DR.TAYLOR MARSHALL DID NOT ASK BISHOP ATHANASIUS SCHNEIDER IF THE PRESENT TWO POPES ARE IN SCHISM. SINCE THE BISHOP SAID THAT THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE DOES NOT REFER TO LITERAL CASES IN THE PRESENT TIMES AND THE POPES SINCE PIUS XII DIFFERED. Dr.Taylor Marshall did not ask Bishop Athanasius Schneider if the present two popes, are in schism.Since Bishop Schneider said that the baptism of desire does not refer to literal cases.The popes since Pius XII stated the opposite.The popes interpret LG 14( baptism of desire) as a rupture with the Creeds, Catechisms,extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the Syllabus of Errors.If the popes interpreted Vatican Council II rationally then they would affirm these Magisterial documents and would not be in schism with the past Magisterium. Pope Benedict in an interview with the daily Avvenire said that EENS today was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century.There was ‘a development’ with Vatican Council II.He meant Vatican Council II with LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 being literal cases in 1965-2021.So EENS, the Syllabus of Errors and the Athanasius Creed were made obsolete. But with LG 14 (baptism of desire) not being a literal case in 2021 for Schneider and Marshall, the game has changed. It is the popes are using the wrong interpretation of the Council.So they are choosing the hermeneutic of rupture with the past. When in principle, hypothetical cases (LG 8,Lg 14,LG 16 ,UR 3 etc) are not literal and personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church in the present times,then the popes and the SSPX, can affirm Vatican Council II ( with the rational premise) and also Tradition ( EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc).They would not be in a rupture with the past Magisterium.They would be supporting Vatican Council II, Tradition and the past Magisterium. Pope Francis is in schism since he rejects Vatican Council II interpreted rationally and rejects Tradition ( Catechism of Pope Pius X,24Q,27Q etc), with his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.He produces the hermeneutic of rupture with the Early Christians, the early Catholics, the Fathers of the Church, the Medieval Fathers and the popes before Pius XII. Now the entire College of Cardinals are in a factory-made, artificial schism with their irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II ( visible LG 14 cases). The German Synodal Path is schismatic and the German cardinals and bishops have a rational and non schismatic alternative before them. CONTINUED
Dr.Taylor Marshall could have asked, « Is Cardinal Marx in schism because of his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II ? ». The “Ecclesia Dei” communities meeting, with Pope Francis this month, as reported on the website of Taylor Marshall, would be of no value for the traditionalists.They need to discuss Vatican Council II, interpreted with the rational premise( invisible cases of LG 14 in 2021 are always invisible).More important, affirm it before the pope. The FSSP (Fraternity of St Peter), ICKSP (Institute of Christ the King), and IBP (Institute of the Good Shepherd),interpretation of Vatican Council II is as schismatic as that of Pope Francis. They all use the false premise which Bishop Schneider avoided. These communities need to tell Pope Francis to interpret the Council rationally,come back to the Church and take the Catholic Church back to Tradition at all rites and liturgies. They should mention that the SSPX-Vatican talks during the pontificate of Pope Benedict,were a waste of time.Since both sides were interpreting the Council with LG 14 ( baptism of desire) referring to literal and objective cases.Fr.Jean Marie Gleize and Fr.Luiz Ladaria sj are still at it .. –Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades Promoter of the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.For him the Council is dogmatic and not only pastoral. Writer on the discovery of the two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is interpreted with the false premise and the other without it. One is Magisterial and the other, the common one, is non Magisterial. It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms. There can be two interpretations. Why should Catholics choose an irrational version which is heretical, non traditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional ? Blog: Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission ) E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com
THE POPE CANNOT INTERPRET VATICAN COUNCIL II SCHISMATICALLY AND EXPECT THE ECCLESIA DEI COMMUNTIES AND THE REST OF THE CHURCH TO DO THE SAME.THE POPE IS REJECTING THE RATIONAL INTERPRETATION OF THE COUNCIL. THE COUNCIL INTERPRETED RATIONALLY OR IRRATIONALLY IS NOW AN ISSUE IN THE CHURCH.WE NOW HAVE OFFICIAL HERESY. THERE IS OFFICIAL SCHISM WITH THE PAST MAGISTERIUM. COURTELAIN DID NOT MENTION THIS POINT. There is only one rational interpretation of Vatican Council II.It’s with a rational premise.So there is no change in the teachings of the Catholic Church.The Ecclesia Dei communities meeting at Courtalain, France, August 31, 2021 had to confirm this.So when there is any reference to Vatican Council II it is understood that only the rational interpretation of the Council has to be chosen.If the pope does not affirm the traditional teachings of the Church, and chooses an irrational interpretion of the Council, with an irrational premise, he is in schism.Since the irrational premise has to create a rupture with de fide teachings ( Creeds and Catechisms). If he interprets Vatican Council II schismatically with the false premise, he is in schism and his interpretation is not Magisterial and binding on all Catholics.The pope cannot interpret Vatican Council II schismatically and expect the Ecclesia Dei communities and the rest of the Novus Ordo Church to do the same. Why should the Latin Mass Societies , Una Voce International and the Catholic Bishops Conference, who follow the pope, for example in Britain, interpret Vatican Council II irrationally, create a break with Tradition and consider this the norm ? The Ecclesia Dei communities statement at Courtalain missed out on this point.The pope is in schism and he wants them to also accept schism by rejecting the rational interpretation of the Council. Lay Catholics Roberto dei Mattei, Joseph Shaw, Peter Kwasniewski and John Henry Weston are ready to attend the Latin Mass and interpret Vatican Council II with the irrational premise, like Pope Francis, and so support a break with Tradition and also support manifest schism.This is approved by the Left. Pope Francis is asking the Ecclesia Dei communities to accept Vatican Council II irrationally and schismatically, and they are going along with him.This was also the schismatic interpretation of Pope Benedict and they were content with it. Before they have a meeting with Pope Francis and welcome apostolic visitors, these communities must clarify that they choose to interpret Vatican Council II non schismatically , with the rational premise, inference and non traditional conclusion.If they choose the irrational premise ( invisible people are visible in 2021) then the Council is a rupture with the Athanasius Creed ( all need Catholic faith for salvation).It contradicts the First Commandment( there is true worship in other religions with other gods).It changes the Nicene Creed ( I believe in one, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church in which membership is not always needed for salvation) and ( I beleive in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins and also three or more known baptisms( desire, blood, invincible ignorance etc), which exclude the baptism of water and so they are practical exceptions to EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc). CONTINUED
This is official heresy. It is also official schism with the past Magisterium.The false premise is used to create a new fake theology.This is unethical.The Ecclesia Dei communities are being coerced, to accept the New Theology and the fake interpretation of the Council, in exchange for canonical recognition and permission to offer the Latin Mass. In Switzerland, Bishop Charles Morerod op would not allow the Society of St.Pius X to use the churches for Holy Mass in Latin.He said here was a doctrinal problem.He wanted the SSPX to interpret Vatican Council II schismatically with the irrational premise and accept the non traditional conclusion.He was supported by Pope Benedict. The Ecclesia Dei communities must demand that Bishop Morerod interpret Vatican Council II with the rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion and that he reject his schismatic version of the Council.It is created with the New Theology.They should also demand that all Apostolic Visitors to their communties do the same. Vatican Council II interpreted rationally or irrationally is now an issue in the Church and the National Catechectical Offices and the Bishops Conferences, have no right to interpret the Council irrationally, creating schism and heresy, and expect the Ecclesia Dei communities to follow them. -Lionel Andrades
Pope Francis' Universal prayer intention is for an environmentally sustainable lifestyle amid general apostasy in the Church ?
When Jessica Gregori met St. Lucia and told Pope John Paul II about the Third Secret of Fatima the whole Church was already in apostasy interpreting Vatican Council II with a false premise to make Tradition obsolete. Archbishop Carlo Vigano has stated according to Life Site News (Sep 3, 2021) that Our Lady warned of a great apostasy in the Church. Our Lady spoke to the Gregori family, after their statue of Mary had started to shed tears of blood on February 2, 1995. She made clear that this apparition is linked to her apparitions in Fatima. She stated: “My children, the darkness of Satan is now obscuring the whole world and it is also obscuring the Church of God. Prepare to live what I had revealed to my little daughters of Fatima”… It is important to know that Jessica Gregori, the daughter of the family who witnessed these apparitions and supernatural events, was given by Our Lady the content of the third secret of Fatima and that this message was then passed on to Pope John Paul II at the time. She herself was able to meet, in 1996, with Sister Lucia of Fatima and to compare with her the messages they received concerning the third secret. They matched. 1 The original interview of Archbishop Vigano was with a Portugese publication and was translated into English for the magazine Vatican Insider.2 Vigano refers often to Vatican Council II in the original interview and draws from a book by Father Flavio Ubodi,the vice-president of the diocesan commission which approved the apparitions at Civitavecchia, Italy, and so the miraculous statue was placed in a church for veneration. Ubodi has recently published a book, in Italian, called Civitavecchia- 25 years with Mary. But Vigano has not said that the apostasy is already there in the Church from the pope to the parish priest and that he is also part of the problem. Peter Kwasniewski’s books and articles in general are written , for example, interpreting Vatican Council II and Magisterial documents deceptively with a false premise.In this way he does not have to affirm Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).He is not ‘racist’ or ‘extremist’.So the Left allows him to speak at conferences and write his books with the error. CONTINUED
CONTINUED They are free to write and speak re-intepreting Vatican Council II with the fake premise.It means Kwasniewski and Vigano are rejecting the Athanasius Creed which says all need faith and baptism of salvation. Imaginary cases are politcally projected as exceptions to EENS and the Syllabus of Errors too.So these traditionalists are not really interested in proclaiming the truths about the Faith. Vigano criticizes the great apostasy but he knows that he must interpret Vatican Council II with the irrational premise, since it would be a break with the liberals and ecclesiastics – but also with his traditionalist friends. With the rational premise, there is no New Theology and when there is no New Theology,there is no New Ecumenism, New Evangelisation, New Ecclesiology etc. There is no new schism and heresy. I ask myself, how can the authenticity of apparitions like Medugorje be evaluated based upon faithfulness to Church doctrine, when the doctrines have been changed with an irrational premise and the popes are no more following the old Magisterium of the Catholic Church ? Eric Sammons has written a book titled Deadly Indifference on how the Church has lost its mission and how we can re-claim it.In the book Sammons could not affirm the absolutist interpretation of outside the Church there is no salvation. The false premise was used by him to create what he called the Salvation Spectrum. He was denying the Faith with his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II and of course did connect his error with the title of the book.He was going along with the New Theology of the liberals that creates the Salvation Spectrum and religious indifferentism...So they appointed him Editor in Chief of Crisis Magazine. CONTINUED
We see the apostasy when John Salza refuses to interpret Vatican Council II with the rational premise and so have to theologically affirm the absolutist interpretation of EENS.This would not help his career as a lawyer.So in an article on the blog 1Peter5 he calls on Catholics to not join sedevacantist communities.Instead he wants them to stay with his apostasy in the Church. Some choice. When Pope Benedict and Cardinal Bertone closed the Fatima apparitions,they did not tell the world that all the books on Vatican Council II, were written with a fake premise to produce a fake rupture with Tradition, which would contribute to the existing apostasy which Our Lady predicted at Fatima. Their interpretation of Vatican Council II and EENS was political and not honest.Their interpretation of the Third Secret could also be political and not honest. Pope Benedict kept the Third Secret of Fatima-apostasy- hidden since he was part of the apostasy with his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.It is political and not Magisterial. If the Third Secret of Fatima was about apostasy in the Church how could he say it .Since he was actively interpreting the Creeds, Catechisms, EENS, Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 with the false premise.He had approved the non traditional and schismatic premise, inference and conclusion of Church documents. Recently Bishop Athanasius Schneider told Dr. Taylor Marshall in an interview, that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire. This would be explosive for Pope Benedict. Since Schneider is saying that we do not need the New Theology. LG 14( baptism of desire) is not an example of an objective exception to EENS.There could be an EENS with no known exceptions. The Council in LG 14 etc does not contradict the understanding of EENS, according to the missionaries of the 16th century.So he was also telling Cardinal Marx that he and Taylor Marshall, do not interpret the Council like Marx and the German Bishops and Pope Benedict.There is no theological basis today for the German Synodal Path, when the New Theology is put aside. With that statement Bishop Schneider is putting on hold the two popes interpretation of the Council and the spread of apostasy.-Lionel Andrades
Pope Francis' Universal prayer intention is for an environmentally sustainable lifestyle amid general apostasy in the Church with Vatican Council II not interpreted with a rational premise ?
VATICAN COUNCIL II SUPPORTS FR.JOHN COURTNEY MURRAY SJ WHEN IT IS INTERPRETED IRRATIONALLY AND MONS. JOSEPH CLIFFORD FENTON WHEN IT IS INTERPRETED RATIONALLY. POPE PAUL VI CHOSE THE IRRATIONAL VERSION OF THE COUNCIL WHEN HE HAD A CHOICE. Vatican Council II supports Fr. John Courtney Murray sj when it is interpreted irrationally and Mons. Joseph Clifford Fenton when it is interpreted rationally.Pope Paul VI chose the irrational version of the Council when he had a choice.The popes and the SSPX choose the irrational version too today, like the liberals and conservative Catholics. When the Council is interpreted with the rational premise, the Church will once again be conservative.It will support Le Pen and Salvini and not Macron and Matterella. Vatican Council II since Paul VI has been interpreted with a false premise, so there is alleged ‘known salvation’, in personal cases in the present times (1965-2021) outside the Church.This is deceptive. The message is that outside the Church, without ‘faith and the baptism of water, there are known non Catholics saved. So the New Theology says outside the Church there is salvation.The past ecclesiocentrism has been made obsolete with exceptions.We have a New Theology which permits general liberalism,new ecumenism etc. It is with this New Theology that Fr.John Courtney Murray sj could present his new theories on religious liberty, Church-State separation etc. With this liberalism, Le Pen in France and Salvini in Italy, will continue to have the Catholic Church against them. BISHOP SCHNEIDER CLOSES THE DOOR TO LIBERALISM Bishop Athanasius Schneider was closing the door to liberalism when he said there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire(Lumen Gentium 14).For him LG 14 etc being invisible and theoretical were not practical exceptions to the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX( ecumenism of return and outside the Church no salvation), in the present times (1965-2021). CONTINUED
With the past exclusivist ecclesiology supported by Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation.All.) and LG 14 etc not being an exception to Ad Gentes 7, there is no block in the Council to oppose the proclaiming of the Social Reign of Christ the King in all political legislation.This is the rational approach i.e hypothetical cases of LG 14 etc, remain hypothetical only. Roberto dei Mattei and Peter Kwasniewski may affirm the Social Reign of Chrst the King but they negate it with their irrational interpreation of Vatican Council II. The St.Benedict Centers too support the past ecclesiocentrism but negate it like the liberals, when they do not choose to interpret Vatican Council II rationally. LG 14 etc have to refer to visible cases for them to be exceptions for the Syllabus of Errors. And if there is salvation outside the Church, if there are exceptions for EENS, then why proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King ? This is important to remember during elections.All Catholics, should only vote for political candidates who affirm the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics, and interpret Vatican Council II rationally, unlike Mattei and the others. When Vatican Council II is interpreted with the rational premise there is no separation between the traditional Church and conservative political parties and politicians.Le Pen and Salvini would not have the Church agaist them. With the rational interpretation of Vatican Council II the Church would be saying that the migrants need faith and baptism for salvation.They would have to accept Jesus in the Catholic Church, and live the faith and moral teachings, and avail of the Sacraments, to avoid Hell. God would be at the centre of political activity and legislation ( pro –life, Ten Commandments, virtues of modesty and chastity in public etc) and not Satan ( abortion, contraception, pornography, immodesty in public, homosexual unions etc). Arcbishop Carlo Maria Vigano and the Lefebvrist group support Satan and the Masons when they interpret Vatican Council II with the irrational and not rational premise.The fruits are bad. It’s the same with John Henry Weston, Marco Tosatti, Joseph Shaw and others. They could choose the rational interpretation of Vatican Council II and be politically incorrect with the Left. CONTINUED
CONTINUED There are only politically correct candidates for the elections for the Mayor’s office in Rome.There is no political party which proclaims the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics, and interprets Vatican Council II rationally. The laity, like the FSSP and SSPX, do not interpret the Council rationally.So theologically, they support the Left, knowingly or unknowingly. Le Pen and Salvini in ignorance allow Pope Francis to interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise and they keep silent on this politico-religious issue.It’s the same with Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke. There are no protests. Even in France the bloggers at Riposte Catholique, Salon Beige,Met etc, do not ask the French Bishops Conference and Bishop Roland Mitterand in Dijon, to accept and interpret Vatican Council II rationally.This is a political and religious issue in the Catholic Church. The traditionelle and militante in France must accept a rational interpretation of Vatican Council II.Since the liberals in France need a theology on which to peg their liberalism.They need the false premise and the traditionelle must not hand it over to them in silence. It was the same for Fr. John Courtney Murray sj and today for Pope Francis.The theology had to be created and the only way it was done was by using a false premise.Without the false premise,which creates the New Theology, there is no liberalism.This was not known to Mons. Joseph Clifford Fenton and Fr. John Courtney Murray sj in their sparring over the issue of Religious Liberty. We have a new discovery after some 50 years. We now know that there are two interpretations of the Council and John Courtney Murray has been made obsolete.-Lionel Andrades Lionel Andrades Promoter of the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.For him the Council is dogmatic and not only pastoral. Writer on the discovery of the two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is interpreted with the false premise and the other without it. One is Magisterial and the other, the common one, is non Magisterial. It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms. There can be two interpretations. Why should Catholics choose an irrational version which is heretical, non traditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional ? Blog: Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission ) E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com
Pope Francis' Universal prayer intention is for an environmentally sustainable lifestyle amid general apostasy in the Church with Vatican Council II not interpreted with a rational premise and this is considered Magisterial by the SBC and SSPX?
08.09.2021 SBC DOCTRINAL BELIEFS : IS THE LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949 AND VATICAN COUNCIL II MAGISTERIAL WHEN THEY ARE INTERPRETED WITH THE FALSE PREMISE ? In his Statement on Doctrinal Beliefs Brother Andre Marie MICM Prior at the St.Benedict Center, New Hampshire, USA, says that the community Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, are faithful to the Magisterium.He cannot mean that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO) is Magisterial when it considers unknown cases of the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance as being known exceptions to 16th century extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).Similarly Vatican Council II cannot be Magisterial when LG 14 ( case of the Catechumen) and LG 16 ( saved in invincible ignorance) etc are interpreted with the same false premise ( invisible cases are visible in the present times).The conclusions are different, they are traditional or non traditional. Can the St.Benedict Center and the SSPX still say that they accept everything that the Church( liberal) teaches ? Does the SBC acknowledge that the popes from Pius XII have made an objective mistake in the LOHO and this cannot be Magisterial ? So now there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one in which hypothetical case(LG 14, etc) are considered only hypothetical and the other when they are considered non hypothetical, physically visible, seen in the flesh cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church without Catholic faith and the baptism of water. So there are two different conclusions. One is a rupture with Tradition and it is the one chosen by the present two popes.The other has the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition and it is the one chosen by me. So the common interpretation of Vatican Council II with the false premise ( hypothetical cases are objectively visible in 2021) is not Magisterial for the SBC ? The LOHO with its confusion over what is implict as being explicit,what is invisible is confused as being visible,( and accepted the popes), is Magisterial ? It is not Magisterial for me. I could go for Mass in Latin and accept Vatican Council II with LG 8,LG 14,LG 16 etc as not being exceptions to Feeneyite EENS and Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation). I can also accept the first part of the LOHO, like the SBC, and reject the second part, which contradicts the first part, traditional EENS, with the use of a false premise to interpret the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance. CONTINUED
The SBC would be liberal if they interpreted Vatican Council II like the present two popes , Bishop Peter Libasci , the bishop of Manchester, USA, his Curia and religious communities in New Hampshire.At Mass in English or Latin in the diocese the priest is interpreting Magisterial documents with the false premise and so theologically supporting the New Ecumenism, New Ecclesiology, New Evangelisation etc..-Lionel Andrades
DOCTRINAL BELIEFS The members of the Saint Benedict Center believe with Divine and Catholic Faith all those things contained in the Word of God, written or handed on, that is, in the one Deposit of Faith entrusted to the Church, and at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the Solemn Magisterium of the Church or by its Ordinary and Universal Magisterium which is manifested by the common adherence of the Christian faithful under the leadership of the Sacred Magisterium, avoiding any doctrines whatsoever contrary to them.1 We embrace and retain each and every thing which is proposed definitively by the Magisterium of the Church concerning the doctrine of Faith and Morals, that is, each and every thing which is required to safeguard reverently and to expound faithfully the same Deposit of Faith.2 We adhere with submission of will and intellect to the teachings which either the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops enunciate when they exercise their authentic Magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim these teachings by a definitive act.3 https://catholicism.org/doctrinal-belief.html
VATICAN COUNCIL II IS DOGMATIC AND NOT JUST A PASTORAL COUNCIL I don't know about Pope Francis but I am back to Traditional Mission based upon ecclesiocentrism since there is no known salvation outside the Church.We cannot meet or see someone saved without faith and baptism; Catholic faith and the baptism of water in 2021. We are back to the non separation of Church and State since outside the Church there is no known salvation and being a Catholic is a priority for avoiding Hell.So the priority is a Catholic Government.In Heaven there are only Catholics is the official teaching of Vatican Council II ( rational) . This is the official teaching of the Catholic Church today when Vatican Council II and other Magisterial documents are interpreted with a rational premise.This is not just a personal view. Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not only a pastoral Council.It supports the 16th century EENS, which did not have any exceptions.It was common sense that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance, without the baptism of water, did not refer to personally known and objective people.This was known at the Council of Trent.-Lionel Andrades
13 comments:
Pope in schism ?
DR.TAYLOR MARSHALL DID NOT ASK BISHOP ATHANASIUS SCHNEIDER IF THE PRESENT TWO POPES ARE IN SCHISM. SINCE THE BISHOP SAID THAT THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE DOES NOT REFER TO LITERAL CASES IN THE PRESENT TIMES AND THE POPES SINCE PIUS XII DIFFERED.
Dr.Taylor Marshall did not ask Bishop Athanasius Schneider if the present two popes, are in schism.Since Bishop Schneider said that the baptism of desire does not refer to literal cases.The popes since Pius XII stated the opposite.The popes interpret LG 14( baptism of desire) as a rupture with the Creeds, Catechisms,extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the Syllabus of Errors.If the popes interpreted Vatican Council II rationally then they would affirm these Magisterial documents and would not be in schism with the past Magisterium.
Pope Benedict in an interview with the daily Avvenire said that EENS today was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century.There was ‘a development’ with Vatican Council II.He meant Vatican Council II with LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 being literal cases in 1965-2021.So EENS, the Syllabus of Errors and the Athanasius Creed were made obsolete.
But with LG 14 (baptism of desire) not being a literal case in 2021 for Schneider and Marshall, the game has changed. It is the popes are using the wrong interpretation of the Council.So they are choosing the hermeneutic of rupture with the past.
When in principle, hypothetical cases (LG 8,Lg 14,LG 16 ,UR 3 etc) are not literal and personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church in the present times,then the popes and the SSPX, can affirm Vatican Council II ( with the rational premise) and also Tradition ( EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc).They would not be in a rupture with the past Magisterium.They would be supporting Vatican Council II, Tradition and the past Magisterium.
Pope Francis is in schism since he rejects Vatican Council II interpreted rationally and rejects Tradition ( Catechism of Pope Pius X,24Q,27Q etc), with his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.He produces the hermeneutic of rupture with the Early Christians, the early Catholics, the Fathers of the Church, the Medieval Fathers and the popes before Pius XII.
Now the entire College of Cardinals are in a factory-made, artificial schism with their irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II ( visible LG 14 cases).
The German Synodal Path is schismatic and the German cardinals and bishops have a rational and non schismatic alternative before them.
CONTINUED
CONTINUED
Dr.Taylor Marshall could have asked, « Is Cardinal Marx in schism because of his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II ? ».
The “Ecclesia Dei” communities meeting, with Pope Francis this month, as reported on the website of Taylor Marshall, would be of no value for the traditionalists.They need to discuss Vatican Council II, interpreted with the rational premise( invisible cases of LG 14 in 2021 are always invisible).More important, affirm it before the pope.
The FSSP (Fraternity of St Peter), ICKSP (Institute of Christ the King), and IBP (Institute of the Good Shepherd),interpretation of Vatican Council II is as schismatic as that of Pope Francis. They all use the false premise which Bishop Schneider avoided.
These communities need to tell Pope Francis to interpret the Council rationally,come back to the Church and take the Catholic Church back to Tradition at all rites and liturgies.
They should mention that the SSPX-Vatican talks during the pontificate of Pope Benedict,were a waste of time.Since both sides were interpreting the Council with LG 14 ( baptism of desire) referring to literal and objective cases.Fr.Jean Marie Gleize and Fr.Luiz Ladaria sj are still at it .. –Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades
Promoter of the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.For him the Council is dogmatic and not only pastoral.
Writer on the discovery of the two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is interpreted with the false premise and the other without it. One is Magisterial and the other, the common one, is non Magisterial.
It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms.
There can be two interpretations.
Why should Catholics choose an irrational version which is heretical, non traditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional ?
Blog: Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission )
E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com
THE POPE CANNOT INTERPRET VATICAN COUNCIL II SCHISMATICALLY AND EXPECT THE ECCLESIA DEI COMMUNTIES AND THE REST OF THE CHURCH TO DO THE SAME.THE POPE IS REJECTING THE RATIONAL INTERPRETATION OF THE COUNCIL. THE COUNCIL INTERPRETED RATIONALLY OR IRRATIONALLY IS NOW AN ISSUE IN THE CHURCH.WE NOW HAVE OFFICIAL HERESY. THERE IS OFFICIAL SCHISM WITH THE PAST MAGISTERIUM. COURTELAIN DID NOT MENTION THIS POINT.
There is only one rational interpretation of Vatican Council II.It’s with a rational premise.So there is no change in the teachings of the Catholic Church.The Ecclesia Dei communities meeting at Courtalain, France, August 31, 2021 had to confirm this.So when there is any reference to Vatican Council II it is understood that only the rational interpretation of the Council has to be chosen.If the pope does not affirm the traditional teachings of the Church, and chooses an irrational interpretion of the Council, with an irrational premise, he is in schism.Since the irrational premise has to create a rupture with de fide teachings ( Creeds and Catechisms).
If he interprets Vatican Council II schismatically with the false premise, he is in schism and his interpretation is not Magisterial and binding on all Catholics.The pope cannot interpret Vatican Council II schismatically and expect the Ecclesia Dei communities and the rest of the Novus Ordo Church to do the same.
Why should the Latin Mass Societies , Una Voce International and the Catholic Bishops Conference, who follow the pope, for example in Britain, interpret Vatican Council II irrationally, create a break with Tradition and consider this the norm ?
The Ecclesia Dei communities statement at Courtalain missed out on this point.The pope is in schism and he wants them to also accept schism by rejecting the rational interpretation of the Council.
Lay Catholics Roberto dei Mattei, Joseph Shaw, Peter Kwasniewski and John Henry Weston are ready to attend the Latin Mass and interpret Vatican Council II with the irrational premise, like Pope Francis, and so support a break with Tradition and also support manifest schism.This is approved by the Left.
Pope Francis is asking the Ecclesia Dei communities to accept Vatican Council II irrationally and schismatically, and they are going along with him.This was also the schismatic interpretation of Pope Benedict and they were content with it.
Before they have a meeting with Pope Francis and welcome apostolic visitors, these communities must clarify that they choose to interpret Vatican Council II non schismatically , with the rational premise, inference and non traditional conclusion.If they choose the irrational premise ( invisible people are visible in 2021) then the Council is a rupture with the Athanasius Creed ( all need Catholic faith for salvation).It contradicts the First Commandment( there is true worship in other religions with other gods).It changes the Nicene Creed ( I believe in one, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church in which membership is not always needed for salvation) and ( I beleive in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins and also three or more known baptisms( desire, blood, invincible ignorance etc), which exclude the baptism of water and so they are practical exceptions to EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc).
CONTINUED
CONTINUED
This is official heresy. It is also official schism with the past Magisterium.The false premise is used to create a new fake theology.This is unethical.The Ecclesia Dei communities are being coerced, to accept the New Theology and the fake interpretation of the Council, in exchange for canonical recognition and permission to offer the Latin Mass.
In Switzerland, Bishop Charles Morerod op would not allow the Society of St.Pius X to use the churches for Holy Mass in Latin.He said here was a doctrinal problem.He wanted the SSPX to interpret Vatican Council II schismatically with the irrational premise and accept the non traditional conclusion.He was supported by Pope Benedict.
The Ecclesia Dei communities must demand that Bishop Morerod interpret Vatican Council II with the rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion and that he reject his schismatic version of the Council.It is created with the New Theology.They should also demand that all Apostolic Visitors to their communties do the same.
Vatican Council II interpreted rationally or irrationally is now an issue in the Church and the National Catechectical Offices and the Bishops Conferences, have no right to interpret the Council irrationally, creating schism and heresy, and expect the Ecclesia Dei communities to follow them. -Lionel Andrades
Pope Francis' Universal prayer intention is for an environmentally sustainable lifestyle amid general apostasy in the Church ?
When Jessica Gregori met St. Lucia and told Pope John Paul II about the Third Secret of Fatima the whole Church was already in apostasy interpreting Vatican Council II with a false premise to make Tradition obsolete.
Archbishop Carlo Vigano has stated according to Life Site News (Sep 3, 2021) that Our Lady warned of a great apostasy in the Church.
Our Lady spoke to the Gregori family, after their statue of Mary had started to shed tears of blood on February 2, 1995. She made clear that this apparition is linked to her apparitions in Fatima. She stated: “My children, the darkness of Satan is now obscuring the whole world and it is also obscuring the Church of God. Prepare to live what I had revealed to my little daughters of Fatima”…
It is important to know that Jessica Gregori, the daughter of the family who witnessed these apparitions and supernatural events, was given by Our Lady the content of the third secret of Fatima and that this message was then passed on to Pope John Paul II at the time. She herself was able to meet, in 1996, with Sister Lucia of Fatima and to compare with her the messages they received concerning the third secret. They matched. 1
The original interview of Archbishop Vigano was with a Portugese publication and was translated into English for the magazine Vatican Insider.2
Vigano refers often to Vatican Council II in the original interview and draws from a book by Father Flavio Ubodi,the vice-president of the diocesan commission which approved the apparitions at Civitavecchia, Italy, and so the miraculous statue was placed in a church for veneration. Ubodi has recently published a book, in Italian, called Civitavecchia- 25 years with Mary.
But Vigano has not said that the apostasy is already there in the Church from the pope to the parish priest and that he is also part of the problem.
Peter Kwasniewski’s books and articles in general are written , for example, interpreting Vatican Council II and Magisterial documents deceptively with a false premise.In this way he does not have to affirm Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).He is not ‘racist’ or ‘extremist’.So the Left allows him to speak at conferences and write his books with the error.
CONTINUED
CONTINUED
They are free to write and speak re-intepreting Vatican Council II with the fake premise.It means Kwasniewski and Vigano are rejecting the Athanasius Creed which says all need faith and baptism of salvation. Imaginary cases are politcally projected as exceptions to EENS and the Syllabus of Errors too.So these traditionalists are not really interested in proclaiming the truths about the Faith.
Vigano criticizes the great apostasy but he knows that he must interpret Vatican Council II with the irrational premise, since it would be a break with the liberals and ecclesiastics – but also with his traditionalist friends.
With the rational premise, there is no New Theology and when there is no New Theology,there is no New Ecumenism, New Evangelisation, New Ecclesiology etc. There is no new schism and heresy.
I ask myself, how can the authenticity of apparitions like Medugorje be evaluated based upon faithfulness to Church doctrine, when the doctrines have been changed with an irrational premise and the popes are no more following the old Magisterium of the Catholic Church ?
Eric Sammons has written a book titled Deadly Indifference on how the Church has lost its mission and how we can re-claim it.In the book Sammons could not affirm the absolutist interpretation of outside the Church there is no salvation. The false premise was used by him to create what he called the Salvation Spectrum. He was denying the Faith with his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II and of course did connect his error with the title of the book.He was going along with the New Theology of the liberals that creates the Salvation Spectrum and religious indifferentism...So they appointed him Editor in Chief of Crisis Magazine.
CONTINUED
CONTINUED
We see the apostasy when John Salza refuses to interpret Vatican Council II with the rational premise and so have to theologically affirm the absolutist interpretation of EENS.This would not help his career as a lawyer.So in an article on the blog 1Peter5 he calls on Catholics to not join sedevacantist communities.Instead he wants them to stay with his apostasy in the Church. Some choice.
When Pope Benedict and Cardinal Bertone closed the Fatima apparitions,they did not tell the world that all the books on Vatican Council II, were written with a fake premise to produce a fake rupture with Tradition, which would contribute to the existing apostasy which Our Lady predicted at Fatima.
Their interpretation of Vatican Council II and EENS was political and not honest.Their interpretation of the Third Secret could also be political and not honest.
Pope Benedict kept the Third Secret of Fatima-apostasy- hidden since he was part of the apostasy with his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.It is political and not Magisterial.
If the Third Secret of Fatima was about apostasy in the Church how could he say it .Since he was actively interpreting the Creeds, Catechisms, EENS, Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 with the false premise.He had approved the non traditional and schismatic premise, inference and conclusion of Church documents.
Recently Bishop Athanasius Schneider told Dr. Taylor Marshall in an interview, that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire. This would be explosive for Pope Benedict. Since Schneider is saying that we do not need the New Theology. LG 14( baptism of desire) is not an example of an objective exception to EENS.There could be an EENS with no known exceptions. The Council in LG 14 etc does not contradict the understanding of EENS, according to the missionaries of the 16th century.So he was also telling Cardinal Marx that he and Taylor Marshall, do not interpret the Council like Marx and the German Bishops and Pope Benedict.There is no theological basis today for the German Synodal Path, when the New Theology is put aside.
With that statement Bishop Schneider is putting on hold the two popes interpretation of the Council and the spread of apostasy.-Lionel Andrades
1
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/archbishop-vigano-our-lady-warned-of-great-apostasy-in-church-followed-by-risk-of-world-war-iii/
2.
https://insidethevatican.com/news/newsflash/letter-8-vigano-on-the-unrevealed-third-secret-of-fatima/
Pope Francis' Universal prayer intention is for an environmentally sustainable lifestyle amid general apostasy in the Church with Vatican Council II not interpreted with a rational premise ?
VATICAN COUNCIL II SUPPORTS FR.JOHN COURTNEY MURRAY SJ WHEN IT IS INTERPRETED IRRATIONALLY AND MONS. JOSEPH CLIFFORD FENTON WHEN IT IS INTERPRETED RATIONALLY. POPE PAUL VI CHOSE THE IRRATIONAL VERSION OF THE COUNCIL WHEN HE HAD A CHOICE.
Vatican Council II supports Fr. John Courtney Murray sj when it is interpreted irrationally and Mons. Joseph Clifford Fenton when it is interpreted rationally.Pope Paul VI chose the irrational version of the Council when he had a choice.The popes and the SSPX choose the irrational version too today, like the liberals and conservative Catholics.
When the Council is interpreted with the rational premise, the Church will once again be conservative.It will support Le Pen and Salvini and not Macron and Matterella.
Vatican Council II since Paul VI has been interpreted with a false premise, so there is alleged ‘known salvation’, in personal cases in the present times (1965-2021) outside the Church.This is deceptive. The message is that outside the Church, without ‘faith and the baptism of water, there are known non Catholics saved. So the New Theology says outside the Church there is salvation.The past ecclesiocentrism has been made obsolete with exceptions.We have a New Theology which permits general liberalism,new ecumenism etc. It is with this New Theology that Fr.John Courtney Murray sj could present his new theories on religious liberty, Church-State separation etc.
With this liberalism, Le Pen in France and Salvini in Italy, will continue to have the Catholic Church against them.
BISHOP SCHNEIDER CLOSES THE DOOR TO LIBERALISM
Bishop Athanasius Schneider was closing the door to liberalism when he said there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire(Lumen Gentium 14).For him LG 14 etc being invisible and theoretical were not practical exceptions to the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX( ecumenism of return and outside the Church no salvation), in the present times (1965-2021).
CONTINUED
CONTINUED
With the past exclusivist ecclesiology supported by Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation.All.) and LG 14 etc not being an exception to Ad Gentes 7, there is no block in the Council to oppose the proclaiming of the Social Reign of Christ the King in all political legislation.This is the rational approach i.e hypothetical cases of LG 14 etc, remain hypothetical only.
Roberto dei Mattei and Peter Kwasniewski may affirm the Social Reign of Chrst the King but they negate it with their irrational interpreation of Vatican Council II. The St.Benedict Centers too support the past ecclesiocentrism but negate it like the liberals, when they do not choose to interpret Vatican Council II rationally. LG 14 etc have to refer to visible cases for them to be exceptions for the Syllabus of Errors. And if there is salvation outside the Church, if there are exceptions for EENS, then why proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King ?
This is important to remember during elections.All Catholics, should only vote for political candidates who affirm the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics, and interpret Vatican Council II rationally, unlike Mattei and the others.
When Vatican Council II is interpreted with the rational premise there is no separation between the traditional Church and conservative political parties and politicians.Le Pen and Salvini would not have the Church agaist them.
With the rational interpretation of Vatican Council II the Church would be saying that the migrants need faith and baptism for salvation.They would have to accept Jesus in the Catholic Church, and live the faith and moral teachings, and avail of the Sacraments, to avoid Hell.
God would be at the centre of political activity and legislation ( pro –life, Ten Commandments, virtues of modesty and chastity in public etc) and not Satan ( abortion, contraception, pornography, immodesty in public, homosexual unions etc).
Arcbishop Carlo Maria Vigano and the Lefebvrist group support Satan and the Masons when they interpret Vatican Council II with the irrational and not rational premise.The fruits are bad. It’s the same with John Henry Weston, Marco Tosatti, Joseph Shaw and others. They could choose the rational interpretation of Vatican Council II and be politically incorrect with the Left.
CONTINUED
CONTINUED
There are only politically correct candidates for the elections for the Mayor’s office in Rome.There is no political party which proclaims the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics, and interprets Vatican Council II rationally.
The laity, like the FSSP and SSPX, do not interpret the Council rationally.So theologically, they support the Left, knowingly or unknowingly.
Le Pen and Salvini in ignorance allow Pope Francis to interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise and they keep silent on this politico-religious issue.It’s the same with Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke. There are no protests.
Even in France the bloggers at Riposte Catholique, Salon Beige,Met etc, do not ask the French Bishops Conference and Bishop Roland Mitterand in Dijon, to accept and interpret Vatican Council II rationally.This is a political and religious issue in the Catholic Church.
The traditionelle and militante in France must accept a rational interpretation of Vatican Council II.Since the liberals in France need a theology on which to peg their liberalism.They need the false premise and the traditionelle must not hand it over to them in silence. It was the same for Fr. John Courtney Murray sj and today for Pope Francis.The theology had to be created and the only way it was done was by using a false premise.Without the false premise,which creates the New Theology, there is no liberalism.This was not known to Mons. Joseph Clifford Fenton and Fr. John Courtney Murray sj in their sparring over the issue of Religious Liberty.
We have a new discovery after some 50 years. We now know that there are two interpretations of the Council and John Courtney Murray has been made obsolete.-Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades
Promoter of the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.For him the Council is dogmatic and not only pastoral.
Writer on the discovery of the two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is interpreted with the false premise and the other without it. One is Magisterial and the other, the common one, is non Magisterial.
It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms.
There can be two interpretations.
Why should Catholics choose an irrational version which is heretical, non traditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional ?
Blog: Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission )
E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com
Pope Francis' Universal prayer intention is for an environmentally sustainable lifestyle amid general apostasy in the Church with Vatican Council II not interpreted with a rational premise and this is considered Magisterial by the SBC and SSPX?
08.09.2021
SBC DOCTRINAL BELIEFS : IS THE LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949 AND VATICAN COUNCIL II MAGISTERIAL WHEN THEY ARE INTERPRETED WITH THE FALSE PREMISE ?
In his Statement on Doctrinal Beliefs Brother Andre Marie MICM Prior at the St.Benedict Center, New Hampshire, USA, says that the community Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, are faithful to the Magisterium.He cannot mean that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO) is Magisterial when it considers unknown cases of the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance as being known exceptions to 16th century extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).Similarly Vatican Council II cannot be Magisterial when LG 14 ( case of the Catechumen) and LG 16 ( saved in invincible ignorance) etc are interpreted with the same false premise ( invisible cases are visible in the present times).The conclusions are different, they are traditional or non traditional.
Can the St.Benedict Center and the SSPX still say that they accept everything that the Church( liberal) teaches ?
Does the SBC acknowledge that the popes from Pius XII have made an objective mistake in the LOHO and this cannot be Magisterial ?
So now there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one in which hypothetical case(LG 14, etc) are considered only hypothetical and the other when they are considered non hypothetical, physically visible, seen in the flesh cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church without Catholic faith and the baptism of water. So there are two different conclusions. One is a rupture with Tradition and it is the one chosen by the present two popes.The other has the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition and it is the one chosen by me.
So the common interpretation of Vatican Council II with the false premise ( hypothetical cases are objectively visible in 2021) is not Magisterial for the SBC ?
The LOHO with its confusion over what is implict as being explicit,what is invisible is confused as being visible,( and accepted the popes), is Magisterial ? It is not Magisterial for me.
I could go for Mass in Latin and accept Vatican Council II with LG 8,LG 14,LG 16 etc as not being exceptions to Feeneyite EENS and Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation).
I can also accept the first part of the LOHO, like the SBC, and reject the second part, which contradicts the first part, traditional EENS, with the use of a false premise to interpret the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance.
CONTINUED
CONTINUED
The SBC would be liberal if they interpreted Vatican Council II like the present two popes , Bishop Peter Libasci , the bishop of Manchester, USA, his Curia and religious communities in New Hampshire.At Mass in English or Latin in the diocese the priest is interpreting Magisterial documents with the false premise and so theologically supporting the New Ecumenism, New Ecclesiology, New Evangelisation etc..-Lionel Andrades
DOCTRINAL BELIEFS
The members of the Saint Benedict Center believe with Divine and Catholic Faith all those things contained in the Word of God, written or handed on, that is, in the one Deposit of Faith entrusted to the Church, and at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the Solemn Magisterium of the Church or by its Ordinary and Universal Magisterium which is manifested by the common adherence of the Christian faithful under the leadership of the Sacred Magisterium, avoiding any doctrines whatsoever contrary to them.1
We embrace and retain each and every thing which is proposed definitively by the Magisterium of the Church concerning the doctrine of Faith and Morals, that is, each and every thing which is required to safeguard reverently and to expound faithfully the same Deposit of Faith.2
We adhere with submission of will and intellect to the teachings which either the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops enunciate when they exercise their authentic Magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim these teachings by a definitive act.3
https://catholicism.org/doctrinal-belief.html
08.09.2021
VATICAN COUNCIL II IS DOGMATIC AND NOT JUST A PASTORAL COUNCIL
I don't know about Pope Francis but I am back to Traditional Mission based upon ecclesiocentrism since there is no known salvation outside the Church.We cannot meet or see someone saved without faith and baptism; Catholic faith and the baptism of water in 2021.
We are back to the non separation of Church and State since outside the Church there is no known salvation and being a Catholic is a priority for avoiding Hell.So the priority is a Catholic Government.In Heaven there are only Catholics is the official teaching of Vatican Council II ( rational) .
This is the official teaching of the Catholic Church today when Vatican Council II and other Magisterial documents are interpreted with a rational premise.This is not just a personal view.
Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not only a pastoral Council.It supports the 16th century EENS, which did not have any exceptions.It was common sense that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance, without the baptism of water, did not refer to personally known and objective people.This was known at the Council of Trent.-Lionel Andrades
Post a Comment