Friday, July 21, 2017

[Punishment In Hell] Adulterers In Hell video

[Punishment In Hell] Adulterers In Hell



There is no way to enter Heaven but the Eucharist.There is no way to enter Heaven but the Eucharist.This is why the Devil hates Catholics.- Gloria Polo


There is no way to enter Heaven but the Eucharist.There is no way to enter Heaven but the Eucharist.This is why the Devil hates Catholics.There is no way to enter Heaven but the body and blood of Christ- Gloria Polo(36:00)


Powerful Testimony Near Death Experience of Dr Gloria Polo.

At none of Our Lady's apparitions has she said that Vatican Council II can be interpreted without the irrational premise -but it can re interpreted

Image result for Photo of Sr.Lucy
In her Letters to relatives in 1969 and after, Sr. Lucia mentions the diabolical disorientation in the world.1 She mentions 'the disorientation of the times' .But Out Lady does not mention 'false doctrines' in Vatican Council II created with an irrational premise and which can be avoided today. 'The devil has deceived souls and now there are 'blind men leading blind men', says Suzanne Pearson quoting Sr. Lucia.



Let us review the two column approach here before I get to the point I want to make.

Would you interpret Vatican Council II with the right hand side or left hand side column? 


LEFT HAND SIDE COLUMN - RIGHT HAND SIDE COLUMN

All salvation referred to in Vatican Council II i.e saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16), imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3),seeds of the Word (AG 11), good and holy things in other religions (NA 2) etc are either:
implicit                        or  explicit for us.
hypothetical               or   known in reality.
invisible                      or   visible in the flesh.
dejure ( in principle)  or   defacto ( in fact ).
subjective                  or   objective
So one can choose from the left hand side or the right hand side column.
 n.


If the right hand side column is chosen then Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors and Tradition in general on other religions and Christian communities and churches. There are known exceptions in 2017 to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. The dead- saved are 'visible'.
If the left hand side column is chosen then Vatican Council II does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus, nor Tradition on other religions and Christian communities and churches.
Most people interpret Vatican Council II with the right hand side values.
So the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance was never ever an exception to the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney, unless one is using the right hand side column.There were and are no known exceptions.

_____________________________________

After 1965 Vatican Council II was being interpreted with the right hand side column, the irrational column.The mainstream media and Catholic liberals like Fr. Hans Kung s.j used the irrational column. Since this irrationality was the norm in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 in the Fr. Leonard Feeney case.The 'dogma of the faith' was changed and lost.
After 1965 they could have chosen to interpret Vatican Council II with the blue columm but this did not happen.
At none of the apparitions of Our Lady was she able to explain this problem and its solution to any of the seers.The right hand side column results in 'false doctrines' a disorientation in the Church and blind men leading blind men.
Image result for Photo Fr. Stefano Gobbi of the Marian Movement of Priests
Why did Our Lady not tell the seers about this aspect of Vatican Council II. Was it because the new theology was false but also complicated.It would have been complicated to explain it to the young seers.Then it was being supported by the magisterium,popes and cardinals, but also traditionalists and conservative Catholics.How could she explain the error to all of them? I am aware how even now how hard it is for them to accept what I write.  Cardinal Ottaviani and Archbishop Lefebvre were interpreting Vatican Council II with the right hand column.  Pope John XXIII and Pope Paul VI made the same mistake. This was a mistake of the 'upper hierarchy of the Church' too which Suzanna Pearson refers to.Even Padre Pio does not talk about it.
Image result for Photo Fr. Stefano Gobbi of the Marian Movement of Priests
I have been writing on this issue for over 20 years,initially through e-mails and letters and then through my blog and the internet.It is clear that what I write about is not popular. Neither the lay Catholics or the ecclesiastics want to accept it.There is a diabolical disorientation.
Cardinal Ratzinger
Cardinal Ratzinger supported the error.Intentionally or unintentionally in March 2016 he did not correct the mistake.Instead he supported the mistake in public and he was the spokesman for the Third Secret at Fatima.
The dogma of the faith will be lost except in Fatima. John Salza agrees that the dogma of the faith refers to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This is our private opinion.Salza has written a book and many articles and has given talks.Yet he finds it difficult to accept what I write.It is hard for him to accept that every one, popes, cardinals, apologists and hundreds of thousands of people were wrong and that I am correct. Also even if I was correct why did not any one mention this before, he wonders like many others.He could say,'not even Our Lady'.
Malachi Martin and Fr. Nicholas Gruner did not know, like John Salza, that Vatican Council II could have been interpreted with the blue column.Now that Chris Ferrara, Michael Matt and John Salza know about it they still have nothing to say.A few years have passed.
The error had come into the Church officially with the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office ,Pope John XIII and Pope Pius XII overlooked the error.Even Pope John Paul II interpreted Vatican Council II with the red hand column and did not seem aware of the alternative choice.
Image result for Photo Fr. Stefano Gobbi of the Marian Movement of Priests
Our Lady did not explain this issue in detail to also Fr. Stefano Gobbi of the Marian Movement of Priests.
Here are the two columns again.

COLUMN A or COLUMN  B
All salvation referred to in Vatican Council II i.e being saved with the seeds of the Word (AG 11), invincible ignorance (LG 16), imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3), good and holy things in other religions (NA 2) can be interpreted with COLUMN A or COLUMN B



COLUMN A
Implicit or us.
hypothetical for us.
invisible.
dejure (in principle).
subjective.
COLUMN B
explicit for us.
known in reality.
visible in the flesh.
defacto (in fact).
objective.
If COLUMN B is chosen then Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors and Tradition.There are known exceptions. The dead-saved are visible. This is an irrational and common interpretation of Vatican Council II.

If COLUMN A is chosen in the interpretation then Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Tradition.The Catholic Church's teaching on other religions and Christians communities and churches is the same before and after Vatican Council II.2

Our Lady did not mention this issue since it was too complicated to explain.It was hard for many to understand it. Then popes and cardinals do not welcome the conclusion. Neither do the lay people welcome it as if there is a diabolical disorientation in the Church.
-Lionel Andrades






1.
Fatima and the Diabolical Disorientation July 15, 2017 http://isoc.ws/

2.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/04/cardinal-luiz-ladaria-sj-and-pope.html




______________________________


JULY 21, 2017

At ISOC Suzanne Pearson and Judith Sharpe are unaware of Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) : Malachi Martin and Nicholas Gruner were also using the irrational premise http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/07/at-isoc-suzanne-pearson-and-judith.html


July 20, 2017


Fr.Nicholas Gruner and John Vennari did not know

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/07/frnicholas-gruner-and-john-vennari-did_20.html




July 20, 2017

Did Pope Benedict intentionally not tell Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre that Vatican Council II was not a rupture with the strict interpretation of EENS ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/07/did-pope-benedict-intentionally-not_20.html


July 20, 2017

It was the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing who was in heresy and not Fr.Leonard Feeney

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/07/it-was-archbishop-of-boston-cardinal_20.html

____________________________________________________________________________________________________



July 8, 2014

There are Catholic religious and lay persons who use the the left hand side column in the interpretation of magisterial text
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/there-are-catholic-religious-and-lay.html#links


JULY 11, 2014

Lay Catholics,including bloggers still do not realize that Vatican Council II can be interpreted with the blue or red column

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/07/lay-catholicsincluding-bloggers-still.html

At ISOC Suzanne Pearson and Judith Sharpe are unaware of Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) : Malachi Martin and Nicholas Gruner were also using the irrational premise

'In the Spirit of Chartres Committe Inc,(ISOC) has also got it wrong on Vatican Council II. Suzanne Pearson and Judith Sharpe in an interesting discussion 1 are not aware that there is a Vatican Council II Cushingite and a Vatican Council II Feeneyite.
When Our Lady said at Fatima that 'the dogma of the faith will be lost' it is really lost on both of them.Since they both interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).
That Vatican Council II can be interpreted without the irrational premise and the conclusion is different, from the familiar one, was not known to Malachi Martin or Fr. Nicholas Gruner.
If Suzanne Pearson and Judith Sharpe choose to interpret Vatican Council II with all hypothetical cases being just hypothetical, then the Council is not a rupture with the dogma of the faith.Presently Dr.E.Michael Jones and Dr.Robert Sungenis mentioned on ISOC website are using a false premise to interpret the Council.They are doing so innocently but it does reflect the general 'diabolical disorientation' in the Catholic Church.-Lionel Andrades
what-we-have-lost
1.
Fatima and the Diabolical Disorientation
July 15, 2017
isoc.ws

July 20, 2017

Fr.Nicholas Gruner and John Vennari did not know
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/07/frnicholas-gruner-and-john-vennari-did_20.html

July 20, 2017
Did Pope Benedict intentionally not tell Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre that Vatican Council II was not a rupture with the strict interpretation of EENS ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/07/did-pope-benedict-intentionally-not_20.html

July 20, 2017
It was the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing who was in heresy and not Fr.Leonard Feeney
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/07/it-was-archbishop-of-boston-cardinal_20.html

Chartres pilgrims do not know about Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) : Cardinal Burke will not tell them about it

Image result for Photo of Chartres Pilgrimage
In a previous post I mentioned that Fr.Nicholas Gruner did not know about Vatican Council II (Feeneyite). He did not know that with Vatican Council II( Feeneyite) the Council supported the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the Syllabus of Errors.

Similarly Chris Ferrara when he wrote his book The Great Facade he did not know that by switiching the interpretation of the baptism of desire(BOD) for example, you can get a completely different interpretation of EENS. BOD can be interpreted as being visible or invisible, explicit or implicit and the interpretation of the Council is one of continuity or rupture with the past magisterium.
Similarly when Ralph Martin wrote his books on evangelisation and salvation he did not know that Vatican Council II was Feeneyite and that his interpretation of the Council was irrational and Cushingite.
Image result for Photo of Chartres PilgrimageImage result for Photo of Chartres PilgrimageImage result for Photo of Chartres Pilgrimage
It means all these 50 years every one had the wrong interpretation of Vatican Council II.They were using the irrational premise. They assumed invisible for us baptism of desire was explicit. They also concluded that BOD excluded the baptism of water in the Church.So BOD and invincible ignorance (I.I),in LG 16, AG 7, LG 14 etc were explicit exceptions to Tradition for them. They wrongly placed the fault on Vatican Council II when the fault was really their premise, visible or invisible BOD and I.I.
Similarly those who attend the Chartres pilgrimage annually would be in general rejecting Vatican Council II and would not know of Vatican Council II( Feeneyite).
Cardinal Raymond Burke if he does know about Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) will he affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted by the missionaries of the 16th century? Is he going to say that he was wrong about the Council which really is in harmony with EENS ( Feeneyite)? Will he say that there are no known exceptions to EENS (Feeneyite) mentioned in the text of Vatican Council II ?
Can all those who attend the Chartres Pilgrimage say this?
It has been difficult all these years for the St. Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the supporters of the St.Benedict Centers who are there at Chartres. It has been difficult for Michael Matt.
Prof.Joseph Shaw who teaches at Oxford University will affirm that all non Catholics in 2017 are on the way to Hell according to Vatican Council II (Feeneyite)?
Is he going to tell Una Voce and Ecclesia Dei that Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) is not a rupture with the dogma EENS as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century and so Pope Benedict XVI made a mistake with his announcement in March 2016 (Avvenire)?
It is easier to criticize Vatican Council II without making the distinction between Vatican Council II, Cushingite and Feeneyite.It is not so easy to affirm Vatican Council II, Feeneyite because of the persecution which will follow from the Left.
After so many of these reports on the Internet over the last few years on Vatican Council II(Feeneyite) Rorate Caeili, the other day, posted another re-hashed version of a Vatican Council II analysis interpreted with Cushingism. They were loyal to Pope Benedict, Pope Francis, the liberals and the Left. But what if they posted a report in support of Vatican Council II (Feeneyite)? The phone calls
would ring and Rorate Caeili would be threathened. So at Rorate Caeili they act as if they do not understand any other interpretation of the Council, other then the one approved for them and the Church, by the Left.
This is also the general understanding at the Chartres Pilgrimage.Do you think that Chris Ferrara and Michael Matt will be comfortable affirming Vatican Council II and EENS Feeneyite? Do you think Bishop Sanborn who has a seminary in Florida and meets the state and academic requirements will announce that Vatican Council II (AG 7) says all Jews, Muslims, Protestants are on the way to Hell without 'faith and baptism'? Will he say that
Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) is not a rupture with EENS ( Feeneyite) which has the same message?
Will he ? It is much easier, safer and prudent to criticize Vatican Council IIin order to make a living or live comfortable in the USA and Europe.
So simply offering the Traditional Latin Mass at Chartres is meaningless in the sense that the ecclesiology of the Mass supports EENS and Vatican Council II ( Cushingite). Summorum Pontificum was offered with the condition that the theology would be based on invisible baptism of desire being a visible exceptions to the dogma EENS( Feeneyite).Nothing new. Same old heresy.
Archbishop Lefebvre was excommunicated since he could not accept Vatican Council II (Cushingism). No one told him about Vatican Council II (Feeneyite).The SSPX General Chapter Doctrinal Statement of 2012 was rejected by the CDF and Ecclesia Dei since it affirmed EENS and Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) in an indirect way. It said every one needs to enter the Church for salvation and there are no possibilities of salvation outside the Church.
It is easy to attend the Old Mass at Chartres and it can be enjoyable walking but when you come back home it is not so easy to affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and EENS ( Feeneyite)
.-Lionel Andrades