"We ask the tough questions Catholic establish media won't." —@BradleyLEli
Saturday, May 27, 2023
CMTV is still not telling Catholics to interpret Vatican Council II rationally.CMTV must refuse to interpret Vatican Council II like the Archbishop of Detroit, the CDF and the ADL.
MAY 25, 2023
CMTV is still not telling Catholics to interpret Vatican Council II rationally.CMTV must refuse to interpret Vatican Council II like the Archbishop of Detroit, the CDF and the ADL.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/05/cmtv-is-still-not-telling-catholics-to.html
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/05/cmtv-must-refuse-to-interpret-vatican.html
MAY 25, 2023
CMTV must refuse to interpret Vatican Council II like the Archbishop of Detroit, the CDF and the ADL.
There is no clarification or correction from Michael Voris at Church Militant TV. He agrees with me. There is no denial. He is not telling Catholics that they can interpret LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II as being invisible, hypothetical and speculative cases only. They are not visible and practical examples of salvation outside the Church and so are not exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and the Athanasius Creed. They do not contradict the Syllabus of Error of Pope Pius IX on an ecumenism of return to the Church. They are not a break with the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church. They do not contradict the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church which is not expressed in the New Evangelisation, New Ecclesiology, New Ecumenism and New Theology.
LG 8 etc have a continuity with Tradition and this is not wanted by the liberals and Masons.They are possibilities known only to God, when all needing faith and baptism of water for salvation, is also a possibility known to God. If anyone is saved outside the Catholic Church it is not part of our human reality. We cannot meet and see such cases.
So if Michael Voris says that LG 8,14, 16 etc refer to only hypothetical cases and not objective exceptions for the dogma EENS and the Syllabus of Errors, CMTV will be saying that all Jews, Muslims and other non Christians, are oriented to Hell without faith and baptism in the Catholic Church and that in Heaven there are only Catholics.
This would be opposed by the political left.
The Archbishop of Detroit and the Vatican would excommunicate him, like ‘the Church’ excommunicated Fr. Leonard Feeney politically, for affirming the Fourth Lateran Council and the Council of Florence on traditional EENS. The ADL would put restrictions on CMTV as a media.
CMTV should really refuse to interpret Vatican Council II like the Archbishop of Detroit, the CDF and the ADL. - Lionel Andrades
MAY 24, 2023
CMTV is still not telling Catholics to interpret Vatican Council II rationally
Michael Voris, Simon Rafe, Christine Niles, Bradley Eili and Jules Gomes are still not affirming the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) in harmony with Vatican Council II interpreted rationally. They want to avoid trouble with the Attorney General in Detroit and the Archbishop of Detroit Allen Vigneron. So they are politically correct with the Left on Catholic doctrine, like the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican. They are calling this irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II Magisterial, since it is supported politically by Pope Francis and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj, Prefect of the CDF, who are unethical and dishonest, like them at CMTV.
This is a scandal. For political reasons Church Militant TV is rejecting the dogma EENS and re-interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally and they are not telling Catholics to avoid this error.-Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/05/cmtv-is-still-not-telling-catholics-to.html
MAY 21, 2023
Public mortal sins which Pope Francis and the CDF must correct
PUBLIC MORTAL SINS WHICH POPE FRANICS AND THE CDF MUST CORRECT
Pope Francis has committed the following mortal sins.These are some which come to mind off hand.They are as follows.
1). He interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally. So his conclusion is heretical and schismatic.It changes the interpretation of de fide teachings, Creeds and Catechisms.
2). Since he interprets Vatican Council II irrationally, he changes the interpretation of the Nicene Creed. Again this is heretical.It is schism with the Magisterium over the centuries.They did not interpret the Creeds with the irrational premise.They did not interpret the baptism of desire with the irrational premise.
3). Since he interprets Vatican Council II and the baptism of desire etc irrationally, he rejects the Athanasius Creed.This Creeds says all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation. The pope is saying there are known exceptions in the present times. He implies that there are visible non Catholics saved outside the Church. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II (Ad Teuendem Fidem).To contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or the Athanasius Creed there would have to be physically visible exceptoins. It is only then that EENS etc become obsolete.Invisible cases cannot be exceptions for EENS in the present times ( 1949-2023).
4) Since he has interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally he has produced a new ecclesiology and so justifies changes in traditional morals too, as in the case of Amoris Laetitia etc.He has not excommunicated the German bishops who also justify their moral liberalism. They base it upon Vatican Council II irrational. - Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/05/public-mortal-sins-which-pope-francis.html
MAY 21, 2023
Michael Voris is not telling viewers that Vatican Council II can be interpreted rationally and then the Council will be in harmony with the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) :The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is Cushingite and political on this issue and so not Magisterial
Michael Voris is not telling viewers that Vatican Council II can be interpreted rationally and then the Council will be in harmony with the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), which he does not support for political reasons. He does not want to be labeled a Feeneyite.It would be Anti Semitic for the Jewish Left.
So he leaves Catholics in the dark, uninformed. He looks after his liberal reputation and the financial position of Church Militant TV. In the Vortex, 'lies and truths' are no more captured on this issue, since it could be expensive. Neither can he criticize the US bishops or the SSPX for not interpreting Vatican Council II rationally instead of irrationally, since then he would have to do the same.
CDF WAS NOT MAGISTERIAL IN THE 1949 LETTER
Michael Voris says that he follows the Magisterium of the Church and so also the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican.
1. But the CDF was Cushingite in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office (CDF) to the Archbishop of Boston. The CDF chose the irrational premise to interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance. This is was unethical and not Catholic. It was political.
2.The CDF was also Cushingite at Vatican Council II (1965). It interpreted invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, as being visible exceptions for the dogma EENS according to the Fourth Lateran Council.
This Council says all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation and the CDF, in the 1949 Letter says not everyone needs to enter the Church for salvation, as if there are personally known exceptions for them in the present times.
Even today the CDF projects Vatican Council II as a rupture with the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors. This is an objective mistake in public and cannot be Magisterial. This is political and not Catholic.
The CDF was also not Magisterial on this issue during the pontificate of Pope Benedict. As Prefect of the CDF, Pope Benedict rejected the Athanasius Creed, Syllabus of Errors and 16th century EENS of the missionaries. They were rejected in the name of Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally.
The rational interpretation of Vatican Council II would not be appreciated or tolerated by the Mosaad, the Pasdaran and the equivalent organization in Saudi Arabia.
So Michael Voris and the CDF choose to interpret Vatican Council II deceptively and politically and they wrongly call it the magisterium.-Lionel Andrades
MAY 20, 2023
Sedevacantism is not the solution
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/05/sedevacantism-is-not-solution_20.html
MAY 19, 2023
There is also the fourth possibility, the orthodox one. Pope Francis is the pope but because of mortal sins, un-confessed and because of scandals not rectified, he is not in communion with Jesus and the Church. He lacks Sanctifying Grace and is outside the Church.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/05/there-is-also-fourth-possibility.html
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/05/michael-voris-is-not-telling-viewers.html
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/05/its-simple-sola-scriptura-is-heresy.html
Peter and Michael Dimond are still interpreting the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance irrationally. They are also interpreting Vatican Council II ( LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc), irrationally.
Peter and Michael Dimond are still
interpreting the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance
irrationally. They are also interpreting Vatican Council II ( LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc),
irrationally. There is no denial or correction from them. For some reason they
will not comment on this error. - Lionel Andrades
Michael Voris is not telling viewers that Vatican Council II can be interpreted rationally and then the Council will be in harmony with the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) :The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is Cushingite and political on this issue and so not Magisterial
MAY 21, 2023
Michael Voris is not telling viewers that Vatican Council II can be interpreted rationally and then the Council will be in harmony with the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) :The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is Cushingite and political on this issue and so not Magisterial
Michael Voris is not telling viewers that Vatican Council II can be interpreted rationally and then the Council will be in harmony with the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), which he does not support for political reasons. He does not want to be labeled a Feeneyite.It would be Anti Semitic for the Jewish Left.
So he leaves Catholics in the dark, uninformed. He looks after his liberal reputation and the financial position of Church Militant TV. In the Vortex, 'lies and truths' are no more captured on this issue, since it could be expensive. Neither can he criticize the US bishops or the SSPX for not interpreting Vatican Council II rationally instead of irrationally, since then he would have to do the same.
CDF WAS NOT MAGISTERIAL IN THE 1949 LETTER
Michael Voris says that he follows the Magisterium of the Church and so also the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican.
1. But the CDF was Cushingite in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office (CDF) to the Archbishop of Boston. The CDF chose the irrational premise to interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance. This is was unethical and not Catholic. It was political.
2.The CDF was also Cushingite at Vatican Council II (1965). It interpreted invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, as being visible exceptions for the dogma EENS according to the Fourth Lateran Council.
This Council says all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation and the CDF, in the 1949 Letter says not everyone needs to enter the Church for salvation, as if there are personally known exceptions for them in the present times.
Even today the CDF projects Vatican Council II as a rupture with the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors. This is an objective mistake in public and cannot be Magisterial. This is political and not Catholic.
The CDF was also not Magisterial on this issue during the pontificate of Pope Benedict. As Prefect of the CDF, Pope Benedict rejected the Athanasius Creed, Syllabus of Errors and 16th century EENS of the missionaries. They were rejected in the name of Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally.
The rational interpretation of Vatican Council II would not be appreciated or tolerated by the Mosaad, the Pasdaran and the equivalent organization in Saudi Arabia.
So Michael Voris and the CDF choose to interpret Vatican Council II deceptively and politically and they wrongly call it the magisterium.-Lionel Andrades
MAY 20, 2023
Sedevacantism is not the solution
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/05/sedevacantism-is-not-solution_20.html
MAY 19, 2023
There is also the fourth possibility, the orthodox one. Pope Francis is the pope but because of mortal sins, un-confessed and because of scandals not rectified, he is not in communion with Jesus and the Church. He lacks Sanctifying Grace and is outside the Church.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/05/there-is-also-fourth-possibility.html
Bradley Eli, M.Div., Ma.Th interprets Vatican Council II with an irrational premise to create a non traditional and heretical conclusion and wants the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) to do the same
MAY 19, 2023
Repost : Bradley Eli, M.Div., Ma.Th interprets Vatican Council II with an irrational premise to create a non traditional and heretical conclusion and wants the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) to do the same
AUGUST 28, 2019
Bradley Eli, M.Div., Ma.Th interprets Vatican Council II with an irrational premise to create a non traditional and heretical conclusion and wants the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) to do the same
Bradley Eli, M.Div., Ma.Th interprets Vatican Council II with an irrational premise to create a non traditional and heretical conclusion and he wants the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) to do the same.
POPE FRANCIS: SSPX MUST ACCEPT VATICAN COUNCIL II AND THE NEW MASS
CDL. MÜLLER: "ON MAY 20, 2017, THE SOVEREIGN PONTIFF APPROVED THESE DECISIONS"
ROME (ChurchMilitant.com) - Pope Francis is requiring that the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) accept an orthodox interpretation of Vatican Council II and the validity of the new Mass in order to be reunited with the Catholic Church.(Lionel: An orthodox interpretation of Vatican Council II is to interpret the Council without the irrational premise.1)
According to a French media report published July 1, the SSPX has received a letter from Cdl. Gerhard Müller, then prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), reminding them that their reunion with the Catholic Church is based on the following conditions:
- Adherence to the profession of faith written under Pope St. John Paul II in 1988( Lionel : Bradley means a profession of faith with the false premise. So the result is modernism)
- Explicit acceptance of teachings from Vatican Council II and the post-conciliar period ( Bradley wants the SSPX to interpret Vatican Council with the false premise and so there is a rupture with Tradition 2)
- Recognition of the validity and legitimacy of the New Rite of Mass and sacraments
Cardinal Müller says these conditions were contained in the "Doctrinal Declaration" given to the SSPX last year during a meeting on June 13, 2016.(Lionel : He wanted the SSPX to interpret all magisterial documents with the false premise to create a rupture with the Creeds and Catechisms. ) He relates that these same conditions were presented by him with the "approval of the Sovereign Pontiff" to his congregation on May 10 and were approved at that time by a "unanimous decision of all members" of the CDF. He further notes the "Sovereign Pontiff approved these decisions" of the CDF on May 20.(Lionel: The CDF supports schism.) 3
By assuming there is known salvation outside the Church and possibilities known only to God are real people on earth saved outside the Churchthere are objective exceptions to exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.So the dogmaextra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) has alleged objective exceptions. EENS is contradicted and made obsolete.
So by assuming there is known salvation outside the Church the past exclusivist ecclesiology is rejected. It is made obsolete.
By assuming there is known salvation outside the Church the ecumenism of return is rejected. Unitatitis Redintigratio 3 refers to known Christians saved outside the Church. The old ecumenism is rejected and now there is a new ecumenism.
By assuming there is known salvation outside the Church the Syllabus of Errors on exclusive salvation and an ecumenism of return is made obsolete.
By assuming there is known salvation outside the Church the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation becomes obsolete.
In this way Vatican Council II is also made a rupture with Tradition(EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc).
But there is no known salvation outside the Church. So unknown cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 2 etc cannot be objective examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church.4
Cardinal Müller's five-year term as head of the CDF ended July 2. On June 27, however, while still in charge of the CDF, he sent a letter with the papally approved terms of reunion to Bp. Bernard Fellay, head of the SSPX. The cardinal's letter has subsequently been circulated to all members of the group.
The SSPX has rejected similar terms of reunification with Rome in 2012 and in 2016.(Lionel : The CDF will not interpret Vatican Council II rationally.They want to create a rupture with Tradition ) 5 It is speculated that the group will also reject these conditions. The SSPX claims Vatican Council II is full of doctrinal errors, and these errors are being universally perpetuated by all subsequent popes and the Magisterium.(Lionel: From Pope Paul VI to Pope Francis, Vatican Council II is being interpreted with an irrational premise instead of without it.So there have to be doctrinal errors and heresy.It is official) On its website FAQ, SSPX questions many doctrinal points of Vatican Council II, many teachings of all the popes since then and even the Catechism of the Catholic Church. (Lionel: The CDF and the SSPX have to make the invisible-visible, implicit-explicit distinction when interpreting Vatican Council II and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Otherwise the confusion among them will continue. But for political reasons the CDF will not interpret Vatican Council II rationally and Bradley Eli wants the SSPX to also interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and to accept it, like Church Militant TV).
The SSPX even claims the Novus Ordo Mass is intrinsically evil, and no one should ever go to a Mass unless it's in the extraordinary form of the Latin Rite — and only then if it's offered by an SSPX priest. This recent video on the society's website clearly states their long-held position in this regard.
These conditions of accepting an orthodox understanding of Vatican Council II(Lionel: With the false premise, I repeat, there can be no orthodox interpretation of Vatican Council II.The CDF knows this and they are not talking about it in public.) and the validity of the ordinary form of the Roman rite are not new. In March 2009, Pope Benedict XVI wrote a letter, explaining the SSPX separation is doctrinal(Lionel: Pope Benedict means that the SSPX has to interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise as he does.The SSPX and Bradley Eli are not talking about this) in nature and not merely canonical or legal, as the SSPX would have the public believe.(Lionel: The SSPX will be accepted canonically and legally, like Church Militant TV, when they interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise to create a rupture with EENS, the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.)
Benedict writes:
The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons. (they have to interpret the Council with a false premise as Pope Benedict does)... In order to make this clear once again: Until the doctrinal questions are clarified,(Until they affirm Vatican Council II, the Catechisms and Creeds with the false premise to create a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors and the Athanasius Creed) the society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers — even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty — do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church. ... In light of this situation, it is my intention henceforth to join the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei — the body which has been competent since 1988 for those communities and persons who, coming from the Society of Saint Pius X or from similar groups, wish to return to full communion with the Pope — to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. This will make it clear that the problems now to be addressed are essentially doctrinal in nature(they have to choose Vatican Council II(Cushingite) instead of Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) ) and concern primarily the acceptance of the Second Vatican Council( with irrational Cushingism) and the post-conciliar magisterium of the Popes(interpreted only with Cushingism).
The Holy Father continues:
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/08/bradley-eli-mdiv-math-interprets.htmlThe Church's teaching authority cannot be frozen in the year 1962 — this must be quite clear to the society.(Lionel: Pope Paul VI interpreted Vatican Council II with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism; with the false premise instead of without it. Since then the Church is 'frozen' with a schism from the Left. It is official and accepted by the CDF and the present two popes) But some of those who put themselves forward as great defenders of the council also need to be reminded that Vatican Council II embraces the entire doctrinal history of the Church.(Lionel: Vatican Council II with Cushingism does not embrace the entire doctrinal history of the Church. It is in schism on EENS with the popes before Pius XII ) Anyone who wishes to be obedient to the council has to accept the Faith professed over the centuries (Lionel: Over the centuries they were Feeneyite on EENS. They were Feeneyite on the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and beign saved in invincible ignorance(I.I). From Pope Paul VI the new faith is Cushingite on EENS and BOD, BOB and I.I .This is official heresy and schism. It is a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors, the Athanasius Creed etc) and cannot sever the roots from which the tree draws its life.(Lionel: We have schism from the Left which is trying to appear magisterial. It is not magisterial since the Holy Spirit cannot make an objective mistake and violate the principle of non Contradiction.The Holy Spirit will suddenly not create a gap between faith and reason, as Cushingism does.Cushingism creates the hermeneutic of rupture and Pope Francis and Pope Benedict have accepted it.)- Lionel Andrades
Their false premise is:-1
1. Invisible people are visible.
2.Unknown case of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are personally known.
3.The unknown case of the catechumen who desired the baptism of water but dies before he received it and is saved, is a personally known person.
4.There is known salvation outside the Catholic Church for us human beings.
5.We can see people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water.
6.We can physically see non Catholics in Heaven and on earth who are saved without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7).
7.There are non Catholics who are dead- men visible and walking who are saved outside the Church.
8.There are known people in invincible ignorance through no fault of their own, who are saved.
9.There are some Anglicans and Protestants whom we know who are going to Heaven even though they are outside the Catholic Church.
10.There are some non Catholics whom we know, who are dead, and now are in Heaven, even though they were not Catholic.
2
So with the false premise there are objective exceptions to EENS etc:-
1. The Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation is contradicted.
2. The Nicene Creed in which we say, 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins' over the centuries referred to only one known baptism, the baptism of water.The baptism of desire etc cannot be given to someone like the baptism of water.But now the understanding is ' I believe in three or more known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins ( desire,blood and ignorance) and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church'.
3. The Apostles Creed says ' we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church'. Over the centuries it was understood that the Holy Spirit guided the Catholic Church and taught that there was no salvation outside the Church.Now unknown cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, and LG 8, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, are assumd to be objective examples of salvation outside the Church.4.In the past three Church Councils defined the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) in the extraordinary Magisterium .It was an 'infallible teaching' for Pope Pius X( Letter of the Holy Offie 1949).Now it is obsolete with their being alleged known salvation outside the Church.
3. The Apostles Creed says ' we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church'. Over the centuries it was understood that the Holy Spirit guided the Catholic Church and taught that there was no salvation outside the Church.Now unknown cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, and LG 8, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, are assumd to be objective examples of salvation outside the Church.4.In the past three Church Councils defined the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) in the extraordinary Magisterium .It was an 'infallible teaching' for Pope Pius X( Letter of the Holy Offie 1949).Now it is obsolete with their being alleged known salvation outside the Church.
5.Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are interpreted with the false premise so they become a rupture with EENS( Feeneyite), the Syllabus of Errors, Athanasius Creed etc.
6.With the false premise the Catechism of Pope Pius X contradict itself. It affirms the strict interpretation of EENS while invincible invincible ignorance is intepreted as referring to personally known non Catholics saved outside the Chuch.Invincible ignorance is not seen as a hypothetical case only.
7.Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus, Ecclesia in Asia, Balamand Declaration etc were all written upholding the false premise. They did not support exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. So in a subtle way they contradicted EENS(Feeneyite), the Athanasius Creed etc. They did not support the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.They are Christological without the traditional ecclesiocentric ecclesiology. It's Christ without the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church for salvation.
6.With the false premise the Catechism of Pope Pius X contradict itself. It affirms the strict interpretation of EENS while invincible invincible ignorance is intepreted as referring to personally known non Catholics saved outside the Chuch.Invincible ignorance is not seen as a hypothetical case only.
7.Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus, Ecclesia in Asia, Balamand Declaration etc were all written upholding the false premise. They did not support exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. So in a subtle way they contradicted EENS(Feeneyite), the Athanasius Creed etc. They did not support the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.They are Christological without the traditional ecclesiocentric ecclesiology. It's Christ without the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church for salvation.
3.
AUGUST 28, 2019
SCHISM FROM THE LEFT CREATED WITH A FALSE PREMISE
AUGUST 28, 2019
We have a schism from the Left.It is silent, un-announced, seeping and creeping but there all the same
AUGUST 27, 2019
There is a schism in the Catholic Church today and it is from the Left and the liberals and the popes, cardinals and bishops must correct it
4
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/08/there-is-schism-in-catholic-church.html
5.
Now we can correct the error. We know there is no known salvation outside the Church.Possibilities of salvation outside the Church are known only to God are not real people in 2019. So there are no exceptions in Vatican Council II or the Catechism of the Catholic Church to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.
Vatican Council II is traditional, irrespective of the presence of Fr. Karl Rahner and the other liberals.
They failed to make the Council a rupture with Tradition.
They put all their money on Catholics assuming there is known salvation outside the Church.
The liberal theologian Fr. Joseph Ratzinger did not give up even as Pope Benedict. In March 2016 (Avvenire) he asked,that when Vatican Council II says there is salvation outside the Church what is the purpose of mission. Since there is salvation outside the Church according to Vatican Council II, he said, EENS is no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century.But there is salvation outside the Church only for him.
LG 8, LG 16 etc are not just possibilities of salvation but real people, personally known non Catholics who are saved outside the Church, for him.
This was the ruse the other liberals were also counting on to create a rupture with Tradition.Pope Paul VI was there to see that there was a continuituy with the error.
So today Pope Francis is in a schism, a rupture with the popes before Pius XII on EENS.He is in a rupture with the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return. There is a break with traditional mission based on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.He has to reject the Syllabus of Errors and the the Athanasius Creed since there are allegedly known examples of non Catholics saved outside the Church.There is a change in the understanding of inter faith marriage and the traditional understanding of the Nicene and Apostles Creed etc.
There is a schism in the Catholic Church today and it is from the Left and the liberals and the popes, cardinals and bishops must correct it.
Church Militant TV repeats the magisterium's false propaganda on Vatican Council II which they have compromised with
Bradley Eli Retweeted
THURSDAY, JULY 6, 2017
Church Militant TV repeats the magisterium's false propaganda on Vatican Council II which they have compromised with
FROM THE CMTV WEBSITE
POPE FRANCIS: SSPX MUST ACCEPT VATICAN COUNCIL II AND THE NEW MASS
CDL. MÜLLER: "ON MAY 20, 2017, THE SOVEREIGN PONTIFF APPROVED THESE DECISIONS"
ROME (ChurchMilitant.com) - Pope Francis is requiring that the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) accept an orthodox interpretation of Vatican Council II and the validity of the new Mass in order to be reunited with the Catholic Church.
Lionel: False. Pope Francis wants the SSPX to accept an un-orthodox interpretation of Vatican Council II instead of the available orthodox one. He wants the SSPX to interpret Vatican Council II with irrational Cushingism instead of rational and traditional Feeneyism.
He also wants them to offer the Old and New Mass with the theology of Cushiningism which is a rupture with the theology of the past.
They are correct in rejection this.
Michael Voris unfortunately has compromised. He interprets Vatican Council II like Pope Francis and Pope Benedict, with Cushingism.So he would agree with Pope Benedict's statement in March 2016. He said that Vatican Council II (he meant Cushingite Vatican Council II) was ' a development' and so the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. This is public heresy and there was no criticism from Church Militant TV.
On the Vortex of CMTV, 'lies and falsehoods' are no more 'trapped'.Non controversial subjects are discussed which would not offend the Archbishop of Detroit and the Jewish Left.
___________________________
According to a French media report published July 1, the SSPX has received a letter from Cdl. Gerhard Müller, then prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), reminding them that their reunion with the Catholic Church is based on the following conditions:
- Adherence to the profession of faith written under Pope St. John Paul II in 1988 ( Lionel: The 1988 Profession of Faith states, ' I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins '.This has become controversial since there can be two interpretations.One interpretation is without an irrational premise and the other is with it.One is Feeneyite and the other is Cushingite. I would use the Feeneyite version.The CDF and the two popes use the Cushingite version which is irrational and the conclusion is non traditional. 1 Similarly the Oath of Fidelity is 'loaded'. OATH OF FIDELITY ON ASSUMING AN OFFICE TO BE EXERCISED IN THE NAME OF THE CHURCHThe Oath of Fidelity on Assuming an Office states'With Christian obedience I shall follow what the Bishops, as authentic doctors and teachers of the faith, declare, or what they, as those who govern the Church, establish. I shall also faithfully assist the diocesan Bishops, so that the apostolic activity, exercised in the name and by mandate of the Church, may be carried out in communion with the Church'. Lionel:This passage from the Oath of Fidelty calls for obedience to Bishops and others who interpret magisterial documents with irrational Cushingism. In other words obedience to heresy is a requirement in the Church. 2
- Explicit acceptance of teachings from Vatican Council II and the post-conciliar period (Lionel : The SSPX can explicitly accept Vatican Council II without the irrational premise; without assuming hypothetical cases are objective in 2017.They could accept a Feeneyite Vatican Council II. But this would be rejected by the Vatican.Since this would be an orthodox interpretation of Vatican Council II in harmony with the Syllabus of Errors and the dogma EENS( Feeneyite) ).
- Recognition of the validity and legitimacy of the New Rite of Mass and sacraments (Lionel: Bishop Fellay has recognised the validity of the Novus Ordo Mass, it is the Sacrifice of Jesus re-enacted for him.He is really objecting to the Cushingite theology of the Mass, which the CMTV and the Archdiocese of Detroit have no problems with.This is 'the false church' within the Catholic Church.This is the Church of Nice which Michael Voris has accepted).
Cardinal Müller says these conditions were contained in the "Doctrinal Declaration" given to the SSPX last year during a meeting on June 13, 2016. He relates that these same conditions were presented by him with the "approval of the Sovereign Pontiff" to his congregation on May 10 and were approved at that time by a "unanimous decision of all members" of the CDF. He further notes the "Sovereign Pontiff approved these decisions" of the CDF on May 20.
(Lionel: He has approved that all magisterial documents be interpreted with the philosophy and theology of Cushingism instead of Feeneyism.Those priests who interpret magisterial documents with Feeneyism will be punished. They will also be threatened by the Jewish Left.)
Cardinal Müller's five-year term as head of the CDF ended July 2. On June 27, however, while still in charge of the CDF, he sent a letter with the papally approved terms of reunion to Bp. Bernard Fellay, head of the SSPX. The cardinal's letter has subsequently been circulated to all members of the group.
The SSPX has rejected similar terms of reunification with Rome in 2012 and in 2016.
(Lionel:In 2012 in the General Chapter Statement the SSPX approved Feeneyite EENS which was rejected by Ecclesia Dei and the CDF. In March 2016 Pope Benedict XVI in public rejected the 2012 doctrinal statement of the SSPX.)
__________________________________
It is speculated that the group will also reject these conditions.
Lionel: It can be speculated that the group will affirm Vatican Council II without the irrational premise, with Feeneyism, which is traditional and rational. In this way they will meet the requirement to accept Vatican Council II. The doctrinal dialogue can resume unless of course the Vatican is once again, as in 2012, not willing to interpret magisterial documents with traditional Feeneyite theology and philosophy.
___________________________________
The SSPX claims Vatican Council II is full of doctrinal errors, and these errors are being universally perpetuated by all subsequent popes and the Magisterium.
Lionel : The basic error is Cushingism as a theology and philosophy. The error is not permanent and fixed. It can be avoided.It can be replaced with Feeneyism in which hypothetical and theoretical cases are not assumed to be explicit and objective in the present times, for example the last 50 years.
____________________________________
On its website FAQ, SSPX questions many doctrinal points of Vatican Council II, many teachings of all the popes since then and even the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Lionel: It is based on irrational Cushingism which was accepted by Archbishop Lefebvre. He did not know that Vatican Council II can be interpreted with Feeneyism. Cardinal Ratzinger and Pope John Paul II did not tell Archbishop Lefebvre about this , if they knew about it.
This can be seen on the SSPX website.
___________________________________
___________________________________
The SSPX even claims the Novus Ordo Mass is intrinsically evil, and no one should ever go to a Mass unless it's in the Latin Rite — and only then if it's offered by an SSPX priest. This recent video on the society's website clearly states their long-held position in this regard.
(Lionel: Bishop Fellay has rejected this position and clarified it. He is referring to the theology of the Novus Ordo Mass, Cushingism, which is evil. However he is not aware that there still is the New Theology, which the SSPX accepts when they offer Mass. Archbishop Lefebvre accepted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and so also the New Theology based on visible- for- us baptism of desire and blood and physically visible , being saved in invincible ignorance. This is irrational.Since there are no such visible cases upon which to build a new theology.)
__________________________________
These conditions of accepting an orthodox understanding of Vatican Council II and the validity of the ordinary form of the Roman rite are not new.
(Lionel: In the past too CMTV has been corrected on this point. There is no comment or correction from them.They just ignore what I say. They do not make the distinction between Cushingism and Feeneyism. Since they do not want to admit that the magisterium has made a mistake.)
___________________________________
In March 2009, Pope Benedict XVI wrote a letter, explaining the SSPX separation is doctrinal in nature and not merely canonical or legal, as the SSPX would have the public believe.
(Lionel: He wants them to accept his New Theology based on Cushingism. Summorusm Pontificum approved the Latin Mass. However it was understood that the Tridentine Rite Mass has to be offered with the new ecclesiology which was a rupture with that of the magisterium of the 16th century.This is doctrinally correct for Pope Benedict as it was for Fr.Karl Rahner, Fr.Hans Kung and his other German friends and colleagues.
Th SSPX does well to reject it. All Catholics in good conscience should reject it.)
_____________________________________
Benedict writes:
The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons. ... (Lionel: Correct. They will not accept Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) which is heretical, non traditional and irrational.God bless them for this).In order to make this clear once again: Until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers — even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty — do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church. ... In light of this situation, it is my intention henceforth to join the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei — the body which has been competent since 1988 for those communities and persons who, coming from the Society of Saint Pius X or from similar groups, wish to return to full communion with the Pope — to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.(Lionel: He does not state that the CDF must doctrinally accept Feeneyite Vatican Council II. Even in March 2016 he did not state that he personally was willing to affirm Vatican Council II( Feeneyite) which would not be ' a development' with respect to EENS according to the 16th century missionaries) This will make it clear that the problems now to be addressed are essentially doctrinal in nature and concern primarily the acceptance of the Second Vatican Council and the post-conciliar magisterium of the Popes. (emphasis added)(Lionel: Agreed. I affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite). I affirm all magisterial documents with Feeneyism. I am waiting for the heretical popes to do the same.I am waiting for the heretical CMTV to sort out their doctrinal issue among themself and be faithful to Jesus Christ).
The Holy Father(who is a Cushingite) continues:
The Church's teaching authority cannot be frozen in the year 1962 — this must be quite clear to the society. (Lionel: Rubbish. This is not the issue.Cushingism precedes Vatican Council II and it was there in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office. Cardinal Ratzinger instead of correcting the error as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith promoted it.) But some of those who put themselves forward as great defenders of the council also need to be reminded that Vatican Council II embraces the entire doctrinal history of the Church.(Lionel: False. Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) is a rupture.Vatican Council II( Feeneyite) would be in harmony with 'the doctrinal history of the Church' in particular the dogma EENS as it was interpreted by St.Robert Bellarmine, St.Francis Xavier and St.Ignatius of Loyola.It would be in harmonyw with the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.) Anyone who wishes to be obedient to the council has to accept the Faith professed over the centuries and cannot sever the roots from which the tree draws its life.(Lionel: This would also apply to Cushingite Pope Francis and Pope Benedict and the ecclesiastics as the Vatican today)
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/pope-francis-sspx-must-accept-vatican-ii-and-the-new-mass
1.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/07/we-can-renew-our-consecration-to.html
2.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/07/we-can-renew-our-consecration-to.html
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/05/repost-bradley-eli-mdiv-math-interprets.html
MAY 19, 2023
Bradley Eli and Church Militant TV interpret Magisterial Documents ( Vatican Council II, EENS etc) with irrational Cushingism and not rational Feeneyism. This is heretical and schismatic. It is political and unethical. This is an objective mistake and so cannot be Magisterial
SALVATION AND THE CHURCH
by Bradley Eli M.Div., Ma.Th. • ChurchMilitant.com • August 31, 2020
LUKE 13:23: 'LORD, ARE THEY FEW THAT ARE SAVED?'
The Catholic Church infallibly teaches the truth that "Outside the Church, there is no salvation." The Church isn't saying here that only Catholics go to Heaven but that all graces needed for salvation originate in Christ and pass through His Mystical Body, the Church.
Lionel: The Catholic Church is saying here that there are only Catholics in Heaven. If there are non Catholics who are going to Heaven, in Heaven they will only be Catholic. The Church is saying this when Magisterial Documents( Councils, Creeds and Catechisms) are interpreted rationally and not irrationally. Bradley Eli interprets Vatican Council II irrationally.
_____________________
Section 846 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms that this dogma does mean "All salvation comes from Christ the head through the Church, which is His body."
Lionel: Yes all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church, which is His Body and all need to enter the Catholic Church with faith and the baptism of water for salvaton ( Ad Gentes 7, Lumen Gentium 14, Catechism of the Catholic Church 845, 846, Fourth Lateran Council (1215) etc). When Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are interpreted rationally there is no contradiction. There is no rupture with the Fourth Council of Florence (1215) on the strict interpretation of EENS, with no known exceptions.
____________________
Those unable to know this truth have what's called invincible ignorance. A little Jewish girl who dies at the age of 6 might be such a person.
Lionel : Yes there could be someone in invincible ignorance and if the person is to be saved this case would only be known to God. For us humans they are theoretical and speculative. We cannot point out any person and say that this or that person will go to Heaven even if he is in invincible ignorance. We cannot meet or see someone saved in invincible ignorance. They are invisible in our reality. So they are not practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Council of Florence 1442).
_______________________
Of these, Pope Pius IX in his 1863 encyclical, Quanto Conficiamur Moerore, wrote:
It is known to Us and to you that they who labor in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion and who, zealously keeping the natural law and its precepts engraved in the hearts of all by God, and being ready to obey God, live an honest and upright life, can, by the operating power of divine light and grace, attain eternal life, since God ... will by no means suffer anyone to be punished with eternal torment who has not the guilt of deliberate sin.
Lionel: Yes and we cannot project this case of invincible ignorance as an exception for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). It was known to Pope Pius IX that these are theoretical cases and not objective exceptions for the dogma EENS.That these are hypothetical cases is common sense. It was known through the centuries.
It was only in 1949 in the Letter of the Holy Office (CDF) that a mistake was made. It was assumed that invincible ignorance was a visible case. Bradley Eli makes this mistake. This is the common formation- error in the Catholic seminaries and universities all over the world.
___________________________
As cited in Denzinger §1677, Pius IX adds:
But, the Catholic dogma that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church is well known; and also that those who are obstinate toward the authority and definitions of the same Church, and who persistently separate themselves from the unity of the Church, and from the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, to whom "the guardianship of the vine has been entrusted by the Savior," cannot obtain eternal salvation.
Lionel : The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office was placed in the Denzinger by the liberals. It was put there along with its objective mistake. Catholics are not obligated to follow the second part of the 1949 LOHO which contradicts the first part which affirmed traditional EENS. It does this with a fake premise.
The 1949 LOHO is not Magisterial, even though it was accepted by Rahner, Ratzinger, Kung and Congar, since the Holy Spirit cannot make an objective mistake. With this objective mistake, confusing what is invisible as being visible, unknown as being known, alleged practical exceptions were created for the Magisterial interpretation of EENS over the centuries.
_______________________________
Vatican II repeats this admonition in Lumen Gentium §14: "Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved. ... Not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged."
Lionel : Yes whoever knows and does not enter is oriented to Hell. But it does not mean that we know of any one in particular who will go to Heaven outside the Church, with invincible ignorance. All people in general need Catholic faith and the baptism of water for salvation (AG 7). All. Those who know and those who do not know, need to accept Jesus in only the Catholic Church for salvation ( to avoid Hell ). Lumen Gentium 14 refers to those ‘who know’ since the Council Fathers, the liberals, interpreted 'being saved in invincible ignorance', irrationally, like the 1949 LOHO. They assumed that the baptism of desire (BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I) referred to 'known and visible non Catholics' in 1949-1965 who were saved outside the Catholic Church, without faith and the baptism of water. But the Councils from the 12th to the 16th century are clear. All need to be members of the Church for salvation. All. The word all is also used in Ad Gentes 7. It says all need faith and the baptism of water, for salvation (AG 7, Vatican Council II) The BOD and I.I are not exceptions or relevant for AG 7 or the dogma EENS.
____________________
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/05/bradly-eli-and-church-militant-tv.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
