The young speaker at the Lega Pontida meeting does not know that it is politically correct to interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and that this is what the Lega is doing. Everyone at Pontida should have been interpreting Vatican Council II rationally (i.e. LG 8, 14, 15, 16 etc in Vatican Council II are theoretical and hypothetical cases only in 2023).

The young speaker at the Lega Pontida meeting does not know that it is politically correct to interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and that this is what the Lega is doing. Everyone at Pontida should have been interpreting Vatican Council II rationally (i.e. LG 8, 14, 15, 16 etc in Vatican Council II are theoretical and hypothetical cases only in 2023). This is exactly what the Left does not want them to do.

The Lega youth need to appeal to the professors of the pontifical and secular universities in Italy , to only interpret Vatican Council II rationally ( i.e. LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to hypothetical and physically invisible cases in 1965-2023). They must accept the traditional conclusion. There is no room for their present liberalism.

The Lega Youth need a Department for Religious Affairs, so that whenever a cardinal, bishop or parish priest in their diocese, interprets Vatican Council II irrationally (i.e. LG 8 etc are mistaken as physically visible non Catholics saved outside the Church), they can correct him, with the rational version.

They need to speak about Hell, since the popes, cardinals and bishops, do not have permission from the Left, to do so.

They need to place advertisements in the newspapers or issue press statements, appealing to the Ecclesia Dei communities, the Latin Mass Societies, the SSPX and Una Voce to interpret Vatican Council II rationally (i.e. the Council is not a break with Tradition when LG 8 etc refer to invisible cases).

If they cannot do all this then they are part of the Left and  part of the problem.

When Vatican Council II is interpreted rationally the Church becomes conservative once again. The Left cannot say any more that Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition and so they can do what they want in changing faith and morals.-Lionel Andrades

SEPTEMBER 19, 2023

If the Lega as a political party would interpret Vatican Council II rationally then they could ask Pope Francis to come back to Tradition and be a conservative pope, like the popes over history in Italy.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/09/if-lega-as-political-party-would.html

SEPTEMBER 20, 2023

Italy needs a Catholic political party similar to the Lega but which would be traditional on the Catholic Faith, since Vatican Council II would be re-interpreted rationally

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/09/italy-needs-catholic-political-party.html

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=660153676156420&set=ecnf.100064853795940

SEPTEMBER 9, 2023

The discovery

 

The discovery

We have a discovery today. It’s ‘a small point’ but this small point turns the Council around. From liberalism the Council returns to Tradition. So by ignoring this small point, we have liberalism in the Church. This small point, is the premise: the rational and irrational premise. It decides if Vatican Council II has a continuity or break with Tradition. This is the discovery. We now have a switch. We can turn it off or on. We can choose a continuity with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors or a rupture with Tradition.   -Lionel Andrades

Lionel Andrades

former Staff Reporter, daily Morning News, Karachi, Pakistan.

Recipient of the All Pakistan Newspaper Society (APNS) Best Reporter of the Year Award, presented by the Prime Minister of Pakistan Benazir Bhutto.

Recipient of the Pakistan Government's Award for Literature ( Childrens stories).

Teacher of English and Church History at the Catholic Minor Seminary, Rawalpindi.                                                                                                 

 

                                                            Bishop Anthony Lobo

Sent to Rome for Ministerial Priesthood by Bishop Anthony Lobo, bishop of Rawalpindi-Islamabad, Pakistan.

He is discriminated against by the pontifical universities and seminaries in Rome.He interprets Vatican Council II rationally and not irrationally. So there is a continuity with Tradition. He is not allowed to study at pontifical universities in  Rome,  where it is obligatory to interpret Magisterial Documents, irrationally and unethically.Catholic students and seminarians are discriminated against. 

The seminarians of the Society of St. Pius X, Albano, are allowed to study at the pontifical universities in Rome since they interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally and this is approved by the Left.

Propaganda Fide only gives schorlarship for all students/ seminarians who are approved by a bishop, who does not interpret Vatican Council II, rationally and expects seminarians to do the same.

However we have a new discovery in the Catholic Church. There are 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, when it is interpreted rationally i.e LG 8,14,15,16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to only hypothetical cases. So they are not objective examples of salvation. They are not objective exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Athanasius Creed.

It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms. There can be two interpretations.Catholics must choose the rational option.The Creeds must not be changed.

Why should Catholics choose an irrational version of the Creeds, Catechisms and Councils, which is heretical, non-traditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional?

It is unethical when the popes, cardinals and bishops choose the Irrational Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents and call it Catholic.

Rahner, Ratzinger, Congar, Murray, Balthazar, Kung, Lefebvre and Paul VI interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally. The popes from Paul VI to Francis did the same. We can today choose to interpret the Council rationally and in harmony with Tradition.

Blog: http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/

Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission)

E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com

Twitter : @LionelAndrades1

Residence temporary : Missionaries of Charity (Contemplative) Men of  Madre Teresa, Via di Sant’Agapito, 8, 00177 Roma RM ( near Largo Preneste and  Termini) Italy.

ONLY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH      SOLAMENTE LA CHIESA CATTOLICA

HEART OF THE MATTER

1.If Vatican Council II is a rupture with the dogma EENS then it means that LG 8,14,15,16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, refer to visible examples of salvation outside the Church. So they are exceptions for EENS etc.

2. If Vatican Council II is not a break with the dogma EENS then it means that LG 8, 14, 15, 16 etc refer to invisible cases. They are not visible examples of salvation outside the Church in 1965-2023. Invisible cases cannot be practical exceptions for me.So there is nothing in the text of Vatican Council II to contradict Feeneyite EENS.

A. Similarly if the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance refer to physically visible cases, of salvation outside the Church in 1949-2023, then this is Cushingism. It is irrational. There is a break with the dogma EENS and the ecumenism of return.The Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q,27Q-outside the Church there is no salvation), has exceptions. There is a break with Tradition.

B. But if BOD, BOB and I.I refer to invisible cases, then they do not contradict EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the ecumenism of return and the Catechism of Pope Pius X(24Q,27Q).There is no rupture with Tradition.

• When what is invisible is considered invisible, I call it Feeneyism.
• When what is invisible is considered visible, I call it a Cushingism.

We can interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism or Cushingism.

We can interpret BOD, BOB and I.I with Feeneyism or Cushingism.

So we can interpret the Nicene, Apostles and Athanasius Creed with Feeneyism or Cushingism. When these Creeds refer to BOD, BOB and I.I they can be Feeneyite or Cushingite. For example, (Nicene Creed-I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin ( and not three known baptisms). 

The Apostles Creed  (the Holy Spirit guides the  Holy Catholic Church  to say outside the Church there is no salvation and not outside the Church there is known salvation.

All need Catholic faith for salvation (Athanasius Creed).This is Feeneyism. But if it is said all need Catholic faith for salvation with some known exceptions then this is Cushingism.

The only holy Catholic and Apostolic Church (Four Marks, Nicene Creed) in the past taught that outside the Church there is no salvation. What it teaches today depends upon you -if you are a Feeneyite or Cushingite.

In the same way there can two interpretations of Vatican Council II (LG 8,14,15,16 etc). It depends upon how you interpret LG 8 etc, with Feeneyism or Cushingism.

-Lionel Andrades