Lionel's blog
Fr. Georges de Laire, Judicial
Vicar, Diocese of Manchester in New Hampshire, USA criticized the St. Benedict
Center, New Hampshire, in an interview with the Catholic Herald, U.K, did not go
into theology. Otherwise he would expose himself as a heretical and schismatic
who chooses a fake premise to create a rupture with Catholic Tradition. This is
unethical. - Lionel Andrades
The SSPX
priest is afraid to affirm the Catholic Faith in public and he is
telling the faithful also to not proclaim it. He is afraid to endorse the following three points.
1. The Fourth
Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1442) defined the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with no exceptions. It has to be accepted. It is a de fide teaching of the Catholic Church.
2. Lumen Gentium 8, 14 and 16, Nostra Aetate 2, Gaudium et Specs 22, Unitatis Redintigratio 3, etc refer to invisible cases in
1965-2023. So they do not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
3. The baptism of desire, being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of
blood, all without the baptism of water, are physically invisible cases in
1949-2023. So they are not practical exceptions for the dogma EENS. They are not exceptions for the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.
It is the same for the priests in the main line Church where Mass is offered in Italian. They too need to affirm these three points otherwise they change the interpretation of the Creeds etc. This is an impediment of offering Mass in the vernacular or in Latin.-Lionel Andrades
All the books in general
at the SSPX Headquarters in Albano, Italy or Econe Switzerland or the US Headquarters, are obsolete.
The authors have interpreted the Council irrationally and not rationally. They
have seen LG 8, 14 and 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, as physically visible and not
invisible cases. So they have produced exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). They
have made the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX
obsolete. It is really their interpretation of the Council which is obsolete.
Since the Council interpreted rationally does not contradict the Athanasius
Creed etc.
The fault lies with the
false premise (invisible cases are visible in the present times) and false
inference (they are visible examples of salvation outside the Church and so
objective exceptions for 12th century EENS).With the rational
premise (invisible cases of LG 8, 14, 16 etc are invisible in 1965-2023)
Vatican Council II returns to the old theology.
The SSPX priest in Rome Fr. Federico
Montani, like Sister Nathalie Bequart Consultant on the Synod, interprets
Vatican Council II with a Fake Premise and Inference to produce a rupture with
Tradition; the Creeds, Catechisms, Syllabus of Errors and dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This
is an impediment to offering Holy Mass in Latin. How is he allowed to offer
Mass in Rome or Albano ?This is a scandal. He needs to correct the error in
public before offering Holy Mass and the Sacraments.
He is a good person otherwise and a good preacher. I like his sermons.He though, is following the policy of the SSPX Headquarters on this issue.-Lionel Andrades
SSPX priest in Rome denies the Faith before non Christians
Another week and he will not answer. I asked him the same question. He is afraid. He knows what I am saying and he knows that he must not answer. It’s tough for the both of us. We know what the stakes are. It makes no difference for me in the sense I have past the point of no return but not him. He knows the implications and the sacrifices he has to make our big. So he wants to avoid it. He does not want to talk about it. It is something too sensitive. He agrees with me and we are on the same wavelength but he does not want to make his position known. He wants to be prudent like just about everyone else.
The priest who offered the Palm Sunday Mass at the SSPX chapel in Rome yesterday morning avoided me again before the Mass and he was cautioning everyone else not to talk to me.
Why? Since the subject is extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Leftist police, non Christians, are targeting Catholics, especially missionaries and those interested in evengelisation with traditional Catholic doctrine supported by Vatican Council II which is ecclesiocentric and missionary.
Fr. Federico Montani the SSPX priest who offered the Mass would not answer if Lumen Gentium 8, 14 and 16 etc, in Vatican Council II referred to invisible cases only in 2023.Since if they referred to visible cases for him, then he was really telling the non Christian police in Rome, that he does not affirm the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1442) which defined extra ecclesiam nulla salus and did not mention any exceptions. When LG 8 etc are explicit then this is liberalism. It is the public heresy of popes from Paul VI to Francis, in their rejection of the rational interpretation of Vatican Council II.
It is well known that for the SSPX bishops Vatican Council II is a rupture with Tradition. For years Fr. Montani has been teaching this and it was part of his religious formation with the SSPX. So they infer that LG 8 etc refer to visible cases. Invisible people cannot be objective examples of salvation outside the Church in the present times and so practical exceptions for the Council of Florence etc.
So Fr. Montani and the SSPX really reject the dogma EENS according to the Fourth Lateran Council and this sits well with the local police. There are visible exceptions for EENS is the political position of the SSPX and the liberals.
The SSPX priest is telling the police, which monitor the chapel and other churches here that he is not Anti Semitic, racists and other control-labels of the Left. His interpretation of Vatican Council II is not continuity with Tradition.
This is a denial of the Catholic Faith. By projecting LG 8 etc as being physically visible cases in the present times. The SSPX priests at Albano, Italy, are changing the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and the Apostles Creed and rejecting the Athanasius Creed. The Catechisms of Trent and Pius X which affirm the dogma EENS are made obsolete. This is bringing the liberal division into the Catholic Church.
I go for the SSPX Mass but I do not interpret Vatican Council II like Bishop Bernard Fellay and Fr. Davide Pagliarani whom Fr. Federico Montani follows.
The irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II, the Creeds and Catechisms was a mistake of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Fr. Franz Schmidberger, Fr. Nicklaus Pfluger, Roberto dei Mattei, the Hildebrands, Fr. Nicholas Gruner, John Vennari, Christopher Ferrara and many others.
YOUNG PEOPLE AT THE SSPX MASS AGREE WITH ME
Yesterday morning I spoke to three young men before the Mass. They agreed with me. There are no invisible cases of a non Catholic saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire. If anyone was saved as such they would only be known to God. I showed them a page which listed LG 8, 14 and 16 etc as being ‘Invisible Cases’. I also showed them a page in color which listed Ad Gentes 7, Lumen Gentium 14, the Catechism of the Catholic Church 845,846 etc supporting 'Exclusive Salvation in the Catholic Church'.
The page which listed invisible cases does not contradict the page with citations showing the Church still today teaches that there is exclusive salvation and this is mentioned in Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
These young men attend the SSPX Mass in Albano Lazio where the local bishop is Vincenzo Viva and the emeritus bishop is Cardinal Marcello Semeraro. They both interpret Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition by choosing the irrational premise. The liberals and traditionalists have something in common at Albano. -Lionel Andrades
Father Federico Montani will not be given permission by Cardinal Arthur Roche to offer the Latin Mass at the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) chapel in Rome because of his rejection of Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. But if he demands that the pope and cardinals interpret Vatican Council II rationally and ethically and accept the traditional and honest conclusion, things could be different. Since Vatican Council II can only be interpreted ethically and rationally and the conclusion has to be traditional only- and the popes and cardinals are not doing this.
The responsibility lies with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican and not the Superior of the SSPX, Albano,Italy or the other religious communities, like the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate of Fr. Stefano Manelli f.i or the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Still River, MA, USA.
The Vatican is illegal when it chooses a Fake Premise to interpret Vatican Council II. The cardinals cannot pretend that this is normal and legal.
Fr. Mantoni has a legal right to be able to interpret Vatican Council II rationally and honestly. He must not be forced to be dishonest by the Vatican and the Left.
If he announces that he chooses to accept Vatican Council II rationally and honestly and so come in harmony with Tradition, without rejecting Vatican Council II, will the Vatican accept it? Will this be enough to officially allow him to continue to offer the Latin Mass? Will it be the same for other religious communities in Italy and throughout the world?
The SSPX must ask this of the Vatican- only clarify a legal point.
The Vatican and the Left must interpret the Council honestly at every Mass, Latin or Novus Ordo. The members of the Vatican Tribunal are obliged to interpret Vatican Council II rationally and honestly. Even Cardinal Angelo Becciu must be granted this right.
The Judges of the Vatican Supreme Tribunal must only interpret the Council rationally. This is obligatory. Catechesis for the children of the secular judges of the secular courts in Rome must only be based upon Vatican Council II interpreted honestly.
Father Federico Montani must only be allowed to interpret Vatican Council II honestly and so rationally at the Latin Mass in Rome. This is a legal point. He is correct when he rejects Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church interpreted irrationally and so dishonestly. - Lionel Andrades
We must remember that the SSPX expelled
Bishop Richard Williamson and Fr. Abrahamovich. The reason was not Catholic
morality but the Holocaust figure. Could Father Federico Montani in Rome,
Bishop Bernard Fellay and Fr. David Pagliarani at the SSPX Headquarters be
intentionally, interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally and unethically, to
please the ADL and the rest of the Jewish Left ? Is the SSPX deliberately
interpreting Vatican Council II with the irrational and not rational premise to
please the ADL ?
Fr. Federico Montani is 1.not affirming
the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Fourth Lateran Council 1215, Pope Honorius
III etc) and neither is he asking the faithful at the SSPX Mass to do the so.
He is also 2. not interpreting LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, as being
only invisible cases in 1965-2023 and neither is he asking the faithful to do
the same i.e.1. interpret Vatican Council II with LG 8 etc referring to invisible cases and 2.accept the Fourth Lateran Council which affirmed EENS with no
exceptions.
This is at the heart of the problem.
The SSPX political, but unethical position on Vatican Council II is a scandal. It is public. The priest here must officially end it or the SSPX Headquarters must issue a statement on this subject.- Lionel Andrades
Dear Mary Ann Kreitzer,
Praised be Jesus.
When Bishop Schneider was interviewed by Dr. Taylor Marshall he said
that there were no literal cases of the baptism of desire. Marshall confirmed
it. He said that there were no explicit cases of St. Thomas Aquinas'
implicit baptism of desire.
This is reality. We cannot meet any one saved with the baptism of
desire.
Could you let us know what do you think ? Is Lumen Gentium 14 ( baptism
of desire) referring to only a hypothetical and theoretical case for you?
In our 'exchanges' before you did not answer this question.
Then could you ask someone at the SSPX Headquarters to let us know what
is their official position on this issue ? The priests here in Rome have
conflicting or no views. They are afraid. Since this is a political subject.
The SSPX interpretation of Vatican Council II is political. You know it.
The SSPX is following the Vatican and the Left on Vatican Council II.The
Council is not a rupture with Tradition.
Is it possible for you to send this comment to someone responsible in
the SSPX. Plese ask him simply : Does LG 8,LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc
in Vatican Council II refer to a subjective or objective case, someone
invisible or visible in 1965-2023, someone unseen or seen, someone unknown or
known.
John Martignoni the apologist says they refer to invisible cases.
Fr. Stefano Visintin osb the former Rector and Dean of Theology at the
University of St.Anselm says the same.
Archbishop Thomas Gullickson in a reply to my question, has also
answered in the affirmative on his blog.
In Christ
Lionel
Andrades
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8568419039847692717&postID=5695333203705705855&page=1&token=1680601484833
Posts
