Monday, September 27, 2021
At Pope Francis’ meeting with the Jesuits in Slovakia no one told him he was interpreting Vatican Council II with a false premise and maintaining division in the Catholic Church. The Jesuits created division when they expelled Fr. Leonard Feeney for not interpreting extra ecclesiam nulla salus with a fake premise.
At Pope Francis’ meeting with the Jesuits in
Slovakia no one told him he was interpreting
Vatican Council II with a false premise and maintaining division in the
Catholic Church. The Jesuits created division when they
expelled Fr. Leonard Feeney for not
interpreting extra ecclesiam nulla salus with
a fake premise. He would not say that they were physically visible cases of the
baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance, in the 1940’s and
50’s in Rome and Boston. The Jesuits and the popes thought otherwise.
Even Pope Francis will not interpret the baptism of
desire without the fake premise. So EENS has exceptions for him. There are
exceptions of BOD, BOB and I.I.
Pope Francis and the Jesuits have to choose between
Jesus and Satan. Satan wants division in the Church.-Lionel Andrades
https://www.jesuits.global/2021/09/23/pope-francis-in-slovakia-a-warm-caress-to-the-jesuits/
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
JANUARY 28, 2013
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/search/label/Hell?updated-max=2014-05-17T20:21:00%2B01:00&max-results=20&start=77&by-date=false
Politically correct with the Left homilies were delivered yesterday at Sunday Mass in Rome : personal and political interpretations of Vatican Council II sustained division and schism in the Church and support the general apostasy.
The homilies yesterday at Sunday Holy
Mass in Italian in Rome supported division and schism in the Church and also the
apostasy with which we are now familiar . They suggested that other religions are
paths to salvation ignoring John 3:5 and Mark 16:16 etc and other passages in
the Bible, which tell us that there is exclusive salvation in Jesus and in the
only Church he founded. They did not say that Jesus was the unique Saviour in a
unique Church and all needed to accept him for salvation from Hell.
I went for the evening Mass on Saturday,
with the Sunday Readings. Yesterday also I went for Holy Mass at 10 a.m in Italian
at two different churches. The doctrines on salvation were Masonic.
During the homilies at these three
different churches none of them mentioned the Gospel reference to Hell. None of
them said there was exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church according to
Vatican Council II(AG 7) with hypothetical cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc not
being practical exceptions to AG 7 or extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
The Holy Spirit can be present in other
religions, but we cannot say that a particular person, a non Catholic, will be
saved in his religion because of the action of the Holy Spirit. For salvation
all need faith and the baptism of water( AG 7, Vatican Council II).
The norm for salvation is the baptism of
water (AG 7, Vatican Council II) and Catholic faith.It is not the ‘seeds of the
Word’(AG 11) in other religions.
At the 11.30 am Holy Mass the priest was
probably Italian. He was clear and fluent and I could easily understand him. But
his doctrines on salvation were as false, as the homilies in the other two
churches. He would repeat the Masonic line on salvation being open for all, without mentioning that all need to enter the Catholic Church to avoid Hell (
Dominus Iesus 20, Pope John Paul II).
A Filipino-American priest at the 10 a.m
Holy Mass was clear in his presentation and delivery as he usually is. But he
presented Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition even when he knows it is
not and he agreed with me a few years back. So in his homily his interpretation of
the Council was personal. It was political. It was not Magisterial. Since the
Holy Spirit cannot make a mistake or lie.
It was his personal interpretation of
Vatican Council II like that of Pope Francis and the popes since Paul VI. They
too had a choice before them. They could have chosen the rational or irrational
version of the Council. They made a bad choice. They chose the interpretation
approved by the Left and Satan. The Left is from Satan.
When Pope Francis interprets Vatican
Council II, he has to reject the rational premise, since the Left would accuse
him of being rigid.
Wikipedia could simply post the
statements of the popes and saints on EENS and leave it at that. Why bring in
Vatican Council II or the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance?
In the same way yesterday, during the
Sunday homilies at Mass the priests were interpreting the Gospel as if we could
know of exceptions to their being
exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. So Traditional Mission, which they
do not call for any more , is obsolete for them. Vatican Council II has
exceptions. The Proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King in Italian
politics is also obsolete for them. Since
with their personal interpretation of Vatican Council II there are exceptions
for EENS, the Syllabus of Errors of Pius IX etc.So there is no more exclusive
salvation in the Catholic Church for them, as their homilies indicated, so why is
there a need to proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King in all political
legislation ? Why should Christ be the center of politics for them? If they
would interpret Vatican Council II and BOD, BOB and I.I rationally,
then they would be able to say that Christ must be the center of all
politics in Italy. Since outside the Church
there is no salvation and all need to be Catholic to avoid the fires of Hell.-Lionel Andrades
Posts
