Friday, August 4, 2017

SSPX Italy is not affirming Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) for political reasons

The Society of St.Pius X(SSPX) is still living in the 1950's when a new theology entered the Church and was introduced in Vatican Council II, so that the Council can be interpreted in harmony with the exclusivist ecclesiology of the past -but also as a rupture with the past.
A report on the SSPX Italy website shows how they are not aware of what really happened in the 1950's and so now they cannot  interpret the Council in harmony with the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
mons. Lefebvre - mons. Schneider

There is a report by Father Angel Citati of the SSPX 1 in which he has no idea of how Vatican Council II can be interpreted with Lumen Gentium 16(LG 16) referring to an invisible case, there is no false premise of invisible people being visible, there is no irrationality like invisible baptism of desire is a visible exception to the dogma EENS, there is really no known salvation outside the Church to justify the new ecumenism and inter-religious relations, there can only be the rational and traditional theology of Feeneyism and no irrational and non traditional theology of Cushingism, which the SSPX, Bishop Atnanasius Schneider and Roberto dei Mattei  are using.
I assume they do not know of Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and so this article by Fr. Citati is written in ignorance.It is similar to the statements on Vatican Council II issued by Bishop Athanasius Schneider and other traditionalists who only can use politically correct Cushingism.

I assume they do not know or do not understand. But what if they do know? Are they for a particular reason not affirming the exclusivist ecclesiology of the past?
For worldly reasons are the traditionalists choosing to interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition? They are choosing the false premise of invisible people being visible? They prefer irrationality like invisible baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are visible exceptions to the dogma EENS and so EENS can no more be interpreted like the missionaries in the 16th century? They prefer to believe that there is known salvation outside the Church and this opens the way for a new ecumenism, which they criticize, but which they support with the irrational New Theology, Cushingite theology which they use.
They choose the new theology since it is politically correct and so do not have to proclaim Feeneyite theology which will be opposed by the Left and Pope Francis? It makes life easier for the traditionalists? Like for example, Una Voce approving the Tridentine Latin Mass in England offered with the new ecclesiology,Cushingite theology and this is approved by Ecclesia Dei and so the Latin Mass Society gets recognition.
But what if they do know? What if they all know what they are doing and saying?Are they all not affirming Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) to guard their worldly interests and life style?
Image result for Edward Schaefer PhotoImage result for Edward Schaefer's college angelorum Photo
What if Deacon Edward Schaefer affirmed Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) as a traditionalist? Would he get an accreditation for his new college in Florida in 2019? Will the local bishop give him the same treatment Bishop Olson meted out to the Fischer More College in Fort Worth, Texas?
Image result for Photo Econe Switzerland SSPXImage result for Photo Econe Switzerland SSPX
With Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) will Econe, Switzerland the headquarters of the SSPX be considered Anti Semitic?  Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) does not oppose the dogma EENS since LG 16, LG 8, LG 14, AG 7, AG 11, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc all refer to hypothetical and invisible cases in 2017.So the Council is really saying all Jews and other non Catholics need to be members of the Catholic Church to go to Heaven and avoid Hell.
Image result for Photo SSPX, AlbanoImage result for Photo SSPX, Albano
Would the leftist media in Italy open up a new campaign against the property and rights of the SSPX, Albano ? For affirming Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) they could be called racist and haters.
Image result for Photo Fr.John ZuhlsdorfImage result for Photo theologian Thomas PinkImage result for Photo theologian Thomas Pink
So to avoid all this the SSPX, Italy on its website has produced a harmless, vague, acceptable for the Left report, written by Fr.  Angel Citati.He only knows about Vatican Council II (Cushingism).So there is no controversy. This is another report like the usual from Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Roberto dei Mattei and Correspondenza Romano, Chris Ferrra, Michael Matt and the Remnant,Fr. John Zuhlsdorf, Joseph Shaw and Rorate Caeili,Thomas Pink and John Lamonte which maintain the status quo with which they are all comfortable with.
Was this how it was in 1965 I ask myself? Those who knew about Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) for some reason could not proclaim it in public.
Image result for Photo Ralph Martin and Robert FastiggiImage result for Photo Bishop Donald sanborns sem inary in Florida photo
Even among the sedevacantists  Bishop Donald Sanborn does not proclaim Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) since he wants to guard his expensive seminary in Florida.
Image result for Photo Peter and Michael Dimond,Most Holy Family Monastery New YorkImage result for Photo Peter and Michael Dimond,Most Holy Family Monastery New York
But why don't the Most Holy Family Monastery, New York, the sedevacantists Peter and Michael Dimond  not proclaim it? Is it because they really don't understand it or is it because they know they made a mistake about Vatican Council II all these years and now do not want to talk about it?
Image result for Photo Ralph Martin and Robert FastiggiImage result for Photo Ralph Martin and Robert Fastiggi
Ralph Martin and Robert Fastiggi at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary ,Detroit knows that Vatican Council II (Cushingite) is irrational.But if they affirm Vatican Concil II ( Feeneyite) will the Archbishop of Detroit allow them to teach theology? No.
Image result for Photo Renewal Ministries Ralph MartinImage result for Photo Rewnweal Ministrie Ralph Martin
Does Ralph Martin's Renewal Ministries consider Cushingism the work of the Holy Spirit? Of course not.So is this why there is no public statement from them on this issue? Neither from Church Militant TV studios in Detroit?
Image result for Photo my wayImage result for Photo I chose this way
I do not interpret Vatican Council II like the traditionalists. I stay clear of the Lefebvrists and Leftists.
I attend the Novus Ordo and Tridentine Rite Mass affirming the traditional and exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church, without rejecting Vatican Council II.
I affirm the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) as being implicit,subjective and hypothetical. Since this is the only way it can be for us human beings. For God they can be explicit. So on earth, I reject BOD, BOB and I.I as being explicit and so being objective exceptions, to traditional EENS and the old ecclesiology.
Since I affirm the old ecclesiology there is no place for the new ecumenism.Since in the old ecclesiology there is no salvation outside the Church.
Most people are oriented to Hell since they die without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7, LG14) so proclaiming the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation and the non separation of Church and State is a priority for me.This is important for saving souls from Hell.

So it is important to re-interpret Cushingite theology of the Church from Pope Pius XII to Pope Francis.Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus are Cushingite.They should not be rejected but be re-interpreted with Feeneyite theology.
Similarly when Mystici Corporis, the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X etc refer to BOD, BOB and I.I they must be interpeted as referring to invIsible people at that time and even in 2017. They must not be projected as being known people saved outside the Church. This was the mistake of the liberal theologians.
Without these errors it is easy to affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and then Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Fr.Citati will see that there can only be an ecumenism of return 2.Collegiality will not be an issue when the past ecclesiology is affirmed since there will be unity on traditional doctrine.Religious liberty will not be an issue just as it never was past ecclesiology of the Church.There will be no rupture with Tradition.Pre and post Vatican Council II ecclesiology will be the same without the irrational premise and false conclusion.
Vatican Council II (Cushingism) is the Arian-like heresy in the Church.3

Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) makes the Council a legitimate Council. Since the theology is rational and traditional. It does not contradict the past Magisterium inspired by the Holy Spirit.4 But Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) is heretical is not the work of the Holy Spirit.Bishop Schneider still does not know this.
Image result for Photo J'accuse le ConcileImage result for Photo J'accuse le Concile
When Archbishop Marcel Lefbvre wrote J'accuse le Concile (1976) 5 he did not know about Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite). Now the SSPX knows about it.It is time to act.
When they accept or proclaim Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) they are not rejecting Vatican Council II and neither are they rejecting Tradition.Instead they can ask 'Rome to come back to the faithwith a rational and traditional interpretation of the Council which has an obvious continuity with the past and no ambiguity within it.This is only possible when they affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite).-Lionel Andrades 

Ancora su mons. Lefebvre, il Concilio e mons. Schneider

 l’ecumenismo, la collegialità, la libertà religiosa, le relazioni con il mondo moderno – e individua in questi errori del Concilio i prodromi della crisi attuale.


 L’ultimo è soltanto un errore storico: l’arianesimo, infatti, fu definitivamente debellato solo dopo diversi secoli e il superamento della crisi non avvenne da un giorno all’altro. 

 «Il Vaticano II fu una legittima assemblea presieduta dai Papi e dobbiamo mantenere verso questo Concilio un atteggiamento rispettoso».

Non è, ad esempio, il tono del noto opuscolo J’accuse le Concile (1976) di mons. Lefebvre. Ma neppure il tono degli scritti di mons. Lefebvre anteriori al 1976 era identico a quello di J’accuse le Concile[8], segno, questo, che il fondatore della Fraternità San Pio X è approdato gradualmente a prese di posizione pubbliche più dure, 

No comments: