https://endtimes.video/good-thief-baptism/
Monday, June 12, 2023
The popes, cardinals and bishops are not apostolic on the Creeds, since they interpret them irrationally.
1949 LOHO NOT APOSTOLIC
The
popes, cardinals and bishops are not apostolic on the Creeds, since they
interpret them irrationally. I interpret them rationally and so I am apostolic. The ecclesiastical hierarchy cannot be apostolic with the mistake of the 1949
Letter of the Holy Office (CDF) to the Archbishop of Boston (LOHO).It was
repeated at Vatican Council II.
In
the 1949 LOHO invisible cases of the baptism of desire (BOD) and being saved in
invincible ignorance(I.I) are confused as visible exceptions for the dogma
extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the
Council of Florence(1442).Both these Councils defined EENS and did not mention
any exceptions.
Since
Pius XII, all the cardinals and bishops have accepted LOHO with this error. It
has also been inserted in the Denzinger and referenced in Vatican Council II
(LG 16) and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
NICENE CREED RE-INTEPRETED WITH THE ERROR
So
the Nicene Creed says for the hierarchy, ‘I believe in three or more baptisms (desire,
blood, ignorance etc) which exclude the baptism of water’. Politically they are not Feeneyite. If they said that everyone needs the baptism of water for salvation, they would be Feeneyite.
For
me there still is one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.It is one visible and
repeatable baptism. The baptism of desire cannot be administered to anyone.
APOSTLES CREED HAS 1949 LOHO VIRUS
The Apostles Creed for them is ’ I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic
Church which today teaches that outside the Church there is known salvation.' For
me it is 'I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church which still
teaches that outside the Church there is no known salvation.' For me LG 8, 14,
16 etc refer to hypothetical and physically invisible cases only, always. This
was magisterial for centuries before 1949. So I am following the reasoning of the Magisterium over the centuries.
ATHANASIUS CREED REJECTED WITH 1949 ERROR
The
popes, cardinals and bishops reject the Athanasius Creed which says all need to
be in the Catholic Church for salvation. I accept this Creed since it is not
contradicted by BOD, BOB and I.I. It is not contradicted by Vatican Council II(LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc,
for me.
They
reject the Athanasius Creed which says all need to be in the Catholic Church
for salvation. I accept this Creed.
SSPX, CMRI,MHT, USSCB CHOOSE ERROR
So
they are not really in the one, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church (Nicene
Creed). There is a rupture with the past.It is same for the bishops of the SSPX, SSPX- Resistance,
the sedevacantists CMRI and MHT in the USA and the USCCB.
BISHOP PETER LIBASCI, DIOCESE OF MANCHESTER, NH IS NOT APOSTOLIC
Bishop Peter Libasci, the bishop of Manchester in New Hampshire, USA and Fr. Georges de Laire, the Judicial Vicar in this diocese, are not magisterial or apostolic on the Creeds.
Instead Brother Andre Marie micm, Superior, at the St. Benedict Center
in New Hampshire, is magisterial and apostolic on the Creeds, Vatican Council
II, BOD, BOB and I.I and the Catechisms. He does not confuse what is invisble as being visible.1
However the Catholic judges, lawyers and canonists in general are not apostolic and magisterial on the Creeds, Vatican Council II, BOD, BOB and I.I and the Catechisms.If they persist with this error even after being informed it is unethical and dishonest.
The Judicial Vicar in New Hampshire has filed a case against Michael Voris who is also not apostolic on the Creeds, Vatican Council II, BOD, BOB and I.I and Catechisms, like, the Archbishop of Detroit, Allen Vigneron.
It is the same with Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF).
CDF DECREE OF PROHIBITIONS NOT APOSTOLIC
He approved a Decree of Prohibitions against the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, at the St.Benedict Center, NH, based upon the irrational interpretation of the Creeds, Vatican Council II, BOD, BOB and I.I and the Catechisms.
The Decree of the Diocese of Manchester and the CDF against the St. Benedict Center is not apostolic. - Lionel Andrades
1
https://catholicism.org/the-brothers
_______________________________________________________________
JUNE 3, 2023
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
JUNE 10, 2023
Pope Francis must not refer to his Letters as 'Apostolic' . Since he accepts the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Bishop relative to Fr. Leonard Feneey (LOHO).It is a rupture with the Apostles, the Church Fathers and the popes and saints of the Middle Ages.They were rational. The LOHO is irrational.Also Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and not rationally by Pope Francis is not apostolic.
Pope Francis must not refer to his Letters as 'Apostolic' . Since he accepts the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Bishop relative to Fr. Leonard Feneey (LOHO).It is a rupture with the Apostles, the Church Fathers and the popes and saints of the Middle Ages.They were rational. The LOHO is irrational.Also Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and not rationally by Pope Francis is not apostolic.
Pope Francis’ interpretation of the Creeds with the irrational premise and inference of the 1949 LOHO is also not apostolic. He interprets the Catechisms as a break with the past ecclesiocentrism of the Apostles and the Church Fathers. For me the Catechism, Creeds and Councils are not a break with Tradition. They are apostolic. I do not use the common irrationality to interpret them.
He could refer to a Personal Letter but not Apostolic Letter.
According to Apostolic teachings when he changes the Creeds etc he is not in communion with Jesus and the Church. He is outside the Church. He is living in mortal sin and does not have the Catholic faith. He does not have Sanctifying Grace.This is a scandal.He should not be offering Holy Mass until he ends the scandal with contrition.
If he interpreted the baptism of desire (BOD) and the invincible ignorance(I.I) rationally he would be apostolic. This means BOD and I.I can only be hypothetical and invisible cases in 2023.This would be apostolic. This was how the popes and saints over the centuries interpreted BOD and I.I. They did not project practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) etc. This was how BOD and I.I were interpreted magisterially over the centuries.It is also common sense. BOD and I.I can only be hypothetical for us human beings. We cannot see someone saved with the baptism of desire etc outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church.
Sometime back Fr. John Weinandy wrote on the Four Marks of the Church, one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic (Nicene Creed). Fr. Weinandy too is not apostolic when he interprets BOD and I.I irrationally. His interpretation of Vatican Council II and the Councils and Creeds confuses what is invisible as being visible.
Brother Andre Marie micm, also wrote on the Four Marks of the Church. He interprets Vatican Council II and BOD and I.I rationally. His interpretation of EENS etc is apostolic.
Brother Peter Dimond at the Most Holy Family Monastery is apostolic on EENS but not on BOD and I.I and Vatican Council II, the Catechisms, Creeds etc. - Lionel Andrades
JUNE 9, 2023
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF), Vatican, issued Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus, with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and not rationally. So were they Magisterial or not Magisterial? some may ask.
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF), Vatican, issued Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus, with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and not rationally. So were they Magisterial or not Magisterial? some may ask.
For me, they are Magisterial, since they can be interpreted in harmony with the past exclusivist ecclesiology, the past ecclesiocentrism.
We simply interpret hypothetical and theoretical cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as being hypothetical and theoretical only. We do not project them as practical exceptions for the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church. Since they cannot be exceptions in real life. We cannot meet or see someone saved outside the Church.
It is the same with Vatican Council II. The Council interpreted rationally is not a break with the Magisterium the centuries on EENS etc. It does not contradict the past Catechisms and Creeds and the past Magisterium. - Lionel Andrades
UNE 4, 2023
Pope Francis and my interpretation of the Creeds is different.Priests do not say that I am wrong.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/pope-francis-and-my-interpretation-of.html
JUNE 4, 2023
We do not have unity on the Creeds in the Catholic Church.Liberalism no more has any theological basis in the Vatican Council II-text https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/we-do-not-have-unity-on-creeds-in.html
OCTOBER 20, 2022
Creeds are no more a sign of unity in the Catholic Church. There are two interpretations of the Nicene, Apostles and Athanasius Creed
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2022/10/creeds-are-no-more-sign-of-unity-in.html
JUNE 24, 2020
Pope Francis interprets the Creeds with a false premise, inference and conclusion. This was un precedented over the centuries
ttps://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/06/pope-francis-interprets-creeds-with.html
____________________________________________________
MAY 23, 2023
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
