Saturday, June 17, 2017

Now if Chris Ferrara , Roberto dei Mattei,Bishop Robert Morlino,Fr. John Zuhlsdorf and Edward Schaefer affirm a Feeneyite Vatican Council II and EENS they will be persecuted. Would they be ready to do this? : Collegium Sanctorum Angelorum

Image result for Photos of Deacon Edward Schaefer

When Deacon Edward Schaefer has a true Catholic college, Feeneyite in its philosophy and theology and so in harmony with the missionaries of the 16th century, the secularists may not grant him accreditation.As in home schooling the Collegium Sanctorum Angelorum(CSA) could then be an educational institution which helps students prepare for examinations, for which they apply for privately.
If CSA  is Cushingite in its philosophy and theology  it will be a rupture with Tradition.
This is something obvious.
There would be the Latin Mass but with Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus interpreted with an irrational premise. CSA would be the same as the liberal, traditional and sedevacantist educational institutions today.
Even the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, traditionalists,interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism.They are Feeneyite on the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So their position on Vatican Council II at their educational institutions would not be clear.
Presently there is no model of a Catholic college or school whose philosophy and theology is Feeneyite, similar to those in the 16th century.
Image result for Photos of bishop PivarunasImage result for Photos of Bishop SanbornImage result for Photos of Bishop Fellay
The SSPX and sedevacantist institutions follow the present magisterium and affirm the new theology. Bishop Pirvanus, Bishop Sanborn and Bishop Fellay all assume for example, invisible cases of the baptism of desire are visible exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So immediately there is a doctrinal and theological break  with EENS and the old ecclesiology.They are in line with the Vatican Curia and the liberals.Theologically they have rejected the Syllabus of Errors.
Students are taught every one needs to enter the Church for salvation except for... so some people do not need to enter the Church as members, some people are saved outside the Church, there are exceptions to John 3:5 and Mark 16:16.This is all Cushingism.It is not really Catholic.
With Feeneyite philosophy and theology Vatican Council II is no more an issue.The Collegium does not have to reject Vatican Council II as the Fisher More College reportedly did.
It  does not deny Vatican Council II.It informs the diocese that they accept Vatican Council II.The college announces that they are a Catholic college where the students accept Vatican Council II.There is no tension on this point.They also interpret Vatican Council II rationally and with no surprises.
It also has to be pointed out though, that the college does not reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and affirms it in harmony with Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) and past Catechisms( Trent etc).So they support the Syllabus of Errors which is in harmony with Vatican Council II(Feeneyite) and EENS(Feeneyite).Invisible baptism of desire is not a visible exception to EENS( Feeneyite). There are no practical exceptions to EENS( Feeneyite) in the USA in 2017.It is here where the Left will be intolerant.The Board Members of the Collegium must be prepared for this opposition.
There are three requirements mentioned for the Board Member on the website of the Collegium.
1.A board member must be a practicing Catholic, committed to the traditional Mass...
Yes and he must affirm the old ecclesiology with which the Latin Mass was associated. So he must interpret magisterial documents with Feeneyism and not Cushingism. 
... and the Church’s traditional ways of  praying (Divine Office) and her traditional teachings. 
Yes all the traditional teachings, I repeat, must be interpreted with the philosophy and theology of Feeneyism. So when the Catechism of Pope Pius X refers to invincible ignorance, it is understood, that this is a reference to an invisible person. It is not someone personally known in the present times or the past.
When the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 mentions the desire for the baptism of water of a catechumen who dies before receiving it, it is a reference to a hypothetical case not someone physically visible.
Similarly when Lumen Gentium 14 refers to those 'who know ', this is not an exception to the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. Since those who know or are in invincible ignorance and are not saved or saved, would only be known to Jesus.They are 'zero case' for us in 2017. We cannot name any particular person saved as such. So LG 14 does not refer to an exception to EENS( Feeneyite)
A board member must be committed to the mission of the institution.
The mission is being a Catholic college inspired by Catholic moral and faith values interpreted with traditional theology (Feeneyite) and where the new common innovation ( Cushingism) is rejected.
A board member must sign the Oath Against Modernism.
On Oath he could also say that he affirms the Nicene and Apostles Creed interpreted with the old theology, which was rational and traditional. He could also clarify that he rejects Cushingite philosophy and theology.
He could clarify that Pope Benedict XVI made a heretical mistake in March 2016 when he stated that EENS was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century and that there was a development with Vatican Council II. This is Cushingism.
They could clarify that like the apologist John Martignoni, they would believe that zero cases of something are not exceptions to the dogma EENS. The baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are not exceptions to the dogma EENS.This is being Feeneyite for me.
Image result for Photos of Bishop Thomas E.Gullickson
Like Bishop Thomas E.Gullickson and Fr. Stefano Visintin osb they could clarify that for them invisible and hypothethical cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, allegedly without the baptism of water, are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is Feeneyism.
This is something  obvious and objective.It can be affirmed by Catholics at the Latin Mass or the Novus Ordo Mass. There will be no change in Church-ecclesiology.
So they will reject Rahnerian theology based on invisible people being visible.
The Board Members must be clear that the present magisterium has made a theological mistake.They violate the Principle of Non Contradiction.They  also are at odds with the magisterium of the past. Do you just support the heresy and apostasy ? No.Cushingism is heretical.It is not Catholic philosophy. It creates a New Theology which is a rupture with Tradition.
The Board Members are Missionary according to Feeneyite and not Cushingite theology.Cushingite theology is modernism.It is a heresy as widespread in the Church as during the Arian heresy.Mission is traditional.It is based on knowing all non Catholics are on the way to Hell in general and not only those who 'know'.Those who know and do not know is Cushingism.
Image result for Photos of Deacon Edward Schaefer
The  Catechism of the Council of Trent, the Baltimore Catechism and the  Catechism of St.Pius X can also be interpreted with Cushingism or Feeneyism and the conclusion would be different.The Board Members must be aware of this.
With Feeneyism it would mean that the ecclesiology of the Church on mission, ecumenism, inter-religious dialogue, non separation of Church and State and the theology of the liturgy would be the same before and after Vatican Council II.
You can interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) with Cushingism or Feeneyism.
With Cushingism BOD, BOB and I.I excludes the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
For Feeneyites BOD, BOB and I.I are followed by the baptism of water and its effects in a way known to God.This is the dogmatic teaching in EENS.

With Feeneyism the entire theology of Vatican Council II changes.We are back to exclusivist salvation in the Church. We are back to the past ecclesiocenterism on ecumenism, all need to be incorporated into the Church as members for salvation, the Eucharist indicates outside the Church there is no salvation,there is traditional mission based on Hell and the last four things,there is the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation based on EENS...
When it is assumed that BOD and I.I are physically visible in the present times, I call it Cushingism.Church Militant TV, Catholic Answers, Catholic National Register and EWTN are Cushingites.
When we assume that the BOD and I.I are not physically visible, I call it Feeneyism.
These are two differenct theologies.
So in Flordia the Collegium  would have to correct the diocese. 
For me Lionel Andrades , the baptism of desire and blood with or without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church refers to a physically invisible case. So it cannot be relevant or an exception to the dogma EENS, as it was known to the 16th century missionaries.It can be the same with the Board Members.
 I Lionel Andrades interpret Vatican Council II without an irrational premise and so my conclusion is different from the magisterium of the two living popes and that of the USCCB.It is the same with the dogma EENS.
 This is Vatican Council II Feeneyite for me with these diagrams which follow.It must be the same for the Board Members and the students and faculty at a Catholic college.It is important to remember that we have found the missing link .We now know what makes Vatican Council II a rupture or continuity with the past. This was not known 50 years back.This was not known by Chris Ferrera when he wrote his book The Great Facade.
Image result for Photo of Fr.Nicholas GrunerImage result for Photos of Roberto de Mattei
It was not known to Fr.Nicholas Gruner and Roberto dei Mattei when they wrote on Vatican Council II. It was not known also to conservatives Bishop Robert Morlino and Fr. John Zuhlsdorf.A new Catholic College now has an advantage. We have found the missing link as to what makes causes the hermeneutic of rupture or continuity.
Now if Chris Ferrara , Roberto dei Mattei,Bishop Robert Morlino,Fr. John Zuhlsdorf and Edward Schaefer affirm a Feeneyite Vatican Council II and EENS they will be persecuted. Would they be ready to do this?

Image result for Photos Letter of the Holy Office 1949Image result for Photos Letter of the Holy Office 1949

-Lionel Andrades

No comments: