Wednesday, August 29, 2018

Repost : Everyone agrees Vatican Council II has a major philosophical mistake

Everyone agrees Vatican Council II has a major philosophical mistake

The reference for Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II is the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 1
Today we know that the Letter made an objective mistake.Invisible cases of being saved in invincible ignorance cannot be visible exceptions to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).This same philosophical error was the bad reasoning at Vatican Council II.This cannot be the work of the Holy Spirit.
The initial error was not corrected by Pope Pius XII and Pope John XXIII also overlooked the mistake.Nor did he lift the excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney.So Catholics believed that there were exceptions to the traditional interpretation of EENS.
Then so much of Vatican Council II was based on this error.In principle hypothetical cases were assumed to be objective.They are mentioned in the text - LG 16, LG 8, LG 14, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22, AG 7, AG 11 etc.
Cardinal Ottaviani and Archbishop Lefebvre said nothing.Mons. Clifford Fenton, Ludwig Ott and Fr.William Most said nothing.They did not ask themselves how can invisible people be visible exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
So the Council has been built on human error.It is heretical. It is not simply non traditional and irrational.
With an irrational premise the dogma EENS has been rejected.
With an irrational premise the Nicene Creed means 'I believe in three or more baptisms and they exclude the baptism of water. They are desire, blood, invincible ignorance, seeds of the Word(AG 11) etc'.
With an irrationality Pope Benedict confirmed in March 2016 that Vatican Council II was 'a developmen't of the dogma EENS. It was no more like it was for the magisterium of the 16th century and he was not going to interpret the Council without the irrational premise.
He was acknowledging that the development came from the Letter of the Holy Office, a private letter from one bishop to another which the Archdiocese of Boston made public three years after it was issued by Rome and which his friend Fr. Karl Rahner placed in the Denzinger.

Ralph Martin and Robert Fastiggi do not deny that Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II with a false premise and non traditional conclusion.2
Ralph Martin does not deny 1) that the baptism of desire is not physically visible in 2017 and that 2) invisible baptism of desire is not an explicit exception to the dogma EENS
Ralph Martin does not deny that Pope Francis has made the same two philosophical errors in his interpretation of Vatican Council II. He has violated the Principle of Non Contradiction.
In other words the pope made an objective mistake in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.Ralph Martin himself has been teaching this error at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary, Detroit.
He does not deny that when he wrote his books on Evangelisation and 'Will Many Be Saved'(Amazon) he made the above two errors.
Everyone agrees I.I is not an exception to EENS and yet this was the reasoning at Vatican Council II.This is a major philosophical error. It runs through Vatican Council II like a theme(LG 16, LG 8, LG 14, UR 3, NA 2,AG 7, AG 11, GS 22 etc).This is not the teaching of the Holy Spirit.
-Lionel Andrades

1

Diabolical disorientation is due to the one turning point in the Church's life which has been entirely detrimental to the faith. Lumen Gentium Chapter 2 Section 16: Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. (19) Cfr. Epist. S.S.C.S. Officii ad Archiep. Boston.: Denz. 3869-72.
Footnote 19 gives source authority to the 1949 Holy Office Pelagian heresy letter to Archbishop Cushing and is the theological foundation for modern ecumenism and ecumenism is the theological foundation for the Novus Ordo and justifies the overthrow of nearly all traditional Catholic teaching resulting in our Church being, for the most part, Neo-Protestant.-Warren Goddard

2.

Ralph Martin and Robert Fastiggi do not deny that Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II with a false premise and non traditional conclusion


_____________________________

December 15, 2016

UNPRECEDENTED!PHILOSOPHICAL MISTAKES DISCOVERED IN VATICAN COUNCIL II

DECEMBER 14, 2016
Catholic professors in Rome now tell lies : pontifical universities don't want to be quoted on a philosophical subject


DECEMBER 13, 2016

Traditionalists too unaware of major philosophical mistake : many errors in Vatican Council II


DECEMBER 13, 2016

Too many mistakes in Vatican Council II


DECEMBER 12, 2016
Vatican Council II riddled with philosphical error : two popes in principle support objective error in text eucharistandmission.blogspot.ro/…/vatican-council…

DECEMBER 11, 2016
The source of the present Arian-like heresy throughout the Church today is due to the following points eucharistandmission.blogspot.ro/…/the-source-of-p…

DECEMBER 10, 2016
The present magisterium has made a major philosophical mistake

DECEMBER 11, 2016
Priest confirms philosophical error : Lefebvre excommunication a mistake

DECEMBER 10, 2016
Scholars supporting four cardinals in major philosophical mistake

DECEMBER 1, 2016
There is a mistake in Vatican Council II and once the error is identified and avoided, the interpretation of the Council radically changes.There is no 'spirit of Vatican Council II ' excuse anymore

NOVEMBER 29, 2016
So it is only by using an irrationality that the present magisterium can re-interpret magisterial documents and say Vatican Council II indicates all Jews and Muslims in Italy do not need to convert into the Catholic Church in 2016


https://gloria.tv/article/ZqXRviApVEho4MfWmE6jyDpqL

Repost : There is a mistake in Vatican Council II : two popes need to be shown that in principle hypothetical cases are not exceptions to EENS

Sep 25, 2017

There is a mistake in Vatican Council II : two popes need to be shown that in principle hypothetical cases are not exceptions to EENS

SEPTEMBER 25, 2017
There is a mistake in Vatican Council II : two popes need to be shown that in principle hypothetical cases are not exceptions to EENS

Image result for Photo Pope Francis and Benedict
There is a mistake in Vatican Council II.However in spite of the mistake the Council can be interpreted in harmony with the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the Syllabus of Errors.

MISTAKE IN PRINCIPLE AT VATICAN COUNCIL II
The mistake which they made was to assume in principle that hypothetical cases were not hypothetical but explicit and objective people.It was further assumed in principle that these invisible cases which were allegedly visible were examples of salvation outside the Church.Non Catholics saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.

IN THE MIND OF CARDINAL CUSHING AND ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE
In the mind of Cardinal Cushing and Archbishop Lefebvre at Vatican Council II invisible cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) were visible people saved outside the Church.
So the Council had mistaken hypothetical cases(LG 16, LG 8, LG 14, UR 3, NA 2, AG7, AG11, GS 22 etc) as not being hypothetical but real people saved outside the Church who were considered exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS.
Lumen Gentium 16 etc should not have been mentioned in Vatican Council II.Since LG 16, LG 8, LG 14, UR 3, NA 2, AG 7, AG 11, GS 22 etc are refer to theoretical cases they are hypothetical speculation, things hoped for with good will.
What is the point in saying that a person can be saved in invincible ignorance and with a good conscience when we do not know any such person in real life who would be saved as such?
Why mention the demand for the baptism of water by a catechumen who dies before he receives it, when the catechumen is unknown?

LG 16, LG 8, AG 11 ETC REFER TO 'ZERO CASES'
If someone was saved in another religions with 'seeds of the Word'(AG 11) or 'elements of sanctification and truth'(LG 8), in our reality it would be ' a zero case' as John Martignoni refers to BOD, BOB and I.I.
Hypothetical cases are zero cases in our reality, we cannot see or meet someone saved in I.I, BOD, BOB, with or without the baptism of water.
So what all the controversy over subsist it (LG 8) ? We cannot know any one saved outside the Church.
Hypothetical cases being mixed up for being objective exceptions to EENS is a false theology in Vatican Council II.
It is clear that theoretical cases are not visible in 2017.

WE CAN RE-READ VATICAN COUNCIL II
So what if we read Vatican Council II without this fault? Can we avoid the factual error in Vatican Council which is not the work of the Holy Spirit?
Yes.
We can re-read Vatican Council II aware of the original error of the Council Fathers.
We have to be aware that there is no known case of the catechumen who dies before receiving the baptism of water in the Catholic Church and who is saved.So this eliminates an exception to Ad Gentes and Lumen Gentium 14 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.So the passage in the Council which refers to the desire and longing of a catechumen is ' a dud'.1
We know that we cannot meet any one today or in the past who was saved in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.So the passages in Lumen Gentium 14 and Ad Gentes 7 which seem to contradict EENS( all need faith and baptism for salvation) is an empty passage.
Then Lumen Gentium 14 says only those who know about Jesus and the Church need to enter the Church to avoid Hell.In other words those who are in invincible ignorance are known exceptions to the dogma EENS and so not every one in general needs to be incorporated into the Church as a member for salvation, but only those who 'know'.LG 14 shows the the specious reasoning and conclusion of the Church Fathers at Vatican Council II.

LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE MADE AN OBJECTIVE MISTAKE
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston in principle accepted hypothetical cases as being exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.The traditional interpretation of outside the Church there is no salvation had exceptions for the Letter .This was made the standard philosophical reasoning at Vatican Council II.

MAGISTERIAL HERESY
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 irrationally and heretically states ' Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member' when the Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441 says the opposite.2
So even though there were no visible cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church, the New Theology at Boston(1949) and Vatican Council II (1965) suggests there are.So with known and visible salvation outside the Church there is no more an ecumenism or return since the Protestant can be saved in his religion. There is no more a need to proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation, since outside the Church there was salvation. There was no need for mission.

NEW NORM
Ecclesiastical missionary had maintained the excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney right through Vatican Council II(1965)so that people would think that invisible for us BOD, BOB and I.I were visible exceptions to the dogma EENS. The Jesuits expelled Fr. Leonard Feeney from the community and Catholic professors at Boston College, whom he supported,were expelled too.The new norm was unknown cases of BOD, BOB and I.I must be accepted as being known.

WE CAN AVOID THE MISTAKE MADE AT VATICAN COUNCIL II
We can now avoid the mistake they made at Vatican Council II.The Vatican Council II of Cushing and Lefebvbre changes.Ratzinger, Rahner and Kung's work will be in vain.We are automatically back to the old ecclesiology of the Church with invisible BOD, BOB and I.I.With the old ecclesiology intact there can only be an ecumenism of return.There is the need for the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation and the non separation of Church and State since the priority for getting into Heaven for all people is being incorporated into the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation.

ECCLESIOLOGY OF MASS IS THE SAME : HOPE FOR TRADITIONALISTS AND SEDEVACANTISTS
So the ecclesiology at the Novus Ordo, Tridentine Latin an Greek Mass is the same.Cardinals can affirm Feeneyite EENS in harmony with Vatican Council II and ask the two popes to do the same.Traditionalists do not have to reject Vatican Council II to affirm Feeneyite EENS as did the 2012 General Chapter Statement of the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX).Sedevacantists can come back into the Church accepting the strict interpretation of EENS in harmony with Vatican Council II, interpreted with hypothetical cases just being hypothetical.-Lionel Andrades

1.

Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door. Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."(17) Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6)...-Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II

14. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.,,
Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.-Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II

2.
__________________________________

DECEMBER 17, 2016
Unprecedented!
SEPTEMBER 24, 2017

Two popes need to correct the objective error in salvation theology which cannot be the teaching of the Holy Spirit and so is not magisterial

SEPTEMBER 23, 2017
The Catholic Church guided by the Holy Spirit teaches that all non Catholics in 2017 need to be incorporated into the Church as members for salvation.This is Vatican Council II and the Catechism : present popes are denying this
eucharistandmission.blogspot.ro/…/the-catholic-ch…


https://gloria.tv/article/rU2TmdKupWos44H4tkB32abkH

Repost : LG16,LG 14, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc are not exceptions to EENS : Fr.Leonard Feeney's excommunication was a mistake

SEPTEMBER 28, 2015


LG16,LG 14, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc are not exceptions to EENS : Fr.Leonard Feeney's excommunication was a mistake

Immagine correlataWe do not know any one in 2015 saved with the baptism of desire, baptism of blood or invincible ignorance - and without the baptism of water.Not a single such case is known or can be known. Since people in Heaven are not visible and known to us. With or without the baptism of water they are invisible for us.
So the Magisterium in 1949 made an objective mistake.It was a mistake  when they assumed that being saved with the baptism of desire, baptism of blood or invincible ignorance referred to known cases.Then the Magisterium inferred that these 'known cases' were explicit exceptions to the tradtional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus  according to Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St. Benedict Center at Boston, USA.
Immagine correlataThe error was then carried over into Vatican Council II.

 Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved...
Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.-Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II
Immagine correlataTherefore though God in ways known to Himself can leadthose inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faithwithout which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6)... -Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II

Those saved in 'inculpable ignorance' should not have been mentioned in Ad Gentes 7. Those  who 'know' or those who are in ignorance' and are saved with or without the baptism of water  are known only to God. Here in Lumen Gentium 14 it is being implied that we know these cases and can judge. They would not  be explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.It was a mistake to have mentioned this in Lumen Gentium 14.We have to be aware that this is a reference to hypothetican cases followed by the baptism of water, since this is the dogmatic teaching and so they are not exceptions to the old ecclesiology.
Also it is implied that there are now three known baptisms, water, desire and invincible ignorance when the Nicene Creed mentions only one known baptism, the baptism of water.

Immagine correlataWith LG 16, LG 8, NA 2, UR 3 etc it is inferred that there are still more 'baptisms' and all of them are without the baptism of water. The text does not state it but this is the Magisterial inference made.
The Magisterium during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII did not correct the error. Also for some 19 years the excommunication of Fr.Leonard Feeney was not lifted. He remained excommunicated even during Vatican Council II. The popes did nothing to defend him.In public they did not affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma.
Immagine correlataRedemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus and the Catechism of the Catholic Church were issued assuming there are known exceptions to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The International Theological Commission has made the same mistake in two theological papers.While the SSPX theologians and the sedevacantists CMRI, MHFM etc, have also made the same error as the liberals.
-Lionel Andrades

Repost : VATICAN REVIEW THE FR.LEONARD FEENEY CASE

FEBRUARY 11, 2018

VATICAN REVIEW THE FR.LEONARD FEENEY CASE

Image result for Photo Fr.Leonard Feeney


NOVEMBER 16, 2011
JESUIT SUPERIOR GENERAL REVIEW THE FR.LEONARD FEENEY CASE :THERE IS NO KNOWN CASE OF A PERSON SAVED WITH THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE WHICH IS VISIBLE

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2011/11/jesuit-superior-general-review.html



FEBRUARY 11, 2018

Repost : That an error was made in the Fr.Leonard Feeney case it was known for a long time: Even the SSPX communique supports the priest from Boston

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/they-have-rejected-eens-changed-nicene.html


FEBRUARY 11, 2018


Repost : If you consider the Holy Office or Fr.Leonard Feeney in heresy determines how you interpret Vatican Council II

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/repost-if-you-consider-holy-office-or.html

FEBRUARY 11, 2018


Repost : Were the excommunications of Archbishop Lefebvre and Fr. Leonard Feeney leftist excommunications?: their fault was orthodoxy

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/repost-were-excommunications-of.html

FEBRUARY 11, 2018

Repost : LG 16, LG 14, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc are not exceptions to EENS : Fr.Leonard Feeney's excommunication was a mistake

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/repost-lg16-lg-14-lg-8-ur-3-na-2-etc.html

FEBRUARY 11, 2018

Repost : JESUITS OPEN THE FR.LEONARD FEENEY CASE

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/repost-jesuits-open-frleonard-feeney.html

FEBRUARY 11, 2018

Repost : Pope Francis, Jesuits review the Fr.Leonard Feeney case

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/repost-pope-francis-jesuits-review.html

 FEBRUARY 11, 2018


Repost : ROBERT KENNEDY ASKED RICHARD CUSHING TO SUPPRESS FR.LEONARD FEENEY

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/repost-robert-kennedy-asked-richard.html

-Lionel Andrades