All the books on Vatican Council II
being promoted by Bishop Kevin Rhoades, President of the USCCB Doctrinal
Committee, are written with the Fake Premise.
Catholics in the USA today could affirm the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus
of Errors since there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict them. The
Rational Premise (invisible cases are invisible) has to be used to interpret
the Council. The US National Catechetical Offices and the Bishops Conference is
still using a False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and their priority
is political.-Lionel Andrades
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 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
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/bishop-athanasius-schneider-and-dr_29.html
JUNE 29, 2020
USCCB Doctrinal Committee wants SBC to interpret Vatican Council II with hypothetical cases being considered practical exceptions to EENS
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' Doctrinal Committee along with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) and the Diocese of Manchester,USA want the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire in the Diocese of Manchester, USA to interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with hypothetical and invisible cases being considered practical examples of salvation outside the Church and objective exceptions to the dogma EENS as it was interpreted by the Jesuits in the Middle Ages.
With this irrational premise a false rupture is created with Church Magisterial documents, which support exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church and which is opposed by the ADL, SPLC and the rest of the Jewish Left.
I have mentioned in a previous blog post that Catholic religious and laity need to formally challenge the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Doctrinal Committee on its bad decisions with reference to Vatican Council II.
I have mentioned in a previous blog post that Catholic religious and laity need to formally challenge the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Doctrinal Committee on its bad decisions with reference to Vatican Council II.
Bishop Stephen Brady, a member of the USCCB Doctrinal Committee intepreted Vatican Council II with the false premise and inference.He then excommunicated Fr. Vaughn Treco, since he rejected Vatican Council II with the error.
Bishop Kevin Rhoades, the present Chairman of the USCCB Doctrinal Committee interpreted Vatican Council II with the irrationality and did not affirm exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.He then supported a 'hit website' along with Jim Likoudis of Catholics United for the Faith, Steubenville, that maligned Robert Sungenis.The issue was theology.
Bishop Michael F. Olson, Bishop of Fort Worth, did not interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with magisterial documents, which support the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.Instead he placed restrictions on the Fischer More College, allowing it to collapse.There were many Catholic studens enrolled there.He wanted them all to accept Vatican Council II confusing what is invisible as being visible and so creating a false break with Tradition.
The public issue was Vatican Council II. An injustice was done by the bishop and the CDF, to the faculty and students of the college.
According to reports there was opposition to Fr. Nicholas Gruner offering Holy Mass at the college since he rejected Vatican Council II( interpreted with the false premise).While the FSSP priests like the bishops accepted Vatican Council II interpreted with the false premise.So they supported a hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.The bishop wanted the traditionalists to interpret Vatican Council II with the irrationality and only then they could offer Holy Mass in his diocese.
Bishop Robert McManus, bishop of Worcester, could be asked to interpret Vatican Council II rationally and affirm EENS like the St. Benedict Center, Still River, MA. He could also appeal for the restrictions on the St. Benedict Center, Richmond, N.H in the Diocese of Manchester, where Bishop Peter Libasci is the bishop, be removed.The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in Manchester would be willing to affim Vatican Council II without the false premise, since it would not be in conflict with Feeneyite EENS.
Vatican Council II supports the strict interpretation of EENS according to the St. Benedict Centers of Fr. Leonard Feeney,Sr.Catherine Clark Goddard MICM and Brother Francis Malus MICM and the Catholic professors wrongly dismissed by Boston College for their Catholic beliefs.The Jesuits at Boston College must admit that the Catholic professors there was discrimination against the dismissed Catholic professors.
Also the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP) and Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity (SOLT) priests and LCWR religious sisters, in Boston and New England, must be asked to affirm Vatican Council II(rational version) before they offer/attend Holy Mass in Latin or English.
Bishop Robert McManus, bishop of Worcester, could be asked to interpret Vatican Council II rationally and affirm EENS like the St. Benedict Center, Still River, MA. He could also appeal for the restrictions on the St. Benedict Center, Richmond, N.H in the Diocese of Manchester, where Bishop Peter Libasci is the bishop, be removed.The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in Manchester would be willing to affim Vatican Council II without the false premise, since it would not be in conflict with Feeneyite EENS.
Vatican Council II supports the strict interpretation of EENS according to the St. Benedict Centers of Fr. Leonard Feeney,Sr.Catherine Clark Goddard MICM and Brother Francis Malus MICM and the Catholic professors wrongly dismissed by Boston College for their Catholic beliefs.The Jesuits at Boston College must admit that the Catholic professors there was discrimination against the dismissed Catholic professors.
Also the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP) and Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity (SOLT) priests and LCWR religious sisters, in Boston and New England, must be asked to affirm Vatican Council II(rational version) before they offer/attend Holy Mass in Latin or English.
Why should Brother Andre Marie MICM Prior at the St. Benedict Center, N.H state that CCC 847-848 ( invincible ignorance) is an objective exception to Feeneyite EENS?
Why should he state that unknown cases of being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) are unknown exceptions to EENS according to the missionaries in the 16th century?
This is an error of the USCCB Doctrinal Committee.
It is also an error expressed by Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Roberto Dei Mattei and the traditionalists, in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and EENS.They also use the false premise like the bishops of the USCCB Doctrinal Committee.
-Lionel Andrades
-Lionel Andrades
JUNE 29, 2020
Catholic religious and laity need to formally challenge the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Doctrinal Committee on its bad decisions with reference to Vatican Council II.
JUNE 29, 2020
Wikipedia needs to correct their ideological report on Fr. Leonard Feeney.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment