We Catholics can interpret Vatican
Council II rationally. We have a choice. Why must we interpret Vatican Council
II irrationally like the DDF, USCCB and 21 new cardinals?
The 21 new cardinals to be appointed
next month and for the Vicar General (Vicariato) in Rome, Cardinal Angelo de
Donatis, and his auxiliary bishops there is a denial of Vatican Council II.
They ignore Vatican Council II ( AG 7, LG 14) and the Catechism of the Catholic
Church ( 845,846,1257 etc) which say other religions are not paths to
salvation.
Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and the baptism of water for salvation and we know that there are no physically visible exceptions of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance in 1965-2023. There are no exceptions for AG 7.
ONE CREATOR BUT HELL EXISTS
There is one Creator but sin exists and so also
Hell.So not everyone will go to Paradise.The 21 new cardinals do not say that
in Heaven there are only Catholics and they are there with faith and baptism
(AG 7 etc) and without mortal sins of faith and morals. Outside the Catholic
Church there is no salvation ( CCC 845,846).
They do not say that the Catholic
Church teaches in Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) and the Catechism (845,846)
that in Heaven there are only Catholics, I repeat. They are there with ‘faith
and baptism’(AG 7) and without mortal sin on their soul. This has been the traditional,
de fide teaching of the Church.It was
taught also by Pope Pius X, whose feast was
celebrated the other day.
THE BIBLE IS FEENEYITE
This has been Jesus’ teachings in the
Bible.It cannot be dubbed ‘ racist’ or pegged under some other leftist ideological
label- the new fascism.
We have to follow the teachings of the
popes and saints over the centuries.They are magisterial. They are not contradicted
by Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, when they are both
interpreted rationally.
We Catholics can interpret Vatican CouncilII
rationally. We have a choice. Why must we
interpret Vatican Council II irrationally like
the DDF and the USCCB?
The 21 new cardinals are in public
without faith. They deny the Faith. Even numerous bishops deny the Faith because of Cushingism which has
spread throughout the Church like a spiritual epidemic.
NO DENIAL FROM THE VATICAN
There is no public denial from the Vatican. The
Nicene, Apostles and Athanasius Creed are being interpreted with Cushingism and
not Feeneyism.
There is no denial from any of the 21
cardinals or the Vicar General or the auxiliary bishops of Rome.They interpret
the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1442) on extra
ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), with Cushingism and not Feeneyism.
Even the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX)
bishops and Fr. Davide Pagliarani, the Superior General, (like Archbishop
Marcel Lefebvre) interpret the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, the
Catechism of Pope Pius X, Mystici Corporis, Quanta Cura etc with irrational
Cushingism and not rational Feeneyism.It is the same with the sedevacantist
bishops Sanborn and Pivarunas. The same error is made by sedevacantists Brothers
Peter and Michael Dimond at the Most Holy Family Monastery, NY, USA.
Archbishop Augustine di Noia op,
Secretary of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), Vatican and
Archbishop Giacomo Morandi, ex –Secretary of the DDF, in public, have interpreted
CCC 847-848 (invincible ignorance etc) with Cushingism and not Feeneyism. The DDF
(CDF) has made an error here in public. There has been no denial from them. Their mistake can be read on the
website of the Diocese of Manchester in New Hampshire with reference to the CDF/DDF
Decree of Prohibitions against the St. Benedict Center in New Hampshire.
The DDF/CDF/Holy Office also made an
error in the 1949 Letter of the Holy
Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney. This Letter issued by the DDF/Holy Office
confused invisible cases of the baptism of
desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as being physically visible exceptions for Feeneyite EENS.
The Vatican Press Office, the USCCB
and the Diocese of Manchester in New Hampshire do not announce that they interpret
Magisterial Documents with Feeneyism and not Cushingism. They cannot say this! They
do not affirm Feeneyism for political reasons. They choose Cushingism. They are
Cushingites. Cushingism produces heresy and schism and is dishonest. So it is
acceptable for the Left.
We Catholics can interpret Vatican CouncilII
rationally. We have a choice. Why must we
interpret Vatican Council II irrationally like
the DDF and the USCCB? - Lionel Andrades
AUGUST 22, 2023
How can you have 21 new cardinals next month who change the Creeds with Cushingism and accept all the books on Vatican Council II interpreted with irrational Cushingism? They approve changes in Church Documents and have a New Missal based upon this error. They reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) by interpreting Vatican Council II with Cushingism.
How can you have 21 new cardinals next month who change the Creeds with Cushingism and accept all the books on Vatican Council II interpreted with irrational Cushingism? They approve changes in Church Documents and have a New Missal based upon this error.
They reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) by interpreting Vatican Council II with Cushingism.
According to Canon Law they must at least affirm the Creeds in their original. But the Athanasius Creed is rejected and the Nicene Creed is re-interpreted politically by them.
From whom do they get their authority to support this error? The Creeds are always only Feeneyite.
They have an obligation to interpret the Creeds rationally and so affirm the dogma EENS. Even if Rahner, Ratzinger, Congar, Murray, Balthazar and Lefebvre were Cushingites we can today interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism.Then there is no rupture with Feeneyite EENS. There is no break with the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors. Our philosophy and theology is Feeneyite.
The SSPX bishops say they accept the Syllabus of Errors but they are Cushingites. So they are not correcting the Cushingism of the 21 new cardinals. They also interpret the Syllabus of Errors with Cushingism and not Feeneyism. This is modernism.
Why should be attend Mass offered by a cardinal who is a Cushingite in public?
How can he support polygamy, LGBT-sex etc in the name of Vatican Council II, Feeneyite? He cannot! The Council, Feeneyite, no more supports liberalism.
Cardinal Arthur Roche says there is a new magisterium with Vatican Council II, Cushingite.He wants everyone to follow him. His ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue is false. It needs to be based upon Vatican Council II, Feeneyite.Then it will be missionary in the traditional sense. It will be mission and out reach, based upon there being exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church. This would be the Conciliar teaching and not just the pre-Conciliar teaching. It will be mission according to Vatican Council II (Feeneyite).
Cardinal-designate Victor Manuel Fernandez cannot approve homosexual unions in the name of Vatican Council II, Cushingite. Morally, the Council has to be interpreted only with Feeneyism.
Cardinals Grech and Hollerich also cannot approve polygamy in the name of Vatican Council II, Feeneyite. The theological opening for liberalism is no more there. - Lionel Andrades
AUGUST 21, 2023
So why should we have new cardinals who accept Vatican Council II interpreted only irrationally and then accept only the new Missal?
The 21 new cardinals to be appointed next month only accept the New Missal which is liberal and does not affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).Since Vatican Council II is interpreted irrationally. This produces alleged exceptions for EENS and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius X.
But if they interpret Vatican Council II rationally, with Feeneyism i.e. invisible cases are always invisible, then there would be no objective exceptions for the past ecumenism of return to the Church of the Syllabus. The Council would also not contradict the Athanasius Creed which says all need Catholic faith for salvation.
So why should we have new cardinals who accept Vatican Council II interpreted only irrationally and then accept only the new Missal?
Pope Paul VI made a mistake in the interpretation of the Council. He could have chosen to interpret the Council rationally. It would be then in harmony with the 16th century Roman Missal. There would not be any new theology.
The cardinals must clarify that they interpret Vatican Council II rationally and so support only the past exclusivisit ecclesiology of the Roman Missal. Also, they can only elect a future pope who does the same. This is the moral thing for the cardinals to do. -Lionel Andrades
Posts
