Wednesday, February 9, 2022

Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not just a pastoral Council

 

 SEPTEMBER 8, 2021

Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not just a pastoral Council

 

VATICAN COUNCIL II IS DOGMATIC AND NOT JUST A PASTORAL COUNCIL

I don't know about Pope Francis but I am back to Traditional Mission based upon ecclesiocentrism since there is no known salvation outside the Church.We cannot meet or see someone saved without faith and baptism; Catholic faith and the baptism of water in 2021.
We are back to the non separation of Church and State since outside the Church there is no known salvation and being a Catholic is a priority for avoiding Hell.So the priority is a Catholic Government.In Heaven there are only Catholics is the official teaching of Vatican Council II ( rational) .
This is the official teaching of the Catholic Church today when Vatican Council II and other Magisterial documents are interpreted with a rational premise.This is not just a personal view.
Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not only a pastoral Council.It supports the 16th century EENS, which did not have any exceptions.It was common sense that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance, without the baptism of water, did not refer to personally known and objective people.This was known at the Council of Trent.-Lionel Andrades



UNE 12, 2021

There are so many reports/articles on the Vatican websites which interpret Vatican Council II as being non dogmatic and as a rupture with Tradition.The Council is dogmatic

 


There are so many reports/articles on the Vatican websites which interpret Vatican Council II as being non dogmatic and as a rupture with Tradition.The websites for the Congregation for the Clergy and the Council for Christian Unity, I have shown on this blog, use a fake premise, to interpret the Council as a rupture with extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).



This has been presented as 'a new revelation' in the Catholic Church. The error was used to justify Amoris Laetitia and so to give the Eucharist to the divorced and remarried.

But the Council is dogmatic. It is in line with Church documents which affirm exclusive salvation with only Catholic faith and the baptism of water.Faith and baptism in the Catholic Church(AG 7) is the Conciliar Church's teaching on exclusive salvation with the past exclusivist ecclesiology.-Lionel Andrades

_________________________



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 )
___________________

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/search?q=Vatican+Council+II+is+dogmatic

JANUARY 18, 2022

All the Superior Generals of the Ecclesia Dei are supporting mortal sins of faith

 

-Lionel Andrades


JANUARY 17, 2022

A Feeneyite is someone who does not use the False Premise to interpret the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance.He accepts the BOD and I.I as being hypothetical only.This is the Rational Premise.

 

A Feeneyite is someone who does not use the False Premise to interpret the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance(I.I). He accepts the BOD and I.I as being hypothetical only.This is the Rational Premise.

 So he does not reject the possibility of God choosing to save someone with BOD or I.I or the possibility of there being only Catholics in Heaven. However he does not project hypothetical cases of BOD and I.I as being practical exceptions for the 16th century extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) of the Jesuits, which had no exceptions. Invisible people cannot be visible exceptions for EENS according to St. Ignatius of Loyola and St. Robert Bellarmine. 

Fr.Leonard Feeney was in harmony with St. Francis Xavier and St. Thomas Aquinas on EENS. 

Vatican Council II says Catholics are the new people of God (Nostra Aetate 4), they are the new elect. In Heaven there are only Catholics who are there with Catholic faith and the baptism of water (Ad Gentes 7, Catechism of the Catholic Church 846 Outside the Church No Salvation).Salvation in potential is open for all but to receive this salvation all need to be Catholic, all need to enter the Catholic Church (Dominus Iesus 20, Pope John Paul II).

A Feneeyite is someone who does not project unknown cases of the baptism of desire etc as being known exceptions in the present times for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athnasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX etc. A Cushingite is someone who projects unknown cases of the BOD and I.I etc, as being known exceptions for the traditional strict interpretation of the dogma EENS and the past ecclesiocentrism.

The Superior Generals of the Ecclesia Dei communities are all Cushingites.

Cushingism creates a break with Tradition. It creates heresy and schism and mortal sins.The New Theology is Cushingite it depends upon the False Premise. The Ecclesia Dei communities intepret Vatican Council II with Cushingism, with the False Premise, with the New Theology.Then they blame Vatican Council II in general and in ignorance, and not their false premise.

On the blog 1Peter 5 Timothy Flanders wants to 'unite the clans' with Cushingism, with Vatican Council II interpreted with the False Premise to produce a false rupture with Tradition, which can be avoided.The Ecclesia Dei communities and the blog 1Peter 5 are united with the liberals and the Masons in their interpretation of Vatican Council II with the same False Premise.

If he uses the Rational Premise as a Feeneyite he will be persecuted. So like Peter Kwasniewski and Roberto dei Mattei they interpret Magisterial Documents with a False Premise and avoid being Feeneyites.-Lionel Andrades



JANUARY 16, 2022

Pope Francis and the Ecclesia Dei communities in France, have chosen the False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and so there is heresy, schism and mortal sins at the Novus Ordo and Latin Mass. This is an abjuration of the Faith.The Courtalain communique supports the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II in Traditionis Custode.

 

Pope Francis and the Ecclesia Dei communities in France, have chosen the False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and so there is heresy, schism and mortal sins at the Novus Ordo and Latin Mass. This is an abjuration of the Faith.The Courtalain communique supports the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II in Traditionis Custode.

 I can interpret Magisterial Documents without the common False Premise and can choose the Rational Premise.

Like Pope Francis in Traditionis Custode and the  Ecclesia Dei communities in France in public  supported  the same abjuration of the Catholic Faith. At Courtalain,France they interpreted  Vatican Council II with an Irrational Premise which creates the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.They did not announce that the choose the Rational Premise to interpret Vatican Council II.With the False Premise they create  schism and mortal sins of faith. In public they are denying Tradition for political reasons.They agree with Pope Francis’ interpretation of Vatican Council II in Traditionis Custode.He too like the popes from Paul VI interprets Vatican Council II, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Nicene and Athanasius Creed and Catechisms with the common False Premise.

I mentioned in a previous blog post how mortal sins of faith, first class heresy and schism with the past Magisterium is created with the False Premise.

1.Vatican Council II interpreted with the False Premise (invisible people are visible in 1965-2021) creates alleged practical exceptions for the 2.Athanasius Creed ( all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation from Hell), 3.changes the Nicene Creed ( I believe in three or more known and visible baptisms which exclude the baptism of water and so are practical exceptions for Feeneyite EENS).With the exceptions there is 4.a new version of ecumenism and a rejection of the ecumenism of return to the Catholic Church of the Syllabus of Errors. The baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are interpreted with the False Premise as in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and so 5.there is a rupture with Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441 on extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The Church no more teaches outside the Church there is no salvation for the Ecclesia Dei communities and the 6.Catechism of Pope Pius X (24 Q, 27Q) is obsolete. If they used the Rational Premise  ( invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 are always invisible), they would have to affirm the strict interpretation of EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors in public and then Pope Francis and the political Left would go after them. Now with the False Premise they  interpret Vatican Council II like the Masons.

They have abjured and so the Left permits them to be legal, to collect funds and have financial projects.  -Lionel Andrades



JANUARY 15, 2022



The Ecclesia Dei communities in France are officially supporting Vatican Council II interpreted with an Irrational Premise which creates the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/01/the-ecclesia-dei-communities-in-france.html

JANUARY 16, 2022

Father Louis-Marie de Blignières, Superior General of the Fraternity of Saint Vincent Ferrier, France signed the Communique of the Ecclesia Dei communities at Cortalain, France last September, in which he approved Vatican Council II interpreted with the False Premise. It creates the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.It is an abjuration of the Catholic faith. It supports schism with the past Magisterium, first class heresy on the Creeds and the rejection of de fide teachings of the Church which it is obligatory to believe in

 We reaffirm our adherence to the magisterium (including that of Vatican II and what follows), according to the Catholic doctrine of the assent due to it (cf. in particular LUMEN GENTIUM, §25, and Catechism of the Catholic Church, §891 and §892), as evidenced by the numerous studies and doctoral theses carried out by several of us over the past 33 years.   -  Joint Statement by Superiors General of “Ecclesia Dei” Communities,Courtelain, France,  https://www.ccwatershed.org/2021/09/02/breaking-joint-statement-by-superiors-general-of-ecclesia-dei-communities/

Father Louis-Marie de Blignières, Superior General of the Fraternity of Saint Vincent Ferrier, France signed the Communique of the Ecclesia Dei communities at Cortalain, France last September, in which he approved Vatican Council II interpreted with the False Premise. It creates the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.It is an abjuration of the Catholic faith. It supports schism with the past Magisterium, first class heresy on the Creeds and the rejection of de fide teachings of the Church which it is obligatory to believe in, example, the Creeds, without their meaning being changed with a False Premise, inference and non traditional conclusion.

Since Father Louis-Marie de Blignières is politically correct with the Left he is allowed politically to function in France. 

Similarly in the USA the sedevacantist bishops are allowed to have their seminaries, churches and educational facilities since they use the False Premise but the conclusion, though politically correct, is a sin for Catholics. -Lionel Andrades


__________________________________________________


JANUARY 9, 2022

Father Louis-Marie de Blignières, Superior General of the Fraternity of Saint Vincent Ferrier, France has not issued a statement on Vatican Council II interpreted with the Fake Premise and the Rational Premise

 


Father Louis-Marie de Blignières, Superior General of the Fraternity of Saint Vincent Ferrier, France will continue to offer the Latin Mass as before Traditionis Custode. However he has not issued a statement on Vatican Council II, which is the real issue. Will he interpret Vatican Council II with the False Premise as Pope Francis wants or will he interpret the Council with the Rational Premise and so with the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition ?

He could also assist the Latin laity at Dijon, France and ask Bishop Roland Minnerath and the diocesan priests there, who offer the Novus Ordo and Latin Mass, to also interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise and return to the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Patristic period and the Middle Ages.

At First Holy Communion preparation classes in France, Vatican Council II should not be interpreted according to Bishop Roland Minnerath but with Vatican Council II (rational) which has a hermeneutic of continuity with the Magisterium over the centuries in France.

He could appeal to Pope Francis to re-interpret Vatican Council II rationally and come back to the Faith. A major flaw in Traditionis Custode is that it interprets Vatican Council II with the Fake Premise and considers this the work of the Holy Spirit.

In Rome, if Cardinal Angelo Donatis, Vicar General, did not use the False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II, then during his Holy Mass in Italian for the Easter Triduum, this year, there would be nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict the Athanasius Creed, the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus with hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire( LG 14) and invincible ignorance(LG 16) not being practical and objective exceptions. Cardinal Donatis, who has prohibited the Latin Mass for the Easter Triduum, would be conservative in his theology. There would be a hermeneutic of continuity with St. Ignatius of Loyola and St. Francis Xavier when they offered the Traditional Latin Mass and held the traditional exclusivist concept of salvation.

The Italian cardinal would be affirming an exclusivist ecclesiology at Holy Mass in Italian and there would no more be a pre and post Vatican Council II ecclesiology. So the theology at Mass in Italian, Latin, Greek or Syro Malabar would be the same. It would be traditional.It would be Feeneyite and not Cushingite.

So there no more would be a reason for Pope Francis and the Left to target only the Latin Mass in the name of Vatican Council II interpreted with the Fake Theology; the Fake Premise.

How can diocesan priests be allowed to use a Fake Premise to interpret Vatican Council II at the Novus Ordo Mass in France, Italy etc ?. Father Louis-Marie de Blignières, Superior General of the Fraternity of Saint Vincent Ferrier must ask the French Bishops Conference.-Lionel Andrades


https://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2016/11/fraternity-of-st-vincent-ferrer-in-nyc.html#.Ydq-oDPMLcc

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/new-rome-pastoral-guidelines-raise-eyebrows


__________________________________________________


Posted by at No comments:
Labels:

Go for the Novus Ordo Mass and affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the Athanasius Creed.There are no exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II. Go for the Latin Mass and interpret Vatican Council II like L.A.

 


Go for the Novus Ordo Mass and affirm  the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the Athanasius Creed.There are no exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II. Go for the Latin Mass and interpret Vatican Council II like L.A.

The L.A interpretation of Vatican Council II is unique. We now know how to switch the hermeneutic of continuity,on or off. Even the sedevacantists can use it. -Lionel Andrades



 AUGUST 4, 2021

The Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II is not a break with Tradition. Pope Francis' interpretation of Vatican Council II in Traditionis Custode is a rupture with 'the true Church' and the past Magisterium on EENS, Syllabus of Errors, Athanasius Creed etc

 

 AUGUST 4, 2021

It is Pope Francis the cardinals and bishops who will have their back to the wall when the laity use the LA interpretation of Vatican Council II. Every thing changes. The premise is different and so the conclusion will also be different

 JULY 14, 2021

It's the French bishops who will have their back to the wall and not the FSSP when the laity use the LA interpretation of Vatican Council II. Every thing changes.



It's the French bishops who will have their back to the wall and not the FSSP when the laity use the LA interpretation of Vatican Council II. Everything changes.The LA interpretation of Vatican Council II and Church documents, may seem new in the Church but it is something really old.With it the French bishops are blocked from using bad theology to create ‘ a parallel Church’, which is a rupture with Tradition.

The laity will be able to ask the bishops and priests  to affirm Vatican Council II interpreted rationally, in harmony with the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, irrespective if Holy Mass is in Latin or French.Vatican Council II can have a hermeneutic of continuity with the Athanasius Creed which says all need Catholic faith for salvation.

The French bishops are not going to say that they will continue to interpret Vatican Council II and Magisterial documents without the fake premise, even if it is unethical.

The bishops would be asked to affirm the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and they would not be able to say that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are exceptions.Since the laity would be informed. Why should the laity accept 'zero cases' as being exceptions for EENS ? The bishops would not be able to say that Vatican Council II contradicts EENS.The laity would have the LA interpretation before them.

The bishops could be asked to affirm the old ecumenism of return since the hypothetical cases mentioned in Unitatis Redintigratio, Decree on Ecumenism, Vatican Council II, could not be practical exceptions to EENS or the old ecumenism of return in the Catholic Church.

So it would finally be obvious to journalists that the issue is not just the Latin Mass or concelebration.

The bishops can no more say that they are following Pope Francis. If Pope Francis is using the common false premise then this is not the work of the Holy Spirit. When Pope Francis and Pope Benedict  interpret Vatican Council II with the rational premise there is a continuity with Tradition. This would be Magisterial.

So how can the bishops ask the FSSP priests to concelebrate Holy Mass in French, when the bishops and diocesan priests  will not interpret the Creeds and Catechisms rationally? This is a scandal.

With the LA interpretation, Vatican Council II is no more a weak point of the Latin laity.Instead it is they who will demand that the bishops affirm Vatican Council II, quick.

The Una Voce International would not have to be defensive in their next advertisement. It is they who could make demands. The tables have changed.

About a year has passed and The National Catholic Reporter, Crux, Commonweal, Catholic Herald U,K, National Catholic Register, EWTN and the Tablet U.K, are not commenting on this issue.They can see the writing on the wall.

They know that Vatican Council II is no more a rupture with Tradition. But they pretend that the LA interpretation does not exist. So their reports over the week mention tension in France over the Traditional Latin Mass and not their tension with the LA interpretation of Vatican Council II.

What difference does the new expected announcement on Summorum Pontificum make when the Mass in French would have the old ecclesiology? There is no other rational choice before the bishops, priests and people. -Lionel Andrades

JULY 13, 2021

The LA interpretation of Vatican Council II is not new in the Church since the original traditional premise of the Catholic Church is being used.

 

_____________________


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).

 LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949 DURING THE PONTIFICATE OF POPE PIUS XII

( This letter was  an inter office correspondence between cardinals. However the liberals placed it in the Denzinger and it has been referenced in Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It contains an objective error when it assumes invisible and unknown cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are visible and known exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Upon this Letter is based the New Theology.)
 We are bound by divine and Catholic faith to believe all those  things which are contained in the word of God, whether it be Scripture or Tradition, and are proposed by the Church to be believed as divinely revealed, not only through solemnjudgment but also through the ordinary and universal teaching office (, n. 1792).
Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there
 is no salvation outside the Church.
However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church...
Now, among the commandments of Christ, that one holds not the least place by which we are commanded to be incorporated by baptism into the Mystical Body of Christ, 
which is the Church, and to remain united to Christ and to His Vicar, through whom He Himself in a visible manner governs the Church on earth...

Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless  refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.
Not only did the Savior command that all nations should  enter the Church, but He also decreed the Church to be a means of salvation without which no one can enter the kingdom of eternal glory.
In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects,necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic
 necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the sacrament of regeneration and in reference to the sacrament of penance (, nn. 797, 807).
  Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.
However, this desire need not always be explicit,as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.

MAGISTERIAL DOCUMENTS CAN BE INTERPRETED WITH 1)THE RED PASSAGES BEING AN EXCEPTION TO THE BLUE PASSAGES OR WITH 2)THE RED PASSAGES NOT BEING AN EXCEPTION TO THE BLUE PASSAGES.THE LATTER(2) IS RATIONAL.


___________________

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.

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." 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...- Ad Gentes 7. Vatican Council II

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.



Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II
14. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.
They are fully incorporated in the society of the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ accept her entire system and all the means of salvation given to her, and are united with her as part of her visible bodily structure and through her with Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. The bonds which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a "bodily" manner and not "in his heart."(12*) All the Church's children should remember that their exalted status is to be attributed not to their own merits but to the special grace of Christ. If they fail moreover to respond to that grace in thought, word and deed, not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged.(13*)
Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.- Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II

  

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).

 Ad Gentes 7 (all need faith and baptism for salvation) supports the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) while the hypothetical cases mentioned in LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NS 2, GS 22 etc.  cannot be objective exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 in 1965-2021. So there is nothing in the text of the Council that contradicts 16th century EENS or the Athanasius Creed or the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX on there being exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.

The Second Vatican Council affirms the dogma EENS with Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 .While the Council does not contradict EENS or Ad Gentes  7 and Lumen Gentium 14, with LG 8, LG 16, UR 3, GS 22 etc. Since if someone was saved outside the Church, he would be known only to God. They are not part of our reality. They are invisible in 1965-2021.

When Pope Francis says that the Second Vatican Council is the Magisterium of the Church he must refer to a pro-EENS dogmatic Council with the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.

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.They are invisible in 2021. 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.

 

13 The bishops and the diocesan priests are in an irregular situation since they do not use the Lionel Andrades interpretation?

The Priestly Fraterniy of St. Peter (FSSP) for example, will have to offer Mass with the diocesan priests and Bishop Minnerath who are in an ‘irregular situation’.The false premise puts them in schism with the past Magisterium over the centuries and in first class heresy with the Creeds.

When they choose the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II it is not something knew in the Church.The innovation and newness came into the Church with the false premise,inference and conclusion.This is being identfied here.It is being pointed out to.So we are back to the original premise, inference and traditional conclusion of the Catholic Church. I call it the LA interpretation to identify it.I am presently the only one who is using it with reference to Vatican Council II and other Magisterial documents.

 

14.Only the Catholic Church?

Since outside the Church there is no salvation according to Vatican Council II, the laity in Dijon, for example,  need an organisation or office to proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King, in French politics.According to Vatican Council II membership in the Catholic Church is necessary to avoid Hell ( Ad Gentes 7- all need faith and baptism for salvation).They could name this organisation Only the Catholic Church, which until now is only a slogan.

The Social Reign of Christ the King can be proclaimed based upon the exclusivist ecclesiology of Vatican Council II.

 


The laity in Dijon, or any where else in the world, could organize candidates for political office in France, who will proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics, based upon the exclusive ecclesiology of Vatican Council II( interpreted with the rational premise) and Tradition ( Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX etc).Vatican Council II must no more be seen as a break with the traditional understanding of Mission, Ecumenism, Mortal Sin etc.

The Latin laity should not really be protesting outside the bishop’s office. They simply have to interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise and it is the progressivists who will be upset.Since there could no more be a liberal catechesis, scout program etc, since the Council will have changed before their eyes.Change your premise and you change the Church.

Ecclesiology depends upon the premise-used.So why protest if the ecclesiology of the Church today can only be traditional ? Where is the rupture with collegiality, ecumenism and religious liberty as in the past, when the Council is traditional, without the false premise ? Let the liberals come outside the bishop’s office with placards and banners, saying, ‘We don’t want to interpret VC2 rationally. Give us back our old Church of 1965’.


Unitatis Redintigratio (Decree on Ecumenism), Vatican Council II 
It follows that the separated Churches(23) and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church.

Nevertheless, our separated brethren, whether considered as individuals or as Communities and Churches, are not blessed with that unity which Jesus Christ wished to bestow on all those who through Him were born again into one body, and with Him quickened to newness of life - that unity which the Holy Scriptures and the ancient Tradition of the Church proclaim. For it is only through Christ's Catholic Church, which is "the all-embracing means of salvation," that they can benefit fully from the means of salvation. We believe that Our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the head, in order to establish the one Body of Christ on earth to which all should be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the people of God. This people of God, though still in its members liable to sin, is ever growing in Christ during its pilgrimage on earth, and is guided by God's gentle wisdom, according to His hidden designs, until it shall happily arrive at the fullness of eternal glory in the heavenly Jerusalem.-Unitatis Redintigratio (Decree on Ecumenism), Vatican Council II


 15.The Rite does not make a difference?

Once we are aware of the false premise,Pope Francis can create the Amazon Rite  and new rites, for the Mass.The  ecclesiology of the Church will not change.It will still be the same as the Traditional Latin Mass of the 16th century.

Catechism of the Catholic Church 846-848 
 "Outside the Church there is no salvation"  846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:  
Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.
847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: 
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.
848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."
-Catechism of the Catholic Church 846-848 


 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
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 )
___________________

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)