The
articles and reports by Muslim scholars at the Al Azhar and other
universities, on Vatican Council II and the Catholic Church are now obsolete.
The authors used a false premise to interpret the Council as a break with the
dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
(EENS), the Athanasius Creed and rest of Tradition.
Even
the inter-religious dialogue at Abu Dhabi and Germany was based upon Vatican
Council II interpreted irrationally and not rationally.
Pope
Francis must accept Vatican Council II. This is obligatory. It is part of the
Catholic Church. The Council can only be interpreted rationally. So its
conclusion is traditional and Feeneyite. There is no other ethical option. The
people know that the pope is confusing what is invisible as being visible, to
produce a non traditional conclusion.
The
Jesuits have written so many books on Vatican Council II and they are all
obsolete now. They have an error. Pope Francis must inform Amazon and other
publishers to only publish books which interpret Vatican Council II rationally,
without confusing what is invisible as being visible. A false new theology is
produced which says outside the Church there is known salvation in the present
times (1965-2023).
LG
8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc are always hypothetical cases. They
cannot be practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the
Athanasius Creed. Vatican Council II does not contradict the Syllabus of Errors,
the Catechism of Pope Pius X and the Catechism of the Council of Trent. The
Council is no more ‘a new revelation’ in the Church as stated by Wikipedia.
The
Conciliar Church in 2023 is in harmony with the missionaries and Magisterium of
the 16th century. It is the theology of Rahner, Ratzinger, Congar,
Balthazar, Kung, Lefebvre and Murray which was produced with a fake premise,
which is now obsolete.
Pope
Francis has said that every Catholic must accept Vatican Council II. This
applies also to him. He must announce that LG 8 etc refer to theoretical and
speculative cases only. It will then be understood that the Council is not an
exception for Feeneyite EENS: The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office (CDF) made an objective
mistake and so is not Magisterial. The Holy Spirit cannot make an objective
mistake.
Vatican
Council II is dogmatic since it is in harmony with the Fourth Lateran Council
(1215) and the Council of Florence (1442) on EENS. This was not known to Pope
Paul VI who said that the Council is only pastoral. The dogmatic Vatican
Council II is the Conciliar Church today for those who want to interpret the
Council rationally.
Cardinal
Arthur Roche must announce that at every liturgy, Vatican Council II is to be
interpreted rationally and ethically in harmony with EENS of the missionaries
of the 16th century. This is the only honest option, Catholics have.
The
interpretation of Vatican Council II by Alberto Melloni of the Bologna Schools
(FSCIRE) is now obsolete. The media has to be informed. There is no denial from
Alberto Melloni and the FSCIRE, who have been e-mailed and informed.
There
is also no denial from the Society of St. Pius X. All the books on Vatican
Council II published by the SSPX’s Angelus Press are written with the fakes
premise, inference and non traditional conclusion. The blame is placed on
Vatican Council II and not specifically on the fake premise, which is common in
the Church. The SSPX refuse to comment. -Lionel Andrades
SEPTEMBER 9, 2023
The discovery
The discovery
We have a discovery today. It’s ‘a small point’ but this small point turns the Council around. From liberalism the Council returns to Tradition. So by ignoring this small point, we have liberalism in the Church. This small point, is the premise: the rational and irrational premise. It decides if Vatican Council II has a continuity or break with Tradition. This is the discovery. We now have a switch. We can turn it off or on. We can choose a continuity with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors or a rupture with Tradition. -Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades
former Staff Reporter, daily Morning News, Karachi, Pakistan.
Recipient of the All Pakistan Newspaper Society (APNS) Best Reporter of the Year Award, presented by the Prime Minister of Pakistan Benazir Bhutto.
Recipient of the Pakistan Government's Award for Literature ( Childrens stories).
Teacher of English and Church History at the Catholic Minor Seminary, Rawalpindi.
Bishop Anthony Lobo
Sent to Rome for Ministerial Priesthood by Bishop Anthony Lobo, bishop of Rawalpindi-Islamabad, Pakistan.
He is discriminated against by the pontifical universities and seminaries in Rome.He interprets Vatican Council II rationally and not irrationally. So there is a continuity with Tradition. He is not allowed to study at pontifical universities in Rome, where it is obligatory to interpret Magisterial Documents, irrationally and unethically.Catholic students and seminarians are discriminated against.
The seminarians of the Society of St. Pius X, Albano, are allowed to study at the pontifical universities in Rome since they interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally and this is approved by the Left.
Propaganda Fide only gives schorlarship for all students/ seminarians who are approved by a bishop, who does not interpret Vatican Council II, rationally and expects seminarians to do the same.
However we have a new discovery in the Catholic Church. There are 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, when it is interpreted rationally i.e LG 8,14,15,16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to only hypothetical cases. So they are not objective examples of salvation. They are not objective exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Athanasius Creed.
It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms. There can be two interpretations.Catholics must choose the rational option.The Creeds must not be changed.
Why should Catholics choose an irrational version of the Creeds, Catechisms and Councils, which is heretical, non-traditional 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 and call it Catholic.
Rahner, Ratzinger, Congar, Murray, Balthazar, Kung, Lefebvre and Paul VI interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally. The popes from Paul VI to Francis did the same. We can today choose to interpret the Council rationally and in harmony with Tradition.
Blog: http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/
Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission)
E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com
Twitter : @LionelAndrades1
Residence temporary : Missionaries of Charity (Contemplative) Men of Madre Teresa, Via di Sant’Agapito, 8, 00177 Roma RM ( near Largo Preneste and Termini) Italy.
ONLY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SOLAMENTE LA CHIESA CATTOLICA
HEART OF THE MATTER
1.If Vatican Council II is a rupture with the dogma EENS then it means that LG 8,14,15,16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, refer to visible examples of salvation outside the Church. So they are exceptions for EENS etc.
2. If Vatican Council II is not a break with the dogma EENS then it means that LG 8, 14, 15, 16 etc refer to invisible cases. They are not visible examples of salvation outside the Church in 1965-2023. Invisible cases cannot be practical exceptions for me.So there is nothing in the text of Vatican Council II to contradict Feeneyite EENS.
A. Similarly if the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance refer to physically visible cases, of salvation outside the Church in 1949-2023, then this is Cushingism. It is irrational. There is a break with the dogma EENS and the ecumenism of return.The Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q,27Q-outside the Church there is no salvation), has exceptions. There is a break with Tradition.
B. But if BOD, BOB and I.I refer to invisible cases, then they do not contradict EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the ecumenism of return and the Catechism of Pope Pius X(24Q,27Q).There is no rupture with Tradition.
- When what is invisible is considered invisible, I call it Feeneyism.
- When what is invisible is considered visible, I call it a Cushingism.
We can interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism or Cushingism.
We can interpret BOD, BOB and I.I with Feeneyism or Cushingism.
So we can interpret the Nicene, Apostles and Athanasius Creed with Feeneyism or Cushingism. When these Creeds refer to BOD, BOB and I.I they can be Feeneyite or Cushingite. For example, (Nicene Creed-I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin ( and not three known baptisms).
The Apostles Creed (the Holy Spirit guides the Holy Catholic Church to say outside the Church there is no salvation and not outside the Church there is known salvation.
All need Catholic faith for salvation (Athanasius Creed).This is Feeneyism. But if it is said all need Catholic faith for salvation with some known exceptions then this is Cushingism.
The only holy Catholic and Apostolic Church (Four Marks, Nicene Creed) in the past taught that outside the Church there is no salvation. What it teaches today depends upon you -if you are a Feeneyite or Cushingite.
In the same way there can two interpretations of Vatican Council II (LG 8,14,15,16 etc). It depends upon how you interpret LG 8 etc, with Feeneyism or Cushingism.
-Lionel Andrades
Posts
