Conservative seminarians were rejected and asked to leave by the Rector of the Legion of Christ seminary in Rome, Fr.Juan Manual Duenas L.C .

Conservative seminarians were rejected and asked to leave by the Rector of the Legion of Christ seminary in Rome, Fr.Juan Manual Duenas L.C .

If there was a conservative student then he could be going back to Tradition and not accepting Vatican Council II with the False Premise. For the faculty it was necessary that all the students accepted and interpreted Vatican Council II with the Fake Premise.This still is the policy there.

In general the students at this seminary when I was there, were interpreting Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents with the False Premise. They would project the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance as being physically visible exceptions for the dogma EENS and they would be critical of Fr. Leonard Feeney. This was the policy of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican. The liberalism of the CDF comes with the False Premise.

With the Rational Premise we return to the past ecclesiocentrism which is opposed by the Left. So there was the leftist theological policy being implemented at this seminary and also the university nearby.

Fr. Duennas was following the policy set by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Prefect of the CDF at that time.

If Cardinal Ratzinger had used the Rational Premise at that time, he could also have asked the German bishops to do the same and give up their liberalism.-Lionel Andrades

https://www.pcimme.org/en/about-us/history/

______________________________________

APRIL 1, 2022

Propaganda Fide, Vatican is only giving scholarships/ stipends for students who interpret Vatican Council II with the False and not Rational Premise.Of course with the approval of the bishop and the rector.

 

Propaganda Fide, Vatican is only giving scholarships/ stipends for students who interpret Vatican Council II with the False and not Rational Premise.Of course with the approval of the bishop and the rector.

Even though I was approved by a bishop I was not allowed to continue to study Philosophy at the University Pontificum Regina Apostolorum, Rome, nor remain at their seminary.

I was also not allowed to remain a seminarian at the Pontifical Beda College, Rome. This is the seminary for late vocations under the bishops of England and Wales.There was no freedom of religion or freedom of opinion on this issue.

Propaganda Fide could give non Christians scholarships to study at pontifical universities in Rome if they interpret Vatican Council II with the False Premise and so contradict the Syllabus of Errors, the Athanasius Creed etc. The Catholic faith is then no more ‘sensitive and ‘controversial’ when the False Premise is used. It is seen as being ‘open’.  -Lionel Andrades

Propaganda Fide, Vatican is only giving scholarships/ stipends for students who interpret Vatican Council II with the False and not Rational Premise.Of course with the approval of the bishop and the rector.

 

Propaganda Fide, Vatican is only giving scholarships/ stipends for students who interpret Vatican Council II with the False and not Rational Premise.Of course with the approval of the bishop and the rector.

Even though I was approved by a bishop I was not allowed to continue to study Philosophy at the University Pontificum Regina Apostolorum, Rome, nor remain at their seminary.

I was also not allowed to remain a seminarian at the Pontifical Beda College, Rome. This is the seminary for late vocations under the bishops of England and Wales.There was no freedom of religion or freedom of opinion on this issue.

Propaganda Fide could give non Christians scholarships to study at pontifical universities in Rome if they interpret Vatican Council II with the False Premise and so contradict the Syllabus of Errors, the Athanasius Creed etc. The Catholic faith is then no more ‘sensitive and ‘controversial’ when the False Premise is used. It is seen as being ‘open’.  -Lionel Andrades

Legislator wins 'anti-LGBTQ' case

 

LEGISLATOR WINS ‘ANTI-LGBTQ’ BIBLE-QUOTE CASE

NEWS: WORLD NEWS

   

by Jules Gomes  •  ChurchMilitant.com  •  March 31, 2022    

Finnish evangelical escapes prison for citing 'hate speech' from St. Paul

HELSINKI, Finland (ChurchMilitant.com) - In a major victory for free speech, the Helsinki district court has cleared a Finnish lawmaker three years after she was charged with "hate speech" crimes for tweeting biblical verses proscribing homosexual acts. 

"It is not for the district court to interpret biblical concepts," the court concluded in a unanimous ruling Wednesday, ordering the prosecution to pay over 60,000 euros in legal costs to the defendants and 496 euros in costs to the Luther Foundation of Finland.

Evangelical Lutheran and medical doctor Dr. Päivi Räsänen was charged with three counts of "incitement" against homosexuals, including tweeting a quote from St. Paul's letter to the Romans in response to the Helsinki LGBTQ+ Pride March in June 2019. 

In Romans 1:24–27, the apostle Paul describes men and women exchanging "natural relations for those that are contrary to nature" and "receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error."

"Although the tweet may have offended the participants in the Pride event, it has not claimed that the participants in the event, for example, are inferior to others," the court ruled. Räsänen's tweet criticized the Lutheran Church for co-sponsoring the Pride parade.

The high-profile trial received international attention, particularly after the prosecutor general Ms. Raija Toiviainen attacked core Christian teachings and cross-examined Räsänen on her theology in court. 

Attacking the phrase "love the sinner; hate the sin," Toiviainen quoted Old Testament Bible verses, alleging that the use of the word "sin" can be "harmful." The prosecution also argued that Räsänen's claim on radio that "God did not originally create man as a homosexual but as a heterosexual," was offensive.

I have been criminally charged for voicing my deeply held beliefs that are based on classical Christianity.

The court, however, ruled that Räsänen did not exceed the limits of free speech or insult homosexuals as a group based on sexual orientation and that her words were not capable of arousing contempt, intolerance or hatred towards homosexuals; nor were they intended to degrade or insult.

"The ruling was what I expected. Not for a second did I believe that I had committed anything illegal in my writings and statements," Räsänen told Church Militant in a statement. "I have been criminally charged for voicing my deeply held beliefs that are based on classical Christianity."

Räsänen defends her deeply held Christian beliefs

The lawmaker emphasized the historic nature of the judgment, explaining that "the court has had to, for the first time, take a stand on whether it is legal or not to cite the Bible." 

"I have felt joy about being able to speak about the gospel and the atonement of Jesus during these couple of years," she added, telling the press that she wouldn't hesitate to cite scriptural texts on homosexuality in the same way she had previously. 

It is not for the district court to interpret biblical concepts.

"What has worried me is that this process, which has lasted almost three years, has tended to narrow religious freedom and cause self-censorship," she lamented.

The prosecutor has warned she will appeal against the ruling, but Räsänen told media she is "prepared to defend freedom of speech and religion in all courts, even before the European Court of Human Rights." 

"And this is impacting people whose views were once acceptable but are now deemed to be potentially 'hateful,'" Price, a member of the team defending Räsänen, lamented. "One may disagree with Christian teaching. Some may even find it shocking. However, a criminal prosecution of high-profile Christians for sharing their beliefs shows that Europe's hate-speech laws have become a serious problem," barrister Lorcán Price, legal counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom International, commented. 

The lawmaker was also charged with "hate speech" for comments on a talk show on the Finnish Broadcasting System in December 2019. The show was titled "What Would Jesus Think About Homosexuals?" 

The prosecutor general's third charge involved a booklet written by the doctor in 2004 titled: Male and Female He Created Them — Homosexual Relationships Challenge the Christian Concept of Humanity.

Continued

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/lawmaker-wins-in-anti-gay-bible-quote-case

How can the USCCB be trusted on other issues when they knowingly use a false form of reasoning?

 

APRIL 1, 2022

The USCCB bishops use the common False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II.Is it legal ? : in principle, the USCCB gives the green light for cheating.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/04/the-usccb-bishops-use-common-false.html

The USCCB bishops use the common False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II.Is it legal ? : in principle, the USCCB gives the green light for cheating.

The USCCB bishops use the common False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II.Is it legal ? They project Lumen Gentium 8, Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16, Nostra Aetate 3, Gaudium et Specs 22 etc, in Vatican Council II as referring to a visible and not invisible case in 1965-2022.

For me they are invisible and not physically visible in the present times.

So for them there are practical examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church but for me LG 8 etc refer to only speculative cases.

For them LG 8 etc are practical exceptions for extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the Athanasius Creed.For me hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14) and invincible ignorance(LG 16) cannot be practical exceptions for the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church,the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Patristic Fathers and the Jesuit missionaries in the 16th century.

So they use a False Premise( invisible non Catholics saved are visible) and I use the Rational Premise( invisible non Catholics saved in the present times are invisible only).

So officially and publically the USCCB bishops are faking it.

They are cheating and not teaching Catholics the faith.

How can invisible people, who are presently in Heaven,be also visible on earth and be present at two places at the same time ? This contradicts the Principle of Non Contradiction.

How can the USCCB be trusted on other issues when they knowingly use a false form of reasoning ?

Otherwise it would seem that in principle, the USCCB gives the green light for cheating.

 -Lionel Andrades

MARCH 31, 2022

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

MARCH 31, 2022

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.How can the Holy Spirit make an objective mistake ? So it is human error and not the Magisterium.

 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

___________________