Pope Francis must not refer to his Letters as 'Apostolic' . Since he accepts the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Bishop relative to Fr. Leonard Feneey (LOHO).It is a rupture with the Apostles, the Church Fathers and the popes and saints of the Middle Ages.They were rational. The LOHO is irrational.Also Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and not rationally by Pope Francis is not apostolic.

 

Pope Francis must not refer to his Letters as 'Apostolic' . Since he accepts the  1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Bishop relative to Fr. Leonard Feneey (LOHO).It is a rupture  with the Apostles, the Church Fathers and the popes and saints of the Middle Ages.They were rational. The LOHO is irrational.Also Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and not rationally by Pope Francis is not apostolic.

Pope Francis’ interpretation of the Creeds with the irrational premise and inference of the 1949 LOHO is also not apostolic. He interprets the Catechisms as a break with the past ecclesiocentrism of the Apostles and the Church Fathers. For me the Catechism, Creeds and Councils are not a break with Tradition. They are apostolic. I do not use the common irrationality to interpret them.

He could refer to a Personal Letter but not Apostolic Letter.

According to Apostolic teachings when he changes the Creeds etc he is not in communion with Jesus and the Church. He is outside the Church. He is living in mortal sin and does not have the Catholic faith. He does not have Sanctifying Grace.This is a scandal.He should not be offering Holy Mass until he ends the scandal with contrition.

If he interpreted the baptism of desire (BOD) and the invincible ignorance(I.I) rationally he would be apostolic. This means BOD and I.I can only be hypothetical and invisible cases in 2023.This would be apostolic. This was how the popes and saints over the centuries interpreted BOD and I.I. They did not project practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) etc. This was how BOD and I.I were interpreted magisterially over the centuries.It is also common sense. BOD and I.I can only be hypothetical for us human beings. We cannot see someone saved with the baptism of desire etc outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church.

Sometime back Fr. John Weinandy wrote on the Four Marks of the Church, one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic (Nicene Creed). Fr. Weinandy too is not apostolic when he interprets BOD and I.I irrationally. His interpretation of Vatican Council II and the Councils and Creeds confuses what is invisible as being visible.

Brother Andre Marie micm, also wrote on the Four Marks of the Church. He interprets Vatican Council II and BOD and I.I rationally. His interpretation of EENS etc is apostolic.

Brother Peter Dimond at the Most Holy Family Monastery is apostolic on EENS but not on BOD and I.I and Vatican Council II, the Catechisms, Creeds etc. - Lionel Andrades