Monday, July 17, 2023
The College of Cardinals are not eligible to vote at the next Conclave to elect a pope, if they are dishonest and interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally.
JULY 11, 2023
The College of Cardinals are not eligible to vote at the next Conclave to elect a pope, if they are dishonest and interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally. They must interpret LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II as not referring to physically visible non Catholics saved outside the Church. Lumen Gentium 8, 14, 16 etc, are not practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX. There is no rupture with the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X. So future cardinals would have to be only traditionalists.
The College of Cardinals are not eligible to vote at the next Conclave to elect a pope, if they are dishonest and interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally. They must interpret LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II as not referring to physically visible non Catholics saved outside the Church. Lumen Gentium 8, 14, 16 etc, are not practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX. There is no rupture with the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X. So future cardinals would have to be only traditionalists.
The cardinals were unethical on Vatican Council II, the Creeds, Councils, Catechisms, and EENS etc when they elected Pope Francis. They were interpreting Church Documents irrationally and non traditionally. This was political.
The cardinals are presently in public mortal sins of faith.They are in heresy and schism and it is official. They cannot condone this any more with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally. The people know that the Council can be interpreted rationally. This is the only moral choice the cardinals have.
ATHANASIUS CREED TWO INTERPRETATIONS
For me the Athanasius Creed says all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation (to avoid Hell). For the cardinals all do not need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation. Since for them there are known and visible cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church in 1949-2023.
For the Nicene Creed says ‘I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins ‘For me it refers to only the baptism of water which is physically visible and repeatable. For them there are three or more baptisms which exclude the baptism of water. They are the baptism of desire, the baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance. These are physically visible baptisms for them and so they contradict Feeneyite EENS or EENS according to the Fourth Lateran Council (1215). This Council did not mention any exceptions.These ‘visible-invisible’ baptisms; known examples of salvation in the present time for us human beings, are also extended to LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, for the cardinals.
APOSTLES CREED WITH TWO INTERPRETATIONS
For me the Apostles Creed refers to the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church which still teaches that outside the Church there is no salvation. For the cardinals the message is outside the Church there is known salvation, exceptions for the pre-1949 magisterial understanding on there being exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
So I am in harmony with the pre-1949 Magisterium, and they are in schism.
For me the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q and 29 Q on outside the Church there is no salvation) is not contradicted by 24Q (invincible ignorance etc). For them there is a contradiction.
For me the Catechism of the Catholic Church ( 1257 on the Necessity of Baptism) is not contradicted by the references to hypothetical and invisible cases mentioned in the line ‘God is not limited to the Sacraments ‘. For them CCC 1257 is contradictory and confusing.
HERETICAL NEW CARDINALS IN SEPTEMBER
In this heretical and schismatic condition there will be new cardinals in September and they include Cardinal-designate Vincent Manuel Fernandez, the new Prefect of the Dicastery for Doctrine and Faith. He needs to recant. The other cardinals need to do the same. Fernandez is in first class heresy according to the Pope John Paul II’s, Ad Tuendem Fidem, which mention a hierarchy of truths for Catholics to follow. Fernandez does not have the Catholic faith. This is a scandal. To re-interpret the Creeds, Councils, Catechisms etc is a kind of apostasy. Cardinals who do not affirm the Creeds in their original meaning should not be allowed to offer Holy Mass.
PERMISSION TO OFFER HOLY MASS
Roberto dei Mattei states:
As regards the Mass una cum Bergoglio, the lawyer Patruno gives a good explanation of the passage of St Thomas, often quoted inappropriately, according to which anyone sins who hears Mass or receives the sacraments from heretical, schismatic or excommunicated ministers (Summa Theologiae, III, q.82, a.9). The passage refers to heretics, schismatics and the excommunicated who are deprived of the exercise of their powers by a sentence of the Church. Until this definitive pronouncement has been made, one may to go to Mass and receive the sacraments from priests subjectively considered heretical, etc. Communicatio in sacris with heretics is illicit when a sentence of the Church has declared them as such, but until that moment it is licit to receive communion from them and hear their Mass.
Pope Francis, the lawyer Patruno judiciously asserts, may be a debated figure, but “until there is the sententia ecclesiae, no one - layman or ordinary priest - may substitute himself for the teaching Church” (p. 213). At the most, the opinion that one might have about Francis could count as the opinion of a private scholar. But no man, apart from the pope, is by nature infallible: only the pope is, under certain conditions, when he exercises his mandate. Moreover, there can be no Church without a pope, and if today the pope is not Francis, who is or will be? These are unavoidable questions to which a “charismatic” answer cannot be given, outside the most elementary notions of theology and canon law.
Cardinals, who do not interpret Vatican Council II, EENS, the Catechism and Church Documents rationally and so traditionally, should not be allowed to offer Holy Mass.
Cardinals who reject the ecclesiology of the old Roman Missal, which is in harmony with the Vatican Council II interpreted rationally, should not be allowed to offer Holy Mass in any Rite.
Cardinal Vincent Nichols, Robert Sarah, Walter Kasper, Francis Arinza, Blaise Cupich, Gerhard Muller, Raymond Leo Burke and Luiz Ladaria should not be allowed to offer Holy Mass, until they affirm the Faith and so correct the scandal.
The most reasonable path to follow in this painful situation seems to be the one traced by the Correctio filialis of 16 July 2017 (http://www.correctiofilialis.org/it/), a firm and respectful document presented by 40 scholars, later becoming more than 200, to urge the Holy Father to reject the heresies and errors he has promoted. This initiative deserves to be taken up again, but above all adopted by a suitable number of cardinals and bishops, not in order to “depose” the pope, but to admonish him filially, following the example of St Paul towards St Peter (Ad Gal 2:14).
The Cardinals like Pope Francis, of course, all these years, have been justifying their heresies with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally.
The signatories of the Correctio Filiale cannot correct Pope Francis and the cardinals, until they also interpret Church Documents rationally. I have mentioned this before and there is no comment or denial from them.They are making the same mistake on Vatican Council II etc, as the cardinals and Pope Francis. This is also the error of Roberto dei Mattei, Peter Kwasniewski, Taylor Marshall, John Henry Weston, Michael Matt, Michael Voris and others.
-Lionel Andrades
______________________________________________________
JULY 9, 2023
No pope, cardinal, bishop or priest must change the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and reject the Athanasius Creed. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem). There are restrictions on offering Holy Mass
from Rorate Caeli ( with comments)
The appointment of the new prefect of the congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith — by Roberto de Mattei
Roberto de Mattei
July 5, 2023
As regards the Mass una cum Bergoglio, the lawyer Patruno gives a good explanation of the passage of St Thomas, often quoted inappropriately, according to which anyone sins who hears Mass or receives the sacraments from heretical, schismatic or excommunicated ministers (Summa Theologiae, III, q.82, a.9).
Lionel: Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II irrationally like the cardinals, bishops, priests and the Lefebvrists.They also interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, irrationally, like the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney. So the understanding of the Nicene Creed is changed and the Athanasius Creed is rejected outright.
In this condition the religious offer Holy Mass.
Roberto dei Mattei also makes the same mistake and does not deny it.He attends Mass in this condition.
The passage refers to heretics, schismatics and the excommunicated who are deprived of the exercise of their powers by a sentence of the Church. Until this definitive pronouncement has been made, one may to go to Mass and receive the sacraments from priests subjectively considered heretical, etc. Communicatio in sacris with heretics is illicit when a sentence of the Church has declared them as such, but until that moment it is licit to receive communion from them and hear their Mass.
Lionel: Any pope, cardinal, bishop or priest who interprets Vatican Council II and other Church Documents irrationally, produces a non traditional conclusion. It is heretical. It is in schism with the past Magisterium before 1949. The past Magisterium interpreted Magisterial Documents ( Creeds, Councils etc) rationally and traditionally.
Pope Francis, the lawyer Patruno judiciously asserts, may be a debated figure, but “until there is the sententia ecclesiae, no one - layman or ordinary priest - may substitute himself for the teaching Church” (p. 213).
Lionel: No pope, cardinal, bishop or priest must change the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and reject the Athanasius Creed. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem).There are restrictions on offering Holy Mass.
At the most, the opinion that one might have about Francis could count as the opinion of a private scholar. But no man, apart from the pope, is by nature infallible: only the pope is, under certain conditions, when he exercises his mandate. Moreover, there can be no Church without a pope, and if today the pope is not Francis, who is or will be? These are unavoidable questions to which a “charismatic” answer cannot be given, outside the most elementary notions of theology and canon law.
Lionel: No pope can change the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and reject the Athanasius Creed. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem).Yet this is official and public today. There is no denial.
The most reasonable path to follow in this painful situation seems to be the one traced by the Correctio filialis of 16 July 2017 (http://www.correctiofilialis.org/it/), a firm and respectful document presented by 40 scholars, later becoming more than 200, to urge the Holy Father to reject the heresies and errors he has promoted. This initiative deserves to be taken up again, but above all adopted by a suitable number of cardinals and bishops, not in order to “depose” the pope, but to admonish him filially, following the example of St Paul towards St Peter (Ad Gal 2:14).
Lionel: Those who signed the Correctio Filialis were all interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally like Pope Francis. So they also have changed the interpretation of the Nicene Creed and have rejected the Athanasius Creed. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem).This was public and there was no denial from them.The signatories today continue with the same error as Pope Francis.
In moments of serious crisis there is an obligation to denounce errors, even coming from the supreme ecclesiastical authority, with all due respect for the Vicar of Christ...
Lionel: There is also an obligation for Roberto dei Mattei to admit that he wrote his book on Vatican Council II by interpreting the Council irrationally. So he is also changing the interpretation of the Creeds. This is heresy and schism. This is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem).
-Lionel Andrades
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2023/07/the-appointment-of-new-prefect-of.html#more
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/07/no-pope-cardinal-bishop-or-priest-must.html
JULY 9, 2023
How can Archbishop Vincent Manuel Fernandez approve homosexual unions since there is no such precedent in the Church, it is not part of Tradition? How can he do it in the name of Vatican Council II? The Council can only be interpreted rationally. The Council is only traditional.
VATICAN COUNCIL II CAN ONLY BE INTERPRETED RATIONALLY
How can Archbishop Vincent Manuel Fernandez approve homosexual unions since there is no such precedent in the Church, it is not part of Tradition? How can he do it in the name of Vatican Council II? The Council can only be interpreted rationally. The Council is only traditional. Tradition says homosexual acts are a grave sin. The Bible says that they who perform these acts or live in this way cannot go to Heaven. So can the teaching of the Church on this issue be changed since there is no precedent in the Church and Vatican Council II supports the past ecclesiology?
VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT SUPPORT LIBERALISM ANY MORE
Pope Francis and Archbishop Vincent Manuel Fernandez can no more cite Vatican Council II to support their liberalism.
We have an obligation to only interpret the Council rationally. Why should Catholics interpret Vatican Council II irrationally?
Archbishop Fernandez must announce that LG 8, LG 14, LG16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to only hypothetical cases in 1965-2023.
For him, LG 8, 14 and 16 etc cannot be practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.
Presently he does not qualify to be the Prefect of the Doctrine of the Faith. He interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and dishonestly.
So how can he approve homosexual unions in the name of Vatican Council II?
How can the Synods use Vatican Council II to support their liberalism?
THE COUNCIL SUPPORTS THE ROMAN MISSAL AND THE OLD LEX ORANDI
The Council supports the past exclusivist ecclesiology and the old Roman Missal and lex orandi.
Cardinal Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF), Vatican, would not only interpret Vatican Council II irrationally but was using the false interpretation of the Council to support liberalism in principle.Pope John Paul II did not correct him.Neither did the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) correct Pope Benedict during the Doctrinal Talks.
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was also interpreting invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG16 as being visible exceptions for the past ecclesiocentrism.
So how can Archbishop Fernandez and Pope Francis confuse invisible cases of LG 8,14 and 16, UR 3,NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II etc as being visible exceptions for the past exclusive salvation in the Church which was part of the lex orandi for centuries in the Catholic Church?
Vatican Council II is ecclesiocentric with Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation). LG 14 is cited in the Catechism of the Catholic Church under the title Outside the Church there is no salvation (CCC 845,846).While CCC 847and 848 on invincible ignorance etc do not contradict Ad Gentes 7, Lumen Gentium 14 and neither CCC 845,846.
NO EXCEPTIONS IN VATICAN COUNCIL II FOR FEENEYITE EENS
So there are no exceptions mentioned in the text of Vatican Council II for Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus. LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are always hypothetical and speculative cases.They refer to physically invisible people in 1965-2023.
Yet children in secular schools interpret Vatican Council II with LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc being exceptions for the past exclusivist ecclesiology and traditional mission based upon exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
SECULAR SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITIES TEACH ERROR
Why must students in the universities interpret Vatican Council II, by confusing invisible cases of LG 8, 14, 16 etc as being visible exceptions for the Fourth Lateran Council and the Council of Florence on EENS? It is only when they choose this deception are they allowed to get a Masters or Doctorate Degree.
This is the official condition at the Urbaniana Pontifical University in Rome.They only give you academic degrees if you interpret Vatican Council II irrationally.This is the official requirement which is political.
Sandra Mussolini has a doctrate in dogmatic theology and is the Dean of the Missiology Department of the Urbaniana University. She only approves the thesis of students who confuse invisible cases of LG 8,14 and 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as being visible examples of salvation outside the Church. So the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the Patristic period, is contradicted in this way by Vatican Council II.This is a political and deceptive interpretation of the Patristic period and Vatican Council II which she promotes.
It is obligatory for all students at the Urbaniana, to reject the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) on EENS by interpreting Vatican Council II with the fake premise ( invisible people are visible, LG 8,14 and 16 refer to visible non Catholics saved outside the Church) and fake inference ( So Vatican Council II has made the dogma EENS obsolete, with practical exceptions) and fake conclusion ( Vatican Council II is a rupture with the past ecclesiocentrism and is a new ecclesiology.It is a revolution in the Church. So there can be innovation in mission, ecclesiology, faith and morals.There is a new magisterium. It has made the old moral theology obsolete and 'immoral').
This was the irrationality Archbishop Victor Fernandez was teaching as rector of the seminary in Argentina.
GOVERNMENTS MUST CLARIFY THEIR POSITION ON VATICAN COUNCIL II
The secular ministries of justice, the departments of education in diferent countries must be asked to clarify that LG 8,14, 16, UR 3, NA 2,GS 22 etc, refer to only theoretical and speculative cases in 1965-2023. They are not known people. if someone was saved as such it would only be known to God.There are no such cases in our human reality.Lay groups could start with Germany.
The ministry has only to confirm the obvious which is that LG 8,14,16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 in Vatican Council II do not refer to practically known people in 2023 saved outside the Church.
START WITH GERMANY
This would mean of course, that in Germany when Pope Benedict and German theologians projected LG 8,14,16 etc as being exceptions for the past exclusivist ecclesiology, they were referring to 'visibile cases'. Invisible people cannot be exceptions.Cardinal Marx and Bishop Batzing are deceptive on Vatican Council II. They have to correct themselves.-Lionel Andrades
https://www.urbaniana.press/autore/mazzolini-sandra/79
_____________________________________________
JULY 7, 2023
Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez has been made the Prefect of the Dicastery for Doctrine and Faith (DDF) and no one is pointing out that he interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally. This is a public and official error of the DDF.If he did not interpret Vatican Council II irrationally he would be a Feeneyite on extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).
Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez has been made the Prefect of the Dicastery for Doctrine and Faith (DDF) and no one is pointing out that he interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally. This is a public and official error of the DDF.If he did not interpret Vatican Council II irrationally he would be a Feeneyite on extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).The Council interpreted rationally supports the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X.
The references to the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are to hypothetical cases. They are speculative and theoretical and so not practical exceptions for traditional mission and evangelization, based upon exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre made the same mistake as the Prefect of the DDF. He interpreted BOD, BOB and I.I irrationally. Then he went ahead and interpreted LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II also irrationally.
Now the traditionalists and sedevacantists interpret the Council irrationally and not rationally,.
So Fr. Claude Barthe, President of Coetus International, the organizers of the Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage and the Superiors of the Ecclesia Dei communities are keeping silent and going along with the mistake.
The Franciscans of the Immaculate will not be given canonical recognition by Fernandez, since they correctly do not accept, Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally.
The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St. Benedict Center, NH, USA will also not be granted canonical recognition since they interpret all Magisterial Documents (Creeds, Councils etc) rationally, in harmony with Feeneyite EENS; or EENS according to the Fourth Lateran Council (1215).It did not mention any exceptions.
By 2025, the Jubilee Year, the traditionalists could be told that they are ‘religious fanatics’ since they do not (correctly) accept Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally. So they could be outside the Church officially according to the leftist secular administration in Rome and the ecclesiastical authorities at the Vatican.Presently some traditionalists say they accept Vatican Council II and others say they do not but neither of them state if they refer to Vatican Council II, rational or irrational.
The old moral theology would be considered ‘immoral’ by Fernan dez since it is contradicted by Vatican Council II ( irrational) and the Lefebvrists do not want to talk about Vatican Council II ( rational) since they do not want to be labeled ‘Feeneyite’ and so Anti Semitic.
The rectors of six universities in Rome, including La Sapienza, are working together on a leftist project, to implement the Synod teachings. There are big posters placed in the churches in Rome. The focus is on woman ( Donna nella Chiesa) in the Church.
There are courses on ecclesiology with its foundation on Vatican Council II (irrational). This is public and no one objects. -Lionel Andrades
During his pontificate he made numerous apostolic journeys. The first of these was in Lampedusa where he highlighted the theme of welcoming migrants, which he too spoke about on his trip to America, first to Cuba and then to the United States of America. During this visit he gave speeches to the UN and to the Congress (the first Pontiff to speak in this institutional place) where he spoke about the environmental theme, so dear to him, and the fight against religious fanaticism of any origin, human rights and individual and civil liberties.
https://www.giubileo-2025.it/en/pope-francis
_______________________________________________________
JULY 6, 2023
ARCHBISHOP VICTOR FERNANDEZ DOES NOT QUALIFY TO BE THE PREFECT OF THE CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH ( DICASTERY FOR DOCTRINE AND FAITH-DDF).
Archbishop Victor Fernandez does not qualify to be the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith ( Dicastery for Doctrine and Faith-DDF), since his Profession of Faith and Oath as A Bishop is invalid, when he changes the interpretation of the Nicene, Apostles and Athanasius Creed by interpreting Vatican Council II ( LG 8,14, 16 etc), irrationally and not rationally. He chooses the false premise (invisible people are visible, LG 16 refers to a physically visible case in 1965-2023).This produces a nontraditional conclusion. It says Vatican Council II is a rupture with the dogma EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors and the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q, 27Q) etc. According to Canon Law he has to be a Catholic. He has to affirm the teachings of the Catholic Church. Otherwise he cannot hold the office of Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), formerly called the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF).Neither can be made a bishop or cardinal until this scandal is removed. Fernandez presently does not qualify.
1. He must interpret Vatican Council II (LG 8, 14 and 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc) rationally. He has to say that LG 8 etc are physically invisible in 2023 for us human beings.
2. In the same way he must affirm the baptism of desire (BOD), baptism of blood (BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I). He has to accept them as being only hypothetical cases. They are physically invisible for us. If anyone is saved as such it could only be known to God. He has an obligation morally to project them honestly i.e. as invisible cases only.
3.So he cannot project invisible cases of LG 8,14 and 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, as being practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). They do not contradict the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1442) on EENS.
So the BOD, BOB and I.I are not practical exceptions for the Fourth Lateran Council and the Council of Florence.
The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office (CDF/DDF) made an objective mistake when it projected invisible cases of the BOD and I.I as being visible exceptions for Feeneyite EENS i.e. the strict interpretation of EENS according to the Church Councils (1215,1442), which did not mention any exceptions.
I instead affirm the teachings of the Catholic Church unlike the Argentine Archbishop.
1. I accept Vatican Council II interpreted rationally. They refer to invisible people in our human reality.
2. Also I accept BOD, BOB and I.I. They are always speculative, theoretical and are not visible in our human reality. They are known only to God. So BOD, BOB and I.I, like Vatican Council II (LG 8 etc), does not contradict the Fourth Lateran Council and the Council of Florence, for me.
3. I reject the second part of the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office(DDF) to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney (Referred to here as LOHO).Since it contradicts the first part of LOHO which supports traditional EENS. It uses a false premise to reject the centuries old strict interpretation of EENS of the Church Councils and the past Magisterium.
So I can affirm Magisterial Documents (Creeds, Councils, Catechisms, and EENS etc) which I interpret rationally. The new DDF Prefect cannot say the same.
I am a Feeneyite and he is a Cushingite.For Feeneyites, invisible people are invisible, Lumen Gentium 16, refers to an invisible case in 1965-2023.So I interpret LG 8 etc with Feeneyism. He chooses irrational Cushingism (invisible people are physically visible in 1965-2023, LG 16 refers to a visible case, an example of salvation outside the Church).
Cushingism is heretical, schismatic, nontraditional and unethical. It is a dishonest way to reject Tradition.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/so-when-cardinals-hollerich-and-grech.html
I interpret Vatican Council II with the Two Columns, choosing the rational option. He chooses the nontraditional, irrational and dishonest option.
These are major philosophical and theological errors of Fernandez who is to be the President of the Pontifical Biblical Commission and the International Theological Commission.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/07/we-have-new-discovery-which-is-unknown.html
He is non apostolic and non magisterial since for the Apostles, the Church Fathers and popes and saints in the Middle Ages, the red was not an exception for the blue. They interpreted the Creeds, Catechisms etc rationally. Fernandes is not proclaiming the Gospel and rejects traditional mission and evangelization based upon exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church (Fourth Lateran Council etc). He is in schism with the pre-1949 Magisterium of the Catholic Church.
Congar, Rahner, Ratzinger, Kung, Murray, Lefebvre, Pope Paul VI and the cardinals and bishops in 1965 were interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally. Now Fernandez and Pope Francis 1 make the same mistake. I avoid their error. Fernandez, the 60 years old archbishop of the diocese of La Plata since 2018, will not only expect all cardinals, bishops, priests and nuns to interpret Magisterial Documents ( Creed, Councils and Catechisms etc) irrationally like him but will also expect the same from the Society of St. Pius X( SSPX) and the sedevacantists ( CMRI,MHT,MHFM etc).
He is not a Catholic. He does not affirm Magisterial Documents rationally like me.
He will not grant canonical recognition to the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, at the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire, USA. They interpret all Magisterial Documents rationally like me.
He will not grant canonical recognition to the Franciscans of the Immaculate of Fr. Stefano Mannelli ffi. They reject the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.
When I interpret the BOD and I.I rationally, and also the Magisterial Documents in which they are referred to, I am supported by Archbishop Thomas E. Gullickson, former Nuncio to Switzerland and Liechtenstein. I am supported by Fr. Stefano Visintin OSB, former Benedictine Rector and Dean of Theology, University of St.Anselm Rome. I am supported by John Martignoni apologist who has had a program on apologetics on EWTN.
Fernandez, is a consultant to various Vatican Congregations, including those overseeing the Bishops Conference in Italy (CEI). The CEI has appointed a Commission to investigate the seer Gisella Cardia in Trevignon, Italy. Fernandez expects the CEI and Cardia to interpret Magisterial Documents irrationally, to be in good standing with the Church.
Archbishop Fernandez ompleted a doctorate in theology at the Faculty of Theology in Buenos Aires, where, if he interpreted Magisterial Documents rationally, he could be accused of being 'a Feeneyite' like Brother Andre Marie mica, the Superior of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, at the St. Benedict Center(SBC) in NH. So he interprets all Church Documents irrationally and deceptively.
The Diocese of Manchester in New Hampshire, USA and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, issued a Decree of Prohibitions against the SBC. Brother Andre Marie micm and his religious community in NH accept all Magisterial Documents which they interpret rationally. They also accept BOD and I.I and interpret them rationally and so affirm Feeneyite EENS according to the Fourth Lateran Council etc. Fernandez cannot say the same. He avoids being a Feeneyite on EENS and having a Decree of Prohibition issued against him. He escapes, by interpreting BOD, BOB and I.I and Vatican Council II, dishonestly.
Conclusion: Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez does not qualify to be the Prefect of the DDF. He violates canon and secular law with his public dishonesty. He is in manifest public heresy and schism.
For political reasons he will not deny it. He will not want to be considered ' a Feeneyite' like the Church Fathers and Apostles and the saints and popes of the Middle Ages. They were all Feeneyite.
He is a political-Left appointee and does not represent the Catholic Church, its body of knowledge, its deposit of faith.
The deposit of faith is the Nicene, Apostles and Athanasius Creed, Feeneyite i.e. invisible people are invisible, LG 8,14 and 16 refer to invisible cases in 2023.These Creeds are not Cushingite i.e. invisible people are visible, LG 8,14,16 etc refer to visible people saved outside the Church in 2023.
The deposit of faith are the Church Councils , Feeneyite and not Cushingite.
The deposit of faith are all the Catechisms, Feeneyite - and not Cushingite.
The deposit of faith is Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Feeneyite and not Cushingite.
This Catholic faith is Feeneyite like it was over the centuries. It does not change with time.
The lex orandi was always Feeneyite and not Cushingite.
Since Fernandez interprets Vatican Council II irrationally, like Pope Francis, he produces a break with Tradition and so they think they can change the Church's teachings on the Eucharist at Mass, its reception and importance, contradicting the Bible and Ecclesia de Eucharistia of Pope John Paul II.
Since Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition, for Fernandez, when it is interpreted irrationally, he uses this error, to approve the liberalism of the Synods on faith and morals e.g LGBT-sex, polygamy etc.They are supported by the new moral theology of Vatican Council II, irrational.
Since the lex orandi for him is Cushingite and not Feeneyite the members of the Coetus International, Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage and Ecclesia Dei communities are outside the Church.This is 'the new magisterium' of Cardinal Arthur Roche which has its foundation in Vatican Council II , Cushingite and not Feeneyite, the Council interpreted irrationally and not rationally.
This is not Catholic teaching. Since with Vatican Council II, rational, there is no change in the ecclesiology of the Church, before and after the Council. There is no development of doctrine. The Council is traditional. It supports evangelization and mission based upon exclusive salvation in the Church. There is no proclamation of Christ without the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church for salvation. So there can only be an ecumenism of return. There is no other rational theological choice.
Now with the irrational interpretation of Magisterial Documents, they can choose a Hindu or Buddhist to be the Prefect of the DDF. A non Christian can be chosen to be a pope, cardinal or bishop whose Profession of Faith and Oath would be modernist and based upon a dishonest interpretation of Magisterial teachings, like that of Archbishop Fernandez. -Lionel Andrades
1
JUNE 22, 2023
We now have new information. It is a breakthrough.It is the popes and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith who will now be on the defensive, on Vatican Council II.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/we-now-have-new-information-it-is.html
Lionel Andrades
Catholic lay man in Rome. Writer on the discovery of the two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is interpreted with the false premise and the other without it. One is Magisterial and the other, the common one, is non Magisterial.How can the Holy Spirit make an objective mistake ? So it is human error and not the Magisterium.
Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not only pastoral.
It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms. There can be two interpretations.Catholics must choose the rational option.
Why should Catholics choose an irrational version which is heretical, nontraditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional?
It is unethical when the popes, cardinals and bishops choose the Irrational Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents.
Blog: Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission)
E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com
Twitter : @LionelAndrades1
JULY 10, 2023
Bradley Eli on CMTV tells Jules Gomes that Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez will have to answer to God on the Day of Judgment for his liberalism. But Fernandez does not think he is doing anything wrong. He is following Vatican Council II. Even Bradley Eli and Jules Gomes accept Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and not rationally.
Bradley Eli on CMTV tells Jules Gomes that Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez will have to answer to God on the Day of Judgment for his liberalism. But Fernandez does not think he is doing anything wrong. He is following Vatican Council II. Even Bradley Eli and Jules Gomes accept Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and not rationally.
Pope Francis and Archbishop Fernandez are frank. They are following Vatican Council II, which is a break with Tradition for them. There is a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The Council has exceptions for EENS. So EENS and the Athanasius Creed are obsolete. This is a revolution in the Church for them. Now even they can break the Church teachings on faith and morals, Amoris Laetia, Traditionis Custode etc. They are only following Vatican Council II as interpreted by even the traditionalists. This is also the interpretation of Church Militant TV and the Leftists. It is political.
The CMTV, even after being informed many times, does not state that there is a rational and irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.
They do not say that they affirm Vatican Council II rational, and so also Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the rest of Tradition.
They want a break with Tradition for political reasons, just like Pope Francis. They call this irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II ‘magisterial’, this is even though the pre-1949 Magisterium interpreted the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance rationally and traditionally. - Lionel Andrades
_____________________
JULY 10, 2023
The SSPX priest did not point out that Pope Francis justified Amoris Laetitia and the Synods with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally: Rahner and Congar made the same mistake and so now are obsolete
VATICAN COUNCIL II IRRATIONAL NOT MENTIONED
The SSPX priest in his sermon yesterday morning at the SSPX chapel in Rome was critical of Amoris Laetitia and Synod and I agreed with what he was saying. It was a good sermon, well researched. However he did not point out that the SSPX interprets Vatican Council II irrationally, just like Pope Francis. Then Pope Francis justifies the liberalism with Vatican Council II (irrational). The SSPX priest did not say that the Council could be interpreted rationally.
LIBERALISM IS JUSTIFIED WITH VATICAN COUNCL II IRRATIONAL ONLY
The main argument for liberalism in the Church is Vatican Council II (irrational). This is the arguement made by Pope Francis to justify his liberalism in faith, morals, ecclesiology, mission etc.The SSPX does not respond by citing Vatican Council II (rational) as an alternative.
The Instrumentum Laboris of the Synods was based on Vatican Council II (irrational).This was not mentioned by the new priest at the chapel yesterday.Why not?
May be it is because Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre made a mistake and interpreted the Council only irrationally. The SSPX bishops are doing the same.
WHY MENTION RAHNER, CONGAR ETC WHO CHOSE VATICAN COUNCIL II IRRATIONAL
A week back another SSPX priest at this chapel was critical of the liberals at Vatican Council II. But did not mention that they were interpreting the Council irrationally and dishonestly.
Why mention Rahner, Congar, Murray, Kung, Balthazar etc when the Council can be interpreted rationally? They were all interpreting the Council irrationally? They were all interpreting the Council irrationally like Michael Davies, Dietrich von Hildebrand and Archbishop Lefebvre.
WITH THE RATIONAL PREMISE THE COUNCIL IS ALWAYS TRADITIONAL
Rahner and Congar are now obsolete. We can re-interpret the Council rationally and there is a hermeneutic of continuity with the past exclusivist ecclesiology and traditional mission. This is mission based upon there being only exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. We simply choose the rational premise. It makes Rahner, Balthasar etc irrelevent.
We don’t have to follow Pope Francis’ New Evangelization which has its foundation on Vatican Council II (irrational). So he proclaimd Christ without the necessity of being a member in the Catholic Church.
WE DO NOT ACCEPT SYNODS BASED UPON VATICAN COUNCIL II INTERPRETED IRRATIONALLY
We also do not have to accept the Synods based upon Vatican Council II, irrational. Since morally, the Council must only be interpreted rationally. So Pope Francis cannot justify Traditionis Custode and Amoris Laetitia with Vatican Council II.The cardinals cannot do this any more.
The College of Cardinals and the new consistory for September must only interpret Vatican Council II rationally and take the Catholic Church back to Tradition. This is the only choice also before Cardinal-designate Victor Manuel Fernandez. - Lionel Andrades
JULY 5, 2023
Vatican Council II interpreted rationally is in harmony with Tradition, the Council is Feeneyite irrespective of what Rahner, Congar, Ratzinger, Kung, Murray, Bea and others said or did there
Who cares?
I could say to myself, 'Who cares anymore?
Vatican Council II interpreted rationally is in harmony with Tradition, the Council is Feeneyite irrespective of what Rahner, Congar, Ratzinger, Kung, Murray, Bea and others said or did there.. –Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/07/last-sunday-morning-at-latin-mass-at.html
JULY 1, 2023
The SSPX must stop publishing magazines (La Tradizione Cattolica etc) with the Council interpreted irrationally and as a rupture with Tradition : Don Louis Sentagne and Don Pier Paulo Petrucci make the same mistake
The SSPX District Superior , Italy, Don Louis Sentagne, in Albano, Italy, Father Federico Montani and the other SSPX priests at Albano, Italy, are still selling books with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally. This is unethical. It is dishonest.
MAGAZINE TRADIZIONE CATTOLICA IS BASED UPON VATICAN COUNCIL II (IRRATIONAL)
The SSPX must stop publishing magazines (La Tradizione Cattolica etc), with the Council interpreted irrationally and so as a rupture with Tradition. They are doing this even after being informed.
SSPX PRIEST REFUSES TO ANSWER QUESTION
The SSPX priest Fr. Federico Montani, in Rome at the SSPX chapel, when asked about LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc Vatican Council II will not respond. He will not clarify what is common sense i.e. LG 8, LG 14, lG 16, UR 33, NA 2, GS 22 etc, always refer to only hypothetical cases. They refer to invisible people in 2023.So they cannot be objective exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) of Pope Honorius III, who also approved the Order of Preachers of St. Dominic Guzman.
He refuses to answer when asked and tells the youth there to also not answer this question.
NOVUS ORDO MASS CAN HAVE THE 12TH CENTURY ECCLESIOLOGY
The SSPX priests in Rome in their sermons also do not say that at the Novus Ordo Mass - if the priest would interpret Vatican Council II, the Creeds, old Councils and Catechisms and EENS rationally, he would be affirming the past ecclesiology of the Church. The priest at Mass in Italian, for example, would have to affirm the understanding of Church as it was known in the 12th to 16th century. This would be the Novus Ordo Mass having the ecclesiology of the Roman Missal of the 16th century. This would be the Roman Missal used in the SSPX chapel.
CARDINALS ROCHE, SARAH AND ARINZE ARE IRRATIONAL
It is only because Cardinal Arthur Roche interprets Vatican Council II irrationally that there is ‘a new Magisterium’ for him. It is his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II, by confusing what is invisible as being visible, that he is able to produce a rupture with Tradition.
Now Cardinal Sarah and Cardinal Francis Arinze’ Holy Mass in Italian is based upon the false interpretation of Magisterial Documents ( Creeds, Councils etc) and so there is a false rupture with Tradition, including the Missal used by the SSPX today.
SENTAGNE CANNOT CORRECT THE CARDINALS
The SSPX District Superior, Fr. Louis Sentagne cannot ask Cardinals Sarah, Arinze and Roche to come back to Tradition and interpret the Council rationally - since he himself is interpreting the Council irrationally.
MAINLINE CHURCH'S INNOVATION DEPENDS UPON VATICAN COUNCIL II (IRRATIONAL).
In the main line Church in Rome they give the Eucharist to the divorced and remarried, women living with non Christians and to non Christians in general who come up to receive the Eucharist. This is because Vatican Council II is seen as a break with Tradition. When Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition for the SSPX priests even, then in the main line Church they ask, why cannot they innovate on faith and morals. This creates division in the Church and the SSPX supports it.
TWO INTERPRETATIONS OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
It is important to note, that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational. The majority of people interpret Vatican Council II irrationally. Even the popes, cardinals, bishops and priests in general, interpret LG 8, 14 and 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, irrationally. They confuse these invisible cases as being visible in the present times. With this false premise there is a false non traditional conclusion. So the New Theology says outside the Church there is known salvation; there is salvation..-Lionel Andrades
__________________________________________________
JUNE 20, 2023
Don Louis Sentagne and Don Federico Montani who offer the Latin Mass at the chapel of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) in Rome are not saying that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to only hypothetical, theoretical, speculative and invisible cases in 1965-2023.This puts an end to so much of non-sense we have been hearing for a long time - the propaganda in the name of the Latin Mass.
Don Louis Sentagne and Don Federico Montani who offer the Latin Mass at the chapel of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) in Rome are not saying that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to only hypothetical, theoretical, speculative and invisible cases in 1965-2023.
This puts an end to so much of non-sense we have been hearing for a long time - the propaganda in the name of the Latin Mass.
Did Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre make a mistake? Of course, he did. It was the common mistake of the liberals in The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office(CDF) to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney (LOHO-Letter of the Holy Office).The mistake was repeated at Vatican Council II. Cardinal Ratzinger did not correct it.
All the books on Vatican Council II at the SSPX libraries are wrongly interpreting LG 8, 14, 16 etc, as being non hypothetical, non theoretical, non speculative and visible cases in 1965-2023. So the Council has produced exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX etc.
It is with this false reasoning; with the invisible- people- are- visible premise and inference that Michael Matt, Peter Kwasniewski, Roberto dei Mattei, Taylor Marshall, John Henry Weston, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Cardinal Raymond Burke, the late Fr. Nicholas Gruner,John Venari,Michal Davies, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Bishops Pivarunas and Sanborn, and the SSPX bishops have interpreted the Council. They chose the irrational option which produces a rupture with Tradition.
But the homilies at the SSPX chapel in Rome are authentic and real. They still are Catholic. This is because the SSPX priests go back to Tradition and ignore Vatican Council II, which they interpret irrationally like the rest of the Church.
If you go to an SSPX Mass and hear the sermon you can still save your soul from Hell. Since the priests speaks about sin, God’s Judgment and Hell.He does not have to choose the new moral theology based upon Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally.
Last Sunday Father Louis Sentagne spoke about mortal sin and the person being automatically excommunicated and on the way to Hell. Sentagne, the District Superior of the SSPX in Italy, said this was the case of someone who is a Freemason.
He was speaking about Silvio Berlusconi, who admitted being a Mason and was married and divorced many times.Yet he was given a funeral Mass in the cathedral of Milan.
Father Louis Sentagne can speak like this since he is not limited like in the mainline Novus Ordo Church. He does not have to adapt to aa new moral theology based upon Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally.
There is also a new salvation theology in the mainline Catholic Church. Last Sunday at the Augustinian Recollect church, Sant Ildefonso and Tomasso Villanova, Rome, the young priest said salvation through Jesus is open for all. This is true. But it is only the first part of the teaching. He did not say that to receive this salvation all must believe in Jesus in the Catholic Church. He could not say that there was exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. Since he interprets LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, as being known non Catholics saved outside the Church. He also accepts the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as being practical and objective exceptions for Feeneyite EENS, as mentioned wrongly in the 1949 LOHO. So he is restricted by Vatican Council II irrational, unlike the SSPX priests, who also interpret the Council irrationally like him, but reject the non traditional and heretical conclusion. He accepts it.
The Augustinian Recollect priest and the SSPX priests could stay with Tradition by interpreting Vatican Council II rationally like me i.e. LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, always refer to only hypothetical cases.They return to the old ecumenism.
So the non Catholic youth at the ecumenical meeting on Sept 30 in Rome are outside the Catholic Church according to Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) are oriented to Hell without Catholic faith and the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. This is the Concliar teaching. It is the pre and post Vatican Council II teaching. It is not just Tradition from the 12th to 16th century.
Those who follow Martin Luther will go to Hell said Padre Pio. He is cited in an article by Fr. Stefano Mannelli ffi, in the magazine IL Settimanale di Padre Pio published by the Franciscans of the Immaculate.1 The Catholic Church has not retracted the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation says an article in the FFI publication, Christ to the World.This is a missionary magazine, in different languages, whose distribution has been blocked by the Rome Vicariate. - Lionel Andrades
1
https://catholicforum.forumotion.com/t1013-padre-pio-said-that-martin-luther-is-in-hell-says-founder-of-franciscans-of-the-immaculate
https://marysarmy742128112.wordpress.com/2020/07/29/blessed-maria-serafina-saw-martin-luther-in-hell/
____________________________
Don Louis Sentagne and Don Federico Montani who offer the Latin Mass at the chapel of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) in Rome are not saying that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to only hypothetical, theoretical, speculative and invisible cases in 1965-2023.
This puts an end to so much of non-sense we have been hearing for a long time - the propaganda in the name of the Latin Mass.
Did Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre make a mistake? Of course, he did. It was the common mistake of the liberals in The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office(CDF) to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney (LOHO-Letter of the Holy Office).The mistake was repeated at Vatican Council II. Cardinal Ratzinger did not correct it.
All the books on Vatican Council II at the SSPX libraries are wrongly interpreting LG 8, 14, 16 etc, as being non hypothetical, non theoretical, non speculative and visible cases in 1965-2023. So the Council has produced exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX etc.
It is with this false reasoning; with the invisible- people- are- visible premise and inference that Michael Matt, Peter Kwasniewski, Roberto dei Mattei, Taylor Marshall, John Henry Weston, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Cardinal Raymond Burke, the late Fr. Nicholas Gruner,John Venari,Michal Davies, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Bishops Pivarunas and Sanborn, and the SSPX bishops have interpreted the Council. They chose the irrational option which produces a rupture with Tradition.
But the homilies at the SSPX chapel in Rome are authentic and real. They still are Catholic. This is because the SSPX priests go back to Tradition and ignore Vatican Council II, which they interpret irrationally like the rest of the Church.
If you go to an SSPX Mass and hear the sermon you can still save your soul from Hell. Since the priests speaks about sin, God’s Judgment and Hell.He does not have to choose the new moral theology based upon Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally.
Last Sunday Father Louis Sentagne spoke about mortal sin and the person being automatically excommunicated and on the way to Hell. Sentagne, the District Superior of the SSPX in Italy, said this was the case of someone who is a Freemason.
He was speaking about Silvio Berlusconi, who admitted being a Mason and was married and divorced many times.Yet he was given a funeral Mass in the cathedral of Milan.
Father Louis Sentagne can speak like this since he is not limited like in the mainline Novus Ordo Church. He does not have to adapt to aa new moral theology based upon Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally.
There is also a new salvation theology in the mainline Catholic Church. Last Sunday at the Augustinian Recollect church, Sant Ildefonso and Tomasso Villanova, Rome, the young priest said salvation through Jesus is open for all. This is true. But it is only the first part of the teaching. He did not say that to receive this salvation all must believe in Jesus in the Catholic Church. He could not say that there was exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. Since he interprets LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, as being known non Catholics saved outside the Church. He also accepts the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as being practical and objective exceptions for Feeneyite EENS, as mentioned wrongly in the 1949 LOHO. So he is restricted by Vatican Council II irrational, unlike the SSPX priests, who also interpret the Council irrationally like him, but reject the non traditional and heretical conclusion. He accepts it.
The Augustinian Recollect priest and the SSPX priests could stay with Tradition by interpreting Vatican Council II rationally like me i.e. LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, always refer to only hypothetical cases.They return to the old ecumenism.
So the non Catholic youth at the ecumenical meeting on Sept 30 in Rome are outside the Catholic Church according to Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) are oriented to Hell without Catholic faith and the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. This is the Concliar teaching. It is the pre and post Vatican Council II teaching. It is not just Tradition from the 12th to 16th century.
Those who follow Martin Luther will go to Hell said Padre Pio. He is cited in an article by Fr. Stefano Mannelli ffi, in the magazine IL Settimanale di Padre Pio published by the Franciscans of the Immaculate.1 The Catholic Church has not retracted the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation says an article in the FFI publication, Christ to the World.This is a missionary magazine, in different languages, whose distribution has been blocked by the Rome Vicariate. - Lionel Andrades
1
https://catholicforum.forumotion.com/t1013-padre-pio-said-that-martin-luther-is-in-hell-says-founder-of-franciscans-of-the-immaculate
https://marysarmy742128112.wordpress.com/2020/07/29/blessed-maria-serafina-saw-martin-luther-in-hell/
____________________________
JUNE 20, 2023
Understanding L.A in five steps
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/understanding-la-in-five-steps.html
JUNE 20, 2023
Questions and Answers : Evangelizing with Vatican Council II
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/questions-and-answers-evangelizing-with.html
JUNE 20, 2023
Questions and Answers : Vatican Council II is Feeneyite. It has an exclusivist ecclesiology
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/questions-and-answers-vatican-council.html
JUNE 20, 2023 Questions and Answers : Vatican Council II affirms the Social Kingship of Christ the King
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/questions-and-answers-vatican-council_20.html
JUNE 20, 2023
Understanding L.A in five steps
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/understanding-la-in-five-steps.html
JUNE 20, 2023
Questions and Answers : Evangelizing with Vatican Council II
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/questions-and-answers-evangelizing-with.html
JUNE 20, 2023
Questions and Answers : Vatican Council II is Feeneyite. It has an exclusivist ecclesiology
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/questions-and-answers-vatican-council.html
JUNE 20, 2023 Questions and Answers : Vatican Council II affirms the Social Kingship of Christ the King
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/06/questions-and-answers-vatican-council_20.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
