Even the Catholic police in Rome affirm Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, like me.

 

Let me clarify that I follow Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church and so does everyone else who attends the Novus Ordo Mass. They accept Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation. They accept the Catechism of the Catholic Church 845,846 which says outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation; the Church is like the Ark of Noah that saves in the flood, and  God the Father wants all  to be united in the Catholic Church.

So I am supported by my Parish Priest Fr. Paolo Boumis, Sant. Agapito, Prenestina; Rome and the priests of the Missionaries of the Charity Brothers (Contemplative), Rome, where I have been living.

Even the Catholic police in Rome affirm Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, like me.

So I am not saying anything new. For all of them, LG 8,14,1,5,16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, in Vatican Council II, refer to only hypothetical cases in 2024.It is the same for me. It is the same for the Auxiliary Bishops and Vicar General in Rome. It has to be the same for the President of the Catholic Bishops Conference in Italy and the Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican.Since it is common knowledge that we cannot meet or see someone saved outside the Church with the baptism of desire(LG 14), invincible ignorance(LG 16) etc.

So I hope I will not be discriminated in any way because of my Catholic Faith in Rome.

I go for Holy Mass in Italian and sometimes in Latin. I do not have a problem with the ecclesiology of the old Roman Missal which is not contradicted by Vatican Council II, interpreted rationally, i.e. Vatican Council II, Feeneyite and not Cushingite.

For me the exclusivist ecclesiology of the 1930’s is not contradicted by Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church interpreted rationally. So I follow the Magisterium of Church Documents ( Creeds, Councils, Catechisms) interpreted only rationally. I affirm Tradition and interpret Vatican Council II and the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston, rationally. For me Vatican Council II, the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms, interpreted irrationally and so dishonestly, cannot be Magisterial.

- Lionel Andrades

JUNE 11, 2024

The baptism of desire is not an exception for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The 1949 LOHO made a mistake

 

JUNE 10, 2024

There is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict the past ecclesiocentrism

 

JUNE 8, 2024

Vatican Council II is in harmony with Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX

 

                                  

JUNE 5, 2024

The Council does not contradict Feeneyite EENS

 

The Council does not contradict Feeneyite EENS

- Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2024/06/the-council-does-not-contradict.html

JUNE 8, 2024

My parish priest Fr. Paolo Boumis at Sant Agapito, Prenestina, Rome, agrees with me. Vatican Council II when interpreted rationally supports the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which he should affirm in public. He understands.

 

My parish priest Fr. Paolo Boumis at Sant Agapito, Prenestina, Rome, agrees with me. Vatican Council II when interpreted rationally supports the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which he should affirm in public. He understands.

Since 1) Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) says outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation, all need faith and baptism for salvation (to avoid Hell) and 2) LG 8, 14, 15, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, in Vatican Council II refer to invisible cases for him in 1965-2024.

So they do not contradict Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 for him.

 Neither do they contradict the Catechism of the Catholic Church 845,846. 

So Vatican Council II for him is not a break with Tradition whenever he interprets it honestly.

He is a good pastor and a good person but he will not explain all this to the people. He will still tell the parish that Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition.

He now knows this is not true. He is telling a lie after being informed but he wants to be politically correct with the Left.

He does not want to tell the Jews and Muslims in the parish that the Church still teaches, as it did in the 16^th century, that all need Catholic faith and the baptism of water for salvation. The Catholic Church is like the sole Ark of Noah that saves in the flood (CCC 845).

He does not tell First Communicants that Vatican Council II supports the Church of the Apostles and the Church Fathers, when they taught that there was exclusive salvation in the Church, Jesus’ Mystical Body. So in 2024 there has to be a return to traditional moral teachings which oppose the LGBT agenda. The new morality comes with the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.

There no more can be liberalism to support the Eucharist being given at Mass, to the divorced and remarried. Homosexual unions (Fiducia Supplicans) can no more be supported with a Vatican Council II which is an alleged rupture with the 16^th century Magisterium.

But he does not tell the people all this. He wants to maintain his liberal-left image with an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II and the Catechism of Pope John Paul II.

According to secular standards in Italy a priest is expected to be honest. Also according to Church law he cannot present a new version of the Athanasius, Nicene and Apostles Creed. 

I AFFIRM THE ATHANASIUS CREED HE DOES NOT

I affirm the Athanasius Creed.

I interpret the Nicene and Apostles Creed rationally. 

I interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with 16th century extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).

I do not use the false premise to interpret the Catechisms of Trent, Baltimore, Pius X, John Paul II etc.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is not a break with Tradition for me.Since I choose the Rational Premise.I do not employ the false premise, inference and conclusion of cardinals Ratzinger and Schonborn.

I interpret Vatican Council II rationally so there is a hermeneutic of continuity with Feeneyite extra eclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Deposit of Faith and the theology popes and saints of the past.

My interpretation of Church documents is Magisterial. Since it is rational, traditional and in harmony with the past Magisterium of the Catholic Church.There is no development of doctrine.

The interpretation of Magisterial documents with the false premise by Pope Francis is not Magisterial. It is political.It will be Magisterial when he chooses the rational premise."

 I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints" - Apostles Creed. 

For me the Holy Spirit teaches the Church today that outside the Catholic Church there is no known salvation. This is not the teaching for Fr. Boumis.For him there is known salvation. Otherwise he would be affirming the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins - Nicene Creed

For me there is only one visible and repeatable baptism, the baptism of water. For him there are three or more visible baptisms. They are water, desire, blood, etc

I affirm the Athanasius Creed. It says:

Whoever desires to be saved should above all hold to the catholic faith.Anyone who does not keep it whole and unbroken will doubtless perish eternally...- Athanasius Creed.For me this Creed has not exceptions. For the Parish Priest there are exceptions.

- Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2024/06/my-parish-priest-fr-paolo-boumis-at.html