Wednesday, December 7, 2022
Pope Benedict contradicts Pope Francis if the Rational Premise is chosen.
DECEMBER 7, 2022
Pope Benedict would contradict Pope Francis if he supported Archbishop Thomas E. Gullickson, Fr. Stefano Visibtin osb and many priests in Rome
DECEMBER 7, 2022
At the pontifical universities in Rome the Catholic professors do not interpret Vatican Concil II in harmony with Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and the past exclusivist ecclesiology. They are doing this so that they can keep their teaching jobs.
At the pontifical universities in Rome the Catholic professors do not interpret Vatican Concil II in harmony with Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and the past exclusivist ecclesiology. They are doing this so that they can keep their teaching jobs.
At the
pontifical universities in Rome the Catholic professors do not interpret Vatican Concil II in harmony with Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and the past exclusivist
ecclesiology. They are doing this so that they can keep their teaching jobs.
So there are
no missionary and outreach organisations in Rome which will proclaim the
Catholic Faith based upon Vatican Council II interpreted rationally in harmony
with the Athanasius Creed and the ecclesiology of St.Francis Xavier and the
founders of the Jesuit community.
I can affirm Vatican Council II and the Catechism of Pope Pius X. The two popes and Patrick Coffin cannot do the same.This is because I use a Rational Premise and Coffin and the popes choose the Irrational Option.
The
sedevacantists interpret Vatican Council II irrationally like the present two popes.
I choose the Rational Premise and so there is the hermeneutic of continuity
with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the rest of Tradition- which the
two popes do not affirm.
Since we can interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with the Catechism of Pope Pius X and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, the sedevacantists are heretical on Vatican Council II and they cannot even deny it.
The Most Holy Trinity Seminary(MHT) of
Bishop Donald Sanborn does not interpret Vatican Council II rationally like me.
Their interpretation of Magisterial Documents( Creeds and Catechisms etc) is
heretical and yet Bishop Sanborn is ordaining new priests, with no
clarification or correction.
Vatican
Council II interpreted with an Irrational Premise has to be discarded but
Vatican Council II interpreted rationally must be accepted.
Cionci,
Bugnolo, Mattei and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, do
not deny that they are interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally and that I
choose the Rational Premise.They choose heresy and schism with also the Creeds-
just like the present two popes.
There was no
comment from Cionci, Bugnolo, Mattei and the CDF when Ruth Graham and Ross
Douthat of the New York Times interpreted Vatican Council II with the
Irrational Premise and Inference.There was also no comment from Pontifex and no
statement from the Vatican Press Office.
Cionci,
Bugnolo and Mattei cannot say that they accept Vatican Council II and the
Catechism of Pope Pius X.They have to accept one or the other.They have to
reject one. Since they use the Irrational Premise which creates exceptions for
EENS.It creates division.
Michael
Voris would not be able to support the Catechism of Pope Pius X like me. Since
the Archdiocese of Detroit and the Left will not allow him to interpret Vatican
Council II like me.He is forced to use the Irrational Premise to interpret
Vatican Council II and so create a rupture with EENS.
We have not
learnt from the conservative modernists at the Fisher-More College
closure.Catholics must get back to Catholic theology and then the Novus Ordo
Mass too will have the old ecclesiology.
Do not
follow the conservative modernists in the Church they are really liberals on
Vatican Council II etc.- Lionel Andrades
Thousands protest pro-abortion amendment in Malta
Pope Benedict would contradict Pope Francis if he supported Archbishop Thomas E. Gullickson, Fr. Stefano Visibtin osb and many priests in Rome
From Twitter
Pope Benedict would contradict Pope Francis if he
supported Archbishop Thomas E. Gullickson, Fr. Stefano Visibtin osb and many
priests in Rome.They have said that there are no visible cases of the baptism
of desire(BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I).
Archbishop Thomas E Gullickson former Nuncio to
Switzerland and Fr.Stefano Visibtin osb, physicist and former Rector of
the University of St. Anselm Rome, told me that there are no visible
cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance.
So if Pope Benedict agrees with them he would be
saying that there are no objective exceptions for the dogma extra
ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and that the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office made an objective mistake.Pope Pius
XII made a mistake.
If Pope Benedict announces that Lumen Gentium does not
contradict 16th century EENS and the Athanasius Creed and Pope Francis
continues to say- it does, we have schism.For Gullickson and Visintin
there are no exceptions.
I affirm Vatican Council II with Lumen Gentium 14 and
16 being physically invisible and so VCII does not contradict the Athanasius
Creed.For Pope Benedict the Athanasius Creed is made obsolete with the
Council.So LG 14 and 16 refer to physically visible cases in 2022. This is
irrational. We humans cannot see any such cases on earth.
Andrea
Cionci and Alex Bugnolo say that Pope Benedict XVI is the pope. This is
even though they agree that he accepts the Council, interpreted irrationally
and rejects Tradition. This is heresy. St.Robert Bellarmine has said that a
pope in heresy cannot be a pope, it is often mentioned by the sedevacantists.
Pope Benedict
will not affirm the Athanasius Creed in public, nor 16th century EENS and he is
a pope?, it is asked.
I affirm the
Catechism of the Catholic Church and Vatican Council II, I am not a
sedevacantist. 1. I am not a traditionalist who rejects Vatican Council
II and 2. neither am I a liberal who rejects Tradition. Andrea Cinci, Alex
Bugnolo, Archbishop Ganswein and Pope Benedict - are one of the two.They
support confusion.
But we only have to go back to the Faith, the
traditional body of knowledge which is constant and divine always and we will
find out who is the real pope. He will have to say that Vatican Council II is
dogmatic, traditional and ecclesiocentric.
There are no physically visible cases of the
baptism of desire (BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I),
Don Tullio Rotondo, an Italian priest, told me
personally at St.Mary Majors basilica in Rome.I asked him about this some years
back.This is something obvious.There are no objective cases.BOD and I.I cases
can only be seen in Heaven.Pope Benedict must announce this.
Pope Benedict holds 'the keys'. He can change
direction in the Church overnight. Immediately. Even Archbishop Georg Ganswein,
or someone else can do it for him. A simple announcement on theology is
needed. Pope Francis will be helpless.
If Pope Benedict announces that there is nothing in
Lumen Gentium to contradict the extra
ecclesiam nulla salus, of the missionaries in the 16 the century, the
Church returns to Tradition overnight. Pope Francis will be in schism if he continues
to interpret Vatican Council II irrationally.
If Pope Benedict announces that there is nothing in
Lumen Gentium, in the entire text, to contradict the Athanasius Creed, Syllabus
of Errors and Catechism of Pope Pius X, then Pope Francis and the cardinals
will be in schism if they continue to interpret the Council irrationally.
Pope Benedict simply has to announce that Lumen
Gentium 8,14 and 16 in Vatican Council II, refer to only hypothetical cases in
2022, so they do not contradict Feeneyite EENS and the Athanasius Creed.Pope
Francis would have to agree or remain in schism.
The
Benepapist books and articles are by writers who either accept Vatican Council
II and reject the Catechism of Pope Pius X or they accept the Syllabus of
Errors of Pope Pius IX and reject Vatican Council II.I don't have to do
either.I can affirm Vatican Council II ( rational) and also Tradition.The popes cannot say the same.
I can affirm
Vatican Council II along with the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX because I
interpret Vatican Council II rationally.Andrea Cionci and Alex Bugnolo cannot say that same.They
interpret Vatican Council II irrationally.It is the 'premise'- this is the
difference.
I affirm the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the
Catechism of Pope Pius X with Vatican Councl II interpreted rationally.It is
not either or, for me.Pope Francis and Pope Benedict cannot say the same.Andrea
Cionci, Alex Bugnolo and Roberto dei Mattei also cannot say the same.
How can
there be a pope who does not affirm the Catechism of Pope Pius X because he
interprets Vatican Council II irrationally for political reasons ?
In Rome, priests and religious sisters are not
proclaiming the Catholic Faith before non Catholics. They are interpreting
Vatican Council II as a break and not continuity with the dogma extra ecclesiam
nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors.
In Rome, the
priests and nuns interpret Vatican Council II irrationally to create a break
with Feeneyite EENS since the two popes are doing the same.
Pope Francis
and Pope Benedict are not Magisterial on Vatican Council II when they interpret
the Council with the Irrational and not Rational Premise.I choose the Rational
Premise which always creates the hermeneutic of continuity with
Tradition.
So when in
Rome most the of priests and religious sisters interpret Vatican Council II
with the Irrational and not Rational Premise they follow the present two popes
and this is official heresy. Can the two popes interpret the Council
rationally?
When the two
popes interpret Vatican Council II irrationally then they create heresy. They
change the interpretation of the Creeds and Catechisms. I interpret Vatican
Council II rationally and traditionally.
The popes
interpret Vatican Council II irrationally, break with Tradition and then
justify changes in faith and morals.
We have two
popes who are not interpreting Vatican Council II rationally. Pope Francis and
Pope Benedict are not interpreting Vatican Council II with the Rational
Premise.
How can there be a pope in first class heresy and in
public schism with the centuries-old Magisterium? There is no denial from
Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj, the Prefect of the CDF.They agree with me.Both popes
are in public heresy on Vatican Council II and the Creeds etc.I interpret
Vatican Council II rationally.
So both the
present wo popes with the Irrational Premise are rejecting the Athanasius
Creed, changing the Nicene Creed, re-interpreting the dogma EENS, changing
Vatican Council II and all the Catechisms, with reference to the baptism of
desire, which is interpreted irrationally with the False Premise.
I accept all
the popes. With the Rational Premise Vatican Council II does not contradict the
Catechism of Pope Pius X( 24Q,27Q), nor the Syllabus of Errors of Pius IX.
Cionci, Bugnolo and Mattei cannot say the same with the False Premise.
I accept the
Magisterium of the popes Francis and Benedict. But both are not Magisterial on
Vatican Council II since they interpret Vatican Council II with the Irrational
Premise and Inference.They need to interpret the Council rationally.Even
Cionci, Bugnolo and Mattei make this mistake.
For Pope
Francis and the Society of St. Pius X the Council contradicts the Catechism of
Pope Pius X ( 24 Q, 27Q) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.The
traditionalists cannot accept Pope Pius X and Pope Francis. I can. Since the
Rational Premise makes it possible.Vatican Council II does not contradict
Tradition.Vatican Council II does not contradict Feeneyite EENS.
The PISAI in
Rome accepts Pope Francis and rejects Pope Pius X.I don't have to do this.They
acccept the liberalism of Pope Benedict on Vatican Council II. They also choose
the Irrational Premise.So they reject Pope Pius IX on the Syllabus of Errors.I
don't have to do this since I choose the Rational Premise.PISAI is liberal. So
they cannot say like me that they accept all the popes including Pius X. They
have to reject Pius X's Catechism ( 24Q,27Q).They do this with the Irrational
Premise. I avoid this error.
The bishops
in Britain cannot say like me that they accept the Catechism of Pope Pius X (
24Q,27Q- other religions and salvation). Since they have to interpret Vatican
Council II irrationally and produce exceptions for Feeneyite EENS. I aviod this
error.
I accept popes
Francis, Benedict and John Paul II as being the Magisterium but when they
interpret Vatican Council II with the Irrational Premise they are not
Magisterial.They have to interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise
to be Magisterial.
I am not a
sedevacantist who rejects the popes. I interpret Vatican Council II with the
Rational Premise and I accept the Council. I reject Vatican Council II
interpreted with the Irrational Premise. I interpret the Catechisms rationally.
So I am not heretical at Mass.
I think we
have a moral obligation to reject Vatican Council II interpreted with an
Irrational Premise.It is a conscience issue.Catholics must not be forced to be
unethical when they can interpret Vatican Council II rationally and
honestly.The Council supports Feeneyite EENS.
Ruth Graham
writing about the Latin Mass in Detroit interpreted Vatican Council II
irrationally and the people don't know . It was the same with Ross Douthat's
writing on Vatican Council II. They do n ot choose the Rational Premise.Graham
interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally like all the cardinals and the two
popes.The faithful don't know about this. It is a CDF secret!
The bishops
are interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally and the people are not
checking them because they do not know theology.
If the
present two popes agree to interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational
Premise and so take the whole Church back to Tradition then Cardinal Cupich and
Massimo Faggioli will be in schismif they still reject Tradition.The lex orandi
would be Tradition.
There are
beautiful pictures from the Una Voce Seville on Twitter, of the Latin Mass.But
the priests are interpreting Vatican Council II, the Creeds and Catechisms with
an Irrational Premise. This is public knowledge and there is no denial from the
Vatican Press Office or the CDF.
In my parish
Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea, Rome, they interpret Vatican
Council II with the Irrational Premise at First Communion , Confirmation and
Adult Catechesis.So the children are not taught that there is exclusive
salvation in only the Catholic Church.Luther the Protestant is in Hell
according to Vatican Council II interpreted with the Rational Premise. So also
Martin Luther King without Catholic Faith and the baptism of water in the
Catholic Church( Ad Gentes 7).. The Council is traditional with the Rational
Premise.
The
International Theological Commissio (ITC) interprets the Council with the
Irrational Premise like Life Site News correspondents.The False Premise creates
liberalism and what Pope Francis calls 'going forward'.
Sedevacantists
cannot speak about a premise. It exposes all their fals doctrines and theology.
The
cardinals and bishops in the USA, like the traditionalists are 'conservative
modernists'.
There are two interpretations of Vatican Council II. One is rational and the other is irrational. The popes refer to the common irrational version which should be rejected.-Lionel Andrades
___________________________
Repost : Archbishop Thomas E.Gullickson says Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors
NOVEMBER 19, 2012
Dear Archbishop Thomas Gullickson,There are three types of baptism water, desire and blood.You would agree that desire and blood are graces of God and are known only to God. We do not know anyone on earth saved with the baptism of desire or blood in 2012. So while in principle we accept the baptism of desire and blood we know they are not visible and repeatable as the baptism of water.So I come back to my question:1. Do we know in the year 2012 any one saved in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire, a good conscience, seeds of the word (AG 11), imperfect communion with the Church(UR) ?Lionel: The answer would be no we do not? Since these cases are known only to God.2. If we do not know any of these cases in 2012 can they be considered exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors?Lionel: So if we do not personally know any of these cases can they be considered de facto (explicit ) exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?In ChristLionel
Thomas E. GullicksonNovember 19, 2012 10:39 AMLionel, Thank you!To my mind your analysis is air tight. How can we know what is known to God alone? Our point of departure is Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus Est. Everything beyond baptism by water and the word is caught up in the mystery of Divine Providence and God's infinite mercy."Imperfect communion" is ecclesiological terminology which says nothing about the eternal salvation of an individual soul. Invincible ignorance goes well for matters of conscience and moral culpability, but otherwise I'd like to think that many people around the world A.D. find themselves in the same situation as people B.C. that is, with no possibility to know Christ. We think of St. Francis Xavier wanting to roust out of the universities of Europe as many as possible for the mission in India or of his urgency to reach China.Simply said, anyone who claims that in 2012 we don't stand in continuity with the great tradition of the Church or that for some reason we are less anxious for souls today, is simply spinning and has not understood the thrust of Vatican II.
http://deovolenteexanimo.blogspot.it/2012/11/a-little-adjunct-to-yesterdays-post.html?showComment=1353318215335
Archbishop Thomas E.Gullickson says Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/11/archbishop-thomas-egullickson-says.html#links
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/11/archbishop-thomas-egullickson-says.html#links
DEAN OF THEOLOGY AT ST. ANSELM SAYS THERE ARE NO KNOWN EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUShttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/10/dean-of-theology-at-st-anselm-says.html#links
CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS IS DE FIDE AND NOT CONTRADICTED BY VATICAN COUNCIL II- Fr. Nevus Marcello O.PBRAZILIAN PRIEST SAYS VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT CONTRADICT DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
Catholic religious contradict Bishop Fellay : Nostra Aetate is not an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus
I follow the Catechism of Trent in agreement with Vatican Council II and the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
Posts
