- Lionel Andrades
Tuesday, April 30, 2024
Healing Prayer at Medugorje 29.04.2024
https://video.marytv.tv/watch/mRFo3esgpVG?ctx=yDj3O1j6sO8%2CmP9bEiEsi5K
Why should the rank and file Catholic confuse what is invisible as being visible, subjective as being objective, unseen as being seen, implicit as being explicit ? Cardinal Napier still feels obligated to do this.
Cardinal Wilfred Napier o.f.m will hopefully be present at the next Conclave
of Cardinals to elect a pope, when hopefully they will interpret Vatican Council
II only rationally. The former Archbishop of Durban, South Africa will not vote
since he has crossed the age limit. I met him on the Rome metro twice and
briefly spoke to him and have communicated with him on Twitter, a few years back.
He was afraid of being considered a Feeneyite instead of the common Cushingite.
So the whole of South Africa was being given a false catechism and the
Gospel was not being preached .Since the cardinal wanted to protect his career
and worldly interests. A typical cardinal.
Can you imagine Cardinal Napier saying in S. Africa that all non
Catholics need Catholic faith and the baptism of water ( Ad Gentes 7, Vatican
Council II) for salvation and that
hypothetical cases, invisible people in 1949-2024, are not visible examples of
salvation outside the Catholic Church
and so they do not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?
Even the other conservative cardinal, Raymond Leo Burke, is preserving
his peace.
Cardinal Napier still teaches error to preserve his ecclesiastical
status and is not willing to dialogue on this issue.
One day, when all the cardinals realize that Vatican Council II (rational)
is the only honest choice they have, the Church automatically returns to
Tradition.
Now Cardinal Napier and the other cardinals are allowing Catholic
children to be taught a false catechism, to please the political Left.
The issue now – no more is conservative and liberal cardinals in opposition.
Since Vatican Council II is no more liberal, it is no more dividing the Church.
Every cardinal is obligated to interpret Vatican Council II, the Catechism of
the Catholic Church and other Magisterial Documents, only rationally and not
irrationally i.e. LG 8, 14, 15, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council
II, always refer to hypothetical cases in 2024.
The liberal cardinals can no more interpret LG 8, 14, 15, 16, UR 3, NA 2,
GS 22 etc, as being physically visible and known cases in 2024.
Why should the rank and file Catholic confuse what is invisible as being
visible, subjective as being objective, unseen as being seen, implicit as being
explicit ? Card. Napier still feels obligated to do this. - Lionel Andrades
JULY 15, 2023
The College of Cardinals can no more interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and neither elect a pope who does the same.
JULY 12, 2023
The College of Cardinals can no more interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and neither elect a pope who does the same.
The College of Cardinals can no more interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and neither elect a pope who does the same.
The people now know that Vatican Council II can be rationally. So there is the Catholic obligation to interpret Vatican Council II etc only rationally and traditionally. So for the popes and cardinals have to affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) according to the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) which did not mention any exceptions.
They also have to reject the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston which wrongly assumed of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance was physically visible examples of salvation outside the Church and practical exceptions for Feeneyite EENS or EENS according to the Church Councils ( Council of Florence 1442 etc). - Lionel Andrades
JULY 11, 2023
The College of Cardinals are not eligible to vote at the next Conclave to elect a pope, if they are dishonest and interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally. They must interpret LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II as not referring to physically visible non Catholics saved outside the Church. Lumen Gentium 8, 14, 16 etc, are not practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX. There is no rupture with the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X. So future cardinals would have to be only traditionalists.
The College of Cardinals are not eligible to vote at the next Conclave to elect a pope, if they are dishonest and interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally. They must interpret LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II as not referring to physically visible non Catholics saved outside the Church. Lumen Gentium 8, 14, 16 etc, are not practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX. There is no rupture with the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X. So future cardinals would have to be only traditionalists.
The cardinals were unethical on Vatican Council II, the Creeds, Councils, Catechisms, and EENS etc when they elected Pope Francis. They were interpreting Church Documents irrationally and non traditionally. This was political.
The cardinals are presently in public mortal sins of faith.They are in heresy and schism and it is official. They cannot condone this any more with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally. The people know that the Council can be interpreted rationally. This is the only moral choice the cardinals have.
ATHANASIUS CREED TWO INTERPRETATIONS
For me the Athanasius Creed says all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation (to avoid Hell). For the cardinals all do not need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation. Since for them there are known and visible cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church in 1949-2023.
For the Nicene Creed says ‘I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins ‘For me it refers to only the baptism of water which is physically visible and repeatable. For them there are three or more baptisms which exclude the baptism of water. They are the baptism of desire, the baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance. These are physically visible baptisms for them and so they contradict Feeneyite EENS or EENS according to the Fourth Lateran Council (1215). This Council did not mention any exceptions.These ‘visible-invisible’ baptisms; known examples of salvation in the present time for us human beings, are also extended to LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, for the cardinals.
APOSTLES CREED WITH TWO INTERPRETATIONS
For me the Apostles Creed refers to the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church which still teaches that outside the Church there is no salvation. For the cardinals the message is outside the Church there is known salvation, exceptions for the pre-1949 magisterial understanding on there being exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
So I am in harmony with the pre-1949 Magisterium, and they are in schism.
For me the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q and 29 Q on outside the Church there is no salvation) is not contradicted by 24Q (invincible ignorance etc). For them there is a contradiction.
For me the Catechism of the Catholic Church ( 1257 on the Necessity of Baptism) is not contradicted by the references to hypothetical and invisible cases mentioned in the line ‘God is not limited to the Sacraments ‘. For them CCC 1257 is contradictory and confusing.
HERETICAL NEW CARDINALS IN SEPTEMBER
In this heretical and schismatic condition there will be new cardinals in September and they include Cardinal-designate Vincent Manuel Fernandez, the new Prefect of the Dicastery for Doctrine and Faith. He needs to recant. The other cardinals need to do the same. Fernandez is in first class heresy according to the Pope John Paul II’s, Ad Tuendem Fidem, which mention a hierarchy of truths for Catholics to follow. Fernandez does not have the Catholic faith. This is a scandal. To re-interpret the Creeds, Councils, Catechisms etc is a kind of apostasy. Cardinals who do not affirm the Creeds in their original meaning should not be allowed to offer Holy Mass.
PERMISSION TO OFFER HOLY MASS
Roberto dei Mattei states:
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). 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.
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). 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.
Cardinals, who do not interpret Vatican Council II, EENS, the Catechism and Church Documents rationally and so traditionally, should not be allowed to offer Holy Mass.
Cardinals who reject the ecclesiology of the old Roman Missal, which is in harmony with the Vatican Council II interpreted rationally, should not be allowed to offer Holy Mass in any Rite.
Cardinal Vincent Nichols, Robert Sarah, Walter Kasper, Francis Arinza, Blaise Cupich, Gerhard Muller, Raymond Leo Burke and Luiz Ladaria should not be allowed to offer Holy Mass, until they affirm the Faith and so correct the scandal.
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).
The Cardinals like Pope Francis, of course, all these years, have been justifying their heresies with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally.
The signatories of the Correctio Filiale cannot correct Pope Francis and the cardinals, until they also interpret Church Documents rationally. I have mentioned this before and there is no comment or denial from them.They are making the same mistake on Vatican Council II etc, as the cardinals and Pope Francis. This is also the error of Roberto dei Mattei, Peter Kwasniewski, Taylor Marshall, John Henry Weston, Michael Matt, Michael Voris and others.
-Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/07/the-college-of-cardinals-is-not.html
______________________________________________________
How can Cardinals Vincent Nichols, Robert Sarah, Walter Kasper, Francis Arinza, Blaise Cupich, Gerhard Muller, Raymond Leo Burke and Luiz Ladaria accept Archbishop Victor Fernandez as the Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith when he interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally. This is a public and official error of the DDF.
How can Cardinals Vincent Nichols, Robert Sarah, Walter Kasper, Francis Arinza, Blaise Cupich, Gerhard Muller, Raymond Leo Burke and Luiz Ladaria accept Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez as the Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith when he interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally? This is a public and official error of the DDF.This is unethical and not Catholic. There is no denial from 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.
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.
The old moral theology would be considered ‘immoral’ by Fernandez since it is contradicted by Vatican Council II ( irrational). He does not mention that his new moral theology would become obsolete when Vatican Council II is interpreted rationally. - Lionel Andrades
JULY 12, 2023
Cardinals Vincent Nichols, Robert Sarah, Walter Kasper, Francis Arinze, Blaise Cupich, Gerhard Muller, Raymond Leo Burke and Luiz Ladaria should not be allowed to offer Holy Mass, until they affirm the Faith and so correct the scandal. They are all interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally.
Cardinals Vincent Nichols, Robert Sarah, Walter Kasper, Francis Arinze, Blaise Cupich, Gerhard Muller, Raymond Leo Burke and Luiz Ladaria should not be allowed to offer Holy Mass, until they affirm the Faith and so correct the scandal. They are all interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally. They are changing the Deposit of the Faith on Vatican Council II, the Creeds, Councils, Catechisms, extra ecclesiam nulla salus, baptism of desire etc and so Michael Voris and Church Militant TV are doing the same.
Michael Voris and other organisations have formed a needed Alliance for Defending the Deposit of Faith, and this is commendable. But they must acknowledge that the liberalism which they oppose, polygamy etc, is justified by Pope Francis and the cardinals, with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and not rationally.
When the Council is interpreted rationally it supports Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the rest of Tradition. There is no theological opening for polygamy, same sex unions etc. Vatican Council II can no more be used to support this immorality. -Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/07/cardinals-vincent-nichols-robert-sarah.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
