Powerful Testimony about Medjugorje by Josip a Local Taxi Driver

March 18, 2023 Message from Our Lady, Queen of Peace, through Mirjana

These 10 points indicate that a future pope will be a conservative or and not liberal.

 

These 10 points indicate that a future pope will be a conservative and not a liberal. The Catholic Church will return to the past. Rome comes back to the Faith. There will be a coherence in theology and doctrine.

1. The pope will have to accept the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1442), on extra ecclesiam nulla salus,  since Vatican Council II interpreted rationally does not contradict them. The two Councils say outside the Church there is no salvation and do not mention any exceptions. So a pope can only interpret Vatican Council II rationally. This is ethical. He has to affirm EENS like the popes over the centuries.In  Vatican Council II ( AG 7, LG 14) the Church is saying, all Protestants and non Christians are oriented to Hell, without faith and the baptism of water.

2.  The pope has to interpret Vatican Council II with the red passages which mention the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, not being exceptions for the blue passages which support the past ecclesiocentrism. The red is not an exception for the blue. In this way there is a continuity with the past exclusivist ecclesiology. When the red is a rupture with the blue, there is a break with Tradition.So the pope will have to read the passages in the Council differently.

3.  The pope will have to realize that the Boston Heresy Case refers to the heresy of Pope Pius XII, the Cardinal Archbishop of Boston, Richard Cushing, the Rector of Boston College and the American Jesuits. It does not refer to Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St. Benedict Center of that time, as the media portrays it.

4. There will be no other choice. The pope will have to re-read LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II as not being exceptions for Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney made an objective mistake in the second part of the document. It contradicts the first part, which affirms traditional EENS. The second part does this with a false premise and inference.

5. Non Catholics are oriented to Hell according to Vatican Council II (rational), interpreted with the rational premise and inference. They are oriented to Hell because of original sin and mortal sins committed in this state, with no access to the Sacraments, especially that of Confession to a Catholic priest. They need to convert into the Catholic Church with faith and the baptism of water ( AG 7, LG 14, CCC 845,846 etc).The Catechism  of the Catholic Church 847-848 (invincible ignorance) does not contradict CCC 845-846.This is a new way for a pope to read the Council. It is a break with the popes from Paul VI;

6. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 847-848- invincible ignorance) does not contradict CCC 845-846. It also does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Athanasius Creed.So this is a different way of reading all the Catechisms and Vatican Council II.This is not the political way the  Bishops Conferences today interpret Vatican Council II. In the future the Bishops Conferences will have to interpret Vatican Council II rationally and so also the cardinals. The pope will have to do the same.

7.Vatican Council II ( rational) has a hermeneutic of continuity with the Council of Florence 1442 and Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St. Benedict Center of his time. It does not have this continuity with  Pope Pius XII, the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop, to Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits at Boston College. Neither has it a continuity today,  with Cardinal Sean O'Malley and his Curia. So the popes can no more interpret Vatican Council II dishonestly. They can no more cite the 1949 LOHO.The books on Vatican Council II based upon the reasoning of the LOHO are now obsolete.People know they have a rational choice.

8. Fr. Leonard Feeney was teaching orthodoxy  ( Council of Florence 1442 etc) and Pope Pius XII un-orthodoxy ( visible cases of BOD and I.I) which contradict the Council of Florence etc.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), was teaching un-orthodoxy (1949 LOHO) and the St. Benedict Center,in 1949 orthodoxy. Today the CDF teaches the same un-orthodoxy and the St. Benedict Center, Richmond, New Hampshire, orthodoxy ( Vatican Council II and EENS are accepted and interpreted rationally). When the CDF chooses to interpret Vatican Council II rationally and so affirm orthodoxy, the pope will have to do the same. The pope can no more support political liberalism in the name of Vatican Council II.

9.The popes have been interpreting Vatican Council II and EENS according to the Jewish Left (ADL etc). The St. Benedict Center, NH interprets Vatican Council II and EENS according to the principles of the Magisterium over the centuries i.e BOD and I.I are always hypothetical only. The norm for salvation is faith and the baptism of water. Exceptions are known only to God.Exceptions do not make the rule etc.The cardinals will have to choose to interpret Vatican Council II and EENS like Brother Andre Marie micm, the Prior at the St. Benedict Center, NH. There will not be any other rational and honest choice.

10. For Pope Benedict, Vatican Council II had a hermeneutic of continuity with Pope Pius XII and the 1949 LOHO. For the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire and me, Vatican Council II has a hermeneutic of continuity with Fr. Leonard Feeney and the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1442) and the rest of Tradition.The liberal theology of Pope Benedict is now obsolete. Catholics know they have a choice.They will check a pope or cardinal who interprets Vatican Council II dishonestly. -Lionel Andrades

Powerful Testimony Medjugorje by Angela Maria from USA

Sunrise Medjugorje | March 31, 2023

Dr. Jules Gomes, Church Miliant correspondent in Rome, cannot tell Cardinal Filipe Neri Ferrão, the Archbishop of Goa, India, that he must affirm the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence(1442) since Vatican Council II interpreted rationally does not contradict them.

We can tell a tree by its fruits. The fruits are bad when Dr. Jules Gomes, Church Miliant correspondent in Rome, cannot tell Cardinal Filipe Neri Ferrão, the Archbishop of Goa, India, that he must affirm the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence(1442), since Vatican Council II interpreted rationally does not contradict them. The two Councils say outside the Church there is no salvation and do not mention any exceptions.

Ex- Anglicans Jules Gomes and Gavin Ashden are not even telling the Catholic Anglican Ordinariate, that in Vatican Council II ( AG 7, LG 14) the Church is saying, all Protestants and non Christians are oriented to Hell, without faith and the baptism of water.

They both are interpreting Vatican Council II like the Archbishop of Goa, where Catholics now worship Hindu deities.

2. They need to interpret Vatican Council II with the red passages which mention the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, not being exceptions for the blue passages which support the past ecclesiocentrism. The red is not an exception for the blue. In this way there is a continuity with the past exclusivist ecclesiology. When the red is a rupture with the blue, there is a break with Tradition.

3.They both must realize that the Boston Heresy Case refers to the heresy of Pope Pius XII, the Cardinal Archbishop of Boston, Richard Cushing, the Rector of Boston College and the American Jesuits. It does not refer to Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St. Benedict Center of that time, as the media portrays it.

4.So Gomes and Ashden have to re-read LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II as not being exceptions for Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney made an objective mistake in the second part of the document. It contradicts the first part, which affirms traditional EENS. The second part does this with a false premise and inference.

5. Non Catholics in India and Boston are oriented to Hell according to Vatican Council II (rational), interpreted with the rational premise and inference. They are oriented to Hell because of original sin and mortal sins committed in this state, with no access to the Sacraments, especially that of Confession to a Catholic priest. They need to convert into the Catholic Church with faith and the baptism of water ( AG 7, LG 14, CCC 845,846 etc).The Catechism  of the Catholic Church 847-848 (invincible ignorance) does not contradict CCC 845-846.

6. Dr.Jules Gomes  and Gavin Ashden  must realise that CCC 847-848 ( invincible ignorance) does not contradict CCC 845-846. It also does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Athanasius Creed.So this is a different way of reading all the Catechisms and Vatican Council II.This is not the poliical way the Catholic Bishops Conference in Britain interpret Vatican Council II.

7.Vatican Council II ( rational) has a hermeneutic of continuity with the Council of Florence 1442 and Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St. Benedict Center of his time.It does not have this continuity with  Pope Pius XII, the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits at Boston College. Neither has it a continuity today,  with Cardinal Sean O'Malley and his Curia.

8.The Archbishop of Detroit and his Curia, and the faculty of the Sacred Heart Major Seminary, Detroit, are heretical and schismatic  according to Vatican Council II ( AG 7/ LG 14 interpreted rationally) and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (845, 846-interpreted rationally).Like them, Ashden and Jules reject Vatican Council II interpreted rationally and accept Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, interpreted irrationally. It is the same with Fr. Michael Nazir Ali. They all accept Vatican Council II and the Catechism as a break with the Council of Florence, the Athanasius Creed, the Catechism of Trent and Pius X and the rest of Tradition.They reject de fide teachings of the Catholic Church.This is political and not Catholic.

9. The interpretation of Vatican Council II by the popes from Paul VI to Francis is heretical and schismatic.The interpretation of the baptism of desire (BOD) and invincible  ignorance (I.I) in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office  by Pope Pius XII to Francis  is also heretical and schismatic.It is irrational and non traditional.It is unethical when Pope Francis and the cardinals continue with their interpretation. It is dishonest and not Catholic.

10. Fr. Leonard Feeney was teaching orthodoxy  ( Council of Florence 1442 etc) and Pope Pius XII un-orthodoxy ( visible cases of BOD and I.I) which contradict the Council of Florence etc.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), was teaching un-orthodoxy (1949 LOHO) and the St. Benedict Center,in 1949 orthodoxy. Today the CDF teaches the same un-orthodoxy and the St. Benedict Center, Richmond, New Hampshire, orthodoxy ( Vatican Council II and EENS are accepted and interpreted rationally).

11.The popes interpret Vatican Council II and EENS according to the Jewish Left (ADL etc). The St. Benedict Center, NH interprets Vatican Council II and EENS according to the principles of the Magisterium over the centuries i.e BOD and I.I are always hypothetical only. The norm for salvation is faith and the baptism of water. Exceptions are known only to God.Exceptions do not make the rule etc.

12.For Pope Benedict, Vatican Council II had a hermeneutic of continuity with Pope Pius XII and the 1949 LOHO. For the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire and me, Vatican Council II has a hermeneutic of continuity with Fr. Leonard Feeney and the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1442) and the rest of Trdaition. -Lionel Andrades

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/catholics-adore-hindu-goddess

Fuori della Chiesa Cattolica non c'e salvezza ( Updated)

 

FUORI DELLA CHIESA CATTOLICA 

NON C’E SALVEZZA

(OUTSIDE THE CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION)

GIOV.3:5, MC.16:16

(JOHN 3:5, MARK 16:16)

CONCILIO VATICANO II (AG7/LG14)

(VATICAN COUNCIL II (Ad Gentes 7/ Lumen Gentes 14)

CATECHISMO DELLA CHIESA CATTOLICA (846)

(CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH 846)

CATECHISMO DEL TRENTO, CATECHISMO DEL PAPA PIO X,

(CATECHISM OF TRENT, CATECHISM OF POPE PIUS X)

CONCILIO LATERANO (1215), CONCILIO DI FIRENZE (1442)

(FOURTH LATERAN COUNCIL (1215), COUNCIL OF FLORENCE (1442))

Name: Lionel Andrades https://twitter.com/AndradesLionel E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com

Blog: eucharistandmission ( Lionel’s blog).           

IL BATTESIMO DI DESIDERIO (BOD), IL BATTESIMO DI SANGUE (BOB) E L'ESSERE SALVATI NELL'INVINCIBILE IGNORANZA (I.I) SONO SEMPRE CASI IPOTETICI E FISICAMENTE INVISIBILI. QUINDI NON CONTRADIDONO IL DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS (EENS).IL BOD, BOB E I.I NON SONO PERSONE CONOSCIUTE NEI CASI PERSONALI. NON CI SONO CASI FISICAMENTE VISIBILI DI ESSERE SALVATI NELL'INVINCIBILE IGNORANZA. QUINDI NON SONO ECCEZIONI OGGETTIVE PER IL DOGMA EENS NEL 1965-2023.AD GENTES 7 E LUMEN GENTIUM 14 SOSTENGONO IL DOGMA EENS .LG 8,14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 ETC NON SONO ECCEZIONI PRATICHE PER AG 7/ LG 14 E IL DOGMA EENS. IL CONCILIO HA L'ERMENEUTICA DELLA CONTINUITÀ CON IL PROGRAMMA DEGLI ERRORI, IL CREDO DI ATANASIO E IL CATECHISMO DI PAPA PIO X (24Q,27Q).