Wednesday, June 29, 2016

The New Theology, the official Cushingite theology contradicts the Principle of Non Contradiction


A conceptual road sign indicating Paradox Ahead  - stock photo



Comments on the blog Musings of a Pertinacious Papist :"For the record: Msgr. Gherardini: "Vatican II must be debated""
On Amateur Brain Surgeons blog there was this link, along with one of his blog posts.

THE FIRST PRINCIPLES
http://www.catholicapologetics.info/catholicteaching/philosophy/princip.htm

So I posted the following report on my blog based on his First Principles.

JUNE 23, 2016
IT IS A METAPHYSICAL LAW THAT WE CANNOT SEE OR KNOW PERSONS SAVED OR ABOUT TO BE SAVED WITH THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE, WITH OR WITHOUT THE BAPTISM OF WATER? http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/o-it-is-metaphysical-law-that-we-cannot.html

He removed it and did not comment.

I  wrote this report on my blog based on my comment on his First Principles.
Ann Barnhardt is a Catholic even though she violates the Principle of Non Contradiction
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/ann-barnhardt-is-catholic-even-though.html

It is interesting how Ann and ABS refer to the Principle of Non Contradiction.
-Lionel Andrades

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6312447&postID=7843293754419428069&page=1&token=1467228860934

What Social Reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ will Bishop Fellay politically affirm ?

'... the Society of Saint Pius X intends to redouble its efforts to establish and to spread, with the means that Divine Providence gives to it, the social reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ.- Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X,Ecône, June 29, 2016   The Feast of Saints Peter and Paul
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2016/06/important-sspx-communique-after-meeting.html
When Bishop Bernard Fellay says  the Society of Saint Pius X intends to redouble its efforts to establish and to spread, the social reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ, this is just a slogan.
Doctrinally he is not in a position to affirm the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation.
1.He is unable to affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Feeneyite) which is the basis of the teaching on the Social Reign of Our Lord  Christ the King.
Instead of extra ecclesiam nulla salus( EENS- Feeneyite) he promotes an EENS (Cushingite) which is acceptable to the Jewish Left.
So if there are exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Church, (when the dogma EENS( Feeneyite) does not mention any exceptions), then why should all need to formally enter the Church for salvation and why should all political legislation have as its center the Catholic Church and Jesus Christ?
2.He has made an objective error, a doctrinal error, in public and there is no correction or acknowledgement from him or the SSPX.1
3.He did not comment on the recent Vatican Document on the Jews, issued by the Vatican Commission for Relations with the Jews.It was titled The Gifts and Calling of God are irrevocable.Jewish Left  rabbis associated with Israel were present at the Vatican Press Office Conference to announce this Document.It said Jews do not need to convert.It rejected Nostra Aetate 4 which says Catholics are the new people of God. It made no mention of Lumen Gentium 14 and Ad Gentes 7 which indicate all Jews need 'faith and baptism' for salvation.
4.He has removed articles from the SSPX website a few years back to prevent a clash with the Jewish Left.
5.Sometime back he asked the SSPX branches to protest against the ecumenical and inter religious dialogue meetings. When the Jewish Left threathened with their Anti-Semitic laws the protests were stopped.
6.He has disowned Bishop Richard Williamson and many priests of the SSPX Resistance who are labelled Anti-Semitic.
So what Social Reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ will he affirm ?
How can he politically support the Social Reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ  when he has not clarified the SSPX doctrinal position  on 1) EENS (Feenyite) or EENS (Cushingite) and 2).Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) or Vatican Council II( Cushingite).
The SSPX does not want to affirm Vatican Council II( Feeneyite) or EENS ( Feeneyite) since they will be opposed by the political Left and also cardinals and bishops who support the secular Left.
Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS),Feeneyite, is the basis for the Social Reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ and the separation of secularism and State.
The Church is in a crisis according to the SSPX, but, then so is the SSPX.
-Lionel Andrades

1

JUNE 14, 2016

SSPX doctrinal position is politically correct and heretical : Bishop Fellay interprets EENS and Vatican Council II assuming hypothetical cases are objectively known in the present times http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/sspx-doctrinal-position-is-politically.html


June 13, 2016
No one to defend Bishop Bernard Fellay : Heresy http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/no-one-to-defend-bishop-bernard-fellay.html

JUNE 13, 2016

THE DOCTRINAL POSITION OF BISHOP BERNARD FELLAY IS HERETICAL. HE ALSO CONTRADICTS THE SSPX DOCTRINAL GENERAL CHAPTER STATEMENT 2012 WHICH AFFIRMED EENS WITH NO EXCEPTIONS

http://eucharistandmission.blospot.it/2016/06/the-doctrinal-position-of-bishop.htmlCardinal Muller, Archbishop Di Noia and Bishop Fellay's theology is based on hypothetical cases being explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/cardinal-muller-archbishop-di-noia-and.html 

CARDINAL GERHARD MULLER, ARCHBISHOP AUGUSTINE DI NOIA, BISHOP BERNARD FELLAY MISTAKE HYPOTHETICAL REFERENCES AS BEING EXPLICIT IN THE PRESENT TIMES
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/cardinal-gerhard-muller-archbishop.html


Apologists Mons. Clifford Fenton, Fr.William Most and Fr. John Hardon considered implicit cases as being explicit: traditionalists agree any one who does this is wrong http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/apologists-mons-clifford-fenton.html

June 10, 2016
Here are the controversial passages again 

2.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/relations-jews-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_20151210_ebraismo-nostra-aetate_en.html
_________________________________________________

JUNE 29, 2016


Bishop of Regensburg, like Ecclesia Dei and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith must be asked to accept Vatican Council II (Feeneyite)

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/bishop-of-regensburg-like-ecclesia-dei.html

Bishop of Regensburg, like Ecclesia Dei and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith must be asked to accept Vatican Council II (Feeneyite)

Press Release of the Bishop of Regensburg concerning the Ordinations of the Society of Saint Pius X

Bistum Regensburg
June 22, 2016

The Bishop of Regensburg welcomes any initiative to overcome a schism, the rapprochement of groups separated from the Catholic Church and therefore to recover the visible unity of the Church.
Lionel:
 The bishop interprets Vatican Council II and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) with Cushingism instead of the traditional Feeneyite theology.This produces heresy. It is a break with the pre-Council of Trent  magisterium of the Church. It is also the official heresy of the contemporary magisterium. So all Catholics, not only traditionalists, are not obliged to follow this error of the Bishop of Regensburg.
The Bishop of Regensburg, like Ecclesia Dei and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith must be asked to accept Vatican Council II (Feeneyite).
_____________________________

The Ordinations announced for Zaitzkofen [Bavaria, Germany] on July 2, 2016, do not represent any danger presently, as the secretary of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, Archbishop Pozzo explains. It does not follow that they are canonically licit, nor an implicit recognition of the licitness of the consecration of the officiating bishop of the Society. The ordinations are only tolerated and accepted, without sanctions. This reflects a favor freely granted by the Holy See in view of a hoped-for convergence of the Society, after a period of intense reflection and examination. The criterion for the recognition of the Society is and remains the full affirmation of the authority of the Second Vatican Council and all its documents (religious freedom, ecumenism etc.).
Lionel:
I affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and reject Vatican Council II ( Cushingite).I interpret ecumenis, religious freedon and the teaching on the Social Reign of Christ the King according to Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus( Feneeyite).The SPPX and all Catholic religious communities could do the same -Lionel Andrades

JUNE 29, 2016

Vatican Council II (Cushingite) has erred but it can be re-intepreted with Feeneyism: Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) is not heretical

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/vatican-council-ii-cushingite-has-erred.html


  http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2016/06/press-release-of-bishop-of-regensburg.html

Ann Barnhardt is a Catholic even though she violates the Principle of Non Contradiction

After reading this, how can we possibly, possibly believe that this man is the Vicar of Christ, and that there is “no way we can know” his status?  To confess Lutheranism is to not be Catholic.  For Bergoglio to be the Pope requires that he be a CATHOLIC.  So, we are firmly into Principle of Non-Contradiction territory yet again. Bergoglio can not be both Catholic and not Catholic. His confession in the presser is Lutheran...
And neither is mine – reality is reality, and it is my job to conform my rational intellect to it, and the Principle of Non-Contradiction is a foundational plank in that conformation. I cannot, in good conscience, violate the Principle of Non-Contradiction. Calling Jorge Bergoglio “The Vicar of Christ” REQUIRES violation of the Principle of Non-Contradiction, therefore, the premise CANNOT be true. It cannot be included in the domain of “The Real”.
http://www.barnhardt.biz/2016/06/27/antipope-bergoglio-confesses-lutheranism/
Lionel :
If you accept that the baptism of desire is an exception to all needing to formally enter the Church for salvation( extra ecclesiam nulla salus) then you contradict the principle of identity.Since who could have known of a case of the baptism of desire today or in the past? No one can identify such a case.


For the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to assume that the baptism of desire was an exceptions to the Feneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS,was contrary to the Principle of Non Contradiction.You cannot really say every one needs to formally enter the Church except for some people, like those saved with the baptism of desire.Every one needs to enter but some do not! 1

Ann Barnhardt rejects Feeneyism and supports Cushingism in the interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II. She contradicts the Principle of Non Contradiction in both cases.So would she say that she is outside the Church, according to her own reasoning? Does she not have to be rational, traditional and non heretical to be a Catholic?

It  is a metaphysical law that we cannot see or know persons saved or about to be saved with the baptism of desire, with or without the baptism of water. Yet for Ann the baptism of desire is an exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENs. So it means that the baptism of desire is explicit and objective.This is her premise.With this irrational premise Ann concludes that there are known exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS. So for her EENs is no more like it was for the 16th century missionaries.With this irrational reasoning which leads to heresy she considers herself her Catholic.

Then what about the millions of ignorant or partially educated Catholics who do not know all the teachings of the Church? They still are Catholics for me.

There is no principle to support the view that hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire are objective to be an explicit exception to EENS. So how could Fr.Leonard Feeney say that the baptism of desire exists to be an exception to EENS? Where are the baptism of desire cases today ?

Ann Barnhardt violates the Principle of Non Contradiction and I think the mistake is innocent. I accept her as a Catholic. She is a Catholic.
-Lionel Andrades

http://www.barnhardt.biz/2016/06/27/antipope-bergoglio-confesses-lutheranism/


1.
JUNE 23, 2016
It is a metaphysical law that we cannot see or know persons saved or about to be saved with the baptism of desire, with or without the baptism of water? http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/o-it-is-metaphysical-law-that-we-cannot.html

Vatican Council II (Cushingite) has erred but it can be re-intepreted with Feeneyism: Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) is not heretical

Conclusion:

Vatican Council II (Cushingite) has erred but it can be re-interpreted with Feeneyism.Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) is not heretical.
So in conclusion I agree with Bishop Robert Sanborn  since Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) would be heretical.I also agree with Dr.Robert Fastiggi, since Vatican Council II ( Feneyite) is not heretical.
Bishop Sanborn assumed hypothetical cases were explicit exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( EENS-Feeneyite).Dr.Fastiggi was trying to interpret hypothetical cases as being only hypothetical and so for him they were not exceptions to EENS.So Vatican Council II would be in agreement with St. Robert Bellarmine for him.
I would choose to interpret Vatican Council II like Dr.Fastiggi since it would come across as rational and traditional.Dr.Fastiggi wanted to reconcile Vatican Council II with the past.This desire was strong in him.It was good.
I would also avoid the errors in Vatican Council II (Cushingite) which Bishop Sanborn correctly pointed out.
Vatican Council Ii supports St. Robert Bellamine on outside the Church there is no salvation.It does not contradict the Syllabus of Errors.
I think the two speakers were a good example of dialogue and they helped me to understand, how they think about Vatican Council II and the Church at large.
-Lionel Andrades


MONDAY, JUNE 27, 2016

Ecclesiology Debate: Bp. Donald Sanborn vs. Dr. Robert Fastiggi (2004) : irrational non traditional Cushingite theology adopted

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/ecclesiology-debate-bp-donald-sanborn.html

JUNE 27, 2016
Bishop Robert Sanborn and Dr.Robert Fastiggi are unaware of Cushing theology and irrational reasoning : at the centre of their debate is really the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus  http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/bishop-robert-sanborn-and-drrobert.html

Both of them would at times refer to an EENS or a Vatican Council II which is Cushingite or Feeneyite, I could just watch the mix up,sadly.I could see through the mistake they are both making innocently http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/both-of-them-would-at-times-refer-to.html


St.Robert Bellarmine and St. Augustine were Feeneyite in their ecclesiology as were the popes of their times.The popes since Pius XII to Pope Francis have accepted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/strobert-bellarmine-and-st-augustine.html


TUESDAY, JUNE 28, 2016

Bp. Donald Sanborn and Dr. Robert Fastiggi are mixing up Cushingism and Feeneyism as a theology  http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/bp-donald-sanborn-and-dr-robert.html


The 23,000 bishops and the Vicar of Christ assumed hypothetical cases were explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS-Feeneyite) : Cushingism is a break with St. Robert Bellarmine

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/the-23000-bishops-and-vicar-of-christ.html

So compared to the time of St. Robert Bellarmine we have a new ecclesiology and soteriology with heretical consequences: the Feeneyite theology of St. Robert Bellarmine is replaced with Cushingism

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/so-compared-to-time-of-st-robert.html

Lumen Gentium 8 reflects the new theology, Cushingism: it has to be re-interpreted with rational Feeneyism

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/lumen-gentium-8-reflects-new-theology.html


There is continuity with the past if Feeneyism is the theology used to interpret Vatican Council II. There is no continuity with the past if Cushingism is the theology.The theology of Pope John Paul II like that of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was Cushingite
 http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/there-is-continuity-with-past-if.html

The Council Fathers erred  http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/the-council-fathers-erred.html

This is un-precedented. We are faced with magisterial heresy.We have a Council which has approved heresy
 http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/10640-this-is-unprecedented-situation.html

The inferences of Bishop Sanborn and Dr. Fastiggi are mistaken.They have used the irrational premise of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and have accepted the non traditional inference

 http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/the-inferences-of-bishop-sanborn-and-dr.html


I don't think we need to eliminate Vatican Council II.We only need to re-interpret it with Feeneyism http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/i-dont-think-we-need-to-eliminate.html

_____________________________________________