There is a Specific Error in Vatican Council II and Pope Paul VI looked the other side or did not know about it.Now people know.This is after some 50 years.The people know what the traditionalists did not know – that a false premise was used for political reasons to interpret Vatican Council II. Archbishop Vigano also does not know the specific cause

There is a Specific Error in Vatican Council II and Pope Paul VI looked the other side or did not know about it.Now people know.This is after some 50 years.The people know what the traditionalists did not know – that a false premise was used for political reasons to interpret Vatican Council II. Archbishop Vigano in the video above also does not know the specific cause. He sees the results of Vatican Council II . He knows that there is a break with the past exclusivist ecclesiology.He does not know that the fault lies with his irrational interpretation. He chooses the irrational option like Pope Francis and Pope Benedict but also like Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

A false break with Catholic Tradition, was sought, especially a break with extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so the Council was called.The popes Pius XII and John XXIII permitted the mistake in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston(LOHO).They did not check the mistake in the LOHO.

Now why should Catholics interpret Vatican Council II with a fake premise, inference and non traditional conclusion instead of the rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion ? We have a choice.

See the graphics with the Two Columns. You don’t have to be a theologian to understand it. If you choose the blue left hand side rational column to interpret Vatican Council II (LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc)then there is no break with the past exclusivist concept of salvation. Since no objective exceptions are projected for extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).

If you choose the red right hand side irrational column which uses a false premise, of course, there will be a rupture with the popes and saints over the centuries. EENS is finished.

It’s simple. Choose the rational column. Vatican Council II should no more be controversial, at least not for the conservative and traditional Catholic.

We don’t have to make the same mistake as Pope Paul VI. We have a choice.

The people did not know about this at Dijon, France or they would tell Bishop Roland Minnerath to accept Vatican Council II and come back to the Catholic faith.They still don’t know about it and at their weekly protests outside the Nuncio’s office in Paris. 

Pope Francis wants every one to accept the political Left Vatican Council II with the objective error. The Catechechtical Centers and Bishops Conferences’ follow him. The protests at the Nuncio's office, or even before the Catechectical Centers,  should also say, ‘Pope Francis please interpret Vatican Council II with the rational premise and come back to Tradition’.

Catholic orthodoxy does not depend upon the Latin Mass but the use of the rational premise to interpret Magisterial documents.Once this is clear the progressivism, and liberalism collapses.It’s foundation was built upon error. There is no theological division in the Church when the error is avoided.

With the rational premise there is no division since no liberalism is possible. There cannot be 'a development of doctrine' based upon a hidden falsehood. So the Nuncio should be told to use the rational premise.He is now unethical.

“Why is Bishop Roland Minnerath allowed to offer Holy Mass?”, would be the rational question. This should have been asked by the laity in Dijone, France, with their banners.Since Minnerath is not using the rational premise to interpret Vatican Council II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church(846,1257), extra ecclesiam nulla salus, with no known exceptions and the Syllabus of Errors, with no known exceptions.He does not affirm an ecumenism of return, with no known exceptions even though Unitatis Redintigratio does not mention any exceptions. UR 3 is hypothetical and does not contradict EENS in 2021.It is not a practical exception.He does not affirm the Catechism of Pope Pius X, 24Q,27Q even though there are no practical exceptions mentioned in the Council-text.He does not affirm the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics with the non separation of Church and State even though Vatican Council II is ecclesiocentric, traditional and dogmatic.He has rejected the Athanasius Creed and changed the understanding of the Apostles and Nicene Creed.So how can Pope Francis and Pope Benedict, like Bishop Roland Minnerath, offer Holy Mass with this impediment? The placards do not ask.

The lay people can now organise Traditional Mission with an ecclesiocentric Vatican Council II(AG 7). The Council tells us that all non Catholics are oriented to Hell without faith and the baptism of water (AG 7). There are no objective exceptions to Ad Gentes 7. It says all need faith and baptism for salvation.All, in 2021 and not just those who know or do not know about Jesus and the Church, those who are in invincible ignorance or are not in ignorance.All in general.

There are no exceptions to AG 7 or EENS mentioned in Vatican Council II.Lay Catholics can go on Mission. They do not have to wait for their bishop.Catholic Tradition is an ally.The bishop can no more bring out the Vatican Council II-card to oppose them.Instead its vice versa.Tell the bishop that Vatican Council II supports the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.He must be a good example of obedience.There is no more a rupture with the Church of St. Francis of Assisi, St. Catherine of Siena and St. Teresa of Avila.The Minneraths can no more use the Council to block Tradition and promote a theology of religious pluralism.

The present two popes need to announce that Pope Paul VI made an objective error, a specific error and the popes who followed him ignored it.So the whole Church, all who avoid the error, can go back to Tradition- and not only those who attend the Latin Mass.

Yes the whole Church. So even those who go for Holy Mass in the vernacular, should be outside the Nuncio’s office in Paris,appealing to also Le Pen, to correct the common mistake in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades

SEPTEMBER 24, 2021

Pope Paul VI brought ‘the smoke of Satan’ into the Church when he interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally instead of rationally. He used the false premise instead of the rational option.Pope Francis and Pope Benedict must announce that Pope Paul VI made an objective error.They must correct the mistake

Pope Paul VI brought ‘the smoke of Satan’ into the Church when he interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally instead of rationally. He used the false premise instead of the rational option.Pope Francis and Pope Benedict must announce that Pope Paul VI made an objective error which overlooked in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.So Catholics today are free to correct his error and interpret the Council with the rational premise, inference and conclusion.

There are orthodox passages in the Council-text which support the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church whle hypothetical cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc  are not objective exceptions in 1965-2021.Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not just a pastoral Council. It is in harmony withy the 16th century interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) with no known exceptions. Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation.It supports the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX on an ecumenism of return with no known exceptions mentioned in the Council.( UR 3 is hypothetical and theoretical only and not an exception to EENS).It supports the Catechism of Pope Pius X , 24Q,27Q on other religions not being paths to salvation( though there may be good and holy things in them-NA 2).So all need to convert into the Church with faith and baptism( AG 7, Athanasius Creed etc).

The popes need to announce that the interpretation of Vatican Council II(LG 14) by Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall is rational and their conclusion is traditional, non schismatic and non heretical.

Pope Paul VI could also have been rational, non schismatic and non heretical. He could have announced that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II are always hypothetical and exist only in our mind. So there would be no New Theology which says outside the Catholic Church there is salvation, since EENS is obsolete, with alleged objective examples of salvation outside the Church(Objective cases are LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, etc).

Now Pope Francis and Pope Benedict must formally correct the mistake.They cannot use the false premise which I have explained with Two Columns and other graphics.

When Vatican Council II is interpreted with the blue rational left hand side column  there is a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition(EENS, Syllabus, Athanasius Creed etc).

When Vatican Council II is interpreted with the red irrational right hand side column then there is a break with the past.Pope Paul VI made a bad choice. The Church still follows the mistake and so do the present two popes.

So the French Bishops Conference , for example, like those in other countries in collegiality with the two popes, must acknowledge that Pope Paul VI made a mistake. They must then re-interpret Vatican Council II rationally.Catholics in France should do the same and not wait for the bishops to correct the objective mistake.

Lay Catholics in France must interpret Vatican Council II like Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall and not the red right hand column users like Karl Rahner, Yves Congar, John Courtney Murray, Joseph Ratzinger, Richard Cushing, Alfredo Ottaviani and Marcel Lefebvre.

The popes need to correct the error common on the Internet and theological journals and articles, especially in Germany and the USA.-Lionel Andrades

SEPTEMBER 23, 2021

Pope Francis and Pope Benedict could correct the error in Wikipedia and Internet resources and the German theological and catechetical publications

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/09/pope-francis-and-pope-benedict-could.html

SEPTEMBER 22, 2021

Pope Francis and Pope Benedict brazenly claim that the Council is innovative and a break with Tradition when they have chosen a false premise to create the innovation.It’s their irrational premise which makes the Council innovative and schismatic.The College of Cardinals must correct this mistake.It has spread throughout the Catholic Church

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/09/pope-francis-and-pope-benedict-brazenly.html

__________________________

NOVEMBER 11, 2019

 

The Oxford University Press has produced many books on Vatican Council II based upon a false premise. A deceptive rupture is created with Catholic Tradition     https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-oxford-university-press-has.html

_______________________________________

AUGUST 29, 2021

Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall say there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire but the German Synodal path is based upon there being literal cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14) in the present times

Bishop Athanasius Schneider in an interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall has said that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire in the present times(2021). So LG 14 ( Case of the Catechumen) would be a hypothetical and speculative case only. But for Cardinal Marx this is not his interpretation of Vatican Council II upon which is based the German Synodal Way.For him LG 14 and also LG 16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22, LG 16,LG 8 would refer to literal cases of non Catholics in the present times (1965-2021) saved without ‘faith and baptism’(AG 7), outside the Church. It is only in this way that he can avoid affirming Catholic Tradition (EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc).

If the Germans interpreted LG 14 like Bishop Athanasius Schneider there would be no theological bases for the German Synodal Breakaway.

In France, Bishop Roland Mitterand in Dijon, wrote his books on the Concordats and the theology of religious pluralism by interpreting LG 14 irrationally.The French Bishops’ Conference must be asked to clarify that the baptism of desire is always hypothetical, theoretical and invisible for us human beings.In principle, hypothetical cases of LG 14, LG 16 etc cannot be practical exceptions in 2021 to Tradition ( Catechism of Pope Pius X, Council of Trent etc).

Like the French, Cardinal Peter Erdo in Hungary and the Hungarian Bishops’ Conference, could also be confusing the “implicit baptism of desire” of St. Thomas Aquinas as being explicit in the present times.

In Poland, the National Catechetical Center is in schism with the past Magisterium, since with visible cases of the baptism of desire, a hermeneutic of rupture is created  with the Athanasius Creed, the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q,27Q).They need to issue a statement on this issue.

Their Episcopal Conference, like those all over the world, interpret the baptism of desire with a fake and not rational premise . So there is a fake break with Catholic Tradition.

The Schneider-Marshall video is really asking the U.S bishops to be ethical and honest.They are saying that the cardinals and bishops in Britain are also dishonest, when they project the baptism of desire as an exception to EENS according to the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16^th century.

The bishops in Switzerland had also been asking the Society of St. Pius X to interpret the baptism of desire with the irrationality mentioned by Bishop Schneider, and then to accept the non traditional conclusion.This is not Catholic.

Pope Benedict did not grant canonical recognition to the SSPX  and said it was a doctrinal issue.Bishop Charles Morerod in Switzerland would not allow the SSPX to use the churches there, and said it was a doctrinal issue. They had to continue to interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise and accept the non traditional conclusion, like the liberals.

Pope Benedict needs to be honest.He needs to apologize to the SSPX.-Lionel Andrades

________________

Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 14: "They could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it, or to remain in it."

Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 16: ". . .Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things, and as Saviour wills that all men be saved. Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. . .But often men, deceived by the Evil One, have become vain in their reasonings and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, serving the creature rather than the Creator. Or some there are who, living and dying in this world without God, are exposed to final despair. . ."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extra_Ecclesiam_nulla_salus

NOTE : Lumen Gentium 14 ( baptism of desire) and Lumen Gentium 16(invincible ignorance ) are mentioned by Wikipedia with reference to Extra ecclesiam nulla salus.It is  as if they are practical exceptions.For them to be exceptions the false premise had to be used creating a New Theology which now says outside the Church there is known salvation. Outside the Church there is salvation.

_______________________

_______________________

2

66. In his encyclical Mystici Corporis, Pius XII addresses the question, How are those who attain salvation outside visible communion with the Church related to her? He says that they are oriented to the mystical body of Christ by a yearning and desire of which they are not aware (DS 3821).(Lionel: But this is a reference  by Pope Pius XII to hypothetical and invisible cases.This is something obvious.It is common sense.) The opposition of the American Jesuit Leonard Feeney, who insisted on the exclusivist interpretation of the expression extra ecclesiam nulla solus, afforded the occasion for the letter of the Holy Office, dated 8 August ,1949, to the archbishop of Boston, which rejected Feeney s interpretation and clarified the teaching of Pius XII. (So he means hypothetical cases are objective exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.He has used the false premise.)  The letter distinguishes between the necessity of belonging to the Church for salvation (necessitas praecepti) and the necessity of the indispensable means of salvation (intrinseca necessitas); in relationship to the latter, the Church is a general help for salvation (DS 3867—69).(O.K,Hypothetically but what has this to do with EENS ? The Letter made an irrational inference too.)  In the case of invincible ignorance the implicit desire of belonging to the Church suffices; this desire will always be present when a man aspires to conform his will to that of God (DS 3870).(Again he is referring to an unknown person so why is this mentioned with reference to EENS? Why? Since his new theology is based upon the irrational premise.) But faith, in the sense of Hebrews 11:6, and love are always necessary with intrinsic necessity (DS 3872).

67. Vatican Council II makes its own the expression extra ecclesiam nulla salus. But in using it the council explicitly directs itself to Catholics and limits its validity to those who know the necessity of the Church for salvation.(He interprets Lumen Gentium 14 as referring to known people saved outside the Church and so there are known people saved in invincible ignorance.So only those who know and are not in ignorance need to enter the Church for him and not all non Catholics in general.  The council holds that the affirmation is based on the necessity of faith and of baptism affirmed by Christ (LG 14). In this way the council aligned itself in continuity with the teaching of Pius XII,( The teaching of Pope Pius XII on EENS with known cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance.Unknown and hypothetical cases are made practical and known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.Unknown cases are known exceptions. ) but emphasized more clearly the original parenthentical character of this expression.(Vaguely supporting the false premise and the New Theology which creates the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition).

68. In contrast to Pius XII, the council refused to speak of a votum implicitum (implicit desire) and applied the concept of the votum only to the explicit desire of catechumens to belong to the Church (LG 14).(The catechumen who is saved with implicit or explicit desire is a hypothetical case. So why is it mentioned here ? Since it is not a hypothetical case for Cardinal Ratzinger and Fr. Luiz Ladaria s.j. ) With regard to non-Christians, it said that they are ordered in diverse ways to the people of God.(He does not say that they are all oriented to Hell. Since that would be the traditional Feeneyite theology with unknown cases not known exceptions to traditional EENS) In accord with the different ways with which the salvific will of God embraces non-Christians, the council distinguished four groups: first, Jews; second, Muslims; third, those who without fault are ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and do not know the Church but who search for God with a sincere heart and try to fulfill his will as known through conscience; fourth, those who without fault have not yet reached an express knowledge of God but who nonetheless try to lead a good life (LG 16). (For him the exceptions to the norm, faith and baptism , are the  ordinary means of salvation. )

Even ITC's The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without being baptised is also presented with the false premise , which is a specific error in Vatican Council II.It creates the New Theology.Liberals and Lefebvrists interpret Vatican Council II with the New Theology.

58. In the face of new problems and situations and of an exclusive interpretation of the adage: (it was a dogma  defined by three Church Councils in the Extraordinary Magisterium and not an adage)“salus extra ecclesiam non est”, (it was always extra ecclesiam nulla salus) the magisterium, in recent times, has articulated a more nuanced understanding as to the manner in which a saving relationship with the Church can be realized.(He is referring to his irrational  interpretation with the false premise.He calls it a nuanced version. His 'nuanced version' of course is not the traditional exclusivist understanding of salvation with the rational premise.) The Allocution of Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quadam (1854) clearly states the issues involved: “It must, of course, be held as a matter of faith that outside the apostolic Roman Church no one can be saved, that the Church is the only ark of salvation, and that whoever does not enter it, will perish in the flood.(This is traditional Feeneyite theology which he will be contradicted in the next line by assuming unknown cases of being saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions to all needing to enter the Catholic Church for salvation) On the other hand, it must likewise be held as certain that those who live in ignorance of the true religion, if such ignorance be invincible, are not subject to any guilt in this matter before the eyes of the Lord” (In other words they are exceptions to EENS  for the ITC and so there is no more an exclusive interpretation. - 

THE HOPE OF SALVATION FOR INFANTS  WHO DIE WITHOUT BEING BAPTISED http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html  

-Lionel Andrades

_____________________

Dona La Pace - Album completo - Canzone di Medjugorje (Mladifest)

Pope Paul VI brought ‘the smoke of Satan’ into the Church when he interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally instead of rationally. He used the false premise instead of the rational option.Pope Francis and Pope Benedict must announce that Pope Paul VI made an objective error.They must correct the mistake

Pope Paul VI brought ‘the smoke of Satan’ into the Church when he interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally instead of rationally. He used the false premise instead of the rational option.Pope Francis and Pope Benedict must announce that Pope Paul VI made an objective error which overlooked in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.So Catholics today are free to correct his error and interpret the Council with the rational premise, inference and conclusion.

There are orthodox passages in the Council-text which support the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church whle hypothetical cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc  are not objective exceptions in 1965-2021.Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not just a pastoral Council. It is in harmony withy the 16th century interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) with no known exceptions. Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation.It supports the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX on an ecumenism of return with no known exceptions mentioned in the Council.( UR 3 is hypothetical and theoretical only and not an exception to EENS).It supports the Catechism of Pope Pius X , 24Q,27Q on other religions not being paths to salvation( though there may be good and holy things in them-NA 2).So all need to convert into the Church with faith and baptism( AG 7, Athanasius Creed etc).

The popes need to announce that the interpretation of Vatican Council II(LG 14) by Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall is rational and their conclusion is traditional, non schismatic and non heretical.

Pope Paul VI could also have been rational, non schismatic and non heretical. He could have announced that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II are always hypothetical and exist only in our mind. So there would be no New Theology which says outside the Catholic Church there is salvation, since EENS is obsolete, with alleged objective examples of salvation outside the Church(Objective cases are LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, etc).

Now Pope Francis and Pope Benedict must formally correct the mistake.They cannot use the false premise which I have explained with Two Columns and other graphics.

When Vatican Council II is interpreted with the blue rational left hand side column  there is a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition(EENS, Syllabus, Athanasius Creed etc).

When Vatican Council II is interpreted with the red irrational right hand side column then there is a break with the past.Pope Paul VI made a bad choice. The Church still follows the mistake and so do the present two popes.

So the French Bishops Conference , for example, like those in other countries in collegiality with the two popes, must acknowledge that Pope Paul VI made a mistake. They must then re-interpret Vatican Council II rationally.Catholics in France should do the same and not wait for the bishops to correct the objective mistake.

Lay Catholics in France must interpret Vatican Council II like Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall and not the red right hand column users like Karl Rahner, Yves Congar, John Courtney Murray, Joseph Ratzinger, Richard Cushing, Alfredo Ottaviani and Marcel Lefebvre.

The popes need to correct the error common on the Internet and theological journals and articles, especially in Germany and the USA.-Lionel Andrades

AUGUST 29, 2021

Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall say there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire but the German Synodal path is based upon there being literal cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14) in the present times

Bishop Athanasius Schneider in an interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall has said that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire in the present times(2021). So LG 14 ( Case of the Catechumen) would be a hypothetical and speculative case only. But for Cardinal Marx this is not his interpretation of Vatican Council II upon which is based the German Synodal Way.For him LG 14 and also LG 16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22, LG 16,LG 8 would refer to literal cases of non Catholics in the present times (1965-2021) saved without ‘faith and baptism’(AG 7), outside the Church. It is only in this way that he can avoid affirming Catholic Tradition (EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc).

If the Germans interpreted LG 14 like Bishop Athanasius Schneider there would be no theological bases for the German Synodal Breakaway.

In France, Bishop Roland Mitterand in Dijon, wrote his books on the Concordats and the theology of religious pluralism by interpreting LG 14 irrationally.The French Bishops’ Conference must be asked to clarify that the baptism of desire is always hypothetical, theoretical and invisible for us human beings.In principle, hypothetical cases of LG 14, LG 16 etc cannot be practical exceptions in 2021 to Tradition ( Catechism of Pope Pius X, Council of Trent etc).

Like the French, Cardinal Peter Erdo in Hungary and the Hungarian Bishops’ Conference, could also be confusing the “implicit baptism of desire” of St. Thomas Aquinas as being explicit in the present times.

In Poland, the National Catechetical Center is in schism with the past Magisterium, since with visible cases of the baptism of desire, a hermeneutic of rupture is created  with the Athanasius Creed, the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q,27Q).They need to issue a statement on this issue.

Their Episcopal Conference, like those all over the world, interpret the baptism of desire with a fake and not rational premise . So there is a fake break with Catholic Tradition.

The Schneider-Marshall video is really asking the U.S bishops to be ethical and honest.They are saying that the cardinals and bishops in Britain are also dishonest, when they project the baptism of desire as an exception to EENS according to the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16^th century.

The bishops in Switzerland had also been asking the Society of St. Pius X to interpret the baptism of desire with the irrationality mentioned by Bishop Schneider, and then to accept the non traditional conclusion.This is not Catholic.

Pope Benedict did not grant canonical recognition to the SSPX  and said it was a doctrinal issue.Bishop Charles Morerod in Switzerland would not allow the SSPX to use the churches there, and said it was a doctrinal issue. They had to continue to interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise and accept the non traditional conclusion, like the liberals.

Pope Benedict needs to be honest.He needs to apologize to the SSPX.-Lionel Andrades

AUGUST 28, 2021

So we proclaim the Faith and return to traditional mission as at the time of St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Robert Bellarmine and St. Francis Xavier

So we proclaim the Faith and return to traditional mission as at the time of St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Robert Bellarmine and St. Francis Xavier. All non Catholics are oriented to Hell according to Bishop Athanasius Schneider and not only those ‘who know’ about Jesus and the Church(LG 14) – since invincible ignorance is no more a practical exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).All in general need faith and baptism for salvation(AG 7) and if there are any exceptions of those 'who know' or 'do not know' it could only be known to God.So there are no known practical exceptions for the Great Commission.

The Council Fathers (1965) made an objective error when they projected  the baptism of desire(LG 14) as an exception to EENS according to Loyola, Bellarmine and Xavier.This mistake was there in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston(LOHO).Pope Benedict needs to issue a correction and apologise. Since his New Theology is based upon the false premise of the LOHO.

The false premise of Pope Benedict is now a theological virus that has spread in the Catholic Church, like an epidemic. He has to end it.He must correct Pope Francis’ mistake, which is also that of the College of Cardinals.

Pope Benedict needs to tell Pope Francis that all the books on Vatican Council II have got the ‘virus’ and so are useless.They were made irrelevant with the error. Also Pope Benedict’s books on Ecclesiology published by Ignatius Press, and in the many German editions,  have to be phased out. The pontifical universities must note the error in the books on Ecclesiology, written also by Semeraro, Kasper and Forte.

Pope Benedict wanted the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) to keep interpreting the baptism of desire(LG 14) as referring to to literal cases, presently known to us. So they would have to interpret Vatican Council II (LG 14 etc) in principle, by confusing invisible cases as being physically visible. Then with this irrationality they would have to accept the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition, which would follow with the use of the false premise. It was only with this doctrinal and theological error, was he prepared to grant the SSPX canonical recognition.Pope Francis needs to apologise.

Pope Benedict wanted the SSPX to interpret Vatican Council II with LG 14 being a literal example of salvation outside the Church in the present times and Bishop Schneider and Dr.Taylor Marshall are saying there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire in 1965-2021.

Bishop Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall are avoiding the fake premise ( invisible people are visible in the present times) and Pope Benedict and Pope Francis have to use it to create a break with Tradition (EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc).

If the popes choose the rational premise ( invisible cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church in 2021 are invisible) then they would be saying that in Vatican Council II,  LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc do not contradict the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church, opposed by the Left.-Lionel Andrades

 AUGUST 28, 2021

Bishop Athanasius Schneider has said that there are no known literal cases of the baptism of desire in our human reality but Cardinal Ratzinger wrote Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus with there being literally known cases of being saved with the baptism of desire

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/bishop-athanasius-schneider-has-said_28.html

AUGUST 27, 2021

Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall are telling Pope Francis that all the books on Vatican Council II are written with a false premise and in general they are obsolete

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/bishop-athanasius-schneider-and-dr.html

AUGUST 26, 2021

Bishop Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall directly oppose Pope Francis on the New Theology : Vatican Council II is not a break with Tradition when the premise is rational

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/bishop-schneider-and-dr-taylor-marshall.html

 AUGUST 25, 2021

Bishop Schneider is one step away from saying that Vatican Council II does not contradict Tradition and the SSPX are no more in schism

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/bishop-schneider-is-one-step-away-from.html

 AUGUST 25, 2021

Bishop Athanasius Schneider has said that we do not know of any literal case of someone saved with the baptism of desire in the present times

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/bishop-athanasius-schneider-has-said.html

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2021

Vatican Council II supports Fr. John Courtney Murray sj when it is interpreted irrationally and Mons. Joseph Clifford Fenton when it is interpreted rationally.Pope Paul VI chose the irrational version of the Council when had a choice

 VATICAN COUNCIL II SUPPORTS FR.JOHN COURTNEY MURRAY SJ WHEN IT IS INTERPRETED IRRATIONALLY AND MONS. JOSEPH CLIFFORD FENTON WHEN IT IS INTERPRETED RATIONALLY. POPE PAUL VI CHOSE THE IRRATIONAL VERSION OF THE COUNCIL WHEN HE HAD A CHOICE.

Vatican Council II supports Fr. John Courtney Murray sj when it is interpreted irrationally and Mons. Joseph Clifford Fenton when it is interpreted rationally.Pope Paul VI chose the irrational version of the Council when he had a choice.The popes and the SSPX choose the irrational version too today, like the liberals and conservative Catholics.

When the Council is interpreted with the rational premise, the Church will once again be conservative.It will support Le Pen and Salvini and not Macron and Matterella.

Vatican Council II since Paul VI has been interpreted with a false premise, so there is alleged ‘known salvation’, in personal cases in the present times (1965-2021) outside the Church.This is deceptive. The message is that outside the Church, without ‘faith and the baptism of water, there are known non Catholics saved. So the New Theology says outside the Church there is salvation.The past ecclesiocentrism has been made obsolete with exceptions.We have a New Theology which permits general liberalism,new ecumenism etc. It is with this New Theology that Fr.John Courtney Murray sj could present his new theories on religious liberty, Church-State separation etc.

With this liberalism, Le Pen in France and Salvini in Italy, will continue to have the Catholic Church against them.

BISHOP SCHNEIDER CLOSES THE DOOR TO LIBERALISM

Bishop Athanasius Schneider was closing the door to liberalism when he said there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire(Lumen Gentium 14).For him LG 14 etc being invisible and theoretical were not practical exceptions to the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX( ecumenism of return and outside the Church no salvation), in the present times (1965-2021).

With the past exclusivist ecclesiology supported by Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation.All.) and LG 14 etc not being an exception to Ad Gentes 7, there is no block in the Council to oppose the proclaiming of the Social Reign of Christ the King in all political legislation.This is the rational approach i.e hypothetical cases of LG 14 etc, remain hypothetical only.

MATTEI, KWASNIEWSKI
Roberto dei Mattei and Peter Kwasniewski may affirm the Social Reign of Chrst the King but they negate it with their irrational interpreation of Vatican Council II. The St.Benedict Centers too support the past ecclesiocentrism but negate it like the liberals, when they do not choose to interpret Vatican Council II rationally. LG 14 etc have to refer to visible cases for them to be exceptions for the Syllabus of Errors. And if there is salvation outside the Church, if there are exceptions for EENS, then why proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King ?
This is important to remember during elections.All Catholics, should only vote for political candidates who affirm the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics, and interpret Vatican Council II rationally, unlike Mattei and the others.
When Vatican Council II is interpreted with the rational premise there is no separation between the traditional Church and conservative political parties and politicians.Le Pen and Salvini would not have the Church agaist them.
With the rational interpretation of Vatican Council II the Church would be saying that the migrants need faith and baptism for salvation.They would have to accept Jesus in the Catholic Church, and live the faith and moral teachings, and avail of the Sacraments, to avoid Hell.

GOD AT THE CENTRE OF POLITICS
God would be at the centre of political activity and legislation ( pro –life, Ten Commandments, virtues of modesty and chastity in public etc) and not Satan ( abortion, contraception, pornography, immodesty in public, homosexual unions etc).

ARCHBISHOP VIGANO IS ON THE WRONG SIDE ON VATICAN COUNCIL II
Arcbishop Carlo Maria Vigano and the Lefebvrist group support Satan and the Masons when they interpret Vatican Council II with the irrational and not rational premise.The fruits are bad. It’s the same with John Henry Weston, Marco Tosatti, Joseph Shaw and others. They could choose the rational interpretation of Vatican Council II and be politically incorrect with the Left.

ROME MAYOR ELECTION

 There are only politically correct candidates for the elections for the Mayor’s office in Rome.There is no political party which proclaims the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics, and interprets Vatican Council II rationally.

The laity, like the FSSP and SSPX, do not interpret the Council rationally.So theologically, they support the Left, knowingly or unknowingly.

Le Pen and Salvini in ignorance allow Pope Francis to interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise and they keep silent on this politico-religious issue.It’s the same with Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke. There are no protests.

Even in France the bloggers at Riposte Catholique, Salon Beige,Met etc, do not ask the French Bishops Conference and Bishop Roland Mitterand in Dijon, to accept and interpret Vatican Council II rationally.This is a political and religious issue in the Catholic Church.
The traditionelle and militante in France must accept a rational interpretation of Vatican Council II.Since the liberals in France need a theology on which to peg their liberalism.They need the false premise and the traditionelle must not permit them to have it in silence. It was the same for Fr. John Courtney Murray sj and today for Pope Francis.The theology had to be created and the only way it was done was by using a false premise.Without the false premise,which creates the New Theology, there is no liberalism.This was not known to Mons. Joseph Clifford Fenton and Fr. John Courtney Murray sj in their sparring over the issue of Religious Liberty.
We have a new discovery after some 50 years. We now know that there are two interpretations of the Council and John Courtney Murray has been made obsolete.-Lionel Andrades

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

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2021

The Superior Generals of the Ecclesia Dei communities are not proclaiming the Catholic Faith- on faith and morals. They are not interpreting Vatican Council II in harmony with the past Magisterium.They do not want to die as martrys.

 

The Ecclesia Dei communities support the schismatic interpretation of Vatican Council II by Pope Francis  and not my  non schismatic interpretation of the Council.

They cannot teach the Catholic Faith in general to lay Catholics and now not even affirm it in public before Pope Francis.

The laity in France, for example,  can no more count on the French Bishops Conference  to explain how Vatican Council II can be interpreted rationally in harmony with the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.

The Institute of Christ the King, for example, permits one of its priests in Dijone, France, to work as Assistant to the Diocesan Parish Priest at Mass in Latin.The priest from the traditionalist community interprets Vatican Council II with the irrational premise to create a rupture with Tradition. It is the same with the diocesan priests and Bishop Roland Mitterand.They are both using the unethical New Theology which is approved by the French Bishops Conference and Pope Francis.

The Superior Generals of the Ecclesia Dei communities are not proclaiming the Catholic Faith- on faith and morals. They are not interpreting Vatican Council II in harmony with the past Magisterium.They do not want to die as martrys.

The Ecclesia Dei communities must not hide behind Vatican Council II any more.They must not let Pope Francis play the Vatican Council II card and support his liberalism. They must proclaim Tradition in harmony with the Council interpreted with the rational premise.-Lionel Andrades

SEPTEMBER 9, 2021

I want the Ecclesia Dei communities to know that they can interpret Vatican Council II with a rational or irrational premise and the conclusion will be different. It will be traditional or non traditional. This hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition does not depend upon Pope Francis or the CDF. The issue is the rational premise

 Comments from the blog Vox Cantoris, 

 Catholic Mission said...

ose guadalupe rodriguez said...
Clearly submission to the holy father,to the supreme pontiff, to pope francis, to the bergoglian magisterium, to lumen gentium #25, to the vatican II.

Lionel:

No. With the false premise there is no submission to Pope Francis, Vatican Council II ( with the irrational premise) etc.

This is the point of my comments here on this thread.

I want the Ecclesia Dei communities to know that they can interpret Vatican Council II with a rational or irrational premise and the conclusion will be different. It will be traditional or non traditional. This hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition does not depend upon Pope Francis or the CDF.

The issue is the rational premise.

____________________

Anonymous said...

Vatican II is a counterfeit church headed by an imposter. It is not the church of Christ. Fake and corrupted. The blind leading the blind. It includes delusional FSSP and SSPX priests, - many of them are honest (but delusional), and will wake up shortly. Vatican II religion serves the NWO agenda. There are no negotiations with Judases. All faithful will go underground soon to celebrate TLM. Some already started new covenants and monasteries. After a while, Holy Ghost will gather these souls and renew Catholic Church, the true church of Christ.

Vatican Council II can be interpreted in harmony with the past exclusivist ecclesiology, the Syllabus of Errors and EENS.The Council then is traditional and it is not just pastoral. It does not contradict EENS, the Athanasius Creed etc and so it is dogmatic.

Without the false premise and with the rational premise the Council is dogmatic.

The message again is -use the rational premise to interpret Vatican Council II and also other Magisterial documents and you return to Tradition without having to reject the Council.

This is not because I say so but because this happens every time you use the rational premise. You can see it for yourself. This is independent of me.-Lionel Andrades

8:27 am, September 08, 2021

 Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
They sound like terrified beggars who expect to be squashed.

Anonymous Anonymous said...
What a fawning, sickening statement they came up with. Absolutely useless. If that's all the response they have then they are done for, Bergoglio and his ilk will devour their institutes just like the Franciscans of the Immaculate.

Lionel:

They are on the defensive since they do not know about Vatican Council II interpreted with a rational premise.

It is Pope Francis and Pope Benedict who are in schism and heresy with their irrational interpretation of the Council. This error has to be exposed by the Ecclesia Dei communities.

Why should Catholics interpret the Council with the irrational premise and create a rupture with Tradition ? There is a choice.

Why should the Ecclesia Dei communities continue to interpret the Council with an irrational premise , which produces a schismatic result, and then continue to be obedient ?

They must tell the present two popes to interpret the Council with the rational premise and then support Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics, based upon the strict interpretation of EENS, supported by Vatican Council II ( rational).

They must tell the two popes to affirm the traditional ecumenism of return to the Catholic Church for all Christians, since Unitatatis Redintigratio 3 does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

They must demand that Pope Francis and Pope Benedict return to the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church since there is nothing in the entire text of Lumen Gentium to contradict the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.

They do not have to be fawning. Theology and doctrine is on their side. -Lionel Andrades

8:35 am, September 08, 2021

 Anonymous said...

Anonymous Paul Dale said...

We owe our allegiance to the pope, but which pope Hammer? Simples: to the one who is reigning. But both call themselves popes - one emeritus, the other Bishop of Rome - so who do we follow? It is very straight forward because it is evident that Pope Benedict XVI did not resign the See of Peter. Very evident. It is all in canon law. I will not try to go through this now but advise you to go to fromrome.info where a very knowledgeable and expert latinist has laid it all out.

Lionel:

On this thread I have been trying to show how important it is to interpret Church Documents with a rational and not irrational premise.

Both Pope Francis and Pope Benedict are using the same New Theology created with a false premise, inference and non traditional conclusion. So they are schismatically in a break with the past Magisterium.

Similarly From Rome.info is also interpreting Vatican Council II with a false premise.

This is something evident. Don't take my word for it. You can consciously interpret the Council with a false or rational premise and the conclusion will be different. You can see it for yourself.

The sedevacantists Most Holy Family Monastery and the Congregatio Mariae Reginae Immaculatae use the false premise to interpret the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance to create a break with 16th century EENS.Neither can the two say in public that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are not literal cases. I have been asking them this for a few years now.

If they say that the baptism of desire etc are not literal cases in 2021 then they would have to say that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2,GS 22 etc are also not literal cases and so are not a break with Tradition ( EENS, Syllabus etc).

This means they were wrong all these years and Vatican Council II is no reason to go into sedevacantism.So they simply block me, end the discussion or do not answer.

This is also the issue with the Ecclesia Dei communities.

-Lionel Andrades

THURSDAY, 2 SEPTEMBER 2021

COMMUNIQUÉ OF THE SUPERIORS GENERAL OF THE COMMUNITIES "ECCLESIA DEI"

https://voxcantor.blogspot.com/2021/09/communique-of-superiors-general-of.html

____________________________