Wednesday, April 8, 2015

Until today the Jesuits use an irrational premise and inference in the interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II.This was a rebellion in the Church.

Pope Francis in St. Peter's square at the Vatican on April 2, 2014.
Pope Francis and the New Rome
By Francis X. Rocca Wall Street Journal April 3, 2015 

One Saturday last month, Pope Francis celebrated Mass at Ognissanti (All Saints’) Church in one of Rome’s working-class neighborhoods. Little known to tourists or art historians, Ognissanti was the site of a momentous event in the modern history of the Catholic Church: Exactly 50 years earlier, Pope Paul VI had gone there to celebrate the first papal mass in Italian rather than in the traditional Latin.
In marking that anniversary, Pope Francis made plain his view of the vernacular Mass, one of the most visible changes ushered in by the Second Vatican Council (1962-65). The practice still pains Catholic traditionalists who mourn the loss of churchwide unity that came with a common language.
Allowing Catholics to pray in their local languages “was truly a courageous act by the church to draw closer to the people of God,” Pope Francis told a crowd gathered outside. “This is important for us, to follow the Mass this way. And there is no going back…Whoever goes back is mistaken.”
In his two years in office, the pontiff has drawn attention for his unconventional gestures—such as personally welcoming homeless people to the Sistine Chapel last month—but those gestures matter most as signs of the radical new direction in which he seeks to lead the Catholic Church: toward his vision of the promise of Vatican II.
The promise is : dogmas, doctrines and theology will be discarded as the Church moves towards the Masonic concept of a new world order with one world religion.Vatican Council II is the slogan, even though the text of Vatian  Council is traditional on ecclesiology( understanding of Church as exclusivist on salvation).
Both the acclaim and the alarm that Francis has generated as pope have been responses to his role in the long struggle over the council’s legacy.
For a half century, ordinary Catholics and their leaders have debated, often passionately, whether the changes that followed the council went too far or not far enough. Pope Francis’ immediate predecessors, John Paul II and Benedict XVI, devoted much of their pontificates to correcting what they deemed unjustified deviations from tradition in the name of Vatican II.
Now Pope Francis has effectively reversed course. In word and deed, he has argued that the church’s troubles reflect not recklessness but timidity in interpreting and applying the principles of Vatican II, especially the council’s call for the church to open itself to the modern world. “It usually takes half a century for a council to begin to sink in,” says Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York. “Now we have a pope who says, ‘Look, we just had five decades of internal debates and controversy about the meaning of Vatican II, and now it’s time to do it.’ And that’s what he’s doing.”
Allegedly the pope and Cardinal Dolan, are saying for example, that homosexuality is not a mortal sin any more. And they are attributing it to Vatican Council II. Even though the text of the Council does not say any thing about this.
Vatican Council II is the political slogan for the pro-Satan lobby.They are those who promote abortion, sodomy, atheism and  open and secret attacks on Jesus and His Church.
The pope’s vision of Vatican II has translated into a dramatic shift in priorities, with an emphasis on social justice over controversial moral teachings and a friendlier approach to secular culture.
Controversial moral teachings. They have become controversial since they have been legalised by the Left, the pro-Satan lobby. The pope approves it.So he is not threatened  by Leftist hate laws, the new fascism. Their media praise him as in this article.
This has alarmed those who fear an erosion of the church’s role as the foremost bulwark of traditional morality in the West, particularly amid heated battles over same-sex marriage, bioethics, abortion and religious freedom...     
The changes were dramatic. Rome absolved the Jewish people of collective guilt for the death of Jesus Christ and declared that God’s covenant with them had never been abrogated. Catholics began to hear Orthodox and Protestants described as “separated brethren,” while church leaders spoke of a “fellowship” with non-Christians.
Even today the Jewish Left owned media(Reuters etc) ignores Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 which say all need faith and baptism for salvation. Vatican Council II indicates that most people are on the way to Hell since at the time of death they do not have faith and baptism. The Council is also telling us that all Jews need 'faith and baptism' for salvation ( to avoid Hell). Nostra Aetate says that Catholics are the new people of God, the chosen people, the elect.
Protestants and Orthodox Christians do not have Catholic Faith which include the Sacraments and the faith and moral teachings of the Catholic Church.Vatican Council II (AG 7) is in agreement with the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Since there canot be any known exception to the centuries old interpretation of the dogma.
The years following the council brought cultural change to the church, blurring many aspects of Catholic identity. Women ceased to wear veils in church, and Catholics started eating meat on Fridays. Nuns moved from convents to apartments. Interfaith marriage ceased to be taboo. Priests moved from hearing confessions in darkened booths to more conversational settings...
Interfaith marriages are no more taboo since the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus was discarded long before Vatican Council II.Cardinal Marchetti in 1949 assumed that there was known salvation outside the Church. This error was not corrected by Pope John Paul II or Pope Paul VI.Now Catholics are allowed to live in adultery in interfaith marriages.Since it is assumed that LG 16, LG 8, NA 2 refer to known cases in the present times and so there are known exceptions to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church. The fault is with the irrational inference and not the text of Vatican Council II.Yet it is with the false inference that Vatican Council II is generally interpreted by the media.

Popes John Paul and Benedict, who had played key roles at Vatican II, concluded that the church had gone too fast and too far in innovations ranging from the abandonment of religious garb to the acceptance of liberal ideas on sexual morality. In response, they issued the first universal catechism since the 16th century, systematically laying out the church’s fundamental teachings; they censured dissent among theologians and within religious orders; and they reversed moves to expand the role of bishops in the development of church teaching and practice.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church (1257,846) continued to uphold the Marchetti error and the irrational inference in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.
They also emphasized the differences between Catholicism and other religions and made it easier to celebrate the traditional Latin Mass.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church did not endorse the traditional rigorist interpretation of the dogma.Like other magisterial documents during the pontificate of Pope John Paul II, it allows a misinterpretation of being saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance. It allowed Catholics to infer that these cases  refer to personally known and visible cases, in the present times. It infers that   these  persons ( still in Heaven!) are objective exceptions to the Feeneyite version of the dogma. The Catechism has endorsed Cushingism which is heresy.It has approved a new doctrine based on an irrationality; an irrational premise/proposition.It has changed the Nicene Creed and the infallible dogma.
The Tradtional Latin Mass is permitted to be offered only by priests who interpret the dogma on salvation with Cushingism. This is approved  also by the Jewish Left.It is seen as a change in the Church's teaching on mission.
Pope Francis, the first pontiff to have received holy orders after Vatican II, is very much a son of the council. It took place during his years of study in the Jesuit order in Argentina—he was ordained just four years after it ended—and he enthusiastically followed the proceedings in Rome.On the eve of the 2013 conclave that elected him pope, then-Cardinal Bergoglio identified the main threat to the church: not the encroachment of secular culture but a tendency among Catholics themselves, especially within church institutions, to retreat into ghettos of their own making. The risk, he said, was of “theological narcissism.”
Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council and other magisterial documents with an irrational premise and inference. So for him Vatican Council II has a hermeneutic of rupture with the past.He approves of this unaware of the factual and objective error he makes.His theology is based on an irrational premise and inference.This is a common error among the Jesuits.
Pope Francis’ understanding of Vatican II was deeply shaped by his background as a Jesuit and an Argentine, according to Austen Ivereigh, author of a recent papal biography, “The Great Reformer.” The Jesuits viewed themselves as occupying the front lines in the application of the council’s teachings...
It was the Jesuits who in 1949 endorsed Cushingism. They expelled Fr.Leonard Feeney for affirming the traditional interpretation of the dogma. Until today the Jesuits use an irrational premise and inference in the interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II.This was a rebellion in the Church.
-Lionel Andrades

Theology for me is reason harmonizing with Faith, within the Catholic Church. Cushingism is not Catholic.

Usually the theology he repeats without knowing what it is- is Cushingism.
When a Catholic says not every one needs to enter the Church he is expressing theology. How does an average Catholic know theology? He has probably heard it.He repeats it. For him this is the teaching of the Church.
Usually the theology he repeats without knowing what it is- is Cushingism. He condemns Feeneyism.He is told it is condemned.He can only choose between Feeneyism and Cushingism and generally he does not know the difference.
Cushingism is a popular theology.It is accepted by the Magisterium. So the average Catholic repeats it.He  assumes it is de fide.
Instead it is something foreign to the Faith.It is heresy.It has come into the  Church in the 1940's.It is not part of the Deposit of the Faith. It is an irrational theology, a compromised theology.It denies the basic teachings of the Church on salvation and the proclamation of the Good News.
Feeneyism says every one needs to be a formal member of the Church, with faith and baptism, for salvation and there are no exceptions.
Cushingism says every one needs to enter the Church with faith and baptism for salvation but there are exceptions; there are known exceptions, so really every one does not need to enter the Church.
Cushingism is irrational.It says all need to enter the Church but those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire do not need to enter the Church.It assumes that we can know these cases in real life.So all do not need to be Catholic in the present times for salvation, since there are exceptions.People in Heaven are exceptions on earth!
When the average Catholic understands this he knows Cushingism is false.Since we cannot see or personally meet someone who is now saved in Heaven with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance.These cases are known only to God. When they do not exist in our reality, how can they be exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Church in the present times ?
If I cannot meet someone in Rome saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire, how can this person who does not exist, be an exception to all needing the baptism of water in the Catholic Church on April 8,2015 ? Where are the exceptions if they do not exist ?
So most people do not know theology and so accept this irrational view made popular by the secular media.It is not Catholic theology.
Traditionalists and even priests accept Cushingism.With Cushingism there is no threat to their career and lifestyle.They cannot be accused of being bigots, fundamentalists,racists and haters in the political sense.
Others choose Cushingism since they believe the Church has condemned Feeneyism or Vatican Council II approves Cushingism. Both views are false.One cannot blame these Catholics.Since the Magisterium has never issued a correction.Instead it has promoted the lie.The priority was security and peace and not the Catholic faith.
 The Cardinal Marchetti Letter to the Archbishop of Boston (1949) was pure heresy.The text said not every one needed to formally enter the Church.This is a rejection of the dogma defined by three Church Councils.It changes the Nicene Creed. It changes Jesus' teaching in the Bible as it was interpreted over centuries.
In other words, according to Cardinal Marchetti,  there were known cases of the baptism of desire or being saved in invincible ignorance,without the baptism of water.Not only were they known  from the past , these cases also existed in the present (1949 for them).So they became exceptions.
A non existing case became an objective exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma. This is irrational. It was also saying people in Heaven are known and visible exceptions (on earth) to all needing to enter the Church in the present times.
It was also saying that we could know of people on earth in 1949 who would be saved in future, without 'faith and baptism'- something which would be known only to God.
This was Cushingism. It was upon this irrationality that a theology was created, which is accepted until today.
It is taught in Catholic universities after Fr.Leonard Feeney and four Catholic professors of theology were expelled by the Jesuit Boston College.
Fr.Leonard Feeney did not accept Cushingism.He was excommunicated by Cardinal Richard Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston.He was expelled from the Jesuit community, whose Superior had accepted Cushingism as a theology.All seminarians had to accept that being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire were exceptions to the traditional dogma.This is the norm in Deaprtments of Theology today.
Cardinal Cushing and the Jesuits placed this confusion in Vatican Council II. Lumen Gentium 14 and Ad Gentes 7 refer to invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire as if these cases were relevant to the dogma.
But all is not lost. We can still interpret Lumen Gentium 14 and Ad Gentes 7 according to Feeneyism.I would respond ,"Yes a person can be saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire and this would be followed by the baptism of water,as the dogma teaches.And anyway we do not know and cannot know these cases in real life.So they are not exceptions to Feeneyism.Theology has not changed".
There can never ever be exceptions to the theology of Feeneyism. Those who say there are exceptions  infer that the dead-saved in Heaven are known and visible to them in the present times.They can see ghosts in 2015! This of course would be Cushingism.
So if you are an average Catholic don't be impressed when someone mentions 'theeeooology'.He is possibly faking it. Odds are he is using Cushingism.
Our Lord was not a Cushingite.He said all need the baptism of water for salvation (John 3:5).There was only one Church at that time.There was only one Church in which the baptism of water could be administered.It was the Catholic Church.
He also said that those who did not believe will be condemned.He did not say that you and I would be able to judge who is an exception.
Theology for me is reason harmonizing with Faith, within the Catholic Church. Cushingism  is not Catholic.-Lionel Andrades
April 12,2015: Divine Mercy Sunday
685.After the Holy Hour, when I went to my cell, I suddenly learned how greatly God was offended by a certain person, who was close to my heart. At the sight of this, my soul was pierced with pain, and I cast myself in the dust before the Lord, begging His mercy.For two hours, in tears, prayer and flagellation I prevented the sin, and I learned that God's mercy had embraced that poor soul. Oh, the price of one single sin!
(p.281.Notebook 2.Diary of Saint Maria Faustina Kowalska-Divine Mercy in My Soul ( Marian Press, Stockbridge MA 2011)

Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX, FSSP and CMRI still agree with me !

I still don't expect a denial from the Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX, FSSP, and CMRI . Since they are not going to say :-
1. The physically dead for us now saved in Heaven in invincible ignorance or with the baptism of desire , and who are allegedly there without the baptism of water, are visible on earth, to be exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This would be irrational. So there is no denial from them.
2. Similarly I do not expect them to say that someone who allegedly died centuries back without the baptism of water ( The Good Thief on the Cross, St.Emerentiana) would be an explicit exception to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church today on April 8,2015. This would be irrational.So there is no denial. They still agree with me.
3.Similarly I do not expect them to say that someone today April 8, 2015 would be saved in future, without faith and baptism and so all do not need to be formal members of the Church to avoid Hell.How could they know such a person. This would be irrational.
So they still agree with me. No denial has been issued with referene to the following links.
They all agree with me !
Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX, FSSP, CMRI agree Marchetti made a mistake and Feeney was correct
Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX, FSSP, CMRI indicate Cardinal Ratzinger made an objective mistake in the Catechism
Contemporary Magisterium is in doctrinal error : Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX,FSSP,CMRI agree
Rome Vicariate, Ecclesia Dei, SSPX,FSSP,CMRI contradict Fr. John Zuhlsdorf
-Lionel Andrades

Family claims Virgin Mary statue sheds tears

Mathis family claims this statue shed tears over Easter weekend. (Contributed to KRIS)

Mathis family claims this statue shed tears over Easter weekend. (Contributed to KRIS)
Mathis family claims this statue shed tears over Easter weekend. (Contributed to KRIS)
MATHIS - A family in Mathis says their Virgin Mary statue has been weeping. They say the statue started crying this weekend they believe it's a miracle. "You could see her tear coming out of her left eye and going and going," said Cleofas Rodriguez the owner of the statue.
Rodriguez has had this Virgin Mary statue for over 6 years but this weekend she says her and her family witnessed a miracle. She says her statue was weeping.

This Protestant Researched Marian Miracles, & What He Learned Blew His Mind

This Protestant Researched Marian Miracles, & What He Learned Blew His Mind

Lawrence OP / Flickr

from Spirit Daily