Monday, November 15, 2021
Cardinal Angelo Donatis who held a high profile political Funeral Mass for an Italian living in adultery has prohibited the Latin Mass in Rome for Good Friday and Easter
Cardinal Angelo Donatis who does not affirm the Athanasius Creed in
public and who had a political funeral Mass for an Italian diplomat who was murdered in
the Congo, has, for public-left reasons prohibited the Latin Mass for the Easter Triduum in Rome.The teachings
of the Catholic Church before and after Vatican Council II, indicate that the
deceased Italian was living in adultery, married to
a non Christian, is now in Hell.Since he had no
chance to repent, change his lifestyle and so be absolved of his mortal sin of
morals.His relatives in Italy and the Congo were present at the funeral.
The cardinal did not mention the tragic
situation of the man for all eternity, for the benefit and prudence of the relatives and
Prime Minister Dragi and other ministers, who were present, at the basilica of
St.Mary of the Angels, Rome.Cardinal Donatis condoled with all the families
affected, including the non Christian one.He did not invite them in the one,true faith (UR 3), outside of which there is no salvation (AG 7/CCC 846), to leave their religion and enter the Catholic Church to save their souls from the fires of Hell.
I knew Cardinal Donatis when he was a priest and spiritual director of the New Catehechumenal Way at the basilica of St. Marco opposite Piazza Venezia, Rome.He would not affirm Vatican Council II ( AG 7) or missionary statements of the popes. The New Catechumenal Way of Kiko Arguello there, did not kmow the faith and at their annual catechesis they would say outside the Church there is salvation and would interpret Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition, using the False Premise like Fr. Donatis.For them too probably adultery would not be a mortal sin.
The high profile funeral Mass is part of the campaign by Satan to implement a new culture in Rome with the approval of the Jewish Left.The deceased Italian's marriage was not a Sacrament.
He also did not announce other religions as false religions and the spirit of their religion not being that of the Holy Spirit of the Catholic Church.The Jewish Left did not object to this funeral Mass.
The liberal rabbis who objected to the Good Friday Prayer for the Conversion of the Jews had also objected to a funeral Mass for Erich Priebike.
So the Rome Vicariate refused to have a funeral Mass for Priebike and the Society of Pope Pius X came forward to hold the funeral Mass since the Vicariate refused to do so for political reasons.Priebike was a good Catholic and would attend Sunday Mass.
When his body was stolen at night the
Jewish Left at the leftist synagogue in Rome, which a Secretary of the Partito
Democratico, described as the center of the new culture – welcomed it,
according to their comments in the daily newspapers.
Now the Latin Mass is prohibited for Easter and Good Friday and this would please Satan.
However this Easter at Mass in the vernacular Catholics will continue to have their same lex orandi and lex credendi, for those, who affirm Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise.The Council affirms the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation) with no objective exceptions mentioned in the entire text of the Council for Ad Gentes 7 or the Athanasius Creed.
In the text of Ad Gentes 7 the passage in red or purple do not contradict the passage in blue in the text of Ad Gentes 7.1. It is the same in Lumen Gentium 14.So Vatican Council II still affirms exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church and the same ecclesiology of the SSPX chapel in Rome, on other religions.-Lionel Andrades
1.
------
THE TEXT IN BLUE SUPPORT ECCLUSIVE SALVATION IN THE CHURCH AND THE TEXT IN RED BEING ONLY HYPOTHETICAL CASES ARE NOT OBJECTIVE EXCEPTIONS.
7. This missionary activity derives its reason from the will of God, "who wishes all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, Himself a man, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim. 2:45), "neither is there salvation in any other" (Acts 4:12). Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door. Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."(17) Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6), yet a necessity lies upon the Church (1 Cor. 9:16), and at the same time a sacred duty, to preach the Gospel. And hence missionary activity today as always retains its power and necessity...-Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II
THE PASSAGE IN PURPLE
ALSO DOES NOT CONTRADICT THE PASSAGE IN BLUE
7. This missionary activity derives its reason from the will of God, "who wishes all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, Himself a man, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim. 2:45), "neither is there salvation in any other" (Acts 4:12). Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door. Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."(17) Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6), yet a necessity lies upon the Church (1 Cor. 9:16), and at the same time a sacred duty, to preach the Gospel. And hence missionary activity today as always retains its power and necessity...-Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II
Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."(17)
Those who are not aware and are saved ; those who are in ignorance and are saved are known only to God. We cannot judge any particular case on earth.They are always hypothetical and theoretical. So this passage also does not contradict the blue orthodox passage.-L.A
----------
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/249546/traditionis-custodes-rome-diocese-bans-traditional-latin-mass-for-easter-triduum
Is it material or formal heresy when Bishop Roland Minnerath uses a fakes premise, false inference and non traditional in the interpretation of Vatican Council II to reject the Athanasius Creed when he knows that a Rational Premise is there and he can choose a continuity with Tradition
Trending /Repost : Archbishop Lefebvre's books are now obsolete
AUGUST 5, 2017
Archbishop Lefebvre's books are now obsolete
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was correct. Vatican Council II(Cushingite) was a rupture with Tradition. It was heretical.He was right to reject it.
The SSPX bishops were also correct to reject Vatican Council II which was commonly interpreted with an irrational premise.
VATICAN COUNCIL II HAS CHANGED DOGMA ACCORDING TO POPE BENEDICT XVI
VATICAN COUNCIL II HAS CHANGED DOGMA ACCORDING TO POPE BENEDICT XVI
This would seem obvious, for example, when it refers to being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) which would mean there is salvation outside the Church. So as Pope Benedict XVI confirmed last year, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is no more like it was for the missionaries of the 16th century. Vatican Council II is a rupture with the magisterium of the 16th century.So Vatican Council II is not a pastoral Council it has changed dogma.
ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE WAS CORRECT TO REJECT ALL THIS
ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE WAS CORRECT TO REJECT ALL THIS
Since LG 16 is an exception to the dogma EENS it means that the old ecclesiology of the Church has been done away with. Now with salvation outside the Church there can be the Anonymous Christian saved in his religion. This was the foundation for the new ecumenism. So it was said that a non Christian does not necessily have to enter the Church for salvation.Since he could be saved in invincible ignorance. He could be saved with the baptism of desire. He could be saved with 'seeds of the Word' all without 'faith and baptism'.Archbishop Lefebvre was correct to reject all this.
So this was a grand rupture with Tradition.Doctrine has been changed. I repeat - Vatican Council II was not a pastoral Council as some of the traditionalists like to believe. Archbishop Lefebvre rejected this interpretation of Vatican Council II and the popes did not.
They all made a mistake.
There was an obvious mistake and it was overlooked.
It got pass every one.
Reason it out.
If LG 16 is an exception to the dogma EENS then it would have to be known.An unknown person cannot be an exception.If there is a box of oranges and there is an apple in the box the apple is an exception because it is different but also becuase it is there in that box.
Someone has to exist and be visible to be an exception to the teaching on all needing to be members of the Church for salvation (Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441).
This person would have to live in our reality. We would have to know his name and surname.
This person would have to live in our reality. We would have to know his name and surname.
So this was the inference.
It is upon this inference that we have the New Theology of Vatican Council II accepted by the popes and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.
And there is no such person. There cannot be any such person.
No one in our life time.
How can we humans know of someone saved outside the Church? He would be in Heaven. How can we see people in Heaven saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water? This would be known only to God.
For us humans this is ' a zero case' as John Martignoni, the apologist puts it.The baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are not exceptions to the dogma EENS said Archbishop Thomas E.Gullickson.
Fr.Stefano Visintin osb, the new Benedictine Rector at the Pontifical University of St. Anselm, Rome agrees with him.
MYSTICI CORPORIS REFERS TO A HYPOTHETICAL CASE
How can we humans know of someone saved outside the Church? He would be in Heaven. How can we see people in Heaven saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water? This would be known only to God.
For us humans this is ' a zero case' as John Martignoni, the apologist puts it.The baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are not exceptions to the dogma EENS said Archbishop Thomas E.Gullickson.
Fr.Stefano Visintin osb, the new Benedictine Rector at the Pontifical University of St. Anselm, Rome agrees with him.
MYSTICI CORPORIS REFERS TO A HYPOTHETICAL CASE
So LG 16 was really a hypothetical case. It was speculative and theoretical and not an exception to the dogma EENS.
It never was an exception even in the past.Mystici Corporis is referring to a hypothetical case. The Catechism of the Council of Trent is referring to an unknown person. When the Catechism of Pope Pius X mentions invincible ignorance it was not an exception to EENS at that time.St.Thomas Aquinas was not saying there was a known case of a catechumen who desired the baptism of water and died before he received and so was now in Heaven.This had to be wrongly inferred by the liberal theologians.
The Holy Office 1949, Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits made a mistake.
Cardinal Cushing imposed the leftist excommunication on Fr. Leonard Feeney for over 19 years.So it gave him time to place the mistake in Vatican Council. The excommunication was political and supported by the Jewish Left.
Cardinal Cushing imposed the leftist excommunication on Fr. Leonard Feeney for over 19 years.So it gave him time to place the mistake in Vatican Council. The excommunication was political and supported by the Jewish Left.
There are now superflous references to being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I), baptism of desire(BOD) and baptism of blood (BOB) in Vatican Council II.
They are not a rupture with Tradition.Non existing cases on earth do not contradict EENS ( Feeneyite) or the Syllabus of Errors.
Archbishop Lefebvre did not know this.
Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger did not tell him about it.
He kept writing books criticizing Vatican Council II in which he interpreted LG 16 as being an exception to Tradition.When Archbishop Marcel Lefbvre wrote J'accuse le Concile and Letter to Confused Catholics he did not know about Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite).
Even now after some 50 years the SSPX bishops still interpret LG 16 as referring to a visible case.
ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE'S WRITINGS DO NOT APPLY TO VATICAN COUNCIL II (FEENEYITE)
ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE'S WRITINGS DO NOT APPLY TO VATICAN COUNCIL II (FEENEYITE)
When LG 16, LG 8, LG 14, UR 3, AG 7, AG 14, GS 22,NA 2 etc are seen only as hypothetical cases in 2017 they are not a rupture with Tradition.We get a new interpretation of the Council which is traditional.
So it makes the writings of Archbishop Lefebvre obsolete.
They no more apply to Vatican Council II(Feeneyite). We now know that there cannot be a new ecumenism when the ecclesiology of the Church has not changed.So with a rational and traditional theology there can only be an ecumenism of return.
There cannot be salvation outside the Church for Jews etc when there is no known salvation outside the Church in 2017 to contradict traditional EENS as the missionareis in the 16th century knew it.Mission is still based on the old understanding of non Catholic religions and salvation.
We need to proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation and the non separation of Church and State since there is absolutely no salvation outside the Church.
Collegiality is not a problem when there is unity on doctrine. If all the bishops and popes are willing to affirm LG 16 as referring to invisible cases we are united on Vatican Council II(Feeneyite).
Religious liberty was never an issue in the past when the ecclesiology of the Church and State was exclusivist. The papal states allowed the Jews and other non Catholics to follow their religion.The religion of the state however taught outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation based on John 3:5 and Mark 16:16. Enter through the narrow gate for the road to Hell is wide and most people take it.(Matt.7:13).All this was unknown to Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops since their premise was wrong. They accepted the objective error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.SSPX bishops and priests are still interpreting Vatican Council II with the irrational inference.
Here is Bishop Fellay making the mistake.
Here is Bishop Fellay making the mistake.
MISTAKES BY BISHOP FELLAY AND FR. PIER PAOLO PETRUCCI
The same declaration (LG, 8) also recognizes the presence of “salvific elements” in non-Catholic Christian communities. The decree on ecumenism goes even further, adding that “the Spirit of Christ does not refrain from using these churches and communities as means of salvation, which derive their efficacy from the fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church.” (UR, 3)Such statements are irreconcilable with the dogma “No salvation outside of the Church, which was reaffirmed by a Letter of the Holy Office on August 8, 1949". -Bishop Bernard Fellay (April 13, 2014 ) Letter to Friends and Benefactors no. 82 2The same mistake was made by Father Pier Paulo Petrucci the present Superior of the SSPX at Albano, Italy. 3
ROME CAN COME BACK TO THE FAITH WITH VATICAN COUNCIL II (FEENEYITE)
When they accept or proclaim Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite, with LG 16 referring to an invisible case ) they are not rejecting Vatican Council II and neither are they rejecting Tradition.Instead as Archbishop Lefebvre suggested they can ask Rome to come back to the faith.IThey can do this in a simple way.They can choose a rational and traditional interpretation of the Council .It has an obvious continuity with the past and no ambiguity within it.
ROME CAN COME BACK TO THE FAITH WITH VATICAN COUNCIL II (FEENEYITE)
When they accept or proclaim Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite, with LG 16 referring to an invisible case ) they are not rejecting Vatican Council II and neither are they rejecting Tradition.Instead as Archbishop Lefebvre suggested they can ask Rome to come back to the faith.IThey can do this in a simple way.They can choose a rational and traditional interpretation of the Council .It has an obvious continuity with the past and no ambiguity within it.
So it is meaningless to read the books of the good Archbishop. They belong to another time.He was correct that Vatican Council II (Cushingite- with LG referring to a visible case) was a rupture with Tradition and the SSPX should continue to reject it as their founder did.
WRONG TO EXCOMMUNICATE HIM
They were wrong to excommunicate him since the magisterium's interpretation of Vatican Council II was rupture with the past and was heretical. Instead there should be an apology.
It was a leftist excommunication as in the case of Fr. Leonard Feeney who was not teaching any thing new. We now know that invisIble for us being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire never ever was an exception to his interpretation of the dogma EENS.
-Lionel Andrades
1.
AUGUST 4, 2017
SSPX Italy is not affirming Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) for political reasons
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/08/sspx-italy-is-not-affirming-vatican.html
2.
NOVEMBER 4, 2016
Bishop Bernard Fellay interprets Vatican Council II with the irrational premise and conclusion : there is an option, a rational conclusion of which he is unaware of http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/bishop-bernard-fellay-interprets.html
3.
JANUARY 12, 2016
Fr. Pierpaolo Petrucci, Superior General,SSPX , Italy makes the familiar SSPX error http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/fr-pier-paolo-petrucci-superior.html
________________________________________
JUNE 14, 2014
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/even-if-non-catholic-was-saved-in-his.html
APRIL 28, 2017
Bishop Fellay does not realize that he is confused between Feeneyism and Cushingism http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/04/bishop-fellay-does-not-realize-that-he.html
________________________________________________________
In my parish too the priests and lay Catechists need to affirm Vatican Council II just like in Dijon, France Bishop Roland Minnerath needs to affirm the Council and interpret it rationally. The priests and lay people must affirm the Athanasius Creed other wise it is first class heresy in the hierarchy of truths of the Catholic faith.
In my parish too( Santa Maria di Nazareth, Boccea, Casalotti, Roma) the priests and lay Catechists need to affirm Vatican Council II just like in Dijon, France Bishop Roland Minnerath needs to affirm the Council and
interpret it rationally.
They must no longer support the Council interpreted with a Fake
Premise. For then they negate the traditional interpretation of the Creeds ,
extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Catechisms.There is no unity on doctrine
and theology in the parish.
They must not project LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc
as being exceptions for the Athanasius Creed, for then it means that they
interpret Vatican Council II irrationally.They are saying that there are
personally known non Catholics saved
outside the Catholic Church in 1965-2021.In reality there cannot be such
people. If any one is saved outside the Catholic Church without ‘faith and
baptism’ (AG 7) it can only be known to God. There are no physically visible
cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance.
So they must not project LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22
etc as being exceptions forTradition ( Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX
etc).This was the mistake made by Bishop Roland Minnerath. He thought Vatican
Council II was a break with the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the
Catechism of Pope Pius X ( 24Q,27Q). Every one in the parish must affirm Vatican
Council II and know that there is no more the liberal-traditionalist division,
since Vatican Council II can only be rational. The common irrational version of
the Council is obsolete.
Why should Catholic lay people in the parish, for example,
interpret Vatican Council II irrationally when they have a rational version
before them?
I would like to resume receiving the Eucharist at Mass in
Italian in the parish and for this the priests must affirm Vatican Council II (
rational) and create doctrinal and theological unity among the people and the
past Magisterium. They must announce that Vatican Council II is not a break with
Tradition it is in harmony with the Athanasius Creed.
The priests and lay people must affirm the Athanasius Creed other wise it is first class heresy in the hierarchy of truths of the Catholic faith.-Lionel Andrades
__________________________
JUNE 5, 2021
Catholic priests agree with me on five points but will not proclaim them in public
The present and past priests at the parish Santa Maria di Nazareth,Casalotti, Boccea, near Rome's Battistini Metro Station,agree with the FIVE POINTS earlier but in public they will not affirm Vatican Council II,interpreted without the false premise. They will not proclaim Vatican Council II without confusing what is invisible as being visible and then projecting practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.
So while Lionel Andrades affirms these Magisterial documents rationally, they have to deny them as being obsolete and contradicted by Vatican Council II interpreted with the false premise.The false premise creates exceptions.
They have to deny the Athanasius Creed and exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church because of the false premise which creates a non traditional conclusion.
Lionel Andrades can affirm the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( 24Q,27Q) which is not in conflict with hypothetical cases of being saved invincible ignorance, which is mentioned in that Catechism.The priests from the two religious communities, who offer Holy Mass in Italian, cannot do the same.They cannot do so since being saved in invincible ignorance is not hypothetical for them. If it was hypothetical it would not be an exception to the strict interpretation of EENS. It would mean that they would have to affirm the strict interpretation of EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors. So they reject the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q,27Q).-Lionel Andrades
_________________________
JUNE 5, 2021
Catholic priests in the parish Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Rome agree with me on five points
In the parish Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea, Rome, near the Battistini Metro Station, there have been two religious communities housed there, the Joseleitos Christo and the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate.This is also the parish of Lionel Andrades according to his blog Eucharist and Mission( Lionel's Blog).The religious communities there agree with him on the following five points.
1.They agree that there are no physically visible cases of non Catholics saved with the baptism of desire over the last 60 years in Italy.If any one was saved as such it would only be known to God.
2.They agree that there are no physically visible non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water over the last 60 years in Italy.If any one was saved as such it would be known only to God.
3.The priests of the two religious communities agree with Lionel Andrades when he says that we do not know of any one in the present times who is saved as a martyr(baptism of blood)and without the baptism of water.If St.Emerentiana or Dismas, the Good Thief, was saved without the baptism of water,we do not know of any such case over the last few years or more in Italy.
4.So the baptism of desire,baptism of blood and invincible ignorance cannot be practical examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church.They cannot be practical exceptions for the Athanasius Creed.It says outside the Church there is no salvation.They cannot be practical exceptions for Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II, which says all need faith and baptism for salvation(to avoid Hell).
The Catholic priests agree on this point too.
5.So there can be nothing in Vatican Council II ( interpreted rationally) to contradict the Athanasius Creed and Pope Pius IX's Syllabus of Errors.Since LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2,GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, can refer to only hypothetical cases.They are speculative. They are not practical exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus( Cantate Domino, Council of florence 1441 etc).
None of these FIVE POINTS are denied by the religious communities Joseleitos Christo and the Franciscans of the Immaculate in the parish Santa Maria di Nazareth.This is the parish in which Pope Francis closed down the seminary of the Franciscans of the Immaculate.-Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/06/catholic-priests-in-parish-santa-maria.html
________________________________
JUNE 4, 2021
They agree with me : A Catholic should be elected Mayor of Rome : Vatican Council II must be the test of being a Catholic
The priests of the Joseleitos de Christo community at the church Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea, Rome, in principle agree that there are no objective examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church in 2021.There are no practical exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) in the present times (1965-2021).There are no physically visible cases of non Catholics, saved with the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water and Catholic faith.We cannot see or meet someone who is an exception to the norm for salvation i.e faith and baptism (Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II).This was also the view of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, who were last year in this parish. They too agree with me.The Rector of Francisican Friar seminary in the parish was Fr. Rosario Sammarco f.i and Parish Priest, Fr.Giuseppe Grioni f.i.The seminary is closed and the building is under the management of the Comitato dell Immaculata, set up originally by Fr. Stefano Mannelli f.i.
In the parish today the Parish Priest Fr.Francisco De Barros Barbosa, sjc in public interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise. If he did not use the false premise, Vatican Council II (AG 7) would affirm the past ecumenism of return to the Catholic Church, an exclusivist ecclesiology, the old traditional theology of outside the Church there is no salvation and the need to proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King in all national politics in Italy.
However he agrees with me - there are no objective exceptions to EENS. There are no physically visible cases of non Catholics saved with the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water and Catholic faith.
The priests of the Joseleitos di Christo and Franciscans of the Immaculate need to tell Catholics and especially parishioners, to vote only for candidates for the Mayor's office in Rome, who interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise.They would be true Catholics. With Vatican Council II ( rational) they would be affirming EENS.So based upon EENS they could proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King ( Quas Primas ) in all political legislation.Since outside the Church there is no known salvation the priority is that all accept the norm for salvation-faith and the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, to avoid Hell.
We all agree that if there was any one saved outside the Catholic Church it could only be known to God.So Catholic faith and the baptism of water is still the norm and the priority to go to Heaven and avoid Hell for all people with no known exceptions.-Lionel Andrades
_______________________________
JUNE 3, 2021
In my parish the priests interpret Vatican Council II irrationally instead of rationally even after being informed.
In my parish the priests interpret Vatican Council II irrationally instead of rationally even after being informed.The traditional conclusion of the Council, interpreted without the false premise is too much for them. - Lionel Andrades
_____________________________
JUNE 2, 2021
In my parish the priests do not affirm the Athanasius Creed.
In may parish, Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea, Rome, the priests do not affirm the Athanasius Creed. They change the meaning of the Nicene and Apostles Creed with the use of a false premise.They re-interpret Vatican Council II with the same fake premise and change the interpretations of all the Catechisms.They do consider this a mortal sin of faith.They about 'new information' and 'being open' and 'following Pope Francis'. Do they believe in the secrecy of the Sacrament of Confession ? Really? Why ? -Lionel Andrades
________________________________
JUNE 1, 2021
Often it is the pope who transfers conservative religious. This time it was a lay organisation which transferred liberal religious, in Rome.
In the parish of Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea, Pope Francis closed down the seminary of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate in Rome.The seminary building and adjoining property is now held by the Comitato dell Immaculata, formed by Fr. Stefano Manelli f.i.
They objected to the presence of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculata.They had been there since Pope Francis shuttered the original seminary of Fr. Manelli.
So the Franciscans Friars of the Immaculate no more live at Casalotti.They do not any more offer Holy Mass there.
Often it is the pope who transfers conservative religious. This time it was a lay organisation which had the liberal religious, in Rome,tranferred.
I attend Holy Mass in Italian and affirm Catholic Tradition as a lay Catholic.There is no more a Latin Mass in the parish or even the adjoining area.
I affirm the Athanasius Creed (Whoever desires to be saved should above all hold to the catholic faith.Anyone who does not keep it whole and unbroken will doubtless perish eternally...).
I affirm the Nicene and Apostles Creed, interpreted without a fake premise. So my interpretation of these two Creeds would be different from that of the present Parish Priest Fr. Francesco Barbosa, of the Brazilian Societa Joselitos Christo.
The Rector of the seminary at Casalotti, was Fr. Rosario Sammarco f.i.He now offers Mass at St.Mary Majors and remains the rector of the seminary in Tiburtina,Rome.
Fr.Rosario Samarco would reject the Athanasius Creed.He would interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise.It would be the same for the seminarians.It is the same for the Joselitos Chrito priests and the Italian diocesan priests.They are following the instructions of Vatican and the Rome Vicariate.
I accept Vatican Council II and interpret it without the false premise. So my interpretation of the Council would not be a rupture with Tradition( Athanasius Creed etc).The priests and religious communities in the parish and diocese, interpret the Council with the false premise. So our Profession of Faith will be different. Since our premises are different the Religious will emerge non traditional and I traditional.
I accept the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance(I.I).I do not reject them or deny them.For me they refer to hypothetical and theoretical cases only.They can only be hypothetical and theoretical in our human reality.Since if any one was saved with BOD and I.I it would only be known to God.So for me, BOD and I.I are not examples of known people in the present times ( 1965-2021), saved outside the Catholic Church.I cannot meet or see someone saved with BOD or I.I.So when Vatican Council II refers to BOD(LG 14) and I.I(LG 16), it is always a reference to a hypothetical and theoretical case which exists only in our mind.It cannot be a practical exception to EENS, as EENS was known to the Church Fathers and the missionaries in the 16th century.
For me the Holy Office 1949 made an objective mistake in the Letter to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney.How can BOD and I.I be practical exceptions to Feeneyite EENS ?
So our interpretation of BOD and I.I would also be different. I would affirm an EENS with no exceptions and they would affirm an EENS with exceptions.
It is not known how the seminary building will be used. The original community of the Fransciscans Friars of the Immaculate are not seen here.-Lionel Andrades
_________________________________________
JUNE 2, 2021
I affirm the Athanasius Creed
I affirm the Athanasius Creed,interpret the Nicene and Apostles Creed rationally,interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with 16th century extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and do not use the false premise to interpret the Catechisms of Trent, Baltimore, Pius X, John Paul II etc.The Catechism of the Catholic Church is not a break with Tradition for me.I do not employ the false premise, inference and conclusion of cardinals Ratzinger and Schonborn.I interpret Vatican Council II rationally with the hermeneutic of continity with Feeneyite EENS, the Deposit of Faith and the popes and saints of the past.My interpretation of Church document is Magisterial,since it is rational, traditional and in harmony with the past Magisterium of the Catholic Church.The present two popes interpretation of Magisterial documents with the false premise is not Magisterial. It is political. -Lionel Andrades
______________________________________________
MAY 13, 2021
Pope Francis had to close down the Franciscans of the Immaculate seminary and force the seminarians to study at the pontifical universities in Rome.There they had to interpret Vatican Council II, the Creeds and Catechisms with the false premise, inference and non traditional conclusion.They had to accept this leftist, political interpretation of the Council .Now they teach it to others
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/05/pope-francis-had-to-close-down.html
MAY 30, 2021
In my parish the priests have changed the meaning of the Nicene and Apostles Creed and rejected the Athanasius Creed and they offer Holy Mass in Italian. They interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise to project a non traditional conclusion and then then offer Holy Mass.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/05/in-my-parish-priests-have-changed.html
MAY 30, 2021
In my parish the priests reject the Athanasius Creed, change the Nicene and Apostles Creed and re-interpet Vatican Council II irrationally and do not deny it. They agree with me!
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/05/in-my-parish-priests-reject-athanasius.html
__________________________________________________
MAY 29, 2021
Scandal at my parish
I affirm the Athanasius Creed (Whoever desires to be saved should above all hold to the catholic faith.Anyone who does not keep it whole and unbroken will doubtless perish eternally...)in the parish but the priests and many of the parishioners do not do the same.
I live in the parish, Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea.It is a 20-minute drive from Rome's Battistini Metro Station.How can they offer/attend Holy Mass and not affirm the infallible teaching of the Athanasius Creed?
I affirm Vatican Council II interpreted rationally in the parish but the priests and most of the parishioners do not do so.
For me LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are practical exceptions for the Athanasius Creed. In other words, they refer to known non Catholics saved outside the Church. They refer to physically visible people saved without faith and the baptism of water.Invisible and unknown people cannot be exceptions to the Creed. So with this irrationality they make the Athanasius Creed obsolete.
My interpretation of Vatican Council II is rational and traditional.It is not a break with the Creeds.
How can the priests and people offer/attend Holy Mass with an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II etc ?
When the priests and people in the parish do not affirm the Athanasius Creed and Vatican Council II, do they no have to go for the Sacrament of Confession, end the scandal and correct themselves in public ?
For me the baptism of desire(BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) refer to hypothetical and theoretical cases only. I cannot meet or see someone saved as such.It is only God who can know if someone is saved with BOD and I.I. So there are no practical cases of BOD and I.I for me.There are also no practical exceptions to the past Magisterial ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.
But with visible for them,BOD and I.I, the priests and catechists and others in the parish, reject the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
They change the interpretation of Vatican Council II.Since for them, LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, etc contradict the dogma EENS. There are practical exceptions for them.
So they have rejected the dogma EENS and the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation.
They have changed the meaning of the Nicene Creed. It is " I believe in three or more known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church( so EENS is rejected)".
They have changed the meaning of the Apostles Creed. It is " I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church,'which teaches the Catholic Church today that there is known salvation outside the Church and so the Creeds and Catechisms are obsolete in their old understanding".
They have changed the meaning of the First Commandment which now indicates for them that outside the Catholic Church there is known salvation and so there is true worship in non Christian religions.
This is public heresy, scandal and schism and Holy Mass is offered/ attended, by all in the parish.
This scandal has to be rectified in public, before absolution is given in the Confessional. -Lionel Andrades
https://www.smnazaret.it/
________________________________
MAY 28, 2021
Priests are expected to affirm the Athanasius Creed in the parish. Vatican Council II according to Lionel Andrades is not a rupture
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/05/priests-are-expected-to-affirm.html
SATURDAY, JUNE 12, 2021
In the parish of Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea, Rome, priests use the false premise to interpret the Council as a break with Tradition (EENS etc.). This non-magisterial interpretation, with an irrationality, is considered Magistral. So Vatican Council II is not dogmatic for them.It contradicts the dogma EENS,on the exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
They also give the Eucharist to non-Christians and Catholic women who live with non-Christians.
Then they say that Jesus died for everyone, in a statement that is incomplete. Instead they should claim that Jesus died for everyone, but to receive salvation everyone needs to believe in Jesus as the Savior, who saves us all from Hell. Everyone needs to believe in Him and live His teachings in the Catholic Church, with faith and the baptism of water (AG 7). This is necessary for salvation from Hell. The priest does not say it. There are non-Christian policemen, present in the church, during Mass in Italian. They control what the priest says.
This parish in which I have lived for many years, is located in the diocese of Porta Santa Rufina, Rome and the bishop was until recently Gino Reali. The bishop-administrator of the diocese is now Mons. Gianrico Ruzza, Bishop of Civittavecchia-Tarquinia.
In this parish Pope Francis installed the Franciscans of the Immaculate, who celebrate Mass only in Italian. This was after closing the seminary of Fr. Stefano Manelli f.i. But last year the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate were asked to leave the parish and the seminary. Since the Comitato dell Immacolata, a lay organization of Fr. Stefano Manelli, legally regained possession of the land and properties. In their agreement with Bishop Gino Reali, they asked that the Franciscans leave.
They had to leave even though Pope Francis wanted them there. The liberal Franciscan community approved by Pope Francis was removed by the conservative, lay Catholic organization. Can the Comitato dell Immaculata, ensure that Catholic orthodoxy is taught and practiced in the parish ?
Yesterday at the morning Mass on the feast of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, a good priest of the Joselitos Christo community said that we must love everyone. He does not tell non-Christians their fate if they die in another religion. This is not love.
If the priests don't renounce the Catholic faith, the non-Christian police in Rome will criticize them and then the priests could be sent back to Brazil.-Lionel Andrades
JUNE 5, 2021
Religious communities in the parish would be saying the same thing as me except for their false premise which creates a non traditional conclusion for them
The Joseleitos Christo and Franciscans of the Immaculate priests would be saying the same thing as Lionel Andrades on Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)but for the false premise( invisible cases of BOD and I.I are visible)which the priests utilise, to create a non traditional conclusion (EENS, Athanasius Creed etc are obsolete).
Father Francisco B.Barbosa sjc, the present Parish Priest at Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea, Rome and Father Rosario Sammarco f.i, the Rector of the Franciscans of the Immaculate seminary in the parish, last year, would be saying the same thing as Lionel Andrades, except, that they use a false premise( invisible cases of LG 16( invincible ignorance, LG 14( baptism of desire) etc are physically visible) to create a non-traditional conclusion(EENS, Syllabus etc are obsolete).
The priests from the two religious communities, in this diocese of Porta Santa Rufina, Rome, agree on the five- common- sense points, mentioned above.However in public they are not affirming Vatican Council II in harmony with Tradition (EENS etc).-Lionel Andrades
JUNE 5, 2021
Catholic priests agree with me on five points but will not proclaim them in public
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/06/catholic-priests-agree-with-me-on-five.html
JUNE 8, 2021
These two religious communities agree with me but they are not proclaiming the faith in public
The Joselitos Christo and Franciscans of Immaculate priests agree with me on the FIVE POINTS. But they are not affirming Vatican Council II without the false premise.Since it would mean that they affirm the Athanasius Creed, 16th century extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.
These two religious communities agree with me but they are not proclaiming the faith in public. - Lionel Andrades
JUNE 5, 2021
Catholic priests in the parish Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Rome agree with me on five points
In the parish Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea, Rome, near the Battistini Metro Station, there have been two religious communities housed there, the Joseleitos Christo and the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate.This is also the parish of Lionel Andrades according to his blog Eucharist and Mission( Lionel's Blog).The religious communities there agree with him on the following five points.
1.They agree that there are no physically visible cases of non Catholics saved with the baptism of desire over the last 60 years in Italy.If any one was saved as such it would only be known to God.
2.They agree that there are no physically visible non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water over the last 60 years in Italy.If any one was saved as such it would be known only to God.
3.The priests of the two religious communities agree with Lionel Andrades when he says that we do not know of any one in the present times who is saved as a martyr(baptism of blood)and without the baptism of water.If St.Emerentiana or Dismas, the Good Thief, was saved without the baptism of water,we do not know of any such case over the last few years or more in Italy.
4.So the baptism of desire,baptism of blood and invincible ignorance cannot be practical examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church.They cannot be practical exceptions for the Athanasius Creed.It says outside the Church there is no salvation.They cannot be practical exceptions for Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II, which says all need faith and baptism for salvation(to avoid Hell).
The Catholic priests agree on this point too.
5.So there can be nothing in Vatican Council II ( interpreted rationally) to contradict the Athanasius Creed and Pope Pius IX's Syllabus of Errors.Since LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2,GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, can refer to only hypothetical cases.They are speculative. They are not practical exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus( Cantate Domino, Council of florence 1441 etc).
None of these FIVE POINTS are denied by the religious communities Joseleitos Christo and the Franciscans of the Immaculate in the parish Santa Maria di Nazareth.This is the parish in which Pope Francis closed down the seminary of the Franciscans of the Immaculate.-Lionel Andrades
JUNE 4, 2021
They agree with me : A Catholic should be elected Mayor of Rome : Vatican Council II must be the test of being a Catholic
The priests of the Joseleitos de Christo community at the church Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea, Rome, in principle agree that there are no objective examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church in 2021.There are no practical exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) in the present times (1965-2021).There are no physically visible cases of non Catholics, saved with the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water and Catholic faith.We cannot see or meet someone who is an exception to the norm for salvation i.e faith and baptism (Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II).This was also the view of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, who were last year in this parish. They too agree with me.The Rector of Francisican Friar seminary in the parish was Fr. Rosario Sammarco f.i and Parish Priest, Fr.Giuseppe Grioni f.i.The seminary is closed and the building is under the management of the Comitato dell Immaculata, set up originally by Fr. Stefano Mannelli f.i.
In the parish today the Parish Priest Fr.Francisco De Barros Barbosa, sjc in public interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise. If he did not use the false premise, Vatican Council II (AG 7) would affirm the past ecumenism of return to the Catholic Church, an exclusivist ecclesiology, the old traditional theology of outside the Church there is no salvation and the need to proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King in all national politics in Italy.
However he agrees with me - there are no objective exceptions to EENS. There are no physically visible cases of non Catholics saved with the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water and Catholic faith.
The priests of the Joseleitos di Christo and Franciscans of the Immaculate need to tell Catholics and especially parishioners, to vote only for candidates for the Mayor's office in Rome, who interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise.They would be true Catholics. With Vatican Council II ( rational) they would be affirming EENS.So based upon EENS they could proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King ( Quas Primas ) in all political legislation.Since outside the Church there is no known salvation the priority is that all accept the norm for salvation-faith and the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, to avoid Hell.
We all agree that if there was any one saved outside the Catholic Church it could only be known to God.So Catholic faith and the baptism of water is still the norm and the priority to go to Heaven and avoid Hell for all people with no known exceptions.-Lionel Andrades
JUNE 3, 2021
In my parish the priests interpret Vatican Council II irrationally instead of rationally even after being informed.
In my parish the priests interpret Vatican Council II irrationally instead of rationally even after being informed.The traditional conclusion of the Council, interpreted without the false premise is too much for them. - Lionel Andrades
JUNE 2, 2021
In my parish the priests do not affirm the Athanasius Creed.
In may parish, Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea, Rome, the priests do not affirm the Athanasius Creed. They change the meaning of the Nicene and Apostles Creed with the use of a false premise.They re-interpret Vatican Council II with the same fake premise and change the interpretations of all the Catechisms.They do consider this a mortal sin of faith.They about 'new information' and 'being open' and 'following Pope Francis'. Do they believe in the secrecy of the Sacrament of Confession ? Really? Why ? -Lionel Andrades
JUNE 1, 2021
Often it is the pope who transfers conservative religious. This time it was a lay organisation which transferred liberal religious, in Rome.
In the parish of Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea, Pope Francis closed down the seminary of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate in Rome.The seminary building and adjoining property is now held by the Comitato dell Immaculata, formed by Fr. Stefano Manelli f.i.
They objected to the presence of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculata.They had been there since Pope Francis shuttered the original seminary of Fr. Manelli.
So the Franciscans Friars of the Immaculate no more live at Casalotti.They do not any more offer Holy Mass there.
Often it is the pope who transfers conservative religious. This time it was a lay organisation which had the liberal religious, in Rome,tranferred.
I attend Holy Mass in Italian and affirm Catholic Tradition as a lay Catholic.There is no more a Latin Mass in the parish or even the adjoining area.
I affirm the Athanasius Creed (Whoever desires to be saved should above all hold to the catholic faith.Anyone who does not keep it whole and unbroken will doubtless perish eternally...).
I affirm the Nicene and Apostles Creed, interpreted without a fake premise. So my interpretation of these two Creeds would be different from that of the present Parish Priest Fr. Francesco Barbosa, of the Brazilian Societa Joselitos Christo.
The Rector of the seminary at Casalotti, was Fr. Rosario Sammarco f.i.He now offers Mass at St.Mary Majors and remains the rector of the seminary in Tiburtina,Rome.
Fr.Rosario Samarco would reject the Athanasius Creed.He would interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise.It would be the same for the seminarians.It is the same for the Joselitos Chrito priests and the Italian diocesan priests.They are following the instructions of Vatican and the Rome Vicariate.
I accept Vatican Council II and interpret it without the false premise. So my interpretation of the Council would not be a rupture with Tradition( Athanasius Creed etc).The priests and religious communities in the parish and diocese, interpret the Council with the false premise. So our Profession of Faith will be different. Since our premises are different the Religious will emerge non traditional and I traditional.
I accept the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance(I.I).I do not reject them or deny them.For me they refer to hypothetical and theoretical cases only.They can only be hypothetical and theoretical in our human reality.Since if any one was saved with BOD and I.I it would only be known to God.So for me, BOD and I.I are not examples of known people in the present times ( 1965-2021), saved outside the Catholic Church.I cannot meet or see someone saved with BOD or I.I.So when Vatican Council II refers to BOD(LG 14) and I.I(LG 16), it is always a reference to a hypothetical and theoretical case which exists only in our mind.It cannot be a practical exception to EENS, as EENS was known to the Church Fathers and the missionaries in the 16th century.
For me the Holy Office 1949 made an objective mistake in the Letter to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney.How can BOD and I.I be practical exceptions to Feeneyite EENS ?
So our interpretation of BOD and I.I would also be different. I would affirm an EENS with no exceptions and they would affirm an EENS with exceptions.
It is not known how the seminary building will be used. The original community of the Fransciscans Friars of the Immaculate are not seen here.-Lionel Andrades
JUNE 2, 2021
I affirm the Athanasius Creed
I affirm the Athanasius Creed,interpret the Nicene and Apostles Creed rationally,interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with 16th century extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and do not use the false premise to interpret the Catechisms of Trent, Baltimore, Pius X, John Paul II etc.The Catechism of the Catholic Church is not a break with Tradition for me.I do not employ the false premise, inference and conclusion of cardinals Ratzinger and Schonborn.I interpret Vatican Council II rationally with the hermeneutic of continity with Feeneyite EENS, the Deposit of Faith and the popes and saints of the past.My interpretation of Church document is Magisterial,since it is rational, traditional and in harmony with the past Magisterium of the Catholic Church.The present two popes interpretation of Magisterial documents with the false premise is not Magisterial. It is political. -Lionel Andrades
MAY 13, 2021
Pope Francis had to close down the Franciscans of the Immaculate seminary and force the seminarians to study at the pontifical universities in Rome.There they had to interpret Vatican Council II, the Creeds and Catechisms with the false premise, inference and non traditional conclusion.They had to accept this leftist, political interpretation of the Council .Now they teach it to others
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/05/pope-francis-had-to-close-down.html
MAY 30, 2021
In my parish the priests have changed the meaning of the Nicene and Apostles Creed and rejected the Athanasius Creed and they offer Holy Mass in Italian. They interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise to project a non traditional conclusion and then then offer Holy Mass.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/05/in-my-parish-priests-have-changed.html
MAY 30, 2021
In my parish the priests reject the Athanasius Creed, change the Nicene and Apostles Creed and re-interpet Vatican Council II irrationally and do not deny it. They agree with me!
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/05/in-my-parish-priests-reject-athanasius.html
MAY 29, 2021
Scandal at my parish
I affirm the Athanasius Creed (Whoever desires to be saved should above all hold to the catholic faith.Anyone who does not keep it whole and unbroken will doubtless perish eternally...)in the parish but the priests and many of the parishioners do not do the same.
I live in the parish, Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea.It is a 20-minute drive from Rome's Battistini Metro Station.How can they offer/attend Holy Mass and not affirm the infallible teaching of the Athanasius Creed?
I affirm Vatican Council II interpreted rationally in the parish but the priests and most of the parishioners do not do so.
For me LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are practical exceptions for the Athanasius Creed. In other words, they refer to known non Catholics saved outside the Church. They refer to physically visible people saved without faith and the baptism of water.Invisible and unknown people cannot be exceptions to the Creed. So with this irrationality they make the Athanasius Creed obsolete.
My interpretation of Vatican Council II is rational and traditional.It is not a break with the Creeds.
How can the priests and people offer/attend Holy Mass with an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II etc ?
When the priests and people in the parish do not affirm the Athanasius Creed and Vatican Council II, do they no have to go for the Sacrament of Confession, end the scandal and correct themselves in public ?
For me the baptism of desire(BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) refer to hypothetical and theoretical cases only. I cannot meet or see someone saved as such.It is only God who can know if someone is saved with BOD and I.I. So there are no practical cases of BOD and I.I for me.There are also no practical exceptions to the past Magisterial ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.
But with visible for them,BOD and I.I, the priests and catechists and others in the parish, reject the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
They change the interpretation of Vatican Council II.Since for them, LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, etc contradict the dogma EENS. There are practical exceptions for them.
So they have rejected the dogma EENS and the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation.
They have changed the meaning of the Nicene Creed. It is " I believe in three or more known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church( so EENS is rejected)".
They have changed the meaning of the Apostles Creed. It is " I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church,'which teaches the Catholic Church today that there is known salvation outside the Church and so the Creeds and Catechisms are obsolete in their old understanding".
They have changed the meaning of the First Commandment which now indicates for them that outside the Catholic Church there is known salvation and so there is true worship in non Christian religions.
This is public heresy, scandal and schism and Holy Mass is offered/ attended, by all in the parish.
This scandal has to be rectified in public, before absolution is given in the Confessional. -Lionel Andrades
https://www.smnazaret.it/
JUNE 11, 2021
Vatican Council II is dogmatic
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE LIONEL ANDRADES INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
1.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?
It does not use the common fake premise.It's a simple, rational and different way to read Vatican Council II.
2.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)?
It does not use the common false premise to interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), invincible ignorance(I.I) and the baptism of blood(BOB).So there are no practical exceptions for EENS.EENS is traditonal and BOD, BOB and I.I are interpreted rationally.It's not EENS or BOB,BOB and I.I. Since the latter are not exceptions for the former.
3.Is the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Magisterial documents copy writed or trademarked? No. Any one can use it. There is no charge.It is simply going back to the traditiional interpretation of Church documents, without the false premise. The false premise came into the Church in a big way, with the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney(1949).
4.How did the Lionel Andrades interpretation of VC 2 emerge?
He kept writing on his blog on EENS and then discovered that Vatican Council II does not really contradict EENS if the false premise is avoided.
5.Is the LA interpretation of VC2 a new theology?
No. It is going back to the old, traditional theology of the Catholic Church by avoiding the false premise.It is the false premise which has created the New Theology.Without the false premise there cannot be the New Ecumenism, New Evangelisation, New Ecclesiology etc.The New Theology is Cristocentric without the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church.Since exceptions were created to EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors etc, by projecting a false premise.The error was overlooked by the popes.
6.What about traditional, 16th century Mission doctrine?
With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II we return to traditional Mission doctrine. It is no more 'only they need to enter the Church who know about it', who are not in invincible ignorance(LG 14) Instead, it is all need to enter the Catholic Church with no known exception.Invincible ignorance is not an exception to all needing to enter the Church with faith and the baptism(LG 14).So we evangelize since all non Catholics are oriented to Hell without faith and the baptism of water( Ad Gentes 7/Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II. The norm for salvation is faith and baptism and not invincible ignorance.When I meet a non Catholic, I cannot assume or pretend to know, that he or she is an exception to the norm. If there is an exception it could be known only to God.I know that the non Catholic before me, is oriented to Hell( Athanasius Creed, Vatican Council II(AG 7, LG 14),Catechism of the Catholic Church(845,846,1257),Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, etc).
7.What about the hermeneutic of continuity or rupture with Tradition ?
With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II there is no rupture with past Magisterium documents and neither do they contradict each other.We have to re-interpret past Magisterial documents though, which mention the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance(I.I), as being hypothetical and invisible always.Being saved with BOD and I.I are always physically invisible, when they are mentioned in the Catechisms( Trent, Pius X etc) and encyclicals and documents of the popes(Mystici Corporis etc).They always refer to hypothetical cases only and are not objectively known non Catholics.If someone is saved outside the Church he or she could only be known to God.This has to be clear when reading also the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.There is also no confusion when reading the text of Vatican Council II.LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3,NA 2,GS 22 etc, refer always to only hypothetical cases and so they do not contradict the Athanasius Creed.
8.Should the popes use the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?
YES! Since presently the two popes are schismatic, heretical, non Magisterial and non traditional on Vatican Council II.It has to be this way since they use the false premise.It is only with the false premise, inference and conclusion that they interpret Magisterial documents. This can be avoided with a rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion.The result is a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.
9.What other advantage is there in knowing the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?
We read the text of Vatican Council II in general differently with the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.
’The red is not an exception to the blue’.The hypothetical passages( marked in red on the blog Eucharist and Mission, are not practical exceptions to the orthodox passages in Vatican Council II which support EENS, and are marked in blue.
For the present two popes and the traditionalists the red is an exception to the blue. This is irrational.
10.What bearing does it have on the liturgy ?
Without the false premise the Council is traditional. Vatican Council II is in harmony with extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the missionaries in the 16th century.So we are back to the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. When the Council is traditional there is no 'development of doctrine' or 'sprit of Vatican Council II'. Collegiality, Religious Freedom and ecumenism are no more an issue. So receiving Holy Communion on the hand can no more be justified with Vatican Council II.Neither can the Eucharist be given to the divorced and re-married, in the name of the Council.
Neither can the German Synod be justified by citing Vatican Council II.There is no theological basis in the Council, any more, for given the Eucharist to Protestants during Holy Mass.
11.What is the essence of this interpretation?
It is the listing of the rational and irrational premise, inference and conclusion. It identifies two different premises with two different conclusions. So the rational premise produces a traditional conclusion and the Vatican Council II is in harmony with Tradition. It has a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition even though Rahner, Congar, Rarzinger and Cushing were present at the Council in 1965.
Collegiality, ecumenism and religious liberty are no more an issue for the conservatives , when Vatican Council II is traditional. Lumen Gentium 8, Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16 ecc. oin Vatican Council II refer to only physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.
12.Vatican Council II is dogmatic ?
Yes. Pope Paul VI and the liberals call Vatican Council II "pastoral" and not dogmatic. Since they do not want to affirm the rigorous interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). Without their false premise the Council is dogmatic. It supports the rigorous interpretation of EENS.This was EENS according to the missionaries and the Magisterium of the sixteenth century. LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NS 2, GS 22 etc., in the Second Vatican Council, if interpreted rationally, cannot be practical exceptions to EENS. Invisible cases in our reality cannot be objective exceptions to EENS. For example, to get on the bus you have to be present at the bus station. If you are not physically at the bus stop it is not possible to get on the bus.
Another example is, if there is an apple in a box of oranges, the apple is an exception since it is there in the box. If it was not there in that box it would not be an exception. Similarly LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3 etc.,refer only to hypothetical cases. We cannot meet or see anyone saved outside the Church, without faith and the baptism of water. So the Council is not referring to real people, known people in the present times.
Unknown and invisible cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14) and of being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) cannot be objective exceptions for EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.There is no conflict.
So when Vatican Council II is interpreted rationally it is dogmatic. -Lionel Andrades
Fake premise
Lumen Gentium 8,Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically visible cases in 1965-2021.
Fake inference
They are objective examples of salvation outside the Church.
Fake conclusion
Vatican Council II contradicts the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).The Athanasius Creed(outside the Church there is no salvation) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( ecumenism of return) were made obsolete.
Here is my interpretation of Vatican Council II in blue.
Rational Premise
LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.They are only hypothetical and theoretical. They exist only in our mind and are not solid bodies at Newton's level of time, space and matter.
Rational Inference
They are not objective examples of salvation outside the Church for us human beings.
Rational Conclusion
Vatican Council II does not contradict EENS as it was interpreted by the Jesuits in the Middle Ages.It does not contradict the strict interpretation of EENS of St. Thomas Aquinas( saved in invincible ignorance is invisible), St. Augustine and Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.
The Letter of the Holy Office(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) 1949 made an objective mistake.-Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades
Promoter of the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not only pastoral.
Catholic lay man in Rome,
Writer on the discovery of the two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is interpreted with the false premise and the other without it. One is Magisterial and the other, the common one, is non Magisterial.
It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms.There can be two interpretations.
Why should Catholics choose an irrational version which is heretical, non traditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional ?
Blog: Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission )
E-mail: lionelandrades10@
___________________
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
