How can we have a pope, cardinals, bishops, priests and religious sisters not accept Vatican Council II, traditional EENS, Church Councils and Catechisms interpreted rationally? We do not have to interpret the Council like Rahner, Ratzinger, Congar, Murray, Balthazar, Lefebvre and Kung. We no more interpret the Council like the popes from Paul VI to Francis

 

How can we have a pope, cardinals, bishops, priests and religious sisters not accept the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, re-interpret Vatican Council II irrationally, reject the Athanasius Creed  with a fake premise and so re-interpret the Nicene and Apostles Creed as a break with the original  understand and then throw away a rational interpretation of the Catechisms? Yet they are doing this.

1.I avoid it. I accept the dogma EENS since hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are not objective exceptions.

2.I accept Vatican Council II interpreted only rationally. It is in harmony with the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms. Anyone can do the same. All they have to do is choose to interpret  LG 8, LG 14,LG 16, UR 3, NA2,GS 22 etc  in Vatican Council II as being hypothetical and speculative in 2023.They are not objective, physically visible, non Catholics saved outside the Catholic Church, without faith and the baptism of water. They are invisible cases in our human reality. So they are not practical exceptions for the traditional teaching on exclusive salvation being there in only the Catholic Church.

When the premise (invisible people are invisible in 2023) is rational then the conclusion has to be traditional.Vatican Council II is not a break with Tradition.There are no exceptions for EENS mentioned in the text of Vatican Council II.

Yet Wikipedia calls Vatican Council II, ‘a new revelation’ in the Church.

Alberto Melloni of the Bologna School (FSCIRE) does not see Vatican Council II as continuity with the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church.

They choose the false premise (invisible people are physically visible in 1965-2023). So there conclusion is non traditional.Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition (EENS etc).Invisible cases of LG 8 etc are visible for Alberto Melloni and Wikipedia.

Their false inference is: visible examples of being saved outside the Church in invincible ignorance (LG 16) etc, are practical exceptions for EENS. So Vatican Council II becomes ‘a new revelation‘ in the Church. It is ‘a revolution’ for Reuters and Associated Press. This is the only interpretation of Vatican Council II known to the New York Times. They start on the wrong foot and end up nowhere.

We now have a discovery. We can choose the hermeneutic of continuity with the dogma EENS and the Athanasius Creed. We do not have to interpret the Council like Rahner, Ratzinger, Congar, Murray, Balthazar, Lefebvre and Kung. We no more interpret the Council like the popes from Paul VI to Francis or like the Jewish Anti Defamation League (ADL), the liberal rabbis and the Joint Vatican-Israel Consortium. We have a non political Vatican Council II. It’s simply another Church Document which is Magisterial and dogmatic- supporting EENS, with Ad Gentes 7 saying all need faith and baptism for salvation. Meanwhile invisible and theoretical cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 15, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, are not visible exceptions for EENS or AG 7.   - 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

Eucharistic Adoration -Medugorje. 9.09.2023

 

https://marytv.tv/adoration/

The priest who offers Holy Mass at the SSPX chapel in Rome, in his homilies often speaks about mortal sin and Hell. But for the priest at the Novus Ordo Mass in Italian, Vatican Council II (irrational) has changed the Catholic Faith on faith and morals. Since the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has been made obsolete. It has exceptions in visible cases of LG 8, 14, 15, 16 etc for the liberals.For the SSPX priest Vatican Council II (interpreted irrationally) is a break with Tradition. So the Council (irrational) is rejected.

 

At Sunday Mass in Italian yesterday the priest presented the liberal teaching on salvation which is common after Vatican Council II, was interpreted irrationally i.e. God is love and merciful. But the First Reading from Ezekiel indicated that there is Hell and God sends people there. In the Second Reading warns against sins of adultery, theft etc.

The priest did not warn many of the non Christians there at Mass that the Church teaches in Vatican Council II that all need faith and the baptism of water for salvation (AG 7) and we do not know of any exceptions for AG 7. There are none mentioned in the text of Vatican Council II. Outside the Church there is no salvation (CCC 845,846).In other words, in Heaven there are only Catholics. They are there without mortal sins on their soul.

He did not warn the non Christians and non Catholics there that they are oriented to Hell without Catholic faith and that their religion is not a path to salvation ( CDF, Notification, Fr. Jacques Dupuis sj, Dominus Iesus 20 etc).

There is exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church is the post Vatican Council II teaching in the Church. Hypothetical and invisible cases of LG 8, LG 15, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, not being exceptions. If they happen they are known only to God. This is Vatican Council II interpreted rationally.

So yesterday at the Novus Ordo Mass the priest did not mention Hell and neither did he tell non Christians that they are going there. Neither did he speak about Catholics in mortal sin going to Hell i.e. adulterer, fornicators who have not received forgiveness in the Sacrament of Confession.

However, the priest who offers Holy Mass at the SSPX chapel in Rome, in his homilies often speaks about mortal sin and Hell. But for the priest at the Novus Ordo Mass in Italian, Vatican Council II (irrational) has changed the Catholic Faith on faith and morals. Since the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has been made obsolete. It has exceptions in visible cases of LG 8, 14, 15, 16 etc for the liberals.For the SSPX priest Vatican Council II (interpreted irrationally) is a break with Tradition. So the Council (irrational) is rejected.- 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

For me the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) are not traditionalits. They simply are Catholics

 

I do not see the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) as traditionalists any more. They are simply Catholics. We are all Catholics. Since with Vatican Council II (rational) we are all united in doctrine and theology at every liturgy. Even at the Novus Ordo Mass they are traditionalists .Since the Council (rational) is conservative and dogmatic. It is in harmony with extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the Fourth Lateran Council (1215).

It’s only the Council interpreted irrationally which produces the traditionalist-liberal division in the Church.

Cardinal Arthur Roche could be asked to announce that at every Holy Mass, at every liturgy, Vatican Council II is to be interpreted only rationally. So even at the Novus Ordo Mass when they use the New Missal, they will be affirming, in homilies, at least, the dogma EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.      - 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