Thursday, June 27, 2024

The issue still is that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani and Pope Paul VI chose the irrational one. To repeat it today , after being informed, is unethical. It is not Catholic.

 

Lefebvrist blogs  still interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally. It is the same with Fr. Thomas J.Weinandy and the conservative media. So they are vague on Vatican Council II and confusing in their rejection of Archbishop Vigano.

To avoid the schism charge the media associated with Roberto dei Mattei announces that they accept Vatican Council II (irrational) and they also accept Pope Francis and Cardinal Fernandez’s irrational interpretation of the Council and Catechism.This is a rupture with the ecclesiology of the Roman Missal.This is not traditional.

None of them  choose Vatican Council II ( rational) and so also the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Athamasius Creed. They are politically correct with the Left, which opposes Tradition.

So the the Latin Mass community is further divided. They do not support Archbishop Vigano even on Vatican Council II. 

There is no mention of the issue on MessainLatino. The SSPX website has distanced itself. Peter Kwasniewski is churning out the same old stuff.

The issue still is that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani and Pope Paul VI chose the irrational one. To repeat it today , after being informed, is unethical. It is not Catholic.

-Lionel Andrades

Vigano must ask Msgr.Kennedy at the DDF to respond

 

After reading the material posted yesterday on the blog Eucharist and Mission, Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano must inform Msgr. Kennedy at the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), Vatican, that he interprets Vatican Council II rationally like Lionel Andrades. So he accepts Vatican Council II (rational) in harmony with Tradition and rejects the irrational interpretation of the Council and Catechism by Pope Francis and that of Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez, Prefect of the DDF.

When the popes from Paul VI to Francis confused invisible cases of LG 8, 14,15,16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, as being visible examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church, among non Catholics, and an exception for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS),it was and still is an objective error. It is a factual mistake. It is a fact of life that we cannot see or meet non Catholics saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance. Such cases, if they exist can only be known to God and so are not practical exceptions for the Athanasius Creed 1 

Archbishop Vigano must ask the Vatican Dicastery to respond to the message of this blog post, as soon as possible. The DDF must clarify that:-

1.          LG 8, 14, 15, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, always refer to hypothetical cases only. So the Council nowhere contradicts Feeneyite EENS and the Athanasius Creed. There are no objective exceptions for EENS as held today by the St. Benedict Centers in Massachusetts and New Hampshire, USA.

2.        Catholics are not obliged to interpret Vatican Council II irrationally to produce a fake break with EENS as defined by three Church Councils which did not mention any exceptions.

3.   So the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office (CDF/DDF) to the Archbishop of Boston (LOHO) made a mistake when it projected invisible cases of the baptism of desire as being visible exceptions for Feeneyite EENS. This objective mistake in the 1949 LOHO was not noticed by Pope Pius XII, Pope John XXIII and Pope Paul VI. So the Council (1965) was not interpreted rationally by Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, who was the pro-prefect of the CDF until 1968.

4.                    So Cardinal Fernandez, Archbishop Carlo Vigano and Msgr. Kennedy will be affirming traditional EENS with no exceptions when they interpret Vatican Council II rationally i.e. Ad Gentes 7 supports the dogma EENS when it says all need faith and baptism for salvation and LG 8 etc are not objective exceptions for Ad Gentes 7. The Catechism of the Catholic Church 845,846 supports Ad Gentes 7 and the Athanasius Creed, while CCC 847-848 (invincible ignorance etc) are not practical exceptions for CCC 845,846. Vatican Council II is in harmony with the Syllabus of Errors ( an ecumenism of return to the Catholic Church) and the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( 24Q,27Q- other religions are not paths to salvation).While the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( 29Q-invincible ignorance) does not contradict Ad Gentes 7 and the Catechism of the Catholic Church 845,846. Also when the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257( The Necessity of Baptism) says God is not limited to the Sacraments, this is a reference to a hypothetical case.So it does not contradict the Council of Trent on outside the Church there is no salvation ( Council of Florence 1442 etc).

Today is the feast of Blessed Cyril of Alessandria who believed in the two natures of Jesus, Our Lady being the Mother of God and outside the Catholic Church, Jesus' Mystical Body, there is no salvation. Vatican Council II does not contradict him. – Lionel Andrades

1.

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone does keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.


_______________________________________________

JUNE 26, 2024

Gerard O’Connell writing in the Jesuit magazine America, has not clarified that Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano has to interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally, otherwise he will face charges of schism or be excommunicated.



Gerard O’Connell writing in the Jesuit magazine America, has not clarified that Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano has to interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally, otherwise he will face charges of schism or be excommunicated.

Neither has this been denied by Msgr. John Kennedy, secretary of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, which is officially interpreting the Council with a fake premise to produce a rupture with Catholic Tradition. 1

 How can Msgr. Kennedy and Cardinal Fernandez be in communion with the Church when they interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise and inference and do not deny it.2

 According to Canon Law Cardinal Fernandez would be in schism when he interprets Vatican Council II ( LG 8,14,15,16,UR 3, NA 2, GS etc) as physically visible examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church and so practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Council of Florence 1442).3

Fernandez also accepts the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston (LOHO). It confused invisible cases of the baptism of desire as being visible exceptions for Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

So the interpretation of the Nicene, Apostles and Athanasius Creed has been changed.This is first class heresy according to Ad Tuendem Fidem of Pope John Paul II. So my interpretation of Vatican Council II with the rational premise has a different conclusion. My interpretation of the Creeds with the rational premise also has a traditional conclusion.Msgr. Kennedy cannot say the same.- Lionel Andrades

1
The decree is dated June 11 and is signed by Msgr. John Kennedy, secretary of the doctrinal office's disciplinary section, requesting that Viganò present himself on June 20 at 15:30 to formally receive the accusation and evidence against him.

https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2024/06/24/vigano-schism-response-trial-248207

 

 

2

On June 20, the archbishop posted on his own website a two-page decree from the Vatican's Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith ordering him to appear for a trial regarding "public statements that show a denial of points necessary for the preservation of communion with the Catholic Church."

https://www.ncronline.org/vatican/vatican-news/archbishop-vigan-says-he-faces-schism-charges-vaticans-doctrinal-office

 

3.

According to the church's Code of Canon Law, the charge of schism is punishable by excommunication.

 

NICENE CREED
We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered, died, and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in fulfillment of the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.


SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2016
The Vatican Curia interprets the Nicene Creed with irrational Cushingism : 'I believe in three known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins.'
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-vatican-curia-interprets-nicene.html



But if there are exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) then the Nicene Creed is saying 1) there are three or more baptisms, 2) they are physically visible for them to be exceptions for EENS, and 3) they exclude the baptism of water and so are practical exceptions for EENS. 4) So EENS is obsolete since there are known exceptions


The Vatican Curia interprets the Nicene Creed with irrational Cushingism : 'I believe in three known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins.' When the Creed is interpreted with Cushingism the result is first class heresy in the hierarchy of truth of Pope John Paul II.




4.
VATICAN COUNCIL II

Rational Premise
 Unitatis Redintigratio 3, Lumen Gentium  14 and Lumen Gentium 16  in Vatican Council II refer to physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.They are only hypothetical and theoretical. They exist only in our mind and are not solid bodies at Newton's level of time, space and matter.

Rational Inference
They are not objective examples of salvation outside the Church for us human beings.

Rational Conclusion
Vatican Council II does not contradict EENS as it was interpreted by the Jesuits in the Middle Ages.It does not contradict the strict interpretation of EENS of St. Thomas Aquinas( saved in invincible ignorance is invisible), St. Augustine and Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.
The Letter of the Holy Office(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) 1949 made an objective mistake.-L.A
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/05/in-italy-national-catechetical-centers.html


APRIL 15, 2021


Pope Francis and Pope Benedict's interpretation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church ( CCC 846, 1257) are non magisterial since they use a false premise to interpret CCC 846 (Outside the Church No Salvation) and CCC 1257 ( The Necessity of Baptism ).They have a rational and traditional choice which they avoid
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/pope-francis-and-pope-benedicts.html

______________________________________