https://www.catholicnh.org/
________________________
https://www.facebook.com/Saint-Benedict-Center-89406028645/
Tuesday, November 2, 2021
We can re-interpret the Council with Feeneyism ( invisible cases are invisible in 2021) and not Cushingism ( invisible cases are visible in 20021) and this will be a move towards a Renewal or Restoration in the Catholic Church
On the Feast of Christ the King - 'The Council and the Eclipse of God' - Part XVIII - by Don Pietro Leone – Part 4 of Chapter 4 on Religious Liberty - Christ the King (b): Silence in the Liturgy
c) The Consequence of the Rupture
Lionel: The rupture with the traditional teachings on the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King, outside the Church there being no salvation and the non separation of Church and State 1) was possible when the popes accepted that unknown cases of the baptism of desire etc were known examples of salvation outside the Church in the present times (1949 , 1965 etc). 2) So they concluded that there were objective exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors and the Athanasius Creed. 3 )Since there was alleged known salvation outside the Church the past ecclesiocentrism was made obsolete.
So the concept of Religious Liberty could also be changed by them, since it was accepted that not every one needed to be a member of the Catholic Church for salvation ( Letter of the Holy Office 1949).
The old theology which justified proclaiming Christ as King in all politics was made obsolete and there was a New Theology in the Catholic Church. This New Theology was not opposed by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Michael Davies.It was the only theology with which they interpreted Vatican Council II. The New Theology put an end to the proclamation of the Catholic Church being the only and unique means of salvation for all mankind and so all needed to be Catholic to avoid Hell.
_____________________
The declaration of the right of all men to Religious Liberty, as we have seen above, amounts to a declaration of the separation of Church and State. This entails the repudiation, on the part of the Council, of the Church’s bounden duty to promote the salvation of all mankind by means of the State: namely (in a positive sense) by commanding the State to worship God in its own person and to assist its citizens to do likewise, and (in a negative sense) by commanding it to suppress error, both doctrinal and moral.
There follow various examples of the application of the Declaration to once Catholic States: Article 6 of the Spanish Charter of 1967, justifying its repeal of previous civil law by reference to the Declaration, reads: ‘The State guarantees the protection of religious liberty, which shall be guaranteed by an effective juridical provision which will safeguard morals and public order’ [19].
The Concordat with Colombia of 1973 reads: ‘The State guarantees to the Catholic Church and to its members the full enjoyment of their religious rights, without prejudice to the just religious liberty of other confessions and their members, and indeed of every citizen’ [20].
Pope John Paul II, in a visit to Malta in 1989, assured the President that the Church did not seek a privileged status at the expense of the State but that, rather, the Church ‘desires to balance her activity within the areas of competence proper to her with the activities of the State in the realm of its own competence.’ In the decades subsequent to the Council we have seen other Churchmen [21]hastening with euphoric and indecorous precipitation to impose Religious Liberty upon Catholic States.
The results, as we said, have been error, both doctrinal and moral. Michael Davies comments that ‘Malta is now saturated with every variety of sect, and no action is taken by the government to restrict their activities.’[22]
Lionel: The political changes were made since outside the Church there is salvation was the New Theology of the Catholic Church based upon the False Premise.This was also the interpretation of Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) by Michael Davies and Catholics in general.They accepted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and also interpreted the Catechism of Pope Pius X, 24 Q, 27Q and 29 Q irrationally.
They all interpreted Vatican Council II with the False Premise and accepted the non traditional new theology on salvation.
________________
He comments further: ‘the legalization of Liberal principles in a Catholic country, initiated by granting non-Catholic sects the right not to be restrained from acting in according with their beliefs in public, initiates a momentum that cannot be controlled.’ Speaking of Spain in particular, he writes: ‘Spain soon conformed to the pattern of a typical European society to-day with legalized pornography, contraception, divorce… sodomy, and abortion…’ [23]
Lionel: Since outside the Church there is known salvation is the official New Theology of the popes, who interpreted Vatican Council II with the False and not Rational Premise, there was no more a theological justification for a Catholic State.
We can now see the bad fruits of the Satanic state, called 'secular'.
___________________
As an example of the last crime, this time in Italy, we recall how Pope Paul broke down and wept when he learnt that an abortion clinic had been established in Rome, but, as Michael Davies notes [24], such was the outcome of his repudiation of the Church’s duty to suppress error. After all, if you make man God, then you cannot be surprised if to-morrow you find him massacring his own children.
And indeed the rupture with Tradition, that is to say with the Catholic Faith, which was effected by the Declaration, is nowhere more clearly seen than in its substitution of man for God, or, more precisely, for Christ the King, as the formal principle of human society. In this connection, we note that the 1920’s which saw the promulgation of the Encyclical Quas Primas also witnessed the glorious uprising of the Mexican Cristeros against their Masonic government, and their martyrdom under the banner of Christ the King. Viva Cristo Rey! The cry of triumph is silenced forty years later, as the Church, in whose name they fought and died, embraces the very Masonic principles of their murderers, and effaces the name of Christ the King from Her teachings, Her liturgy, and from the hearts of the faithful.
Christ the King: King of every Nation, King of every family, is effaced from Her social teaching, effaced from Her marital teaching. The same 1920’s that saw the Encyclical and the Mexican uprising saw the composition of the Hymn to Christ the King in Germany, which all through the dark years of Nazi oppression was to represent fidelity to the Catholic Faith and values: not only to political, but also to domestic virtues, particularly that of purity: a virtue which was also to claim its martyrs [25].
Lionel: Now it is known that with the Rational Premise Vatican Council II is not a break with the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.The Council is dogmatic and supports Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So again we have the theological basis to proclaim the Christ as King of Society since outside the Church there is no salvation. So what stops Rorate Caeili and its readers from going back to Tradition, even if it is politically incorrect ? Why was this not done, for example, before the recent elections for the Mayor of Rome ? There was no report on Rorate Caeili, Remnant News etc interpreting Vatican Council II rationally.There is no support for political parties in Italy which affirm the Social Reign of Christ the King. They are not shown how Vatican Council II interpreted with the Rational Premise supports them.
Rorate Caeili and Don Pietro Leone remain politically correct with the Left, with their interpretation of Vatican Council II.
___________________
‘Christ my King, to Thee alone do I pledge my love, pure as a lily, and my fidelity unto death’ [26]: where in the Council and the post-conciliar liturgy, we may ask, do we find virtues promoted such as these? We look for them in vain in the mutilated hymns of the Feast-day and in the Council’s treatment of the family, saturated as it is with eroticism and with the spirit of the World [27].
Lionel: We can re-interpret the Council with Feeneyism ( invisible cases are invisible in 2021) and not Cushingism( invisible cases are visible in 20021) and this will be a move towards a Renewal or Restoration in the Catholic Church.-Lionel Andrades
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2021/10/on-feast-of-christ-king-council-and.html#more
Repost : Fr.Marco Hausmann removed by bishop : no more offers the Traditional Latin Mass for Militia Christi in Rome
SEPTEMBER 29, 2019
Fr.Marco Hausmann removed by bishop : no more offers the Traditional Latin Mass for Militia Christi in Rome
Fr. Marco Hausmann in a response to a question a few years back said that there are no personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church with the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance. There are none personally known to him in the present times (2015-19).He has been removed from the church Sant Giuseppe a Capo le Case where he would offer the Traditional Latin Mass.I went to his residence an hour back but he did not want to comment.The Latin Mass was offered today morning by another priest, for the Militia Christi.Most of the regular members were not present and some of the new faces were possibly friends of the new priest.
Fr. Hausmann was saying that he personally did not know any one saved outside the Church in 2019 as referenced in LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc.This means the common false interpretation of Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition, especially the old ecclesiology, has been made obsolete. It is done away with.
The interpretation of Pope Francis, Pope Benedict and the Left no more holds water.
I reported on Sept 23, 2019 Fr. Marco Hausmann in a response to a question a few years back said that there are no personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church with the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance. There are none personally known to him in the present times (2015-19).
Fr.Marco was not present on Sept 20 at Porta Pia when the Militia Christi paid homage to the soldiers who died defending the pope.He has been the Spiritual Director of the Militia Christi who have been opposing the Gay Pride marches and the LGBT in Italy.Many of their activists were not present at the Mass in Latin today morning.
On July 30 it was reported on this blog that 'last Sunday there was no Mass in Latin at 11.30 a.m at the church San Giuseppe a Capo le Case, in central Rome, for the Militia Christi. The last Sunday morning Mass for July, before the August holidays when the church will remain closed, was held at 10.30 a.m in Italian.
Fr. Marco Hausmann was not allowed to offer the Latin Mass for members of the Militia Christi'
-Lionel Andrades
Repost : Q & A : What is the difference between your interpretation of Vatican Council II and every one else ?
OCTOBER 24, 2021
Q & A : What is the difference between your interpretation of Vatican Council II and every one else ?
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Q. In brief can you tell us what is the difference between your interpretation of Vatican Council II and every one else ?
A. I interpret LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 , UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II as always referring to hypothetical and invisible cases in 2021. So there are no objective exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus , the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the Athanasius Creed ( all need the Catholic faith for salvation).There are none mentioned in the text of Vatican Council II.Neither are there any known, practical exceptions.
I accept the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance as being hypothetical cases. I do not reject them.But I do not project them as being practical exceptions to EENS. It was the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which made an objective mistake.
So there are two interpretations of the Council today. One with the common False Premise and the other, mine, with the Ratioinal Premise. Their conclusion is non traditional, heretical, schismatic and divisive. Mine is in harmony with the past Magisterium.It has the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition. So Catholics today have an option.-Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/10/q-what-is-difference-between-your.html
_____________________________
NOVEMBER 2, 2021
Vatican Council II is dogmatic for me since it does not contradict EENS, the Syllabus of Errors etc.I choose the Rational Premise.Invisible people are always invisible in 2021.
I interpret LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II as not being exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) since LG 8 etc are always hypothetical and theoretical only in 2021. Most people interpret them as being exceptions to EENS. This is how the popes interpret them.So they wrongly imply that these are not visible cases.They are visible and known people for you.Otherwise how could they be exceptions for EENS ?
So we have two interpretations of Vatican Council II, yours and mine.
In the same way we have two interpretations of EENS, one is with visible cases of the baptism of desire and the other is without it.
It is the same with the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the Catechism of Pope Pius X.
For you 29 Q ( invincible ignorance) of the Catechism of Pope Pius X would contradict 24Q and 27 Q (outside the Church no salvation ) but not for me.It is the same for the Catechism of the Catholic Church n.846, 1257.( See the links at the right hand bar).
Those who project the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance as being exceptions for EENS, I call Cushingites.
Those who project them as not being exceptions I call Feeneyites.
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was a Cushingite and so Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus are Cushingite. He read Vatican Council II with the False Premise.
But I can read Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise and so I can re-read Dominus Iesus etc rationally with the traditional ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.
Vatican Council II is dogmatic for me since it does not contradict EENS, the Syllabus of Errors etc.I choose the Rational Premise.Invisible people are always invisible in 2021.
Lionel Andrades
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 ?Vatican Council II.
Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not only pastoral.
Blog: Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission )
E-mail: lionelandrades10@
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/11/vatican-council-ii-is-dogmatic-for-me.html
_____________________________________
OCTOBER 21, 2021
I AFFIRM CHURCH TEACHINGS
I affirm Church Teachings and Documents. Vatican Council II is an ally
I AFFIRM CHURCH TEACHINGS
When Vatican Council II is interpreted with the Rational Premise the Council is an ally. We can affirm Tradition along with Vatican Council II.
I affirm all the teachings of the Catholic Church but I only interpret Church documents with the rational premise. So there is no rupture with the past Magisterium and Catholic Tradition.
I AVOID THE CONFUSION
Today's Christocentric missionaries will interpret the Catechism of Pope Pius X, 29Q ( invincible ignorance) as being a practical exception to 24Q and 27Q ( outside the Church no salvation) in the same Catechism. They are Cushingite and not Feeneyite.
For Feeneyites 29 Q ( invincible ignorance) is only a hypothetical case. So LG 16 ( invincible ignorance) does not contradict Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation).
Also the Catechism of the Catholic Church 847-848 ( invincible ignorance) does not contradict the same Catechism of the Catholic Church n.846 ( AG 7 - all need faith and baptism for salvation.)
Cardinal Tagle's Cushingite missionaries, will also welcome other Christians, Protestans, Lutherans, Episcopalians, even if they officially believe contraception and abortion are not mortal sins. The false New Evangelisation, presents Jesus in a new Church, without the necessity of the traditional faith and moral teachings of the Catholic Church of St. Ignatius of Loyola.
With the Rational Premise, Pope Francis and Cardinal Tagle could affirm the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics ( Quas Primas ). Since the ecclesiology of Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents, would have returned to ecclesiocentrism. There would no more be a rupture with the Principle of Non Contradiction ( baptism of desire cases are visible in Heaven and on earth at the same time and so they are practical exceptions to EENS), of Aristotle.
LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949
I affirm the first part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which is not contradicted by the second half for me.Since the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance refer to hypothetical and theoretical cases only in 2021. They could not have been practical exceptions to Feenyite EENS in 1949. Pope Pius XII and the popes who followed made an objective mistake.The present popes continue with the mistake and expect all Catholics to follow them.So the interpretation of Vatican Council II by the College of Cardinals is also irrational and non Magisterial.
CATECHISM OF POPE PIUS X
I affirm the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( 24 Q, 29 Q) on other religions.It is not contradicted by that same Catechism mentioning those who are saved in invincible ignorance. Similarly I affirm Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation) which is not contradicted by Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance).LG 16 is always a hypothetical case.Only God can know if someone is saved in invincible ignorance.LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 are always hypothetical.So they do not contradict the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.
Similarly the Vatican Council II, Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis Redintigratio 3, is always hypothetical.So does not contradict the past ecumenism of return or the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation.
ATHANASIUS CREED
Similarly I affirm the Athanasius Creed which says all need Catholic faith for salvation.I do not know of any practical exception in the present times.
DOGMA EENS
I affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and I accept hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance. I do not have to reject them.Since they can only be hypothetical, always.
CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
I affirm the Catechism of the Catholic Church (846 Outside the Church No Savation) with Ad Gentes 7 saying all need faith and baptism. I do not know of any exception.There is no exception mentioned in the phrase , ' all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church'.The priority is membership in the Catholic Church, with 'faith and baptism' to avoid Hell ( for salvation).We do not separate Jesus from His Mystical Body the Catholic Church.The norm for salvation is faith and baptism.
Similarly I know that 'the Church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water'(CCC 1257) and that there are no practical exceptions.Theoretically 'God is not limited to the Sacraments', and practically all need the baptism of water and Catholic faith,always, to avoid Hell.There are no practical exceptions for the norm for salvation.
NICENE CREED
In the Nicene Creed, we say 'one baptism for the forgiveness of sins'. This refers to one baptism, the baptism of water, which is physically visible. I cannot administer the baptism of desire and it is not known to us human beings.So there is one baptism and not three or more known baptisms.There are no known baptisms which exclude the baptism of water.There is no literal baptism of desire, as says, Bishop Athanasius Schneider in the recent interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall.
FOUR MARKS OF THE CHURCH
So the Four Marks of the Church( one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic) must include affirming all Church documents with the rational and not irrational premise.
APOSTLES CREED
In the Apostles Creed, we say "I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church".The Holy Spirit guides the Catholic Church even today, to say that outside the Catholic Church there is no known salvation.This would be interpreting the Apostles Creed with the rational premise.Otherwise the Creed would be saying outside the Church there is known salvation.
VATICAN COUNCIL II IS DOGMATIC
Vatican Council II is dogmatic and supports traditional EENS, with LG 8, LG 16 etc not being practical exceptions in the present times.
For Pope Paul VI, Vatican Council was pastoral and not dogmatic, since he used the false premise to create a break with the dogma EENS, the Syllabus of Errors etc.If he had interpreted the Council with a rational premise then the Council would also be dogmatic in 1965.It would make Fr. John Courtney Murray sj, Fr. Joseph Ratzinger, Fr. Yves Congar op and Fr. Karl Rahner sj unable to theologicallysupport their liberalism.There would not be a New Theology.
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS ECCLESIOCENTRIC
Since the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance are always hypothetical, theoretical and speculative only, they do not contradict the Church's traditional ecclesiocentrism.
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY
The footnotes of Dignitatis Reditigratio, Vatican Council II refer to the Church in a secular state.With Vatican Council II ecclesiocentric and dogmatic, the Council would be an ally for a Catholic Government in a Catholic State. It would be important for the pope to be a Catholic to save their soul, since Vatican Council II is also saying outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation( Cantate Domino, Council of Trent 1441).The Catholic Government may choose to grant religious liberty to non Catholics as during the time of the Papal States in Europe. The roots of Europe are Catholic and not Christian, unless it refers to the Catholic Church.
COLLEGIALITY, SYNODALITY
Collegiality and Synodality are not an issue when Vatican Council II is ecclesiocentric and supports the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Since in a Synod all wold have to interpret the Council with the Rational Premise and the so support the past ecclesiocentrism of the Syllabus of Errors, EENS, Catechisms of Trent and Pius X etc.
TRADITIONAL MISSION
Since Vatican Council II is ecclesiocentric we are back to Traditional Mission according to the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. Every one with no known exception needs to enter the Catholic Church, with no mortal sin at the time of death, to avoid Hell ( for salvation).
The New Evangelisation of Pope Benedict rejects ecclesiocentrism when it interprets Vatican Council II with the Fake Premise. So the Church becomes Christocentric without remaining Ecclesiocentric as in the past.
It is only with ecclesiocentrism that there is a return to Traditional Mission. To save souls from going to Hell it is necessary to have a Catholic Government in a Catholic State like Italy.The present secular, liberal or Communist states are Satanic.They are supported by Vatican Council II interpreted with the False Premise which says outside the Church there is known salvation.So every one does not have to be Catholic to go to Heaven is the new teaching of George Soros and the Rotschild family.They present a Council which presents exceptions for EENS.
So there is no real evangelization in Europe.Since in Europe people know about Jesus but they are not being told by the Church that it is necessary to believe in Jesus, while being a member of the Catholic Church, with Catholic faith and the baptism of water, for salvation ( to avoid Hell ).
Now with radio and television even people in the poor countries of Asia and Africa know about Jesus but they do know tht he is the unique and only Saviour, who saves people from Hell in the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church according to the Bible is His Mystical Body.
SOCIAL REIGN OF CHRIST THE KING
The Catholic Identity Conference held recently mentions the Social Reign of Christ the King while interpreting Vatican Council II with the False Premise this is contradictory.It also mentions George Soros when the interpretation of the Council by the Lefebvrists is approved by George Soros and the Rothschilds.
Catholics are not told that outside the Church there is no salvation and that this is the teaching of Vatican Council II.So Catholics should vote for a Political Party which supports the Social Reign of Christ the King in politics.Christ must be the center of all politics. Christ must not restricted to the liturgy.
When Vatican Council II supports the dogma EENS which says outside the Church there is no salvation then Catholics have an obligation to support a Catholic political party or candidate, who interprets the Council rationally.
Traditional Mission in the Church can only return when the Lefebvrists, Thucs and others interpret Magisterial Documents with the Rational Premise and avoid the objective error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.
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
This irrationality is accepted by both the present two popes . So we have a political Left interpretation of the Council. There are two interpretations, one with the False Premise above and the other with the Rational Premise, which avoids the mistake above.How can invisible cases of the baptism of desire be objective exceptions to the practical teaching on all needing to be incorporated into the Catholic Church with faith and the baptism of water for salvation.
This irrationality is accepted by both the present two popes . So we have a political Left interpretation of the Council. There are two interpretations, one with the False Premise above and the other with the Rational Premise, which avoids the mistake above.How can invisible cases of the baptism of desire be objective exceptions to the practical teaching on all needing to be incorporated into the Catholic Church with faith and the baptism of water for salvation.
TRADITIONIS CUSTODE AND VATICAN COUNCIL II.
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 of the Church indicated by the Holy Spirit. To doubt the Council is to doubt the intentions of those very Fathers who excercised their collegial power in a solemn manner cum Pietro et sub Pietro 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 calls Vatican Council II interpreted with a fake premise, to create a false rupture with Tradition, 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 the Syllabus of Errors ? Yet this is how Pope Francis and the Masons interpret Vatican Council II.It is different from rational way. I interpret the Council. I consider the interpretations of Vatican Council II with the rational premise as being Magisterial.It is not a rupture with the past Magisterium. Pope Francis cannot say the same.
With Traditional Mission and ecclesiocentrism the Catholic political parties can proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics and the non separation of Church and State, as a priority to save souls from Hell.
These are the teachings and documents of the Catholic Church which I affirm. -Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/10/i-affirm-church-teachings.html
__________________
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
