Wednesday, March 21, 2018

Like Vatican Council II, the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 can be interpreted with the for and against EENS method or the for and neutral to EENS method , with or without the Ladaria Error, with or without the false premise and the conclusion will be different.

Like Vatican Council II, the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston can be interpreted with the for and against EENS method or the for and neutral to EENS method , with the Ladaria Error or without it, with the false premise or without it.The conclusion would be different.





So when the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) is mentioned in the Letter(1949) there are two ways to interpret it.1) We can assume that they refer to hypothetical cases known only to God or 2) we can infer, as is commonly done, that it refers to known people saved outside the Church, saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.Or we can assume that we humans can know of people who will be saved outside the Church, without Catholic faith and the baptism of water.
We can assume that they refer to invisible people in 2018 and this would be the obvious choice or we can wrongly assume that they refer to visible people in 2018. Either way our conclusion would be different since the premise is different.

The Holy Office 1949 during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII chose the irrational option. It assumed that BOD, BOB and I.I referred to known people saved outside the Church, in other words, there were personally known people saved in 1949 without the baptism of water.So BOD, BOB and I.I became an exception to Feeneyite EENS.
Similarly at Vatican Council II , Lumen Gentium 16( invincible ignorance), Lumen Gentium 14( case of the catechumen) etc is read by the Magisterium today as exceptions to traditional, Feeneyite EENS.
Image result for photos of  ecclesiam nulla salus
So on March 1,2018 Cardinal Luiz Ladaria at the Press Conference on Placuit Deo in answer to a question, said Lumen Gentium 8 was an exception to the old exclusivist understanding of salvation.
This indicates that he interprets the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and Vatican Council II with the for and against EENS method, with the false premise and with the Ladaria Error.





Image result for photos of  ecclesiam nulla salus
So the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 heretically said that it was not necessary that everyone be a member of the Catholic Church for salvation, while the dogma EENS defined by three Church Councils says, it is necessary.
The Letter of the Holy Office was an innovation in the Church with  a new theology(outside the Church there is salvation) based on an irrational philosophical premise(invisible people are visible in the present times).It was accepted by the Magisteriium of the Church.-Lionel Andrades

Related image

Image result for Photos of outside the Church there is no salvation

Image result for Photos of outside the Church there is no salvation











Image result for photos of  ecclesiam nulla salus

Yeshua Appears To Jewish Rabbi & Shakes His Entire World!


https://www.messiahofisraelministries.org/zevs-story.html

The Church supports the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This is official. There are no known exceptions to EENS mentioned in Vatican Council II


  1. Comments:
  2. The official teaching of the Magisterium in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. 
  3. VI. THE NECESSITY OF BAPTISM

    1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.60 He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.61 Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament.62 The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.-Catechism of the Catholic Church.


    Lionel: The Church is saying all Jews and other non Christians are on the way to Hell without the baptism of water.
    The Church is saying theoretically God is not bound to the Sacraments.In principle God can do what he wants being God.However defacto, in real life, everyone with no known exceptions needs to enter the Church with the baptism of water.No baptism no salvation.
    The baptism of water is given to adults with faith. So Vatican Council II says all need faith and baptism for salvation.(Ad Gentes 7).
    So
    the Church supports the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This is official.
  4. ____________________________________________________
  5. The Church recognizes that God does not condemn those who are innocently ignorant of the truth about his offer of salvation. Regarding the doctrine in question, the Catechism of the Catholic Church (quoting Vatican II document Lumen Gentium, 16) states:
    This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation. (CCC 847)
    Vatican II document Gaudium Et Spes teaches similarly on the possibility of salvation:

    All this holds true not only for Christians, but for all men of good will in whose hearts grace works in an unseen way. For, since Christ died for all men, and since the ultimate vocation of man is in fact one, and divine, we ought to believe that the Holy Spirit in a manner known only to God offers to every man the possibility of being associated with this paschal mystery. (Gaudium et Spes 22)
  6. Lionel:Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door. -Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II.
  7. _____________________________

    The Church recognizes that God does not condemn those who are innocently ignorant of the truth about his offer of salvation.
    Lionel: This is not a reference to an exception to Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II. We cannot know any one in 2018 who is 'innocently ignorant of the truth' in 2018 and is saved.
    _______________

    This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own...they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation. (CCC 847)


    Lionel. This is a reference to a hypothetical case. It is not a reference to someone in particular known to be saved in invincible ignorance.So it is not relevant or an exception to the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.
    So it is not an official negation.
    _________________________

    Vatican II document Gaudium Et Spes teaches similarly on the possibility of salvation:

    Lionel: A possibility is a hypothetical case. It can only be accepted as such. It must not be mistaken as being a known person saved as such.
    So GS 22, like LG 8 ,LG 16,UR 3, NS 2 etc are not exceptions to EENS as it was known to the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century.

    __________________

    All this holds true not only for Christians, but for all men of good will...the Holy Spirit in a manner known only to God offers to every man the possibility of being associated with this paschal mystery. (Gaudium et Spes 22)
    Lionel:. Again, this is a reference to a hypothetical case a possibility known only to God. Possibilities are not real people.
    So officially there are no known exceptions to EENS.There are none mentioned in Vatican Council II..
    -Lionel Andrades

Liberals cannot any more cite the Council they are bankrupt


Vatican Council II is in harmomy with the traditional teachings of the Church interpreted without the Ladaria Error. The liberal reading of Vatican Council II with the for and against EENS method instead of the for and neutral to EENS method, is now obsolete. Without the irrationality, the false premise, which comes with the for and against EENS method of reading Vatican Councl II, the liberals cannot any more cite the Council.It is they who are bankrupt.-Lionel Andrades





































Medjugorje secrets





Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate must announce immediately that they affirm Vatican Council II without the Ladaria Error and in harmony with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church and the Syllabus of Errors.

The Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate must announce immediately that they affirm Vatican Council II without the Ladaria Error and in harmony with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church and the Syllabus of Errors.
In this way Vatican Council II is no more an issue and they remove  the confusion created by Cardinal Braz de Avez.He wants them to accept Vatican Council II with the Ladaria Error.In this way the Council becomes a rupture with the Church's teaching over the centuries, that, it has the superiority and exclusiveness in salvation.
The Franciscans of the Immaculate have already announced that they accept Vatican Council II but they do not interpret it with Rahnerian theology and the common interpretations in the local media in Italy.
But this announcement was not enough for Cardinal Braz de Avez.
He announced once again that the Franciscans of the Immaculate must affirm Vatican Council II.
So the Sisters must not go on the defensive.They instead must ask the two popes and Cardinal Avez to affirm Vatican Council II, like they do, without the Ladaria Error.
Tell the cardinals to interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I),as referring to invisible and not visible people in 2018.This changes the interpretation of the Council.BOD, BOB and I.I can only be hypothetical and theoretical. We cannot meet any one in Rome, who has been saved or will be saved with BOD, BOB and I.I and without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
So when popes and saints referred to BOD, BOB and I.I they were mentioning hypothetical cases.They could not be exceptions to Feeneyite EENS, traditional EENS.Mystici Corporis, the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X and the Catechism of the Catholic Church never ever were exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
This is an important point to note.
Since Fr. Stefano Mannelli F.I one of the founders of the community also made a mistake on this point.He had a book, written by Fr. William Most, translated into Italian and which was sold at F.I centres.The apologetics of Fr. William Most were good,but he interpreted BOD,BOB and I.I as being non hypothetical and referring to known people saved outside the Church.This was also the mistake of Mons. Brunero Gherardino, the SSPX bishops, Roberto dei Mattei,Corrado Gnerre and others who have influenced the Sisters.
This is also the mistake of Cardinal Braz de Avez.
This 'mistake' is approved by the Left. They do not give the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) permission to affirm the old ecclesiology and EENS. So the CDF says Vatican Council II, interpreted with hypothetical cases not being hypothetical, are examples of salvation outside the Church.They are alleged exceptions to the old ecclesiology of the Church.This is objectively false.It is a factual error which Cardinal Luiz Ladaria made on March 1,2018  at the Press Conference on Placuit Deo when he was asked a question by a lady journalist from AP.

The Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate must end the confusion on Vatican Council II being a rupture with Tradition.It is not. They need to show the Vatican Curia that Vatican Council II is not a rupture with Tradition, it cannot be a rupture, and that the Sisters affirm the Council, interpreted rationally.So they would expect the CDF to do the same, and so end the doctrinal confusion created and maintained in the Church by the Magisterium.
The issue is no more Vatican Council II but Vatican Council II with or without the premise, with or without the Ladaria Error.
Understanding this can resolve the artificial doctrinal confusion created in the Church.This is the solution to this issue.
The Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate must not be defensive on the issue of Vatican Council II because of the doctrinal error made by Fr. Stefano Mannelli,Fr. Settimo Manneli, Fr. Francesco Giordano and others.This is also the error of the priests of the Franciscans of the Immaculate who offer Mass in only Italian at Boccea, Rome and are approved by Pope Francis.Fr. Rosario, the Superior and Rector at the Seminary, Fr. John Francesco, Religious Formator at the Formation House in Cassino,Italy and Fr. Giuseppe Giorni, the Parish Priest at Santa Maria di Nazareth, also interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise( BOD is visible and not invisible, hypothetical cases are non hypothetical) and they do not deny this.This is a common theological and doctrinal error with both groups of the Franciscans of the Immaculate.This error can be corrected.It is common among all religious communities in the Catholic Church.


None of the Franciscan priests after being informed are today are saying in public that  BOD,BOB and I.I refer to known people saved outside the Church in 2018.They agree with the obvious.They refer to personally unknown people. They need to say this in public. Neither do they say that LG 8, LG 14,LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to physically visible people in 2018, saved outside the Church; without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7).There are no such people. This is common sense.They know this.In public they are not affirming the Ladaria Error.


So Cardinal Braz de Avez must be shown how all Catholic religious communities, affirm Vatican Council II without the Ladaria Error.Since this is rational.An announcement has to be made by the religious commmunities.
-Lionel Andrades



MARCH 20, 2018



Why is Cardinal Braz de Avez imposing the Ladaria Error on the Franciscans of the Immaculate and the Mannelli Family ?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/03/why-is-cardinal-braz-de-avez-imposing.html