https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/peter-will-become-judas-faithful-priest-presents-messages-from-marian-mystic/
Wednesday, July 13, 2022
Fr. Blount's Vision of the World Blacked Out Three Times.
https://spiritdaily.org/blog/prophecy/follow-up-on-blackout-prophecy
In ignorance the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican and Fr. Georges de Laire, Judicial Vicar of the Diocese of Manchester, in New Hampshire, USA placed a Decree of Prohibitions upon the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire, USA. They were rational and the CDF was irrational.
In ignorance the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican and Fr. Georges de Laire, Judicial
Vicar of the Diocese of Manchester, in New Hampshire, USA placed a Decree of
Prohibitions upon the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire, USA. They were
rational and the CDF was irrational.
There still is no clarification from Fr. Georges de Laire saying that he interpreted Vatican Council II with an Irrational Premise and this was unethical. Brother Andre Marie MICM the Prior at the St, Benedict Cente, chooses the Rational Premise.
Fr. Georges de Laire did
not tell the National Catholic Reporter, which reported on the happenings
there, that he had used a False Premise to avoid being called a Feeneyite and
then placed sanctions on the St. Benedict Center, NH which used the Rational Premise and were ethical.
For years Reuters,
Associated Press, the NCR and other media have been churning out Fake News on
Vatican Council II, which they interpret politically and irrationally.
The NCR had a report by
Christopher White which did not say that Fr. Georges de Laire like Archbishop
Augustine di Noia, the Assistant Secretary of the CDF, did not use the Rational
Premise to interpret Vatican Council II as does Brother Andre Marie MICM.
The NCR did not say that the St. Benedict Center, Richmond, NH, interprets Vatican Council II in harmony with extra ecclesiam nulla sales (EENS) while Fr. Georges de Laire did not use the Rational Premise- and neither did the CDF.
The CDF and Fr. Laire
interpret Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus with the False
Premise and have faulted the St. Benedict Center for interpreting Vatican
Council II and EENS with the Rational Premise. This point was not mentioned by
Christopher White in his report on Fr. Laire filing a case against Michael
Voris. He also mentioned the St. Benedict Center.
He did not say that when the Fake and not Rational Premise is used to interpret Vatican Council II then the Council is politicized by Fr. Laire.
In the NCR report by Christopher White it was not mentioned that without the False Premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II, the Judicial Vicar would be interpreting EENS like the SBC.
Similarly in an interview with Michael Warren
Davis for the Catholic Herald, U.K , the Judicial
Vicar did not seem to know that without the False Premise he would be affirming Feeneyite EENS like the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St. Benedict Center, Richmond, NH. -Lionel Andrades
JULY 12, 2022
When the False and not Rational Premise is used to interpret Vatican Council II then the Council is politicized by the Left
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/07/when-false-and-not-rational-premise-is.html
___________________________
NOVEMBER 27, 2021
Christopher White at the National Catholic Reporter is not reporting that Fr. Georges de Laire Judicial Vicar in the Diocese of Manchester, USA interprets the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance with the False Premise otherwise he would be affirming the same interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) as the missionaries in the 16th century.
Christopher White at the National Catholic Reporter is not reporting that Fr. Georges de Laire Judicial Vicar in the Diocese of Manchester, USA interprets the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance with the False Premise otherwise he would be affirming the same interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) as the missionaries in the 16th century. It is only because White and the NCR use the False Premise and not the Rational Premise that they are not Feeneyite.
Similarly if Vatican Council II was interpreted with the Rational Premise there would be no ‘reforms of Vatican Council II ‘.
If Christopher White interpreted Vatican Council II and EENS with the Rational Premise he would have the same theological position on other religions as Michael Voris and Brother Andre Marie MICM.
NO MORTAL SINS OF FAITH BECAUSE OF THE FALSE PREMISE
Now the NCR and the Curia in the Diocese of Manchester would not speak about mortal sins of faith because of the rupture with Tradition created by Vatican Council II interpreted only with the False Premise. There no more are mortal sins of faith for the Diocese of Manchester or the NCR since with Vatican Council II interpreted with the False Premise there are alleged exceptions for the Athanasius Creed, Syllabus of Errors etc. LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc are practical exceptions for extra ecclesiam nulla salus for the liberals, Lefebvrists, Thuc and others too.
So rejecting the Athanasius Creed and changing the understanding of the Nicene Creed is not a mortal sin of faith for them. It comes with ‘the reforms of Vatican Council II’ interpreted irrationally. This is official but it cannot be Magisterial.
When Massimo Faggioli, John Allen Jr, and other contributors/ correspondents for the National Catholic Reporter do not affirm the Athanasius Creed, and the Nicene Creed and Syllabus of Errors, rationally, then it is schism and heresy. Since now they can no more say that there are practical exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II.
So the journalist Phil Lawler, or any Catholic in New Hampshire could demand that Bishop Libasci interpret Vatican Council II, EENS and other Catholic Magisterial Documents without the False Premise and ask all religious communities in the diocese to do the same.
How can the Paulist Fathers in Rome or the Diocese of Manchester reject the Athanasius Creed and re-interpret Vatican Council II and EENS irrationally? This is public schism with the past Magisterium, which was guided by the Holy Spirit.
In Rome, how can Cardinal Angelo Donatis, Vicar General, do the same and prohibit the Latin Mass for the Easter Triduum? The Novus Ordo Mass has the same ecclesiology as the Traditional Latin Mass when Vatican Council II and EENS are interpreted rationally.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider has said that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire. He agrees with Dr. Taylor Marshall who clarified that there are no explicit cases of St.Thomas Aquinas’s implicit baptism of desire. So this Good Friday if Bishop Athanasius Schneider is in Rome, he will offer the Mass in Latin or Italian, with Vatican Council II and EENS interpreted rationally.
So why is Pope Benedict allowed to interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with the common False Premise at Holy Mass in the vernacular?
This is schism. It is the False Premise which
creates schism and heresy even when it used by
conservative Catholics.
-Lionel Andrades
If the National Catolic Reporter did not use the Fake Premise to interpret Church Documents Christopher White would be affirming the same strict interpretation of EENS as the St.Benedict Center, Richmond, New Hampshire
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/11/christopher-white-in-his-report-at.html
MISSING LINK DISCOVERED : WHAT CAUSES THE HERMENEUTIC OF RUPTURE
The fault is not there with Vatican Council II but his assuming that salvation in Heaven is visible on earth to be exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Avoid the premise and the conclusion is traditional.This is the missing link in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.
If a pope uses the irrational premise and comes to an irrational conclusion it still is an objective error, even if he is the pope.
To reiterate:
what premise ?
The irrational premise is "The dead are visible to us on earth".
what conclusion ?
The conclusion is since the dead are visible to us on earth those who are saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance are explicit ( visible in the flesh) exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
what theology,
So the post -1949 theology says every one needs to enter the Catholic Church except for those in invincible ignorance or with the baptism of desire.
Defacto there are known exceptions to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston.
what Tradition.
Pre- 1949 Catholic Tradition, on salvation ( soteriology) says there is exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. Extra ecclesiam nulla salus ,defined by three Church Councils does not mention any exception. The text also does not mention the baptism of desire or being saved in invincible ignorance.I am referring to Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441.
Also Mystici Corporis and the Council of Trent mention implicit desire etc but do not state that these cases are known to us, to be exceptions to the dogma .Neither do they state that there are exceptions to the dogma.
FRIDAY, JUNE 18, 2021
Fr.Georges de Laire, Judicial Vicar of the Diocese of Manchester, USA interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise, like Bishop Peter Libasci and the rest of the Curia.I have e-mailed him and the other members of the Curia. There is no denial from them.
Fr.Georges de Laire, Judicial Vicar of the Diocese of Manchester, USA interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise, like Bishop Peter Libasci and the rest of the Curia.I have e-mailed him and the other members of the Curia. There is no denial from them.
Officially, Fr. de Laire uses the false premise to interpret Magisterial documents , which is unethical and dishonest and he has issued a Decree of Prohibitions against the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire on a doctrinal issue.He has also entered into litigation with Michael Voris and Church Militant TV. - Lionel Andrades
JUNE 18, 2021
The Archdiiocese of Detroit officially uses a fake premise to interpret Magisterial documents, including Vatican Council II, to create a false rupture with Tradition ( EENS etc) and their spokespersons would consider this official deception as being Catholic
The Archdiiocese of Detroit officially uses a fake premise to interpret Magisterial documents, including Vatican Council II, to create a false rupture with Tradition ( EENS etc) and their spokespersons would consider this official deception as being Catholic. -Lionel Andrades
JUNE 18, 2021
Christopher White and the Staff at the National Catholic Reporter know that Vatican Council II can be interpreted without the false premise. I have e-mailed them many times. Yet they continue to interpret the Council and extra ecclesiam nulla salus with the false premise, to create a false rupture with Tradition and so not be labelled 'extremists'
Christopher White and the Staff at the National Catholic Reporter know that Vatican Council II can be interpreted without the false premise. I have e-mailed them many times. Yet they continue to interpret the Council and extra ecclesiam nulla salus with the false premise, to create a false rupture with Tradition and so not be labelled 'extremists'. - Lionel Andrades
JUNE 17, 2021
Bishop Peter Libasci and Fr. Georges de Laire like the ecclesiastics at the CDF,Vatican are dishonest in public
It fell to de Laire as judicial vicar to reinforce a Vatican decree that the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary could not present themselves as Catholic. According to the lawsuit, this resulted in "several articles [at Church Militant] not only criticizing the Diocese's decision to issue the Decree, but defaming Father de Laire, personally."
The traditionalists at the St. Benedict Center, Richmond,New Hampshire, USA are still being told that they are not Catholic since they do not interpret Vatican Council II and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) with the common irrationality, the false premise, used by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican and the bishop and Curia of the Diocese of Manchester, USA.The use of the false premise to interpret Church documents and then project an alleged rupture with Tradition, is dishonest and unethical.
If Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican, would interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise he would be called an ‘extremist’ by the Leftist media.Since without the false premise, the Council would be dogmatic. It would affirm the dogma EENS with Ad Gentes 7 and LG 8,LG 14, LG 16, UR 3,GS 22 etc would not be exceptions, as, it is wrongly interpreted by the CDF today.
Similarly when Bishop Peter Libasci, bishop of Manchester and Fr.Georges de Laire, Judicial Vicar, interpret Vatican Council II , the Creeds,Catechisms, extra ecclesiam nulla salus and being saved with the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance with the false premise, that they avoid being labelled traditionalists, extremists etc.
Presently Bishop Lbasci and Fr. Georges de Laire, like the ecclesiastics at the CDF, Vatican, are publically dishonest and are defaming the SBC.-Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/06/bishop-peter-libasci-and-fr-georges-de.html
______________________
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).
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. 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
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 )
E-mail: lionelandrades10@
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AndradesLionel
___________________
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
