Look at the mistakes on the website and the Internet reports of Bishop Donald Sanborn.He has listed many references to 'the baptism of desire' as if they they were personally known cases ;people known to other people in the past.He imagines these hypothetical cases were objectively seen in real life in the past (St.Thomas Aquinas, Catechism of the Council of Trent etc) and they excluded the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.After this objective mistake he then infers that these 'visible' cases in the past were exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus( EENS) during his the present times. Invisible people in the past are also visible exceptions to the dogma EENS for him, in the present times(2017).! He has listed invisible cases of the baptism of desire and infers they are visible and then calls this the Anti-Feeneynite Catechism.1
Even now after being informed about that error he cannot get himself to pull down that report or even admit he made an error. When contacted he says he does not want to be contacted.
On the website 2 of the Most Holy Trinity seminary, Florida the sedevacantist bishop says :-
Most Holy Trinity Seminary was founded in 1995 in order to provide priestly training for young men who thoroughly reject Vatican II, its reforms, and the Modernist hierarchy which promulgates them. This position is in contrast to the seminaries of traditionalist groups that operate with the approval of the Modernist hierarchy, or who seek this approval.
Lionel: He is referring to a Vatican Council II in which hypothetical and invisible cases are considered objective and personally known. So LG 16, LG 8, LG 14, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22, AG 7, AG 14 for the faculty and students would not be invisible cases but personally exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
For me LG 16 etc refer to invisible case so there is nothing in the Council to contradict Feeneyite EENS.
The Seminary trains priests according to pre-Vatican II standards.
Lionel: By pre-Vatican II standards he means when he interprets all references to the baptism of desire by the popes and saints as referring to visible cases in their life.He then also projects those cases of the past as explicit exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS in 2017.So with this irrationality Vatican II still stands rejected.
I affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) which avoids all this mixing up of invisible cases as being visible.
Its rule, discipline, spiritual formation, and academic curriculum imitate faithfully those which were in effect in seminaries before the Second Vatican Council.
Lionel: He interprets all magisterial documents with the Cushingite theology,i.e invisible people are visible in the present times. He applies this irrationality to Vatican Council II, the dogma EENS and the Nicene Creed.He considers this irrationality as existing before the Council.
By training priests in this manner, the seminary hopes to contribute to the solution to the problem of the nearly universal desintegration of Catholic faith, morals, discipline, and liturgy which the Second Vatican Council has caused.
Lionel: He does not interpret Vatican Council II, the dogma EENS and the Nicene Creed without this irrationaliy and considers this Catholic teaching.It is the same interpretation of the liberals and the present magisterium of the Church. They are all using the irrational New Theology.
The seminary sees that the only solution to the problem of Vatican II, however, is to condemn it as a false council which was dominated by heretics, and to discard and ignore its decrees and enactments.
Lionel: He has no comment on Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite).
Consequently, the Seminary does not seek to be recognized by the heretical hierarchy which promulgates Vatican II, nor does it seek to work with the Novus Ordo clergy, as if in a single church or religion.
Lionel: He has presented a long list of baptism of desire cases in his Anti Feeneyite Catechism which he assumes are known exceptions to the dogma EENS(Feeneyite). He then mixes up Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance) as being visible when it is invisible for us .When I ask him if LG 16 is visible or invisible he will not answer since his modernist theology is based on visible for us LG 16 etc.
Then he blames Vatican Council II.
August 2, 2017
Sedevacantist Bishop Donald Sanborn's Anti Feeneyite Catechism has an objective error