Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre used the False Premise to interpret the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance and also Vatican Council ( LG 16 etc) so his interpretation of the First Commandment would be that there is not true worship in only the Catholic Church, since there are exceptions. People are saved in other religions with other gods.So for him the Nicene Creed and Apostles Creed would be changed and also the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX on an ecumenism of return.All Christians would not need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation- there would be exceptions.Since outside the Chruch there was salvation for him he would reject the Athanasius Creed which says all need Catholic faith for salvation.So theologically he was rejecting Tradition like the popes from Pius XII.
There was a choice before Archbishop Lefebvre. He could choose to
interpret LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as referring to physically invisible or physically visible cases and his conclusion would be traditional
or non traditional, ecclesiocentric or non ecclesiocentric. He chose the
irrational option like the popes from Paul VI.
At the SSPX center/chapel in Rome they have a room full of books and magazines all interpreting Vatican Council II with the fake premise, the irrational option. They were not aware of the Specific Error in the the Council-text.They blamed the Council and not Archbishop Lefebvre.
I have a choice. I choose to interpretLG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as referring to physically invisible cases in 2021, So they are not objective examples of salvation outside the Church. They are not practical exceptions to the old ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church. The Syllabus of Error, Creeds, Catechisms and extra ecclesiam nulla salus have not changed or become obsolete for me.
Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise in Traditionis Custode. No one corrected him on this point.
Andrea Grillo and 180 signatories in a public Letter criticized the Latin Mass and interpreted Vatican Council II with the false premise. The Una Voce International advertisement in the leftist newspaper in Rome did not correct his mistake.
Vatican Council II will be interpreted with the false premise and not the rational premise at the next Synod, and it will overlooked by all.
Peter Kwasniewksi repeats the public error of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. There has been so much of propaganda on Rorate Caeili and other media supporting liberal theology, and they will continue, even after being informed.Kwasniewski's books and articles are still a lot of straw ( aside from the good things in them).Kwasneiwski interprets Vatican Council II and Magisterial documents with the irrational premise creating liberalism and heresy.It is schism with the past Magisterium of the 13th and 16th century.
Don Pietro Leone and Rorate Caeili ( F.G) are outdated with their irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II which creates schism on Ecumenism, Inter-Religious Dialogue, Religious Liberty, Collegiality, Synodality etc.Their reports on Rorate Caeili are appreciated by the liberals. Since they affirm the Council as a rupture and continuation with Tradition.
They don't know that the Catholic Church has returned to Tradition. Rome has come back to the faith doctrinally and theologically- or rather the Faith has come back to Rome.We now know what causes the hermeneutic of continuity, how to avoid it and how to maintain it.
We have a rational and traditional Church with no break between faith and reason. The Council is dogmatic and supports EENS, an ecumenism of return, a Catholic State, the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics and the absence of a development of doctrine. The Catholic Church is one, holy, Catholic, Apostolic and ecclesiocentric.
Don Pietro Leone, however good his intentions are and he could be a wonderful person, is part of the old liberal propaganda, that Archbishop Lefebvre fell for, innocently.The Catholic Church has returned to Tradition.
I appreciate the contribution for the Church by Chris Ferrara, Roberto dei Mattei, Fr. Nicholas Gruner and many others, including Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. I too have gained from them but we have to accept that they were/are still using the False Premise which creates heresy and schism and liberalism. -Lionel Andrades
SEPTEMBER 26, 2021
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre interpreted Vatican Council II with the false premise, the right hand side column and he was followed in the error by Michael Davies, Dietrich von Hildebrand, Chris Ferrara,, Roberto dei Matteo, Fr. Nicholas Gruner. The SSPX bishops are still interpreting Magisterial documents with the false premise
SEPTEMBER 24, 2021
Pope Paul VI brought ‘the smoke of Satan’ into the Church when he interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally instead of rationally. He used the false premise instead of the rational option.Pope Francis and Pope Benedict must announce that Pope Paul VI made an objective error.They must correct the mistake
SEPTEMBER 23, 2021
Pope Francis and Pope Benedict could correct the error in Wikipedia and Internet resources and the German theological and catechetical publications
AUGUST 28, 2021
So we proclaim the Faith and return to traditional mission as at the time of St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Robert Bellarmine and St. Francis Xavier
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/so-we-proclaim-faith-and-return-to.html
_________________________________
SEPTEMBER 26, 2021
The theological paper Christianity and the World Religions of the International Theological Commission was approved by Pope Benedict and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj in 1997 during the pontificate of Pope John Paul II : it interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise to create a false rupture with Catholic Tradition
CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS BY THE INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION (1997) APPROVED BY POPE BENEDICT AND CARDINAL LUIZ LADARIA SJ.
INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION
CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS
(1997)
66. In his encyclical Mystici Corporis, Pius XII addresses the question, How are those who attain salvation outside visible communion with the Church related to her? He says that they are oriented to the mystical body of Christ by a yearning and desire of which they are not aware (DS 3821).(Lionel: But this is a reference by Pope Pius XII to hypothetical and invisible cases.This is something obvious.It is common sense.) The opposition of the American Jesuit Leonard Feeney, who insisted on the exclusivist interpretation of the expression extra ecclesiam nulla solus, afforded the occasion for the letter of the Holy Office, dated 8 August ,1949, to the archbishop of Boston, which rejected Feeney s interpretation and clarified the teaching of Pius XII. (So he means hypothetical cases are objective exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.He has used the false premise.) The letter distinguishes between the necessity of belonging to the Church for salvation (necessitas praecepti) and the necessity of the indispensable means of salvation (intrinseca necessitas); in relationship to the latter, the Church is a general help for salvation (DS 3867—69).(O.K,Hypothetically but what has this to do with EENS ? The Letter made an irrational inference too.) In the case of invincible ignorance the implicit desire of belonging to the Church suffices; this desire will always be present when a man aspires to conform his will to that of God (DS 3870).(Again he is referring to an unknown person so why is this mentioned with reference to EENS? Why? Since his new theology is based upon the irrational premise.) But faith, in the sense of Hebrews 11:6, and love are always necessary with intrinsic necessity (DS 3872).
SEPTEMBER 27, 2021
Trending as the post most on this blog : PADRE PIO SAID THAT MARTIN LUTHER IS IN HELL AND CHRISTIANS WHO FOLLOw HIM WILL MEET THE SAME END Fr.Stefano Manelli F.I founder of the Franciscans of the Immaculate
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/09/trending-as-most-read-post-on-this-blog.html
____________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment