At Albano and Rome the SSPX has a room full of books. What are they to do with them ?

 

-Lionel Andrades

The Judge in the De Laire-Voris case in New Hampshire would be interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally since this is a common error. This would be unethical. If he interprets the Council rationally he will become a Feeneyite like the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St. Benedict Center, NH

 

The Judiciary and legislature in New Hampshire, USA are interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally.It is the same with the canonists and secular lawyers.

Bishop Peter Libasci, the bishop of the Diocese of Manchester, in New Hampshire, his Curia and all the religious communities except for the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, interpret Vatican Council II irrationally. They must be told to interpret the Council rationally and honestly. They must also inform Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, to do the same.

The Catholic religious community in New Hampshire, Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, interprets Vatican Council II rationally.

For them LG 8, LG14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, refer to only hypothetical cases. So LG 8 etc are not exceptions for Feenyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) or EENS according to the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1442).

The Judge in the De Laire-Voris case in New Hampshire would be interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally since this is a common error. This would be unethical. If he interprets the Council rationally he will become a Feeneyite like the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St. Benedict Center, NH. -Lionel Andrades

JUNE 1, 2023

Judiciary in New Hampshire must be honest

 

Catholics can no more cite Vatican Council II to project a liberal image. We now know that the Council is ‘rigid’, exclusivist and traditional.

I am following Vatican Council II. A pope cannot out of the blue re-interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and claim the Council contradicts Tradition, in particular the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).So based upon this dishonesty he cannot make radical changes in faith and morals, like, for example, Amoris Laetitia and the Abu Dhabi Declaration.

I am following the Council. I interpret it rationally. It is not a break with Tradition for me.I am not innovating.

So the judge in the Fr. George de Laire-Michael Voris case 1 in New Hampshire, USA must only interpret Vatican Council II rationally. This is being ethical.

This also has a direct bearing on the case.

Fr. Georges de Laire and the Curia in the Diocese of Manchester are interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally. They are also interpreting the baptism of desire etc irrationally. So if they are told to interpret the baptism of desire etc rationally they would have to affirm Fourth Lateran Council (1215), in other words, Feeneyite EENS.The Council would not have any exceptions for Feeneyite EENS. Invisile people cannot be visible examples of salvation outside the Church and objective exceptions for the traditional ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.

Fr. Laire has issued a Decree of Prohibitions against Brother Andre Marie micm, the Superior of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, at Richmond, New Hampshire. Since, the Slaves affirm Feeneyite EENS which he would be obliged to do also, if he did not interpret Vatican Council II, the baptism  of desire etc , irrationally and dishonestly.But for the false premise, the confusion over what is invisible and visible, he would be a confirmed Feeneyite like those against whom he has issued the Decree.

It may be mentioned that over the centuries the popes and saints( Aquinas, Augustine, Francis of Assisi etc) were Feeneyite. Since it is common sense that the baptism of desire etc are not visible cases on earth. If any one is saved with the baptism of desire etc he would be Heaven and unknown to any one on earth.

Bishop Peter Libasci, the bishop of Manchester and the Curia’s dishonesty is public. They do not deny that they officially interpret Vatican Council II irrationally, as does the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican.

The Judiciary in New Hampshire in general must be honest and transparent.- Lionel Andrades

 

1

https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/unionleader.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/f/b2/fb201325-

Madonna di Trevignano piange in tv a Pomeriggio 5: il video delle lacrime e la reazione di Barbara D'Urso

https://notizie.virgilio.it/madonna-di-trevignano-piange-in-tv-a-pomeriggio-5-il-video-delle-lacrime-e-la-reazione-di-barbara-d-urso-1568462

 

Il vescovo Marco Salvi interviene sulla Madonna di Trevignano: cosa ha detto sulla veggente Gisella Cardia

https://notizie.virgilio.it/il-vescovo-marco-salvi-interviene-sulla-madonna-di-trevignano-cosa-ha-detto-sulla-veggente-gisella-cardia-1570597

Mattei is a good historian and his books on Tradition, the saints and popes, are recommended but not those on Vatican Council II or on subjects in which he has interpreted the Council irrationally and not rationally.

 

Roberto dei Mattei is still selling books on Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and for how long is this to continue? I interpret LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, rationally. So they are not practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). Vatican Council II does not contradict the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX neither does it contradict the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q, 27Q on other religions not being paths to salvation). The Council is traditional.

It is the same Vatican Council II before the both of us. But he interprets LG 8, as being physically visible cases. For me they are physically invisible cases in 2023.There have to be visible cases, for LG 8 etc, to be exceptions for the dogma EENS and the rest of Tradition. Invisible people cannot be exceptions.

For me LG 8 etc refer to invisible cases for Mattei, the SSPX , Pope Francis and the cardinals they refer to visible cases. If they were invisible cases for them , then they would be Feeneyites. But they deny this.

So they imply that LG 8 etc refer to visible cases for them and so LG 8 etc are exceptions for EENS etc. This is Cushingism. They do  not affirm the strict interpretation of EENS of the Fourth Lateran Council and the Council of Florence.

The SSPX also is still selling books which project Vatican Council II as a break with the past. This is dishonest. Why should we interpret LG 8 etc as a break with the past?

We know that LG 8 etc can only be hypothetical, always. This was known over the centuries. It is common sense. So they did not project exceptions for EENS.

Mattei is a good historian and his books on Tradition, the saints and popes, are recommended but not those on Vatican Council II or on subjects in which he has interpreted the Council irrationally and not rationally.

Even Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops made the same mistake. They interpreted Vatican Council II like the liberals. Bishop Bernard Fellay can now choose to interpret  the Council, like me. - Lionel Andrades