eucharistandmission: Jun 25, 2022

Saturday, June 25, 2022

The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St. Benedict Cente, Richmond, New Hampshire, USA only interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise : there is now only one rational interpretation of Traditionis Custode

-Lionel Andrades

For the Lefebvrists and Feeneyites the interpretation of Traditionis Custode could be different

-Lionel Andrades

Thomas: Same-Sex Marriage, Contraception Next?

June 24, 2022 by sd

From Newsmax:

Justice Clarence Thomas says the Supreme Court should reconsider rulings that currently protect contraception, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage.

Thomas expressed his thoughts in a concurring opinion with Friday’s decision overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion nationwide. Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Health Organization. In agreeing with the majority that there was “no constitutional right to abortion” and that “the purported right to abortion is not a form of ‘liberty’ protected by the Due Process Clause,” Thomas wrote, “to emphasize a second, more fundamental reason why there is no abortion guarantee lurking” in the 14th Amendment.

https://spiritdaily.org/blog/news/thomas-same-sex-marriage-contraception-next

Supreme Court Overturns Roe V. Wade

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-overturns-roe-v-wade-dobbs-v-jackson-womens-health-organization

Don Pietro Leone on Rorate Caeili continues to interpret Vatican Council II with the False Premise as did Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops

Don Pietro Leone on the web blog continues to interpret Vatican Council II with the False Premise as did Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops and their supporters at that time (1965).I have mentioned it before that in his article on Ecumenism, Don Leone interpreted Unitatitis Redintigratio 3 with the common False Premise and then projected Vatican Council II as a break with the past exclusivist ecumenism.

I mentioned this to Rorate Caeili via e-mails and there was no response from Fr. Leone. I mentioned it to F.G ( Rorate Caeili) on Twitter and have been blocked by him.He is unable to discuss this issue. If I ask him if Lumen Gentium 16 refers to an invisible person he in 2022? He will answer, yes. This is something obvious. He will then have to see the Council as not being a break with Tradition and he will no longer be politically correct with the Left and the liberals.He would have to admit that Lefebvre made a mistake too.

In the present report Leone interprets the Councils like Pope Paul VI and the liberals and Lefebvrists. He uses the common False Premise. Then he projects the Council as a break with traditional philosophical concepts.It may not be seen up front always. It is like Redemptoris Missio of Cardinal Ratzinger. It is Christocentric and seems normal and inspiring. But there is a built in error. Cardinal Ratzinger was interpreting Vatican Council II with the False and not Rational Premise. So Redemptoris Missio is not exclusivist. In the same way Done Leone interprets Vatican Council II with the False Premise and there is a break with tradition in philosophy and theology.

But even if this was the irrationality of the Council Fathers in 1965 we can today interpet the Council with the Rational Premise and there is a continuity with Tradition.

In an earlier installment Leone put forward subjective views and was critical of Vatican Council II.He chooses the break with Tradition.He wants it.

TRADITION IS FEENEYITE AND NOT LEFEBVRIST

There are fundamental differences in the interpretation of Vatican Council II by Don Pietro Leone and for example, the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St.Benedict Center, New Hampshire.

For the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire, LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, in Vatican Council II, refer to only hypothetical and speculative cases. So they are not objective exceptions for Feeneyite EENS for them.The baptism of desire does not contradict Feeneyite EENS for them. But it has to contradict EENS for Leone otherwise he will not be a Lefebvrist but a Feeneyite.

So Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall said that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire and then maintained silence. They were warned probably to stay in the camp of the liberals and the Lefebvrists. So they are not saying that the Council is not a break with Tradition. They maintain the politically correct narrative on the Council, for the liberals and leftists.

THEY IMPLY THAT INVISIBLE PEOPLE ARE VISIBLE

For Leone and Pope Francis, LG 8 etc are exceptions for Feeneyite EENS, so in other words they are objectively visible cases for them to be exceptions. But this is false. Since if anyone is saved outside the Church, without faith and the baptism of water, it would only be known to God. There are no visible cases on earth. No one saw St. Emerentiana in Heaven without the baptism of water. No one knows someone like Dismas the Good Thief, who has been saved in the present times without the baptism of water.

Don Leone and Rorate Caeili are unable to respond to the reports on this blog and the messages on Twitter and are going ahead with the political Left propaganda on Vatican Council II. They are as obsolete as Pope Francis on the Council.

WE CAN INTERPRET TRADITIONIS CUSTODE RATIONALLY AND THE CONCLUSION IS DIFFERENT

In Traditionis Custode Pope Francis interpreted Vatican Council II like Don Leone and Rorate Caeili. But we can interpret the Council rationally, like Brother Andre Marie MICM, Prior at the St. Benedict Center,NH and then the Council will be in harmony with the theology of the Roman Missal(1580).

It means there can only be a rational interpretation of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc and the conclusion is in harmony with the ecclesiology of the pre-1962 Missal.There is only one interpretation and it has a continuity with the old theology.

The New Missal is based upon Vatican Council II interpreted with the False Premise.This is how Don Leone,Roberto dei Mattei, Plinio Correa D’Oliveira and Michael Davies saw the Council.

So the condition for offering Holy Mass must only be Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise. This must be the condition for bishops.It is unethical to use the False Premise after you have been informed.

The Novus Ordo and Latin Mass can be offered with Vatican Council II interpreted with the Rational Premise only - and the Rational Premise is in harmony with the past ecclesiology. It is not in harmony with the New Ecclesiology which depends upon the False Premise to project alleged known cases of salvation outside the Catholic Church.

The ecclesiology of the Church does not depend upon the rubrics of the Mass but the False and Rational Premise, which creates a break or continuity with Tradition. -Lionel Andrades

The Council and the Eclipse of God – by Don Pietro Leone - Chapter 8 – ‘The Council’s Anthropology in its Ideological Context.’

https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2022/06/the-council-and-eclipse-of-god-by-don_25.html

___________________________________

JUNE 25, 2022

John Henry Weston does not tell Cardinal Gerhard Muller that Vatican Council II interpreted with a Rational Premise is in harmony with Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) of the St. Benedict Center, Richmond, New Hampshire, USA and also the theology of the Roman Missal (1580).
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/06/john-henry-weston-does-not-tell.html

MEDJUGORJE: "SHE SHOWED ME THE FUTURE"... THIS IS WHAT SHE SAID ABOUT THE FUTURE

Medjugorje | Special Mission by our Lady for Janet (USA) : Priestly Consecration.com - they sponsor priests for free on a pilgrimage to Medugorje

DIVINE MERCY CHAPLET (With Reflective Music & Images)

FR. RODRIGUE: DEAR EARTH IT HAS BEGUN - "THIS IS MY LAST MESSAGE FOR HUMANITY

Chiara Amirante e Don Davide Banzato - Che Tempo Che Fa 10/04/2022

John Henry Weston does not tell Cardinal Gerhard Muller that Vatican Council II interpreted with a Rational Premise is in harmony with Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) of the St. Benedict Center, Richmond, New Hampshire, USA and also the theology of the Roman Missal (1580).

John Henry Weston does not tell Cardinal Gerhard Muller that Vatican Council II interpreted with a Rational Premise is in harmony with Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) of the St. Benedict Center, Richmond, New Hampshire, USA and also the theology of the Roman Missal (1580).

The popes did not announce that Vatican Council II interpreted with the Rational Premise supports the Feeneyite EENS of the St.Benedict Center, USA.

Cardinal Muller refers to ‘the doctrine of our Catholic faith’, in a different context, when interviewed by John Henry Weston the Editor-in- Chief of Life Site News.He does not mention, on the issue of doctrine, that Vatican Council II is in harmony with Feeneyite EENS when the Council is interpreted with the Rational Premise.There is no confusing what is implicit as being explicit and invisible as being visible.

This is known at the St. Benedict Center, Richmond, New Hampshire, USA.They interpret Vatican Council II and the dogma EENS ( baptism of desire etc) with only the Rational Premise.

Cardinal Muller and John Henry Weston do not do this. They use the False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition.

This is a breakthrough on Vatican Council II and it was not known to Cardinal Muller when he was the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. -Lionel Andrades