Fr.Georges de Laire, Judicial Vicar in the Dioceseof Manchester, USA
with the approval of Pope Francis, Cardinal Ladaria and Bishop Peter Libasci,
has placed restrictions on the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire, USA, for not
interpreting the baptism of desire (LG 14) etc with the False Premise (
invisible people are visible in 2021), confusing what is invisible as being
visible, to create a fake rupture with the traditional strict interpretation
of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, with no exceptions.We know that
this is unethical and dishonest. But is it legal ?
This is a secular issue.Do Catholics in New Hampshire have to claim that they can physically see non Catholics saved outside the Church, without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7) in 1965-2021 ?
Must they claim that they can explicitly see non Catholics in New Hampshire, saved in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water ?
What is the physical reality of Fr. Georges de Laire, can he see such people ? Has he met them ?
This is a secular issue since it refers to the physical observation, at an empirical level, in Newton's time, space and matter.
If Fr.Georges de Laire can see physically visible non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance outside the Church, without faith and baptism, then his reality is different from the other normal human beings in New Hampshire.
Phil Lawler. Anthony Burgess and the rest of the faculty at the Thomas College of Liberal Arts, New Hampshire, are 'legally Catholic ' for Fr. Georges de Laire. Since they can see non Catholics in New Hampshire saved without faith and the baptism of water and so have made the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, obsolete.
The Diocese of Manchester needs to clarify that Fr. Georges de Laire cannot physically see non Catholics in New Hampshire saved outside the Church with the baptism of desire or invincible ignorance, otherwise he would be making an objective error.
Similarly Mary Ellen Mahon, Kelly Goodreau and Fr. Matthew Mason and other members of the Curia canot physically see or meet any exceptions for EENS in the diocese.
The St. Benedict Center, NH has a right to reject the False Premise being opposed upon them . The Decree of Prohibitions is coercion.It would be the same other Catholics in the diocese who attend Holy Mass in Latin or English.Some would feel entitled to relief and compensation for the error from the diocese.-Lionel Andrades
The Diocese of Manchester, USA interprets 1) Vatican Council II 2) baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance 3) Catechism of the Catholic Church 4) extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and the 5 ) Athanasius Creed with a false premise and inference to create a non traditional conclusion.This is approved by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) officials who want the St.Benedict Center,USA, in the diocese, to do the same.All the religious communities in the diocese are obliged to interpret magisterial documents with a false premise to receive canonical recognition.
The St.Benedict Center interprets EENS without the false premise.It does not have canonical recognition.
The FSSP uses the false premise.It is recognised.
All the priests who offer Holy Mass in Latin or English have to use the false premise to interpret the Creeds.This is heresy.It is an impediment to offering Holy Mass.
The Thomas More College of Liberal Arts 1 is in the diocese of Manchester.Phil Lawler teaches there.He chooses to interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise.Anthony Esolen also taught at this institution and was approved by Bishop Peter Libasci and the CDF.
-Lionel Andrades 1 REPOSTS
Thomas More College of Liberal Arts branch in Rome is teaching irrationality and heresy to project a liberal image and attract students like their principal office in Manchester, USA.Phil Lawler is a teacher at this college and he goes along with the deception.
With the connivance of the Bishop Peter Libasci, the bishop of Manchester, they present Vatican Council II with Lumen Gentium being an exception to the past exclusivist ecclesiology , an ecumenism of return, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the Athanasius Creed.The faculty at the college do not want to interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with the past exclusivist ecclesiology as it was known to the Jesuit missionaries in the 16th century.
Students in Rome are not being taught the truths about the Catholic faith, for political and financial reasons.
This is unethical.
Education is a business in Rome.
An accreditation would not be given to the college, by the Leftist government in Italy if the college did not present philosophy and theology with deception.
The Catholic political parties should be protesting outside the offices of the Thomas More College of Liberal Arts in Rome, to defend the culture, history and religion of Italy.
The college must be asked to affirm Vatican Council II and to teach the students the truth about the Council interpreted rationally.Students are taught the Catholic classics but Vatican Council II is taught as contradicting the saints and popes of the past.-Lionel Andrades
The faculty of the Thomas More College(TMC) of Liberal Arts, N.H, USA is not eligible to teach according to Canon Law since they reject the Syllbus of Errors , Athanasius Creed, past catechisms, original understanding of the Nicene Creed,the dogma EENS and reinterpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition when it is not: Phil Lawler could be an exception.
Thomas More College of Liberal Arts rejects Catholic Tradition by irrationally interpreting Vatican Council II. This has the approval of the two popes, the political Left and the college accreditors :I support Tradition by re-interpreting Vatican Council II rationally
From the time 12.00 in the video above Dr.
Taylor Marshall mentions the New Theology and the False Premise used to
interpret the baptism of desire.
This is a source of other heresies for me.
It also
changes the understanding of the First Commandment and the Nicene and Apostles
Creed. It outright rejects the Athanasius Creed.This is heresy in 2021.It is official.It is coming from the top to the bottom.
It is official in Germany and the Vatican.The New
Theology has created two interpretations of Vatican Council II in the whole Catholic Church. One interpretation is rational and
the other irrational, heretical and a break with the past Magisterium.With the
Rational Premise, in the interpretation of Vatican Council II the popes,
cardinals and bishops would have to go back to the traditional strict
interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, an Athansius Creed
with no known exceptions and a Syllabus of Error of Pope Pius X with no
exceptions.But do they want to do that ?
They do not want to talk about this in
Germany.Since it would mean that Cardinal Marx would have to affirm the past
ecclesiocentrism of the Church and then be opposed, instead of supported by the
Left, as at present.
.
Dr. Taylor Marshall in his
latest,new video says that in the past if you would go against the mainstream Church you
would be a heretic. True. Since they had the Faith from the Apostles. It was
the one, true and holy Church.The Holy Spirit guided the Church and the Magisterium was obedient.But now it is the official Church, whichis in heresy.The popes and ecclesiastics are in a break with the past Magisterium, with the use of the False Premise.
Even in a secular discussion if you use a False Premise the conclusions would be different. If I am talking about the New Physics with a group of scientists and if I believe that the moon is the sun and is seen during the day and it gives light then my conclusions would be different from the others, in the group.
A False Premise was used in the Church to create a kind of apostasy. It is universal.
The currect crisis is worse(timing 3:08) says Bishop Athanasius Schneider. "It is universal", he says.True. The False Premise and the New Theology has spread throughout the Church and the ecclesiastics have not corrected it by saying that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire. There are no literal cases in 1965-2021 of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc.
So today the popes reject the dogma extra ecclesiam
nulla salus ( with no exceptions ) as it was known over the centuries.They use the False Premise.
They reject the Athanasius Creed which
says all need the Catholic faith for salvation. There are exceptions created
with the New Theology and the False Premise.
They changed the Nicene and Apostles
Creed with the same False Premise.
They interpret Vatican Council II with
the FalsePremise instead of the
Rational Premise and so the conclusion is non traditional instead of
traditional.This is something obvious today for any one to check.
The Catechism of Pope Pius X 24 Q, 27 Q affirms the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS but when it mentions invincible ignorance, then this is interpreted with the False Premis. So invincible ignorance etc would contradict 24Q and 27 Q on outside the Church there is no salvation.
The first part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 affirms traditional EENS and the second part posits the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance as exceptions for the first past. Again the False Premise is in operation.
It is the same with the Catechism of the Catholic Church, n.846 Outside the Church No Salvation and n.1257 The Necessity of Baptism.
Based upon the irrational interpretation
of Vatican Council II and the resulting liberalism in the Church Pope Francis
has justified Amoris Laetitia, the Abu Dhabi Statement, Traditionis Custode
etc.This official division. It is coming from the top. It is liberalism based upon an irrationality which is official but not Magisterial.
The one, true, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church still exists in the Catholic Church when the False Premise is avoided, wherever it is avoided. In other words, where the New Theology has been made obsolete.-Lionel Andrades
The Archdiocese of Munich and Freising, Germany has a battery ofpublic relations officers but no one responds
to these blog posts which I e-mail them.I would simply like them to confirm
whether LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3,NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to
hypothetical and theoretical cases only in 2021. They are not personally known
non Catholics saved outside the Catholic Church in 2021. That’s all.-Lionel Andrades
Ihre Ansprechpartner in der Pressestelle
Bernhard Kellner Pressesprecher, Leiter der Stabsstelle Kommunikation pressestelle@eomuc.de
Dr. Christoph Kappes Stv. Pressesprecher, Leiter der Pressestelle CKappes@eomuc.de
Karin Basso-Ricci Stv. Pressesprecherin, Stv. Leiterin der Pressestelle kbasso-ricci@eomuc.de Ansprechpartnerin für die Region München (Karte), Diözesanrat der Katholiken
Ursula Hinterberger Redakteurin UHinterberger@eomuc.de Ansprechpartnerin für die Region Nord (Karte), Freising
Hendrik Steffens Redakteur HSteffens@eomuc.de Ansprechpartner für die Region Süd (Karte), Landeskomitee der Katholiken in Bayern
Dr. Christiane Schwarz Dokumentarin CSchwarz@eomuc.de Ansprechpartnerin für Pressefotos
Annette Medeiros da Silva Sachbearbeiterin mit Sekretariatsaufgaben Tel.: 089 / 2137 - 1263 Fax: 089 / 2137 - 271478 pressestelle@eomuc.de
https://www.erzbistum-muenchen.de/presse/kontakt
______________________________________
OCTOBER 9, 2021
All the books on Vatican Council II in Germany are written with the False Premise and not the Rational Premise. The German Government could clarify this for Cardinal Reinhardt Marx
All the books on Vatican Council II in Germany are written with the False Premise and not the Rational Premise. The German Government could clarify this for Cardinal Reinhardt Marx and the German Synodal Way.The editors of the newspapers in Germany do not know it yet but all their reports on the Council and the New Ecumenism, New Ecclesiology, New Evangelisation etc were all created with the False Premise-deception.
Cardinal Marx does not issue a statement to correct the error. He does not grant interviews to admit that he made an error.
German journalists are not asking him how can hypothetical cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II be objective examples of salvation in 2021 ? How can they contradict the traditional strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which says outside the Church there is no salvation ?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall have said that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire(LG 14).There are no explicit cases of Aquinas’ implicit baptism of desire said Dr.Taylor Marshall.This contradicts the bad theology of Cardinal Marx and the Synod.
Cardinal Marx should be affirming the Athanasius Creed which says all need Catholic faith for salvation, since there are no exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II.
The German bishops also should be affirming the Syllabus of Errors (ecumenism of return) with Unitatis Redintigratio 3, Decree on Ecumenism in Vatican Council II, not being an objective exception.
The books on Ecumenism, in Germany, interpret UR 3 as a rupture with EENS and the past ecclesiocentrism and so Cardinal Marx has rejected an ecumenism of return to the Catholic Church.
Even the conservative media in Germany are interpreting LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, irrationally, so they are not correcting Cardinal Marx.
If Cardinal Marx announces that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22, AG 11( seeds of the Word) etc, always refer to hypothetical and invisible peoplein Germany in 2021, then it means that there is nothing in the Council-text to contradict the Catechism of Pope Pius X, 24Q, 27Q on other religions and the need for conversion into the Catholic Church for salvation.-Lionel Andrades
Cardinal Marx and Michael Matt Editor Remnant News use the same False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II
Both Cardinal Marx and Michael Matt are using the same Fake Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and so break with Tradition, especially Magisterial Documents which support exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.Michael Matt is the Editor of Remnant TV. He believes that there is division between traditionalists and liberals.This is seen in the Latin Mass for him.
But this division was really created by the
False Premise.This was not know to Archbishop
Marcel Lefebvre.It was also unknown to Cardinal
Marx.
If they all simply used the Rational Premise to
interpret Vatican Council II there would be a
continuity with Tradition, especially
ecclesiocentrism.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall have said that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire(LG 14).There are no
explicit cases of the implicit baptism of desire of
St. Thomas Aquinas.But for the liberals and
traditionalists the baptism of desire is explicit.Physically visible. So extra ecclesiam nulla salus becomes obsolete for Cardinal Marx and Michael Matt.-Lionel Andrades
OCTOBER 6, 2021
Pope Francis and Cardinal Marx can no more cite Vatican Counci lII to support the German Synodal Way, since the False Premise has been discovered by Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall.Lumen Gentium 14 etc are exceptions to Tradition, for the pope and cardinal and not exceptions to Tradition, for the bishop and lay apologist.This is a new reality before the German bishops
Pope Francis and Cardinal Marx can no more cite Vatican Counci lII to support the German Synodal Way, since the False Premise has been discovered by Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall.Lumen Gentium 14 etc are exceptions to Tradition, for the pope and cardinal and not exceptions to Tradition, for the bishop and lay apologist.This is a new reality before the German bishops.
Pope Francis and Cardinal Marx can no more cite Vatican Counci lII to support the German Synodal Way, since the False Premise has been discovered by Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall.Lumen Gentium 14 etc are exceptions to Tradition, for the pope and cardinal and not exceptions to Tradition, for the bishop and lay apologist.This is a new reality before the German bishops.
Bishop Schneider said that the baptism of desire does not refer to literal cases. The German Synodal Way interprets LG 14( baptism of desire)as a rupture with the Creeds, Catechisms, extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, In other
words, it is a literal and visible case in the
present times,for it to be an exception to EENS etc.
But an invisible case cannot be a practical
exception.
This was the reasoning of the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr.Leonard Feeney.
Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.- Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Unknown and invisible cases of the baptism of desire were projected as being visible and personally known exceptions to EENS which
traditionally had no exceptions. So the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 says that ‘ for eternal
salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member’. It is as if there were explicit and
objective cases of the baptism of desire in 1949-Boston or Rome.
If the German cardinals and bishops interpret
Vatican Council II rationally i.e LG 14 is an invisible case in 2021; it is always, only
hypothetical and theoretical for us humans, then
they could be affirming EENS with no exceptions.They would not be in schism with the past Magisterium on EENS, Syllabus of Errors,
Athanasius Creed etc.The Catechisms would no more contradict each other and other Magisterial Documents,There would not be contradictions in the Catechisms, like invincible ignorance being
projected as an exception to EENS.
With LG 14 ( baptism of desire) not being a
literal case in 2021 for Schneider and Marshall,
they indicate that Pope Francis and Cardinal Marx re different. They have another interpretation of the Council. In principle, Pope Francis and Cardinal Marx assume that unknown and invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, GS 22 etc, are physically visible examples of non Catholics saved outside the Church.These would be physically visible non Catholics for the pope and Cardinal Marx ( so they are exceptions for EENS) and physically invisible cases of non Catholics for Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall.So LG 14 etc are exceptions to Tradition for the pope and cardinal and not for the bishop and lay apologist.
So there is a new reality before the German bishops. There are two different interpretations.Both their conclusions are different.This is a fact.
The Synodal Way intentionally chooses the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition by using the False Premise( invisible non Catholics are visible in 2021 ) and Schneider and Marshall are intentionally choosing the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition with the Rational Premise( invisible cases are invisible in 2021, there are no literal cases of LG 14 etc).
With the False Premisethe Synodal Path has to be heretical, schismatic, liberal and non traditional. It is not Catholic.
The German bishops have a rational and non schismatic choice before them.-Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades
Writer on Vatican Council II being dogmatic and not only pastoral.It is in harmony with the extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, the Athanasius Creed etc.
It is found that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other irrational. Since one uses a Rational Premise and the other a False Premise.One is Magisterial with the past Magisterium and the other, the common one, has an objective error and so cannot be Magisterial.It is the same with the Creeds and Catechisms.There can be two interpretations.
Why should Catholics choose the irrational version which is heretical, non traditional, liberal and schismatic, while a rational option is there, which is traditional ?.
__________________
OCTOBER 5, 2021
With Vatican Council II interpreted with the Rational Premise the German Catholic ecclesiastics come back to the 16th century Church on a faith-issue : exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. They also will have to return to the morals of that time, like homosexual unions being a sin, which are not contradicted by Vatican Council II( rational ).Cardinal Marx can no more say that the Council is a break with Tradition.All the books, articles and theological journals in Germany wrongly interpreted the Council with the False Premise.
With Vatican Council II interpreted with the Rational Premise the German Catholic ecclesiastics come back to the 16th century Church on a faith-issue : exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. They also will have to return to the morals of that time, like homosexual unions being a sin, which are not contradicted by Vatican Council II( rational ).Cardinal Marx can no more say that the Council is a break with Tradition.All the books, articles and theological journals in Germany wrongly interpreted the Council with the False Premise.
They have to agree with Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall who said that there are no explicit cases of the baptism of desire(BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I).There are no explicit and literally-known cases of a non Catholic saved with St. Thomas Aquinas’ implicit baptism of desire.This is a given. It is something obvious.Even the German bishops will agree.
So when the German ecclesiastics, priests and lay people admit this in public, they also would be saying that hypothetical cases of LG 14( case of the catechumen) are not a practical breakwith the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) as it was known to the saints and martyrs in Germany over the centuries.In principle, LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc are always theoretical and speculative only in 2021.So there is nothing in the text of the Council to contradict the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( an ecumenism of return) and the Catechism of Pope Pius X, 24Q,27Q( other religions are not paths to salvation and their members need to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid Hell).So when it is a return to Tradition on Catholic faith it is also a return to Tardition on Catholic morals.There is nothing in the Council-text which contradicts traditional morals.
SYNODAL PATH HAS NOT SUPPORT IN VATICAN COUNCIL II
The German Synodal Path has no support in Vatican Council II on faith and morals.The Council cannot be blamed in general. It has a Specific Error which can be avoided.Then there is a return to Tradition with no new theology.
Bishop Athanasius Schnedier and Dr. Taylor Marshall have found that Specific Error in Vatican Council II.They know what causes the break with Tradition.It is the False Premise.This was not known to the German cardinals and bishops.The Council Fathers( Rahner, Ratzinger etc) used the False Premise of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston(LOHO) and Pope Paul VI did not correct the mistake.
Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.- Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Why is it not necessary to be a member when for centuries the dogma EENS has said that it was necessary ? Since the Letter assumes there are practical exceptions of being saved with the baptism of desire.But it was common sense for centuries that there were no objective cases of the catechumen being saved without the baptism of water and instead with only the desire.So what was invisible was projected as being visible.This was the False Premise. It gave birth to the New Theology which says outside the Church there is known salvation in the present times, so there are exceptions to EENS etc.
UNETHICAL INTERPRETATION OF EENS
Why must Catholics in Germany choose the unethical and dishonest interpretation of Vatican Council II and EENS when a rational and traditional alternative is there ? It is a mortal sin of faith to change the understanding of the Creeds and the dogma EENS.
It is the premise which creates a continuity or break with Tradition, irrespective if you are conservative or liberal,a pope, cardinal or bishop.This was not known at the German universities and seminaries. The books and articles were written with the False Premise.
Now in Traditionis Custode, Pope Francis chose the False and not Rational Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and to make it a condition to offer the Latin Mass.
For Pope Francis and the German bishops there are exceptions for EENS, the Syllabus etc. So they imply that there are physically visible exceptions to EENS etc in the present times.But invisible people cannot be practical exceptions to the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.It is a fact of life that there are no physically visible examples of salvation outside the Church in 2021.So now we have two interpretations of Vatican Council II in Germany.One is with the False Premise ( invisible cases are physically visible in the present times) and the other is with the Rational Premise ( invisible cases are invisible).This is a fact that the Church in Germany will have to acknowledge.It is a reality that the German episcopy has to face.-Lionel Andrades
OCTOBER 5, 2021
In Germany the Catholics who support homosexual marriages could affirm Vatican Council II and interpret it with the Rational Premise and not the False Premise. Then they return to the faith-teachings of the 16th century.In the past homosexual unions were always mortal sins.
In Germany the Catholics who support homosexual marriages could affirm Vatican Council II and interpret it with the Rational Premise and not the False Premise. Then they return to the faith-teachings of the 16th century.In the past homosexual unions were always mortal sins.
With Vatican Council II interpreted rationally the German Catholics would be saying outside the Church there is no salvation( Ad Gentes 7) and there are no exceptions to AG 7 in hypothetical cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc and neither are there any practical exceptions to AG 7 in Germany in 2021.
So the Catholic Church would be saying that all non Catholics are oriented to Hell without ‘faith and baptism’(AG 7). This is a faith teaching.
In the 16th century gay marriages were mortal sins of morals.This still is a moral teaching of the Catholic Church.Homosexual unions are sin.
The Church has not changed when Vatican Council II is interpreted with the Rational Premise.
Cardinal Marx justifies the German Synodal Way with a break with Tradition for him, when Vatican Council II is interpreted with the common false premise.With the Rational Premise he will return to 16th century Germany.-Lionel Andrades
Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr.Taylor Marshall have found the Specific Error in Vatican Council II. It is the Fake Premise. They have used the Rational Premise. This was not known to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops.
Was the Holy Mass of Archbishop Lefebvre 'irregular' with mortal sins of faith ? Are the SSPX bishops and priests offering Holy Mass in doctrinal heresy ? Is it a scandal ?
Posts
