Archbishop Victor Fernandez does not
qualify to be the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (
Dicastery for Doctrine and Faith-DDF), since his Profession of Faith and Oath
as A Bishop is invalid, when he changes the interpretation of the Nicene,
Apostles and Athanasius Creed by interpreting Vatican Council II ( LG 8,14, 16
etc), irrationally and not rationally. He chooses the false premise (invisible
people are visible, LG 16 refers to a physically visible case in
1965-2023).This produces a nontraditional conclusion. It says Vatican Council
II is a rupture with the dogma EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of
Errors and the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q, 27Q) etc. According to Canon Law
he has to be a Catholic. He has to affirm the teachings of the Catholic Church.
Otherwise he cannot hold the office of Prefect of the Dicastery for the
Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), formerly called the Congregation for the Doctrine
of the Faith (CDF).Neither can be made a bishop or cardinal until this scandal
is removed. Fernandez presently does not qualify.
1. He must interpret Vatican Council II (LG 8, 14 and
16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc) rationally. He has to say that LG 8 etc are physically invisible in 2023 for us human beings.
2. In the same way he must affirm the baptism of desire (BOD), baptism of blood (BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I). He has to accept them as being only hypothetical cases. They are physically invisible for us. If anyone is saved as such it could only be known to God. He has an obligation morally to project them honestly i.e. as invisible cases only.
3.So he cannot project invisible cases of LG 8,14 and 16, UR 3,
NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, as being practical exceptions for the dogma extra
ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). They do not contradict the
Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1442) on EENS.
So the BOD, BOB and I.I are not practical exceptions for the Fourth Lateran
Council and the Council of Florence.
The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office (CDF/DDF)
made an
objective mistake when it projected invisible cases of the BOD and I.I as
being visible
exceptions for Feeneyite EENS i.e. the strict interpretation of EENS according
to the Church Councils (1215,1442), which did not mention any exceptions.
I instead affirm the teachings of the Catholic Church
unlike the Argentine Archbishop.
1. I accept Vatican Council II interpreted rationally.
They refer to invisible people in our human reality.
2. Also I accept BOD, BOB and I.I. They are
always speculative, theoretical and are not visible in our human reality. They
are known only to God. So BOD, BOB and I.I, like Vatican Council II (LG 8 etc),
does not contradict the Fourth Lateran Council and the Council of Florence, for
me.
3. I reject the second part of the 1949 Letter
of the Holy Office(DDF) to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard
Feeney (Referred to here as LOHO).Since it contradicts the first part
of LOHO which supports traditional EENS. It uses a false premise to reject the
centuries old strict interpretation of EENS of the Church Councils and the past
Magisterium.
So I can affirm Magisterial
Documents (Creeds, Councils, Catechisms, and EENS etc) which I interpret
rationally. The new DDF Prefect cannot say the same.
I am a Feeneyite and he is a
Cushingite.For Feeneyites, invisible people are invisible, Lumen Gentium 16,
refers to an invisible case in 1965-2023.So I interpret LG 8 etc with
Feeneyism. He chooses irrational Cushingism (invisible people are physically
visible in 1965-2023, LG 16 refers to a visible case, an example of salvation
outside the Church).
Cushingism is heretical, schismatic,
nontraditional and unethical. It is a dishonest way to reject Tradition.
I interpret Vatican Council II
with the Two Columns, choosing the rational option. He chooses the nontraditional,
irrational and dishonest option.
These are major philosophical
and theological errors of Fernandez who is to be the President of the
Pontifical Biblical Commission and the International Theological Commission.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/07/we-have-new-discovery-which-is-unknown.html
He is non apostolic and non
magisterial since for the Apostles, the Church Fathers and popes and
saints in the Middle Ages, the red was not an exception for the blue.
They interpreted the Creeds, Catechisms etc rationally. Fernandes is not
proclaiming the Gospel and rejects traditional mission and evangelization based
upon exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church (Fourth Lateran Council etc).
He is in schism with the pre-1949 Magisterium of the Catholic Church.
Congar, Rahner, Ratzinger,
Kung, Murray, Lefebvre, Pope Paul VI and the cardinals and bishops in 1965 were
interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally. Now Fernandez and Pope
Francis 1 make the same mistake. I avoid
their error. Fernandez, the 60 years old archbishop of the diocese
of La Plata since 2018, will not only expect all cardinals, bishops, priests
and nuns to interpret Magisterial Documents ( Creed, Councils and Catechisms
etc) irrationally like him but will also expect the same from the Society of
St. Pius X( SSPX) and the sedevacantists ( CMRI,MHT,MHFM etc).
He is not a Catholic. He does
not affirm Magisterial Documents rationally like me.
He will not grant canonical
recognition to the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, at the St. Benedict
Center, New Hampshire, USA. They interpret all Magisterial Documents rationally
like me.
He will not grant canonical
recognition to the Franciscans of the Immaculate of Fr. Stefano Mannelli ffi.
They reject the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.
When I interpret the BOD and
I.I rationally, and also the Magisterial Documents in which they are referred
to, I am supported by Archbishop Thomas E. Gullickson, former Nuncio to
Switzerland and Liechtenstein. I am supported by Fr. Stefano Visintin OSB,
former Benedictine Rector and Dean of Theology, University of St.Anselm Rome. I
am supported by John Martignoni apologist who has had a program on apologetics
on EWTN.
Fernandez, is a consultant to various Vatican Congregations, including those overseeing the Bishops Conference in Italy (CEI). The CEI has appointed a Commission to investigate the seer Gisella Cardia in Trevignon, Italy. Fernandez expects the CEI and Cardia to interpret Magisterial Documents irrationally, to be in good standing with the Church.
Archbishop Fernandez ompleted a doctorate in theology at the Faculty of Theology in Buenos Aires, where, if he interpreted Magisterial Documents rationally, he could be accused of being 'a Feeneyite' like Brother Andre Marie mica, the Superior of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, at the St. Benedict Center(SBC) in NH. So he interprets all Church Documents irrationally and deceptively.
The Diocese of Manchester in
New Hampshire, USA and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,
Vatican, issued a Decree of Prohibitions against the SBC. Brother Andre Marie
micm and his religious community in NH accept all Magisterial Documents which
they interpret rationally. They also accept BOD and I.I and interpret them
rationally and so affirm Feeneyite EENS according to the Fourth Lateran Council
etc. Fernandez cannot say the same. He avoids being a Feeneyite on EENS and
having a Decree of Prohibition issued against him. He escapes, by interpreting
BOD, BOB and I.I and Vatican Council II, dishonestly.
Conclusion: Archbishop Victor
Manuel Fernandez does not qualify to be the Prefect of the DDF. He violates
canon and secular law with his public dishonesty. He is in manifest public
heresy and schism.
For political reasons he will
not deny it. He will not want to be considered ' a Feeneyite' like the Church
Fathers and Apostles and the saints and popes of the Middle Ages. They were all
Feeneyite.
He is a political-Left
appointee and does not represent the Catholic Church, its body of knowledge,
its deposit of faith.
The deposit of faith is the
Nicene, Apostles and Athanasius Creed, Feeneyite i.e. invisible people are invisible,
LG 8,14 and 16 refer to invisible cases in 2023.These Creeds are not Cushingite
i.e. invisible people are visible, LG 8,14,16 etc refer to visible people saved
outside the Church in 2023.
The deposit of faith are the
Church Councils , Feeneyite and not Cushingite.
The deposit of faith are all
the Catechisms, Feeneyite - and not Cushingite.
The deposit of faith is
Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Feeneyite and
not Cushingite.
This Catholic faith is
Feeneyite like it was over the centuries. It does not change with time.
The lex orandi was always Feeneyite and not Cushingite.
Since Fernandez interprets Vatican Council II irrationally, like Pope Francis, he produces a break with Tradition and so they think they can change the Church's teachings on the Eucharist at Mass, its reception and importance, contradicting the Bible and Ecclesia de Eucharistia of Pope John Paul II.
Since Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition, for Fernandez, when it is interpreted irrationally, he uses this error, to approve the liberalism of the Synods on faith and morals e.g LGBT-sex, polygamy etc.They are supported by the new moral theology of Vatican Council II, irrational.
Since the lex orandi for him is Cushingite and not Feeneyite the members of the Coetus International, Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage and Ecclesia Dei communities are outside the Church.This is 'the new magisterium' of Cardinal Arthur Roche which has its foundation in Vatican Council II , Cushingite and not Feeneyite, the Council interpreted irrationally and not rationally.
This is not Catholic teaching.
Since with Vatican Council II, rational, there is no change in the ecclesiology
of the Church, before and after the Council. There is no development of
doctrine. The Council is traditional. It supports evangelization and mission
based upon exclusive salvation in the Church. There is no proclamation of
Christ without the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church for
salvation. So there can only be an ecumenism of return. There is no other
rational theological choice.
Now with the irrational
interpretation of Magisterial Documents, they can choose a Hindu or Buddhist to
be the Prefect of the DDF. A non Christian can be chosen to be a pope, cardinal
or bishop whose Profession of Faith and Oath would be modernist and based upon
a dishonest interpretation of Magisterial teachings, like that of Archbishop Fernandez. -Lionel Andrades
1
JUNE 22, 2023
We now have new information. It is a breakthrough.It is the popes and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith who will now be on the defensive, on Vatican Council II.
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.How can the Holy Spirit make an objective mistake ? So
it is human error and not the Magisterium.
Vatican Council II is
dogmatic and not only pastoral.
It is the same for the Creeds
and Catechisms. There can be two interpretations.Catholics must choose the
rational option.
Why should Catholics choose an
irrational version which is heretical, nontraditional and schismatic, when a
rational option is there which is traditional?
It is unethical when the
popes, cardinals and bishops choose the Irrational Premise to interpret Vatican
Council II and other Magisterial Documents.
Blog: Eucharist and Mission
(eucharistandmission)
E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com
Twitter : @LionelAndrades1
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment