Life of the Virgin Mary 1 of 8 (FREE audiobook)

Formal correction of Cardinal Raymond Burke is needed since intimidated by the two popes and the political Left he allowed the 1983 Code of Canon Law to enforce a lie

A formal correction of Cardinal Raymond Burke(whom I admire otherwise) is needed since intimidated by the two popes and the political Left he allowed the 1983 Code of Canon Law to enforce a lie, which he supported knowingly or unknowingly.1With invisible for him baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) there is alleged known salvation outside the Church, for him.So the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known to Fr. Leonard Feeney is rejected.The dogma has developed for him, as it has for Pope Benedict (Avvenire March 2016).So for him there is salvation for Protestants and Orthodox Christians and for non Christians, Jews etc.He approved all this at Marriage Tribunals and as the Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura.2

He does not affirm Feeneyite EENS and neither does he want to affirm Vatican Council II in harmony with Feeneyite EENS.This is politically correct.3

It is the same with John Henry Weston Editor of LifeSites News who interviews him often.He never answers the question and neither does he ask Cardinal Burke, 'How can invisible for us BOD,BOB and I.I be visible exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS? Yet this was his reasoning when interpreting Canon Law.

How can the 1983 Code of Canon Law support this irrationality and deception? John Henry Weston does not want to affirm Feeneyite EENS for finanical reasons.Like the cardinal he does not want to displease the Jewish Left.

For the USCCB bishops the Catholic faith is believing unknown cases of BOD, BOB and I.I are personally known in 2017.So the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS is not proclaimed.

How can Cardinal Burke be the Patron of the Knights of Malta or be given another office ? He infers that unknown cases of BOD, BOB and I.I are known and objective people in the present times and this is a lie.How can he infer that there is known salvation outside the Church when we do not know of any such person? How could Cardinal Burke create new doctrines on salvation with a new theology based on visible for us BOD, BOB and I.I? Then he enforces this deception with Canon Law.Can a Canon Lawyer question his right to hold a juridical office of the Church?-Lionel Andrades

1.

SEPTEMBER 7, 2017

Vatican Council II and the 1983 Code of Canon Law violate the Principle of Non Contraduction

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/09/vatican-council-ii-and-1983-code-of.html

2.

SEPTEMBER 7, 2017

Cardinal Ratzinger made the objective error offical in the 1983 Code of Canon Law : enforced liberalism and heresy

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/09/cardinal-ratzinger-made-objective-error.html

3.

MAY 15, 2016

Cardinal Burke will not affirm Vatican Council II with Feeneyism.If he did Vatican Council II would not be a break with the dogma EENS according to the 16th century missionaries

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/05/cardinal-burke-is-unable-to-affirm.html

Cardinal Burke interprets Vatican Council II like Fr.Hans Kung: contradicting the infallibility of the pope ex cathedra

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/cardinal-burke-interprets-vatican.html

Fr.Gaudron, like Cardinal Burke and Joseph Shaw does not see how judgement of hypothetical cases result in a non traditional conclusion in Vatican Council II 
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/father-matthias-gaudron-like-cardinal.html

Cushingism is not part of the whole Tradition of the Church. Cardinal Burke interprets Vatican Council II and the dogma EENS with Cushingism: Amoris Laetitia is based on the new moral theology, the heretical theology.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/cushingism-is-not-part-of-whole.html

This is all accepted by Fr.John Zuhlsdorf, Cardinal Raymond Burke and Joseph Shaw. They offer/ attend the Traditional Latin Mass with this official heresy http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/this-is-all-accepted-by-frjohn.html

Cardinal Raymond Burke and Prof. Joseph Shaw assume hypothetical factors or theories are explicit exceptions to the traditional de fide teaching on faith and morals http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/cardinal-raymond-burke-and-prof-joseph.html 

Cardinal Burke accepts the 'contemporary official magisterium' and does not consider Amoris Laetita heretical, since he uses the same heretical magisterial new moral theologyhttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/cardinal-burke-accepts-contemporary.html

So when Cardinal Burke and Fr. Z say there is no doctrinal change in Vatican Council II ( interpreted with exceptions) or in AL ( with known exceptions) are they really protecting themself ?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/so-when-cardinal-burke-and-fr-z-say.html

What if Cardinal Burke and Fr. Zuhlsdorf said that there are no known exceptions to Catholic moral and salvation theology ?.Would they lose their religious faculties in Rome?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/what-if-cardinal-burke-and-fr-zuhlsdorf.html

Cardinal Burke accepts the liberal moral and faith teachings which have been changed with exceptions, so called known exceptions in the present times

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/cardinal-burke-acceptsthe-liberal-moral.html

Cardinal Raymond Burke ignores the new moral theology upon which Amoris Laetitia is based since he and Pope Benedict use the same irrational theology

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/cardinal-raymond-burke-ignores-new.html

 Cushingism is not part of the whole Tradition of the Church. Cardinal Burke interprets Vatican Council II and the dogma EENS with Cushingism: Amoris Laetitia is based on the new moral theology, the heretical theology

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/cushingism-is-not-part-of-whole.html

Cardinal Raymond Burke accepts the liberal moral theology, which affirms known exceptions to the traditional teaching on mortal sin.So he will not have noticed this error in Amoris Laetitia http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/cardinal-raymond-burke-accepts-liberal.html

SEPTEMBER 5, 2017

Formal correction of cardinals needed : understanding of salvation at Novus Ordo Mass same as St.Paul's Greek Mass

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/09/formal-correction-of-cardinals-needed.html

__________________________

MARCH 31, 2015

Cardinal Raymond Burke approved the article. Fr.Hardon like Cardinal Marchetti makes this wrong inference in the article

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/cardinal-raymond-burke-approved-article.html

Cardinal Raymond Burke approved Fr. John Hardon's error

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/cardinal-raymond-burke-approved-fr-john.html

What was Fr. Hardons error that Cardinal Burke approved?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/what-was-fr-hardons-error-that-cardinal.html

Cardinal Raymond Burke interprets Church documents with an irrational premise and conclusion and offers the Traditional Latin Mass
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/cardinal-raymond-burke-interprets.html

Rome made a mistake in 1949 and Fr.John Hardon did not notice it
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/rome-made-mistake-in-1949-and-frjohn_3.html

The Catechumen you refer to is a hypothetical case for you and me. So it is not an explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus : Fr.John Hardon too did not notice this.http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/the-catechuman-you-refer-to-is.html
For Cardinal Raymond Burke these hypothetical cases are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salushttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/for-cardinal-raymond-burke-these.html

__________________________________________________

The Birth Of Mary from the revelations given Maria Valtorta

Vatican Council II and the 1983 Code of Canon Law violate the Principle of Non Contraduction

It seems as if Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger knew that invisible for us baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood (BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I) never ever were exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the magisterium in 1949 made a mistake.But he went ahead along with his friend Fr. Karl Rahner s.j and implemented the error in the Church.He adapted the 1983 Code of Canon Law to accomodate invisible for us baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) as being examples of salvation outside the Church and so he hints in Redemptoris Missio that 'the past ecclesiology' exists no more or there is a new interpretation of the past ecclesiology.1

Now a Catholic can be dismissed from an institute 2 if he says BOD, BOB and I.I refer to invisible people in the present times and so are not explicit exceptions to the dogma EENS as it was known to the magisterium in the 16th century. Even if he affirms BOD, BOB and I.I as being just possibilities known to God and which would be followed by the baptism of water since this is the dogmatic teaching, the local bishop may not understand or not want to understand.

The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 has made an objective mistake.It is not the work of the Holy Spirit. The same irrational reasoning is there in Vatican Council II. It  is not the work of the Holy Spirit but an example of human error. However it is being implemented in the 1983 Code of Canon Law which replaced the 1917 Code of Canon Law.

The 1983 Code of Canon Law states that catechumenates are to instructed into 'the mystery of salvation'.3

So Canon Law is implenting a falsehood in the Church which is not the teaching of the Holy Spirit but which was supported by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

A Profession of Faith has to be made in which the Nicene Creed is re-interpreted.It is no longer 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins' but 'I believe in three or more known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins which exclude the baptisms of water in the Catholic Church'. This is first class heresy.4

Those Catholics who want to be deacons have to complete a theological education in which it is taught that there are known cases of BOD, BOB and Il.I which are explicit exceptions to the dogma EENS according to the traditional interpretation over the centuries.Those who do not affirm this cannot be deacons or priests.

All jurdical persons, including nuns, have to affirm this lie  according to the 1983 Code of Canon Law.5

How can invisible people be visible exceptions to the dogma EENS ? Vatican Council II and the 1983 Code of Canon Law violate the Principle of Non Contradiction of Aristotele.

-Lionel Andrades

1

SEPTEMBER 7, 2017

Cardinal Ratzinger made the objective error offical in the 1983 Code of Canon Law : enforced liberalism and heresy

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/09/cardinal-ratzinger-made-objective-error.html

2.

Art. 3.

DISMISSAL OF MEMBERS

Can. 694 §1. A member must be held as ipso facto dismissed from an institute who:

1/ has defected notoriously from the Catholic 

3.

THE MISSIONARY ACTION OF THE CHURCH (Cann. 781 - 792)

§2. Missionaries are to take care that they teach the truths of faith to those whom they consider prepared to receive the gospel message so that they can be admitted to receive baptism when they freely request it.

§2. Through instruction and the first experience of Christian life, catechumens are to be initiated suitably into the mystery of salvation and introduced into the life of the faith, the liturgy, the charity of the people of God, and the apostolate.

4.

THE PROFESSION OF FAITH (Can. 833)

Can. 833 The following are obliged personally to make a profession of faith according to the formula approved by the Apostolic See:

1/ in the presence of the president or his delegate, all those who attend with either a deliberative or consultative vote an ecumenical or particular council, a synod of bishops, and a diocesan synod; the president, however, makes it in the presence of the council or synod;

2/ those promoted to the cardinalatial dignity, according to the statutes of the sacred college...

5.

REQUIREMENTS IN THOSE TO BE ORDAINED

Can.  1032 §1. Those aspiring to the presbyterate can be promoted to the diaconate only after they have completed the fifth year of the curriculum of philosophical and theological studies.

§2. After a deacon has completed the curriculum of studies and before he is promoted to the presbyterate, he is to take part in pastoral care, exercising the diaconal order, for a suitable time defined by the bishop or competent major superior.

§3. A person aspiring to the permanent diaconate is not to be promoted to this order unless he has completed the time of formation.
________________________________________

DECEMBER 17, 2016

Unprecedented!http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/12/unprecedented.html

Fr.Paul Morgan, SSPX Superior in England defects -Phineas Report

About three weeks ago, Fr. Paul Morgan defected from the S.S.P.X.  He had been for some time the Society District Superior for Great Britain.  His last assignment was at the Society priory in British Columbia.  It is situated at Langley (near Vancouver) and has a mission to Vancouver Island (at Nanaimo).  He was assisted in B.C. by one other Society priest, who continues his work here.  Fr. Morgan, by all accounts, has been an extremely impressive priest.  He recently defected from the Society and was taken in by the Franciscans of Morgon, in France.

Fr. Patrick Girouard was the earlier Society priest for the Vancouver area.  He has also defected to the Resistance and now operates his own chaplaincy in Greater Vancouver.  I've heard that he took about one-third of the Society lay supporters with him when he left.

Now we hear that Fr. David Aldalur has also defected and has also been taken in by the Franciscans of Morgon.  He was one of the seven priors who defied Bishop Fellay over this marriage débâcle.  The seven were from among the most populous priories in France (Paris, Marseilles, Lyon, Toulouse, &c.). 

As for the Franciscans of Morgon, their prior was one of three whose orders are affiliated with the S.S.P.X and who have also defied Bishop Fellay on the same issue.  The Franciscans of Morgon have had previous disputes with Menzingen, as a result of which, about two years ago, Fellay refused to send them a bishop to ordain religious priests from among them.  Then they threatened to turn to Bishop Faure of the Resistance.  As far as I have heard, they are still affiliated with the S.S.P.X but it's obvious that that cannot last for long. 

Priors of two other orders which are affiliated with the S.S.P.X have also defied Bishop Fellay on the marriage issue.  One of them heads the Religious of the Transfiguration.  The other is, I believe, a Benedictine.

We must keep in mind that Frs. Morgan and Aldalur are leading Society priests.  A fracture is growing in the Society but how large it will become is anyone's guess.  I suspect that others among the dismissed priors of France will now join Aldalur and Morgan.

[This is all in contrast, as some of the SSPX are refusing flat out the marriage issue with the Novus Ordo establishment, whereas, the FSSP has no qualms coupling up with the Novus Ordo establishment in meeting with Protestants in their Protestant facility, in order to have a banquet, when the Novus Ordo could very easily have the banquest in one of their own.     Goes to show the sharp contrast between the SSPX and the FSSP regards their being sold out to the Revolution, only in bits and pieces.....the frog and the boiling water.      Works every time.] -Phineas Report

https://catholicendtimetruths.com/fr-paul-morgan-has-left-sspx/13/08/2017

https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/fr-paul-morgan-leaves-the-sspx/

Cardinal Ratzinger made the objective error offical in the 1983 Code of Canon Law : enforced liberalism and heresy

It seems as if Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger knew that invisible for us baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood (BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I) never ever were exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the magisterium in 1949 made a mistake.But he went ahead along with his friend Fr. Karl Rahner s.j and implemented the error in the Church.He adapted the 1983 Code of Canon Law to accomodate invisible for us baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) as being examples of salvation outside the Church and so he hints in Redemptoris Missio that 'the past ecclesiology' exists no more or there is a new interpretation of the past ecclesiology.

In the Catechism of the Catholic Church (846) he proclaims a new theory which says all who are saved are saved though Jesus and the Church.He is trying to approve his invisible BOD, BOB and I.I as being relevant to the past ecclesiology and being exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
As Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) he could have corrected the mistake.He could have stated that unknown cases of BOD, BOB and I.I were not known exceptions to the dogma EENS.So Pope Pius XII and the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Cushing made an objective mistake by mixing up what was invisible as being invisible, someone in heaven as also being on earth and being saved outside the Church.They violated the Principle of Non Contradiction.Invisible people in Heaven are also visible on earth? Yes, they accepted this and now it is being enforced through the 1983 Canon Code of Canon Law.
Then he could have announced that there was a mistake in Vatican Council II.The Council should not have said in Lumen Gentium 14 that those who know and do not enter the Church are on the way to Hell without clarifying that all non Catholics in general need to enter the Church with no exceptions and being saved in invincible ignorance was not an exception.
Cardinal Ratzinger could have said that we do not know who 'knows' or 'does not know' and will be saved or not saved .So LG 14 does not contradict the 16th century missionaries understanding of EENS.Now when Edward Pentin asked Cardinal Muller about EENS in an interview for the National Catholic Register the former Prefect of the CDF said LG 14 was an exception.So EENS was no more like it was before.This was confirmed in March 2016 by Pope Benedict XVI in the interview with Avvenire. Cardinal Ratzinger did not announce that being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16), imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3), seeds of the Word (AG 11) etc all refer to hypothetical cases.So they never ever were exceptions to the past ecclesiology and the centuries old interpretation of EENS.
It was a superficial interpretation of Vatican Council II which considered LG 14 16, LG 8, LG 14, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22, AG 11, AG 7, etc as exceptions to EENS.In other words they refer to known and visible cases.This is false and it is magisterial.
So if he wanted to he could have made the correction with reference to the objective error in the Letter of the Holy Office(1949) and the repetition of that irrational form of reasoning at Vatican Council II (1965).
He could have announced that everyone needs to be a visible member of the Catholic Church, with no known exceptions, to avoid the fires of Hell.The Orthodox Christians and the Protestants are outside the Church and so are the Jews,Hindus, Buddhists,Muslims, pagans and atheists.
Instead his friend Fr. Karl Rahner S.j placed the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 in the Denzinger and he issued Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus, the Catechism of the Catholic Church and other 'magisterial' documents supporting the error in the Church.His friend Fr. Hans Kung S.j wrote books interpreting Vatican Council II as a rupture with EENS and he did not issue a correction.
Summorum Pontificum expects priests to offer the Tridentin Rite Mass without the past ecclesiology associated with the Traditional Latin Mass and the Mass in Greek at the time of St.Paul.The Code of Canon Law (1983) obliges priests to interpret BOD, BOB and I.I as referring to visible and known people saved outside the Church and so they are exceptions to the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church. It is important to note that priests can still affirm the 1983 Code of Canon Law and accept BOD, BOB and I.I but interpret them as being invisible and unknown.This is common sense. Also the Code does not state that they have to be interpreted as being visible and known. It leaves the inference to you.
Similarly afirm LG 14 but interpret 'those who know' and those who 'do not know' and who are saved or not saved as being known only to God.They are hypothetical and speculative cases for us. They cannot be anything else.So they are not exceptions to EENS as it was known to Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston, the Early Church Fathers and the Medieval Fathers of the Church.Undo the damage done by the ecclesiastics-Lionel Andrades


July 11, 2012

CARDINAL RAYMOND BURKE SAYS THE 1983 CODE OF CANON LAW HAS REMOVED THE STIPULATION THAT A PRIEST IN MORTAL SIN SHOULD NOT OFFER MASS WITHOUT FIRST AVAILING OF THE SACRAMENT OF CONFESSION

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/07/cardinal-raymond-burke-says-1983-code.html

September 6, 2017

Christian Burial & Canon Law by Phineas

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/09/christian-burial-canon-law-by-phineas.html

September 6, 2014

Cardinal Muller must also begin dialogue with Bishop Mark A. Pivarunas, CMRI :sedevacantism based on misunderstanding on doctrine

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/09/cardinal-muller-must-also-begin.html

July 10, 2012

Fr.Leonard Feeney, Wikipedia and Vatican Council II

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/07/frleonard-feeney-wikipedia-and-vatican.html

April 26, 2017

Father Gerstle FSSP interprets Vatican Council II with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism : accepts rupture with dogma EENS (Feeneyite), Syllabus of Errors etc

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/04/father-gerstlefssp-interprets-vatican.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It seems as if Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger knew that invisible for us baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I) never ever were exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the magisterium in 1949 made a mistake but he went ahead along with his friend Fr. Karl Rahner s.j and implemented the error in the Church.He adapted the 1983 Code of Canon Law to accomodate invisible for us baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) as being examples of salvation outside the Church and so he hints in Redemptoris Missio that 'the past ecclesiology' exists no more or there is a new interpretation of the past ecclesiology.

In the Catechism of the Catholic Church(846) he proclaims a new theory which says all who are saved are saved though Jesus and the Church.He is trying to approve his invisible BOD, BOB and I.I as being relevant to the past ecclesiology and being exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
As Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) he could have corrected the mistake.He could have stated that unknown cases of BOD, BOB and I.I were not known exceptions to the dogma EENS.So Pope Pius XII and the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Cushing made an objective mistake by mixing up what was invisible as being invisible, someone in heaven as also being on earth and being saved outside the Church.They violated the Principle of Non Contradiction.Invisible people in Heaven are also visible on earth? Yes, they accepted this and now it is being enforced through the 1983 Canon Code of Canon Law.
Then he could have announced that there was a mistake in Vatican Council II.The Council should not have said in Lumen Gentium 14 that those who know and do not enter the Church are on the way to Hell without clarifying that all non Catholics in general need to enter the Church with no exceptions and being saved in invincible ignorance was not an exception.
Cardinal Ratzinger could have said that we do not know who 'knows' or does not 'know' and will be saved or not saved .So LG 14 does not contradict the 16th century missionaries understanding of EENS.Now when Edward Pentin asked Cardinal Muller about EENS in an interview for the National Catholic Register the former Prefect of the CDF said LG 14 was an exception.So EENS was no more like it was before.This was confirmed in March 2016 by Pope Benedict XVI in the interview with Avvenire.
Cardinal Ratzinger did not announce that being saved in invincible ignorance(LG 16), imperfect communion with the Church(UR 3), seeds of the Word (AG 11) etc all refer to hypothetical cases.So they never ever were exceptions to the past ecclesiology and the centuries old interpretation of EENS.
It was a superficial interpretation of Vatican Council II which considered LG 14 16, LG 8, LG 14, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22, AG 11, AG 7, etc as exceptions to EENS in other words they refer to known and visible cases.This is false and it is magisterial.

 

 

July 11, 2012

CARDINAL RAYMOND BURKE SAYS THE 1983 CODE OF CANON LAW HAS REMOVED THE STIPULATION THAT A PRIEST IN MORTAL SIN SHOULD NOT OFFER MASS WITHOUT FIRST AVAILING OF THE SACRAMENT OF CONFESSION

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/07/cardinal-raymond-burke-says-1983-code.html

September 6, 2017

Christian Burial & Canon Law by Phineas

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/09/christian-burial-canon-law-by-phineas.html

September 6, 2014

Cardinal Muller must also begin dialogue with Bishop Mark A. Pivarunas, CMRI :sedevacantism based on misunderstanding on doctrine

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/09/cardinal-muller-must-also-begin.html

July 10, 2012

Fr.Leonard Feeney, Wikipedia and Vatican Council II

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/07/frleonard-feeney-wikipedia-and-vatican.html

April 26, 2017

Father Gerstle FSSP interprets Vatican Council II with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism : accepts rupture with dogma EENS (Feeneyite), Syllabus of Errors etc

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/04/father-gerstlefssp-interprets-vatican.html