Medjugorje messaggio del 2 maggio 2019 a Mirjana

 

THIS IS THE MESSAGE OF MAY 2, 2019 IN MEDJUGORJE

It is formal heresy when the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is rejected, the Athanasius Creed is made obsolete, the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and Apostles Creed changed and Vatican Council II is wrongly interpreted as a rupture with the Creeds and Catechisms by using a false premise and inference

It is formal heresy when the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) is rejected, the Athanasius Creed is made obsolete, the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and Apostles Creed changed and Vatican Council II is wrongly interpreted as a rupture with the Creeds and Catechisms by using a false premise and inference.The present two popes and the Prefect and Secretaries of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) need to recant and correct the error.They are contradicting ex cathedra teachings on faith and morals.

In principle they assume that hypothetical and theoretical cases are personally known and physically visible non Catholics, saved outside the Church. Then it is assumed that EENS and the past exclusive ecclesiology of the Church is  contradicted.

But we can interpret Vatican Council II as not being a rupture with traditional EENS( example LG 16 etc hypothetical and not visible). This interpretation of Vatican Council II will not be affirmed by the  popes and the CDF.

Cardinals and bishops may believe that they are free to interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS but this will not be permitted by the CDF.

The CDF has asked Brother Andre Marie MICM, Prior at the St. Benedict Center, N.H to interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church 847-848( invincible ignorance) as being an objective exception to Feeneyite EENS.This is even though there are no literal cases of being saved in invincible ignorance. CCC 847-848 can refer only to hypothetical cases.

The evidence for this heresy, expressed in public, has been pointed out to in Church-text in posts on this blog.It also applies to the Prefect and Secretaries of the CDF.
 The evidence against Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj is there in two theological papers of the International Theological Commission.He assumes that hypothetical case of LG 16, GS 22 etc are exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. So LG 16 etc would refer to objective  and literal cases in his reality for them to be exceptions to the ecclesiocentric interpretation of EENS by Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.So the ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the popes and saints over the centuries is rejected.St.Thomas Aquinas held the strict interpretation of EENS and BOD and I.I were hypothetical for him.So they could not be exceptions to EENS.It is the same with St. Robert Bellarmine.

So the ecclesiastics cannot be magisterial on this issue since the Holy Spirit cannot make an objective mistake. This is human error which can be corrected.

I am not making a formal charge of heresy and I am not judging and condemning any one. I am pointing out to what the Holy Spirit has taught the Church over the centuries.Also if I was wrong I would expect to be corrected. I am not authority. However there has been no denial or clarification over the years when I have been repeating the same thing.

They cannot prove me wrong by affirming the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. They will not affirm EENS. I repeat they will not affirm the dogma EENS in public.

Instead, they want us Catholics to believe that unknown cases of the baptism of desire(BOD),baptism of blood(BOB)  and invincible ignorance( I.I) are known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.So for them the Holy Office(CDF) was correct  and Fr. Leonard Feeney was wrong in 1949. Similarly today,for the CDF, invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are physically visible exceptions to EENS, as it was known to the Church in the 16th century.It as if we humans  can meet or see someone saved outside the Church.

So Catholics have to irrationally interpret Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1994) when there is a rational choice.This choice would be in harmony with the Syllabus of Errors and the past exclusive understanding of salvation.

Jimmy Akins and Massimo Faggioli have been informed.There is no comment from them.

The LifeSite Editor in Chief, John Henry Weston, and correspondents will admit that there are no personally known cases of non Catholics saved in 2019 with BOD, BOB and I.I or LG 16( invincible ignorance) and LG 14( the case of the unknown catechumen).Neither are there any physically visible cases for them of non Catholics- saved, as referred to in LG 8 ( elements of sanctification and truth), UR 3 ( imperfect communion with the Church), salvation outside the visible boundaries of the Church where the Catholic Church  allegedly subsists ( LG 8), good and holy things in other religion(NA 2) etc.There are only hypothetical cases mentioned in Vatican Council II.
So for LifeSite  there can be no exception to EENS in real life.None can be mentioned in Vatican Council II unless a false inference is made.

The false inference would be a violation of the Principle of Non Contradiction.It would assume that now invisible people saved  in Heaven are visible on earth for them to be objective exceptions to the traditional interpretation of EENS.

1.So there is no formal affirmation of EENS by the present two popes. They do not affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma defined by three Church Councils in the Extraordinary Magisterium.

2.There are no literal cases of BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22  etc known to the LifeSites correspondents in 2019.There are none known also to the two popes and they do not admit this.

3.Without an irrational inference( unknown people are exceptions to EENS) Vatican Council II does not contradict Feeneyite EENS.It is not in conflict with EENS as it was interpreted by the Magisterium in the 16th century.This is not announced by the CDF.

4.So Pope Benedict made an objective error when he said in Avvenire, in 2016 that EENS today is not the same as it was for the missionaries in the 16th century.There was a development with Vatican Council II for him.1 The CDF during the pontificate of Pope Francis did not correct this statement of the Emeritus pope. 

5.Pope Francis was wrong in Evangelii Gaudium  to present the kerygma without the necessity of being a member of the Catholic Church for salvation.This is heresy.
6. It is also formal heresy when the CDF Secretaries, and Bishop Peter Libasci, the Bishop of Manchester, USA  interpret CCC 847-848  as exceptions to Feeneyite EENS and Ad Gentes 7( which says all need faith and baptism for salvation).
7. The  dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) is a faith-teaching which is obligatory for all Catholics to believe in.It is mentioned clearly in the Athanasius Creed.The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St. Benedict Center, N.H, USA are not allowed to make an oath with it.

8. The Holy Spirit teaches the Catholic Church ( Apostles Creed) that outside the Church there is no salvation.So to claim outside the Church there is known salvation is heresy.

It is also heresy to say there are three or  more known baptisms and not just one as mentioned in the Nicene Creed.

MORTAL SINS OF FAITH

1. So  a heretic, according to Jimmy Akins,  is a Catholic who  rejects a truth that the “Magisterium has infallibly defined” to be “divinely revealed” like outside the Church there is no salvation. There is no known salvation outside the Church in 2019 and so the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) cannot be contradicted by any practical exceptions. Since for us human beings there can be no exceptions.But for the present two popes there are exceptions. The baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions to EENS. So they have changed the understanding of the dogma.

2. A heretic is a Catholic who  rejects a truth that the “Magisterium has infallibly defined” to be “divinely revealed” like we believe in there being only one baptism for the forgiveness of sins( Nicene Creed). This is the baptism of water. For the two popes there are three or more known baptisms, all without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. So there is not only one baptism but many theoretical and unknown possibilities.They are all  assumed to be equivalent to the baptism of water.

3.  A heretic is a Catholic who  rejects a truth that the “Magisterium has infallibly defined” to be “divinely revealed” like EENS, the Nicene Creed, Apostles Creed and Athanasius Creed.They are all being rejected with an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.The Council is interpreted by the two popes with alleged exceptions of invisible people being visible. Invisible cases of the BOD, BOB and I.I and in Vatican Council II, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are all assumed to be visible examples of salvation outside the Church.This is irrational and the conclusion is heretical.

HERESY LIST

1. So EENS is contradicted and so is John 3:5, Mark 16 :16 etc.

2. The Nicene Creed is contradicted.( I believe in more than one known baptism for the forgiveness of sins and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church).

3.The Apostles Creed is re-interpreted ( I believe in the Holy Spirit which teaches the Catholic Church today according to the two popes that there is known salvation outside the Church).

4.The Athanasius Creed is rejected( Outside the Church there is no salvation).

This is all first class heresy in the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II.

What the past Magisterium has infallibly defined  to be “divinely revealed” is rejected or changed by the present two popes.

THE EVIDENCE

1.The evidence is there for Pope Benedict's heresies  in the theological papers of the International Theological Commission.It is there in black and white.2 They are approved by Pope Francis .The same irrtional reasoning was used at the Plaquet Deo Press Conference by Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

2. Pope Francis on the plane when asked about his Abu Dhabi statement did not affirm the dogma EENS. Instead he projected Vatican Council II( interpreted with the irrationality) as a rupture with EENS.This was a rejection of EENS.

3. He has officially presented a kerygma in Evangelii Gaudium without the necessity of being a member of the Catholic Church.

4.Today if he is asked he will not affirm EENS like the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century.This is further proof. 

 He can recite the Nicene or Apostles Creed but he will  interpret them with the irrational premise and inference which is creates a rupture with their understanding over the centuries.So his reciting the Creeds is meaningless.

5. During the pontificate of Pope Francis,  Pope Benedict confirmed that EENS was no more, for Pope Francis, like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. There was 'a development' with Vatican Council II.He meant Vatican Council II interpreted with the false premise and inference.Otherwise there could not be a development.So EENS and the Creeds were changed in their meanings. The original strict interpretation was denied.

6. Pope Francis does not ask Pope Benedict to issue a correction saying EENS today is like it was for the Magisterium in the 16th century.There is no development with Vatican Council II interpreted without the irrationality.

They are both guilty. So we cannot expect a Catholic proclamation of the faith.

7. So with EENS and Nicene, Apostles andAthanasius Creeds changed theologically there are new heretical doctrines. They are there in the new ecumenism,  new ecclesiology,  newevangelisation and joint mission with other Christian communities who are not outside the Church for the two popes.There is a new understanding of mission in which everyone does not need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation( since there are known exceptions for the two popes).

8. Now a new super department will be created at the Vatican,it is reported,  which will proclaim Jesus without Catholic doctrines and traditional theology.Since the old theology and doctrines have been officially and heretically rejected.

The new  doctrines are heretical and practical conclusions of a new theology based upon a false premise and inference. So now heresy is the norm in the Church supported by the present two popes.
9.They interpret the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 with the irrational reasoning. So BOD, BOB and I.I contradict EENS.

He(Jimmy Akins) believes that the signers of the Open Letter failed to demonstrate that Pope Francis obstinately doubts or denies dogmas that the Magisterium has infallibly defined to be divinely.- Leading Catholics react to Open Letter accusing Pope Francis of heresy, ,LifeSite News

Here I have shown how the two popes obstinately doubt or deny the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

They also deny the centuries old interpretation ofthe Nicene and Apostles Creed by re-interpreting BOD, BOB and I.I.

They also deny the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation.For them outside the Church there is personally known salvation so there are exceptions to theAthanasius Creed.

They re-interpret Vatican Council II as a rupturewith these Creeds even though a rational interpretation of the Council in harmony with the Creeds is possible.They do not proclaim this rational interpretation of Vatican Council II.

The overall result is new doctrines with the Catechisms contradicting each other.

The present two popes interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism.The result is heresy.
I interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism the result is a return to the past exclusive ecclesiology and  an ecumenism of return.It is a return to the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX. 

I can make a traditional Profession of Faith and recite and Oath Against Modernism.The popes cannot do so.Cushingism is modernism. The profession of faith is a Cushingite one. 
 The two popes now have to correct the error and re-interpret Vatican Council II rationally.They need to be Feeneyite on Vatican Council II. Otherwise the whole Church will continue to follow heresy.3

So there was the false premise ( outside the Church there is known salvation, invisible people are visible) and the false inference ( LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc are visible examples of salvation outside the Church and exceptions to EENS). The bottom line is that today we can interpret Vatican Council II with or without the false premise and inference and our conclusion will be different.

When we accept Vatican Council II with the false premise and inference I call it Cushingism.

When we accept Vatican Council II without the false premise and inference I call it Feeneyism. These terms are useful in a discussion.

Cushingism is irrational( physically invisible people are visible), non traditional ( outside the Church there is salvation) and heretical ( EENS is contradicted, the Nicene Creed is changed etc).

POPE BENEDICT IS A CUSHINGITE
In 2016 when Pope Benedict said that extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century, this was Cushingism.
He could have disappointed ecclesiastical Masonry and announced that EENS today is the same as it was for the Magisterium and missionaries in the 16th century and there was no development with Vatican Council II.
Similarly Pope Francis can prove that he is not in heresy and  announce that EENS is the same today as it was over the centuries.He does not know of any practical exceptions in 2019.
But he will not do so since he wants to create heresy and a rupture with Tradition.This is important for the Left and Satan.
EENS and the Nicene Creed are de fide teachings and so we have the present two popes in mortal sins of faith.

Just as the divorced and remarried and those living in concubinage are in mortal sins of morals, there are also mortal sins of faith.Pope, cardinals, bishops and priests in mortal sins of faith should not offer Holy Mass.They first need to end the scandal in public and receive absolution in the Sacrament of Reconciliation with God. Otherwise the Mass is a sacrilege.
Similarly lay Catholics who cannot affirm Church teachings, which are obligatory for all in the one true faith,are in mortal sins of faith and are outside the Church.They have lost Sanctifying Grace which is necessary for salvation.
 When a pope does not affirm the faith, and is in mortal sin, he has lost Sanctifying Grace.
Even in the times of the Early Church, the Early Christians, those who committed a grave  sine were put out of the community. Only after penance , sometimes over a long time, were they allowed to re-enter.

Today we have the two popes in public mortal sins of faith.They have lost Sanctifying Grace and are outside the Church.

 They are automatically excommunicated.They need to rectify the scandal and make amends.
They need to proclaim the faith in spirit and truth.

It is important to note that when the popes and saints over the centuries referred to BOD, BOB and I.I they meant hypothetical and theoretical cases,only. This is a given. They cannot be anything else.This is something obvious.

But the liberal theologians in the 1940's and then at Vatican Council II made a false inference. They assumed BOD, BOB and I.I were literally known and  so were practical exceptions to traditional EENS. They needed to get rid of the dogma EENS for whatever reason and the only way they could do it was by assuming there was known salvation outside the Church. Possibilities were considered known non Catholics saved outside the Church.

This was a ruse.Since obviously there were no such cases when even Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was the Prefect of the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF).

He allowed LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc , ALL HYPOTHETICAL, to be interpreted as being exceptions to traditional EENS. So it was implied that these were personally known people to be exceptions to EENS. Invisible people cannot be exceptions to the dogmatic teaching on all needing to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation.

So this was heresy. It was a heretical interpretation of Vatican Council II.

He could have interpretd LG 8 etc as not being exceptions to EENS and so there would be no basis for the new ecumenism, the new evangelisation and a new understanding of what is Church( ecclesiology).

But Cardinal Ratzinger maintained the heresy and the false narrative on Vatican Council II and was supported by others at the CDF.4

I.

Now the signatories of the Open Letter have the text of Vatican Council II before them. The Council can be interpreted in harmony with EENS and the past ecclesiology or as a rupture. It depends upon how we interpret hypothetical cases.If LG 8, LG 16 etc refer to known or unknown people in the present times, decides the conclusion.

For the two popes LG 8 etc refer to personally known people and so there is a rupture with Tradition( EENS, Syllabus of Errors).

This is heresy and it is not denied by the two popes.

The heresy is there in two theological papers of the International Theological Society and it can be read in black and white.(See the right hand bar for details).So we have the evidence. We have the proof.

II.

With personally visible cases of BOD, BOB and I.I  the present two popes interpret the Nicene Creed to mean,'I believe in three or more known baptisms, desire, blood and invincible ignorance... and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church'. This is first class heresy.We cannot change the understanding of the Nicene Creed.The whole Church now has to repeat the new interpretation of the Nicene Creed.

III

So we have a false new theology created at Vatican Council II with alleged physically visible cases of BOD, BOB and I.I.Then this irrationality is applied to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). So there is no more the strict interpretation of EENS but EENS with BOD, BOB and I.I being exceptions. Now even GS 22, UR 2, NA 2 etc are interpreted as literal exceptions.

Pope Benedict confirmed that EENS was no more the same as it was for the missionaries in the 16th century(Avvenire, March 2016). He said there was ' a development' with Vatican Council II. Of course he means Vatican Council II with LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc being exceptions to EENS.

So the  faith - teachings have been changed on EENS and  the Nicene Creed by  assuming invisible cases of BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 8 etc are not invisible but are objective exceptions to EENS.

This has also given a new meaning to the Apostles Creed and the Profession of Faith (See the right hand bar for details). The Catechism of Pope Pius X would conradict itself. It says all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation and also mentions invincible( which is visible for the popes and the CDF).This is modernism.

This is not denied by the two popes.

For example when Pope Benedict said that EENS was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century he could have said, "EENS TODAY IS THE SAME AS IN THE 16TH CENTURY SINCE THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS TO EENS IN VATICAN COUNCIL II".

But there had to be exceptions to EENS for him.So he misinterpreted Vatican Council II.He also wanted the Society of St. Pius X to accept this false interpretation of the Council. He had Archbishop Lefebvre excommunicated. The Archbishop was correct Vatican Council II when interpreted with the irrationality had to be a rupture with Tradition.

Similarly if Pope Francis wants to, he can say that EENS today is the same as it was for the Magisterium in the 16th century.There is no conflict with Vatican Council II. But he needs to create heresy. He needs to create the 'hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition'.

These points on faith and salvation were not covered by the Open Letter to the Bishops. They can still be studied and announced.

The signatories of the Open Letter to the Bishops were correct to infer from the popes actions his intentions and so accuse him of heresy and sin. Veritatis Splendor of Pope John Paul II tells us that a mortal sin is always a mortal sin and the outward action indicates the subjective intent.5

But the Open Letter gave a wide berth to the pope on Vatican Council II. It did not criticize Vatican Council II which is interpreted with a false premise, by Pope Francis. It did not tell him that he could interpret Vatican Council II without the irrationality and there would be no rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)  and an ecumenism of return.

The Letter mentions the Abu Dhai Statement but the pope defends himself by citing Vatican Council II.It is  interpreted with hypothetical cases being objective examples of salvation outside the Church.So they emerge exceptions to EENS.It is a rupture with EENS as it was interpreted by the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century.The result is ecclesiology is changed and there is a new ecumenism with other new doctrines.

To reject the dogma EENS with there being allegedly physically visible cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I), is heresy.EENS has been defined by three Church Councils and Pope Pius XII called it an 'infallible teaching'.The dogma EENS is rejected and the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation is made obsolete. This is heresy in public. It is formal heresy.

The Nicene Creed, when it states, that we believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins, is changed to a belief in three or more known baptisms, desire, blood and invincible ignorance, which exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. So this is a new version of the Nicene Creed. It is heresy.

Note: the popes and saints over the centuries mentioned BOD, BOB and I.I but did not state that they referred to personally known people saved outside the Church. So a wrong inference is made by the pope.It is a heretical inference.

 With the interpretation of EENS and the Nicence Creed changed we have heresy.

It also means Vatican Council II is being heretically interpreted when a rational alternative is available. So a rupture with Tradition ( Catechisms and Creeds) is intentionally being created by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the present two popes.

Here are seven points .They are in response to Jimmy Akins article saying that the signatories of the Open Letter have not mentioned any specific theology and so the pope cannot be accused of formal heresy.

1.So there is a denial of traditional EENS by Pope Francis which is confirmed in public by Pope Benedict.Pope Pius XII called EENS an 'infallible teaching'(Letter of the Holy Office 1949). So this is heresy.

2.Since both popes interpret BOD, BOB and I.I as referring to known people saved outside the Church, they have  rejected the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation. This is heresy.

3.With seen- in- the- flesh cases of BOD, BOB and I.I(otherwise they cannot be exceptions to EENS) for the present two popes they have changed the meaning of the Nicene Creed to ,'I believe in three or more known baptisms, desire, blood and invincible ignorance... and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church'. This is first class heresy.

4.Since BOD, BOB and I.I refer to known people saved outside the Church( otherwise they could not be exceptions to EENS according to the 16th century) the Catechism of Pope Pius X is contradicted when it says that all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation.

The Catechisms would also contradict themselves with the use of the pontiff's irrationality.They would be contradicting EENS and the Creeds according to the 16th century. This is heresy.

5.Vatican Council II can be interpreted with hypothetical cases just being hypothetical and not objectively known people saved outside the Church. Then Vatican Council II would not be a rupture with EENS according to the Magisterium of the 16th century.But this is not the interpretation of the two pontiffs. This is heresy. They intentionally interpret Vatican Council II  with a hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition( past ecclesiology, ecumenism of return, Syllabus of Errors, Creeds and Catechism).

6.Dominus Iesus and Redemptoris Missio was written assuming that BOD, BOB and I.I referred to known people saved outside the Church.So there was salvationoutside the Church. This is irrational but this is the basis of the New Theology.Possibilities and theoretical cases are assumed to be practical exceptions to EENS in the present times(2019). With the New Theology Dominus  Iesus and Redemptoris Missio do not affirm exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church and so they are a rupture with Tradition( 16th century EENS, past ecclesiology).A heretical theology creates new doctrines.They are heretical.They are  expressed in the new ecumenism( in which Protestants do not need to convert), a new ecclesiology( in which there is salvation outside the church), new mission( in which non Catholics are saved in their religion since there is known salvation outside the Church,possibilities are real people) etc.This is heretical doctrine. 

7. With visible- for- the- pontiff cases of BOD, BOB and I.I and so they have re-interpreted St. Thomas Aquinas who was a Feeneyite. Aquinas affirmed the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS and knew that hypothetical cases of being saved in invincible ignorance and the case of the unknown catechumen, were not objective exceptions to EENS.The pontiffs and the CDF also project St. Augustine. St. Francis of Assisi  and the  other saints who affirmed exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church, as denying it.They deny it with alleged practical exceptions of BOD, BOB and I.I.The saints are interpreted heretically.

So we have heresy in theology and doctrine and it is manifest. 

I would invite the signatories of the Open Letter to the Bishops  to comment on what I have in 'We have heresy in theology and doctrine and it is manifest'. 

 Or  re-present  it, express it as they understand it. Let us read it on their blogs and view it on their media.Faggioli and Akins demands have been met.We now know the exact theology which creates heresy.We have found the missing link.

It is possible, over time that Pope Francis and Pope Benedict will correct the mistake. They will affirm Vatican Council II without the mistakes and then end the theological confusion in the Catholic Church.6

Pope Francis is the pope for me and even if he and another pope would teach heresy, the teachings of the Catholic Church would not change for me. Even when the present two popes are forced to follow the Left,  and so Satan, the fundamental teachings of the Church on faith and morals do not change for me.

Fr.Joseph Ratzinger tried to change doctrine on faith (salvation) at Vatican Council II(1965) but we see after some 50 years that the doctrine has corrected itself, like an unsteady, sinking ship has buoyed  and balanced itself and is steady on the water once again.

He would know now that he could not say that unknown cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are personally known exceptions to traditionalextra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).He could not simply get rid of the dogma EENS which points to an existing reality at another level, the supernatural level.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(1949) made an error on a faith-issue.The Boston Heresy now refers to the cardinals and not Fr. Leonard Feeney.

We Catholics can now interpret Vatican Council II with invisible cases of LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc not being known and real exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. This is the theology of the Catholic Church today, without the mistake.Nothing in Vatican Council II contradicts EENS according to the missionaries and Magisterium in the 16th century.

This is the theology the popes have to choose to avoid the new ecumenism, new ecclesiology, new inter faith marriage doctrines etc.The errors in doctrine were only possible with the new theology, which creates heresy and which Akins and Faggiolli still defend.

Pope Benedict confirmed that EENS today( 2016) was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. He said that there was a rupture with Vatican Council II. (Avvenire).He interpreted Vatican Council II interpreting  LG 14, LG 16 etc as  referring  to known people saved outside the Church.So they become exceptions to EENS as it was interpreted over the centuries and in the 16th century.He was admitting that the Magisterium was wrong either in the past or the present.So at one time, the ecclesiastics were not magisterial. Since the Holy Spirit cannot make an objective mistake.

Invisible cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) are not physically visible. This is a fact of life. It is objective. One does not need an academic degree to observe this. For the two popes and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF),invisible cases of  BOD, BOB and I.I are objective examples of salvation outside the Church. This is irrational. It is non Catholic and it is deception.Upon this false reasoning a new theology is created and magisterial documents are interpreted with it, to create a rupture with Sacred Tradition.
The same irrationality is used in the interpretation of Vatican Council II. Even a school boy would know there is something wrong with this logic.
This is expressed in love for Jesus and the Church and not to condemn any one. It is hoped that the Church will right itself theologically and so it is mentioned here.
It is painful to have to point out the mistakes of a religious more so of a pope. The aim is to correct the mistake.The aim is not to judge any one.
I respect Pope Francis as the pope even though he is repeating the same error of the previous popes.

The two popes have rejected the dogma EENS ( with an irrational interpretation of BOD, BOB and I.I).This has been confirmed by Pope Benedict (Avvenire, March 2016).EENS was defined three times in a Solemn Magisterium by three different popes and Church Councils over Church history.
They interpret LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II as referring to known people saved outside the Church. They can choose to interpret them as referring to only hypothetical cases.Then  Vatican Council II would not be a rupture with Tradition. So this interpretation of Vatican Council II is false and politically motivated. Vatican Council II comes in the category of the Ordinary Magisterium.It has to be obeyed and not re-interpreted as a break with Tradition when it is really in harmony with the strict interpretation of EENS.
The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla saluswas a dogma of the Church. For centuries it was accepted as a dogma. However Pope Benedict rejected it as a dogma with alleged personally known cases of BOD, BOB and I.I. So in the Catechism of the Catholic Church  he called EENS an 'aphorism'. This was heretical.
In two papers of the International Theological Commission, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and Fr. Luiz Ladaria Sj, rejected the dogma EENS.They have also proposed ' a theology of religions' and a Christian theology of religious pluralism.Since for them there was known salvation outside the Church.This is heretical.
Pope Francis does not affirm EENS.He calls it triumphalism.He does not affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite i.e hypothetical cases are just hypothetical) which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.Vatican Council II does not does not mention any exceptions to EENS( hypothetical cases of LG 16 etc are not exceptions).
This is a rejection of the teaching of the Catholic Church in the Extraordinary and Ordinary Magisterium.There have been no denial from the two pontiffs and the CDF over the years.
He interprets BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc irrationally to create a rupture with EENS and change the meaning of the Creeds and Catechisms.

Summing Up( according to Jimmy Akins)

The Open Letter has many other flaws, but its chief one is that it fails to make the case that the present pope is guilty of heresy. To do that, it would need to show the following:

1. The Magisterium has infallibly defined some specific truth ( The Creeds and EENS.)
2. It has infallibly defined that this specific truth is divinely revealed, creating a dogma (EENS and the Creeds)
3. The pope has been baptized (that’s easy)
4. The pope’s words or actions indicate that he refuses to believe the dogma (EENS was refuted at the Abu Dhabi meeting. It has been refuted many times with a Christian theology of religious pluralism. EENS is never affirmed in public )
5. His words or actions cannot be understood in a way consistent with the dogma (This is documented in the The Open Letter with reference to EENS and Vatican Council II(Ad Gentes 7 )
6. He does so obstinately (This is documented here. The heresy is repeated.EENS, the Creed and Vatican Council II are re-interpreted as a rupture with Tradition. 

 So I have mentioned the specific dogma. I have shown how there is a rupture with the dogma as it was known to the popes in the 16th century. I have cited Pope Benedict confirming this in an interview with Avvenire (2016).I have shown how the irrationality used to change the meaning of EENS also changes the interpretation of the Nicene Creed. The Athanasius Creed is made obsolete.The  Apostles Creed now means ' I believe in the Holy Spirit which teaches the Church that there is known salvation outside the Church and so all do not need to be members.' So there are known exceptions also to the Great Commission of Jesus.I have shown how there can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II and the one used by the present two  popes is irrational and heretical.
The Jesuit Fr.Leonard Feeney is supported by Vatican Council II( Feeneyite)  on EENS. Pope Francis can confirm this. He can also clarify that Vatican Council II( Cushingite) has a mistake.8

Vatican Council II(Cushingite) creates a rupture with the Nicene Creed. This should be sufficient reason for Pope Francis to change ship and desert the old crew.9

Cardinal Raymond Burke at the Voice of the Family Conference on May 18,2018 affirmed the Social Reign of Christ the King over all areas of life.For me,theologically its foundation would be the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church. 10

For centuries the Catholic Church has taught that it alone has the superiority and exclusiviseness in salvation.So it is based on this truth, and not upon arms and a military, that Cardinal Burke would be affirming 'the great reality of the Kingship of Christ'.
So the liberal theologians can no more reject the traditional teaching on the Kingship of Christ by citing exceptions to traditional EENS in Vatican Council II.There are no known exceptions.This is a practical reality. There are no known examples of salvation outside the Church.This is something objective and obvious.
So when there are no known exceptions to the traditional teaching on the Catholic Church having the superiority and exclusiveness in salvation, the Magisterium can once again affirm the Kingship of Christ. Cardinal Burke has proclaimed the Social Kingship of Christ the King over all areas of life, political, social, cultural, religious....

The Kingship of Christ by nature is universal and extends to all men and it is not limited to only the Church said Cardinal Raymond Burke. He said Christ has authority in civil affairs and his empire includes not only baptized persons but also those who are outside the Christian faith. All men are subject to Christ and so there is no difference in this manner. The salvation of the individual and society is in Christ only.

So mission is important.
Since most people are on the way to Hell since they die outside the Church.When the government affirms the Kingship of Christ the priority for most people would be to go to Heaven and avoid Hell, since society and government would be promoting this end.This is possible when the Government is Catholic and would support the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation.

The present two popes have not affirmed the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation.11. Instead they  support the secular state with its pro-Satan laws.

What if Pope Francis admits that the ecclesiastics at the Vatican made a mistake ? They overlooked something which was important and there before their very eyes.They did not notice it.12

What if he admits that the error could have been avoided  and now the mistake will be corrected.The deception cannot be encouraged. As Catholics we have a duty to speak the truth before God.

What if Pope Benedict agrees with Pope Francis.It was an oversight on his part and the correction should have been made in 1965, or earlier.

If they do not affirm Vatican Council II( Feeneyite) the alternative will be to promote public heresy and mortal sin. 

With Vatican Council II ( Cushingite), Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance) and Lumen Gentium 14 ( case of the unknown catechumen), refers to personally known people saved outside the Catholic Church.So the Nicene Creed is changed to ' I believe in three or more personally known, baptisms for the forgiveness of sins, they are the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) and they all exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church'.They are personally known baptisms and so they are considered exceptions to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).

So what if Pope Francis says that this is clearly wrong and is not Catholic theology?

Will he ask the Church to switch to Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) ?
Then will the cardinals support him and say LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc in Vatican Council II, being hypothetical only, are not examples of salvation outside the Church in 1965 -2019.So they are not exceptions to the Athansius Creed  which says outside the Church there is no salvation?
What if the pope says that this is rational even though it is traditional, it is being realistic  and honest even though it is triumphalistic.
Could Pope Francis admit that he was wrong all these years on Vatican Council II and that the Council is something different, from how he was taught to interpret it as a Jesuit ?

Fr.Leonard Feeney's interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) is supported by Vatican Council II, Feeneyite, a frightful spectre for the liberals.This is something that has come from out of the blues. No one planned it or even conceived it.The Council is Feeneyite.13

But the signatories do not yet know about this. May be in the text petition they will focus on this issue. Then the liberals
cannot cite Vatican Council II(Cushingite) to justify heresy, schism and sacrilege.
So we can re-interpret Vatican Council II. Here comes the uncomfortable part for Winters and the others at NCR.

I repeat , Vatican Council II can be interpreted with Feeneyism( BOD etc are only hypothetical and not literal cases).

So the Council with Feeneyism supports the 'most extreme theological position held before Vatican II ' The Council is Feeneyite.😊

This is unfortunately the point missed by the signatories of the Open Letter. For then they would be neo-Feeneyites since the Council is Feeneyite.They don't have to cite the dogma EENS and the old catechisms. It is all there in Vatican Council II (Feeneyite). 14

The present two popes and the Prefect of the CDF need to recant and announce:-
1.Invisible cases of BOD, BOB and I.I  and LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II are not physically visible and personally known exceptions  to EENS.So EENS today is not a rupture with EENS according to the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century.

2.Vatican Council II  and the Catechism of the Catholic Church do not contradict the strict interpretation of EENS, the past exclusive ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.

3.
They can confirm that they personally do not know of non Catholics saved outside the Church in 2019 and neither do people in general know of such cases. If any one was saved as such it would only be known to God.
-Lionel Andrades



1
 http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2016/03/pope-benedict-breaks-silence-and.html


2.
MAY 7, 2019
Evidence of mortal sins of faith

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/05/evidence-of-mortal-sins-of-faith.html


3.
MAY 7, 2019
The present two popes interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism.The result is heresy    https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-present-two-popes-interpret-vatican.html

4.

 MAY 6, 2019

These points on faith and salvation were not covered by the Open Letter to the Bishops. They can still be studied and announced  https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/05/these-points-on-faith-and-salvation.html

5.

 MAY 6, 2019

The two popes have made a theological mistake.The evidence is now out

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-two-popes-have-made-theological.html

6

MAY 6, 2019

Jimmy Akins and Massimo Faggioli now need to defend themselves or admit they were wrong and I am correct. They cannot continue to say that there was no theology mentioned, which shows that Pope Francis is in heresy

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/05/jimmy-akins-and-massimo-faggioli-now.html

7.

MAY 5, 2019

We have heresy in theology and doctrine and it is manifest

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/05/we-have-heresy-in-theology-and-doctrine.html


8.

MAY 5, 2019

The Jesuit Fr.Leonard Feeney is supported by Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) on EENS. Pope Francis can confirm this.He can also clarify that Vatican Council II (Cushingite) has a mistake

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-jesuit-frleonard-feeney-is.html


9

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/05/vatican-council-iicushingite-creates.html

10.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/05/repost-in-secular-state-which-allows.html

11.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/05/new-brazilian-representative-invokes.html

12.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/05/what-if-pope-francis-accepts-vatican.html


13.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/05/frleonard-feeneys-interpretation-of.html


14.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/05/michael-sean-winters-is-probably-aware.html

___________________________________

Links from the right hand bar. Click to access.

• Magisterial Apostasy (3)
• Magisterial Documents (1)
• Magisterial documents can be reinterpreted (1)
• Magisterial Heresy (22)
• Magisterial Heresy -2 (Updated June 18 (2)
• Magisterial Heresy -3 (Updated June18 (14)
• Magisterial heresy on the feast of the Baptism of Our Lord (1)
• Magisterial Heresy- 1 (19)
• Magisterial heresy.Fr Thomas Weinandy (2)
• Magisterial Mistake (3)
• Magisterial Schism (8)
• Magisterium (37)
• Magisterium promotes heresy for political reasons (11)
• Magisterium and traditionalists violate the Principle of Non Contradiction in general (1)
• Magisterium in rebellion (5)
• Magisterium mistake (15)
• Magisterium of Church documents (2)
• Magisterium of persons (5)
• Magisterium of the Church (4)
• MAGISTERIUM PROMOTES HERESY FOR POLITICAL REASONS (4)
• Magisterium violates the Principle of Non Contradiction and does not issue a correction : Catholics go along with it (2)

JANUARY 30, 2019

CDF delegation meet Asian Bishops in Thailand : new doctrines on salvation presented   https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/01/asian-bishops-meet-cdf-delegation-in.html

In The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptized they used Marchetti theology, an irrational theology
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/05/in-hope-of-salvation-for-infants-who.html

Former Secretary of the International Theological Commission holds that those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance are known to us and so an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2012/02/secretary-of-international-theological.html

NO NEED FOR ‘SECRET TALKS’ ANYMORE: WE KNOW THE HERETICAL POSITION OF THE VATICAN NEGOTIATORS

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/no-need-for-secret-talks-anymore-we.html#links

BISHOP CHARLES MOREROD O.P IN BLATANT HERESY IS TO SPEAK BEFORE THE POPE ON ANGLICAN RELATIONS

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/09/bishop-charles-morerod-op-in-blatant.html#links

VATICAN'S INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MAKES AN ERROR IN ITS POSITION PAPER CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/03/vaticans-international-theological.html#links

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION USES PREMISE THAT IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT : LIMBO

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/03/international-theological-commission_29.html

The International Theological Commission's position paper Christianity and the World Religions 1997 has an objective factual error and is approved by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger : invincible ignorance is not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/03/international-theological-commissions.html

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION ASSUMES ‘SEEDS OF THE WORD’ (VATICAN COUNCIL II ) IN OTHER RELIGIONS ARE KNOWN TO US AND THIS IS AN EXPLICIT EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/03/international-theological-commission.html

VATICAN'S INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MAKES AN ERROR IN ITS POSITION PAPER CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/03/vaticans-international-theological.html

Bishop Fellay, Fr.Schmidberger,FSSP,Joseph Fenton seem unaware the baptism of desire is not an explicit exception to the dogma

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/03/bishop-fellay-frschmidbergerfsspjoseph.html

NO NEED FOR ‘SECRET TALKS’ ANYMORE: WE KNOW THE HERETICAL POSITION OF THE VATICAN NEGOTIATORS

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/no-need-for-secret-talks-anymore-we.html#links


______________________________