None of the traditionalists bloggers are concerned that the Most Rev. David J. Malloy the Bishop of Rockford is not permitting priests to offer the Traditional Latin Mass and affirm in public the old ecclesiology associated with this Mass.None of them are saying that the priest should be able to say that outside the Church there is no salvation since this was how Mass was offered over the centuries.
None of them are saying that Vatican Council II must be interpreted with Feeneyism and in harmony with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known and offered by the priests in the 16th century.
None of them are saying that Lumen Gentium 16(invincible ignorance), Lumen Gentium 14( catechist with the desire for the baptism) refer to invisible, hypothetical and theoretical cases. So they are not exceptions to all needing to be incorporated into the Church as members in 2017 to avoid the fires of Hell.
Zero cases of something are not exceptions to the dogma EENS says the apologist John Martignoni.
Zero cases of something are not exceptions to the dogma EENS says the apologist John Martignoni.
None of them are saying that Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) is in harmony with extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Feeneyite) and so there is no change in ecclesiology of the Catholic Church before and after Vatican Council II.
Instead like the Bishop of Rockford and Pope Francis they have accepted an extra ecclesiam nulla salus in which invisible cases are supposed to be known exceptions to all needing to be incorporated into the Church for salvaton.
Like the liberals and the Masons the traditionalists have accepted that Vatican Council II is break with Tradition and in particular the dogma EENS , since LG 16, LG 14,LG 8 refer to visible and personally known cases in 2017 saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
They like to refer to themself as traditionalists and criticize 'those modernists' when they themself approve of the standard modernism of the liberals like EENS ( Cushngite) and Vatican Council(Cushingit).They interpret all magisterial documents using an irrational premise to create an innovated and non traditional conclusion.
When writing about the Rockford issue these points are not mentioned by Fr.John Zuhlsdord, Joseph Shaw ,New Catholic at Rorate Caeili and others.
Since in their personal life and on their media they would not like to affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Feeneyite) and Vatican Council II(Feeneyite).
So with this silence EENS (Cushingite) and Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) is not an issue with the Rockford diocese Bishop and priests.
For the priests of the Institute of Christ the King the baptism of desire is an explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This is Cushingism.
For these traditionalist priests Vatican Council II,LG 16 etc refers to explicit cases objectively seen in 2017.This again is Cushingism.It is also fantasy theology.
It is a deception and a lie.It is worldly prudency, syncretism and indifferentism.It is faking it to maintain the peace and their status quo.
They know that if they say that the baptism of desire is always invisible for us and never was an exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS, then Bishop Malloy would not give them permission to offer the Latin Mass.Since this would be Feeneyism. It would be rational and Catholic.
They know that if they had said in public that Vatican Council II(LG 16 etc) does not contradict the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS since invisible cases cannot be exceptions, they would not be allowed to offer Holy Mass.Even though they would be traditional and non heretical.
So the bloggers also maintain this silence and protect their reputation and status quo.
-Lionel Andrades
January 22, 2017
So with this silence EENS (Cushingite) and Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) is not an issue with the Rockford diocese Bishop and priests.
For the priests of the Institute of Christ the King the baptism of desire is an explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This is Cushingism.
For these traditionalist priests Vatican Council II,LG 16 etc refers to explicit cases objectively seen in 2017.This again is Cushingism.It is also fantasy theology.
It is a deception and a lie.It is worldly prudency, syncretism and indifferentism.It is faking it to maintain the peace and their status quo.
They know that if they say that the baptism of desire is always invisible for us and never was an exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS, then Bishop Malloy would not give them permission to offer the Latin Mass.Since this would be Feeneyism. It would be rational and Catholic.
They know that if they had said in public that Vatican Council II(LG 16 etc) does not contradict the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS since invisible cases cannot be exceptions, they would not be allowed to offer Holy Mass.Even though they would be traditional and non heretical.
So the bloggers also maintain this silence and protect their reputation and status quo.
-Lionel Andrades
January 22, 2017
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment