"Il dono che ho ricevuto a Medjugorje": La bellissima testimonianza del ex calciatore Federico Rizzi

Messaggio del 19 giugno 2021 al veggente Ivan di Medjugorje

Nella mia parrocchia i sacerdoti, i catechisti e i parrocchiani interpretano irrazionalmente il Credo di Nicea e Atanasio: questo è un peccato mortale pubblico.La nostra Professione di Fede è diversa

 

Nella mia parrocchia i sacerdoti, i catechisti e i parrocchiani interpretano irrazionalmente il Credo di Nicea e Atanasio: questo è un peccato mortale pubblico.La nostra Professione di Fede è diversa

Nella mia parrocchia i sacerdoti e i catechisti interpretano casi sconosciuti del battesimo di desiderio (BOD) e dell'ignoranza invincibile (I.I) come persone conosciute ed esempi oggettivi di salvezza al di fuori della Chiesa e quindi eccezioni pratiche al Credo di Atanasio. Questo Credo dice che tutti hanno bisogno la Fede Cattolica per la salvezza, e il Credo non menziona alcuna eccezione.

Per me casi sconosciuti del BOD e I.I non possono essere eccezioni conosciute e oggettive al Credo di Atanasio.

I sacerdoti ei catechisti ei parrocchiani non possono affermare il Credo di Atanasio e il dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). Questa è eresia di prim'ordine e un peccato mortale pubblico. Non lo negano.

In questa condizione, senza che pongano fine allo scandalo, devo salire a ricevere l'Eucarestia nella S. Messa in italiano.

A parte il Credo di Atanasio c'è un problema anche con il Credo di Nicea. Per me il Credo di Nicea dice “Credo in un solo battesimo per la remissione dei peccati”, è un riferimento al battesimo d'acqua. Non conosco nessuno che sono salvato con il BOD o I.I.

Non conosco nessuno salvato al di fuori della Chiesa Cattolica con la fede e il battesimo d'acqua.

Ma per i sacerdoti, catechisti e parrocchiani di Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea, Roma, il Credo Niceno dice proprio: «Credo in tre o più battesimi per il perdono del peccato; del desiderio, del sangue, dell'ignoranza invincibile ecc., ed escludono il battesimo dell'acqua nella Chiesa Cattolica (e quindi ci sono eccezioni pratiche all'EENS Feeneyite;EENS traditionale, per loro). Quindi la comprensione dei Credo di Nicea è stata cambiata. Questo è peccato mortale pubblico.

La comprensione del Credo di Nicea da parte della parrocchia e la mia comprensione sono diverse. Quindi anche la nostra Professione di Fede durante la Santa Messa sarebbe diversa.

E devo salire a ricevere l'Eucaristia nella Messa senza che loro ritrattano e correggano l'errore, che è comune in questa diocesi di Porta Santa Rufina,Roma ora sotto l'amministrazione dell'Arcivescovo di Civitavecchia e del Vaticano.

Sacerdoti e laici sono tenuti ad affermare i Credo senza alcuna innovazione.

Con BOD e I.I che si riferiscono a persone visibili salvate al di fuori della Chiesa (e quindi c'è una presunta salvezza conosciuta al di fuori della Chiesa) il Primo Comandamento è diverso oggi per i Cattolici. Significa che non c'è solo il vero culto nella Chiesa Cattolica ma anche in altri religioni che hanno falso culto e idoli.-Lionel Andrades

JUNE 22, 2021

In my parish the priests, catechists and parishioners interpret the Nicene and Athanasius Creed irrationally : this is a public mortal sin , our profession of faith is different

In my parish the priests and catachists interpret unknown cases of the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance(I.I) as being known people and objective examples of salvation outside the Church and so practical exceptions to the Athanasius Creed.This Creed  says all need the Catholic faith for salvation, and the Creed does not mention any exceptions.

For me unknown cases of the BOD and I.I cannot be known and objective exceptions to the Athanasius Creed.

The priests and catechists and the parishioners cannot affirm the Athanasius Creed and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).This is first class heresy and a public mortal sin.They do not deny this.

In this condition, without their ending the scandal, I have to go up to receive the Eucharsit at Holy Mass in Italian.

Aside from the Athanasius Creed there is a problem also with the Nicene Creed.For me the Nicene Creed says “I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins”,it is a reference to the baptism of water.I don’t know of any one saved with the BOD or I.I.

I don’t know of any one saved outside the Catholic Church with faith and the baptism of water.

But for the priests, catechists and parishioners of Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti,Boccea,Rome,the Nicene Creeds really says, « I believe in three or more baptisms for the forgiveness of sin, desire, blood , invincible ignorance etc and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church( and so there are practical exceptions to Feeneyite EENS for them).So the understanding of the Nicene Creeds has been changed. This is public mortal sin.

The parish’s understanding of the Nicene Creed and my understanding is different.So our Profession of Faith at Holy Mass would also be different.

And I have to go up to receive the Eucharist at Mass without them recanting and correcting the error, which is common in this diocese of Porta Santa Rufina, now under the administration of the Archbishop of Civitavecchia and the Vatican.

Priests and lay people are expected to affirm the Creeds without any innovation.

With BOD and I.I referring to visible people saved outside the Church( and so there is alleged known salvation outside the Church) the First Commandment is different today for Catholics.It means that there is not only true worship in the Catholic Church but also in other religions which have false worship and idols.-Lionel Andrades

 JUNE 17, 2021

There are good priests in my parish but they interpret the Creeds and Magisterial documents irrationally : St. Alphonsus Liguori says do not go up to receive the Eucharist from a priest in public mortal sin

There are good priests in the parish Santa Maria di Nazareth,Casalotti, Boccea, Rome.However St.Alphonsus Liguori, father of Moral Theology says that if there is a priest in public mortal sin do not go up to receive the Eucharist from him. Since if you do so you would be telling him all is well even though his soul is oriented to Hell. St. Alphonsus says that if there is no other means to fulfill your Sunday obligation, then go up to him to receive the Eucharist at Mass ( Teologia Moralis, Bk.3,N.46).In my parish, like the rest of the diocese, the priests interpret the Creeds irrationally since it is politically correct with the Left and the Vatican.They reject the Athanasius Creed, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors with the same false premise. Then they interpret the Catechisms and Vatican Council II with the same false premise creating a false rupture with Tradition(EENS etc).

How am I to go up to receive the Eucharist from them ? -Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/06/there-are-good-priest-in-my-parish-but.html

 JUNE 19, 2021

Annual parish fete tomorrow - stall needed for Catechesis

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/06/annual-parish-fete-tomorrow-stall.html

In my parish the priests, catechists and parishioners interpret the Nicene and Athanasius Creed irrationally : this is a public mortal sin , our profession of faith is different

In my parish the priests and catachists interpret unknown cases of the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance(I.I) as being known people and objective examples of salvation outside the Church and so practical exceptions to the Athanasius Creed.This Creed  says all need the Catholic faith for salvation, and the Creed does not mention any exceptions.

For me unknown cases of the BOD and I.I cannot be known and objective exceptions to the Athanasius Creed.

The priests and catechists and the parishioners cannot affirm the Athanasius Creed and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).This is first class heresy and a public mortal sin.They do not deny this.

In this condition, without their ending the scandal, I have to go up to receive the Eucharsit at Holy Mass in Italian.

Aside from the Athanasius Creed there is a problem also with the Nicene Creed.For me the Nicene Creed says “I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins”,it is a reference to the baptism of water.I don’t know of any one saved with the BOD or I.I.

I don’t know of any one saved outside the Catholic Church with faith and the baptism of water.

But for the priests, catechists and parishioners of Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti,Boccea,Rome,the Nicene Creeds really says, « I believe in three or more baptisms for the forgiveness of sin, desire, blood , invincible ignorance etc and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church( and so there are practical exceptions to Feeneyite EENS for them).So the understanding of the Nicene Creeds has been changed. This is public mortal sin.

The parish’s understanding of the Nicene Creed and my understanding is different.So our Profession of Faith at Holy Mass would also be different.

And I have to go up to receive the Eucharist at Mass without them recanting and correcting the error, which is common in this diocese of Porta Santa Rufina, now under the administration of the Archbishop of Civitavecchia and the Vatican.

Priests and lay people are expected to affirm the Creeds without any innovation.

With BOD and I.I referring to visible people saved outside the Church( and so there is alleged known salvation outside the Church) the First Commandment is different today for Catholics.It means that there is not only true worship in the Catholic Church but also in other religions which have false worship and idols.-Lionel Andrades

 JUNE 17, 2021

There are good priests in my parish but they interpret the Creeds and Magisterial documents irrationally : St. Alphonsus Liguori says do not go up to receive the Eucharist from a priest in public mortal sin

There are good priests in the parish Santa Maria di Nazareth,Casalotti, Boccea, Rome.However St.Alphonsus Liguori, father of Moral Theology says that if there is a priest in public mortal sin do not go up to receive the Eucharist from him. Since if you do so you would be telling him all is well even though his soul is oriented to Hell. St. Alphonsus says that if there is no other means to fulfill your Sunday obligation, then go up to him to receive the Eucharist at Mass ( Teologia Moralis, Bk.3,N.46).In my parish, like the rest of the diocese, the priests interpret the Creeds irrationally since it is politically correct with the Left and the Vatican.They reject the Athanasius Creed, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors with the same false premise. Then they interpret the Catechisms and Vatican Council II with the same false premise creating a false rupture with Tradition(EENS etc).

How am I to go up to receive the Eucharist from them ? -Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/06/there-are-good-priest-in-my-parish-but.html

 JUNE 19, 2021

Annual parish fete tomorrow - stall needed for Catechesis

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/06/annual-parish-fete-tomorrow-stall.html

Archbishop Pierre Thuc, like Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Father Leonard Feeney did not announce that LG 8 etc in Vatican Council II were not literal cases in the present times and so they could not be in conflict with Tradition

Peter Dimond should have told Nick Santosuosso in this video of their debate that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire (BOD), baptism of blood (BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) in our reality.So the popes and saints were always referring to the hypothetical and theoretical cases of BOD, BOB and I.I. They could not be practical examples of salvation outside the Church.They must not be seen as exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). There are no such cases in real life.

How could someone saved and in Heaven also be seen on earth at the same time ? This would violate the Principle of Non Contradiction.

But why did Peter Dimond not say it ? 

1) He is interpreting Vatican Council II with the same error. Hypothetical cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 are non hypothetical for him. So they are practical exceptions to EENS.He then puts the blame on Vatican Council II and rejects the Council.

2)Archbishop Pierre Thuc, like Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Fr. Leonard Feeney did not state that LG 8 etc were not literal cases and so could not be in conflict with Tradition.

3) Neither did they all know that LG 8 etc with interpreted without the false premise does not contradict Tradition (EENS, Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, Athanasius Creed etc).-Lionel Andrades

Video:
“Baptism Of Desire” Debate – Bro. Peter Dimond vs. Nick Santosuosso
https://endtimes.video/baptism-of-desire-debate-june-2021/

JUNE 11, 2021

Vatican Council II is dogmatic

 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE LIONEL ANDRADES INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II

1.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?

It does not use the common fake premise.It's a simple, rational and different way to read Vatican Council II.

2.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)?

It does not use the common false premise to interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), invincible ignorance(I.I) and the baptism of blood(BOB).So there are no practical exceptions for EENS.EENS is traditonal and BOD, BOB and I.I are interpreted rationally.It's not EENS or BOB,BOB and I.I. Since the latter are not exceptions for the former.

3.Is the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Magisterial documents copy writed or trademarked? 

No. Any one can use it. There is no charge.It is simply going back to the traditiional interpretation of Church documents, without the false premise. The false premise came into the Church in a big way, with the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney(1949).

4.How did the Lionel Andrades interpretation of VC 2 emerge?

He kept writing on his blog on EENS and then discovered that Vatican Council II does not really contradict EENS if the false premise is avoided.

5.Is the LA interpretation of VC2 a new theology?

No. It is going back to the old, traditional theology of the Catholic Church by avoiding the false premise.It is the false premise which has created the New Theology.Without the false premise there cannot be the New Ecumenism, New Evangelisation, New Ecclesiology etc.The New Theology is Cristocentric without the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church.Since exceptions were created to EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors etc, by projecting a false premise.The error was overlooked by the popes.

6.What about traditional, 16th century Mission doctrine?

With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II we return to traditional Mission doctrine. It is no more 'only they need to enter the Church who know about it', who are not in invincible ignorance(LG 14) Instead, it is all need to enter the Catholic Church with no known exception.Invincible ignorance is not an exception to all needing to enter the Church with faith and the baptism(LG 14).So we evangelize since all non Catholics are oriented to Hell without faith and the baptism of water( Ad Gentes 7/Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II. The norm for salvation is faith and baptism and not invincible ignorance.When I meet a non Catholic, I cannot assume or pretend to know, that he or she is an exception to the norm. If there is an exception it could be known only to God.I know that the non Catholic before me, is oriented to Hell( Athanasius Creed, Vatican Council II(AG 7, LG 14),Catechism of the Catholic Church(845,846,1257),Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, etc).

7.What about the hermeneutic of continuity or rupture with Tradition ?

With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II there is no rupture with past Magisterium documents and neither do they contradict each other.We have to re-interpret past Magisterial documents though, which mention the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance(I.I), as being hypothetical and invisible always.Being saved with BOD and I.I are always physically invisible, when they are mentioned in the Catechisms( Trent, Pius X etc) and encyclicals and documents of the popes(Mystici Corporis etc).They always refer to hypothetical cases only and are not objectively known non Catholics.If someone is saved outside the Church he or she could only be known to God.This has to be clear when reading also the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.There is also no confusion when reading the text of Vatican Council II.LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3,NA 2,GS 22 etc, refer always to only hypothetical cases and so they do not contradict the Athanasius Creed.

8.Should the popes use the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?

YES! Since presently the two popes are schismatic, heretical, non Magisterial and non traditional on Vatican Council II.It has to be this way since they use the false premise.It is only with the false premise, inference and conclusion that they interpret Magisterial documents. This can be avoided with a rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion.The result is a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.

9.What other advantage is there in knowing the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?

We read the text of Vatican Council II in general differently with the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.

’The red is not an exception to the blue’.The hypothetical passages( marked in red on the blog Eucharist and Mission, are not practical exceptions to the orthodox passages in Vatican Council II which support EENS, and are marked in blue.

For the present two popes and the traditionalists the red is an exception to the blue. This is irrational.

10.What bearing does it have on the liturgy ?

Without the false premise the Council is traditional. Vatican Council II is in harmony with extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the missionaries in the 16th century.So we are back to the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. When the Council is traditional there is no 'development of doctrine' or 'sprit of Vatican Council II'. Collegiality, Religious Freedom and ecumenism are no more an issue. So receiving Holy Communion on the hand can no more be justified with Vatican Council II.Neither can the Eucharist be given to the divorced and re-married, in the name of the Council.

Neither can the German Synod be justified by citing Vatican Council II.There is no theological basis in the Council, any more, for given the Eucharist to Protestants during Holy Mass.

11.What is the essence of this interpretation?

It is the listing of the rational and irrational premise, inference and conclusion. It identifies  two different premises with two different conclusions. So the rational premise produces a traditional conclusion and the Vatican Council II is in harmony with Tradition. It has a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition even though Rahner, Congar, Rarzinger and Cushing were present at the Council in 1965.

Collegiality, ecumenism and religious liberty are no more an issue for the conservatives , when Vatican Council II is traditional.  

 Lumen Gentium 8, Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16 ecc. oin Vatican Council II refer to only physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.

12.Vatican Council II is dogmatic ?

Yes. Pope Paul VI and the liberals call Vatican Council II "pastoral" and not dogmatic. Since they do not want to affirm the rigorous interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). 

 Ad Gentes 7 (all need faith and baptism for salvation) supports the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) while the hypothetical cases mentioned in LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NS 2, GS 22 etc.  cannot be objective exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 in 1965-2021. So there is nothing in the text of the Council that contradicts 16th century EENS or the Athanasius Creed or the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX on there being exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.

The Second Vatican Council affirms the dogma EENS with Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 .While the Council does not contradict EENS or Ad Gentes  7 and Lumen Gentium 14, with LG 8, LG 16, UR 3, GS 22 etc. Since if someone was saved outside the Church, he would be known only to God. They are not part of our reality. They are invisible in 1965-2021.

When Pope Francis says that the Second Vatican Council is the Magisterium of the Church he must refer to a pro-EENS dogmatic Council with the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.

Without their false premise the Council is dogmatic. It supports the rigorous interpretation of EENS.This was EENS according to the missionaries and the Magisterium of the sixteenth century. LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NS 2, GS 22 etc., in the Second Vatican Council, if interpreted rationally, cannot be practical exceptions to EENS. Invisible cases in our reality cannot be objective exceptions to EENS. For example, to get on the bus you have to be present at the bus station. If you are not physically at the bus stop it is not possible to get on the bus.

Another example is, if there is an apple in a box of oranges, the apple is an exception since it is there in the box. If it was not there in that box it would not be an exception. Similarly LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3 etc.,refer only to hypothetical cases. We cannot meet or see anyone saved outside the Church, without faith and the baptism of water. So the Council is not referring to real people, known people in the present times.

Unknown and invisible cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14) and of being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) cannot be objective exceptions for EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.There is no conflict.

So when Vatican Council II is interpreted rationally it is dogmatic. -Lionel Andrades

Fake premise

Lumen Gentium 8,Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically visible cases in 1965-2021.

Fake inference

They are objective examples of salvation outside the Church.

Fake conclusion

Vatican Council II contradicts the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).The Athanasius Creed(outside the Church there is no salvation) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( ecumenism of return) were made obsolete.

Here is my interpretation of Vatican Council II in blue.

Rational Premise

LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.They are only hypothetical and theoretical. They exist only in our mind and are not solid bodies at Newton's level of time, space and matter.

Rational Inference

They are not objective examples of salvation outside the Church for us human beings.

Rational Conclusion

Vatican Council II does not contradict EENS as it was interpreted by the Jesuits in the Middle Ages.It does not contradict the strict interpretation of EENS of St. Thomas Aquinas( saved in invincible ignorance is invisible), St. Augustine and Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.

The Letter of the Holy Office(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) 1949 made an objective mistake.-Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/05/there-is-no-denial-from-congregation.html   

Lionel Andrades

Promoter of the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not only pastoral.

Catholic lay man in Rome,

Writer on the discovery of the two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is interpreted with the false premise and the other without it. One is Magisterial and the other, the common one, is non Magisterial.

It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms.There can be two interpretations.

Why should Catholics choose an irrational version which is heretical, non traditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional ?

Blog: Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission )

E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com

___________________

7° Giorno: Novena alla Regina della Pace per il 40° Anniversario- MEDJUGORJE

Bob Larson's Daughters Purge Chaotic London Demons | Teen Exorcists

Benny Hinn Crusade Classics Mumbai #2

Benny Hinn Crusade Classic - Anaheim 2004

I Started Masturbating At The Age Of 4 😱! (FULL VIDEO)