Pope Francis and Cardinal Fernandez are in schism on
Vatican Council II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church and other Magisterial
Documents, when they use the irrational and not rational premise, to produce a
break with Tradition (EENS etc). There is no denial from Bishop Athanasius
Schneider. He agrees with me.
In an interview Dr. Taylor Marshall he has said that
there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire. Marshall agreed with
him. He confirmed that there are no explicit cases of Aquinas implicit baptism of
desire.
But Bishop Schneider continues to interpret LG 8, 14,
15, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II as explicit cases, known
people saved outside the Catholic Church in 1965-2024. Marshall does the same.
This is the irrational interpretation of Pope Francis and Cardinal Fernandez. They confuse invisible cases of LG 14 (baptism of desire) as being visible exceptions
for 16th century extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). They are all, Archbishop
Carlo Vigano, included, confusing invisible cases as being visible people, in
the present times. Then they conclude that the Council is a break with
Tradition. Vigano rejects this interpretation and Fernandez and the liberals accept it.
Both groups are in the same theological ship which does not have a rudder.
I too reject Vatican Council II (irrational) as does
Vigano but I accept Vatican Council II (rational). The Council can only be
interpreted honestly. We must not confuse LG 8 etc as being visible exceptions
for Tradition (Athanasius Creed, Syllabus of Errors. etc).
Fernandez is interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally like President Biden, the U.S State Department and the U.S Secretary of Education.There is no denial from the Rector of the Pontifical North American University, Rome and the American Rector of the Dominican University of St. Thomas Aquinas, Rome. President Biden and the U. S Administration are unethical.
There is now no denial also from the Paulist Fathers
in Rome. Cardinal Fernandez and Pope Francis interpret the Council
irrationally and thrust this dishonest version of the Council upon
Archbishop Vigano, with the threats of excommunication and schism.It is Pope Francis and Cardinal Fernandez who really have made an objective error in public,
which can be verified by anyone. - Lionel Andrades
_____________________________________________
JUNE 25, 2024
Bishop Athanasius Schneider should point out that it is Cardinal Victor Fernandez and Pope Francis who interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally and so are in schism
Bishop Athanasius Schneider is not honest when he says that Archbishop Vigano should not be excommunicated and does not speak the complete truth. Instead he should point out that it is Cardinal Victor Fernandez and Pope Francis who interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally and so are in schism.He has issued a statement posted on Gloria TV.
It is Pope Francis who needs to interpret Vatican Council II rationally; this is the only option he has.
It is those who do not accept Vatican Council II, rational, who are in schism and should be excommunicated, if they do not choose the rational and ethical option.
Bishop Schneider is sadly looking after his own status and does not want to affirm Vatican Council II rational and so affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, like the St. Benedict Centers, traditionalists in the diocese of Manchester in New Hampshire and Worcester, Mass, USA. He does not want to be called a Feeneyite. So he is interpreting the Council dishonestly like the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican.
Similarly Mons. Giles Wach Prior General of the Institute of Christ the King, offers the Latin Mass while interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally. So the Council is a break with Tradition and the ecclesiology of the Roman Missal. He does not announce that the New Missal is flawed since it is based upon Vatican Council II, irrational.
Why must they all expect Archbishop Vigano to interpret LG 8,14,15,16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, irrationally like Pope Francis and Bishop Schneider . Why should Catholics interpret the Council II, irrationally. With the rational interpretation there is no more liberalism in the Church.
If Tom Sawyer s.j editor of the magazine America and John Henry Westen,editor of Life Site News interpret Vatican Council II, rationally, they would be affirming the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the old theology, whether they like it or not.
Then the liberalism of Cardinal Fernandez will be obsolete. He will be in heresy and schism and will not be able to justify his liberalism with Vatican Council II, rational.
-Lionel Andrades
JUNE 12, 2024
There is no denial from any of the Rome Vicariate offices under the new Vicar General too.
MAY 31, 2024
There is no denial from any of the Rome Vicariate offices under the new Vicar General too.
There is no denial from any of the Rome Vicariate offices under the new Vicar General too. Cardinal Mauro Gambetti ofm conv., agrees that hypothetical cases of LG 8,14,15,16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II do not contradict Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney made an objective mistake. It confused invisible cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as being visible exceptions for EENS. So EENS according to the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) was made obsolete.
“Outside the Church there is no salvation” (extra ecclesiam nulla salus) is a doctrine of the Catholic Faith that was taught By Jesus Christ to His Apostles, preached by the Fathers, defined by popes and councils and piously believed by the faithful in every age of the Church. Here is how the Popes defined it:
- “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215.)
- “We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.)
- “The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.)https://catholicism.org/outside-the-church-there-is-no-salvation
The Dominicans and Franciscans held the strict interpretation of EENS which today is not contradicted by Vatican Council II (rational/Feeneyite) and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (rational/Feeneyite). So are back to traditional faith and morals.
NEW MORAL THEOLOGY OBSOLETE
The new mortal theology and new concept of mission and evangelization is based upon Vatican Council II (irrational/Cushingite). There is no denial from the Vicar General of the offices of the Auxiliary bishops. Neither has there been any denial over the year from Fr. Paulo Boumis, the Parish Priest of Sant Agapito, Prenistina, Rome.
-Lionel Andrades
MAY 30, 2024
Whether they like it or not, the Vicar General and Auxiliary Bishops of Rome support me, when they interpret LG 8,14,15,16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, rationally
MAY 20, 2024
Definition : fake premise, inference and conclusion and the rational premise, inference and conclusion.
The common fake premise is – invisible people are physically visible in 2024.
The common fake inference is – there are physically visible non Catholics in 2024 saved outside the Catholic Church without Catholic faith and the baptism of water.
So the conclusion; the expected false conclusion is that Vatican Council II is a rupture with the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church. This is a New Theology in the Church. It says outside the Church there is known salvation.
All this reasoning I call Cushingism. This process of bad reasoning is common among the Cushingite popes, cardinals and bishops.
The rational premise is – invisible people are invisible in 2024. Lumen Gentium 16 etc refer to hypothetical cases only.
The rational inference is – there are no physically visible non Catholics saved outside the Catholic Church in 2024 without Catholic faith and the baptism of water.
The traditional and rational conclusion is that Vatican Council II is not a rupture with the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. There are no objective exceptions for the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus of the Council of Florence (1441), the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( 24Q,27Q ) and the rest of Tradition.We are back to the old theology of the Roman Missal.
I call this reasoning Feeneyism.
Feeneyism and Cushingism, for me, refer to a way of thinking and not the two well known persons, Cardinal Richard Cushing and Fr. Leonard Feeney.
I interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance with Feeneyism. Cardinal Richard Cushing and the popes from Pius XII interpreted them with Cushingism.
I interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism ( invisible cases of Lumen Gentium 16 etc are invisible in 2024). Pope Paul VI and the popes who followed used Cushingism ( invisible cases of Lumen Gentium 14 are physically visible in 1965-2024).
In the 1920s and 1930's the Catholic Church was Feeneyite. Today it is Cushingite.
-Lionel Andrades
Mary, Mother of the Church
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment