JUNE 4, 2023
Pope Francis and my interpretation of the Creeds is different.Priests do not say that I am wrong.
JUNE 23, 2020
Pope Francis and my interpretation of the Creeds is different.Priests do not say that I am wrong.
Due to the error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 (LOHO) there are two interpretations of the Creed. Pope Francis' and mine.They are different.
The LOHO assumed invisible cases of the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance were visible examples of salvation outside the Church and so there were visible exceptions to the traditional strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
The popes before the 1930's however interpreted the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) as being only hypothetical, theoretical and speculative cases.Obviously the BOD etc referred to the case of an unknown person.
Now for Pope Francis visible cases of BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions to EENS. So he does not hold the 'rigid theological view' of the past popes. He and the Left need exceptions to EENS.
But if BOD,BOB and I.I are exceptions to EENS then they are no more invisible and hypothetical.
We now have visible and known cases of BOD,BOB and I.I.
There are two interpretations of BOD, BOB and I.I, his and mine.For him BOD, BOB and I.I are visible ( so he gets his exceptions to EENS) and for me they are invisible.For Pope Francis they are objective and for me they are subjective.
So his approach to Vatican Council II and the Creeds would also be different. Our Professio of Faith( Nicene Creed) would also be different.
For him Vatican Council II ( LG 8, LG 14, LG 16,UR 3, Na 2 etc) would contradict 16th century EENS. For me there is no theological change.
For him the meaning of the Creeds would have changed. For me there would be no change since invisible and hypothetical cases cannot be objective exceptions to EENS, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX,the Athanasius Creed, the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q, 27Q) and the rest of Tradition, which supports exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
So there is a new interpretation of the Creeds for Pope Francis.
All this is not permanent. It can be changed.
Pope Francis can choose to acknowledge the error and then correct it.
It would mean the ecclesiology of the Catholic Church before and after Vatican Council II would be the same.There is no new ecclesiology, new ecumenism, new evangelisation etc based upon the false premise ( what is invisible is visible).
There would be no 'development of doctrine' based upon confusing what is invisible as being visible examples of salvation outside the Church.
The secret is out. We have found the missing link. We now know what causes the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.We can avoid it.
We have to acknowledge that the official interpretation of the Creeds, EENS, Vatican Council II, Catechisms etc is irrational, non traditional, schismatic and heretical. It is schism with the popes over the centuries.
It is not magisterial since the Holy Spirit cannot make an objective mistake, a factual error.
The interpretation of the Creeds by Pope Francis, Pope Benedict and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Vatican Press Office,is different from mine. One one us has to be wrong.
I have shown my work to priests and they can find no fault. However they did not want to comment.-Lionel Andrades
JUNE 22, 2020
Ci sono due interpretazioni del Credo recitate qui da Papa Francesco. C'è la Sua interpretazione e la mia.
JUNE 22, 2020 CI SONO DUE INTERPRETAZIONI DEL CREDO RECITATE QUI DA PAPA FRANCESCO. C'È LA SUA INTERPRETAZIONE E LA MIA. https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/06/ci-sono-due-interpretazioni-del-credo_22.html
JUNE 21, 2020
St.Paul Center, Oblate School of Theology, Daughter of Professor Dismissed by Boston College confuse what is invisible as being visible then make false conclusions
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/06/pope-francis-and-my-interpretation-of.html
JUNE 24, 2020
So who will tell the two popes that they interpret the Creeds with heresy ?
Over the last two days I have been writing on how Pope Francis and my understanding of the Creeds is different and as expected no one can show me where I am wrong.They know that I am correct and they agree with me. I have written about this quite a few times before.I call the error Cushingism.It is common throughout the Church. It has spread like a theological virus and we can say that the whole Catholic Church today is affected with Cushingite.
Pope Pius XII was Cushingite when he did not oppose an irrational interpretation of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood (BOB) and invincible ignorance (I.I).So artificial exceptions were created for extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)
Pope Paul VI was Cushingite when he chose to interpret Vatican Council II with the irrational premise, instead of without it.
Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger were Cushingite when they excommunicated Cushingite Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and did not show him an alternative interpretation of Vatican Council II, which was traditional but which would be opposed by the Jewish Left.
Not too long ago Fr.Vaughn Treco was excommunicated for opposing the Cushingite interpretation of Vatican Council II and no one asked his bishop, Stephen Brady to affirm the Council, without the false premise, with Feeneyism.
It Italy, on Roberto dei Mattei's Radioromalibera and Corrado Gnerre's website Tre Sentieri, the interpretation of Vatican Council II and EENS is Cushingite.They still cannot see the problem.
Hypothetical are assumed to be objective in the present times and then non traditional connlusions are drawn.
Maike Hickson's latest report on Lifesite News still assumes LG 8 ( subsists it in) and UR 3 ( imperfect communion with the Church) are examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church..They are exceptions to traditional EENS and the past common understanding on the Church having exclusive salvation.LG 8 and UR 3 were always hypothetical. To assume today that they are visible and real in personal cases, is a false premise.
So she has criticized Vatican Council II and no one corrects her Cushingite reasoning.
Zero cases of something are not exceptions to EENS says John Martignoni.LG 8 and UR 3 are zero cases with reference to EENS.
They are also zero cases with reference to the Creeds. So Pope Francis' interpretation of Vatican Council II and the Creeds is Cushingite. It is the same for the German, American and English cardinals and bishops. Their liberalism is based upon Cushingism.It needs the false premise.It is also called the New Theology.
So who is going to ask these cardinals, bishops and Pope Francis to interpret Vatican Council II without Cushingism; without the irrational premise and inference ? Fr.Aidan Nicols op,who signed a statement, a petition, saying the pope was teaching heresy, is a also a Cushingite.So are Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, Archbisbhop Carlo Maria Vigano, Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Roberto dei Mattei. The CDF is officially Cushingite.
So who will tell the two popes that they interpret the Creeds with heresy ?-Lionel Andrades
JUNE 23, 2020
Archbishop Vigano, Bishop Schneider and Abbe Barthe are Lefebvrist Cushingites: they interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise and inference and then do not like the non traditional conclusion : they have no concept of the Council interpreted without their error
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/06/archbishop-viganobishop-schneider-and.html
JUNE 23, 2020
Pope Francis and my interpretation of the Creeds is different (Graphics)
JUNE 23, 2020
Pope Francis and my interpretation of the Creeds is different.Priests do not say that I am wrong.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/06/pope-francis-and-my-interpretation-of.html
JUNE 22, 2020
Ci sono due interpretazioni del Credo recitate qui da Papa Francesco. C'è la Sua interpretazione e la mia.
JUNE 22, 2020
Brother Thomas Augustine MICM needs to clarify that he originally accepted Vatican Council II( with the false premise) and that he condoned it in the diocese of Worcester, USA and that he did not affirm Vatican Council II( without the false premise) and so has been granted canonical recognition by the Diocese of Worcester and the CDF and this is approved by Pope Francis.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/06/brother-thomas-augustine-micm-needs-to.html
JUNE 21, 2020
Cardinale Gianfranco Ravasi interpreta Concilio Vaticano II con una falsa premessa per creare una rottura artificiale con Traduzione in particolare salvezza esclusiva nella Chiesa.
JUNE 20, 2020
SBC tell the CDF that you will not use the false premise to interpret Vatican Council II like the Oblate Dean of Theology in Texas
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/06/tell-cdf-that-you-will-not-use-false.html
JUNE 19, 2020
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment