Wednesday, March 22, 2017

The Angelicum University does not come to Vatican Council II knowing that the baptism of desire cannot be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus : since then the interpretation of the Council changes

Immagine correlata
If you come to Vatican Council II knowing that the baptism of desire cannot be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( past or present) then the entire interpretation of Vatican Council II changes.Since there is a different premise and conclusion.

 
Image result for Photo Rabbi Prof. Jack Bemporad
This is not the premise and conclusion taught at the pontifical universities and seminaries in Italy.Nor is it being taught to many international students at the Angelicum University in Rome where a leftist Jewish professor, supported by Israel's military and political strength, teaches ecumenism and inter religious dialogue, as a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and Catholic Tradition.

PHILOSOPHICAL ERRORS IN VATICAN COUNCIL II
If you come to Vatican Council II with this approach-that being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) and the baptism of desire(BOD) cannot be exceptions to EENS - you will find Vatican Council II full of philosophical errors.However if you avoid the error and re-interpret hypothetical cases (LG 16 etc) as being only hypothetical, then Vatican Council II has a refreshing continuity with Tradition, including the dogma EENS as it was known in the Middle Ages and to the Church Fathers.
SCANDAL
That these errors have not been pointed out and they are still being taught to students at pontifical universities is a scandal.

ST.FRANCIS XAVIER/ST.THOMAS AQUINAS
Since hypothetical and invisible cases of BOD and I.I could never have been exceptions or relevant to EENS,we do not know any martyr saved with the baptism of blood (BOB) and without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church who is in Heaven.God could have sent the martyr back to earth to be baptised with water( St.Francis Xavier) or God could have sent a preacher to this person to be saved, before he died nd which was unknown to the people of his time(St.Thomas Aquinas).
So for the Council Fathers in 1960-1965 to mention BOD and I.I as being relevant to all needing faith and baptism for salvation (AG 7, LG 14) was an objective mistake.

CDF NEGLIGENCE
The mistake was supported after Vatican Council II.It was negligence at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under Cardinal Ratzinger.The CDF Prefect protected the error within the Church.He supported the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 from where the mistake  originated.While his friend Fr. Hans Kung S.J placed the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 in the Denzinger.The Archdiocese of Boston suspiciously made this private Letter public some three years after it was issued by the Holy Office in Rome.When it was issued there were administrative irregularities ( See the website Catholicism.org).

IF BOD IS AN EXEPTION TO EENS YOUR A LIBERAL
So if you, like the cardinals at Vatican Council II, see 'invincible ignorance and a good concience'(LG 16) as being an exception to the dogma EENS;an explicit exception, then the interpretation of Vatican Council II is no more traditional.It does not support Tradition.Your a liberal.
IF BOD IS NOT AN EXCEPTION TO EENS YOUR NOT A LIBERAL
However if unlike the magisterium in 1965 you interpret 'elements of sanctification and truth' (LG 8) and 'subsist it'(LG 8) as not being exceptions to Feeneyite EENs, then Vatican Council II is not a rupture with Tradition.It has the hermeneutic of continuity.There is no 'development of dogma'.Your a traditionalist or conservative Catholic who does not need to reject Vatican CouncilII and does not have to be a liberal.Your like me.
CDF HERESY
Image result for Photo John Paul II Center for Interreligious Dialogue logo
This would be unlike Cardinal Muller, Archbishop Di Noia and Mons. Pozzo who have  not been honest.Instead when Edward Pentin asked Muller and Di Noia about EENS they interpreted LG 14 ( those who know) and LG 8( elements of sanctification and truth) as an exception to EENS.So for them too there was a development of doctrine with Vatican Council II.It was a development of doctrines with a new theology creating new doctrines on Catholic salvatin.

ANTI SEMITIC LAW USED AS A WHIP IN ITALY
Now if you confront the Dominican priests at the Angelicum with this information they will keep quiet. They will ask you to go away and not e-mail them.Since the rabbi teaching at the Angelicum, or rabbis Segni or Lara in Italy, could confront these priest-professors with their hated Anti-Semitism law.It is used as a whip against the Catholic Church.
So every one keeps quiet.For all of them BOD is an exception to EENs. It is not as it was known to the three Church Councils  which defined it and did not mention any practical exceptions.

SSPX PRUDENTLY NOT ANTI SEMITIC : WILL NOT AFFIRM FAITH
There are no practical exceptions to EENS says Chris Ferrara but for Bishop Bernard Fellay and the SSPX priests LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc are practical exceptions.The SSPX did not comment in 2015 when the Vatican and Leftist Jews 'released a new document reiterating that Catholics shouldn’t try to convert Jews', 1 .The SSPX also deserted Bishop Williamson and Fr.Floriano Abrahamovic and others, 2 so as not to appear Anti-semitic. Are they going to say that that BOD is not an exception to EENS?

TLM NEW ECCLESIOLOGY BASED ON BOD BEING EXCEPTIONS TO EENS
The Traditional Latin Mass is offered and supported by   Una Voce, Latin Mass Societies, Rorate Caeili, Fr. Z and Joseph Shaw only with the new ecclesiology.The new ecclesiology is based on BOD being an exception to EENS.Joseph Shaw keeps his teaching job at Oxford University  since he is as liberal as Catholics Gavin C'Costa and Tom O'Loughlin, ultra liberals at the Engish universities, who probably don't attend the TLM.

NO ONE WANTS TO CORRECT ABP.KEVIN MCDONALD
For all three of them, as it is for Archbishop Kevin McDonald spokesman for the English bishops on inter-religious dialogue,  'seeds of the Word'(AG 11) and Gaudium et Specs 22 refer to exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.The  Archbishop criticizes Fr. Leonard Feeney for not assuming, like him, that there were known cases, physically visible persons who were exceptions to traditional EENS.
So who is going to correct Archbishop McDonald and the English bishops? Joseph Shaw,Rorate Caeili, Fr.John Zuhlsdorf ? Unlikely since they have to preserve their personal interests.

NO INCARDINATION FOR PRIESTS WHO SAY BOD IS NOT AN EXCEPTION TO EENS
Fr.Nicholas Gruner affirmed EENS and was not allowed to be incardinated.However he interpreted Vatican Council II with the irrational premise(like the Vatican Curia) and then rejected this interpretation of the Council(which they accepted).Satan and the Left knew that EENS was the real issue. Catholics in general do not know this.No one will tell it to them.
I know of a young Italian priest who was also hounded the same way in Rome, because of his position on EENS and other religions.
DECEPTION WAS STANDARD RELIGIOUS FORMATION FOR TWO POPES
All this deception in theology was probably standard religious formation for Pope Benedict and Pope Francis and the Vatican cardinals.It is the same for the tradtionalists over some 70 years.
For instance the Rapid Response Team of the Fatima Network simply rejects Vatican Council II interpreted with BOD being an exception to EENS.They reject the Council and continue to interpret BOD as being an exception to EENS.With the same reasoning LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA  2, GS 22 etc are all exceptions to EENS.They are not aware that they can interpret Vatican Council II without BOD being an exception to EENs.
REINTERPRET VATICAN COUNCIL II WITH BOD NOT BEING AN EXCEPTION TO EENS
Just accept BOD as being invisible and hypothetical ( which is common sense) and then LG 16 etc are not exceptions to EENS.Wikipedia has made a mistake. Check it out and ask them to correct it please.
There are no known cases of someone saved in invincible ignorance or with a good conscience, who did not need to enter the Church formally, with faith and baptism, for salvation.
IN THE PAST THE POPES KEPT THE JEWISH LEFT UNDER CONTROL
This needs to be proclaimed outside the Angelicum and other pontifical universities where they are teaching magisterial heresy.In the past the popes kept the Jewish Left, Kabbalists, Masons, Talmudis and the rest of the bag, under control.Now it is Satan who controls the popes and the Church. There is official heresy being taught which should be identified and stopped.Catholics have a right to their identity.
-Lionel Andrades
 
 
 
1
 
 
 
 March 21, 2017
Vatican Council II has a continuity with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus but the Angelicum hides this Catholic teaching
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/vatican-council-ii-has-continuity-with.html

Tuesday, March 21, 2017

Vatican Council II has a continuity with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus but the Angelicum hides this Catholic teaching


Immagine correlata
(This report is a potential LEAFLET.It can be distributed outside the Angelicum University or elsewhere.It can be edited and translated no permission is required. It is based on the magisterial teachings and documents of the Catholic Church, interpreted without the irrational premise and conclusion,without the common irrational reasoning which violates the Principle of Non Contradiction).
Vatican Council II had a continuity all along with the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and this is not being taught at the Angelicum, the University of St.Thomas Aquinas in Rome.
The liberal interpretation of Vatican Council II could only be made with the philosophical error approved by the Dominicans.This intepretation was made by assuming what is hypothetical is not hypothetical.Invisible cases were considered visible.The liberals' famous case of the catechumen who allegedly was known is really unknown.
STUDENTS TAUGHT MAGISTERIUM CONTRADICTS MAGISTERIUM
With this false premise(visible cases of the baptism of desire etc) a non traditional conclusion (there is known salvation outside the Church so the dogma has exceptions) was  created.This is what students are taught at this pontifical university, where the magisterium contradicts the magisterium of the past.
Image result for Fr.Francesco Giordano  HLIImage result for Photo Rabbi Prof. Jack Bemporad
FACULTY WILL NOT ANSWER BASIC QUESTIONS ON THE FAITH
Now when Catholic religious at the Angelicum are asked in English basic philosophical questions, they can see where it leads to.So they refuse to answer, or be quoted.Similarly at the pontifical universities and seminaries in Rome there are priest-professors who continue to teach a lie.Their interpretation of Vatican Council II, is based on the philosophical error.They maintain the error even after being informed.This should be stopped at the Angelicum.
The Council Fathers at Vatican Council II, according to the text of the Council, wrongly assumed hypothetical cases were not hypothetical.
They wrongly assumed that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance referred to visible cases, when they could have chosen to see the obvious,that they are invisible cases.This is not told to the students at the Pontifical University of St.Thomas Aquians(Angelicum), Rome.
VATICAN COUNCIL II CAN BE INTERPRETED WITH HYPOTHETICAL CASES BEING VISIBLE OR INVISIBLE
Vatican Council II can be interpreted with hypothetical cases being visible or invisible.The Council Fathers in principle assumed invisible cases were visible since the error was there in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.
BAPTISM OF DESIRE IS ALWAYS HYPOTHETICAL AND SO NOT AN EXCEPTIONS TO EENS
The baptism of desire is always hypothetical for us.So it cannot be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiiam nulla salus(EENS). We can accept the baptism of desire (hypothetical/theoretical and physically invisible) without rejecting the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).
WITHOUT THE IRRATIONAL PREMISE WE ARE BACK TO AN ECUMENISM OF RETURN
Without the irrational premise there is no new theology and we are back to the old ecclesiology and salvation theology which is Feeneyism. Vatican Council II then affirms an Ecumenism of Return, Social Reign of Christ the King and no known salvation outside the Church.
 WITH THE PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY OF FEENEYISM VATICAN COUNCIL HAS A HERMENEUTIC OF CONTINUITY
With Feeneyism Vatican Council II does not have a hermeneutic of rupture.It has the hermeneutic of continuity and the professors will not teach this.
DOMINICANS WILL NOT ANNOUNCE
The Dominicans also will not announce that with Feeneyism Vatican Council II would not contradict the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).So there can only be an ecumenism of return.All Lutherans in 2017 need to be incorporated into the Catholic Church to avoid Hell.

IN AGREEMENT WITH ST.DOMINIC
Vatican Council II would be in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known in the 16th century and to St. Dominic.
REFORMED RABBI TEACHES A FALSE ECUMENISM AT THE ANGELICUM
Vatican Council II would be saying, without the mix up over invisible cases being visible, that there can only be an ecumenism of return.I repeat. So the ecumenism being taught by the reformed rabbi at the Angelicum is presently false.
THERE IS NO KNOWN SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CHURCH
Since there is no known salvation outside the Church there can be no Anonymous Christian theology of Fr.Karl Rahner, Cardinal Ratzinger, Cardinal Kasper and other liberals.
Since there is no known salvation outside the Church, we do not know of any one saved in another religion.Outside the Church there is no salvation. So it is important that all political legislation have as its centre the Social Reign of Christ the King.There cannot be a separation of Church and State.

ERRORS IN PRINCIPLE WERE MADE AT VATICAN COUNCIL IIIn principle the Vatican Council II Fathers assumed hypothetical cases were not hypothetical but objectively visible.
In principle they assumed people in Heaven are objectively visible on earth.
In principle they assumed that we can know of non Catholics on earth saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
In general, as a norm, the Principle of Non Contradiction was violated.
The Council Fathers violated basic laws of logic and philosophical reasoning.
 ERRORS SUBTLE
Then the error in principle, which is hidden in Vatican Council II, can be detected.It is subtle but there.It is important to understand the following four points.
1.The Council is rejecting the baptism of desire etc as being invisible and known only to God.
2.It is assuming that the baptism of desire and being saved in in invincible ignorance refer to known cases in the present times.
3.In principle it is assuming hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire etc are objectively visible in the present times and then interpreting Vatican Council II with this irrationality.
4.The Council Fathers at Vatican Council II seemed  unaware that this error of assuming the baptism of desire refers to visible instead of invisible cases.This error was there in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which assumed that the baptism of desire etc refers to visible cases. .This is an error of the magisterium. It was then repeated in Vatican Council II by the Council Fathers.
 PHILOSOPHICAL ERRORS IN VATICAN COUNCIL II IGNORED AT THE ANGELICUM
These following four points in philosophy must also be clear for you. Then you can detect the error in the passages of Vatican Council II especially if you are a student at the Angelicum.
1.From the philosophical point of view a catechumen desires to receive the baptism of water but he dies before he can receive it.This is a hypothetical case for us?
My answer is YES.It is a hypothetical case.
It would be hypothetical for us and known only to God.
2.So if someone at the Angelicum says that this case of the catechumen is physically visible in 2017 and personally known to us then this would be false reasoning.? My answer is YES.
3.Would it violate the Principle of Non Contradiction if someone said this case was visible in the present times, and was personally known?
My answer Yes.
Since it is being assumed that something invisible is visible.It is being inferred that someone who does not exist is there on earth and known, someone who is not concrete and tangible it is assumed to be defacto and real in present time and space.
4.Similarly this case of a catechumen in the past too would be hypothetical for the people of that time, since it cannot be physically visible and known in personal cases?
My answer is YES.No could have physically seen this catechumen saved, in Heaven or on earth.

Once this concept is clear for you then you can analyse the errors in the text of Vatican Council II. There are many of them.
Image result for Photo John Paul II Center for Interreligious Dialogue logo
FALSEHOOD AND DECEPTION AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ST.THOMAS ACQUINAS, ROMEVatican Council II is  riddled with this philosophical error.The norm was to assume invisible cases are visible. This then became the basis of the new theology, the Ratzinger-Rahner New Theology.This is the falshood, the deception being taught at the Angelicum by those who offer Holy Mass there and attend day long Eucharist Adoration in the chapel.-Lionel Andrades

 March 19, 2017

Rapid Response Team needed at the Angelicum University : unethical academics teach factual and objective errors 

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/rapid-response-team-needed-at-angelicum.html

March 20, 2017
VATICAN STOP THE DECEPTION AT THE ANGELICUM UNIVERSITY
December 15, 2016

UNPRECEDENTED!PHILOSOPHICAL MISTAKES DISCOVERED IN VATICAN COUNCIL II

DECEMBER 14, 2016
Catholic professors in Rome now tell lies : pontifical universities don't want to be quoted on a philosophical subject
DECEMBER 13, 2016
Traditionalists too unaware of major philosophical mistake : many errors in Vatican Council II

DECEMBER 13, 2016

Too many mistakes in Vatican Council II

DECEMBER 12, 2016
Vatican Council II riddled with philosphical error : two popes in principle support objective error in text http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/12/vatican-council-ii-riddled-with.html

 DECEMBER 11, 2016
The source of the present Arian-like heresy throughout the Church today is due to the following points http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/12/the-source-of-present-arian-like-heresy_11.html
DECEMBER 10, 2016
The present magisterium has made a major philosophical mistake
DECEMBER 11, 2016
Priest confirms philosophical error : Lefebvre excommunication a mistake
 DECEMBER 10, 2016
Scholars supporting four cardinals in major philosophical mistake
DECEMBER 1, 2016
There is a mistake in Vatican Council II and once the error is identified and avoided, the interpretation of the Council radically changes.There is no 'spirit of Vatican Council II ' excuse anymore
NOVEMBER 29, 2016
So it is only by using an irrationality that the present magisterium can re-interpret magisterial documents and say Vatican Council II indicates all Jews and Muslims in Italy do not need to convert into the Catholic Church in 2016
 NOVEMBER 28, 2016
Yet it is with this reasoning that cardinals Ratzinger,Kasper and other liberals interpret Vatican Council II. They use an irrational premise to create a non traditional and heretical conclusion.They with their executive power in the Vatican, they call it magisterial

NOVEMBER 23, 2016

The Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate have set a precedent for all religious communities.They have announced that they accept Vatican Council II without Rahnerian theology.This is extra ordinary. Since they are not denying the Council and neither are they denying Tradition

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/the-franciscan-sisters-of-immaculate.html
NOVEMBER 21, 2016  Can the SSPX accept Vatican Council II like the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate to get canonical status ? : No one tells the pope that he is interpreting Vatican Council II with bad philosophy and bad theology which has now been exposed http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/can-sspx-accept-vatican-council-ii-like.html
NOVEMBER 20, 2016
When we get rid of the Rahnerian theology to interpret Vatican Council II then Catholics in general can know the importance of the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation : Feast of Christ the King
NOVEMBER 14, 2016
Don Francesco Riscossa has made an objective error. Lumen Gentium 8 refers to a hypothetical case and so it is not relevant or an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which he has cited in part one of the conference.
NOVEMBER 13, 2016
Don Allessandro Minutella does not deny it : there is no theology in Vatican Council II to contradict the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and an ecumenism of return, Vatican Council II is in accord with the Lefbrists and 'integralists' whom he criticizes in the video
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/frlessandro-minutella-does-not-deny-it.html 
NOVEMBER 8, 2016Today the magisterium wants the SSPX to affirm Vatican Council II with hypothetical cases being objective in the present times and they are not doing so.Neither would I.http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/today-magisterium-wants-sspx-to-affirm.html 
NOVEMBER 8, 2016Once we avoid the new theology, with the irrational premise then the conclusion is traditional. We have the old ecclesiology and upon it we base the teaching on religious liberty, ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/once-we-avoid-new-theology-with.html
 NOVEMBER 8, 2016 Once you have identified the new theology and avoided it,it is possible to view Vatican Council II in the light of Tradition. We would be back to the old ecclesiology at any Mass http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/once-you-have-identified-new-theology.html 
NOVEMBER 7, 2016 Pope Benedict XVI was promoting the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/pope-benedict-xvi-was-promoting.html 
DECEMBER 13, 2016 PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS FOR A PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY : ASK HIM ABOUT MISTAKES IN VATICAN COUNCIL II   


MARCH 17, 2017

The practical result now is that Vatican Council II can be interpreted as a rupture or a continuity with the past, depending upon the use of the irrational premise; invisible cases are visible or not visible in 2017

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/the-practical-result-now-is-that.html

_________________________________