Pope John Paul II overlooked it.Every one followed every one else’s false interpretation .Pope Paul VI said the Council is pastoral.But the Council is dogmatic. Ad Gentes 7 supports traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) with no exceptions.While LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are not visible examples of salvation outside the Church.
In other words these are not non Catholics saved without faith and the baptism of water.
Yet they are projected as visible cases. It is as if they could see or meet such people.Then they projected LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as being practical exceptions to the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.So they made the Syllabus of Errors obsolete.
Traditional ecclesiocentrism was rejected in Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus.Cardinal Ratzinger did not
interpret the Council with the rational premise. He approved the false premise
in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.He was the Prefect of the Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith overseeing all this doctrinal chaos.
So Cardinal Gerhard Muller, as Prefect, CDF did not celebrate a landmark
anniversary of the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.How could he? Pope
Benedict rejected the Syllabus with the Council interpreted irrationally. Until
today, the cardinal still goes along with the error.
The pope may pastorally and in the media support homosexual unions while
officially th CDF would say that they are ‘intrinsically evil’.But Pope Francis
and Pope Benedict formally, in writing and also in the media, have chosen the
false premise to interpret Vatican Council II, EENS, Syllabus etc.Their
understanding of the Creeds is different from mine and that of the popes over
the centuries.
Any one can check it out and confirm it.Vatican Council II can be interpreted with a rational or irrational premise to produce two different conclusions, one traditional and the other non traditional.The evidence is there in public.
With the false premise Pope Francis and Pope Benedict change doctrine
and theology. This is not just a disciplinary issue. In principle ( de jure)
and de facto they change Catholic doctrine when they re-interpret Magisterial
documents wih the irrational premise . This creates the expected break with
Tradition.
Ecclesiastics may say that the pope’s public statements on homosexuality
are in a particular context, there is nothing in writing but they cannot deny
that the present two popes reject the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic
Church and to do this they have to interpret Vatican Council II with the
irrational premise, without this ruse there is no liberalism.
In the Introduction to Dominus Iesus, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was
concerned on how the Church’ s teachings were being changed not only
practically but also in principle.Yet in principle Pope Benedict has used
the false premise to change the understanding of the Vatican Council II, EENS,
Syllabus of Errors, Catechism of Pope Pius IX
etc.The Council Fathers did the same at Vatican Council
II(1960-1965).Pope Pius XII, Pope John XXIII and Pope Paul VI did not correct
the objective error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of
Boston.
Pope Francis now thinks it is the Mass which makes a Catholic or seminarian ‘rigid’ when it really is the use of the fake premise.The Catholic goes back back to Tradition leaving behind the Council interpreted irrationally.
___________________________________________
When Vatican Council II is interpreted with the rational premise we
go back to the Traditional Mission doctrine based upon ecclesiocentrism.It is
no more ‘those who know or do not know' and who are not in invincible ignorance'(LG 14).Instead it is - all need to
enter the Catholic Church with no known exceptions. Invincible ignorance is no
more an exception to all needing to be Catholic with faith and the baptism of
water (LG 14,AG 7 etc).Yes every one needs to get his name on the Parish
Baptism Register to avoid Hell.So we evangelize.Since all non Catholics are
oriented to Hell without faith and the baptism of water (AG 7, LG14), Catechism
of the Catholic Church (845,846,1257), Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX (
ecumenism of return with no known exceptions).The non Catholic is not condemned
as long as he or she is alive.
But faith and baptism are not the norm for salvation for the present two
popes.Since there are exceptions to the norm, for them, for example, in Vatican
Council II.The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is also no more the norm for
them.Since there are exceptions of the baptism of desire and invincible
ignorance, for them and not for me.
We are no more one , holy, Catholic
and Apostolic Church. The norm for salvation is relative.The premise
makes it relative.This is the official confusion of the two popes.Cardinal
Walter Kasper could cite The Four Marks of the Church and so also could Fr.
Leonard Feeney.
INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MISTAKE
There should be a check on new papers being produced by the International Theological Commission. Since in two papers (documents) of the ITC approved by Pope John Paul II, Cardinal Ratzinger and then then Fr. Luiz Ladaria sj, the false premise was used to change theology and doctrine. 2
__________________________
The Vatican also needs to issue a clarification. Books should not be
published on Vatican Council II, in which the fake premise is employed to
produce a non traditional conclusion which is not the Deposit of the
Faith.Future books written on Vatican Council II must not claim that the
Council is innovative and a break with Tradition. It should be shown how with the rational premise the Council is traditional.Then we don’t have schismatic and heretical popes.-Lionel Andrades
1
LINKS FROM THE RIGHT HAND COLUMN. CLICK TO ACCESS.
- Wikipedia (24)
- Wikipedia interprets Vatican Council II with Cushingism (2)
- Wikipedia Misleading (5)
- Wikipedia needs to correct their ideological report on Fr. Leonard Feeney. (1)
- Wikpedia (1)
Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 14: "They could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it, or to remain in it."
_______________________
2
______________________________
SEPTEMBER 21, 2021
Pope Francis and Pope Benedict cannot deny that Vatican Council II can be interpreted with a rational or irrational premise to produce two different conclusions and they have chosen the false premise. The evidence is there in public.The College of Cardinals must respond.
All Catholics simply have to use the rational premise to go back to Tradition. It is for the liberals for whom Vatican Council II will become an issue.This is when LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc, are seen as hypothetical cases always.So they cannot be practical exceptions for the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius X ( ecumenism of return ), the Catechism of Pope Pius X, 24Q,27Q (other religions and exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church), the Athanasius Creed ( all need the Catholic faith for salvation).
GERMAN SYNODAL PATH
Since the popes from Paul VI have interpreted Vatican Council II with the false premise there exists the German Synodal Way.It would fall flat if the Germans would choose to use the rational premise.
The Lefebvrist and Ecclesia Dei communities are also using the same fake premise and are unaware of it.So they do not correct the mistake of Pope Francis and Pope Benedict.Vatican Council II with the rational premise would not be an issue for the traditionalists.
PROOF OF THE FALSE PREMISE
1.Pope Francis wants the Ecclesia Dei communities to interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise and only then they will be allowed to offer the Latin Mass.
2.Pope Benedict told the Society of St. Pius X that they had to accept Vatican Council II( with the irrational and not rational premise) to be canonically accepted and that this was a doctrinal issue.So they had to use the false premise to create the New Theology which changed doctrine/dogma on outside the Church there is no salvation.
3.In two theological papers of the International Theological Commission,Pope Benedict and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj, have criticized Fr. Leonard Feeney and his exclusivist ecclesiocentrism.They also mention that Vatican Council II(LG 16 etc) contradicted the priest’s exclusivist understanding of salvation.In other words, LG 16 referred to visible and known non Catholics saved outside the Church, without faith and the baptism of water.This is irrational. In this way, with the false premise i.e by confusing invisible cases of being saved in invincible ignorance, as being visible, practical exceptions were created for the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.Exceptions were created for the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, the Catechism of Pope Pius X and Trent, EENS etc.
3.Cardinal Braz de Avez has told the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate that they had to accept Vatican Council II. He meant the Council had to be interpreted with the false premise and then a false rupture would be created with Tradition.
4.Archbishops Giacomo Morendi and Augustine di Noia of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, demanded that Brother Andre Marie MICM, and the religious community Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church( 847-848) on invincible ignorance with the false premise. This is irrational.The CDF and the Diocese of Manchester, USA are using the false premise. Since the St. Benedict Center refuses to do likewise, a severe Decree of Prohibitions has been placed upon them since 2019.
5.The Abu Dhabi Statement of Pope Francis was attributed to a change in ecclesiology and theology created by Vatican Council II when the false premise is used to interpret the text.Without the fake premise the pope would have to say outside the Church there is no salvation.
7.All Pope Benedict’s books on Vatican Council II and Ecclesiology are written with a false premise. So his conclusion is non traditional and not the Deposit of the Faith.It is the same with the books of Cardinal Walter Kasper, Cardinal Marcello Semeraro and Archbishop Bruno Forte.
8.The dialogue with the Lutherans was based upon Vatican Council II interpreted with the false premise. Otherwise with the rational premise, the Lutherans are outside the Church without Catholic faith (AG 7).While Unitatis Redintigratio 3 etc in Vatican Council II are not practical exceptions to 16th century EENS.
11.The pontifical universities Regina Apostolorum and John Lateran, Rome, along with German liberal theologians offer an academic course on Ratzinger Studies. It is based upon Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally. So it is politcally correct with the Left.The Wojtyla-Ratzinger interpretation of the Council is obsolete.It does not have a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.
12.The liberalism in the Church comes with the use of the false premise which makes the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King in politics and Traditional Mission obsolete. With this liberalism in the Catholic Church today does not oppose Satanic political parties in Rome( Partito Democratico, Movimento Cinque Stelle etc).They promote homosexual unions, abortion, contraception,public immodesty, pornography on the offical media and pontifical heresy and schism in the Catholic Church.
13.Summorum Pontificum of Pope Benedict permitted the Holy Mass but only for the priests who interpreted Vatican Council II with the fake premise and so supported the New Ecclesiology which is a break with the past.
14.Matteo Salvini and the Lega political party in Italy do not know that Vatican Council II can be interpreted with the rational premise, like I interpret it.This will mean that the local bishops and the parish priests would be able to affirm the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics(Quas Primas) and the necessity to vote for a Catholic political party, to save souls from going to Hell - without any one citing Vatican Council II (irrational) in opposition.The Council interpreted with the rational premise is in the interest of the centre right political parties in Italy.So the Church's theological attitude to migrants and non Catholics would be Conciliar and also traditional on salvation.
15.Bishop Robert Barron is now as obsolete on Vatican Council II as is Massimo Faggioli.
16. Pope Francis thinks it is the Mass which makes a Catholic or seminarian 'rigid' when it really is the use of the false premise.It is no more 'only they need to enter the Church who know about it'(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 of water(LG 14,AG 7 etc). So we evangelize since all non Catholics are oriented to Hell without faith and the baptism of water( AG 7, LG 14 etc).The norm for salvationis faith and baptism and not invincible ignorance. When I meet a non Catholic, I cannot know if he or she is an exception to the norm.If there is an exception it could only be known to God.I know that ther 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.The non Catholic is not condemned as long as he or she is alive. There is hope.
17.The lay Catechists in my parish, Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea, Rome are forced to cheat and use a fake premise,inference and non traditional conclusion to interpret Vatican Council II.Then they emerge politically correct with the Vatican.They do not teach the young Catholics that there is exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church only.This is the diocese of Porta Santa Rufina, Rome under the Administration of the Archdiocese of Civitavecchia. -Lionel Andrades
Photos
https://gaudiumpress.ca/dear-cardinal-braz-de-aviz-the-grass-is-green/
https://bedacollege.org/beda-people
No comments:
Post a Comment