WE ARE CATHOLICS AND
NOT POLITICIANS
Wikipedia’s interpretation of Vatican Council II,
EENS, Fr.Leonard Feeney etc is political.The false premise is used to interpret
all Magisterial documents.Not a single Catholic or Catholic organisation has
issued a correction.
Similarly Nicole Winfield in her report on Traditionis Custode for the Associated Press,interpreted Vatican Council II with the false premise to create a fake rupture with extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).No one has issued an official or unofficial clarification or correction.
Eric Sammons in his report of May 25,2021 for Crisis magazine,used the Wikipedia citation on Fr. Leonard Feeney.In general, the new Editor in Chief interprets Vatican Council II, the Creeds, Catechisms and EENS with the irrational premise which would put him in conflict with 16th century EENS , the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors and traditional ecclesiocenterism.To reject the Athanasius Creed is serious stuff.
Even centre right political parties have not corrected this leftist doctrine on the Internet.We are Catholics and not politicians.-Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades
Promoter of the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not only pastoral.
Catholic lay man in Rome,
Writer on the discovery of the two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is interpreted with the false premise and the other without it. One is Magisterial and the other, the common one, is non Magisterial.
It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms.There can be two interpretations.
Why should Catholics choose an irrational version which is heretical, non traditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional ?
Blog: Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission )
E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com
___________________
AUGUST 4, 2021
Poland and Hungary need to adopt the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council IIhttps://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/poland-and-hungary-need-to-adopt-lionel.html
JUNE 24, 2021
The Latin laity at Dijon, France can get back the old ecclesioloy of the TLM : They simply have to interpret Vatican Council II etc.,without the false premise. They are back to Tradition !https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/06/the-latin-laity-at-dijon-france-can-get.html
The Latin laity at Dijon, France can get back the old ecclesioloy of the TLM : They simply have to interpret Vatican Council II etc.,without the false premise. They are back to Tradition !
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/06/the-latin-laity-at-dijon-france-can-get.html
Vatican Council II is dogmatic
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE LIONEL ANDRADES INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
1.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?
It does not use the common fake premise.It's a simple, rational and different way to read Vatican Council II.
2.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)?It does not use the common false premise to interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), invincible ignorance(I.I) and the baptism of blood(BOB).So there are no practical exceptions for EENS.EENS is traditonal and BOD, BOB and I.I are interpreted rationally.It's not EENS or BOB,BOB and I.I. Since the latter are not exceptions for the former.
3.Is the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Magisterial documents copy writed or trademarked? No. Any one can use it. There is no charge.It is simply going back to the traditiional interpretation of Church documents, without the false premise. The false premise came into the Church in a big way, with the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney(1949).
4.How did the Lionel Andrades interpretation of VC 2 emerge?He kept writing on his blog on EENS and then discovered that Vatican Council II does not really contradict EENS if the false premise is avoided.
5.Is the LA interpretation of VC2 a new theology?No. It is going back to the old, traditional theology of the Catholic Church by avoiding the false premise.It is the false premise which has created the New Theology.Without the false premise there cannot be the New Ecumenism, New Evangelisation, New Ecclesiology etc.The New Theology is Cristocentric without the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church.Since exceptions were created to EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors etc, by projecting a false premise.The error was overlooked by the popes.
6.What about traditional, 16th century Mission doctrine?With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II we return to traditional Mission doctrine. It is no more 'only they need to enter the Church who know about it', who are not in invincible ignorance(LG 14) Instead, it is all need to enter the Catholic Church with no known exception.Invincible ignorance is not an exception to all needing to enter the Church with faith and the baptism(LG 14).So we evangelize since all non Catholics are oriented to Hell without faith and the baptism of water( Ad Gentes 7/Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II. The norm for salvation is faith and baptism and not invincible ignorance.When I meet a non Catholic, I cannot assume or pretend to know, that he or she is an exception to the norm. If there is an exception it could be known only to God.I know that the non Catholic before me, is oriented to Hell( Athanasius Creed, Vatican Council II(AG 7, LG 14),Catechism of the Catholic Church(845,846,1257),Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, etc).
7.What about the hermeneutic of continuity or rupture with Tradition ?With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II there is no rupture with past Magisterium documents and neither do they contradict each other.We have to re-interpret past Magisterial documents though, which mention the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance(I.I), as being hypothetical and invisible always.Being saved with BOD and I.I are always physically invisible, when they are mentioned in the Catechisms( Trent, Pius X etc) and encyclicals and documents of the popes(Mystici Corporis etc).They always refer to hypothetical cases only and are not objectively known non Catholics.If someone is saved outside the Church he or she could only be known to God.This has to be clear when reading also the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.There is also no confusion when reading the text of Vatican Council II.LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3,NA 2,GS 22 etc, refer always to only hypothetical cases and so they do not contradict the Athanasius Creed.
8.Should the popes use the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?YES! Since presently the two popes are schismatic, heretical, non Magisterial and non traditional on Vatican Council II.It has to be this way since they use the false premise.It is only with the false premise, inference and conclusion that they interpret Magisterial documents. This can be avoided with a rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion.The result is a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.
9.What other advantage is there in knowing the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?We read the text of Vatican Council II in general differently with the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.’The red is not an exception to the blue’.The hypothetical passages( marked in red on the blog Eucharist and Mission, are not practical exceptions to the orthodox passages in Vatican Council II which support EENS, and are marked in blue.For the present two popes and the traditionalists the red is an exception to the blue. This is irrational.
10.What bearing does it have on the liturgy ?Without the false premise the Council is traditional. Vatican Council II is in harmony with extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the missionaries in the 16th century.So we are back to the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. When the Council is traditional there is no 'development of doctrine' or 'sprit of Vatican Council II'. Collegiality, Religious Freedom and ecumenism are no more an issue. So receiving Holy Communion on the hand can no more be justified with Vatican Council II.Neither can the Eucharist be given to the divorced and re-married, in the name of the Council.Neither can the German Synod be justified by citing Vatican Council II.There is no theological basis in the Council, any more, for given the Eucharist to Protestants during Holy Mass.
11.What is the essence of this interpretation?It is the listing of the rational and irrational premise, inference and conclusion. It identifies two different premises with two different conclusions. So the rational premise produces a traditional conclusion and the Vatican Council II is in harmony with Tradition. It has a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition even though Rahner, Congar, Rarzinger and Cushing were present at the Council in 1965.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE LIONEL ANDRADES INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
1.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?
It does not use the common fake premise.It's a simple, rational and different way to read Vatican Council II.
2.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)?
It does not use the common false premise to interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), invincible ignorance(I.I) and the baptism of blood(BOB).So there are no practical exceptions for EENS.EENS is traditonal and BOD, BOB and I.I are interpreted rationally.It's not EENS or BOB,BOB and I.I. Since the latter are not exceptions for the former.
3.Is the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Magisterial documents copy writed or trademarked?
No. Any one can use it. There is no charge.It is simply going back to the traditiional interpretation of Church documents, without the false premise. The false premise came into the Church in a big way, with the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney(1949).
4.How did the Lionel Andrades interpretation of VC 2 emerge?
He kept writing on his blog on EENS and then discovered that Vatican Council II does not really contradict EENS if the false premise is avoided.
5.Is the LA interpretation of VC2 a new theology?
No. It is going back to the old, traditional theology of the Catholic Church by avoiding the false premise.It is the false premise which has created the New Theology.Without the false premise there cannot be the New Ecumenism, New Evangelisation, New Ecclesiology etc.The New Theology is Cristocentric without the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church.Since exceptions were created to EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors etc, by projecting a false premise.The error was overlooked by the popes.
6.What about traditional, 16th century Mission doctrine?
With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II we return to traditional Mission doctrine. It is no more 'only they need to enter the Church who know about it', who are not in invincible ignorance(LG 14) Instead, it is all need to enter the Catholic Church with no known exception.Invincible ignorance is not an exception to all needing to enter the Church with faith and the baptism(LG 14).So we evangelize since all non Catholics are oriented to Hell without faith and the baptism of water( Ad Gentes 7/Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II. The norm for salvation is faith and baptism and not invincible ignorance.When I meet a non Catholic, I cannot assume or pretend to know, that he or she is an exception to the norm. If there is an exception it could be known only to God.I know that the non Catholic before me, is oriented to Hell( Athanasius Creed, Vatican Council II(AG 7, LG 14),Catechism of the Catholic Church(845,846,1257),Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, etc).
7.What about the hermeneutic of continuity or rupture with Tradition ?
With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II there is no rupture with past Magisterium documents and neither do they contradict each other.We have to re-interpret past Magisterial documents though, which mention the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance(I.I), as being hypothetical and invisible always.Being saved with BOD and I.I are always physically invisible, when they are mentioned in the Catechisms( Trent, Pius X etc) and encyclicals and documents of the popes(Mystici Corporis etc).They always refer to hypothetical cases only and are not objectively known non Catholics.If someone is saved outside the Church he or she could only be known to God.This has to be clear when reading also the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.There is also no confusion when reading the text of Vatican Council II.LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3,NA 2,GS 22 etc, refer always to only hypothetical cases and so they do not contradict the Athanasius Creed.
8.Should the popes use the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?
YES! Since presently the two popes are schismatic, heretical, non Magisterial and non traditional on Vatican Council II.It has to be this way since they use the false premise.It is only with the false premise, inference and conclusion that they interpret Magisterial documents. This can be avoided with a rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion.The result is a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.
9.What other advantage is there in knowing the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?
We read the text of Vatican Council II in general differently with the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.
’The red is not an exception to the blue’.The hypothetical passages( marked in red on the blog Eucharist and Mission, are not practical exceptions to the orthodox passages in Vatican Council II which support EENS, and are marked in blue.
For the present two popes and the traditionalists the red is an exception to the blue. This is irrational.
10.What bearing does it have on the liturgy ?
Without the false premise the Council is traditional. Vatican Council II is in harmony with extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the missionaries in the 16th century.So we are back to the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. When the Council is traditional there is no 'development of doctrine' or 'sprit of Vatican Council II'. Collegiality, Religious Freedom and ecumenism are no more an issue. So receiving Holy Communion on the hand can no more be justified with Vatican Council II.Neither can the Eucharist be given to the divorced and re-married, in the name of the Council.
Neither can the German Synod be justified by citing Vatican Council II.There is no theological basis in the Council, any more, for given the Eucharist to Protestants during Holy Mass.
11.What is the essence of this interpretation?
It is the listing of the rational and irrational premise, inference and conclusion. It identifies two different premises with two different conclusions. So the rational premise produces a traditional conclusion and the Vatican Council II is in harmony with Tradition. It has a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition even though Rahner, Congar, Rarzinger and Cushing were present at the Council in 1965.
Lumen Gentium 8,Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically visible cases in 1965-2021.
Fake inferenceThey are objective examples of salvation outside the Church.
Fake conclusionVatican Council II contradicts the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).The Athanasius Creed(outside the Church there is no salvation) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( ecumenism of return) were made obsolete.
Here is my interpretation of Vatican Council II in blue.
Rational PremiseLG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.They are only hypothetical and theoretical. They exist only in our mind and are not solid bodies at Newton's level of time, space and matter.
Rational InferenceThey are not objective examples of salvation outside the Church for us human beings.
Rational ConclusionVatican Council II does not contradict EENS as it was interpreted by the Jesuits in the Middle Ages.It does not contradict the strict interpretation of EENS of St. Thomas Aquinas( saved in invincible ignorance is invisible), St. Augustine and Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.The Letter of the Holy Office(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) 1949 made an objective mistake.-Lionel Andrades
Lumen Gentium 8,Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically visible cases in 1965-2021.
Fake inference
They are objective examples of salvation outside the Church.
Fake conclusion
Vatican Council II contradicts the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).The Athanasius Creed(outside the Church there is no salvation) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( ecumenism of return) were made obsolete.
Here is my interpretation of Vatican Council II in blue.
Rational Premise
LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.They are only hypothetical and theoretical. They exist only in our mind and are not solid bodies at Newton's level of time, space and matter.
Rational Inference
They are not objective examples of salvation outside the Church for us human beings.
Rational Conclusion
Vatican Council II does not contradict EENS as it was interpreted by the Jesuits in the Middle Ages.It does not contradict the strict interpretation of EENS of St. Thomas Aquinas( saved in invincible ignorance is invisible), St. Augustine and Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.
The Letter of the Holy Office(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) 1949 made an objective mistake.-Lionel Andrades
MONDAY, JUNE 28, 2021
Le Pen must see that the problem in Dijon is political and not only religious : Bishop Minnerath must be asked to interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise at Holy Mass
LE PEN MUST SEE THAT THE PROBLEM IN DIJON IS POLITICAL AND NOT ONLY RELIGIOUS: BISHOP MINNERATH MUST BE ASKED TO INTERPRET VATICAN COUNCIL II WITHOUT THE FALSE PREMISE AT HOLY MASS.
Le Pen must be shown that the Dijon problem is not only religious but also political. Bishop Minnerath wants to interpret Vatican Council II like the poltiical Left and so create a rupture between Church and State, faith and practical government.
Le Pen could ask Bishop Minnerath to interpret Vatican Council II and the Syllabus of Errors without the false premise and to interpret the First Commandment as did the Magisterium of the Church over the centuries in France.
The difference between Bishop Minnerath and me is that I consider baptism of desire (BOD), baptism of blood (BDS) and invincible ignorance (I.I) as not being exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. There are no literal cases in 2021. So the Second Vatican Council is not a break with Tradition for me. It has a continuity with the traditional exclusive salvation. Ad Gentes 7 says that everyone needs faith and baptism for salvation. Therefore according to the Council everyone needs to convert to the Catholic Church for salvation (AG 7) and not only those who "know" (LG 14). Those who "know" and who are saved,are known only to God. The norm for salvation is AG 7 and not LG 14. While LG 14(invincible ignorance) is not exception for AG 7. -Lionel Andrades
LE PEN MUST SEE THAT THE PROBLEM IN DIJON IS POLITICAL AND NOT ONLY RELIGIOUS: BISHOP MINNERATH MUST BE ASKED TO INTERPRET VATICAN COUNCIL II WITHOUT THE FALSE PREMISE AT HOLY MASS.
Le Pen must be shown that the Dijon problem is not only religious but also political. Bishop Minnerath wants to interpret Vatican Council II like the poltiical Left and so create a rupture between Church and State, faith and practical government.
Le Pen could ask Bishop Minnerath to interpret Vatican Council II and the Syllabus of Errors without the false premise and to interpret the First Commandment as did the Magisterium of the Church over the centuries in France.
The difference between Bishop Minnerath and me is that I consider baptism of desire (BOD), baptism of blood (BDS) and invincible ignorance (I.I) as not being exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. There are no literal cases in 2021. So the Second Vatican Council is not a break with Tradition for me. It has a continuity with the traditional exclusive salvation. Ad Gentes 7 says that everyone needs faith and baptism for salvation. Therefore according to the Council everyone needs to convert to the Catholic Church for salvation (AG 7) and not only those who "know" (LG 14). Those who "know" and who are saved,are known only to God. The norm for salvation is AG 7 and not LG 14. While LG 14(invincible ignorance) is not exception for AG 7. -Lionel Andrades
JUNE 27, 2021
Bishop Roland Minnerath made an error in two books which he wrote on Vatican Council II and the Syllabus of Errors https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/06/bishop-roland-minnerath-made-error-in.html
JUNE 26, 2021 The diocesan priests in Dijon, France who will replace the FSSP priests and offer Holy Mass in Latin must be asked by the laity to interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise, inference and conclusion and instead with the rational, premise and traditional conclusion The diocesan priests in Dijon, France who will replace the FSSP priests and offer Holy Mass in Latin must be asked by the laity to interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise, inference and conclusion and instead with the rational, premise and traditional conclusion. - Lionel Andrades
Bishop Roland Minnerath made an error in two books which he wrote on Vatican Council II and the Syllabus of Errors
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/06/bishop-roland-minnerath-made-error-in.html
JUNE 26, 2021 The diocesan priests in Dijon, France who will replace the FSSP priests and offer Holy Mass in Latin must be asked by the laity to interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise, inference and conclusion and instead with the rational, premise and traditional conclusion
The diocesan priests in Dijon, France who will replace the FSSP priests and offer Holy Mass in Latin must be asked by the laity to interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise, inference and conclusion and instead with the rational, premise and traditional conclusion. - Lionel Andrades
AUGUST 4, 2021
Priests are expected to affirm the Athanasius Creed in the parish. Vatican Council II according to Lionel Andrades is not a rupture with Tradition : Vatican Council II according to Traditionis Custode contradicts the Athanasius Creed ( all need Catholic faith for salvation )
MAY 28, 2021
Priests are expected to affirm the Athanasius Creed in the parish. Vatican Council II according to Lionel Andrades is not a rupture with Tradition
Priests are expected to affirm the Athanasius Creed in the parish. Vatican Council II according to Lionel Andrades is not a rupture with the Creeds.
Priests are allowed to not affirm the Athanasius Creed in public and offer Holy Mass ?The Catechesis in the parish is not Magisterial when the priests cannot affirm the Athanasius Creed in public.They also choose to reject the Athanasius Creed when they interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise.We now have the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II which does not employ the false premise. It interprets the Council with the rational premise, inference and conclusion. So there is no rupture with the Athanasius Creed, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX. There is a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.So the Parish Priest is expected to affirm the Athanasius Creed.He can no more say that it is contradicted with Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades
Priests are expected to affirm the Athanasius Creed in the parish. Vatican Council II according to Lionel Andrades is not a rupture with the Creeds.
Priests are allowed to not affirm the Athanasius Creed in public and offer Holy Mass ?
The Catechesis in the parish is not Magisterial when the priests cannot affirm the Athanasius Creed in public.They also choose to reject the Athanasius Creed when they interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise.
We now have the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II which does not employ the false premise. It interprets the Council with the rational premise, inference and conclusion. So there is no rupture with the Athanasius Creed, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX. There is a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.
So the Parish Priest is expected to affirm the Athanasius Creed.He can no more say that it is contradicted with Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades
MAY 27, 2021
Questions and Answers about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ( Updated )
Questions and Answers about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II (Updated)
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE LIONEL ANDRADES INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
1.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?
Ir does not use the common fake premise.It's a simple, rational and different way to read Vatican Council II.
2.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)?It does not use the common false premise to interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), invincible ignorance(I.I) and the baptism of blood(BOB).So there are no practical exceptions for EENS.EENS is traditonal and BOD, BOB and I.I are interpreted rationally.It's not EENS or BOB,BOB and I.I. Since the latter are not exceptions for the former.
3.Is the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Magisterial documents copy writed or trademarked? No. Any one can use it. There is no charge.It is simply going back to the traditiional interpretation of Church documents, without the false premise. The false premise came into the Church in a big way, with the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney(1949).
4.How did the Lionel Andrades interpretation of VC 2 emerge?He kept writing on his blog on EENS and then discovered that Vatican Council II does not really contradict EENS if the false premise is avoided.
5.Is the LA interpretation of VC2 a new theology?No. It is going back to the old, traditional theology of the Catholic Church by avoiding the false premise.It is the false premise which has created the New Theology.Without the false premise there cannot be the New Ecumenism, New Evangelisation, New Ecclesiology etc.The New Theology is Cristocentric without the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church.Since exceptions were created to EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors etc, by projecting a false premise.The error was overlooked by the popes.
6.What about traditional, 16th century Mission doctrine?With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II we return to traditional Mission doctrine. It is no more 'only they need to enter the Church who know about it', who are not in invincible ignorance(LG 14) Instead, it is all need to enter the Catholic Church with no known exception.Invincible ignorance is not an exception to all needing to enter the Church with faith and the baptism(LG 14).So we evangelize since all non Catholics are oriented to Hell without faith and the baptism of water( Ad Gentes 7/Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II. The norm for salvation is faith and baptism and not invincible ignorance.When I meet a non Catholic, I cannot assume or pretend to know, that he or she is an exception to the norm. If there is an exception it could be known only to God.I know that the non Catholic before me, is oriented to Hell( Athanasius Creed, Vatican Council II(AG 7, LG 14),Catechism of the Catholic Church(845,846,1257),Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, etc).
7.What about the hermeneutic of continuity or rupture with Tradition ?With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II there is no rupture with past Magisterium documents and neither do they contradict each other.We have to re-interpret past Magisterial documents though, which mention the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance(I.I), as being hypothetical and invisible always.Being saved with BOD and I.I are always physically invisible, when they are mentioned in the Catechisms( Trent, Pius X etc) and encyclicals and documents of the popes(Mystici Corporis etc).They always refer to hypothetical cases only and are not objectively known non Catholics.If someone is saved outside the Church he or she could only be known to God.This has to be clear when reading also the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.There is also no confusion when reading the text of Vatican Council II.LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3,NA 2,GS 22 etc, refer always to only hypothetical cases and so they do not contradict the Athanasius Creed.
8.Should the popes use the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?YES! Since presently the two popes are schismatic, heretical, non Magisterial and non traditional on Vatican Council II.It has to be this way since they use the false premise.It is only with the false premise, inference and conclusion that they interpret Magisterial documents. This can be avoided with a rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion.The result is a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.
9.What other advantage is there in knowing the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?We read the text of Vatican Council II in general differently with the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.’The red is not an exception to the blue’.The hypothetical passages( marked in red on the blog Eucharist and Mission, are not practical exceptions to the orthodox passages in Vatican Council II which support EENS, and are marked in blue.For the present two popes and the traditionalists the red is an exception to the blue. This is irrational.
10.What bearing does it have on the liturgy ?Without the false premise the Council is traditional. Vatican Council II is in harmony with extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the missionaries in the 16th century.So we are back to the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. When the Council is traditional there is no 'development of doctrine' or 'sprit of Vatican Council II'. Collegiality, Religious Freedom and ecumenism are no more an issue. So receiving Holy Communion on the hand can no more be justified with Vatican Council II.Neither can the Eucharist be given to the divorced and re-married, in the name of the Council.Neither can the German Synod be justified by citing Vatican Council II.There is no theological basis in the Council, any more, for given the Eucharist to Protestants during Holy Mass.-Lionel Andrades
Fake premiseLumen Gentium 8,Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically visible cases in 1965-2021.
Fake inferenceThey are objective examples of salvation outside the Church.
Fake conclusionVatican Council II contradicts the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).The Athanasius Creed(outside the Church there is no salvation) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( ecumenism of return) were made obsolete.
Here is my interpretation of Vatican Council II in blue.
Rational PremiseLG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.They are only hypothetical and theoretical. They exist only in our mind and are not solid bodies at Newton's level of time, space and matter.
Rational InferenceThey are not objective examples of salvation outside the Church for us human beings.
Rational ConclusionVatican Council II does not contradict EENS as it was interpreted by the Jesuits in the Middle Ages.It does not contradict the strict interpretation of EENS of St. Thomas Aquinas( saved in invincible ignorance is invisible), St. Augustine and Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.The Letter of the Holy Office(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) 1949 made an objective mistake.-Lionel Andrades
Lionel AndradesPromoter of the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.Catholic lay man in Rome,Writer on the discovery of the two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is interpreted with the false premise and the other without it. One is Magisterial and the other, the common one, is non Magisterial.It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms.There can be two interpretations.Why should Catholics choose an irrational version which is heretical, non traditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional ?Blog: Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission )E-mail: lionelandrades10@
__________________________________
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE LIONEL ANDRADES INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
1.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?
Ir does not use the common fake premise.It's a simple, rational and different way to read Vatican Council II.
2.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)?
It does not use the common false premise to interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), invincible ignorance(I.I) and the baptism of blood(BOB).So there are no practical exceptions for EENS.EENS is traditonal and BOD, BOB and I.I are interpreted rationally.It's not EENS or BOB,BOB and I.I. Since the latter are not exceptions for the former.
3.Is the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Magisterial documents copy writed or trademarked? No. Any one can use it. There is no charge.It is simply going back to the traditiional interpretation of Church documents, without the false premise. The false premise came into the Church in a big way, with the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney(1949).
4.How did the Lionel Andrades interpretation of VC 2 emerge?
He kept writing on his blog on EENS and then discovered that Vatican Council II does not really contradict EENS if the false premise is avoided.
5.Is the LA interpretation of VC2 a new theology?
No. It is going back to the old, traditional theology of the Catholic Church by avoiding the false premise.It is the false premise which has created the New Theology.Without the false premise there cannot be the New Ecumenism, New Evangelisation, New Ecclesiology etc.The New Theology is Cristocentric without the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church.Since exceptions were created to EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors etc, by projecting a false premise.The error was overlooked by the popes.
6.What about traditional, 16th century Mission doctrine?
With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II we return to traditional Mission doctrine. It is no more 'only they need to enter the Church who know about it', who are not in invincible ignorance(LG 14) Instead, it is all need to enter the Catholic Church with no known exception.Invincible ignorance is not an exception to all needing to enter the Church with faith and the baptism(LG 14).So we evangelize since all non Catholics are oriented to Hell without faith and the baptism of water( Ad Gentes 7/Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II. The norm for salvation is faith and baptism and not invincible ignorance.When I meet a non Catholic, I cannot assume or pretend to know, that he or she is an exception to the norm. If there is an exception it could be known only to God.I know that the non Catholic before me, is oriented to Hell( Athanasius Creed, Vatican Council II(AG 7, LG 14),Catechism of the Catholic Church(845,846,1257),Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, etc).
7.What about the hermeneutic of continuity or rupture with Tradition ?
With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II there is no rupture with past Magisterium documents and neither do they contradict each other.We have to re-interpret past Magisterial documents though, which mention the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance(I.I), as being hypothetical and invisible always.Being saved with BOD and I.I are always physically invisible, when they are mentioned in the Catechisms( Trent, Pius X etc) and encyclicals and documents of the popes(Mystici Corporis etc).They always refer to hypothetical cases only and are not objectively known non Catholics.If someone is saved outside the Church he or she could only be known to God.This has to be clear when reading also the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.There is also no confusion when reading the text of Vatican Council II.LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3,NA 2,GS 22 etc, refer always to only hypothetical cases and so they do not contradict the Athanasius Creed.
8.Should the popes use the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?
YES! Since presently the two popes are schismatic, heretical, non Magisterial and non traditional on Vatican Council II.It has to be this way since they use the false premise.It is only with the false premise, inference and conclusion that they interpret Magisterial documents. This can be avoided with a rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion.The result is a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.
9.What other advantage is there in knowing the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?
We read the text of Vatican Council II in general differently with the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.
’The red is not an exception to the blue’.The hypothetical passages( marked in red on the blog Eucharist and Mission, are not practical exceptions to the orthodox passages in Vatican Council II which support EENS, and are marked in blue.
For the present two popes and the traditionalists the red is an exception to the blue. This is irrational.
10.What bearing does it have on the liturgy ?
Without the false premise the Council is traditional. Vatican Council II is in harmony with extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the missionaries in the 16th century.So we are back to the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. When the Council is traditional there is no 'development of doctrine' or 'sprit of Vatican Council II'. Collegiality, Religious Freedom and ecumenism are no more an issue. So receiving Holy Communion on the hand can no more be justified with Vatican Council II.Neither can the Eucharist be given to the divorced and re-married, in the name of the Council.
Neither can the German Synod be justified by citing Vatican Council II.There is no theological basis in the Council, any more, for given the Eucharist to Protestants during Holy Mass.-Lionel Andrades
Fake premise
Lumen Gentium 8,Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically visible cases in 1965-2021.
Fake inference
They are objective examples of salvation outside the Church.
Fake conclusion
Vatican Council II contradicts the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).The Athanasius Creed(outside the Church there is no salvation) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( ecumenism of return) were made obsolete.
Here is my interpretation of Vatican Council II in blue.
Rational Premise
LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.They are only hypothetical and theoretical. They exist only in our mind and are not solid bodies at Newton's level of time, space and matter.
Rational Inference
They are not objective examples of salvation outside the Church for us human beings.
Rational Conclusion
Vatican Council II does not contradict EENS as it was interpreted by the Jesuits in the Middle Ages.It does not contradict the strict interpretation of EENS of St. Thomas Aquinas( saved in invincible ignorance is invisible), St. Augustine and Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.
The Letter of the Holy Office(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) 1949 made an objective mistake.-Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades
Promoter of the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.
Catholic lay man in Rome,
Writer on the discovery of the two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is interpreted with the false premise and the other without it. One is Magisterial and the other, the common one, is non Magisterial.
It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms.There can be two interpretations.
Why should Catholics choose an irrational version which is heretical, non traditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional ?
Blog: Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission )
E-mail: lionelandrades10@
__________________________________
MAY 27, 2021
In the parish in which I live the priests are not proclaiming the Faith for political reasons
In the parish in which I live the priests are not proclaiming the Faith for political reasons.They are letting the people remain in ignorance.They will say that 'Jesus died for the salvation of all' and leave it at that.They will not continue and say that 'all must accept Jesus in the Catholic Church with faith and baptism, for salvation ( to avoid Hell )'.They are not permitted by the Rome Vicariate and the Vatican to 1) affirm exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church and 2)to speak about Hell.So they do not proclaim the Gospel on this subject.They also do not interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise.So they are not affirming the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation.They are unable to affirm the Creed in public. -Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/05/in-parish-in-which-i-live-priests-are.html
In the parish in which I live the priests are not proclaiming the Faith for political reasons.They are letting the people remain in ignorance.They will say that 'Jesus died for the salvation of all' and leave it at that.They will not continue and say that 'all must accept Jesus in the Catholic Church with faith and baptism, for salvation ( to avoid Hell )'.They are not permitted by the Rome Vicariate and the Vatican to 1) affirm exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church and 2)to speak about Hell.So they do not proclaim the Gospel on this subject.They also do not interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise.So they are not affirming the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation.They are unable to affirm the Creed in public. -Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/05/in-parish-in-which-i-live-priests-are.html
TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2021
Peter Kwasniewski misguided the seminarian on Vatican Council II
Peter Kwasniewski on the blog 1Peter5 tells a seminarian who wants to be coherent that the continuity of the Church's teachings ended on the eve of Vatican Council II.Kwasniewski did not want to be accused of being a Feeneyite and be further de-platformed. So he misguided the seminarian. - Lionel Andrades
https://onepeterfive.com/a-reply-to-the-discouraged-seminarian-there-are-6000-reasons-to-remain-catholic/
Peter Kwasniewski on the blog 1Peter5 tells a seminarian who wants to be coherent that the continuity of the Church's teachings ended on the eve of Vatican Council II.Kwasniewski did not want to be accused of being a Feeneyite and be further de-platformed. So he misguided the seminarian. - Lionel Andrades
https://onepeterfive.com/a-reply-to-the-discouraged-seminarian-there-are-6000-reasons-to-remain-catholic/
MAY 31, 2021
With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II the great Catholic Tradition does not stop on the eve of Vatican Council II
Peter Kwasniewski writes on the blog 1Peter5
If someone were to ask me “Why be a Catholic?,” I would reply: The theology of the Church in its apostolic, patristic, and scholastic plenitude, a grand oak tree birthed from a tiny acorn, showing in its mighty trunk and vast crown the power of the principles at root. As John Henry Newman saw and described so well in writing the work that accompanied his entry into the Roman Church, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, the truth unfolds in strength and stability across the ages of faith. Whether we take up the formidable Summa theologiae of St Thomas Aquinas with its seried ranks of syllogisms or simply consult any standard catechism from the Counter-Reformation down to the eve of the Second Vatican Council, we will find one and the same Catholic Faith, always confessing the Holy and Undivided Trinity, the perfect humanity and divinity of Jesus Christ, the virginal maternity of Mary, the veneration of the saints, the life of grace, virtues, prayer, worship, and sacraments, the promise of eternal life in the bliss of the beatific vision.-from A Reply to the Discouraged Seminarianhttps://onepeterfive.com/a-reply-to-the-discouraged-seminarian-there-are-6000-reasons-to-remain-catholic/
'down to the eve of the Second Vatican Council'.
Down to the eve of the Second Vatican Council II ? Why did Peter Kwasniewski have to stop here.
Why? Since he is using the narrative of the progressivists and the Lefebvrists.
Kwasniewski, as he puts it in the article, 'allows the enemy to dictate the terms of the entire debate'. He interprets the Council like the Modernists.
With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II the great Catholic Tradition does not stop on the eve of Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades
https://onepeterfive.com/a-reply-to-the-discouraged-seminarian-there-are-6000-reasons-to-remain-catholic/
__________________________
Peter Kwasniewski writes on the blog 1Peter5
If someone were to ask me “Why be a Catholic?,” I would reply: The theology of the Church in its apostolic, patristic, and scholastic plenitude, a grand oak tree birthed from a tiny acorn, showing in its mighty trunk and vast crown the power of the principles at root. As John Henry Newman saw and described so well in writing the work that accompanied his entry into the Roman Church, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, the truth unfolds in strength and stability across the ages of faith. Whether we take up the formidable Summa theologiae of St Thomas Aquinas with its seried ranks of syllogisms or simply consult any standard catechism from the Counter-Reformation down to the eve of the Second Vatican Council, we will find one and the same Catholic Faith, always confessing the Holy and Undivided Trinity, the perfect humanity and divinity of Jesus Christ, the virginal maternity of Mary, the veneration of the saints, the life of grace, virtues, prayer, worship, and sacraments, the promise of eternal life in the bliss of the beatific vision.-from A Reply to the Discouraged Seminarian
https://onepeterfive.com/a-reply-to-the-discouraged-seminarian-there-are-6000-reasons-to-remain-catholic/
Down to the eve of the Second Vatican Council II ? Why did Peter Kwasniewski have to stop here.
Why? Since he is using the narrative of the progressivists and the Lefebvrists.
Kwasniewski, as he puts it in the article, 'allows the enemy to dictate the terms of the entire debate'. He interprets the Council like the Modernists.
With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II the great Catholic Tradition does not stop on the eve of Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades
https://onepeterfive.com/a-reply-to-the-discouraged-seminarian-there-are-6000-reasons-to-remain-catholic/
__________________________
MARCH 2, 2021
Could a new discovery about Vatican Council II change the voting pattern in Catholic France ?
Macron and Le Pen in France interpret Vatican Council II with a fake premise to create a rupture with Catholic theology of France in the Middle Ages.Will a new discovery about Vatican Council II change the voting pattern in Catholic France ?
Practising Catholics who voted for Fellon would appreciate the Catholic Church going back to Tradition. They simply have to interpret the Council without the fake premise and it is back to Catholic doctrine of the 15th century.1
Traditional Catholics voted for Fellon in a Church divided with liberalism based upon a false interpretation of Vatican Council II. Now it is clear that the Council can be interpreted in harmony with Tradition and there is no theological opening for the liberalism of the last 55 years.2
-Lionel Andrades
1
According to a recent poll, only 42 percent of Fillon voters plan to vote Macron in the runoff, versus 31 percent for Le Pen; 27 percent either have not made up their mind or plan to stay home. Not all Fillon voters are Catholics, of course, but the Fillon vote overlaps with a lot of practicing Catholics. Forty-four percent of Mass-going Catholics voted for Mr. Fillon in the first round, according to a Harris Interactive poll, and 68 percent of practicing Catholics voted for a candidate who is not in the runoff, reports the Catholic magazine La Vie.
https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2017/05/03/macron-le-pen-runoff-reveals-fault-lines-french-catholic-revival
2
But Francois Fillon showed in November that there were still lots of votes to win on the right when he swept the primary of the Republicans — the main conservative party — by openly appealing to traditional Catholics angered by the Socialist government’s legalization of same-sex marriage in 2013.
His unexpected primary victory made him look like the probable next president. But his campaign soon became mired in a series of financial scandals that unsettled Catholics originally attracted by his Mr. Clean image.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/03/24/france-president-election-politicians-religion-muslims/99580576/
___________________________
Macron and Le Pen in France interpret Vatican Council II with a fake premise to create a rupture with Catholic theology of France in the Middle Ages.Will a new discovery about Vatican Council II change the voting pattern in Catholic France ?
Practising Catholics who voted for Fellon would appreciate the Catholic Church going back to Tradition. They simply have to interpret the Council without the fake premise and it is back to Catholic doctrine of the 15th century.1
Traditional Catholics voted for Fellon in a Church divided with liberalism based upon a false interpretation of Vatican Council II. Now it is clear that the Council can be interpreted in harmony with Tradition and there is no theological opening for the liberalism of the last 55 years.2
-Lionel Andrades
1
According to a recent poll, only 42 percent of Fillon voters plan to vote Macron in the runoff, versus 31 percent for Le Pen; 27 percent either have not made up their mind or plan to stay home. Not all Fillon voters are Catholics, of course, but the Fillon vote overlaps with a lot of practicing Catholics. Forty-four percent of Mass-going Catholics voted for Mr. Fillon in the first round, according to a Harris Interactive poll, and 68 percent of practicing Catholics voted for a candidate who is not in the runoff, reports the Catholic magazine La Vie.
https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2017/05/03/macron-le-pen-runoff-reveals-fault-lines-french-catholic-revival
2
But Francois Fillon showed in November that there were still lots of votes to win on the right when he swept the primary of the Republicans — the main conservative party — by openly appealing to traditional Catholics angered by the Socialist government’s legalization of same-sex marriage in 2013.
His unexpected primary victory made him look like the probable next president. But his campaign soon became mired in a series of financial scandals that unsettled Catholics originally attracted by his Mr. Clean image.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/03/24/france-president-election-politicians-religion-muslims/99580576/
___________________________
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment