The Missionaries of Charity’s vows for brothers and sisters and
ordination of priests must only be held with the Creeds, Councils and
Catechisms, and especially Vatican Council II, interpreted rationally i.e. LG
8,14,15,16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, refer to physically invisible cases only in
2024. So they are not exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
(EENS).Vatican Council II is not a break with Tradition but has a continuity
with the Athanasius Creed which says all need to be members of the Church for
salvation.
On the feast of St. Joseph today, they have been renewing their vows but have not been interpreting Vatican Council II rationally in harmony with Tradition. So their understanding of the Nicene and Apostles Creed is different from mine.
They also reject the Athanasius Creed which I accept. They can get
back to orthodoxy by re-interpreting LG 8, 14, 15, 16 etc as being hypothetical
only. LG 8,16 etc are not explicit examples of salvation outside the Church for us
human beings. At the level of physics, they are not visible matter.
Mother Teresa did not know that Vatican Council II could be interpreted
rationally and neither did Fr. John Hardon sj.
The Missionaries of Charity communities, men and women, are politically
correct with the Left, and so there is a denial of the Catholic Faith. This is unintentional.
They accept the error in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the
Archbishop of Boston (LOHO).It confused invisible cases of the baptism of
desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as being physically visible
exceptions for the dogma EENS, defined by three Church Councils, which did not
mention any exceptions.
With the invisible-visible confusion the understanding of the Creeds,
Catechisms and Councils are changed. For them there are exceptions and for me
there are none.
Unknown to many of them, this is first class heresy and it is schism
with the past Magisterium, which is common in the mainline Catholic Church.
The MCs need to reject the error in the 1949 LOHO and re-interpret Vatican
Council II rationally, like me i.e. LG 8,14,15,16 etc refer to non explicit cases
in 1965-2024.
VICARIATE IS OFFICIALLY IRRATIONAL
Presently the Missionaries of Charity (MC) in Rome are aligned with the
Vicariate which interprets all Church Documents by confusing what is invisible
as being visible and then accepting the expected non traditional conclusion.
They want the hermeneutic of rupture and not continuity with Tradition.
So the MC’s , to be recognized by the Rome Vicariate and the Vatican,
have to publically espouse heresy ( new versions of the Creeds), schism ( break
with the 16th century on EENS, Creeds etc) and sectarianism(
Protestant-Catholic Church) .This is not the Catholic Faith.
However the MC system of prayers is sound and admirable and so also their
work for the poor.
IMPEDIMENT TO OFFERING HOLY MASS
But the MC priest is not eligible to offer Holy Mass when he interprets
Magisterial Documents (Creeds etc) irrationally. This is an impediment
according to Canon Law.
The MC priests here have had their formation at the pontifical
universities in Rome where Vatican Council II is still interpreted
irrationally.
The Missionaries of Charity of Mother Teresa are good people, careing
persons but before God they cannot make a religious vow or be ordained, when
they interpret Vatican Council II etc irrationally and so heretically and
schismatically. They have a rational choice.
The vow is made before God and to Churchmen who are faithful to Tradition.
The Vicar General of Rome, Cardinal Angelo Donatis and Pope Francis reject
Tradition and de fide teachings which obligatory for all Catholics to believe
in . They also for political reasons interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and
so deceptively.
The Vicariate gives them wealth in exchange for the Faith. -Lionel Andrades
OCTOBER 20, 2022
Creeds are no more a sign of unity in the Catholic Church. There are two interpretations of the Nicene, Apostles and Athanasius Creed
I AFFIRM THE ATHANASIUS CREED THEY DO 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 Magisteria. 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 the present two popes, is not Magisterial. It is political.
HOW DO YOU INTERPRET THE APOSTLES CREED?
There are two options.One is rational and the other irrational.One is traditional and the other non traditional.There is the heretical option and non heretical, ortohodox version. One is schismatic.The other is not a rupture with the past Magisterium. Most Catholics choose the irrational version. It is not prohibited by the popes, cardinals and bishops.
" I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints" - Apostles Creed
THIS IS HOW THE PRESENT POPES INTERPRET THE APOSTLES CREED
1. When you say " I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints" what do you mean?
Do you mean that the Holy Spirit guides the Church to teach that outside the Catholic Church there is salvation ?
Are you saying that there is known salvation outside the Church?
Are you saying that there are visible non Catholics saved without faith and the baptism of water?
So since there is known salvation ( irrational and a heresy), outside the Church, there is no communion with the saints on extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athanasius Creed etc ? There is a rupture with the past ecclesiocentrism.
THIS IS HOW I INTERPRET THE APOSTLES CREED
2. For me the line, "I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints" is traditional. I interpret it rationally.
It means that the Holy Spirit guides the Church today to teach that outside the Church there is no known salvation.
It means for me that there are no physically visible non Catholics in 2022-2023 who are saved without Catholic faith and the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
So I am in communion with the saints - Francis of Assisi, Ignatius of Loyola, Francis Xavier, Catherine of Siena, Maximillian Kolbe etc - on extra ecclesiam nulla salus( with no exceptions).
There is unity in the Catholic Church with the Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed and the Athanasius Creed. For me the Creeds say all need to be Catholic for salvation.
There is a continuity with the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q,27Q), the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( ecumenism of return)and Quas Primas of Pope Pius XI on the Proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King, in all political legislation etc.The Creeds are not a break with the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church.But for the present two popes and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) there is a rupture with the traditional interpretation.
TODAY THERE ARE TWO INTERPRETATIONS OF THE NICENE CREED
This is now the controversial line.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins - Nicene Creed
This is how I interpret the Nicene Creed.
1. There is one baptism of water for the forgiveness of sins, it is the baptism of water. It is physically visible and repeatable. There are not three or more physically visible baptisms.
2.For the popes and the CDF there is another version, an irrational version.There are visible cases for them of the baptism of desire etc. Otherwise they would be Feeneyite.They deny being Feeneyite.
For the cardinals, bishops and priests there are more than three baptisms for the forgiveness of sins.These are known baptisms, personally visible. They are the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance.They could include LG 8, UR 3, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council, for the liberals. They exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
Since they are 'visible' they are,allegedly, practical exceptions for 16th century extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).This is their False Inference. This was the bad reasoning of the Letter of the Holy Office(CDF) 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston. It was referenced by the liberals, in Vatican Council II(Lumen Gentium 16).
MAGISTERIAL INTERPRETATION OF THE CREEDS
When Pope Francis and Pope Benedict avoid the false premise, inference and conclusion, their interpretation of the Creeds will be Magisterial.It will be in harmony with the past Magisterium. There would be no hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.They would become traditionalists.
THE HOLY SPIRIT FOR ME SAYS OUTSIDE THE CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION
Since the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance refer to invisible cases in 1965-2022, for me,the line, 'I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church',means the Holy Spirit teaches the Catholic Church that outside the Church there is no salvation.
But for Pope Francis, Pope Benedict and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF), Vatican it is different. For them, the Holy Spirit teaches that outside the Church there is salvation(visible cases of the baptism of desire etc)
For them BOD, BOB and I.I( physically visible) are exceptions to EENS, the Athanasius Creed etc., for them.
So our understanding of the Apostles Creed is different.
For them there are exceptions for EENS and for me there are no exceptions.
Yet all of us recite the same Apostles Creed.
EXCEPTIONS MUST EXIST IN OUR REALITY
It is the exceptions which determine the interpretation of the Creeds.They are Cushingite or Feeneyite.
In a box of oranges an apple would be an exception since it is different but also because it exists in that box. If it was not in that box it would not be an exception.But the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance do not exist in our reality.They are not exceptions.
In a hospital with many sick patients if one of them is healed then he is an exception since he is there in that ward.Where are the BOD, BOB and I.I cases being visible in the present times? Who can see someone on earth saved outside the Church?
For Cushingites invisible cases are visible.For Feeneyites invisible cases are just invisible.
EENS is rejected when Catholics say that not all need to be Catholic for salvation.This is Cushingism.They reinterpret Vatican Council II, irrationally and then say that not all need to convert into the Church to go to Heaven.Not all - since there are exceptions.This was the heresy and schism of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.
With that same Irrational Premise of the 1949 CDF Letter, they have changed the Nicene and Apostles Creed with a fake premise.
They choose to interpret Vatican Council II irrationally.So the Council contradicts the past Catechisms, the Syllabus of Errors and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
This is a mortal sin of faith.Yet this is the Creed for the bishops.
According to Canon Law a Parish Priest has to be a Catholic and affirm the Creed. My interpretation of the Creed is traditional. The priests instead are not traditional.The Parish Priests teach the common irrational version of the Creeds at First Communion classes and Adult Catechesis(RCIA.This is now political innovation.
To interpret the Apostles and Nicene Creed with a false premise is a mortal sin - but about everyone is choosing the false version.
To reject the Athanasius Creed is a mortal sin.This is a scandal.I am pointing out what the Church judges as being a mortal sin.
In my parish,Santa Maria di Nazareth, Casalotti, Boccea,Rome the priests are not saying that they affirm the Athanasius Creed.
It is the same with the CDF, They reject the Athanasius Creed with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally.Then they say that the Council is a break with the Creeds.The CDF and the popes, and also the traditionaists,(SSPX,CMRI etc) do not admit that they all interpret the Nicene and Apostles Creed irrationally.-Lionel Andrades
Posts
