Saturday, September 3, 2016

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

936full-virgen-de-guadalupeAll the priests in the FSSP can agree :-
1.Some things are seen or unseen.Some would point out that all things are either seen or not seen.
2.The baptism of desire is not seen. It is invisible.
3.Lumen Gentium 16 is being interpreted as being visible or invisible, seen or not seen.
4.The FSSP choose to interpret LG 16 as being visible.Someone in invincible ignorance saved without the baptism of water in 2016 is seen.
5.They can now choose to interpret LG 16 as being invisible.So also with LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc.These are references to persons not seen.
6.So this is Feeneyism. They choose Feeneyism instead of Cushingism as a theology. They choose to see through Feeneyite lens.
7.Since this is rational, traditional,non innovative and non heretical they would expect all Catholics, including the popes and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, to do the same.
Agreement in public on these points would help the SSPX reconciliation and the Vatican's return to the Faith.Since the doctrinal scenario would have changed.With Feeneyism, Vatican Council II would no more be an issue.The Council is traditional on EENS( Feeneyite).
EENS( Feeneyite) was the basis over the centuries for an ecumenism of return, non Christians needing to formally convert and the need for the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation,with the non separation of Church and State.
Parishioners at FSSP parishes could in public, also affirm these points.
-Lionel Andrades
(First Saturday)

Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Sarah and the FSSP priests offer Holy Mass ad orientem and assume LG 16 refers to visible cases in 2016. This is irrational. It's inference and conclusion is non traditional.It creates the hermeneutic of rupture with the past


Anonymous said...

What do you think of this blog post: Ignorance about ignorance ?

Catholic Mission said...

Ignorance about ignorance

Invincible ignorance has nothing to do with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
As I mentioned 'Some things can be seen and some cannot'. We cannot see any one in 2016 saved with invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water.
So the sedevacantist at Introibo Ad Altare Dei is speculating.It is all hypothetical and there is no concrete case.He can play God and theorize.

It is now over a year.He will not answer if LG 16 can be visible or invisible.Even the sedevacantists Bishop Sanborn and Fr. Cekada will not answer.

Instead they affirm some concept of ' Feeneyism' and keep condemning it.
They assume that the baptism of desire can be seen. It is visible. So they criticize Fr. Leonard Feeney for not saying that the baptism of desire, without the baptism of water, is visible for him too. So it should be an exception to the dogma EENS.This was the ridiculous position of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which Introibo and the other sedevacantists accept.For the Letter the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance were exceptions to all needing the baptism of water for salvation.
On the right bar tags of this blog check IAAD for my communication with him.