The DDF is in a rupture with the CDF before 1949

 

The trial of Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano was null and void since the Prefect and Secretary of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican were not competent to conduct it.

1. There are priests in Rome who offer Mass in the vernacular. They indicate that the DDF made an objective mistake which can be verified in public. Since LG 8,14,15,16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to hypothetical, non objective cases in 1965-2004. For the DDF they are objective cases.Since they are objective cases, the DDF does not affirm the dogma EENS , the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors. This is heresy and schism.

 There has been no comment or denial from the DDF.

2. It is reported on social media that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, before 1949 interpreted the Creeds, Church Councils and Catechisms with a rational premise. Today the CDF/DDF chooses an irrational premise. The result has to be heresy and schism.

The DDF is in public heresy and schism when its officials do not accept the Athanasius Creed, change the understanding of the Nicene Creed with a false premise and reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, with alleged visible cases of the baptism of desire. They do not deny it.

 They no more can justify this error with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally. 

It is now known that the Council can be interpreted rationally and the DDF has a moral obligation to only choose the rational interpretation of Vatican Council II.

Before 1949 the CDF/DDF was Feeneyite. Today it is Cushingite.

3.The Holy Office (CDF/ DDF) made an objective error in the 1949 Letter to the Archbishop of Boston. It confused invisible cases of the baptism of desire as being visible exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, of the Church Councils.

-Lionel Andrades