The USCCB bishops are officially and publically using a False Premise in the USA to interpret Vatican Council II and other Church Documents. Is this legal?

 

The USCCB bishops are officially and publically using a False Premise in the USA to interpret Vatican Council II and other Church Documents. Is this legal?

Bishop Robert Barron does the same and after being informed does not deny it. He now continues to interpret Vatican Council II with a Fake Premise ( invisible people are visible), Fake Inference( they are examples of salvation outside the Church and practical exceptions for EENS, Syllabus of Errors, Athanasius Creed etc) and Non Traditional Conclusion( Vatican Council II is a rupture with Tradition, the Syllabus of Errors has exceptions and so is obsolete etc).

For me Lumen Gentium 16 refers to an invisible case but for the USCCB bishops it is visible. For me, LG 16 (being saved in invincible ignorance) refers to a hypothetical case but for the American bishops it is not hypothetical. If it was hypothetical it would not contradict the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.So they need the exceptions.

LG 16 is objective for them and subjective for me. LG 16 is always implicit and never explicit, for me. For them it is the reverse. Upon this irrationality they follow their new theology. The USCCB bishops at Baltimore decided to give the Eucharist to Biden to protect their interests.

They are now choosing to interpret Vatican Council II with a Fake Premise, to protect their interests. Bishop Barron is doing this after being informed. It is unethical.

John Allen Jr’s podcasts are offered on Bishop Barron’s website. Bishop Barron and John Allen interpret Vatican Council II with a Fake Premise and so produce a liberal version of the Catholic faith.

They also support the liberal theology of the popes from Paul VI to Francis, who also created liberalism with the same Fake Premise. The USCCB officially does the same.-Lionel Andrades

Bishop Robert Barron interprets Vatican Council II with a Fake Premise produces an artificial rupture with Tradition and then criticizes Catholics on social media who do not accept his liberalism

At the Los Angeles Catholic Conference they were all in general, interpreting Vatican Council II with the False Premise and so was Bishop Barron. So there was a fake and artificial rupture with Tradition.

 

It’s unethical by secular standards for Bishop Robert Barron and Dr. Larry Chapp to use a False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II. I affirm Vatican Council II with a Rational Premise. I avoid the False Premise.

Bishop Barron interprets Vatican Council II with the Fake Premise emerges a liberal and then holds a talk with Jordan Peterson.

For Bishop Barron Lumen Gentium 16 contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX (ecumenism of return to the Church/ outside the Church no salvation). For me it does not contradict these Magisterial Documents. Since they always refer to hypothetical and invisible cases in the present times (2022).There are no known cases of non Catholics saved outside the Catholic Church. So there are no practical exceptions for Tradition. (Catechism of Pope Pius X, Athanasius Creed etc).

At the Los Angeles Catholic Conference they were all in general, interpreting Vatican Council II with the False Premise and so was Bishop Barron. So there was a fake and artificial rupture with Tradition.  -Lionel Andrades

Hans urs Balthazar did not know that Vatican Council II could be interpreted with a Fake or Rational Premise.

Hans urs Balthazar did not know that Vatican Council II could be interpreted with a Fake or Rational Premise. He did not know that there were two possible interpretations of the Council and the conclusion would be different. It would be either for or against Tradition (Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX etc).

He chose the irrational interpretation and produced a liberal theology.

The prefects of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the popes did not correct him objective and factual mistake.

-Lionel Andrades

ntium 16, 24-hours, throughout the year, always refers to a hypothetical and invisible case. How could it contradict the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius X, the dogma EENS and the Athanasius Creed which Bishop Barron rejected before Shapiro ?

The U.S bishops like Bishop Robert Barron use a False Premise to reject Tradition. They are intellectually dishonest. Unlike the U.S bishops, the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) does not accept Vatican Council II interpreted with the False Premise.

In this video Bishop Barron says that he did not tell Ben Shapiro that he needed to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation and justifies himself by citing Lumen Gentium 16 ( being saved in invincible ignorance).But Lumen Gentium 16, 24-hours, throughout the year, always refers to a hypothetical and invisible case. How could it contradict the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius X, the dogma EENS and the Athanasius Creed which Bishop Barron rejected before Shapiro ? - Lionel Andrades

 MARCH 30, 2022

Bishop Robert Barron is intellectually dishonest. He openly uses a False Premise to create a rupture with traditional ecclesiocentrism of the Church. This was also done by Cardinal Luiz Ladaria at the Placquet Deo, Press Conference

Bishop Robert Barron is intellectually dishonest. He openly uses a False Premise to create a rupture with traditional ecclesiocentrism of the Church. This was also done by Cardinal Luiz Ladaria at the Placquet Deo, Press Conference, when he was asked by a reporter of the Associated Press,if the Church still teaches that it had a superiority on salvation. This response is not the Gospel teaching (John 3:5, John 16:16).

Bishop Barron is creating division in the Catholic Church with the False Premise and was attacking other Catholics on social media who do not accept his liberalism.

In this new politically correct with the Left video(above), Bishop Barron supports first class heresy ( rupture with the Creeds and Catechisms) when he interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise. This is not magisterial. Since the Holy Spirit cannot make an objective mistake. This is human error which is there in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 (LOHO) and Pope Paul VI’s 1) accepting the LOHO, 2) accepting the LOHO being referenced in Vatican Council II (LG 16) and 3) then concluding that there is known salvation outside the Catholic Church, in the present times. So there are also practical exceptions for extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, Athanasius Creed etc. So then there is a rupture with the Magisterium of the 16^th century which affirmed the strict interpretation of EENS.

The rupture with EENS by Bishop Barron is created by projecting the baptism of desire(LG 14) and invincible ignorance(LG 16), as being objective exceptions for EENS. In other words, what is invisible in 1965-2022 has to be misunderstood as being visible. Then with the false inference Magisterial Documents are rejected.

Bishop Robert Barron is intellectually dishonest, when he does not use a Rational Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and then support the strict interpretation of EENS, as held by St. Thomas Aquinas. In this video he presents Lumen Gentium as an exception for EENS. In other words, there are visible cases of LG which contradict EENS.(See the video-time 10.05 and then 26:25).He then calls this a development of doctrine. First comes with the false premise ( visible cases of Lumen Gentium 16) and then the 'development'.  - Lionel Andrades

______________________________________________

MARCH 29, 2022

Future bishops in the USA could be Scholastic. There is no other choice. Since Vatican Council II interpreted rationally supports the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

 

 The Congregation for Bishops,Vatican recommends the name of bishops for the pope to decide but ultimately it is the pope who will decide. Cardinal Blaise Cupich and Cardinal Joseph Tobin among others, decides who will be a bishop. Politically they are centre-left says John Allen jr, at Crux. They would be moderate and progressive. They will decide who are the future bishops.

But they are still interpreting Vatican Council II with the Irrational and not Rational Premise. There is only one choice. It makes the Council traditional. It supports the past exclusivist ecclesiology.

So all future bishops in the USA could be Scholastic. There is no other choice. Since Vatican Council II interpreted rationally supports the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.  -Lionel Andrades

__________________________________

MARCH 29, 2022

Bishop Barron presents Larry Chapp without mentioning that Vatican Council II can be interpreted with a Rational Premise and the Council will be Traditional supporting the past exclusivist ecclesiology

 

MARCH 28, 2022

The first commandment of God is: I am the Lord thy God; thou shalt not have strange gods before Me.

 

-Lionel Andrades

MARCH 27, 2022

'The Red is not an Exception to the Blue' changes everything in our interpretation of Vatican Council II

 

___________________

MARCH 27, 2022

A video needs to be produced showing the difference in the interpretation of Vatican Council II with the 1) Fake Premise, False Inference and Non Traditional Conclusion and 2) with the Rational Premise, Rational Inference and Traditional Conclusion. The graphics are available on this blog.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/03/a-video-needs-to-be-produced-showing.html

___________________________________________

   

  

____________________________

_____________________

________________________________________________________

MARCH 12, 2022

Is the German Synodal Way legal?

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/03/is-german-synodal-way-legal_12.html

1 Athanasius Creed

2.Nicene Creed

3.Apostles Creed

____________________________________

OCTOBER 1, 2021

With the irrational premise of the Red Right Hand Side Column, the Athanasius Creed is changed : Popes, Cardinals and Bishops use the irrational column

 

                                                                                                                            -Lionel Andrades

 OCTOBER 1, 2021

Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall chose the Blue Left Hand Side Rational Column to interpret the Baptism of Desire (LG 14). The Ecclesia Dei communities can also interpret Vatican Council II rationally ( Graphics )

                                                                                               

 

                                                                               

_________________________________________________

 WE HAVE TWO INTERPRETATIONS OF 

VATICAN COUNCIL II : YOURS AND MINE

Lionel Andrades

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. Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not only pastoral.

It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms. There can be two interpretations.Catholics must choose the rational option.

Why should Catholics choose an irrational version which is heretical, nontraditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional?

Blog: Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission)

E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com

___________________

Gesù siamo ancora una volta davanti a Te con il bisogno di incontrarti e la "sete" profonda di Te

Readers of this blog could inform the editors and correspondents of Crux, National Catholic Reporter, Commonweal and the Tablet, (whenever they mention Vatican Council II) that the Council can be interpreted with a Rational Premise and the conclusion is traditional.

 

Readers of this blog could inform the editors and correspondents of Crux, National Catholic Reporter, Commonweal and the Tablet, (whenever they mention Vatican Council II) that the Council can be interpreted with a Rational Premise and the conclusion is traditional.

Bishop Robert Barron can no more have his television discussions which interpret Vatican Council II dishonestly. He cannot talk about the hermeneutic of continuity of Pope Benedict and then with a False Premise produce a hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.

Writers like George Weigel and John Allen jr, must also mention that Pope Benedict used the Fake Premise to interpret Vatican Council II. So in all his books, Vatican Council II was interpreted with the hermeneutic of rupture and not continuity with Tradition.

With the Rational Premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II there is no more a rational progressivist and liberal theology.Since the False Premise is avoided. It is a return to the old theology, the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church. There is a hermeneutic of continuity with the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the Athanasius Creed.  

-Lionel Andrades

Mortal sins orient a person to Hell according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church. All it takes is one un-confessed mortal sin for a Catholic to go to Hell.

The speaker in this video says that mortal sin breaks our link; our connection with Jesus Christ.He speaks about the difference between mortal and venial sin.

There are some people who come to church but are really in mortal sin and in whom Christ is not there. Since mortal sin has broken the link. He means there no more is Sanctifying Grace.

The speaker, in Italian then mentions the three elements of mortal  sin. Its subject has to be grave.Killing someone is grave matter.

·         Its subject matter must be grave. ...

 He then mentions two conditions which refer to our intentions and motivations.

·        
It must be committed with full knowledge (and awareness) of the sinful action and the gravity of the offense.

·         It must be committed with deliberate and complete consent.

 Here we often have a liberal interpretation of mortal sin.It is the new moral theology at  Catholic universities.However Pope John Paul II, in Veritatis Splendor (1993) has said that a mortal sin is a mortal sin and the outside action indicates the interior thinking of the person.But for the liberal New Moral Theology the exception proves the rule. Since we cannot objectively know the interior state of a person, we cannot really say that an act is a mortal sin, is their false reasoning.It is no more black and white, but is a whole beige area, for Bishop Robert Barron, for example.This interpretation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on mortal sin was a bed rock for Pope Francis issuing the controversial Amoris Laetitia. He approved the Eucharist being given to the divorced and remarried as if they are not in public and objective mortal sin. Similarly the Eucharist is being given to non Catholics who are obviously outside the Church and without Sanctifying Grace.

IInter-faith marriages are accepted when one of the spouses is not a Catholic.The marriage is not a Sacrament when a spouse is not part of the community of believers.This is all a rejection of the moral theology of St. Alphonsus Liguori, father of Catholic moral theology. He did not pretend that we could judge the interior state of a person and so reject the traditional understanding of mortal sin.Immodesty in clothes is a mortal sin. The interior understanding can only be known to God.Robbery in big amounts is a mortal sin.

Abortion is a mortal sin.Sodomy is a mortal sin.

Rejection of the Creeds is a mortal sin.A rejection or re-interpretation of the First Commandment for Catholics is a mortal sin. 

When a Catholic leaves the Catholic faith it is a mortal sin of faith.

Mortal sins orient a person to Hell according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church. All it takes is one un-confessed mortal sin for a Catholic to go to Hell,for eternity.

-Lionel Andrades

MAY 31, 2018

Volcanic lakes of fire and Fatima : Kilauea Volcano, Hawaii, May 23

Our Lady also mentioned a lake of fire  in Hell. So does the Bible.

In The True Story of Fatima, Father John de Marchi recounted how Jacinta’s father Ti Marto witnessed the children’s actions in the Cova da Iria that day. He remembered “that Lucia gasped in sudden horror, that her face was white as death, and that all who were there heard her cry in terror to the Virgin Mother, whom she called by name,” wrote Father de Marchi. “The children were looking at their Lady in terror, speechless, and unable to plead for relief from the scene they had witnessed.”

Later at the request of the Bishop of Leiria, Lucia described the vision this way:

As Our Lady spoke these last words, she opened her hands once more, as she had done during the two previous months. The rays of light seemed to penetrate the earth, and we saw as it were a sea of fire. Plunged in this fire were demons and souls in human form, like transparent burning embers, all blackened or burnished bronze, floating about in the conflagration, now raised into the air by the flames that issued from within themselves together with great clouds of smoke now falling back on every side like sparks in huge fires, without weight or equilibrium, amid shrieks and groans of pain and despair, which horrified us and made us tremble with fear. (It must have been this sight which caused me to cry out, as people say they heard me). The demons could be distinguished by their terrifying and repellent likeness to frightful and unknown animals, black and transparent like burning coals. Terrified and as if to plead for succour, we looked up at Our Lady, who said to us, so kindly and so sadly: You have seen hell where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart. If what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be peace.

MAY 30, 2018

Hell - lake of fire on earth