Tuesday, January 24, 2017

Catechism's philosophical subjectivism in morals is repeated in Amoris Laetitia.

Image result for photos of the catechism of the catholic churchPhilosophical subjectivism is there in the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1995).It is there in morals and salvation.So faith and morals have been changed by the Masons.
THREE CONDITIONS OF MORTAL SIN SUPERFLOUS
The Catechism mentions three conditions to determine a mortal sin.But they are not really conditions.Since they can only be known to God with reference to salvation.So they are irrelevant to judgeing mortal sin.They are not exceptions to the traditional teachings on morals and mortal sin.
Similarly on salvation, the Catechism mentions being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire, which really refer to invisible and unknown cases.So they are not relevant or exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
So there really is no change on the traditional teachings on morals and salvation in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, for me.
However with the present magisterium considering invisible cases as being visible( unlike me) we now don't just have morals and salvation.We now have 'moral theology' and 'salvation theology.' Since we have a new theology based on invisible cases being visible.Theoretical cases are now considered practical exceptions to the traditional teaching on faith( salvation) and morals.
Image result for pHOTOS OF aMORIS lAETITIASo this new theology on morals which is an innovation and is irrational has been placed in Amoris Laetitia, of course with the approval of the two liberal popes.
Amoris Laetitia suggests that a priest or bishop could know of a few cases, extraordinary cases of a couple who have divorced and remarried and who are not in mortal sin and who can be given the Eucharist.This can be judged!It can be subjectively known by a priest or bishop.The couple also can subjectively know it by following their individual conscience.
So the old 'fixed' objective teaching on morals and faith no more exists in Amoris Laetitia and the Catechism of the Catholic Church for those who can judge  conditions and exceptions, which would only be known to God.
What is interesting about the Catechism is that it can be interpreted in two ways.
If you consider the three conditions for mortal sin as objective,judgeable and manifest then the Catechism is a rupture with the old 'fixed' teachings on morals. There is a new moral theology. A mortal sin is not aways a mortal sin.
If you consider the three conditions as subjective,non judgeable and invisible for us human beings, then the Catechism is not a rupture with the traditional teachings on morals. It is irrelevant to mortal sin. A mortal sin is always a mortal sin and the outward action indicates the subjective state of sin(Veritatis Splendor).
Similarly if you consider CCC 846( Outside the Church No Salvation) as referring to known cases of the baoptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, then the Catechism is a rupture with the centuries old interpretation of the dogma EENS. Since there are exceptions and so every one does not need to be incorporated into the Church for salvation.This was said boldly and heretically in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
If you consider them as being hypothetical, theoretical and invisible for us human beings then the Catechism(846) is not a rupture with the dogma WEENS according to the 16th century missionaries.It does not contradict St. Francis Xavier and St. Ignatius of Loyola.
This same reasoning can be used with CCC 1257 on the necessity of the baptism of water for all for salvation.
If there are personally known cases of people saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, since God is not limited to the Sacraments, then the Catechism is a rupture with the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS.There is an exception.
If you consider being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire(without the baptism of water) or because God is not limited to the Sacraments, as referring to hypothetical, speculative and personally unknown cases in our reality in 2017,then the Catechism is not a rupture with the dogma EENS.
Then CCC 846 and 1257 support the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma EENS.There can be no known exceptions to the dogma.
This is why I often affirm Feeneyite EENS and use CCC 846 and 1257 as a supporting reference.
For many readers all this could be new and hard to believe.'It could not be all that simple '' they ask.'Why didn't someone mention this before?'.
Yet the proof is there before our very eyes.We can check it out.
Cardinal Ratzinger and Schonborn assumed  what is invisible is visible, since this was the reasoning in Vatican Council II(1965) and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.There was no correction or clarification in the Catechism which they approved.
Now if you consider what is invisible as just being invisible you neutralize their error and have a hermeneutic of continuity.The same approach can be used with Vatican Council II.
 We have to be aware of the new philosophical subjectivism in faith and morals.The same subjectivism is there in Pope Francis' Amoris Laetitia.
The Catechism should not have mentioned the three conditions of mortal sin nor being saved in invincible ignorance the baptism of desire.
In the past they(three conditions/invincible ignorance etc) have been referred to by popes and catechisms in answer to questions from persons, who were a part of a long campaign, by enemies of the Church, to change the basic teachings of the Catholic Church.
They succeeded with philosophical subjectivism.
-Lionel Andrades
 
 
January 23, 2017
dubia-brothers

La Stampa still trying to white wash the error of Amoris Laetitia http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/la-stampa-still-trying-to-white-wash.html





January 23, 2017
Bloggers are not discussing the real issue in the Rockford diocese http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/bloggers-are-not-discussing-real-issue.html



January 21, 2017
Image result for Photos Cardinal Muller
By now the CDF should have been able to accept that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II and one has the hermeneutic of continuity and the other does not. http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/by-now-cdf-should-have-been-able-to.html
 
 
 
January 21, 2017
All non Catholic immigrants in Rome, Italy are on the way to Hell unless they convert into the Catholic Church: this is Catholic teaching according to Lega Nord?

Monday, January 23, 2017

La Stampa still trying to white wash the error of Amoris Laetitia

La Stampa has posted an editorial Amoris Laetitia: Where Truth and Mercy Embrace 1 justifying 'philosophical subjectivism' and playing God.The writer tries to answer the questions of the four cardinals in the dubbia.
dubia-brothers
Philosophical subjectivism is common in the Catholic Church after the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston was issued and not corrected.It suggests that we can subjectively identify non Catholics saved  without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.It considered the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as not being theoretical and hypothetical.Instead ,it postulated them as being practical exceptions to the Feeneyite and traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.For the cardinals in Rome and Boston in 1949 the Letter referred to defacto and known cases of a catechumen who desired the baptism of water and died before receiving it and is now in Heaven.
So with this irrational subjectivism in salvation theology for the ideological magisterium, we now have subjectivism in moral theology being taught at pontifical universities.This moral subjectivism,is the norm.
An extraordinary case is mentioned by moral theologians Fr.Curran and Fr.Harding and they judge that this theoretical and unknown person has been saved, or will be saved and is an exception to the traditional teaching on mortal sin.Then they insist, they judge,that we cannot judge moral cases in general according to the traditional teachings of the Church.
This is the error of Amoris Laetitia and which La Stampa is still trying to white wash.The editorial like Amoris Laetitia assumes we can judge exceptions to the general moral teachings of the Church and so there are exceptions to the norm given by Bible and interpreted by the popes and Tradition.This is the new moral theology of Pope Benedict and Pope Francis.
It directly contradicts Ecclesia di Eucharestia and Veritatis Splendor of Pope John Paul II and Catholic Tradition in general.
This new faith ( salvation) and moral theology is the work of the Devil,through the usual Leftist sources and especially the Synagogue of Satan.They control the mainstream media.Catholics are given this false narrative on morals, supported by the present ideological magisterium of the Catholic Church.
La Stampa cites Vatican Council II.The writer is unable to see that there are many errors in the Council based on philosophical subjectivism.The wrong inference is that LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc are practical exceptions, known to us human beings, to the dogma EENS.
Since there is a change in the exclusivist ecclesiocentrism of the past, Cardinal Walter Kasper in an interview before the Synod, said there could be changes in other areas of Church teaching and that the Eucharist could be given to the divorced and remarried.
He meant if no one objects to the philosophical subjectivism in Vatican Council II and the 1949 Letter then why object to it in moral theology.
The editorial in La Stampa too agrees.For them a Confessor would be able to detect exceptions to the general moral teaching and these exceptions would be the new general rule in Catholic moral theology.The Maltese and German bishops have confirmed.This is the new norm and it has been supported by L'Osservatore Romano and the one world religion people.
Praxis and doctrine has been changed and they do not consider it heresy.They do not say that Pope Francis is supporting heresy.
There is a new doctrine in faith(salvation) and morals, based on subjectively being able to know practical exceptions  to the general rule . This is enforced pastorally and now it has been legitimized, made official, by Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia.
It is a rejection of the Church's teachings on mortal sin, the Eucharist and the sanctity of marriage.-Lionel Andrades

1

https://mobile.twitter.com/EdwardPentin/status/823277663246843905?p=v

Bloggers are not discussing the real issue in the Rockford diocese


None of the traditionalists bloggers are concerned that the Most Rev. David J. Malloy the Bishop of Rockford is not permitting priests to offer the Traditional Latin Mass and affirm in public the old ecclesiology associated with this Mass.None of them are saying that the priest should be able to say that outside the Church there is no salvation since this was how Mass was offered over the centuries.
None of them are saying that Vatican Council II must be interpreted with Feeneyism and in harmony with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known and offered by the priests in the 16th century.
None of them are saying that Lumen Gentium 16(invincible ignorance), Lumen Gentium 14( catechist with the desire for the baptism) refer to invisible, hypothetical and theoretical cases. So they are not exceptions to all needing to be incorporated into the Church as members in 2017 to avoid the fires of Hell.

Zero cases of something are not exceptions to the dogma EENS says the apologist John Martignoni.
None of them are saying that Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) is in harmony with extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Feeneyite) and so there is no change in ecclesiology of the Catholic Church before and after Vatican Council II.
Instead like the Bishop of Rockford and Pope Francis they have accepted an extra ecclesiam nulla salus in which invisible cases are supposed to be known exceptions to all needing to be incorporated into the Church for salvaton.
Like the liberals and the Masons the traditionalists have accepted that Vatican Council II is break with Tradition and in particular the dogma EENS , since LG 16, LG 14,LG 8 refer to visible and personally known cases in 2017 saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
They like to refer to themself as traditionalists and criticize 'those modernists' when they themself  approve of the standard modernism of the liberals like EENS ( Cushngite) and Vatican Council(Cushingit).They interpret all magisterial documents using an irrational premise to create an innovated and non traditional conclusion.
When writing about the Rockford issue these points are not mentioned by Fr.John Zuhlsdord, Joseph Shaw ,New Catholic at Rorate Caeili and others.
Since in their personal life and on their media they would not like to affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Feeneyite) and Vatican Council II(Feeneyite).
So with this silence EENS (Cushingite) and Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) is not an issue with the Rockford diocese Bishop and priests.

For the priests of the Institute of Christ the King the baptism of desire is an explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This is Cushingism.
For these traditionalist priests Vatican Council II,LG 16 etc refers to explicit cases objectively seen in 2017.This again is Cushingism.It is also fantasy theology.
It is a deception and a lie.It is worldly prudency, syncretism and indifferentism.It is faking it to maintain the peace and their status quo.
They know that if they say that the baptism of desire is always invisible for us and never was an exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS, then Bishop Malloy would not give them permission to offer the Latin Mass.Since this would be Feeneyism. It would be rational and Catholic.
They know that if they had said in public that Vatican Council II(LG 16 etc) does not contradict the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS since invisible cases cannot be exceptions, they would not be allowed to offer Holy Mass.Even though they would be traditional and non heretical.
So the bloggers also maintain this silence and protect their reputation and status quo.
-Lionel Andrades



January 22, 2017

Catholic bishops and priests affirm the old ecclesiology in public,do not use the irrational premise, then we have the Mass of the Ages, the Traditional Latin Mass

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/when-catholic-bishops-and-priests-agree.html

Sunday, January 22, 2017

Catholic bishops and priests affirm the old ecclesiology in public,do not use the irrational premise, then we have the Mass of the Ages, the Traditional Latin Mass


ECCLESIOLOGY ALSO A CONDITION AT ROCKFORD
The bishop of Rockford Illinois,USA allows the Traditional Latin Mass to be offered in his diocese.It can be offered with his permission only.Also the condition is that the priest's understanding of theology and ecclesiology, is the same as the priests who offer Holy Mass in English.He has to use an irrational premise to create an innovated conclusion which is a rupture with the ecclesiocentrism of the past.This is obligatory in the Latin, Byzantine, Greek and other Rites.Otherwise the Mass becomes ideological for Pope Francis.
The bishop does not object to  Mass being offered in Latin, since it is not really the Traditional Latin Mass of the centuries.The ecclesiology has been changed.
NEW ECCLESIOLOGY APPROVED BY TRADITIONALISTS
This change in ecclesiology is supported by the traditionalist priests and bloggers and also the Society of St Pius X.They do not object.Nor do they discuss this issue.
Though, many traditionalists do not have a clue as to how the ecclesiology of the Mass which they attend is not that of 'the Mass of the Ages.' For them subjectively, there may be no change.
It is the same for me. I attend Mass in different rites,subjectively, with the old ecclesiology.

MAGISTERIUM HERETICAL FOR IDEOLOGICAL REASONS
Most of the traditionalists who attend the alleged Traditional Latin Mass do not know that the present ecclesiology is heretical.The present magisterium will not tell this to them.The present magisterium is heretical on this issue for ideological reasons.
NO OBJECTIONS NOW FROM POPE FRANCIS
Pope Francis has said that he objects to 'the ideology of the Traditional Latin Mass and now there are are no objections from him. Since 'the ideology'(ecclesiology) of the Latin Mass (TLM) is that of the Left.It prohibits the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which is the foundation of the old ecclesiocentrism.
So the Bishop of Rockford approves the Latin Mass in his diocese as long as there is no priest who proclaims 'the old ideology', the old ecclesiology in his homilies or writings.This rule would apply also for a priest offering Mass in English.
It is the traditionalists bloggers, who attend/offer this Latin Mass with the new ecclesiology who have made a big thing about the Rockford issue.For them the vestments, rubrics and the ad orientem direction of the priest is important and it constitutes the Traditional Latin Mass even though the priest  believes in irrationality and heresy.


NEW THEOLOGY AT THE OLD MASS
Here is their new theology at the old Mass.
1.There is no more the ecclesiocentrism of the past since there are known cases of the baptism of desire in 2017, who are are physically visible exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).So the dogma EENS, like Pope Benedict has stated (March 2016), is no more like it was for the 16th century missionaries.It is no more like when the Traditional Latin Mass was offered in the 16th century.There is a rupture.
2.So the Latin Mass offered by the Institute of Christ the King Soverign Priest in Rockford or Rome, is not the Mass of the Ages. It's ecclesiology is clearly a rupture with the 16th century.So it is approved by Pope Francis as not being ideological and the bishop of Rockford gives it the green light.It is not traditional with an exclusivist ecclesiology.
3.This was the understanding of Summorum Pontificum. The Mass in the Extraordinary Form could be offered without the permission of the bishop as long as the priest supported the New Theology based on a false premise.The false premise is a major philosophical error in the Catholic Church, unknown to traditionalists.However if a priest offered Mass with the old ecclesiology and persisted even after being informed he could be suspended.
4.The FSSP, SSPX and sedevacantist priests ALL accept the New Theology.It posits there are known exceptions to the old ecclesiology based on the extra ecclesiam nulla salus, since there are known cases of non Catholics saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.

MECHANICS OF THE NEW THEOLOGY AT MASS
Since there are known cases of people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church and there are known cases of people on earth who will be saved without being members of the Catholic Church ( confirmed by Archbshop Di Noia in an interview with Edward Pentin for the NCR), the old ecclesiology is obsolete.
So Cardinal Ratzinger did not mention the dogma EENS in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. While in Redemptoris Missio he re-interpreted the old ecclesiocentrism with the Cushingite irrationality.Here are three examples.
LIBERAL THEOLOGIANS REINTERPRET DOCTRINE IN HISTORY
When the Catechism of Pope Pius X says all need to be incorporated into the Church as members for salvation, Cardinal Ratzinger and the liberal theologians, would refer to invincible ignorance being mentioned in that Catechism. For them invincible ignorance was a reference to a known, explicit, seen in the flesh case.It was interpreted as a concrete example of someone saved outside the visible -Church; saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
So when St.Thomas Aquinas mentioned the man in the forest in invincible ignorance who was saved after a preacher was sent to him the ideological spin would be added. The liberal theologians would say that the man in the forest referred to a known case, someone personally known who was saved without being a member of the Catholic Church.
So the Letter of the Holy Office criticized Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Centre for not accepting physically known and seen cases of the baptism of desire without the baptism of water.For the cardinals in Rome in 1949 there were non Catholics,saved in invincible ignorance and outside the Church, whose names and surnames were known to them.

WITH AN IRRATIONAL PREMISE CHANGE IN MASS OF ALL AGES
With this irrational premise they changed the ecclesiology of the Mass for All Ages and the traditionalists from the time of Archbishop Lefebvre,Michael Davies and Dietrich von Hildebrand have still not noticed it.
So they still call the Novus Ordo Latin Mass the Traditional Latin Mass and believe it is the same Mass as that offered by St.Francis Xavier and St.Robert Bellarimine and the 16th century Jesuit missionaries.
This is the problem.

SOLUTION FOR THE FUTURE
Traditionalists, and Catholics in general could ask the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and Ecclesia Dei to clarify the following,they themself can proclaim it on their blogs and websites.
1.Vatican Council II can be Cushingite ( with the irrational premise) or Feeneyite (without the premise).
2.The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus can be interpreted as being Cushingite ( as having exceptions of the baptism of desire etc) or being Feeneyite( as it was defined by the three Church Councils,with no exceptions mentioned).
3.The baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance could be Cushingite ( being visible and objective) or Feeneyite( not being physically visible).
If the dogma EENS, Vatican Council II, the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance is Feeneyite, then we have the old ecclesiology of the Mass of the Ages. Then we have the Traditional Latin Mass in 2017.
But there wil be persecution.The old Mass with the old ecclesiology would be ideological for Pope Francis and the Bishop of Rockford.No priest is permitted today to affirm in public the dogma EENS as it was understood in the 16th century.The Jewish Left rabbis would protest in public.
So when Catholic bishops and priests (and bloggers) agree to affirm the old ecclesiology in public,without the irrational premise, then we have the Mass of the Ages, the Traditional Latin Mass, not only with its rubrics(instructions) but also ecclesiology.-Lionel Andrades


JANUARY 20, 2017

Concern over restrictions placed on the ideological Traditional Latin Mass in Rockford,Illinois,USA http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/concern-over-restrictions-placed-on.html



https://youtu.be/2kA_oGo5lB0



Photos from Group logo of Latin Mass
https://awestruck.tv/groups/latin-mass/

Saturday, January 21, 2017

By now the CDF should have been able to accept that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II and one has the hermeneutic of continuity and the other does not.


Image result for congregation for the doctrine of the faith membersImage result for Photos Cardinal MullerImage result for Photo augustine di noiaImage result for Photo cardinal ladariaImage result for Photo mons guido pozzo

Vatican Council II is Feeneyite and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) must know it by now. since there are over a thousand reports on line on this issue.There are over 900 posts on extra ecclesiam nulla salus on this blog alone.Then there are hundreds of other reports on this blog which indirectly refer to the dogma with reference to Vatican Council II,catechism of the catholic church,sspx etc.



There is Vatican Council II Feeneyite and Vatican Council II Cushingite. So the CDF cannot just keep referring to Vatican Council II, without being specific.
They should clarify when they refer to Vatican Council II that they mean Vatican Council II (Cushingite).
They could also clarify that I interpret Vatican Council II without an irrational premise and so my conclusion is different from theirs. This is Vatican Council II Feeneyite.
It has been a few years, since I have been asking the CDF to clarify if the Society of St.Pius X can accept Vatican Council II(Feeneyite) for canonical status.There is no comment from the CDF,SSPX or traditionalist bloggers.
The traditionalist bloggers and the SSPX have been conditioned to think of the baptism of desire as being explicit and so they infer it is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
They have also been conditioned to think that Fr.Leonard Feeney was in heresy, since the baptism of desire refers to explicit cases.
They cannot conceive of the Holy Office 1949 making a mistake by assuming that the baptism of desire is explicit when it really is implicit and invisible for us.So the position of the magisterium in 1949 and that of the Archbishop of Boston was an innovation. It was Fr.Leonard Feeney who was teaching orthodoxy.
By now the CDF should have been able to accept that  there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II and one has the hermeneutic of continuity and the other does not.
-Lionel Andrades

1.

SEPTEMBER 7, 2016


Vatican Council II is Feeneyite and Rome knows it by nowhttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/09/vatican-council-ii-is-feeneyite-and.html

___________________________________________


AUGUST 14, 2015


I follow the Catechism of Trent in agreement with Vatican Council II and the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/08/i-follow-catechism-of-trent-in.html

OCTOBER 30, 2016


With Feeneyite Vatican Council II the Catholic Church affirms the Social Reign of Christ the King

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/10/with-feeneyite-vatican-council-ii.html

SEPTEMBER 3, 2016


FSSP priests need to change direction : mission, salvation, Vatican Council II

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/09/fssp-priests-need-to-change-direction.html



______________________________________________________



St. Peter's seen from the Tiber river

JANUARY 13, 2017

I'm a Catholic on theology and doctrine : the two popes, trads and sedes are irrational, non traditional and heretical

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/im-catholic-on-theology-and-doctrine.html

The Vortex—Trump and the Church Militant

 The Vortex—Trump and the Church Militant




All non Catholic immigrants in Rome, Italy are on the way to Hell unless they convert into the Catholic Church: this is Catholic teaching according to Lega Nord?

Matteo Salvini there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II.One is false and the other true.One is ideological and the other magisterial.One is of the two popes and the other is mine.The two popes are irrational, non traditional and heretical.They have overlooked a factual mistake.
OBJECTIVE MISTAKE AMONG LEGA NORD CATHOLICS
 This is the objective mistake being made by most(all) Catholics including members of the Catholic political parties in Italy.When they will avoid this objective error, like I do, then the interpretation of Vatican Council II changes.It becomes traditional, rational and magisterial.
INTERPRET VATICAN COUNCIL TRADITIONALLY
Interpret Vatican Council II traditionally, rationally and according to the text of the Council, by simply referring to Lumen Gentium 16, Lumen Gentum 8, Unitatis Redintigratio 3, Nostra Aetate 2 etc as referring to invisible, hypothetical and theoretical cases in 2017.So they cannot be known, explicit, objective and concrete exceptions to the Church teaching on all needing to be members of the Church for salvation.
 Immigrati, tra Lega Nord e Caritas è lite sui numeri dell’«invasione»
NO SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
Since there cannot be any physically known exception to all needing to be members of the Church in 2017; since there are no known cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance without the baptism of water,past or present, all immigrants in Italy need to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid the fires of Hell.They are all free to follow their religion however since there is no salvation outside the Church, Catholics must be free to work for the non separation of Church and State and all political legislation must have its centre in Jesus Christ as known in the Catholic Church.
NO EXCEPTIONS TO TRADITIONAL ECCLESIOCENTRISM
In 2017 all non Catholics need to enter the Church with 'faith and baptism' (AG 7,LG 14, Council of Trent, Council of Florence 1441 etc) to avoid the fires of Hell.Since there is no known salvation outside the Church and there are no exceptions to the traditional ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.
This is how I interpret Vatican Council II and everyone else can do the same.
INTER-RELIGIOUS DIALOGUE: CATHOLIC POSITION
In inter-religious dialogue, Lega Nord, proclaim,like St.Paul, that all need to believe in Jesus in the Catholic Church,which was the Early Church, the Early Christians, the Early Catholics, the only Church Jesus founded.
Proclaim Jesus Christ and the need for all Protestants, Evangelicals and Orthodox Christians to accept Jesus in the Catholic Church.All Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and Muslims need to convert into the Catholic Church to go to Heaven and avoid the fires of Hell.
Most people go to Hell since they die without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7,LG 14) in the Catholic Church.
CATHOLICS THE NEW PEOPLE OF GOD(NOSTRA AETATE)
Catholics are the new people of God(Nostra Aetate 4, Vatican Council II).In Heaven there are only Catholics.The Catholic Church is the only Ark of Noah that saves in the flood(CCC 845).
All the non Catholic immigrants in Rome are on the way to Hell since they know about the Church(LG 14) and yet do not enter.They die without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7, LG 14).Extra ecclesiam nulla salus( Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441).
NON CATHOLIC IMMIGRANTS IN ROME LOST
All non Catholic immigrants in Rome,Italy are on the way to the fires of Hell is the Catholic understanding of the Catholic Faith for members of the Lega Nord?
Matteo Salvini please make an announcement on the Lega Nord position on Vatican Council II.
Ask the two popes and the Vatican Curia to affirm the Catholic faith according to the text of Vatican Council II.
HISTORIC MAGISTERIAL MISTAKE
The two popes have overlooked a mistake.They assume hypothetical and theoretical cases of the baptism of desire etc are objective exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) as interpreted by the 16th century  missionaries.So for them there is ' a development of doctrine' with Vatican Council II.
VATICAN CLARIFICATION NEEDED
The Vatican must be asked to correct this objective mistake on what it calls 'the ecclesiocentrism of the past'(Redemptoris Missio).Please ask, through your official Lega Nord sources for a clarification from the Vatican.
As Catholics your position must be : Vatican Council II indicates all non Catholic immigrants in Rome and Italy are on the way to Hell without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church(AG 7, LG 14).
CATHOLIC MAGISTERIAL PROCLAMATION
This must be your proclamation as Catholics. It is supported by Vatican Council II(AG 7, LG 14), Catechism of the Catholic Church(1257,845,846),Council of  Florence 1441,Nicene Creed("I believe in one baptism"), Athanasius Creed(outside the Church there is no salvation),Mystici Corporis, Evangelii Nuntiandi,Dominus Iesus 20( universal salvation is available in potential for all, in reality all need to enter the Church to receive it), Redemptoris Missio 55( the Church is the ordinary means of salvation),Ecclesia de Eucharestia,Ut Unum Sint,Letter of the Holy Office 1949 (first part) etc.
LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE CONTRADICTS ITSELF
The second part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston has made an objective mistake.It contradicts the first part.It wrongly assumes that there are known cases of being saved in invincible ignorance and with what the Baltimore Catechism called the baptism of desire.It further assumes that these are personally known cases without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.So they irrationally infer that these (theoretical) cases are (practical) exceptions to the dogma EENS.
HOLY OFFICE IN HERESY
The Letter irrationally criticizes Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Centers, including professors at Boston College,who were really orthodox, as being heretical.When it was really the Holy Office and the Archbishop of Boston and the U.S Jesuits who had brought an innovation into the Church and were heretically rejecting the dogma EENS, the Nicene Creed, the Athanasius Creed and other magisterial documents.
NO PHYSICALLY VISIBLE EXCEPTIONS TO EENS THS YEAR
It is a fact of life that for us humans there cannot be  known exceptions to the dogma EENS.This is something obvious. It is common sense.We cannot meet or physically see someone saved without the baptism of water.Yet this was ther main thesis, the new premise of the Holy Office in 1949 and still is 'magisterial'.
MAJOR PHILOSOPHICAL ERROR IN THE CHURCH
This is now a major philosophical error in the Catholic Church and is the foundation of the new theology approved by Rahner, Kung,Ratzinger and other liberal, pro-Masonic, theologians.
POPES HAVE MADE FACTUAL MISTAKE
The popes have made a factual mistake on Vatican Council II and the Lega Nord needs to ask them to correct it .Ask the Vatican to clarify that Vatican Council II indicates (AG 7, LG 14) all non Catholic immigrants in Rome are on the way to the fires of Hell, unless they convert visibly ( with faith and baptism) into the Catholic Church.-Lionel Andrades



January 20, 2017
Matteo Salvini and the Lega Nord members need to affirm Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) and ask the two popes and the Congregation for the Doctrrine of the Faith to do the same. http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/matteo-salvini-and-lega-nord-members.html



Maltese bishops: Remarried Catholics ‘at peace’ can receive Communion
January 18, 2017
Maltese 'magisterium' in rebellion and heresy like CDF and pontificate of Pope Francis
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/maltese-magisterium-in-rebellion-and.html



January 17, 2017
Can Archbishop Carlo Liberati teach this in his diocese?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/can-archbishop-carlo-liberati-teach.html



Immagine correlata
January 16, 2017
It was a small premise and it caused a major and new interpretation of Vatican Council II and Michael Davies did not know about it. http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/it-was-small-premise-and-it-causes.html



 January 15, 2017
Media chooses Vatican Council II (Cushingite) instead of Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) : approved magisterial heresy http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/media-chooses-vatican-council-ii_15.html

Image result for photo of Archbishop Thomas E.gullickson

January 14, 2017
Two popes irrational and in heresy : Archbishop Gullickson, Fr.Visintin osb correct http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/two-popes-irrational-and-in-heresy.html


St. Peter's seen from the Tiber river
January 13, 2017
I'm a Catholic on theology and doctrine : the two popes, trads and sedes are irrational, non traditional and heretical
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/im-catholic-on-theology-and-doctrine.html