Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, a Cushingite offers the Latin Mass in Rome while rejecting de fide teachings : Archbishop Carlo Vigano does not want to be excommunicated : Bishop Athanasius Schneider recants his Khazakhistan statement

 Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, a Cushingite liberal who rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus,  sang vespers on Friday at Rome's Pantheon as part of the annual Summorum Pontificum Pilgrimage. The dissenting Cardinal-Archbishop of Bologna approves Vatican Council II interpreted with Cushingism by Alberto Melloni of the Leftist Bologna School (FSCIRE) financed by the Italian government.This is the political interpretation of the Council approved by the Left for the Catholic Church.

Zuppi has stopped priests in Rome.He did not want them to interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance with rational Feeneyism.He wanted the Irrational Premise used to create division in the Church. With the Rational Premise he would have to leave his liberalism.

So the priests now cannot affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus, rationally, according to the Patristic period.He wants the Council to be a  break with Tradition.This is still the political interpretation of the Council by liberals and traditionalists.

 

So Bishop Athanasius Schneider in his three interviews this October presented the Council as having exceptions for Tradition. He used the False Premise.In this way he recanted the ecclesiocentrism he proclaimed when Pope Francis was recently in Kazakhstan.

 

SYNODS USE CUSHINGISM  

When asked about the Synods, Schneider also did not say that Pope Francis and the organisers,interpret the Council II with irrational Cushingism.So the break with Tradition is false. It is calculated and artificial. Instead he wanted the division.He did not ask for the Council to be interpreted with rational Feeneyism.  

He did not point out that Cardinal Grech and the organizers of the Synods were dishonest. He could not say it. The  traditionalist bishop himself used Cushingism in the interviews,to break with Tradition.

 FEENEY AND LEFEBVRE'S EXCOMMUNICATION WAS POLITICAL

It may be mentioned that Fr. Leonard Feeney refused to accept the baptism of desire with Cushingism  as did the Jesuits and the Archbishop of Boston. So he received an excommunication approved by the Left.

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre also refused to accept the Cushingite interpretation of the Council.He was excommunicated. It was approved by the Left.

The Left would later also demand that Bishop Richard Williamson be excommunicated. This is even though he had not committed any mortal sins of faith and morals.Though like Archbishop Lefebvre and the other SSPX bishops he rejected Vatican Council II interpreted with Cushingism.

VIGANO KEEPS SILENT

Now in a recent statement on Vatican Council II, Archbishop Carlo Vigano did not say that he would interpret the Council with LG 8,14,15 and 16 referring to only hypothetical and invisible cases in 2022. 

He did not say that with this rational interpretation of LG 8 etc there would no longer be practical exceptions for Feeneyite EENS in Vatican Council II. The Council would not contradict the past exclusivist ecclesiology which Bishop Athanasius Schneider proclaimed at Khazakistan.

He did not say that the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office made an objective mistake. It ushered in Cushingism, the New Heresy and the New Theology.It was approved by the popes for political reasons and so he rejected it. 

The popes, cardinals and bishops do not want to affirm Feeneyite EENS in public.Now even Archbishop Carlo Vigano does not want to be excommunicated on the advice of the globalists. -Lionel Andrades

Archbishop Carlo Vigano does not want to be excommunicated on the advice of the globalists

Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, a Cushingite liberal who rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus,  sang vespers on Friday at Rome's Pantheon as part of the annual Summorum Pontificum Pilgrimage. The dissenting Cardinal-Archbishop of Bologna approves Vatican Council II interpreted with Cushingism by Alberto Melloni of the Leftist Bologna School (FSCIRE) financed by the Italian government.This is the political interpretation of the Council approved by the Left for the Catholic Church.

Zuppi has stopped priests in Rome.He did not want them to interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance with rational Feeneyism.He wanted the Irrational Premise used to create division in the Church. With the Rational Premise he would have to leave his liberalism.

So they could not affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus, rationally, according to the Patristic period.

He wants the Council to be a  break with Tradition.This is still the political interpretation of the Council by liberals and traditionalists.

So Bishop Athanasius Schneider in his three interviews this October presented the Council as having exceptions for Tradition. He used the False Premise.In this way he recanted the ecclesiocentrism he proclaimed when Pope Francis was recently in Kazakhstan.

When asked about the Synods, Schneider also did not say that they interpret the Council II with irrational Cushingism.So the break with Tradition is false.Instead he wanted the division.He did not ask for the Council to be interpreted with rational Feeneyism. 

He did not point out that Cardinal Grech and the organizers of the Synods were dishonest. The  traditionalist bishop himself used Cushingism in the interviews,to break with Tradition.

It may be mentioned that Fr. Leonard Feeney refused to accept the baptism of desire with Cushingism  as did the Jesuits and the Archbishop of Boston. So he received an excommunication approved by the Left.

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre also refused to accept the Cushingite interpretation of the Council.He was excommunicated. It was approved by the Left.They would later also demand that Bishop Richard Williamson be excommunicated. This is even though he had not committed any mortal sins of faith and morals.He like Archbishop Lefebvre and the other SSPX bishops rejected Vatican Council II interpreted with Cushingism.

Now in a recent statement on Vatican Council II, Archbishop Carlo Vigano did not say that he would interpret the Council with LG 8,14,15 and 16 referring to only hypothetical and invisible cases in 2022. 

He did not say that with this rational interpretation of LG 8 etc there would no longer be practical exceptions for Feeneyite EENS in Vatican Council II. 

He did not say that the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office made an objective mistake. It ushered in Cushingism, the New Heresy and the New Theology.It was approved by the popes for political reasons. 

None of them wanted to affirm Feeneyite EENS in public.Now even Archbishop Carlo Vigano does not want to be excommunicated on the advice of the globalists. -Lionel Andrades

 

You Have Chosen Death’

October 25, 2022 by sd

Not since the early days of Medjugorje, and perhaps during the brutal Serbian-Croatian conflict, which surrounded the town, has there been quite so stark a monthly message.

“Dear children,” it starts, as always, on the twenty-fifth of each month. Then:

“The Most High permits me to be with you, and to be joy for you and the way in hope, because mankind has decided for death.

“That is why He sent me to keep instructing you that without God you do not have a future. Little children, be instruments of love for all those who have not come to know the God of love. Witness joyfully your faith and do not lose hope in a change of the human heart. I am with you and am blessing you with my motherly blessing. Thank you for having responded to my call.”

It was these words — “mankind has decided for death” and “without God you do not have a future” — that sounded, if not a final warning, a message hearkening to a new and perhaps ominous stage of the apparitions.

Those apparitions of Mary — the first week of which have been formally authenticated by a Vatican Commission (involving one more apparition than at Fatima) — are usually brimming with optimism and hopefulness, with joy, even when serious events surround humankind, for Our Lady sees from the joyous perspective of Heaven.

But not this month of October. Not this month of both the Rosary and spiritual warfare. Not this time of constant nuclear threats by Russia, as the brutal war it provoked in Ukraine continues to generate carnage.

Was it related mainly to the war? Abortion, manipulation of embryos, and euthanasia also come to mind. The Culture of Life versus the Culture of Death, as John Paul II said. This is the overarching theme. Despite the over-ruling of Roe v. Wade, most of the world, and still a large number in the United States, continue, including now by pill, to exterminate the unborn. There are moves to codify abortion or open mobile clinics, circumventing the Supreme Court ruling.

The Polish translation of the message is yet more stark. “May the Most High allow me to be with you and be your joy and way of hope, for mankind has chosen to die. That is why He sent me to teach you that without God there is no future. Children, be instruments of love for all those who have not met God. Witness your faith and do not lose hope of a change in the human heart. I am with you and bless you with a motherly blessing.”

On September 25, 1991, as former Yugoslavia headed into civil war, the Virgin said, “Dear children! Today in a special way I invite you all to prayer and renunciation. For now as never before satan wants to show the world his shameful face by which he wants to seduce as many people as possible onto the way of death and sin. Therefore, dear children, help my Immaculate Heart to triumph in the sinful world. I beseech all of you to offer prayers and sacrifices for my intentions so I can present them to God for what is most necessary. Forget your desires, dear children, and pray for what God desires, and not for what you desire. Thank you for having responded to my call.”

In 1996 it seemed related to eternal destinations: “Choose life and not death of the soul,” she said on March 25 of that year.

In 2003: ““Dear children! Particularly at this holy time of penance and prayer, I call you to make a choice. God gave you free will to choose life or death.”

Important: that admonition not to lose hope. In other words, it’s not likely a prediction so much, again, as a warning.

But the Polish translation — “chosen to die” — does not seem related to abortion but to something coming in the future, with no mere humans knowing what is being planned in secret, in the midst of ongoing military hostilities. Instead of the unborn, it seems directed to the death of those alive and conscious.

Be instruments of love toward non-believers, she seemed to be saying. For in messages to another seer (the monthly one is to Marija Pavlovic-Lunetti), she has often referred to atheists as “those who have not yet come to know the love of God.” (We’ll address this more at the retreat Saturday.)

And so it goes, as the pandemic winds down and then erupt again in another form — thankfully nothing like three years ago — but as the war continues, in a most unpredictable fashion, at the same time as there are rumblings in nature: On Tuesday, a small but loud quake in San Francisco that was described as sounding like thunder.

[Footnote: seer Pavlovic has commented, “I believe that it is understood as spiritual death because too many people today in the world and in the wealthy part of Europe live without their own spirit anymore. When we lack spirit, we are mostly like walking dead. I believe that the Holy Spirit is missing in the hearts of this drifting mankind, through wars, depressions, going towards all these ideologies of selfishness and without building a future through the family, the children who today are considered more like a burden than a real treasure. Our Lady in several messages has invited us not to be afraid to have a large family and put our trust and rely more on God.”]

[resources: Michael Brown retreat, 10/29]

Archbishop Vigano and Bishop Schneider want division in the Church otherwise they could be hit with a leftist excommunication as it was for Fr. Leonard Feeney and Archbishop Lefebvre.

 

FR.LEONARD FEENEY'S EXCOMMUNICATION WAS POLITICAL

Fr.Leonard Feeney was saying that there are no physically visible cases of the baptism of desire. This is reality. It is a fact. His excommunication was political by the Left. The Archbishop of Boston and Pius XII were saying that invisible cases of the BOD were visible examples of salvation.

ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE'S EXCOMMUNICATION WAS LEFTIST

Even the excommunication of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was political-left. He refused to accept Vatican Council II in which invisible cases of Lumen Gentium 14 and 16 etc were projected as visible exceptions for extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the rest of Tradition.

Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger accepted it.They accepted Vatican Council II interpreted with the Irrational Premise to produce a non tratitional conclusion.

Pope Pius XII did not tell the Archbishop of Boston and the Jesuits that invisible cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance were not visible exceptions for Feeneyite EENS. Instead they silenced the priest.

THEY DID NOT TELL ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE TO INTERPRET VATICAN COUNCIL II RATIONALLY

Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger did not tell Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre that he could interpret Vatican Council II with invisible cases of LG 8,14 and 16 etc not being visible exceptions for Feeneyite EENS. So he could return to Tradition without rejecting Vatican Council II.

Today Archbishop Carlo Vigano and Bishop Athanasius Schneider will not tell traditionalists at the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire, to interpret Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus rationally. They will not say in public that Vatican Council II is not a break with Feeneyite EENS.

POPES FRANCIS AND BENEDICT FOR POLITICAL REASONS ARE INTERPRETING VATICAN COUNCIL II IRRATIONALLY.

Pope Francis and Pope Benedict for political reasons will not say that Vatican Council II does not contradict the Athanasius Creed which says all need Catholic faith for salvation. They want to pretend that LG 8, 14 and 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to visible cases. Irrational?!

For political reasons the popes and Archbishop Vigano and Bishop Schneider want division in the Church. Otherwise the bishops could be excommunicated like Fr. Leonard Feeney and Archbishop Lefebvre.

The ADL had also asked for the excommunication of Bishop Richard Williamson.Even though he committed no mortal sin of faith or morals Pope Benedict side lined him. Williamson was not obliged to accept Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally by Pope Benedict.This is the political interpretation of the Council.It is unethical.

Pope Benedict wanted Bishop Bernard Fellay to accept Vatican Council II as a break with EENS. Why? This is irrational and dishonest.

WE NOW KNOW HOW TO CREATE THE HERMENEUTIC OF CONTINUITY WITH TRADITION

Pope Pius XII after World War II allowed division to come into the Church. It can be ended today. Since we know how to always create the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.The Council is not ambiguous.Bishop Schneider said in one of his three interviews this month that the Council is ambiguous. He interpreted the Council as a break with Tradition. So he chose the Irrational Premise of the liberals.

THE PROFESSION OF FAITH IS DIFFERENT SINCE THE INTERPRETATION OF THE CREEDS IS DIFFERENT

It is because of the Irrational Premise, that the Profession of Faith of Mon.Nicola Bux and the bishops, is different from mine. We can have unity when he chooses to interpret Magisterial Documents rationally as I do.

For political left reasons Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II irrationally like Prof. Roberto dei Mattei of the Lepanto Institute, Archbishop Carlo Vigano and Bishop Athanasius Schneider. May be it is due to leftist coercion within and outside the Church.-Lionel Andrades

Rosario dalla Collina delle Apparizioni di Medjugorje con Padre Francesco Rizzi 29 ottobre 2022

Gesù risveglia in noi il desiderio di stare con Te

What is the Irrational Premise ?

 PantheraBlanca writes on Twitter

Please extrapolate this premise for less informed Catholics, myself included.

Lionel Andrades

I am following Aristotle's Logic.There is a premise, inference and conclusion.If Lumen Gentium 16, being saved in invincible ignorance, refers to a physically visible person this month for you and not for me then our premises are different.

Our premises are different when an invisible person for you is visible for me.Can you see someone saved as such? No we cannot.The person would be in Heaven and known only to God. So I cannot infer that Lumen Gentium 16 refers to a practical exception for extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).

For Lumen Gentium 16 to be a practical exception for Feeneyite EENS, it had to refer to a physically visible case. But it is invisible to me. So Lumen Gentium 16 does not contradict the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, for me. My premise is LG 16 is invisible.

So my premise is something invisible(LG 16) is invisible, in my reality and that of other humans.But for Bishop Athanasis Schneider and Archbishop Carlo Vigano, LG 16 is a break with EENS.So it is visible. An invisible person cannot be an exception for EENS.

So the premise and inference of Archbishop Carlo Vigano and Bishop Athanasius Schneider is different, from mine. Our conclusions too would have to be different. Vatican Council II is not a rupture with EENS for me. Vatican Council II is a break with EENS for them and the popes.

How can they imply that invisible cases of non-Catholics saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) are physically visible on earth too? Archbishop Vigano and Bishop Schneider violate the Principle of Non Contradiction of Aristotle. -Lionel Andrades

Bishop Schneider criticizes modernism before Steve Bannon but interprets Vatican Council II with modernism

 

                                                                                                                                                                             - Lionel Andrades

OCTOBER 27, 2022

Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s interpretation of Vatican Council II was modernist.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/10/bishop-athanasius-schneiders.html

OCTOBER 26, 2022

Bishop Athanasius Schneider interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally throughout the interview with Steve Bannon this month

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/10/bishop-athanasius-schneider-interpreted.html

 OCTOBER 25, 2022

Steve Bannon does not ask Bishop Athanasius Schneider the question important for conservatives and the center right

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/10/steve-bannon-does-not-ask-bishop.html

S.Rosario sulla collina delle apparizioni in attesa del messaggio di Ottobre

Little children, be instruments of love for all those who have not come to know the God of love - Medugorje Message October 2022 from Our Lady

 October 25, 2022

“Dear children! The Most High permits me to be with you, and to be joy for you and the way in hope, because mankind has decided to die. That is why He sent me to keep teaching you that without God you do not have a future. Little children, be instruments of love for all those who have not come to know the God of love. Witness joyfully your faith and do not lose hope in a change of the human heart. I am with you and am blessing you with my motherly blessing. Thank you for having responded to my call.”

https://medjugorje.com/latest-25-message/our-lady-of-medjugorjes-october-25-2022-monthly-message-for-the-world/

Messaggio della Regina della Pace del 25 ottobre 2022 - Medjugorje

Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s interpretation of Vatican Council II was modernist.

 Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s interpretation of Vatican Council II was modernist. It was a break with Tradition. My interpretation of Vatican Council II  with the Rational Premise is rational. It is in harmony with Tradition. It was rational and so it is ethical. There is no break between faith and reason.There is no break with the past Magisterium.It has the hermeneutic of continuity with the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus of the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century. It supports the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, the Catechism of Pope Pius X and the Athanasius Creed, interpreted rationally.

VATICAN COUNCIL II CAN BE INTERPRETED WITH CUSHINGISM OR FEENEYISM

When invisible cases are considered invisible I call it Feeneyism. When invisible cases in the present times are considered visible I call it Cushingism. Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents( Creeds and Catechisms) can be interpreted with Feeneyism or Cushingism and the Conclusion will be different.

In the interview with Steve Bannon, Bishop Schneider interpreted Vatican Council II with irrational Cushingism and not rational Feeneyism. So he presented the Council as a  break with Tradition; as supporting heresy etc.Yes - the Council interpreted with Cushingism is heretical and schismatic. He was correct. I agree with him.

THERE ARE NO LITERAL CASES OF THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE

When interviewed by Dr.Taylor Marshall ( see video above) he said that there were no literal cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14).So here he was interpreting Vatican Council II with Feeneyism.He was using the Rational Premise i.e invisible cases of people being saved with the baptism of desire in the present times, are physically invisible on earth. So they are not objective examples of salvation outside the Church.They cannot be practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Athanasius Creed. Hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire do not contradict Feeneyite EENS. If someone was saved outside the Church it could only be known to God.The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston made an objective mistake. The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office ( LOHO) was heretical and schismatic.

THE LOHO WAS HERETICAL

It projected exceptions for EENS, and that too by confusing invisible cases as being visible. It brought theological liberalism into the Catholic Church.It was based upon a philosophical error, an empirical error.There were no literal cases of the baptism of desire but the LOHO assumed that there were there real and physically visible cases.

The LOHO with its objective mistake was referenced in Vatican Council II(LG 16) and placed in the Denzinger by Fr.Karl Rahner and his colleagues.Bishop Schneider has not criticized the mistake in the LOHO. 

WE CAN BE ECCLESIOCENTRIC WITH THE SUPPORT OF VATICAN COUNCIL II

However recently in Kazakhstan when he said that there was salvation in only Jesus and in only the Catholic Church, he was going back to Tradition and was rejecting Vatican Council II Irrational. He was rejecting the liberalism of the LOHO.He was correct in doing this.I agree with him.Vatican Council II irrational has to be rejected by all.It is unethical.The Council cannot be interpreted with the LOHO mistake.

I too am affirming the past ecclesiocentrism like he did at Khazkistan but I do not have to reject Vatican Council II, when the Council is interpreted with the Rational Premise.

THE RED IS NOT AN EXCEPTION FOR THE BLUE FOR ME

Schneider told Bannon that there are good things in the Council. But he was still interpreting the Cushingite passages in the Council as a rupture with the Feeneyite passages. The 'Red was an exception for the Blue' for him.He was confusing hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as being non-hypothetical objective examples of salvation outside the Church.This is a mistake. They are not literal cases, as he referred to LG 14, in the Taylor Marshall interview.Marshall too, agreed with him. He said that there are no explicit cases of Aquinas’ implicit baptism of desire.

ALL THE INTERVIEWS THIS MONTH WERE CUSHINGITE

So Bishop Schneider should have told Steve Bannon that the interpretation of Vatican Council II by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican is irrational and dishonest. It is unethical, heretical and schismatic.This was the Council which he criticized before Bannon this month.It was the same interpretation of the Council in his interview with John Henry Weston of Life Site News and Raymond Arroyo at EWTN World Over.

He could have interpreted the Council with rational Feeneyism and said that Vatican Council II supports the past exclusivist ecclesiology and has a hermeneutic of continuity with the Athanasius Creed.

THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SUPPORTS THE PAST CATECHISMS INTERPRETED RATIONALLY

Even the Catechism of the Catholic Church of Pope John Paul II when interpreted with the Rational Premise has a continuity with the Athanasius Creed, when, also interpreted with the Rational Premise. So the Catechism of the Catholic Church supports the Catechism of Pope Pius X , the Baltimore Catechism and the Catechism of Trent, when alll are interpreted rationally.

Without rejecting Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church we have returned to the old theology of the founders of the great religious communities, St.Francis of Assisi, St. Dominic…

Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are in harmony with the Patristic period and the great popes from the 12 th to 16 th century.The Golden Period in the history of the Church.The Council interpreted rationally, Bannon had to be told, is not a break with Tradition,the Early Christians, the Early Catholics. Since it supports Feeneyite EENS it supports the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King in all political legislation, to save the maximum souls from going to Hell, for in Heaven, there are only Catholics.Lionel Andrades

OCTOBER 26, 2022

Bishop Athanasius Schneider interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally throughout the interview with Steve Bannon this month.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/10/bishop-athanasius-schneider-interpreted.html

 OCTOBER 25, 2022

Steve Bannon does not ask Bishop Athanasius Schneider the question important for conservatives and the center right

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/10/steve-bannon-does-not-ask-bishop.html