Abridged : DDF Statement on Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano
IN LAW
10. Code of Canon Law:
a. can. 209 § 1: “The faithful are bound by the obligation always to preserve, even in their manner of acting, communion with the Church.”
can. 750 § 2: “One must also firmly accept and hold firmly also all and every one of those things which are proposed definitively by the Magisterium of the Church concerning the doctrine of faith and morals, that is, those things which are required in order to keep holy and faithfully expound the same deposit of faith; one is therefore opposed to the doctrine of the Catholic Church who rejects the same propositions to be held definitively.
c. can. 751: “There is called heresy, the obstinate denial, after having received baptism, of some truth which is to be believed by divine and catholic faith, or obstinate doubt about it; apostasy, the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism, the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2024/09/ddf-statement-on-archbishop-carlo-maria.html
SEPTEMBER 28, 2024
Priests at Prenestina, Rome agree that Lumen Gentium 16 refers to an invisible case in 2024: Pope Francis, Cardinal Fernandez and the DDF made a mistake in the Vigano trial
Vatican Council II (irrational) is obsolete. Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez must admit it. He used the wrong version of the Council at the schism-trial for Archbishop Vigano. He interpreted the Council like Fr. Sebastian Vazhakhala mc and I in 2003 and not like us in 2024.The 2003 interpretation was also part of the religious formation of Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano and the Church at large.
Why should any Catholic accept Pope Francis as the pope when he interprets Vatican Council II irrationally as did Fr. Sebastian Vazhakhala and I and priests in general, in 2003 and not rationally as in 2024?
Archbishop Vigano has the right to reject Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and not rationally by Pope Francis?
He has the right to reject a pope who interprets Vatican Council II and the Creeds and Catechisms, irrationally and not rationally.
Pope Paul VI and the other popes who followed, interpreted Lumen Gentium 16 as a physically visible example of salvation in the present times (1965). But the priests in the Prenestina area of Rome today, all agree that Lumen Gentium 16 refers to an invisible case in 2024. We cannot meet or see a person on earth saved in invincible ignorance. It can only be known to God. Even non Christians and non Catholics agree on this point.
For all of here, in this locality, near Porta Maggiore, LG 16 refers to a hypothetical case only. LG 16, NA 2, GS 22, UR 3 etc in Vatican Council II refer to theoretical cases only. So they cannot be objective exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Athanasius Creed and the rest of Tradition. Vatican Council II does not contradict the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. It is not a break with the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century on EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Councils and Catechisms.
We have continuity with the past.
So there no more is theological support for the liberalism of the German Synod and neither for the liberalism of the trial for of the former Nuncio to the USA.
The 2024 interpretation of Lumen Gentium 16 would also be that of the Islamic organization in Rome, which represents Muslims and is recognized by the Rome Vicariate. All the Missionaries of Charity Sisters at nearby Casilina and Settimo Caeili, Rome would agree with them. - Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2024/09/priests-at-prenestina-rome-agree-that.html
No comments:
Post a Comment