Sunday, September 12, 2021
Bishop Athanasius Schneider chose the rational column, the left hand side column to interpret the baptism of desire ( Lumen Gentium 14)
-Lionel Andrades
SEPTEMBER 12, 2021
It is Pope Francis and Pope Benedict who are in schism and heresy with their irrational interpretation of the Council. This error has to be exposed by the Ecclesia Dei communities. Why should Catholics interpret the Council with the irrational premise and create a rupture with Tradition ? There is a choice. Why should the Ecclesia Dei communities continue to interpret the Council with an irrational premise , which produces a schismatic result, and then continue to be obedient ?
AUGUST 5, 2021
Repost : Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II with a false premise to create a false rupture with Tradition and he calls it the work of the Holy Spirit, in the Letter which accompanies Traditionis Custode.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/repost-pope-francis-interprets-vatican.html
The hands of women giving Holy Communion turned pitch black.
The hands of women giving Holy Communion turned pitch black.
Dr. Taylor Marshall says that it is important for the Ecclesia Dei communities to affirm the faith as approved by the Magisterium- but it is the 'magisterium' which interprets Vatican Council II and other Church Documents with a specific error, a false premise and a false new theology
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2021
Dr. Taylor Marshall says that it is important for the Ecclesia Dei communities to affirm the faith as approved by the Magisterium.But here is the catch.The popes, have changed doctrine and theology with the use of an irrational premise. So the past Faith is no more there for the liberals but also the Ecclesia Dei communities
Taylor Marshall says that it is important for the Ecclesia Dei communities to affirm the faith as approved by the Magisterium.But here is the catch.The popes, have changed doctrine and theology with the use of an irrational premise. So the past Faith is no more there for the liberals but also the Ecclesia Dei communities.
Pope Paul VI interpreted Vatican Council II with a false premise instead of a rational premise. He had a choice and he chose the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition. He chose the irrational interpretation.The Ecclesia Dei communities are doing the same.
So where is their Faith ? It is not there. The false premise is something real. This is something evident. It is there in black and white. Any one can check it out.It is not a personal theology or theory of mine.
With the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II there is a new interpretation of the Creeds.Now there are two interpretations, one is rational and the other is irrational.There are two interpretations at the Profession of Faith. There are two interpretations of the Oath Against Modernism.
This is not personal view. Any one can interpret LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as referring to physically visible or physically invisible cases in 1965-2021 and your inference and conclusion will be different.
If they are physically invisible cases then they cannot be objective exceptions to the past ecclesiocentrism.
Since they are physically visible for the popes they become practical exceptions for the past ecclesiocentrism.
But common sense tells us that there are no physically visible cases of being saved with the baptism of desire ( LG 14).This was observed by Bishop Athanasius Schneider. He said there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire. He told this to Dr. Taylor Marshal in a previous video.
The Ecclesia Dei communities with the false premise, change the interpretation of the Creeds.They also outright rejected the Athanasius Creed.This was the same error of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. He interpreted Vatican Council II with the false premise. He interpreted the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance, with the false premise. He interpreted extra ecclesiam nulla salus, with the false premise.With the false premise he projected practical exceptions to the Athanasius Creed which says all need Catholic faith for salvation.
The Ecclesia Dei communities are in a way, Archbishop Lefebvre's legacy, even Taylor Marshall acknowledges it.The popes since Pius XII interpreted the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance with the false premise.
With the false premise Archbishop Lefebvre and these Ecclesia Dei communities, and the liberals, re-interpreted the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance as being exceptions to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
In other words what is invisible was projected as being visible.So practical exceptions are projected for the past understanding of the Creeds. This is innovation and not Tradition.It is the popes who are in schism.They are in public heresy. It is there in black and white. They are interpreting LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc as being visible exceptions to the past ecclesiocentrism, which they have made obsolete for political reasons.
They are not affirming the dogma EENS like the missionaries of the 16th century but like Pope Paul VI and Pope Francis.They have lost the Faith.They do not deny it in public and the rest of the Catholic Church is following them.There is no denial. They often agree with me.
They have lost the Faith. They are not traditionalists but liberals like Pope Francis. Just because they offer the Latin Mass, it does not make them traditionalists, as they are called by the liberal media.-Lionel Andrades
https://taylormarshall.com/2021/09/746-fssp-icksp-cave-francis-latin-mass-orders-respond-popes-restriction-tlm-podcast.html
SEPTEMBER 9, 2021
I want the Ecclesia Dei communities to know that they can interpret Vatican Council II with a rational or irrational premise and the conclusion will be different. It will be traditional or non traditional. This hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition does not depend upon Pope Francis or the CDF. The issue is the rational premise
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/09/i-want-ecclesia-dei-communities-to-know.html
SEPTEMBER 9, 2021
The Superior Generals of the Ecclesia Dei communities are not proclaiming the Catholic Faith- on faith and morals. They are not interpreting Vatican Council II in harmony with the past Magisterium.They do not want to die as martrys.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/09/the-superior-generals-of-ecclesia-dei.html
_____________
_____________
AUGUST 31, 2021
France, Germany, Poland, Hungary... need to re-interpret Vatican Council II rationally : USA and Britain also must use the rational premise
taylormarshall.com/2020/02/375-bp-athanasius-schneider-dr-taylor-marshall-discuss-theology-liturgy-podcast.html
AUGUST 31, 2021
Pope Francis is in schism with the past Magisterium which did not interpret the baptism of desire as being a literal case. So for them there were no exceptions to the traditionalist exclusivist ecclesiology.Bishop Athanasius Schneider told Dr. Taylor Marshall in an interview that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire.This is a complete U-turn with the common interpretation of Vatican Council II(LG 14 etc).
AUGUST 31, 2021
Pope Benedict has always supported the German Synod with his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II. Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall have overturned the interpretation. For the German bishops Lumen Gentium 14( the baptism of desire) is an exception to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus. For Schneider and Marshall it is not
AUGUST 30, 2021
AUGUST 29, 2021
Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall say there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire but the German Synodal path is based upon there being literal cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14) in the present times
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@
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/bishop-athanasius-schneider-and-dr_28.html
____________________
AUGUST 8, 2021
This is official schism, ecclesiastic schism. Pope Francis and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith must issue a correction and admit they are wrong
We have a pope in schism since he uses a false premise, instead of a rational one, to interpret Vatican Council II and so create a false break with Tradition. With the false premise, exceptions are created for the Athanasius Creed ( all need Catholic faith for salvation), the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus( with no exceptions) and the Syllabus of Errors with no exceptions.This is official schism with the past Magisterium.It is created by confusing hypothetical cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II as being non hypothetical but objective examples of salvation outside the Church, when such cases do not exist in our reality and can only be known to God.
How can the Holy Spirit make an objective mistake and confuse what is invisible as being visible, implicit as being explicit and hypothetical as being objective ? It means non Catholics saved in Heaven, allegedly outside the Catholic Church; without faith and the baptism of water, are also visible on earth for them to be practical exceptions to the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church.They are in two places at the same time i.e in Heaven and on earth and are physically visible ? If they were not physically visible there could not be exceptions for EENS, the Creed and the Syllabus of Errors.
This is official schism, ecclesiastic schism. Pope Francis and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith must issue a correction and admit they are wrong. – Lionel Andrades
AUGUST 7, 2021
Pope Francis is in schism-Vatican Council II is being interpreted with a fake premise to create a fake rupture with Tradition . Traditionis Custode also imposes the error : The error needs to be corrected with the rational premise
POPE FRANCIS IS IN SCHISM - VATICAN COUNCIL II IS BEING INTERPRETED WITH A FAKE PREMISE TO CREATE A FAKE RUPTURE WITH TRADITION: TRADITIONIS CUSTODE ALSO IMPOSES THE ERROR : THE ERROR NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED WITH THE RATIONAL PREMISE.
Pope Francis was in schism at the National Cathechectical Center, Italy (Jan 30,2021) when he said that Vatican Council II had to be accepted as he interpreted it i.e with a fake premise.He said that his interpretation of Vatican Council II( with the fake premise) which produces a rupture with the past Magisterium- was Magisterial.
He reiterated that the interpretation of the Council with the false premise, which produces a rupture with the Athansius Creed( all need Catholic faith for salvation),changes the meaning of the Nicene and Apostles Creed( we believe in three known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins which exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church hence there are exceptions for EENS), and a re-interpretation of the Catechisms – was the Magisterium.
This is schism since with the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II there is a break with ‘the true Church’ represented by the Creeds, Catechisms, dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and other Magisterial documents intepreted rationally.
To reject the Athanasius Creed and change the understanding of the Nicene and Apostles Creed, is first class heresy, in the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II(Ad Tuendum Fidem). It is schism in the Church.
This is a scandal.Pope Francis needs to go for Confession and recant.
He could announce that he interprets Vatican Council II with the rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion and so there is no schism with the past Magisterium, the popes and saints on doctrine and dogma.In particular there is no break with the past ecclesiocenterism of the Catholic Church.
In this way Pope Francis would return to the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology without rejecting Vatican Council II, interpreted with the rational premise.
Pope Francis says in the Letter which accompanies Traditionis Custode :
A recent stage of this dynamic was constituted by Vatican Council II where the Catholic episcopate came together to listen and to discern the path for the Church indicated by the Holy Spirit. To doubt the Council is to doubt the intentions of those very Fathers who exercised their collegial power in a solemn manner cum Petro et sub Petro in an ecumenical council, and, in the final analysis, to doubt the Holy Spirit himself who guides the Church.- Letter of Pope Francis which accompanies Traditionis Custode.
Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II with a false premise to create a false rupture with Tradition and he calls it the work of the Holy Spirit.
How can the Holy Spirit make an objective mistake and use a false premise to interpret LG 14( baptism of desire) and LG 16( invincible ignorance),for example ?
For me LG 14 and LG 16 refer to hypothetical and theoretical cases always. They are always speculative and not real people saved outside the Church in the present times, 1965-2021. This is something obvious.
How can LG 14, LG 16 etc be exceptions to EENS, the Athanasius Creed and Syllabus of Errors ? Yet this is how he interprets Vatican Council II and it is different from the rational way I interpret the Council.I consider the interpretation of Vatican Council II with the rational premise Magisterial, since it is not a rupture with the past Magisterium. Pope Francis cannot say the same.
EIGHTY TWO YEARS BACK
Eighty two years back Pope Pius XII allowed doctrine and dogma to be changed in the Catholic Church in exchange for peace and security. He did not defend Fr. Leonard Feeney and allowed the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to say that unknown cases of the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance were known exceptions to the centuries old strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). EENS was based upon the Bible teachings in John 3:5 and Mark 16:16.
So the New Theology was outside the Church there is salvation.
This meant the teachings on ecumenism, other religions, Social Reign of Christ the King in all political legislation and exclusive salvation would have to change.The Zionists could be present in 1960-1965 at Vatican Council II.The Church had surrendered.
Then non Catholics were allowed to be professors at the pontifical universities in Rome, beginning with the John Lateran University.
In 1949, the time of surrender, the popes Benedict, John Paul II and Francis were young.They became cardinals in a Church, which was separated from the State because of a change in doctrine in 1949.
Now if that doctrine is restored to its original, with a rational premise, we have an ecumenism of return, 16th century EENS, the Social Reign of Christ the King in all political legislatioin and the non separation of Church and State based on the there being exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. So the priority would be that all be formal members of the Catholic Church to avoid Hell.
It means we do not not reject Vatican Council II but re interpret it in harmony with the pre-1949 Catholic Churh. We undo what was lost 82 years back.The Council is no more an ally of the liberals.
With the error Pope Francis and the liberals and even traditionalists are maintaining division in the Church.
JOHN HENRY WESTON AND SBC AND SSPX
John Henry Weston had a good program recently on the subject outside the Church there is no salvation .He can now work for creating unity in the Catholic Church but also answer if Pope Francis is in public schism.
The Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) accepts extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) with exceptions and the St. Benedict Centers(SBC) accept EENS with no exceptions.Both groups are Catholic.
For the SSPX, the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance (I.I) are exceptions for EENS and for the SBC they are not exceptions.
If you discuss this issue with either of them they will go into their specific theology, defending the founders of their communities.
How can we create unity betweem these two groups ? One of them has to be wrong on doctrine.Similarly Pope Francis or I am in error on this issue.
The SSPX will cite the present two popes who project the BOD and I.I as exceptions to EENS. The SBC will cite the past popes, many of them, who did not project BOD and I.I as exceptions to EENS.
Now after Vatican Council II(1965) and the Fr. Leonard Feeney case in Boston (1949) we know that there are no physically visible cases of the BOD and I.I in our reality.We cannot see or meet any one saved outside the Church with BOD and I.I. So BOD and I.I could not have been practical exceptions to EENS in 1949 or 1965.Someone made a mistake.
It was only be confusing what was speculative (BOD and I.I) as being non speculative and objective, that practical exceptions ( visible cases of being saved with BOD and I.I) were created for EENS.In this way the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church was made obsolete.Ths is the point that John Henry Weston, Editor in Chief at Life Site News, must bring out in questions and discussions with the SSPX and SBC.
It will have a direct bearing on how he personally will interprets Vatican Council II.Will LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II be exceptions for EENS or will they not be exceptions, for him ?
Is Pope Francis rational or irrational on Vatican Council II ? Is there schism or no schism ? What does he think?. The interpretation of Vatican Council II by Peter Kwasniewski, Fr.John Zuhlsdorf and Michael Matt is also schismatic and so is the interpretation of the FSSP and SSPX.So they overlook the schism of Pope Francis, when he also interprets the Council with an irrational premise,to create a calculated break with Tradition( EENS, Athanasius Creed, Syllabus of Errors etc) and the traditionalists and liberals do the same. -Lionel Andrades
AUGUST 6, 2021
When Archbishop Augustine di Noia interprets Vatican Council II with the common false premise it is not Magisterial. The Holy Spirit cannot confuse hypothetical cases as being objective and visible in the present times (2021) and then reject Tradition, exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church, the Creeds, Catechisms,EENS etc. This is a type of official apostasy.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/vatican-city-cns-pope-francis-letter.html
It is Pope Francis and Pope Benedict who are in schism and heresy with their irrational interpretation of the Council. This error has to be exposed by the Ecclesia Dei communities. Why should Catholics interpret the Council with the irrational premise and create a rupture with Tradition ? There is a choice. Why should the Ecclesia Dei communities continue to interpret the Council with an irrational premise , which produces a schismatic result, and then continue to be obedient ?
AUGUST 5, 2021
Repost : Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II with a false premise to create a false rupture with Tradition and he calls it the work of the Holy Spirit, in the Letter which accompanies Traditionis Custode.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/repost-pope-francis-interprets-vatican.html
SEPTEMBER 9, 2021
I want the Ecclesia Dei communities to know that they can interpret Vatican Council II with a rational or irrational premise and the conclusion will be different. It will be traditional or non traditional. This hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition does not depend upon Pope Francis or the CDF. The issue is the rational premise
Comments from the blog Vox Cantoris,
Catholic Mission said...ose guadalupe rodriguez said...
Clearly submission to the holy father,to the supreme pontiff, to pope francis, to the bergoglian magisterium, to lumen gentium #25, to the vatican II.
Lionel:
No. With the false premise there is no submission to Pope Francis, Vatican Council II ( with the irrational premise) etc.
This is the point of my comments here on this thread.
I want the Ecclesia Dei communities to know that they can interpret Vatican Council II with a rational or irrational premise and the conclusion will be different. It will be traditional or non traditional. This hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition does not depend upon Pope Francis or the CDF.
The issue is the rational premise.
____________________Anonymous said...
Vatican II is a counterfeit church headed by an imposter. It is not the church of Christ. Fake and corrupted. The blind leading the blind. It includes delusional FSSP and SSPX priests, - many of them are honest (but delusional), and will wake up shortly. Vatican II religion serves the NWO agenda. There are no negotiations with Judases. All faithful will go underground soon to celebrate TLM. Some already started new covenants and monasteries. After a while, Holy Ghost will gather these souls and renew Catholic Church, the true church of Christ.
Vatican Council II can be interpreted in harmony with the past exclusivist ecclesiology, the Syllabus of Errors and EENS.The Council then is traditional and it is not just pastoral. It does not contradict EENS, the Athanasius Creed etc and so it is dogmatic.
Without the false premise and with the rational premise the Council is dogmatic.
The message again is -use the rational premise to interpret Vatican Council II and also other Magisterial documents and you return to Tradition without having to reject the Council.
This is not because I say so but because this happens every time you use the rational premise. You can see it for yourself. This is independent of me.-Lionel Andrades
Anonymous said...Anonymous Anonymous said...
They sound like terrified beggars who expect to be squashed.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
What a fawning, sickening statement they came up with. Absolutely useless. If that's all the response they have then they are done for, Bergoglio and his ilk will devour their institutes just like the Franciscans of the Immaculate.
Lionel:
They are on the defensive since they do not know about Vatican Council II interpreted with a rational premise.
It is Pope Francis and Pope Benedict who are in schism and heresy with their irrational interpretation of the Council. This error has to be exposed by the Ecclesia Dei communities.
Why should Catholics interpret the Council with the irrational premise and create a rupture with Tradition ? There is a choice.
Why should the Ecclesia Dei communities continue to interpret the Council with an irrational premise , which produces a schismatic result, and then continue to be obedient ?
They must tell the two popes to affirm the traditional ecumenism of return to the Catholic Church for all Christians, since Unitatatis Redintigratio 3 does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
They must demand that Pope Francis and Pope Benedict return to the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church since there is nothing in the entire text of Lumen Gentium to contradict the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.
They do not have to be fawning. Theology and doctrine is on their side. -Lionel Andrades
Anonymous said...Anonymous Paul Dale said...
We owe our allegiance to the pope, but which pope Hammer? Simples: to the one who is reigning. But both call themselves popes - one emeritus, the other Bishop of Rome - so who do we follow? It is very straight forward because it is evident that Pope Benedict XVI did not resign the See of Peter. Very evident. It is all in canon law. I will not try to go through this now but advise you to go to fromrome.info where a very knowledgeable and expert latinist has laid it all out.
Lionel:
On this thread I have been trying to show how important it is to interpret Church Documents with a rational and not irrational premise.
Both Pope Francis and Pope Benedict are using the same New Theology created with a false premise, inference and non traditional conclusion. So they are schismatically in a break with the past Magisterium.
Similarly From Rome.info is also interpreting Vatican Council II with a false premise.
This is something evident. Don't take my word for it. You can consciously interpret the Council with a false or rational premise and the conclusion will be different. You can see it for yourself.
The sedevacantists Most Holy Family Monastery and the Congregatio Mariae Reginae Immaculatae use the false premise to interpret the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance to create a break with 16th century EENS.Neither can the two say in public that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are not literal cases. I have been asking them this for a few years now.
If they say that the baptism of desire etc are not literal cases in 2021 then they would have to say that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2,GS 22 etc are also not literal cases and so are not a break with Tradition ( EENS, Syllabus etc).
This means they were wrong all these years and Vatican Council II is no reason to go into sedevacantism.So they simply block me, end the discussion or do not answer.
This is also the issue with the Ecclesia Dei communities.
-Lionel AndradesTHURSDAY, 2 SEPTEMBER 2021
https://voxcantor.blogspot.com/2021/09/communique-of-superiors-general-of.html
__________________
___________________
SEPTEMBER 4, 2021
The pope cannot interpret Vatican Council II schismatically and expect the Ecclesia Dei communities and the rest of the Church to do the same. The pope is rejecting the rational interpretation of the Council. The Council interpreted rationally or irrationally is now an issue in the Church. We now have official heresy. There is official schism with the past Magisterium. Courtelain did not mention this point
THE POPE CANNOT INTERPRET VATICAN COUNCIL II SCHISMATICALLY AND EXPECT THE ECCLESIA DEI COMMUNTIES AND THE REST OF THE CHURCH TO DO THE SAME.THE POPE IS REJECTING THE RATIONAL INTERPRETATION OF THE COUNCIL. THE COUNCIL INTERPRETED RATIONALLY OR IRRATIONALLY IS NOW AN ISSUE IN THE CHURCH.WE NOW HAVE OFFICIAL HERESY. THERE IS OFFICIAL SCHISM WITH THE PAST MAGISTERIUM. COURTELAIN DID NOT MENTION THIS POINT.
There is only one rational interpretation of Vatican Council II.It’s with a rational premise.So there is no change in the teachings of the Catholic Church.The Ecclesia Dei communities meeting at Courtalain, France, August 31, 2021 had to confirm this.So when there is any reference to Vatican Council II it is understood that only the rational interpretation of the Council has to be chosen.If the pope does not affirm the traditional teachings of the Church, and chooses an irrational interpretion of the Council, with an irrational premise, he is in schism.Since the irrational premise has to create a rupture with de fide teachings ( Creeds and Catechisms).
If he interprets Vatican Council II schismatically with the false premise, he is in schism and his interpretation is not Magisterial and binding on all Catholics.The pope cannot interpret Vatican Council II schismatically and expect the Ecclesia Dei communities and the rest of the Novus Ordo Church to do the same.
Why should the Latin Mass Societies , Una Voce International and the Catholic Bishops Conference, who follow the pope, for example in Britain, interpret Vatican Council II irrationally, create a break with Tradition and consider this the norm ?
The Ecclesia Dei communities statement at Courtalain missed out on this point.The pope is in schism and he wants them to also accept schism by rejecting the rational interpretation of the Council.
Lay Catholics Roberto dei Mattei, Joseph Shaw, Peter Kwasniewski and John Henry Weston are ready to attend the Latin Mass and interpret Vatican Council II with the irrational premise, like Pope Francis, and so support a break with Tradition and also support manifest schism.This is approved by the Left.
Pope Francis is asking the Ecclesia Dei communities to accept Vatican Council II irrationally and schismatically, and they are going along with him.This was also the schismatic interpretation of Pope Benedict and they were content with it.
Before they have a meeting with Pope Francis and welcome apostolic visitors, these communities must clarify that they choose to interpret Vatican Council II non schismatically , with the rational premise, inference and non traditional conclusion.If they choose the irrational premise ( invisible people are visible in 2021) then the Council is a rupture with the Athanasius Creed ( all need Catholic faith for salvation).It contradicts the First Commandment( there is true worship in other religions with other gods).It changes the Nicene Creed ( I believe in one, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church in which membership is not always needed for salvation) and ( I beleive in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins and also three or more known baptisms( desire, blood, invincible ignorance etc), which exclude the baptism of water and so they are practical exceptions to EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc).
This is official heresy. It is also official schism with the past Magisterium.The false premise is used to create a new fake theology.This is unethical.The Ecclesia Dei communities are being coerced, to accept the New Theology and the fake interpretation of the Council, in exchange for canonical recognition and permission to offer the Latin Mass.
In Switzerland, Bishop Charles Morerod op would not allow the Society of St.Pius X to use the churches for Holy Mass in Latin.He said here was a doctrinal problem.He wanted the SSPX to interpret Vatican Council II schismatically with the irrational premise and accept the non traditional conclusion.He was supported by Pope Benedict.
The Ecclesia Dei communities must demand that Bishop Morerod interpret Vatican Council II with the rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion and that he reject his schismatic version of the Council.It is created with the New Theology.They should also demand that all Apostolic Visitors to their communties do the same.
Vatican Council II interpreted rationally or irrationally is now an issue in the Church and the National Catechectical Offices and the Bishops Conferences, have no right to interpret the Council irrationally, creating schism and heresy, and expect the Ecclesia Dei communities to follow them.
The Ecclesia Dei communities are limited. Since they accept Vatican Council II schismatically like Pope Francis. They all use the false premise which Bishop Schneider avoided in his recent interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall.
The Institute of Christ the King priest , who is an Assistant to the diocesan Parish Priest for the Latin Mass in Dijon, France, could inform Bishop Roland Minnerath and the present two popes that he refuses to interpret Vatican Council II schismatically with the false premise.He would also inform the laity to accept the Council, which is no more an issue, but interpret it with the rational premise.-Lionel Andrades
SEPTEMBER 3, 2021
The Ecclesia Dei communties must not let Pope Francis affirm Vatican Council II schismatically with the false premise and expect the rest of the Church to follow
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/09/the-ecclesia-dei-communties-must-not.html
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@
___________________
SEPTEMBER 3, 2021
The Ecclesia Dei communties must not let Pope Francis affirm Vatican Council II schismatically with the false premise and expect the rest of the Church to follow
The Ecclesia Dei communities in their statement have said that they do not see themselves as ‘the true Church’.They also indicate that they accept Pope Francis’ interpretation of Vatican Council II with the false premise instead of the rational premise.
They are concerned about disciplinary apostolic visits.They will be forced to implement liberal programs based upon the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II, which they will not challenge.
The Ecclesia Dei communities are limited. Since they accept Vatican Council II schismatically like Pope Francis. They all use the false premise which Bishop Schneider avoided in his recent interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall.
These communities need to tell Pope Francis to interpret Vatican Council rationally and take the Catholic Church back to Tradition at all rites and liturgies.
They should mention that the SSPX-Vatican talks during the pontificate of Pope Benedict,were a waste of time.Since both sides were interpreting the Council with LG 14 ( baptism of desire) referring to literal and objective cases.
With his liberalism,based upon the false premise, Pope Francis is creating division in the Church and the Ecclesia Dei communities have not called attention to it.He is not allowing the Latin and Novus Ordo Mass to be offered by those who go back to Tradition, while correctly putting aside the Council, when it is interpreted schismatically.
ECCLESIA DEI COMMUNITIES MEET POPE FRANCIS
1.The Ecclesia Dei communties must tell Pope Francis and Pope Benedict, to affirm Vatican Council II interpreted non schismatically and that they expect the popes to also interpret the Council with the rational premise, before they offer Holy Mass.
2.They need to tell Pope Franics to affirm the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics and political legislation,based upon the strict interpretation of EENS, supported by Vatican Council II( interpreted with the rational premise).
3.They must tell him to affirm an Ecumenism of Return to the Catholic Church, for Christian communities and churches, since Unitatis Redintigratio 3 does not contradict the traditional exclusivist ecclesiology and interpretation of EENS.
4.They need to tell Pope Francis to affirm Traditional Mission like the Jesuits of the 16th century, since the baptism of desire (Lumen Gentium 14) and invincible ignorance (Ad Gentes 7) are not exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known to St.Ignatius of Loyola, St.Robert Bellarmine and St. Francis Xavier.
5.They must not let Pope Francis affirm Vatican Council II schismatically, with the false premise and expect the rest of the Church to follow. The Council is no more an issue for the traditionalists.Pope Francis can no more cite Vatican Council II to support his liberalism. The people are aware of a rational interpretation of the Council. -Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades
Promoter of the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.For him the Council is dogmatic and not only pastoral.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
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/leaders-of-ecclesia-dei-communities-rhetorical-judo/?utm_source=home_more_news&utm_campaign=catholic
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2021/09/communique-of-superiors-general-of.html
SEPTEMBER 2, 2021
I affirm the Catholic Church's teachings on other religions and salvation
I affirm all the teachings of the Catholic Church but I only interpret Church documents with the rational premise. So there is no rupture with the past Magisterium and Catholic Tradition.
1.I affirm the first part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which is not contradicted by the second half for me.Since the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance refer to hypothetical and theoretical cases only in 2021. They could not have been practical exceptions to Feenyite EENS in 1949. Pope Pius XII and the popes who followed made an objective mistake.The present popes continue with the mistake and expect all Catholics to follow them.So the interpretation of Vatican Council II by the College of Cardinals is also irrational and non Magisterial.
2.I affirm the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( 24 Q, 29 Q) on other religions.It is not contradicted by that same Catechism mentioning those who are saved in invincible ignorance. Similarly I affirm Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation) which is not contradicted by Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance).LG 16 is always a hypothetical case.Only God can know if someone is saved in invincible ignorance.LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 are always hypothetical.So they do not contradict the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.
3.Similarly the Vatican Council II, Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis Redintigratio 3, is always hypothetical.So does not contradict the past ecumenism of return or the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation.
4.Similarly I affirm the Athanasius Creed which says all need Catholic faith for salvation.I do not know of any practical exception in the present times.
5.I affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and I accept hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance. I do not have to reject them.Since they can only be hypothetical, always.
6.I affirm the Catechism of the Catholic Church (846 Outside the Church No Savation) with Ad Gentes 7 saying all need faith and baptism. I do not know of any exception.There is no exception mentioned in the phrase , ' all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church'.The priority is membership in the Catholic Church, with 'faith and baptism' to avoid Hell ( for salvation).We do not separate Jesus from His Mystical Body the Catholic Church.The norm for salvation is faith and baptism.
7.Similarly I know that 'the Church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water'(CCC 1257) and that there are no practical exceptions.Theoretically 'God is not limited to the Sacraments', and practically all need the baptism of water and Catholic faith,always, to avoid Hell.There are no practical exceptions for the norm for salvation.
8.In the Nicene Creed, we say 'one baptism for the forgiveness of sins'. This refers to one baptism, the baptism of water, which is physically visible. I cannot administer the baptism of desire and it is not known to us human beings.So there is one baptism and not three or more known baptisms.There are no known baptisms which exclude the baptism of water.There is no literal baptism of desire, as says, Bishop Athanasius Schneider in the recent interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall.
9.So the Four Marks of the Church( one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic) must include affirming all Church documents with the rational and not irrational premise.
10.In the Apostles Creed, we say "I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church".The Holy Spirit guides the Catholic Church even today, to say that outside the Catholic Church there is no known salvation.This would be interpreting the Apostles Creed with the rational premise.Otherwise the Creed would be saying outside the Church there is known salvation.
11.Vatican Council II is dogmatic and supports traditional EENS, with LG 8, LG 16 etc not being practical exceptions in the present times.
For Pope Paul VI, Vatican Council was pastoral and not dogmatic, since he used the false premise to create a break with the dogma EENS, the Syllabus of Errors etc.If he had interpreted the Council with a rational premise then the Council would also be dogmatic in 1965.It would make Fr. John Courtney Murray sj, Fr. Joseph Ratzinger, Fr. Yves Congar op and Fr. Karl Rahner sj unable to theologicallysupport their liberalism.There would not be a New Theology.
12.Since the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance are always hypothetical, theoretical and speculative only, they do not contradict the Church's traditional ecclesiocentrism.
These are the teachings of the Catholic Church which I affirm and the priests in the parish are unable to do the same.
St. Alphonsus Liguori, father of Catholic moral theology,says that if a priest is in public mortal sin, do not go up to receive the Eucharist. Since it would be a sin against faith and charity. He is on the way to Hell and you are telling him all is well.
The priest must end the scandal.(Teologia Moralis Bk.3, N.47)
In my parish, Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea Rome the priests have a problem with the Creeds, Catechisms and other Magisterial documents, just like Pope Francis.They are in public schism. So I do not go up to receive the Eucharist, at Holy Mass in Italian.
Pastorally, they allow this situation to continue. -Lionel Andrades
THE FALSE PREMISE IS AS FOLLOWS
1. Invisible people are visible.
2.Unknown case of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are personally known.
3.The unknown case of the catechumen who desired the baptism of water but dies before he received it and is saved, is a personally known person.
4.There is known salvation outside the Catholic Church for us human beings.
5.We can see people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water.
6.We can physically see non Catholics in Heaven and on earth who are saved without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7).
7.There are non Catholics who are dead- men visible and walking who are saved outside the Church.
8.There are known people in invincible ignorance through no fault of their own, who are saved.
9.There are some Anglicans and Protestants whom we know who are going to Heaven even though they are outside the Catholic Church.
10.There are some non Catholics whom we know, who are dead, and now are in Heaven, even though they were not Catholic.
WITH THE FALSE PREMISE IN VATICAN COUNCIL II THERE ARE ALLEGED OBJECTIVE EXCEPTIONS TO EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS, THE SYLLABUS OF ERROR AND THE ATHANASIUS CREED.
With the false premise there are 'objective exceptions' to EENS. There are visible exceptions to the Athanasius Creed, the Nicene Creed is changed, there is a new understanding of the Nicene Creed etc :-
1. The Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation is contradicted.
2. The Nicene Creed in which we say, 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins' over the centuries referred to only one known baptism, the baptism of water.The baptism of desire etc cannot be given to someone like the baptism of water.But now the understanding is ' I believe in three or more known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins ( desire,blood and ignorance) and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church'.
3. The Apostles Creed says ' we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church'. Over the centuries it was understood that the Holy Spirit guided the Catholic Church and taught that there was no salvation outside the Church.Now unknown cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, and LG 8, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, are assumd to be objective examples of salvation outside the Church.
4.In the past three Church Councils defined the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) in the extraordinary Magisterium .It was an 'infallible teaching' for Pope Pius X( Letter of the Holy Offie 1949).Now it is obsolete with their being alleged known salvation outside the Church.
5.Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are interpreted with the false premise so they become a rupture with EENS( Feeneyite), the Syllabus of Errors, Athanasius Creed etc.
5.Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are interpreted with the false premise so they become a rupture with EENS( Feeneyite), the Syllabus of Errors, Athanasius Creed etc.
6.With the false premise the Catechism of Pope Pius X contradict itself. It affirms the strict interpretation of EENS while invincible invincible ignorance is intepreted as referring to personally known non Catholics saved outside the Chuch.Invincible ignorance is not seen as a hypothetical case only.
7.Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus, Ecclesia in Asia, Balamand Declaration etc were all written upholding the false premise. They did not support exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. So in a subtle way they contradicted EENS(Feeneyite), the Athanasius Creed etc. They did not support the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.They are Christological without the traditional ecclesiocentric ecclesiology. It's Christ without the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church for salvation.8. Traditional mission based upon exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church is rejected. Since with the false premise, there is salvation outside the Church.
9.Inter faith marriages which are not Sacraments are common held.It is no more adultery. Since the non Catholic spouse could be saved outside the Church it is assumed. A posibility which could only be known to God is assumed to be a practical exception to EENS and a literally known case of salvation outside the Church in a personal case.
10. There is a new heretical ecclesiology at Holy Mass in all the rites and liturgies. The Latin Mass today does not have the same exclusivist ecclesiology of the Tridentine Rite Mass of the missionaries in the 16th century.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/08/cardinal-reinhold-marx-of-munich.html
https://damselofthefaith.wordpress.com/2014/12/11/no-salvation-outside-the-catholic-church/
https://damselofthefaith.wordpress.com/2014/12/11/no-salvation-outside-the-catholic-church/
When Pope Benedict refused to give canonical recognition to the SSPX unless they accepted Vatican Council II schismatically with the false premise it was coercion. Even today the Ecclesia Dei communities have to follow the popes' schismatic interpretation of the Council for canonical recognition and permission to offer the Latin Mass
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/09/when-pope-benedict-refused-to-give.html
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 )
___________________https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/09/i-want-ecclesia-dei-communities-to-know.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
