Saturday, April 2, 2016

The Catechism and Vatican Council II are not a break with the dogma EENS unless invisible and visible, hypothetical and objective cases are confused : how would Dr.Robert Hickson interpret CCC 1257 ?









How would Dr.Robert Hickson interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1257) ? He has a choice and he doesn't know it.

1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit."God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.-Catechism of the Catholic Church.

 'but he himself is not bound by his sacraments'. Is this relevant or an exception to the interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) according to the 16th century missionaries? Probably it is an exception  for Robert and Maike Hickson.
But not for me.
1. Since I do not know any one  this year who will be saved without the Sacraments.
2.Neither would Maike and Robert Hickson know of any one in 2016 or in the past who was  saved without the Sacraments.
3.I look at CCC 1257 with the theology of Feeneyism i.e there are no known exceptions to EENS. For Maike and Robert Hickson, Cardinal Ratzinger and Fr.John Hardon, it was with the theology of Cushingism ( there are known exceptions to the dogma EENS and so every one does not need to enter the Church formally as it was believed in the 16th century.)
4.For me in principle hypothetical cases cannot be objectively seen.
5.The baptism of desire and blood,LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to invisible and not visible cases.

FEENEYISM OR CUSHINGISM CHOICE
So there is a choice. We can interpret CCC 1257 with Feeneyism or Cushingism, with rationality or with an irrationality, according to Tradition or opposed to Tradition, in agreement with the pre-Council of Trent magisterium or in agreement with the contemporary magisterium.

KASPER'S FALSE CLAIM
For Pope Benedict and Cardinal Kasper the interpretation of CCC 1257 is Cushingite. So we have the hermeneutic of rupture. There is a break with the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS.So  Cardinal Kasper could ask for other teachings of the Church to be also changed like EENS.If he makes this claim, we must note that there is no change in ecclesiology, there is no rejection of EENS according to Fr.Leonard Feeney and the 16th century missionaries.EENS should not be made a reference when the Synod Exhortation is announced next Friday,April 8.

VISIBLE-INVISIBLE CONFUSION
So it is important to know that the Catechism(1992) and Vatican Council II is not a break with the dogma EENS unless invisible and visible, hypothetical and objective cases are confused.What is invisible, Cardinal Kasper assumes is visible.So visible LG 16 is a break with the dogma EENS for him.

LG 14 TEXT BASED ON 1949 MISTAKE
It was because of this confusion in 1949 Boston, that it was assumed every one does not need to enter the Church and that a person in invincible ignorance can be saved without the baptism of water.So they inserted in Lumen Gentium 14 the text saying only those persons need to enter the Church to avoid Hell, who know about Jesus and the Church.Since those who are saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions to the dogma, was the understanding in 1949 Boston.Remember this understanding was based on a falsehood i.e there is known salvation outside the Church, someone saw people in Heaven without the baptism of water.It is upon this irrationality that we have this text in LG 14.
Related image
LUMEN GENTIUM 14 HAS A MISTAKE
14. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.
They are fully incorporated in the society of the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ accept her entire system and all the means of salvation given to her, and are united with her as part of her visible bodily structure and through her with Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. The bonds which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a "bodily" manner and not "in his heart."(12*) All the Church's children should remember that their exalted status is to be attributed not to their own merits but to the special grace of Christ. If they fail moreover to respond to that grace in thought, word and deed, not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged.
Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.-Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II

(Note: Why did the text in red have to be inserted in LG 14 which refers to all needing 'faith and baptism', similar to EENS which says all need to convert into the Church?
The text in red refers to hypothetical cases. They are meaningless in this passage.They cannot be relevant to all needing 'faith and baptism'. They cannot be exceptions to all needing 'faith and baptism'.
They were inserted since in 1949 Boston they were considered to be explicit, seen in flesh exceptions to EENS.The objective mistake from the Letter (1949) is carried over into Vatican Council II (LG 14).There was a 'development of a dogma' based on a factual mistake in the Cardinal Marchetti Selvaggiani letter, issued during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII.)

THEOLOGY BASED ON A MISTAKE
The LG 14 insertion comes from the Holy Office 1949 and the Archdiocese of Boston wrongly assuming there is salvation outside the Church, since there are known cases, physically known cases of persons saved without the baptis mof water.People in Heaven were considered exceptions on on earth.

SAME PATTERN IN LG 8 TOO
It was based on this objective error that LG 8 mentions being saved with 'elements of sanctification and truth', as if these cases are known and so relevant to the dogma EENS.

UR 3 IS ALSO HYPOTHETICAL
Similarly it is based on this objective error in 1949 that UR 3 refers to those Christians saved in imperfect communion with the Church, as if these cases are known and phyiscally visible, so they were mentioned in Vatican Council II.

NA 2 WAS SUPERFLOUS
Similarly NA 2 refers to 'that ray of the Truth'.This is another hypothetical case interpreted as being objective, since this was the error pattern at Boston in 1949.It should not have been mentioned in Vatican Council II. It is like dead wood, flotsam and jetsam and unecessary Cushing Addition.
Related imageRelated image
MORE FLOTSAM AND JETSAM
Ad Gentes 7 mentions 'seeds of the Word' and AG 7 and LG 14 refer to the catechuman saved with the desire for the baptism of water, which he did not receive before dieing and there are those  cases of persons in invincible ignorance, allegedly personally known and saved. None of these cases should have been mentioned in Vatican Council II.
There cannot be adevelopent of a doctrine or dogma based on invisible cases.However the mistake was made in 1949 and the error transferred  to Vatican Council II on a big scale. It is as if they called up the Council only to officially approve the error in the 1949 Cardinal Marchetti Selvaggiani Letter from Rome.

EVEN A POPE CAN MAKE A FACTUAL ERROR
This is a magisterial error. If any one, pope or cardinal, infers that we humans can physically see people in Heaven saved this year with or without the baptism of water, it is nonsense.-Lionel Andrades

Maike Hickson

It would be useful if Dr.Maike Hickson could comment on this before the Synod Exhortation is out http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/it-would-be-useful-if-drmaike-hickson.html


Dr. Robert Hickson
Cardinal Ratzinger, Fr.John Hardon and Robert Hickson were interpreting the Catechism and Vatican Council II with irrational Cushingism as a theology
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/cardinal-ratzinger-frjohn-hardon-and.html
_______________________

It would be useful if Dr.Maike Hickson could comment on this before the Synod Exhortation is out

Comment from the blog One Peter 5 : Preparations for the Exhortation are Being Made – in Rome and in Germany

vatican-454979_1280LionelAndrades
In the recent interview with Avvenire, Pope Benedict's denial of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the old ecclesiology by using an irrational inference to change theology, could be used as a model for change by Cardinal Walter Kasper - and the traditionalists are not prepared. Even Dr. Robert Hickson is unaware of it.This can be seen in his review of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
http://pblosser.blogspot.it/20...
http://www.christianorder.com/...

Dr.Hickson uses irrational Cushingism ( there are known exceptions to EENS) as a theology as did Fr.John Hardon.
 
Cardinal Ratzinger, Fr.John Hardon and Robert Hickson were interpreting the Catechism and Vatican Council II with irrational Cushingism as a theology
http://eucharistandmission.blo...
 
Maike Hickson
It would be useful if Dr.Maike Hickson could comment on this before the Exhortation is out.
-Lionel Andrades



http://www.onepeterfive.com/preparations-for-the-exhortation-are-being-made-in-rome-and-in-germany/

Cardinal Ratzinger, Fr.John Hardon and Robert Hickson were interpreting the Catechism and Vatican Council II with irrational Cushingism as a theology














In my usual scavenging I came up with a copy of YouCat. It is truly awful. When I compared it with Benedict's 2006 Compendium of the Catechism, I immediately recognized how good Benedict's work is. It is theological throughout and hangs together as an integrated text.-Benedict's Compendium, the CCC, and YouCat compared, from the blog Musings of a Pertinacious Papist.
Lionel :
When you say it is theological are you reading it with Feeneyism or Cushingism ?

Feeneyism according to Wikipedia : with comments

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/02/feeneyism-according-to-wikipedia-with.html

At the 'New Traditional College' will the faculty interpret magisterial documents with Feeneyism or Cushingism ?

The theology mentioned in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, is meaningless and does not apply.In a way they kind of duped all of us, including me http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/the-theology-mentioned-in-letter-of.html

Traditionalists are still interpreting Lumen Gentium 16 with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/traditionalists-are-still-interpreting.html


Traditionalists like Reuters correspondents use Cushingism to interpret Vatican Council II : Feeneyism cannot be part of the dialogue.http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/traditionalists-like-reuters.html

No denial from traditionalists and Catholic journalists : contemporary TLM and Novus Ordo Mass is modernist, accompanied with a heretical theology (for them) http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/no-denial-from-traditionalists-and.html
 

The baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance can be interpreted according to Feeneyism or Cushingism, one approach is irrational http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/the-baptism-of-desire-and-blood-and.html

Michael Voris could show how Vatican Council II can be interpreted with Cushingism or Feeneyism,with visible exceptions or without them, irrationally or rationally http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/09/michael-voris-could-show-how-vatican.html

CDF Notification on Fr.Jacques Dupuis S.j repeats the error of the 1949 Holy Office Letter : the mistake was placed in Vatican Council in so many passages

SSPX priests are using Cushingism instead of Feeneyism as a theology this is a break with the Syllabus of Errors,traditional ecumenism and the old ecclesiology based on the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/sspx-priests-are-using-cushingism.html

________________________________________
Recently Robert Hickson released a damning indictment of the CCC which Fr. John Hardon did not want published while he was still alive. Hardon claimed that the final text was not Catholic - Benedict's Compendium, the CCC, and YouCat compared, from the blog Musings of a Pertinacious Papist.
Lionel:
Fr.Hardon was interpreting Vatican Council II with irrational Cushingism as a theology.


Image result for Photo of Fr.John Hardon

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 interprets Church documents with an irrational premise and conclusion and offers the Traditional Latin Masshttp://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/ro me-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 salus http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/for-cardinal-raymond-burke-these.html
 

_____________________________________
 
 Dr. Robert Hickson
There was an objective mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and its conclusion was placed in Vatican Council II(LG 14) and Cardinal Ratzinger, Fr.John Hardon and Robert Hickson were unaware of it. They did not mention it.
 
There is an objective mistake in Vatican Council II. Based on this error Pope Benedict said the dogma EENS has 'developed': avoid the error and we are back to the old ecclesiology with Vatican Council II