-Lionel Andrades
Monday, December 20, 2021
Bishop Athanasius Schneider said that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire. This makes the New Theology obsolete. It confused what is invisble as being visible
NOVEMBER 30, 2021
Pope Benedict and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria choose the New Theology. Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall choose the Old Theology
OCTOBER 4, 2021
Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr.Taylor Marshall have found the Specific Error in Vatican Council II. It is the Fake Premise. They have used the Rational Premise. This was not known to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr.Taylor Marshall have found the Specific Error in Vatican Council II. It is the Fake Premise. They have used the Rational Premise. This was not known to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops.
When interviewed recently by Dr. Taylor Marshall, Bishop Athanasius Schneider said that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire.This is something obvious but still unknown among sections of the SSPX and the Church at large.It is at the centre of the New Theology and the interpretation of Vatican Council II.Dr. Taylor Marshall agreed. He said that there are no explicit cases of St. Thomas Aquinas’ implicit baptism of desire. He avoided the False Premise and the New Theology which attaches itself to extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and Vatican Council II when the False Premise is used.
This was not known to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre who blamed the Council.Since the Council Fathers had used the False Premise of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO) and Pope Paul VI did not correct them.There are no baptism of desire cases.This is a fact of life.This was not stated by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith or the popes who followed Paul VI.
Now in Traditionis Custode Pope Francis used the False Premise and not Rational Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and the SSPX Superior General Fr. Davide Pagliarani did not correct the mistake.Since he also interprets the Council like the popes and Archbishop Lefebvre. So as expected there was no comment also from Una Voce International,FSSP,Latin Mass Societies, Coetus International, Novus Ordo Watch,CMRI, Most Holy Family Monastery,Most Holy Trinity seminary of Bishop Donald Sanborn. They have not discovered the Specific Error in the Council-text and so put the blame on the Council in general.
All these years they have criticized Fr. Leonard Feeney and remained politically correct with the Left and the liberals, who also use the same False Premise.
There are no physically visible examples of salvation outside the Church. This is a fact of life.So now there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II. It is with the Fake Premise or with the Rational Premise. This is a fact we have to acknowledge.-Lionel Andrades
AUGUST 29, 2021
Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall say there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire but the German Synodal path is based upon there being literal cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14) in the present times
Bishop Athanasius Schneider in an interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall has said that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire in the present times(2021). So LG 14 ( Case of the Catechumen) would be a hypothetical and speculative case only. But for Cardinal Marx this is not his interpretation of Vatican Council II upon which is based the German Synodal Way.For him LG 14 and also LG 16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22, LG 16,LG 8 would refer to literal cases of non Catholics in the present times (1965-2021) saved without ‘faith and baptism’(AG 7), outside the Church. It is only in this way that he can avoid affirming Catholic Tradition (EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc).
If the Germans interpreted LG 14 like Bishop Athanasius Schneider there would be no theological bases for the German Synodal Breakaway.
In France, Bishop Roland Mitterand in Dijon, wrote his books on the Concordats and the theology of religious pluralism by interpreting LG 14 irrationally.The French Bishops’ Conference must be asked to clarify that the baptism of desire is always hypothetical, theoretical and invisible for us human beings.In principle, hypothetical cases of LG 14, LG 16 etc cannot be practical exceptions in 2021 to Tradition ( Catechism of Pope Pius X, Council of Trent etc).
Like the French, Cardinal Peter Erdo in Hungary and the Hungarian Bishops’ Conference, could also be confusing the “implicit baptism of desire” of St. Thomas Aquinas as being explicit in the present times.
In Poland, the National Catechetical Center is in schism with the past Magisterium, since with visible cases of the baptism of desire, a hermeneutic of rupture is created with the Athanasius Creed, the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q,27Q).They need to issue a statement on this issue.
Their Episcopal Conference, like those all over the world, interpret the baptism of desire with a fake and not rational premise . So there is a fake break with Catholic Tradition.
The Schneider-Marshall video is really asking the U.S bishops to be ethical and honest.They are saying that the cardinals and bishops in Britain are also dishonest, when they project the baptism of desire as an exception to EENS according to the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century.
The bishops in Switzerland had also been asking the Society of St. Pius X to interpret the baptism of desire with the irrationality mentioned by Bishop Schneider, and then to accept the non traditional conclusion.This is not Catholic.
Pope Benedict did not grant canonical recognition to the SSPX and said it was a doctrinal issue.Bishop Charles Morerod in Switzerland would not allow the SSPX to use the churches there, and said it was a doctrinal issue. They had to continue to interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise and accept the non traditional conclusion, like the liberals.
Pope Benedict needs to be honest.He needs to apologize to the SSPX.-Lionel Andrades
AUGUST 30, 2021
Pope Benedict needs to be honest and apologize to the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX)
Pope Benedict needs to be honest and apologize to the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) . He demanded that they interpret Vatican Council II and Magisterial documents with the common false premise ( invisible people are visible in the present times) and accept the non traditional conclusion for canonical recognition.
This interpretation of Vatican Council II is deceptive and unethical. This was brought out by Bishop Athansius Schneider when interviewed by Dr. Taylor Marshall.The bishop avoids the fake premise.He says that there are no objective cases of the baptism of desire in the present times.
Lumen Gentium 14( baptism of desire )in Vatican Council II refers to a hypothetical case and not an objective and known person saved outside the Church in 1965-2021.It would be the same for LG 8,LG 16, UR 3, GS 22 etc.
Pope Benedict’s interpretation of the baptism of desire, Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) is still based upon a lie. He must correct the scandal.It is unethical even by secular standards.
Pope Benedict must also ask the Regina Apostolorum and John Latran universities in Rome, to stop offering courses and academic degrees, on his theology.Since he has made a major mistake in the interpretation of Magisterial documents. Even Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus were written with this error, so also his book on Ecclesiology and Vatican Council II.He was forcing all this bad theology, with deception, upon the SSPX, in exchange for regularizing their status in the Church.
It was Pope Paul VI who interpreted Vatican Council II with the false premise.Cardinal Ratzinger, as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, did not correct the error.
Instead he excommunicated Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre who would not accept Vatican Council II with a non traditional conclusion.
There was no apology from Cardinal Ratzinger for the CDF’s excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney.The Jesuit brave priest from Boston would not say that unknown cases of the baptism of desire were known exceptions to 16th century EENS.For him there were no practical exceptions for the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.
He was excommunicated for some 19 years and the CDF never acknowledged their error(Holy Office 1949) even after the death of the priest.-Lionel Andrades
AUGUST 30, 2021
Don Pietro Leone and Rorate Caeili interpret Vatican Council II like Fr. John Courtney Murray sj : Lumen Gentium 14 ( Baptism of desire) is an exception to Tradition for them
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/don-pietro-leone-and-rorate-caeili.html
AUGUST 29, 2021
Bishop Kevin Rhoades, the Chairman of the USCCB Doctrinnal Committee, interprets Lumen Gentium 14 ( baptism of desire) with a false premise. Bishop Athanasius Schnedier and Dr. Taylor Marshall avoid it
NOVEMBER 9, 2020
Bishop Kevin Rhoades, the Chairman of the USCCB Doctrinal Committee, interprets Vatican Council II with a false premise. His error is there on line as proof.No one questions him about it
Bishop Kevin Rhoades, the Chairman of the USCCB Doctrinal Committee, interprets Vatican Council II with a false premise. His error is there on line as proof.No one questions him about it. -Lionel Andrades
AUGUST 28, 2021
So we proclaim the Faith and return to traditional mission as at the time of St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Robert Bellarmine and St. Francis Xavier
So we proclaim the Faith and return to traditional mission as at the time of St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Robert Bellarmine and St. Francis Xavier. All non Catholics are oriented to Hell according to Bishop Athanasius Schneider and not only those ‘who know’ about Jesus and the Church(LG 14) – since invincible ignorance is no more a practical exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).All in general need faith and baptism for salvation(AG 7) and if there are any exceptions of those 'who know' or 'do not know' it could only be known to God.So there are no known practical exceptions for the Great Commission.
The Council Fathers (1965) made an objective error when they projected the baptism of desire(LG 14) as an exception to EENS according to Loyola, Bellarmine and Xavier.This mistake was there in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston(LOHO).Pope Benedict needs to issue a correction and apologise. Since his New Theology is based upon the false premise of the LOHO.
The false premise of Pope Benedict is now a theological virus that has spread in the Catholic Church, like an epidemic. He has to end it.He must correct Pope Francis’ mistake, which is also that of the College of Cardinals.
Pope Benedict needs to tell Pope Francis that all the books on Vatican Council II have got the ‘virus’ and so are useless.They were made irrelevant with the error. Also Pope Benedict’s books on Ecclesiology published by Ignatius Press, and in the many German editions, have to be phased out. The pontifical universities must note the error in the books on Ecclesiology, written also by Semeraro, Kasper and Forte.
Pope Benedict wanted the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) to keep interpreting the baptism of desire(LG 14) as referring to to literal cases, presently known to us. So they would have to interpret Vatican Council II (LG 14 etc) in principle, by confusing invisible cases as being physically visible. Then with this irrationality they would have to accept the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition, which would follow with the use of the false premise. It was only with this doctrinal and theological error, was he prepared to grant the SSPX canonical recognition.Pope Francis needs to apologise.
Pope Benedict wanted the SSPX to interpret Vatican Council II with LG 14 being a literal example of salvation outside the Church in the present times and Bishop Schneider and Dr.Taylor Marshall are saying there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire in 1965-2021.
Bishop Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall are avoiding the fake premise ( invisible people are visible in the present times) and Pope Benedict and Pope Francis have to use it to create a break with Tradition (EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc).
If the popes choose the rational premise ( invisible cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church in 2021 are invisible) then they would be saying that in Vatican Council II, LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc do not contradict the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church, opposed by the Left.-Lionel Andrades
AUGUST 28, 2021
Bishop Athanasius Schneider has said that there are no known literal cases of the baptism of desire in our human reality but Cardinal Ratzinger wrote Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus with there being literally known cases of being saved with the baptism of desire
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/bishop-athanasius-schneider-has-said_28.html
AUGUST 27, 2021
Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall are telling Pope Francis that all the books on Vatican Council II are written with a false premise and in general they are obsolete
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/bishop-athanasius-schneider-and-dr.html
AUGUST 26, 2021
Bishop Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall directly oppose Pope Francis on the New Theology : Vatican Council II is not a break with Tradition when the premise is rational
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/bishop-schneider-and-dr-taylor-marshall.html
AUGUST 25, 2021
Bishop Schneider is one step away from saying that Vatican Council II does not contradict Tradition and the SSPX are no more in schism
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/bishop-schneider-is-one-step-away-from.html
AUGUST 25, 2021
Bishop Athanasius Schneider has said that we do not know of any literal case of someone saved with the baptism of desire in the present times
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/bishop-athanasius-schneider-has-said.html
JULY 11, 2021
Coetus Internationalis Patrum made a mistake at the Amazon Synod they are repeating it with Cardinal Jean Claude Hollerich sj General Relator of the Synod on Synodality 2023
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/07/coetus-internationalis-patrum-made.html
SEPTEMBER 8, 2020
At the Amazonian Synod the Brazilian Cardinal Claudio Hummes, rejected exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church by citing Vatican Council II interpreted with the false premise. It was also a negation of the First Commandmenthttps://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/09/at-amazonian-synod-brazilian-cardinal.html
JULY 12, 2021
If the FSSP avoids the fake premise in their religious formation of seminarians it would be a big step. Then they can appeal to the bishops to avoid the fake premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and other Magisterial documentshttps://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/07/if-fssp-avoids-fake-premise-in-their.html________________________________________
If the FSSP avoids the fake premise in their religious formation of seminarians it would be a big step. Then they can appeal to the bishops to avoid the fake premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and other Magisterial documents
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/07/if-fssp-avoids-fake-premise-in-their.html
________________________________________
AUGUST 31, 2021
Pope Francis is in schism with the past Magisterium which did not interpret the baptism of desire as being a literal case. So for them there were no exceptions to the traditionalist exclusivist ecclesiology.Bishop Athanasius Schneider told Dr. Taylor Marshall in an interview that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire.This is a complete U-turn with the common interpretation of Vatican Council II(LG 14 etc).
Pope Francis is in schism with the past Magisterium which did not interpret the baptism of desire as being literal cases.So for them there were no exceptions to the traditionalist exclusivist ecclesiology.Extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX,the Athanasius Creed etc were not made obsolete.Bishop Athanasius Schneider told Dr. Taylor Marshall in an interview that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire.This is a complete U-turn with the common interpretation of Vatican Council II(LG 14 etc).
But Marshall agreed with him but in principle Pope Francis and Pope Benedict interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) as being known and not unknown cases.The implicit baptism of desire of St. Thomas Aquinas is explicit for them.They confuse what is invisible as being visible.Then they say that there is a development of doctrine.They say Vatican Council II is a revolution, Tradition is obsolete and this is the teaching of the Holy Spirit.
According to the Magisterium of the 16th century, Pope Francis is automatically excommunicated.With his liberalism based upon a false premise, to which Bishop Schneider has called attention, the pope has changed the interpretation of the Apostles and Nicene Creed and rejected the Athanasius Creed.
So his interpretation of Vatican Council II is not Magisterial and Catholics are not obliged to follow it.
The Vatican Press Office has not commented on Bishop Schneider’s statement nor acknowledged their mistake and issued an apology.
There is no statement from the Bishops Conferences and the national Cathechetical Centers.-Lionel Andrades
Pope Francis is in schism with the past Magisterium which did not interpret the baptism of desire as being literal cases.So for them there were no exceptions to the traditionalist exclusivist ecclesiology.Extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX,the Athanasius Creed etc were not made obsolete.Bishop Athanasius Schneider told Dr. Taylor Marshall in an interview that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire.This is a complete U-turn with the common interpretation of Vatican Council II(LG 14 etc).
But Marshall agreed with him but in principle Pope Francis and Pope Benedict interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) as being known and not unknown cases.The implicit baptism of desire of St. Thomas Aquinas is explicit for them.They confuse what is invisible as being visible.Then they say that there is a development of doctrine.They say Vatican Council II is a revolution, Tradition is obsolete and this is the teaching of the Holy Spirit.
According to the Magisterium of the 16th century, Pope Francis is automatically excommunicated.With his liberalism based upon a false premise, to which Bishop Schneider has called attention, the pope has changed the interpretation of the Apostles and Nicene Creed and rejected the Athanasius Creed.
So his interpretation of Vatican Council II is not Magisterial and Catholics are not obliged to follow it.
The Vatican Press Office has not commented on Bishop Schneider’s statement nor acknowledged their mistake and issued an apology.
There is no statement from the Bishops Conferences and the national Cathechetical Centers.-Lionel Andrades
AUGUST 31, 2021
France, Germany, Poland, Hungary... need to re-interpret Vatican Council II rationally : USA and Britain also must use the rational premise
SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
Dr.Taylor Marshall did not ask Bishop Athanasius Schneider if the present two popes are in schism. Since the bishop said that the baptism of desire does not refer to literal cases in the present times and the popes since Pius XII differed
Dr.Taylor Marshall did not ask Bishop Athanasius Schneider if the present two popes, are in schism.Since Bishop Schneider said that the baptism of desire does not refer to literal cases.The popes since Pius XII stated the opposite.The popes interpret LG 14( baptism of desire) as a rupture with the Creeds, Catechisms,extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the Syllabus of Errors.If the popes interpreted Vatican Council II rationally then they would affirm these Magisterial documents and would not be in schism with the past Magisterium.
Pope Benedict in an interview with the daily Avvenire said that EENS today was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century.There was ‘a development’ with Vatican Council II.He meant Vatican Council II with LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 being literal cases in 1965-2021.So EENS, the Syllabus of Errors and the Athanasius Creed were made obsolete.
But with LG 14 (baptism of desire) not being a literal case in 2021 for Schneider and Marshall, the game has changed. It is the popes are using the wrong interpretation of the Council.So they are choosing the hermeneutic of rupture with the past.
When in principle, hypothetical cases (LG 8,Lg 14,LG 16 ,UR 3 etc) are not literal and personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church in the present times,then the popes and the SSPX, can affirm Vatican Council II ( with the rational premise) and also Tradition ( EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc).They would not be in a rupture with the past Magisterium.They would be supporting Vatican Council II, Tradition and the past Magisterium.
Pope Francis is in schism since he rejects Vatican Council II interpreted rationally and rejects Tradition ( Catechism of Pope Pius X,24Q,27Q etc), with his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.He produces the hermeneutic of rupture with the Early Christians, the early Catholics, the Fathers of the Church, the Medieval Fathers and the popes before Pius XII.
Now the entire College of Cardinals are in a factory-made, artificial schism with their irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II ( visible LG 14 cases).
The German Synodal Path is schismatic and the German cardinals and bishops have a rational and non schismatic alternative before them.Dr.Taylor Marshall could have asked, « Is Cardinal Marx in schism because of his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II ? ».
The “Ecclesia Dei” communities meeting, with Pope Francis this month, as reported on the website of Taylor Marshall, would be of no value for the traditionalists.They need to discuss Vatican Council II, interpreted with the rational premise( invisible cases of LG 14 in 2021 are always invisible).More important, affirm it before the pope.
FSSP,ICKSP,IBP
The FSSP (Fraternity of St Peter), ICKSP (Institute of Christ the King), and IBP (Institute of the Good Shepherd),interpretation of Vatican Council II is as schismatic as that of Pope Francis. They all use the false premise which Bishop Schneider avoided.
These communities need to tell Pope Francis to interpret the Council rationally,come back to the Church and take the Catholic Church back to Tradition at all rites and liturgies.
They should mention that the SSPX-Vatican talks during the pontificate of Pope Benedict,were a waste of time.Since both sides were interpreting the Council with LG 14 ( baptism of desire) referring to literal and objective cases.Fr.Jean Marie Gleize and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj are still at it. –Lionel Andrades
___________________________________
Pope Benedict in an interview with the daily Avvenire said that EENS today was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century.There was ‘a development’ with Vatican Council II.He meant Vatican Council II with LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 being literal cases in 1965-2021.So EENS, the Syllabus of Errors and the Athanasius Creed were made obsolete.
But with LG 14 (baptism of desire) not being a literal case in 2021 for Schneider and Marshall, the game has changed. It is the popes are using the wrong interpretation of the Council.So they are choosing the hermeneutic of rupture with the past.
When in principle, hypothetical cases (LG 8,Lg 14,LG 16 ,UR 3 etc) are not literal and personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church in the present times,then the popes and the SSPX, can affirm Vatican Council II ( with the rational premise) and also Tradition ( EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc).They would not be in a rupture with the past Magisterium.They would be supporting Vatican Council II, Tradition and the past Magisterium.
Pope Francis is in schism since he rejects Vatican Council II interpreted rationally and rejects Tradition ( Catechism of Pope Pius X,24Q,27Q etc), with his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.He produces the hermeneutic of rupture with the Early Christians, the early Catholics, the Fathers of the Church, the Medieval Fathers and the popes before Pius XII.
Now the entire College of Cardinals are in a factory-made, artificial schism with their irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II ( visible LG 14 cases).
The German Synodal Path is schismatic and the German cardinals and bishops have a rational and non schismatic alternative before them.
Dr.Taylor Marshall could have asked, « Is Cardinal Marx in schism because of his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II ? ».
The “Ecclesia Dei” communities meeting, with Pope Francis this month, as reported on the website of Taylor Marshall, would be of no value for the traditionalists.They need to discuss Vatican Council II, interpreted with the rational premise( invisible cases of LG 14 in 2021 are always invisible).More important, affirm it before the pope.
FSSP,ICKSP,IBP
The FSSP (Fraternity of St Peter), ICKSP (Institute of Christ the King), and IBP (Institute of the Good Shepherd),interpretation of Vatican Council II is as schismatic as that of Pope Francis. They all use the false premise which Bishop Schneider avoided.
These communities need to tell Pope Francis to interpret the Council rationally,come back to the Church and take the Catholic Church back to Tradition at all rites and liturgies.
They should mention that the SSPX-Vatican talks during the pontificate of Pope Benedict,were a waste of time.Since both sides were interpreting the Council with LG 14 ( baptism of desire) referring to literal and objective cases.Fr.Jean Marie Gleize and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj are still at it. –Lionel Andrades
___________________________________
SEPTEMBER 2, 2021
Cardinal Vincent Nicols, the Bishops Conference of England and Wales and the Beda, English and Irish seminaries in Rome interpret the baptism of desire ( LG 14) as referring to literal and known people in the present times.In this way a break with Tradition is created.Vocations to the religious life have to accept this irrationality : Schneider and Marshall say there are no such objective cases for us human beings
SEPTEMBER 5, 2021
Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshal say( see video ) that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire. For Pope Francis and Bishop Roland Minnerath there are literal and visible cases of the baptism of desire in the present times. So we have two interpretations of Vatican Council II (LG 14 is visible or invisible and the conclusion is different) and extra ecclesiam nulla salus( with or without the baptism of desire being visible or invisible and an exception or not an exception to EENS).
Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshal say( see video ) that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire. For Pope Francis and Bishop Roland Minnerath there are literal and visible cases of the baptism of desire in the present times. So we have two interpretations of Vatican Council II (LG 14 is visible or invisible and the conclusion is different) and extra ecclesiam nulla salus( with or without the baptism of desire being visible or invisible and an exception or not an exception to EENS).
One interpretation is irrational and not Magisterial. Can you guess which one is it ? - Lionel Andrades
Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshal say( see video ) that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire. For Pope Francis and Bishop Roland Minnerath there are literal and visible cases of the baptism of desire in the present times. So we have two interpretations of Vatican Council II (LG 14 is visible or invisible and the conclusion is different) and extra ecclesiam nulla salus( with or without the baptism of desire being visible or invisible and an exception or not an exception to EENS).
One interpretation is irrational and not Magisterial. Can you guess which one is it ? - Lionel Andrades
SEPTEMBER 6, 2021
Recently Bishop Athanasius Schneider told Dr. Taylor Marshall in an interview, that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire. This would be explosive for Pope Benedict. Since Schneider is saying that we do not need the New Theology
Recently Bishop Athanasius Schneider told Dr. Taylor Marshall in an interview, that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire. This would be explosive for Pope Benedict. Since Schneider is saying that we do not need the New Theology.-Lionel Andrades_____________________________________________
Recently Bishop Athanasius Schneider told Dr. Taylor Marshall in an interview, that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire. This would be explosive for Pope Benedict. Since Schneider is saying that we do not need the New Theology.-Lionel Andrades
_____________________________________________
SEPTEMBER 10, 2021
Bishop Athanasius Schnedier and Dr. Taylor Marshall say LG 14 is invisible and the popes and cardinals say it is visible
Pope Francis’s interpretation of Vatican Council II is non Magisterial.It is personal like that of Pope Paul VI and the popes who followed him.They did not use the rational premise to interpret the Council but chose the irrational premise and so created a false rupture with Tradition.
Dr. Taylor Marshall has said that there are no explicit cases of Aquinas’ implicit baptism of desire but the popes interpret Lumen Gentium ( case of the catechumen) as referring to visible cases. LG 14 is explicit.If it was not explicit for them it could not be a rupture with Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors etc.So what is implicit is projected as explicit and then the Church’s ecclesiocentric ecclesiology is said to be obsolete.
This cannot be the work of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit cannot make an objective error.
There are no literal cases of the baptism of desire in the present times said Bishop Athanasius Schneider.LG 14 is not a visible case for him.
Yet all the books on Vatican Council II are written with this invisible-visible mix up and new ones are being written without any correction or clarfication from the Vatican.
So why should Catholics interpret LG 14 and the rest of Vatican Council II irrationally like the popes and not like Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall ?
Why should not lay Catholics choose the rational option which is in harmony with Tradition ?.
At the Hungarian and German Catholic seminaries in Rome, the young men are taught to interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise ( invisible cases are visible in 1965-2021). Why should they be obedient to this error?
Why must the Ecclesia Dei communities follow the same error and over look it in the seminaries- liberal and traditionalist ? They are not affirming the faith.
Pope Francis is schismatic.The past Magisterium did not use the false premise.
This was also the error of Pope Benedict, before and after, he was appointed the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.There is no unity in theology in doctrine since the official teaching is irrational, schismatic and really non Magisterial.
Bishop Athanasius Schnedier and Dr. Taylor Marshall say LG 14 is invisible and the popes and cardinals say it is visible.-Lionel Andrades
Pope Francis’s interpretation of Vatican Council II is non Magisterial.It is personal like that of Pope Paul VI and the popes who followed him.They did not use the rational premise to interpret the Council but chose the irrational premise and so created a false rupture with Tradition.
Dr. Taylor Marshall has said that there are no explicit cases of Aquinas’ implicit baptism of desire but the popes interpret Lumen Gentium ( case of the catechumen) as referring to visible cases. LG 14 is explicit.If it was not explicit for them it could not be a rupture with Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors etc.So what is implicit is projected as explicit and then the Church’s ecclesiocentric ecclesiology is said to be obsolete.
This cannot be the work of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit cannot make an objective error.
There are no literal cases of the baptism of desire in the present times said Bishop Athanasius Schneider.LG 14 is not a visible case for him.
Yet all the books on Vatican Council II are written with this invisible-visible mix up and new ones are being written without any correction or clarfication from the Vatican.
So why should Catholics interpret LG 14 and the rest of Vatican Council II irrationally like the popes and not like Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall ?
Why should not lay Catholics choose the rational option which is in harmony with Tradition ?.
At the Hungarian and German Catholic seminaries in Rome, the young men are taught to interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise ( invisible cases are visible in 1965-2021). Why should they be obedient to this error?
Why must the Ecclesia Dei communities follow the same error and over look it in the seminaries- liberal and traditionalist ? They are not affirming the faith.
Pope Francis is schismatic.The past Magisterium did not use the false premise.
This was also the error of Pope Benedict, before and after, he was appointed the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
There is no unity in theology in doctrine since the official teaching is irrational, schismatic and really non Magisterial.
Bishop Athanasius Schnedier and Dr. Taylor Marshall say LG 14 is invisible and the popes and cardinals say it is visible.-Lionel Andrades
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
