Nessun papa, cardinale, vescovo o sacerdote deve cambiare l'interpretazione del Credo niceno e rifiutare il Credo di Atanasio. Questa è un'eresia di prima classe secondo la gerarchia delle verità di Papa Giovanni Paolo II (Ad Tuendum Fidem). Ci sono restrizioni sull'offerta della Santa Messa.

 

JULY 9, 2023

No pope, cardinal, bishop or priest must change the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and reject the Athanasius Creed. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem). There are restrictions on offering Holy Mass

 

from Rorate Caeli ( with comments)

The appointment of the new prefect of the congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith — by Roberto de Mattei

Roberto de Mattei

July 5, 2023

As regards the Mass una cum Bergoglio, the lawyer Patruno gives a good explanation of the passage of St Thomas, often quoted inappropriately, according to which anyone sins who hears Mass or receives the sacraments from heretical, schismatic or excommunicated ministers (Summa Theologiae, III, q.82, a.9).

Lionel: Papa Francesco interpreta irrazionalmente il Concilio Vaticano II come i cardinali, i vescovi, i sacerdoti e i lefebvriani. Interpretano anche il battesimo del desiderio e l'essere salvati nell'invincibile ignoranza, irrazionalmente, come la Lettera del Sant'Uffizio del 1949 all'arcivescovo di Boston relativo a p. Leonard Feney. Quindi la comprensione del Credo di Nicea è cambiata e il Credo di Atanasio è completamente rifiutato.

In questa condizione i religiosi offrono la Santa Messa.

Anche Roberto dei Mattei commette lo stesso errore e non lo nega. Va a messa in queste condizioni.

Lionel: Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II irrationally like the cardinals, bishops, priests and the Lefebvrists.They also interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, irrationally, like the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney. So the understanding of the Nicene Creed is changed and the Athanasius Creed is rejected outright.

In this condition the religious offer Holy Mass.

Roberto dei Mattei also makes the same mistake and does not deny it.He attends Mass in this condition.

 The passage refers to heretics, schismatics and the excommunicated who are deprived of the exercise of their powers by a sentence of the Church. Until this definitive pronouncement has been made, one may to go to Mass and receive the sacraments from priests subjectively considered heretical, etc. Communicatio in sacris with heretics is illicit when a sentence of the Church has declared them as such, but until that moment it is licit to receive communion from them and hear their Mass.

Lionel: Qualsiasi papa, cardinale, vescovo o sacerdote che interpreta irrazionalmente il Concilio Vaticano II e altri documenti della Chiesa, produce una conclusione non tradizionale. È eretico. È in scisma con il passato Magistero prima del 1949. Il passato Magistero ha interpretato i Documenti Magistrali (Credi, Concili ecc.) in modo razionale e tradizionale.

Lionel: Any pope, cardinal, bishop or priest who interprets Vatican Council II and other Church Documents irrationally, produces a non traditional conclusion. It is heretical. It is in schism with the past Magisterium before 1949. The past Magisterium interpreted Magisterial Documents ( Creeds, Councils etc) rationally and traditionally.

Pope Francis, the lawyer Patruno judiciously asserts, may be a debated figure, but “until there is the sententia ecclesiae, no one - layman or ordinary priest - may substitute himself for the teaching Church” (p. 213).

Lionel: Nessun papa, cardinale, vescovo o sacerdote deve cambiare l'interpretazione del Credo niceno e rifiutare il Credo di Atanasio. Questa è un'eresia di prima classe secondo la gerarchia delle verità di Papa Giovanni Paolo II (Ad Tuendum Fidem). Ci sono restrizioni sull'offerta della Santa Messa.

Lionel: No pope, cardinal, bishop or priest must change the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and reject the Athanasius Creed. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem).There are restrictions on offering Holy Mass.

 At the most, the opinion that one might have about Francis could count as the opinion of a private scholar. But no man, apart from the pope, is by nature infallible: only the pope is, under certain conditions, when he exercises his mandate. Moreover, there can be no Church without a pope, and if today the pope is not Francis, who is or will be? These are unavoidable questions to which a “charismatic” answer cannot be given, outside the most elementary notions of theology and canon law.

Lionel: Nessun papa può cambiare l'interpretazione del Credo di Nicea e rifiutare il Credo di Atanasio. Questa è un'eresia di prim'ordine secondo la gerarchia delle verità di Papa Giovanni Paolo II (Ad Tuendum Fidem). Eppure oggi è ufficiale e pubblica. Non c'è negazione.

Lionel: No pope can change the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and reject the Athanasius Creed. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem).Yet this is official and public today. There is no denial.

The most reasonable path to follow in this painful situation seems to be the one traced by the Correctio filialis of 16 July 2017 (http://www.correctiofilialis.org/it/), a firm and respectful document presented by 40 scholars, later becoming more than 200, to urge the Holy Father to reject the heresies and errors he has promoted. This initiative deserves to be taken up again, but above all adopted by a suitable number of cardinals and bishops, not in order to “depose” the pope, but to admonish him filially, following the example of St Paul towards St Peter (Ad Gal 2:14).

Lionel : Coloro che hanno firmato la Correctio Filialis stavano tutti interpretando il Concilio Vaticano II in modo irrazionale come Papa Francesco. Così anche loro hanno cambiato l'interpretazione del Credo di Nicea e hanno rifiutato il Credo di Atanasio. Questa è un'eresia di prima classe secondo la gerarchia delle verità di Papa Giovanni Paolo II (Ad Tuendum Fidem). Questo era pubblico e non c'è stata alcuna smentita da parte loro. I firmatari oggi continuano con lo stesso errore di Papa Francesco.

Lionel: Those who signed the Correctio Filialis were all interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally like Pope Francis. So they also have changed the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and have rejected the Athanasius Creed. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem).This was public and there was no denial from them.The signatories today continue with the same error as Pope Francis.

In moments of serious crisis there is an obligation to denounce errors, even coming from the supreme ecclesiastical authority, with all due respect for the Vicar of Christ...

Lionel: There is also an obligation for Roberto dei Mattei to admit that he wrote his book on Vatican Council II by interpreting the Council irrationally. So he is also changing the interpretation of the Creeds. This is heresy and schism. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem).

-Lionel Andrades

https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2023/07/the-appointment-of-new-prefect-of.html#more

 JULY 9, 2023

No pope, cardinal, bishop or priest must change the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and reject the Athanasius Creed. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem). There are restrictions on offering Holy Mass

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/07/no-pope-cardinal-bishop-or-priest-must.html

No pope, cardinal, bishop or priest must change the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and reject the Athanasius Creed. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem). There are restrictions on offering Holy Mass

 

from Rorate Caeli ( with comments)

The appointment of the new prefect of the congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith — by Roberto de Mattei

Roberto de Mattei

July 5, 2023

As regards the Mass una cum Bergoglio, the lawyer Patruno gives a good explanation of the passage of St Thomas, often quoted inappropriately, according to which anyone sins who hears Mass or receives the sacraments from heretical, schismatic or excommunicated ministers (Summa Theologiae, III, q.82, a.9).

Lionel: Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II irrationally like the cardinals, bishops, priests and the Lefebvrists.They also interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, irrationally, like the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney. So the understanding of the Nicene Creed is changed and the Athanasius Creed is rejected outright.

In this condition the religious offer Holy Mass.

Roberto dei Mattei also makes the same mistake and does not deny it.He attends Mass in this condition.

 The passage refers to heretics, schismatics and the excommunicated who are deprived of the exercise of their powers by a sentence of the Church. Until this definitive pronouncement has been made, one may to go to Mass and receive the sacraments from priests subjectively considered heretical, etc. Communicatio in sacris with heretics is illicit when a sentence of the Church has declared them as such, but until that moment it is licit to receive communion from them and hear their Mass.

Lionel: Any pope, cardinal, bishop or priest who interprets Vatican Council II and other Church Documents irrationally, produces a non traditional conclusion. It is heretical. It is in schism with the past Magisterium before 1949. The past Magisterium interpreted Magisterial Documents ( Creeds, Councils etc) rationally and traditionally.

Pope Francis, the lawyer Patruno judiciously asserts, may be a debated figure, but “until there is the sententia ecclesiae, no one - layman or ordinary priest - may substitute himself for the teaching Church” (p. 213).

Lionel: No pope, cardinal, bishop or priest must change the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and reject the Athanasius Creed. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem).There are restrictions on offering Holy Mass.

 At the most, the opinion that one might have about Francis could count as the opinion of a private scholar. But no man, apart from the pope, is by nature infallible: only the pope is, under certain conditions, when he exercises his mandate. Moreover, there can be no Church without a pope, and if today the pope is not Francis, who is or will be? These are unavoidable questions to which a “charismatic” answer cannot be given, outside the most elementary notions of theology and canon law.

Lionel: No pope can change the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and reject the Athanasius Creed. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem).Yet this is official and public today. There is no denial.

The most reasonable path to follow in this painful situation seems to be the one traced by the Correctio filialis of 16 July 2017 (http://www.correctiofilialis.org/it/), a firm and respectful document presented by 40 scholars, later becoming more than 200, to urge the Holy Father to reject the heresies and errors he has promoted. This initiative deserves to be taken up again, but above all adopted by a suitable number of cardinals and bishops, not in order to “depose” the pope, but to admonish him filially, following the example of St Paul towards St Peter (Ad Gal 2:14).

Lionel: Those who signed the Correctio Filialis were all interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally like Pope Francis. So they also have changed the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and have rejected the Athanasius Creed. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem).This was public and there was no denial from them.The signatories today continue with the same error as Pope Francis.

In moments of serious crisis there is an obligation to denounce errors, even coming from the supreme ecclesiastical authority, with all due respect for the Vicar of Christ...

Lionel: There is also an obligation for Roberto dei Mattei to admit that he wrote his book on Vatican Council II by interpreting the Council irrationally. So he is also changing the interpretation of the Creeds. This is heresy and schism. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem).

-Lionel Andrades

https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2023/07/the-appointment-of-new-prefect-of.html#more

Come può l'arcivescovo Vincent Manuel Fernandez approvare le unioni omosessuali dal momento che non esiste un precedente del genere nella Chiesa, non fa parte della Tradizione? Come può farlo in nome del Concilio Vaticano II? Il Concilio può essere interpretato solo razionalmente. Il Concilio è solo tradizionale.

 

IL CONCILIO VATICANO II PUO' ESSERE INTERPRETATO SOLO RAZIONALMENTE

Come può l'arcivescovo Vincent Manuel Fernandez approvare le unioni omosessuali dal momento che non esiste un precedente del genere nella Chiesa, non fa parte della Tradizione? Come può farlo in nome del Concilio Vaticano II? Il Concilio può essere interpretato solo razionalmente. Il Concilio è solo tradizionale. La tradizione dice che gli atti omosessuali sono un peccato grave. La Bibbia dice che coloro che compiono questi atti o vivono in questo modo non possono andare in Paradiso. Quindi l'insegnamento della Chiesa su questo tema può essere cambiato dal momento che non ci sono precedenti nella Chiesa e il Concilio Vaticano II sostiene l'ecclesiologia del passato?

IL CONCILIO VATICANO II NON SOSTIENE PIÙ IL LIBERALISMO

Papa Francesco e l'arcivescovo Vincent Manuel Fernandez non possono più citare il Concilio Vaticano II per sostenere il loro liberalismo.

Abbiamo l'obbligo di interpretare razionalmente il Consiglio. Perché i cattolici dovrebbero interpretare il Concilio Vaticano II in modo irrazionale?

L'arcivescovo Fernandez deve annunciare che LG 8, LG 14, LG16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 ecc. si riferiscono solo a casi ipotetici nel 1965-2023. 

Per lui, LG 8, 14 e 16 ecc non possono essere eccezioni pratiche per il dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), il Credo di Atanasio e il Sillabo degli errori di Papa Pio IX.

Attualmente non è idoneo a essere Prefetto della Dottrina della Fede. Interpreta il Concilio Vaticano II in modo irrazionale e disonesto.

Allora come può approvare le unioni omosessuali in nome del Concilio Vaticano II?

Come possono i Sinodi usare il Concilio Vaticano II per sostenere il loro liberalismo?

IL CONCILIO APPOGGIA IL MISSALE ROMANO E L'ANTICA LEX ORANDI

Il Concilio sostiene la passata ecclesiologia esclusivista e l'antico Messale Romano e la lex orandi.

 Il Cardinale Ratzinger come Prefetto della Congregazione per la Dottrina della Fede (CDF), Vaticano, non solo interpretava irrazionalmente il Concilio Vaticano II, ma usava la falsa interpretazione del Concilio per sostenere il liberalismo in linea di principio. Papa Giovanni Paolo II non lo corresse .Nemmeno la Fraternità San Pio X (FSSPX) ha corretto Papa Benedetto durante i Colloqui Dottrinali.

Anche l'arcivescovo Marcel Lefebvre interpretava i casi invisibili di LG 8, LG 14, LG16 come eccezioni visibili al passato ecclesiocentrismo.

Allora come possono l'Arcivescovo Fernandez e Papa Francesco confondere i casi invisibili di LG 8,14 e 16, UR 3,NA 2, GS 22 ecc. nel Concilio Vaticano II ecc. come eccezioni visibili per la passata salvezza esclusiva nella Chiesa che faceva parte del lex orandi per secoli nella Chiesa Cattolica? 

Il Concilio Vaticano II è ecclesiocentrico con Ad Gentes 7 e Lumen Gentium 14 (tutti hanno bisogno della fede e del battesimo per la salvezza). LG 14 è citata nel Catechismo della Chiesa Cattolica con il titolo Fuori della Chiesa non c'è salvezza (CCC 845,846). Mentre CCC 847 e 848 sull'ignoranza invincibile ecc. non contraddicono Ad Gentes 7, Lumen Gentium 14 e neppure CCC 845,846.

NESSUNA ECCEZIONE NEL CONCILIO VATICANO II PER FEENEYITE EENS

Quindi non ci sono eccezioni menzionate nel testo del Concilio Vaticano II per Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus. LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc sono sempre casi ipotetici e speculativi. Si riferiscono a persone fisicamente invisibili nel 1965-2023. 

Eppure i bambini nelle scuole secolari interpretano il Concilio Vaticano II con LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 ecc. come eccezioni per la passata ecclesiologia esclusivista e missione tradizionale basata sulla salvezza esclusiva nella Chiesa Cattolica.

LE SCUOLE E LE UNIVERSITÀ LAICI INSEGNANO ERRORE

Perché gli studenti delle università devono interpretare il Concilio Vaticano II, confondendo casi invisibili di LG 8, 14, 16 ecc. come eccezioni visibili per il Concilio Lateranense IV e il Concilio di Firenze su EENS? È solo quando scelgono questo inganno che possono ottenere un master o un dottorato.

Questa è la condizione ufficiale della Pontificia Università Urbaniana di Roma. Ti danno titoli accademici solo se interpreti irrazionalmente il Concilio Vaticano II. Questa è la condizione ufficiale che è politica.

Sandra Mussolini ha un dottorato in teologia dogmatica ed è Preside del Dipartimento di Missiologia dell'Università Urbaniana. Lei approva solo la tesi degli studenti che confondono i casi invisibili di LG 8,14 e 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 ecc. come esempi visibili di salvezza al di fuori della Chiesa. Quindi il dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus secondo il periodo patristico, viene contraddetto in questo modo dal Concilio Vaticano II. Si tratta di un'interpretazione politica e ingannevole del periodo patristico e del Concilio Vaticano II che essa promuove.

È obbligatorio per tutti gli studenti dell'Urbaniana, rifiutare il Concilio Lateranense IV (1215) sull'EENS interpretando il Concilio Vaticano II con la falsa premessa (le persone invisibili sono visibili, LG 8,14 e 16 si riferiscono a non cattolici visibili salvati fuori Chiesa) e falsa deduzione (Quindi il Concilio Vaticano II ha reso obsoleto il dogma EENS, con eccezioni pratiche) e falsa conclusione (Il Concilio Vaticano II è una rottura con il passato ecclesiocentrismo ed è una nuova ecclesiologia. È una rivoluzione nella Chiesa. Quindi può esserci innovazione nella missione, nell'ecclesiologia, nella fede e nella morale.C'è un nuovo magistero che ha reso obsoleta e 'immorale' la vecchia teologia morale).

Questa era l'irrazionalità insegnata dall'arcivescovo Victor Fernandez come rettore del seminario in Argentina.

 I GOVERNI DEVONO CHIARIRE LA LORO POSIZIONE SUL CONCILIO VATICANO II

I ministeri laici della giustizia, i dipartimenti dell'istruzione nei diversi paesi devono essere chiamati a chiarire che LG 8,14, 16, UR 3, NA 2,GS 22 ecc., si riferiscono solo a casi teorici e speculativi nel 1965-2023. Non sono persone conosciute. se qualcuno si salvasse come tale lo saprebbe solo Dio. Nella nostra realtà umana non ci sono casi del genere. I gruppi laici potrebbero partire dalla Germania.

È obbligatorio per tutti gli studenti dell'Urbaniana, rifiutare il Concilio Lateranense IV (1215) sull'EENS interpretando il Concilio Vaticano II con la falsa premessa (le persone invisibili sono visibili, LG 8,14 e 16 si riferiscono a non cattolici visibili salvati fuori Chiesa) e falsa deduzione (Quindi il Concilio Vaticano II ha reso obsoleto il dogma EENS, con eccezioni pratiche) e falsa conclusione (Il Concilio Vaticano II è una rottura con il passato ecclesiocentrismo ed è una nuova ecclesiologia. È una rivoluzione nella Chiesa. Quindi può esserci innovazione nella missione, nell'ecclesiologia, nella fede e nella morale.C'è un nuovo magistero che ha reso obsoleta e 'immorale' la vecchia teologia morale).

Questa era l'irrazionalità insegnata dall'arcivescovo Victor Fernandez come rettore del seminario in Argentina.

I GOVERNI DEVONO CHIARIRE LA LORO POSIZIONE SUL CONCILIO VATICANO II

I ministeri laici della giustizia, i dipartimenti dell'istruzione nei diversi paesi devono essere chiamati a chiarire che LG 8,14, 16, UR 3, NA 2,GS 22 ecc., si riferiscono solo a casi teorici e speculativi nel 1965-2023. Non sono persone conosciute. se qualcuno si salvasse come tale lo saprebbe solo Dio. Nella nostra realtà umana non ci sono casi del genere. I gruppi laici potrebbero partire dalla Germania.

Il ministero deve solo confermare l'ovvio che è che LG 8,14,16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 nel Concilio Vaticano II non si riferiscono a persone praticamente conosciute nel 2023 salvate fuori dalla Chiesa.

INIZIA CON LA GERMANIA

Ciò significherebbe naturalmente che in  Germania, quando Papa Benedetto ei teologi tedeschi hanno proiettato LG 8,14,16 ecc. come  eccezioni alla passata ecclesiologia esclusivista, si riferivano a "casi visibili". Le persone invisibili non possono fare eccezione. Il cardinale Marx e il vescovo Batzing ingannano sul Concilio Vaticano II. Devono correggersi.-Lionel Andrades

JULY 9, 2023

How can Archbishop Vincent Manuel Fernandez approve homosexual unions since there is no such precedent in the Church, it is not part of Tradition? How can he do it in the name of Vatican Council II? The Council can only be interpreted rationally. The Council is only traditional.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/07/how-can-archbishop-vincent-manuel.html

 

How can Archbishop Vincent Manuel Fernandez approve homosexual unions since there is no such precedent in the Church, it is not part of Tradition? How can he do it in the name of Vatican Council II? The Council can only be interpreted rationally. The Council is only traditional.

VATICAN COUNCIL II CAN ONLY BE INTERPRETED RATIONALLY

How can Archbishop Vincent Manuel Fernandez approve homosexual unions since there is no such precedent in the Church, it is not part of Tradition? How can he do it in the name of Vatican Council II? The Council can only be interpreted rationally. The Council is only traditional. Tradition says homosexual acts are a grave sin. The Bible says that they who perform these acts or live in this way cannot go to Heaven. So can the teaching of the Church on this issue be changed since there is no precedent in the Church and Vatican Council II supports the past ecclesiology?

VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT SUPPORT LIBERALISM ANY MORE

Pope Francis and Archbishop Vincent Manuel Fernandez can no more cite Vatican Council II to support their liberalism.

We have an obligation to only interpret the Council rationally. Why should Catholics interpret Vatican Council II irrationally?

Archbishop Fernandez must announce that LG 8, LG 14, LG16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to only hypothetical cases in 1965-2023.

For him, LG 8, 14 and 16 etc cannot be practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.

Presently he does not qualify to be the Prefect of the Doctrine of the Faith. He  interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and dishonestly.

So how can he approve homosexual unions in the name of Vatican Council II?

How can the Synods use Vatican Council II to support their liberalism?

THE COUNCIL SUPPORTS THE ROMAN MISSAL AND THE OLD LEX ORANDI

The Council supports the past exclusivist ecclesiology and the old Roman Missal and lex orandi.

Cardinal Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF), Vatican, would not only interpret Vatican Council II irrationally but was using the false interpretation of the Council to support liberalism in principle.Pope John Paul II did not correct him.Neither did the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) correct Pope Benedict during the Doctrinal Talks.

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was also interpreting invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG16 as being visible exceptions for the past ecclesiocentrism.

So how can Archbishop Fernandez and Pope Francis confuse invisible cases of LG 8,14 and 16, UR 3,NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II etc as being visible exceptions for the past exclusive salvation in the Church which was part of the lex orandi for centuries in the Catholic Church?

Vatican Council II is ecclesiocentric with Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation). LG 14 is cited in the Catechism of the Catholic Church under the title Outside the Church there is no salvation (CCC 845,846).While CCC 847and 848 on invincible ignorance etc do not contradict Ad Gentes 7, Lumen Gentium 14 and neither CCC 845,846.

NO EXCEPTIONS IN VATICAN COUNCIL II FOR FEENEYITE EENS

So there are no exceptions mentioned in the text of Vatican Council II for Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus. LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are always hypothetical and speculative cases.They refer to physically invisible people in 1965-2023.

Yet children in secular schools interpret Vatican Council II with LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc being exceptions for the past exclusivist ecclesiology and traditional mission based upon exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.

SECULAR SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITIES TEACH ERROR

Why must students in the universities interpret Vatican Council II, by confusing invisible cases of LG 8, 14, 16 etc as being visible exceptions for the Fourth Lateran Council and the Council of Florence on EENS? It is only when they choose this deception are they allowed to get a Masters or Doctorate Degree.

This is the official condition at the Urbaniana Pontifical University in Rome.They only give you academic degrees if you interpret Vatican Council II irrationally.This is the official requirement which is political.

Sandra Mussolini has a doctrate in dogmatic theology and is the Dean of the Missiology Department of the Urbaniana University. She only approves the thesis of students who confuse invisible cases of LG 8,14 and 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as being visible examples of salvation outside the Church. So the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the Patristic period, is contradicted in this way by Vatican Council II.This is a political and deceptive interpretation of the Patristic period and Vatican Council II which she promotes. 

It is obligatory for all students at the Urbaniana, to reject the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) on EENS by interpreting Vatican Council II with the fake premise ( invisible people are visible, LG 8,14 and 16 refer to visible non Catholics saved outside the Church) and fake inference ( So Vatican Council II has made the dogma EENS obsolete, with practical exceptions) and fake conclusion ( Vatican Council II is a rupture with the past ecclesiocentrism and is a new ecclesiology.It is a revolution in the Church. So there can be innovation in mission, ecclesiology, faith and morals.There is a new magisterium. It has made the old moral theology obsolete and 'immoral').

This was the irrationality Archbishop Victor Fernandez was teaching as rector of the seminary in Argentina.

GOVERNMENTS MUST CLARIFY THEIR POSITION ON VATICAN COUNCIL II

The secular ministries of justice, the departments of education in diferent countries must be asked to clarify that LG 8,14, 16, UR 3, NA 2,GS 22 etc, refer to only theoretical and speculative cases in 1965-2023. They are not known people. if someone was saved as such it would only be known to God.There are no such cases in our human reality.Lay groups could start with Germany.

The ministry has only to confirm the obvious which is that LG 8,14,16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 in Vatican Council II do not refer to practically known people in 2023 saved outside the Church.

START WITH GERMANY

This would mean of course, that in Germany when Pope Benedict and German theologians projected LG 8,14,16 etc as being exceptions for the past exclusivist ecclesiology, they were referring to 'visibile cases'. Invisible people cannot be exceptions.Cardinal Marx and Bishop Batzing are deceptive on Vatican Council II. They have to correct themselves.-Lionel Andrades

https://www.urbaniana.press/autore/mazzolini-sandra/79

_____________________________________________

 JULY 7, 2023

Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez has been made the Prefect of the Dicastery for Doctrine and Faith (DDF) and no one is pointing out that he interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally. This is a public and official error of the DDF.If he did not interpret Vatican Council II irrationally he would be a Feeneyite on extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).

 

Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez has been made the Prefect of the Dicastery for Doctrine and Faith (DDF) and no one is pointing out that he interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally. This is a public and official error of the DDF.If he did not interpret Vatican Council II irrationally he would be a Feeneyite on extra  ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).The Council interpreted rationally supports the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X.

The references to the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are to hypothetical cases. They are speculative and theoretical and so not practical exceptions for traditional mission and evangelization, based upon exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre made the same mistake as the Prefect of the DDF. He interpreted BOD, BOB and I.I irrationally. Then he went ahead and interpreted LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II also irrationally.

Now the traditionalists and sedevacantists interpret the Council irrationally and not rationally,.

So Fr. Claude Barthe, President of Coetus International, the organizers of the Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage and the Superiors of the Ecclesia Dei communities are keeping silent and going along with the mistake.

The Franciscans of the Immaculate will not be given canonical recognition by Fernandez, since they correctly do not accept,  Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally.

The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St. Benedict Center, NH, USA will also not be granted canonical recognition since they interpret all Magisterial Documents (Creeds, Councils etc) rationally, in harmony with Feeneyite EENS; or EENS according to the Fourth Lateran Council (1215).It did not mention any exceptions.

By 2025, the Jubilee Year, the traditionalists could be told that they are ‘religious fanatics’ since they do not (correctly) accept Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally. So they could be outside the Church officially according to the leftist secular administration in Rome and the ecclesiastical authorities at the Vatican.Presently some traditionalists say they accept Vatican Council II and others say they do not but neither of them state if they refer to Vatican Council II, rational or irrational. 

The old moral theology would be considered ‘immoral’ by Fernan dez since it is contradicted by Vatican Council II ( irrational) and the Lefebvrists do not want to talk about Vatican Council II ( rational) since they do not want to be labeled ‘Feeneyite’ and so Anti Semitic.

The rectors of six universities in Rome, including La Sapienza, are working together on a leftist project, to implement the Synod teachings. There are big posters placed in the churches in Rome. The focus is on woman ( Donna nella Chiesa) in the Church.

There are courses on ecclesiology with its foundation on Vatican Council II (irrational). This is public and no one objects. -Lionel Andrades

During his pontificate he made numerous apostolic journeys. The first of these was in Lampedusa where he highlighted the theme of welcoming migrants, which he too spoke about on his trip to America, first to Cuba and then to the United States of America. During this visit he gave speeches to the UN and to the Congress (the first Pontiff to speak in this institutional place) where he spoke about the environmental theme, so dear to him, and the fight against religious fanaticism of any origin, human rights and individual and civil liberties.

https://www.giubileo-2025.it/en/pope-francis

_______________________________________________________

 JULY 6, 2023

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).

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.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/a-new-discovery-pope-francis-cdf-etc.html

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.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/repost-those-who-affirm-vatican-council.html

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.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/07/the-red-is-not-exception-for-blue-but.html

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).

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/i-am-affirming-vatican-council-ii-like.html

Cushingism is heretical, schismatic, nontraditional and unethical. It is a dishonest way to reject Tradition.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/so-when-cardinals-hollerich-and-grech.html

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-revolution-in-interpretation-of.html

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.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/we-now-have-new-information-it-is.html

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/pope-francis-is-not-magisterial-on.html

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/the-basic-issue-which-i-keep-writing.html

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