Saturday, August 7, 2021
Pope Francis is in schism-Vatican Council II is being interpreted with a fake premise to create a fake rupture with Tradition . Traditionis Custode also imposes the error : The error needs to be corrected with the rational premise
POPE FRANCIS IS IN
SCHISM - VATICAN COUNCIL II IS BEING INTERPRETED WITH A FAKE PREMISE TO
CREATE A FAKE RUPTURE WITH TRADITION: TRADITIONIS CUSTODE ALSO IMPOSES THE
ERROR : THE ERROR NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED WITH THE RATIONAL PREMISE.
Pope Francis was in schism at the National
Cathechectical Center, Italy (Jan 30,2021) when he said that Vatican Council II
had to be accepted as he interpreted it i.e with a fake premise.He said that
his interpretation of Vatican Council II( with the fake premise) which produces
a rupture with the past Magisterium- was Magisterial.
He reiterated that the interpretation of the
Council with the false premise, which produces a rupture with the Athansius
Creed( all need Catholic faith for salvation),changes the meaning of the Nicene
and Apostles Creed( we believe in three known baptisms for the forgiveness of
sins which exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church hence there are
exceptions for EENS), and a re-interpretation of the Catechisms – was the
Magisterium.
This is schism since with the irrational
interpretation of Vatican Council II there is a break with ‘the true Church’
represented by the Creeds, Catechisms, dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and
other Magisterial documents intepreted rationally.
To reject the Athanasius Creed and change the
understanding of the Nicene and Apostles Creed, is first class heresy, in the
hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II(Ad Tuendum Fidem). It is schism in the
Church.
This is a scandal.Pope Francis needs to go for
Confession and recant.
He could announce that he interprets Vatican
Council II with the rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion and
so there is no schism with the past Magisterium, the popes and saints on
doctrine and dogma.In particular there is no break with the past ecclesiocenterism
of the Catholic Church.
In this way Pope Francis would return to the past
ecclesiocentric ecclesiology without rejecting Vatican Council II, interpreted
with the rational premise.
Pope Francis says in the Letter which accompanies
Traditionis Custode :
A recent stage of this dynamic was constituted by
Vatican Council II where the Catholic episcopate came together to listen and to
discern the path for the Church indicated by the Holy Spirit. To doubt the Council
is to doubt the intentions of those very Fathers who exercised their collegial
power in a solemn manner cum Petro et sub Petro in an ecumenical council, and,
in the final analysis, to doubt the Holy Spirit himself who guides the Church.-
Letter of Pope Francis which accompanies Traditionis Custode.
Pope Francis interprets
Vatican Council II with a false premise to create a false rupture with
Tradition and he calls it the work of the Holy Spirit.
How can the Holy Spirit make an objective mistake and use a false premise to
interpret LG 14( baptism of desire) and LG 16( invincible ignorance),for
example ?
For me LG 14 and LG 16 refer to hypothetical and theoretical cases always. They
are always speculative and not real people saved outside the Church in the
present times, 1965-2021. This is something obvious.
How can LG 14,
LG 16 etc be exceptions to EENS, the Athanasius Creed and Syllabus of Errors ?
Yet this is how he interprets Vatican Council II and it is different from the
rational way I interpret the Council.I consider the interpretation of Vatican
Council II with the rational premise Magisterial, since it is not a rupture
with the past Magisterium. Pope Francis cannot say the same.
EIGHTY TWO YEARS
BACK
Eighty two years
back Pope Pius XII allowed doctrine and dogma to be changed in the Catholic
Church in exchange for peace and security. He did not defend Fr. Leonard Feeney
and allowed the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to say that unknown cases of the
baptism of desire and invincible ignorance were known exceptions to the
centuries old strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). EENS was based upon the Bible
teachings in John 3:5 and Mark 16:16.
So the New Theology was outside the Church there is salvation.
This meant the
teachings on ecumenism, other religions, Social Reign of Christ the King in all
political legislation and exclusive salvation would have to change.The Zionists
could be present in 1960-1965 at Vatican Council II.The Church had surrendered.
Then non Catholics were allowed to be professors at the pontifical universities
in Rome, beginning with the John Lateran University.
In 1949, the
time of surrender, the popes Benedict, John Paul II and Francis were young.They
became cardinals in a Church, which was separated from the State because of a
change in doctrine in 1949.
Now if that doctrine is restored to its original, with a rational premise, we
have an ecumenism of return, 16th century EENS, the Social Reign of Christ the
King in all political legislatioin and the non separation of Church and State
based on the there being exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. So the priority
would be that all be formal members of the Catholic Church to avoid Hell.
It means we do not not reject Vatican Council II but re interpret it in harmony
with the pre-1949 Catholic Churh. We undo what was lost 82 years back.The
Council is no more an ally of the liberals.
With the error Pope Francis and the liberals and even traditionalists are
maintaining division in the Church.
JOHN HENRY WESTON AND SBC AND
SSPX
John Henry Weston had a good program recently on the subject outside the Church
there is no salvation .He can now work for creating unity in the Catholic
Church but also answer if Pope Francis is in public schism.
The Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) accepts extra
ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) with exceptions and the St. Benedict
Centers(SBC) accept EENS with no exceptions.Both groups are Catholic.
For the SSPX, the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance (I.I) are
exceptions for EENS and for the SBC they are not exceptions.
If you discuss this issue with either of them they will go into their specific
theology, defending the founders of their communities.
How can we
create unity betweem these two groups ? One of them has to be wrong on
doctrine.Similarly Pope Francis or I am in error on this issue.
The SSPX will
cite the present two popes who project the BOD and I.I as exceptions to EENS.
The SBC will cite the past popes, many of them, who did not project BOD and I.I
as exceptions to EENS.
Now after Vatican Council II(1965) and the Fr. Leonard Feeney case in Boston
(1949) we know that there are no physically visible cases of the BOD and I.I in
our reality.We cannot see or meet any one saved outside the Church with BOD and
I.I. So BOD and I.I could not have been practical exceptions to EENS in 1949 or
1965.Someone made a mistake.
It was only be confusing what was speculative (BOD and I.I) as being non
speculative and objective, that practical exceptions ( visible cases of being
saved with BOD and I.I) were created for EENS.In this way the past
ecclesiocentrism of the Church was made obsolete.Ths is the point that John
Henry Weston, Editor in Chief at Life Site News, must bring out in questions
and discussions with the SSPX and SBC.
It will have a
direct bearing on how he personally will interprets Vatican Council II.Will LG
8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II be exceptions for
EENS or will they not be exceptions, for him ?
Is Pope Francis
rational or irrational on Vatican Council II ? Is there schism or no schism ?
What does he think? -Lionel Andrades
AUGUST 6, 2021
When Archbishop Augustine di Noia interprets Vatican Council II with the common false premise it is not Magisterial. The Holy Spirit cannot confuse hypothetical cases as being objective and visible in the present times (2021) and then reject Tradition, exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church, the Creeds, Catechisms,EENS etc. This is a type of official apostasy.