Terrance Berris, a retired Catholic lawyer in Wisconsin, USA depends upon a fake premise to interpret Vatican Council II and so create a rupture with the Athanasius Creed, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.He does not deny this on his blog The Badger Catholic. He is supported by Fr. John Kartje, the former Rector of Mundalein Seminary, Chicago

 Like the bishops and priests of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX),Terrance Berris, a retired Catholic lawyer in Wisconsin, USA depends upon a fake premise to interpret Vatican Council II and so create a rupture with the Athanasius Creed, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.He does not deny this on his blog The Badger Catholic.

He is supported by Fr. John Kartje, the former Rector of Mundalein Seminary, Chicago and a correspondent of the Badger Catholic.

Berris uses a false premise to interpret LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II. For him these are physically invisible cases in 1965-2021 which he projects as physically visible examples of salvation outside the Church and so they become for him, practical exceptions to Feeneyite EENS and the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.

For me LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are not a rupture with Tradition (EENS etc) but for him they are.So to support his irrational use of the false premise to make the Council a break with Tradition, he cites the SSPX U.S  website  Fr. Feeney and Catholic doctrine 

Just imagine it! Liberals from Chicago and Mundelein seminary need the SSPX for support  with the New Theology. They both use, the New Theology of Rahner and Ratzinger,  which has its foundation on the fake premise.

Mundalein seminary, Terrance Berris and the SSPX are using a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II and EENS are are not apologizing.They will not identify the problem to correct it.They are going ahead with the deception.

Terrance Berris and I are in the same Catholic Church but our Profession of Faith would be different.Since our premises are different the conclusions too would have to be different.

With the false premise, he the SSPX and Fr. Kartje are modernists. I am not.

Berris is implying that non Catholics who are dead and are now in Heaven and also visible on earth to be exceptions to EENS, the Athanasius Creed etc.How can people be in two places at the same time?

How can he see people in Heaven and also on earth for them to be exceptions for the traditional ecclesiocentrism of the Church.

Yet this is also the reasoning of other Catholic lawyers e.g John Salza, Chris Ferrara, Christine Niles. When Ferrara wrote his book EWTN a Network Gone Wrong he did not know that he and  the EWTN Management and apologists, were interpreting Vatican Council II and EENS, with a fake premise which was officially approved by the popes .

When Christine Niles on the M’ced Up program for Church Militant TV did a program on extra ecclesiam nulla salus she made the same error when she quoted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and projected unknown cases of the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance as being known exceptions to the dogma EENS according to Cantate Domino, Council of Florence which she quoted on that program.Neither did she or Charles Coulombe, whom she interviewed on that program say that Vatican Council II and EENS could be interpreted with the rational premise and so there would be no rupture with Catholic Tradition( Athanasius Creed etc).-Lionel Andrades

http://badgercatholic.blogspot.com/2021/07/the-nadir-of-american-catholicism.html#comment-form

https://usml.edu/academic-affairs/

All the pontifical universities are not interpreting Vatican Council II with the rational premise and neither is Joseph Shaw

 

Joseph Shaw in Does Traditionis Custodes contradict the documents of Vatican II? (Life site news) refers to Sacrosanctum Concilium but avoids the real issue with Vatican Council II,the Latin Mass  and the traditionalists.This was known to Pope Benedict and the same policy is being followed by Pope Francis.

The Latin Mass is only permitted presently for those priests who interpret the Council  with a false premise and so create a rupture with Tradition (Athanasius Creed etc).  For example, in Britain.

The priests who accept Vatican Council II and interpret it with a rational premise , which does not contradict Tradition( Athanasius Creed) will not be given permission, even though they accept the Council.Since they would be affirming Feeneyite EENS.

Presently there is an interview of Eric Sammons by John Henry Weston on the Church teaching outside the Church there is no salvation. They have both kept the issue vague. Since they do not want to interpret Vatican Council II with the rational premise( and so affirm Feeneyite EENS) and neither do  they want to affirm Feeneyite EENS without the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance being exceptions. It is the same with Joseph Shaw.

Archbishop Thomas Gullickson avoids the false premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II, EENS and other Magisterial documents.There is no rupture with Tradition for him.So he had appealed to the SSPX to accept Vatican Council II, as he does.

On the other hand the English bishops and priests interpret the Council with the false premise, so they are permitted by Cardinal Vince Nicols  to offer the Latin Mass. The ADL does not object.

Dr.Joseph Shaw a professor of philosophy interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise and teaches it at the Benedictine St.Benet Hall, Oxford.

But Fr. Stefano Visintin osb, former Dean of Theology and Rector of the Benedictine Pontifical University of St. Anselm, Rome, does not use the false premise  to interpret Vatican Council II, as did Rahner, Ratzinger, Congar and Kung.

It is the same with Una Voce International and the Latin Mass Societies in Britain.They depend upon the fake premise to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition since this is approved by the Left.

With the use of the fake premise there are exceptions created in Vatican Council II for EENS. So there is a new version of EENS. It is EENS with exceptions. This is also the understanding of John Henry Weston and Eric Sammons and Steve Skojec who has left 1Peter5.

So with the false premise, like the Left, the traditionalist and conservative Catholics, support ‘ a theology of religions’.

This is the theology at the ecumenical and inter religious meetings for the Catholic Bishops Conference in Britain.

There was no 'theology of religious pluralism' at the time of St. Benedict,St. Ignatius of Loyola, St.Dominic Guzman. They all interpreted EENS without the fake premise, of the correspondents of Life Site News,like Joseph Shaw.But today in all the educational institutions of the Benedictines, Jesuits and Dominicans this is the norm.All the pontifical universities are not interpreting Vatican Council II with the rational premise and neither is Joseph Shaw.-Lionel Andrades

https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/contrary-to-pope-francis-unity-in-the-church-is-best-expressed-in-liturgical-diversity

La FEDE: RADICE dell'ALBERO della VITA che è CRISTO in noi - Catechesi di padre Max

Pope Francis is not magisterial on Amoris Laetitia and Traditionis Custode: Mundalein seminary and Bishop Robert Barron must acknowledge the error

 

The Mundalein seminary, Chicago interprets Vatican Council  with the false premise instead of the rational option and there is no comment from them or Bishop Robert Barron and the apologists at Word of Fire.

According to Vatican Council II, Rahm Emmanuel the former Mayor of Chicago and Biden’s Ambassador to Japan, is oriented to Hell without faith and the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.The Council says all need faith and baptism for salvation (AG 7).He does not have it.Ad Gentes 7 is placed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church n.846 under the sub title Outside the Church no salvation.

With hypothetical cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II there are no objective exceptions to AG 7 in 1965-2021.We cannot see or meet someone saved outside the Church.There are no practical cases of being saved as referenced in LG 8,LG 14 etc.No one in Chicago knew of someone saved outside the Church without faith and baptism .

There are no known cases of people in Heaven with the baptism of desire(BOD) or invincible ignorance(I.I) in 2021.

Cardinal Cupich, the archbishop of Chicago appointed by Pope Francis, like the faculty at Mundalein seminary continues to interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise and so remains politically correct with the Left.

But this is unethical and not Catholic.

I accept the BOD and I.I as always being hypothetical.The book, Bread of Life, indicates that they were also hypothetical for Fr. Leonard Feeney.

I do not have to reject BOD and I.I ( speculative always) to affirm ‘the strict interpretation’ of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).BOD and I.I can only be speculative and never objective for us human beings.So being theoretical it is compatible with EENS and the need for all to practically have faith and the baptism of water to avoid the fires of Hell.

So BOD and I.I never ever were an issue.The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston(LOHO) made it an issue by confusing what is invisible(BOD, I.I) as being visible.

Fr. Leonard Feeney’s excommunication was lifted without him having to recant.The CDF knew that it had made a mistake.Since the Athanasius Creed states, like Fr. Leonard Feeney, that all need Catholic faith for salvation.This was the Creed of the Catholic Church for centuries.

Cardinal Cupich and Mundalein seminary could acknowledge that Pope Francis is not Magisterial when he uses a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II . Amoris Laetitia and Traditionis Custode were issued with this error.So they cannot be Magisterial.The pope needs to correct the mistake.He has issued these documents based upon Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally, with a fake premise.Only in this way could a hermeneutic of rupture be created with Tradition( Athanasius Creed etc).-Lionel Andrades

Gesù vogliamo donarti i nostri desideri, i nostri pensieri, le nostre croci e vogliamo ringraziarti