Repost : Franciscan Friars ask to be dispensed of their vows: Franciscans Sisters of the Immaculate being suppressed -Roberto de Mattei

 

MAY 21, 2014

Francscan Friars ask to be dispensed of their vows: Franciscans Sisters of the Immaculate being suppressed -Roberto de Mattei

Franciscans of the Immaculate ( Roberto de Mattei ) The last doubt, for those who still had them , have definitely been removed. There  exists a definite plan for the systematic destruction of the Franciscans of the Immaculate , the two religious institutes founded by Father Stefano Maria Manelli , now swept away by the storm .Monday, May 19, 2014 , Cardinal João Braz de Aviz, Prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life , announced to the Mother General of the Franciscans of the Immaculate , the appointment, with immediate effect , of a " visitor " to the Institute , with powers of full  control, equivalent to those of a " Commissioner " . In the general house of Frattocchie, Sr. Fernanda Barbiero, of the Sisters of St. Dorothy Maestre  took office , ipso facto...
The Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate are a religious order of pontifical right, which is distinguished by the young average age , the number of vocations and especially  the rigor with which they live their charism , according to the approved Rule of St. Francis of Assisi . One section  of them carries an intense apostolic mission  in Africa, Brazil and the Philippines, while another  has embraced the contemplative life , in a spirit of deep austerity and prayer. The Sisters , inspired by the example of St. Maximilian Mary Kolbe , run publishing houses , radio and popular  mainstream journals , such as " Il Settimanale di Padre Pio". This apostolate of conquest , combined with a love of tradition , is certainly one of the cause of hatred that is directed to them and the Franciscan Friars.On 11 July 2013, Cardinal Braz de Aviz has entrusted the government of the Franciscans of the Immaculate , an " apostolic commissioner ," which in less than a year has managed to disrupt the order , forcing the best Friars to ask for permission to be dispensed of their vows, to live their vocation in another way  and to leave  an Institute now reduced to a field of ruins.
The case of the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate is now more serious  than the  Institute for the Friars . The pretext for the "visit " and then creating a commissioner for the Friars was the presence of a small and aggressive group of " dissidents" , encouraged and nurtured from the outside. No dissent has manifested itself , however, between the sisters , who live in a spirit of unity and brotherly love . The Franciscans of the Immaculate,Sisters and Friars are being suppressed especially for their approach to Tradition ,which is  in conflict with the practice of most of the Institutes of Consecrated Life...
Faced with the collapse of the post - theological and pastoral council , they have expressed an attachment to the orthodoxy of the Church , which contrasts with the doctrinal and liturgical creativity  prevalent today . The Congregation for Religious sees this sentire cum ecclesia "traditional"  incompatibile with  sentire cum ecclesia ...The Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life committed a blatant abuse of power when they prevented  the Franciscans of the Immaculate offering Mass according to the ancient Roman Rite . The Friars also committed a clear error when they agreed to give up the celebration of the traditional Mass . They justified their waiver on the basis of two reasons: obedience and bi- ritualism . But the underlying problem is not the mono-or bi- ritualism .The fact is that the traditional Mass was never abrogated and can not be, and that all priests retain the right to celebrate it. The cornerstone of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum of Pope Benedict XVI(July 7, 2007) states every priest has the right "to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass following the...Roman Missal promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962 and which was never abrogated , as an extraordinary form of the Liturgy of the Church . " It is a universal law of the Church , which confirms the Bull Quo Primum of St. Pius V (1570 ) . No priest has ever been punished , or could be, because he celebrates the traditional Mass . It can never be imposed on the faithful, nuns or lay people who are not to waive the right to a Rite canonized by the use of almost two millennia of Church history.

Obedience is a virtue, perhaps the highest . But the problem that arises in the Church today is who and what we should obey. When obedience to human authorities , instead of perfecting the spiritual life, prejudice , jeopardizing their salvation, must be vigorously rejected, because we must obey God rather than men (Acts 5 : 29).Perhaps Cardinal Braz de Aviz wants to push the nuns to move en masse to the Society of St. Pius X , in order to prove that there is no space... possible between the traditionalist " schismatics " and the Church " conciliar " . He seems to forget , however, two things : first, that many bishops and even entire conferences of bishops are now separated from the Church's faith in a much greater extent than ....is separated from the Society of St. Pius X by the ecclesiastical authorities ; secondly that canon law allows the Friars and Sisters to be freed from their vows to regroup in the form of a private association of the faithful , living their vocation outside of any arbitrary taxation (tax 298-311 ) .Can the Congregation of the Religious Sisters refuse  400 sisters if they ask to be dispensed with their vows? It would be a brutal violation of the freedom of conscience of which today there is so much talk and so much nonsense . The traditional doctrine of the Church considers inviolable, freedom of conscience in the internal forum , because no one can be forced in his choices , but denies that freedom in the public sphere , or the external forum , because only the truth , and not the error has no rights. The fanatics of Vatican II theorize religious freedom in the external forum , recognizing the rights of all religions and sects, but deny it in the internal forum , processing the intentions and invading the realm of individual conscience.But is it  possible to impose by force, on  the Friars and Sisters , to remain within a religious institute,  which you do not recognize because its identity has been destroyed  ? The principle that animarum salus suprema lex , is the basis not only of canon law , but of the spiritual life of every baptized person , which  must be an indispensable rule of  action for the salvation of the soul.If, in this perspective, some , following a right conscience , wanted to resist unjust orders what do you expect ? A hug dialoguing, mercy or a harsh stick policy ? Expulsion, censure, suspension a divinis  , excommunications and interdicts, are now reserved only for  those who retain the orthodox faith ?One last question is unanswered for the moment.Is not the stick of Cardinal Braz de Aviz is in open contradiction with the policy of mercy of Pope Francis...? (Roberto de Mattei ) (emphasis added) Translated by L.A.

 

Salus animarum suprema lex? http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/05/salus-animarum-suprema-lex.html#links

http://www.corrispondenzaromana.it/salus-animarum-suprema-lex/

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2014/05/francscan-friars-ask-to-be-dispensed-of.html

Perpetual Eucharistic Adoration from Saint Mary Chapel, Middletown, NJ

Official error which the religious communities must correct

The Franciscans of the Immaculate, the Ecclesia Dei communities and religious communities whose members offer/ attend Holy Mass in the vernacular could ask Cardinal Luiz Ladaria and Cardinal Braz de Avez to confirm that there is no literal case of being saved with the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance known to them in 2022.They could confirm that for them there are no explicit cases of St.Thomas Aquinas’ implicit baptism of desire as it was mentioned by Dr.Taylor Marshall. They could agree with the apologist John Martignoni who says that the baptism of desire(BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) are ‘zero cases’ in our reality. This is his reality. Is it also that of the cardinal-prefects?

FALSE AND RATIONAL PREMISE

1.When the baptism of desire (LG 14) and invincible ignorance (LG 16) refer to known people in 2021-2022 saved without Catholic faith and the baptism of water, a False Premise has been used in the interpretation. There are no such known cases. If any one was saved as such it could only be known to God.

2.When the BOD and I.I refer to invisible people in the present times then the premise is rational.

The cardinals could be asked to interpret Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents with the Rational Premise only and officially recommend it for all religious communities.

The religious communities must not be forced to interpret Vatican Council II with the False Premise and accept Apostolic Visitors, Commissars, and Canonical Consultants, who promote the same irrationality.

Parish priests and rectors like cardinals and bishops must only use the Rational Premise to interpret Church Documents and reject the interpretation with the Irrational Premise. It us unethical.

Traditionis Custode interprets Vatican Council II with the False Premise which confuses what is invisible as being visible. In this way there is a new liberalism in the Church and there is a break with traditional ecclesiocentrism. A new theology and new ecclesiology is created and so there is a pre and post Vatican Council II ecclesiology which is different. For me there is no change in the ecclesiology since I avoid the False Premise which creates the New Theology.

The religious communities need to formally inform the cardinal-prefects at the Vatican that they will only accept Vatican Council II interpreted rationally and they would expect them to do the same.

 The present interpretation of Pope Francis and Pope Benedict with the False Premise produces a conclusion which is schismatic, heretical, irrational, non traditional and non Magisterial. It is not part of the Deposit of the Faith.

Archbishop Arthur Roche must take back his restrictions for the Latin Mass since there is no new magisterium, when he interprets Vatican Council II, confusing what is invisible as being visible and then produces a non-traditional conclusion. Vatican Council II (Rational) is in harmony with all the teachings of the Roman Missal over the centuries-Vatican Council II (Irrational) is not.

FIRST COMMUNION CLASSES WITH VATICAN COUNCIL II RATIONAL ONLY

Religious communities could inform the Vatican offices that they will teach Catholic children, at First Communion, Confirmation etc, to only interpret Vatican Council II rationally and honestly. This would be Magisterial.

Priests cannot be expected to concelebrate Holy Mass with other priests, who use a False Premise to change theology and create a new version of the Nicene Creed. They reject the Athanasius Creed and change the understanding of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The baptism of desire and invincible ignorance cannot be interpreted with a False Premise and then projected as being practical exceptions for traditional exclusivist extra ecclesiam nulla salus. These are mortal sins of faith and are a public scandal for those who discern what is happening.

The Congregation for Catholic Education, Vatican sponsored a secular and humanistic educational program at which the former Mayor of Rome was also present. Of course they had to interpret Vatican Council II with the confusion of the False Premise otherwise they would be going back to the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Jesuit missionaries of the 16^th century. This is dishonest. Since the Council can really only be interpreted with a Rational Premise.

NON CATHOLICS DO NOT KNOW

Pope Francis must not permit education programs along with secular organizations and use the False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and other important Church Documents, without informing non Catholics about the error.

 The Latin Mass in Rome is only permitted for religious communities which interpret Vatican Council II with the False Premise as is done by the cardinals Ladaria and Avez.

In Rome after Traditionis Custode the Latin Mass can be offered in the premises of public institutions and even conference rooms of hotels but not in the old or new church building of the parish Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea. The Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate of Fr. Stefano Manelli fi, do not accept Vatican Council II interpreted with the False Premise. So they are prohibited from offering Holy Mass in this parish. In the past they would offer the Latin Mass in the parish and I would attend the Latin Mass in the parish.

FRANCISCANS COULD OFFER MASS IN ITALIAN SINCE THEY USED THE FALSE PREMISE

Pope Francis allowed access to the parish church to the  Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate who offer Holy Mass only in Italian.They could use the new  church building, since they interpret  the Council with the False Premise and teach it to others.

There still is confusion after Traditionis Custode. Joshua McElwee at the National Catholic Reporter recently interpreted the Council with the common error and then referred to 'the reforms of Vatican Council II'. Without the False Premise there would be no 'reforms'. It is only with the False Premise that there are 'Eucharistic reforms' and Holy Communion at Mass is given to non Catholics and to the divorced and remarried and others living in public mortal sins of faith and morals. Inter-marriages are not seen as adultery since the non Catholic spouse could be saved outside the Church. Outside the Church there is known salvation and so there is a new ecclesiology and morality.

Pope Benedict interprets Vatican Council II with the False Premise and then refers to ‘the development of doctrine’ with Vatican Council II.He says traditional mission and extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the 16th century missionaries is now obsolete.

Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II with the same Fake Premise and then says that it is ‘magisterial’ and tells the National Catechetical Center, Italy, to do the same.

This is official error which the religious communities must correct.-Lionel Andrades

  

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

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@gmail.com

___________________

OCTOBER 23, 2021

Vatican Council II is dogmatic and ecclesiocentric

 JUNE 11, 2021

Vatican Council II is dogmatic

 

 

 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE LIONEL ANDRADES INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II.

1.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?

It does not use the common fake premise.It's a simple, rational and different way to read Vatican Council II.

 

2.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)?

It does not use the common false premise to interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), invincible ignorance(I.I) and the baptism of blood(BOB).So there are no practical exceptions for EENS.EENS is traditonal and BOD, BOB and I.I are interpreted rationally.It's not EENS or BOB,BOB and I.I. Since the latter are not exceptions for the former.

 

3.Is the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Magisterial documents copy writed or trademarked? 

No. Any one can use it. There is no charge.It is simply going back to the traditiional interpretation of Church documents, without the false premise. The false premise came into the Church in a big way, with the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney(1949).

 

4.How did the Lionel Andrades interpretation of VC 2 emerge?

He kept writing on his blog on EENS and then discovered that Vatican Council II does not really contradict EENS if the false premise is avoided.

 

5.Is the LA interpretation of VC2 a new theology?

No. It is going back to the old, traditional theology of the Catholic Church by avoiding the false premise.It is the false premise which has created the New Theology.Without the false premise there cannot be the New Ecumenism, New Evangelisation, New Ecclesiology etc.The New Theology is Cristocentric without the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church.Since exceptions were created to EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors etc, by projecting a false premise.The error was overlooked by the popes.

 

6.What about traditional, 16th century Mission doctrine?

With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II we return to traditional Mission doctrine. It is no more 'only they need to enter the Church who know about it', who are not in invincible ignorance(LG 14) Instead, it is all need to enter the Catholic Church with no known exception.Invincible ignorance is not an exception to all needing to enter the Church with faith and the baptism(LG 14).So we evangelize since all non Catholics are oriented to Hell without faith and the baptism of water( Ad Gentes 7/Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II. The norm for salvation is faith and baptism and not invincible ignorance.When I meet a non Catholic, I cannot assume or pretend to know, that he or she is an exception to the norm. If there is an exception it could be known only to God.I know that the non Catholic before me, is oriented to Hell( Athanasius Creed, Vatican Council II(AG 7, LG 14),Catechism of the Catholic Church(845,846,1257),Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, etc).

 

7.What about the hermeneutic of continuity or rupture with Tradition ?

With the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II there is no rupture with past Magisterium documents and neither do they contradict each other.We have to re-interpret past Magisterial documents though, which mention the baptism of desire(BOD) and invincible ignorance(I.I), as being hypothetical and invisible always.Being saved with BOD and I.I are always physically invisible, when they are mentioned in the Catechisms( Trent, Pius X etc) and encyclicals and documents of the popes(Mystici Corporis etc).They always refer to hypothetical cases only and are not objectively known non Catholics.If someone is saved outside the Church he or she could only be known to God.This has to be clear when reading also the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.There is also no confusion when reading the text of Vatican Council II.LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3,NA 2,GS 22 etc, refer always to only hypothetical cases and so they do not contradict the Athanasius Creed.

 

8.Should the popes use the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?

YES! Since presently the two popes are schismatic, heretical, non Magisterial and non traditional on Vatican Council II.It has to be this way since they use the false premise.It is only with the false premise, inference and conclusion that they interpret Magisterial documents. This can be avoided with a rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion.The result is a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.

 

9.What other advantage is there in knowing the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?

We read the text of Vatican Council II in general differently with the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.

’The red is not an exception to the blue’.The hypothetical passages( marked in red on the blog Eucharist and Mission, are not practical exceptions to the orthodox passages in Vatican Council II which support EENS, and are marked in blue.

For the present two popes and the traditionalists the red is an exception to the blue. This is irrational.

 

10.What bearing does it have on the liturgy ?

Without the false premise the Council is traditional. Vatican Council II is in harmony with extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the missionaries in the 16th century.So we are back to the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. When the Council is traditional there is no 'development of doctrine' or 'sprit of Vatican Council II'. Collegiality, Religious Freedom and ecumenism are no more an issue. So receiving Holy Communion on the hand can no more be justified with Vatican Council II.Neither can the Eucharist be given to the divorced and re-married, in the name of the Council.

Neither can the German Synod be justified by citing Vatican Council II.There is no theological basis in the Council, any more, for given the Eucharist to Protestants during Holy Mass.

 

11.What is the essence of this interpretation?

It is the listing of the rational and irrational premise, inference and conclusion. It identifies  two different premises with two different conclusions. So the rational premise produces a traditional conclusion and the Vatican Council II is in harmony with Tradition. It has a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition even though Rahner, Congar, Rarzinger and Cushing were present at the Council in 1965.

Collegiality, ecumenism and religious liberty are no more an issue for the conservatives , when Vatican Council II is traditional.  

 Lumen Gentium 8, Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16 ecc. oin Vatican Council II refer to only physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.

12.Vatican Council II is dogmatic ?

Yes. Pope Paul VI and the liberals call Vatican Council II "pastoral" and not dogmatic. Since they do not want to affirm the rigorous interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). 

 Ad Gentes 7 (all need faith and baptism for salvation) supports the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) while the hypothetical cases mentioned in LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NS 2, GS 22 etc.  cannot be objective exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 in 1965-2021. So there is nothing in the text of the Council that contradicts 16th century EENS or the Athanasius Creed or the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX on there being exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.

The Second Vatican Council affirms the dogma EENS with Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 .While the Council does not contradict EENS or Ad Gentes  7 and Lumen Gentium 14, with LG 8, LG 16, UR 3, GS 22 etc. Since if someone was saved outside the Church, he would be known only to God. They are not part of our reality. They are invisible in 1965-2021.

When Pope Francis says that the Second Vatican Council is the Magisterium of the Church he must refer to a pro-EENS dogmatic Council with the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.

Without their false premise the Council is dogmatic. It supports the rigorous interpretation of EENS.This was EENS according to the missionaries and the Magisterium of the sixteenth century. LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NS 2, GS 22 etc., in the Second Vatican Council, if interpreted rationally, cannot be practical exceptions to EENS. Invisible cases in our reality cannot be objective exceptions to EENS. For example, to get on the bus you have to be present at the bus station. If you are not physically at the bus stop it is not possible to get on the bus.

Another example is, if there is an apple in a box of oranges, the apple is an exception since it is there in the box. If it was not there in that box it would not be an exception. Similarly LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3 etc.,refer only to hypothetical cases. We cannot meet or see anyone saved outside the Church, without faith and the baptism of water. So the Council is not referring to real people, known people in the present times.

Unknown and invisible cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14) and of being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) cannot be objective exceptions for EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.There is no conflict.

So when Vatican Council II is interpreted rationally it is dogmatic. -Lionel Andrades

Fake premise

Lumen Gentium 8,Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically visible cases in 1965-2021.

 

Fake inference

They are objective examples of salvation outside the Church.

 

Fake conclusion

Vatican Council II contradicts the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).The Athanasius Creed(outside the Church there is no salvation) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( ecumenism of return) were made obsolete.

 

 

Here is my interpretation of Vatican Council II in blue.

 

Rational Premise

LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.They are only hypothetical and theoretical. They exist only in our mind and are not solid bodies at Newton's level of time, space and matter.

 

Rational Inference

They are not objective examples of salvation outside the Church for us human beings.

 

Rational Conclusion

Vatican Council II does not contradict EENS as it was interpreted by the Jesuits in the Middle Ages.It does not contradict the strict interpretation of EENS of St. Thomas Aquinas( saved in invincible ignorance is invisible), St. Augustine and Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.

The Letter of the Holy Office(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) 1949 made an objective mistake.-Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/05/there-is-no-denial-from-congregation.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@gmail.com

___________________

OCTOBER 21, 2021

I AFFIRM CHURCH TEACHINGS

 

I affirm Church Teachings and Documents. Vatican Council II is an ally

 

I AFFIRM CHURCH TEACHINGS 

When Vatican Council II is interpreted with the Rational Premise the Council is an ally. We can affirm Tradition along with Vatican Council II.

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.

I AVOID THE CONFUSION

Today's  Christocentric missionaries will interpret the Catechism of Pope Pius X, 29Q ( invincible ignorance) as being a practical exception to 24Q and 27Q ( outside the Church no salvation) in the same Catechism. They are Cushingite and not Feeneyite.

For Feeneyites  29 Q ( invincible ignorance) is only a hypothetical case. So LG 16 ( invincible ignorance) does not contradict Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and  baptism for salvation).

Also the Catechism of the Catholic Church 847-848 ( invincible ignorance) does not contradict the same Catechism of the Catholic Church n.846 ( AG 7 - all need faith and baptism for salvation.)

Cardinal Tagle's Cushingite missionaries, will also welcome other Christians, Protestans, Lutherans, Episcopalians, even if they officially believe  contraception and abortion are not mortal sins. The false New Evangelisation, presents Jesus in a new Church, without the necessity of the traditional faith and moral teachings of the Catholic Church of St. Ignatius of Loyola.

With the Rational Premise, Pope Francis and Cardinal Tagle  could affirm the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics ( Quas Primas ). Since the ecclesiology of Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents, would have returned  to ecclesiocentrism. There would no more be a rupture with the Principle of Non Contradiction ( baptism of desire cases are visible in Heaven and on earth at the same time and so they are practical exceptions to EENS), of Aristotle.

LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949

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.

CATECHISM OF POPE PIUS X

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. 

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.

ATHANASIUS CREED

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.

DOGMA EENS

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.

CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

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.

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.

NICENE CREED

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.

FOUR MARKS OF THE CHURCH

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.

APOSTLES CREED

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.

VATICAN COUNCIL II IS DOGMATIC

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.

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS ECCLESIOCENTRIC 

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. 

RELIGIOUS LIBERTY

The footnotes of Dignitatis Reditigratio, Vatican Council II refer to the Church in a secular state.With Vatican Council II ecclesiocentric and dogmatic, the Council would be an ally for a Catholic Government in a Catholic State. It would be important for the pope to be a Catholic to save their soul, since Vatican Council II is also saying outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation( Cantate Domino, Council of Trent 1441).The Catholic Government may choose to grant religious liberty to non Catholics as during the time of the Papal States in Europe. The roots of Europe are Catholic and not Christian, unless it refers to the Catholic Church.

COLLEGIALITY, SYNODALITY

Collegiality and Synodality are not an issue when Vatican Council II is ecclesiocentric and supports the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Since in a Synod all wold have to interpret the Council with the Rational Premise and the so support the past ecclesiocentrism of the Syllabus of Errors, EENS, Catechisms of Trent and Pius X etc.

TRADITIONAL MISSION

Since Vatican Council II is ecclesiocentric we are back to Traditional Mission according to the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. Every one with no known exception needs to enter the Catholic Church, with no mortal sin at the time of death, to avoid Hell ( for salvation).

The New Evangelisation of Pope Benedict rejects ecclesiocentrism when it interprets Vatican Council II with the Fake Premise. So the Church becomes Christocentric without remaining Ecclesiocentric as in the past.

It is only with ecclesiocentrism that there is a return to Traditional Mission. To save souls from going to Hell it is necessary  to have a Catholic Government in a Catholic State like Italy.The present secular, liberal or Communist states are Satanic.They are supported by Vatican Council II interpreted with the False Premise which says outside the Church there is known salvation.So every one does not have to be Catholic to go to Heaven is the new teaching of George Soros and the Rotschild family.They present a Council which presents exceptions for EENS.

So there is no real evangelization in Europe.Since in Europe people know about Jesus but they are not being told by the Church that it is necessary to believe in Jesus, while being a member of the Catholic Church, with Catholic faith and the baptism of water, for salvation ( to avoid Hell ).

Now with radio and television even people in the poor countries  of Asia and Africa know about Jesus but they do know tht he is the unique and only Saviour, who saves people  from Hell in the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church according to the Bible is His Mystical Body.

SOCIAL REIGN OF CHRIST THE KING

The Catholic Identity Conference held recently mentions the Social Reign of Christ the King while interpreting Vatican Council II with the False Premise this is contradictory.It also mentions George Soros when the interpretation of the Council by the Lefebvrists is approved by George Soros and the Rothschilds.

Catholics are not told that outside the Church there is no salvation and that this is the teaching of Vatican Council II.So Catholics should vote for a Political Party which supports the Social Reign of Christ the King in politics.Christ must be the center of all politics. Christ must not restricted to the liturgy.

When Vatican Council II supports the dogma EENS which says outside the Church there is no salvation then Catholics have an obligation to support a Catholic political party or candidate, who interprets the Council rationally.

 Traditional Mission in the Church can only return when the Lefebvrists, Thucs  and others interpret Magisterial Documents with the Rational Premise and avoid the objective error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.

Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949

This irrationality is accepted by both the present two popes . So we have a political Left interpretation of the Council. There are two interpretations, one with the False Premise above and the other with the Rational Premise, which avoids the mistake above.How can invisible cases of the baptism of desire be objective exceptions to the practical teaching on all needing to be incorporated into the Catholic Church with faith and the baptism of water for salvation.

This irrationality is accepted by both the present two popes . So we have a political Left interpretation of the Council. There are two interpretations, one with the False Premise above and the other with the Rational Premise, which avoids the mistake above.How can invisible cases of the baptism of desire be objective exceptions to the practical teaching on all needing to be incorporated into the Catholic Church with faith and the baptism of water for salvation. 

TRADITIONIS CUSTODE AND VATICAN COUNCIL II.

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 of the Church indicated by the Holy Spirit. To doubt the Council is to doubt the intentions of those very Fathers who excercised their collegial power in a solemn manner cum Pietro et sub Pietro 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 calls Vatican Council II interpreted with a fake premise, to create a false rupture with Tradition, 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 the Syllabus of Errors ? Yet this is how Pope Francis and the Masons interpret Vatican Council II.It is different from  rational way. I interpret the Council. I consider the interpretations of Vatican Council II with the rational premise as being Magisterial.It is not a rupture with the past Magisterium. Pope Francis cannot say the same.

With Traditional Mission and ecclesiocentrism the Catholic political parties can proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics  and the non separation of Church and State, as a priority to save souls from Hell.

These are the teachings and documents of the Catholic Church which I affirm.  -Lionel Andrades

__________________

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/10/i-affirm-church-teachings.html