Wednesday, March 22, 2023
From the secular point of view, it is unethical for the Federal Ministry of Education in Germany to allow Vatican Council II to be interpreted irrationally and then taught to students.
The German Catholic Synod can no more cite Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally to justify their innovation in faith and morals.Even cardinals Kasper, Muller and Brandmuller must interpret Vatican Council II rationally.
Pope Francis must correct this mistake in the interpretation of Vatican Council II etc.
It is more important than environmental issues since it is related to sin, Heaven and Hell.Jesus tells us in the Bible that Hell is a place. It is has fire and suffering. It is eternal. The pain does not stop.
I mentioned on this blog yesterday that the Faculty of Theolog at the University of Munich, Germany, the professors, Catholic and Protestant, are all interpreting Vatican Council II with a Fake Premise and Inference and so their conclusion is nontraditional, heretical and schismatic. They are unethical. So this is a legal issue in Germany. Students must be informed that the university offers classes with a Fake Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents and it is obligatory for all enrolled students to do the same. Also only those students will be given an academic degree or allowed to complete the final matriculation exam, who interpret the Council with the common Fake Premise to produce a liberal result.
Cardinal Reinhold Marx, Bishop Georg Batzinger and the rest of the German Bishops Conference are also dishonest and are doing the same. In public there is no denial from them.
They have a rational option. When Lumen Gentium 8, Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16, Unitatis Redintigratio 3, Nostra Aetate 2,Gaudium et Specs 22 etc refer to hypothetical cases only then LG 8 etc do not contradict the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church in Germany. So the teaching on outside the Church there is no salvation still stands and professors would have to teach it today.
Michael Seewald could no more produce books which say doctrine and dogma evolve in the Catholic Church. With the Rational Premise, Inference and Traditional Conclusion he has to return to the past ecclesiology on salvation, faith and morals. The liturgy can only be based on the 1962 Missal. Since Vatican Council II is traditionalist when interpreted rationally. This is the only option we have. It is the ethical interpretation of the Council.
Seewald read the Council superficially, with the False Premise and then concluded that dogmas and doctrine change.
The University of Munich's interpretation of Vatican Council II, the Creeds, Catechisms and dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) is based upon the error of Pope Pius XII made in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston. This was the Boston Heresy case in which Pope Pius XII, Cardinal Richard Cushing, Boston College and the American Jesuits were guilty. The error spread through the whole Church.Now it is being repeated by Catholics and Protestants at the University of Munich.
The professors could write books without the Boston Heresy of Pope Pius XII. They would interpret LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc rationally. Then their concept of religion and politics changes.- Lionel Andrades
I have not written books on this subject and I have no intention of writing books in future. But one thing of which I am sure is that - there are no physically visible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in the present times.
1. Michael Voris and Michael Lofton are in schism when they do not affirm in public the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1442)
on outside the Church there is no salvation. Their priority is not the Magisterium
but political expedience.
2. They are also in schism when they do not accept Vatican
Council II interpreted rationally and honestly.
So they reject the Athanasius Creed and the Magisterium of the Church in
the 12th to 16th century. This is schism. The popes from
Pius XII to Francis have done the same. The heresy and schism was there in the
1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston(LOHO).
If Voris and Lofton interpreted Vatican Council II rationally then they would have to affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They do not want to do this.It is Magisterial but not politically correct. Vatican Council II interpreted rationally would not have any exceptions for the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors and the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( 24Q, 27Q).
For the popes there are physically visible cases of being saved in
invincible ignorance (I.I) and the baptism of desire (BOD). So there are objective
examples in 1949 of being saved outside the Church. They could allegedly meet
non Catholics saved outside the Church without faith and baptism (AG 7, LG 14).
I cannot.
For me the BOD and I.I refer to invisible cases in 1949-2023. So they do
not contradict the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
(EENS). This was known to the popes and saints over the centuries. There was no break with Tradition even in their times.
Obviously there were no visible and known cases of non Catholics on
earth, saved outside the Church. This is common sense.They would be known to God. They would be in
Heaven. But this was the ruse used by the Masons in the 1949 LOHO.
No Catholic, or non Catholic, with a doctorate in theology or philosophy
is willing to challenge me, on this point.
I am a simple layman with no academic degrees in theology or philosophy
but one thing I know: there are no physically visible cases of the baptism of desire
(LG 14) or being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) on earth in 2023.
I have not written books on this subject and I have no intention of writing books in future. But one thing of which I am sure is that : there are no physically visible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in the present times.
I go for Mass on Sunday mornings to the SSPX chapel in Rome and Mass in Italian at the Novus Ordo churches in Rome. They both are the same for me. Vatican Council II has a continuity with the past ecclesiology for me.
I do not write all this for the sake of criticism.I accept Pope Francis as the pope. He told Fr. James Martin sj that homosexual acts are a sin. While he had elsewhere said...But he is on record, saying, homosexual acts are a sin and he is a son of the Church. He is expected to say this.
In the same way, he can re-interpret Vatican Council II rationally and bring the Catholic Church back, theologically, on an even keel. The ship of the Church changes its direction.It is toward God. It is toward Jesus as he was known over 2000 years.- Lionel Andrades
MARCH 22, 2023
Michael Voris and Michael Lofton are not Magisterial when they do not affirm the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1442) on the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as do the priests of the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX). So why do they say the SSPX is not Magisterial?
MARCH 21, 2023
MARCH 20, 2023
An Augustinian Recollect priest at the church Sant Ildefonso e Tomasso Villanova, via Sistina, Rome, yesterday agreed with me. He said Vatican Council II has a continuity with the past.
MARCH 19, 2023
This is interpreting Church Documents with the Boston Heresy of Pope Pius XII.
MARCH 19, 2023
Without the Boston Heresy of Pope Pius XII, Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits - the Franciscans of the Immaculate and the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) could interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Michael Voris and Michael Lofton are not Magisterial when they do not affirm the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1442) on the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as do the priests of the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX). So why do they say the SSPX is not Magisterial?
Michael Voris and Michael Lofton are not Magisterial when they do not affirm
the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1442) on the
dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as do the priests of the Society of St. Pius
X(SSPX). So why do they say the SSPX is not Magisterial? Even the pope is not magisterial.
He does not affirm the dogma EENS and neither do Voris and Lofton. This is
schism with the past Magisterium in the 12 th to 16 th centuries.
The SSPX follows the 1962 Missal whose ecclesiology is in harmony with
Vatican Council II interpreted rationally. The new Missal is based upon Vatican
Council II interpreted irrationally. How can this be inspired by the Holy Spirit?
An irrational interpretation of the Council is Magisterial? Voris and Lofton
attend the Novus Ordo Mass with the New Missal, reject the past Councils and
interpret Vatican Council II irrationally. I don’t.
I attend the Novus Ordo Mass, affirm the old Councils, interpret Vatican
Council II rationally and in harmony with the 1962 Missal. So when I attend
the Latin or Novus Ordo Mass in Rome I am not in schism with the Magisterium of
the 12th to 16th century. Voris and Lofton cannot say the
same.
Why should the SSPX accept Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally?
Why must they follow Pope Francis and Michael Voris? It is Cardinal Arthur
Roche who must accept Vatican Council II interpreted rationally. There cannot
be a new Magisterium with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally, with the
common Fake Premise.
So those Catholics who want to follow the Holy Spirit at Mass in Latin
or the vernacular, where can they go? I attend the Novus Ordo Mass in church.
But they cannot go for the Latin Mass in the churches. It is prohibited by Pope
Francis who does not affirm the past Councils, interprets Vatican Council II
irrationally and so is not Magisterial on many subjects of faith and morals. Must the SSPX be obedient to all this ?
Catholics need to find a priest who will offer the Latin Mass with the past
ecclesiology in a private home, school, office etc.The priest can affirm the Council, interpreted rationally, and also Tradition. There is no conflict.
Pope Francis, Michael Voris and Michael Lofton reject Tradition. They have not denied it when I have interacted with them on Twitter.
The pope is expected to be Magisterial. The pope is not magisterial when
he publically interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and rejects the Fourth
Lateran Council and the Council of Florence on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
These Councils are not contradicted by Vatican Council II interpreted
rationally.
He rejects the Athanasius Creed by interpreting Vatican Council II and
the Catechism of the Catholic Church irrationally.
This changes the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and the Apostles Creed.
This is first class heresy in the hierarchy of truths (Ad Tuenduem Fidem).This
is an impediment to offering Holy Mass in any Rite. The pope is automatically
excommunicated. He ceases to be pope until he ends the scandal receives
absolution in the Confessional. Now he supports mortal sins of faith.
A pope cannot follow Satan and the Left. Otherwise it is political and
not Catholic.
When Pope Francis chooses to interpret Vatican Council II rationally,
then there is no new Magisterium. He becomes a traditionalist and the whole
Church returns to Tradition. It was Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre who wanted Rome
to come back to the Faith. Pope Francis has simply to interpret LG 8, LG 14, LG
16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, rationally – and Rome comes
back to the Catholic Faith. One simple action is needed. Vatican Council II
will have a continuity with the past. - Lionel Andrades
https://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/mvsx-speeding-towards-schism
Posts
