Sunday, March 12, 2017

Catholic-Protestant debates, discussions use irrational theology of Cushingism: Scott Hahn, Kenneth Samples unaware of magisterial error

(40:30)You would rather go to the official and authoritative teachings of the Catholic Church.You would find them in the documents of Vatican Council II, you would find them in the famous book Denzinger, it is the source of Catholic dogma...and there you will find what the Church, what the Holy Spirit requires of faithful Catholics to believe and even do...-Scott Hahn 

In Catholic-Protestant debates and discussions both groups use the theology of Cushingism.It is irrational, non traditional and an innovation in the Church.They do not choose rational Feeneyite theology, which does not use an irrational premise.
Before 1949 the magisterium used Feeneyism as a theology and after 1949 it is Cushingism.This new theology was approved by the magisterium.It is based on a philosophical error.
Scott Hahn on a video (10:28) refers to the  Magisterium, the  teaching authority of the Church.1
He means the present magisterium which interprets Vatican Council II, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1995) with irrational Cushingism. Liberal theologians, and the magisterium, now interpret all catechisms and statements of the popes and saints with Cushingism.
Cushingism assumes there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, people in the present times who have been saved outside the Church.It assumes there are visible and  nameable people saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.This is irrational but central to Cushingism.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 is Cushingite in its second half.It contradicts the first part.The reasoning in the second half of the Letter was used in Vatican Council II.
So Vatican Council II is interpreted with Cushingism by Catholics and Protestants. Also the 1949 Letter was placed in the Denzinger by the liberal Cushingite theologian Fr.Karl Rahner s.j.
So with the Feeneyite-Cushingite choice there-  both groups choose Cushingism,as do the popes.
Scott Hahn says that we are saved by grace alone(19:34) and also justified as such(11:41)(16:16)but what about the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (John 3:5, Mark 16:16 etc)? Scott had his Catholic religious formation with the theology of Cushingism. So the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church originally was Feeneyite could have no meaning for him.
(25:39) Is the Catholic Church the true Church and the only Church of Our Saviour Lord Jesus Christ ? Scott answers -Yes.However he does not say that all Protestants are oriented to Hell. Since he does not beleive this.This would be Feeneyite for him. It would not be magiseterial for him.He assumes there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as suggested by the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and then repeated in Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.He accepts that invisible cases are visible on earth and they exclude being saved in the Catholic Church with 'faith and baptism'.
An evangelical Christian Kenneth Samples, who is a former Catholic observes :
(33.04) I went through Vatican Council II and the Catechisms that the way we believe on salvation is the way they do...'. He does not know that the Council and Catechism can be interpreted with Feeneyism and Scott Hahn does not tell him this.
Samples says:
(34:19) Salvation by faith alone and grace alone is really what the New Testament teaches...Scott Hahn and I differ on this...and I think that the Catholic view is distorted.It is off base..
He refers to the Cushingite interpretation since this is the only one he knows of.
Scott Hahn says :
(35:27) De fide teaching requires all Catholics to believe and live out the grace by which we are saved by is a living and dynamic and active faith it is the life of a Son that Christ communicates to us...
Yes but with which theology do we live it? The saints did not use an irrational premise to reject the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.Vatican Council II (Cushingite) rejects this ecclesiology but Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) does not .It affirms the old ecclesiocentrism which is rejected in Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus.
I have mentioned in a previous blog post: 
Christian professors of theology make no comment or have nothing to say on a faith-issue, when I send them these blog posts.It is their first exposure to factual errors in Vatican Council II .There are no theological papers or precedents from which they can draw support.The basic error is there in philosophy.It  has spilled over into theology.Now there is a new Catholic theology on salvation based on a philosophical error, an irrational premise.2
They cannot draw support from the views of the present two popes.
Last March 2016 in an interview published in the daily Avvenire, Pope Benedict XVI assured the Jewish Left  and whoever mattered, that extra ecclesiam nulla salus was no more like it was for the 16th century missionaries. There was a development of doctrine, he said, with Vatican Council II.He meant Vatican Council II (Cushingite), which assumes invisible cases are visible and hypothetical cases are defacto known in 2017 are examples of salvation outside the Church. So there was for him, known salvation outside the Church.Anyway, this was also the mistake in Vatican Council II and he 'only' repeated the same error in Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus.He chose Cushingism, from the Feeneyite-Cushingite theological model.2
When there is a reference to the baptism of desire or being saved in invincible ignorance in the writings of the popes and saints the liberal Catholic theologians assume this is a reference to known people who are saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. So the theology they have chosen,whether they know it or not,is Cushingite.
So like theologians Ratzinger, Rahner, Kung and Kasper theologians at large have interpreted Vatican Council II as a rupture with the  Syllabus of Errors.It was a break with EENS as it was known to Fr. Francis Xavier, St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Francis of Assisi, St Teresa of Avila...The liberal theologians have created a new EENS and Vatican Council II, interpreted with the Cushingite model.They even re-interpret St. Robert Bellarmine, St.Thomas Aquinas and St.Alphonsus Ligouiri with Cushingism.2.
So how Catholics and Protestants discuss the Catholic Faith is determined by the Cushingite magisterium which controls how theology is being taught at Pontifical Universities.They make sure it is with the error, which is not Catholic or traditional and really is heretical.Today we are faced with the issue of magisterial heresy.
Tom O'Loughlin, professor of theology, at the University of Nottingham, England and Gavin D'Costa, professor of theology at the University of Bristol, England, have been informed. I have e-mailed some of these reports to them.
Even after being informed, it seems, they still will maintain the lie.They will continue to use irrational philosophy.They will support the false premise and false conclusion.They are  supported by the pro-Left English Catholic hierarchy which issues the mandatum for a Catholic to teach the new theology, Cushingism.The use of the false premise is mandatory.2
Catholic-Protestant discussions could also be held with all magisterial documents ( Vatican Council II, Catechism of the Catholic Church, Council of Florence 1441 on extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Nicene Creed, Athanasiius Creed, Catechism of Pope Pius X, Council of Trent etc) interpreted with traditional Feeneyite theology.Then Vatican Council II( Feeneyite) would be in harmony with the 'strict interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century.The tone and content of this discussion would then change.It would mean all Protestants are on the way to Hell according to Vatican Council II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church etc.-Lionel Andrades

Debate: Catholic vs Protestant - Catholicism and Evangelicalism - Scott Hahn vs Kenneth Samples


MARCH 11, 2017

English Christian theologians nonplussed : first exposure to factual errors in Vatican Council II


MARCH 4, 2017

English universities present a lie on Catholic theology and doctrine - unethical for academics

MARCH 10, 2017

University of Nottingham professor maintains invisible cases are visible : irrational inference not professional or ethical

MARCH 8, 2017

No denial from Archbishop Kevin Mcdonald, Tom O' Loughlin : there is an objective error in the text of Vatican Council II

 FEBRUARY 18, 2017

These terms and definitions should be used.Then liberals like Cardinal Kasper cannot get away with confusion and lies in the name of theology.

Email Glossary

Cardinals and bishops do not know the name of anyone saved outside the Catholic Church in 2016. Yet all Catholics, including Catholic religious communities and organisations have to assume that there are such people.. This is another LIE.
The FSSP and the Institute of Christ the King are allowed to offer the Traditional Latin Mass since they have chosen to compromise.They have chosen to lie.
I interpret the following terms with Feeneyism and the two popes and the cardinals do so with Cushingism(so does the SSPX).
I use Feeneyism and Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz and the Franciscans of the Immaculate  use Cushingism.
For me the Baptism of Desire is Feeneyite and for them it isCushingite.For me Invincible Ignorance is Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite.For meVatican Council II is Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite.
For me Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus is Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite.
For me the Nicene Creed is Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite.
For me the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Bostonis Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite.
I avoid the New Theology, while they uses it.
For me the Catechism of the Catholic Church is Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite.-Lionel Andrades

Feeneyism: It is the old theology and philosophical reaoning which says there are no known exceptions past or present, to the dogma EENS.There are no explicit cases to contradict the traditional interpretation of EENS.
Cushingism: It is the new theology and philosophical reasoning, which assumes there are known exceptions, past and present, to the dogma EENS, on the need for all to formally enter the Church.It assumes that the baptism of desire etc are not hypothetical but objectively known.In principle hypothetical cases are objective in the present times.
Baptism of Desire (Feeneyite): It refers to the hypothetical case of an unknown catechumen who desires the baptism of water but dies before he receives it and is saved. Since this is an invisible case in our reality it is not relevant to the dogma EENS.
Baptism of Desire (Cushingite): It refers to the known case of a catechumen who desires the baptism of water but dies before he receives it and is saved. Since this is a visible case or the SSPX it is relevant to the dogma EENS.
Invincible Ignorance ( Feeneyite): This refers to the hypothetical case of someone allegedly saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, since he was in ignorance.
Invincible Ignorance (Cushingite): This refers to the explicit case of someone allegedly saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, since he was in ignorance.Since it is an exception to the dogma EENS it is assumed to be objectively known in particular cases.This reasoning is irrational.
Council of Florence: One of the three Councils which defined the dogma EENS.It did not mention any exceptions.It did not mention the baptism of desire. It was Feeneyite.
Liberal theologians: They reinterpreted the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, as objective cases, known in the present times.
Vatican Council II (Cushingite): It refers to the interpretation of Vatican Council II with Cushingism.LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer not to hypothetical but known cases in the present times. So Vatican Council II emerges as a break with the dogma EENS.
Vatican Council II (Feeneyite): It refers to the interpretation of Vatican Council II with Feeneyism.LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to hypothetical cases, which are unknown personally in the present times.So Vatican Council II is not a break with EENS, the Syllabus of Errors, ecumenism of return, the Nicene Creed ( Feeneyite-one baptism),the teaching on the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation and the non separation of Church and State( since all need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell).
Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.: It assumed hypothetical cases were defacto known in the present times. So it presented the baptism of desire etc as an explicit exception, to the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS.It censured Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center.Since they did not assume that the baptism of desire referred to a visible instead of invisible case.The Letter made the baptism of desire etc relevant to EENs.From the second part of this Letter has emerged the New Theology.
Letter of the Holy Office 1949 ( Feeneyite). It means accepting the Letter as Feeneyite based on the first part .It supports Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.The traditional interpretatiion of the dogma EENS does not mention any exceptions.
Letter of the Holy Office ( Cushingite). It is based on the second part of the Letter.It rejects the traditional interpretation of EENS. Since it considers the baptism of desire ( Cushingite-explicit) and being saved in invincible ignorance ( Cushingite-explicit cases) as being exceptions to EENS ( Feeneyite).It worngly assumes hypothetical cases are objectively visible and so they are exceptions to the first part of the Letter.
Baltimore Catechism: It assumed that the desire for the baptism of an unknown catechumen, who dies before receiving it and was saved, was a baptism like the baptism of water. So it was placed in the Baptism Section of the catechism. In other words it was wrongly assumed that the baptism of desire is visible and repeatable like the baptism of water or that we can administer it like the baptism of water.(The Baltimore Catechism is accepted with the confusion).
Catechism of Pope X: It followed the Baltimore Catechism and placed the baptism of desire in the Baptism Section.
Nicene Creed ( Cushingite) ; It says 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins' and means there are more than three known baptisms. They are water, blood, desire, seeds of the Word etc.
Nicene Creed ( Feeneyite): It says 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins and means there is one known baptism the baptism of water.
New Theology: It refers to the new theology in the Catholic Church based on hypothetical cases being objective in the present times.So it eliminates the dogma EENS.With the dogma EENS made obsolete the ecclesiology of the Church changes. There is a new ecclesiology which is a break with Tradition.
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus ( Cushingite): .It refers to the dogma but with exceptions.All do not need to defacto convert into the Church in the present times, since there are exceptions.
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus ( Feeneyite): It refers to the dogma as it was interpreted over the centuries.There are no known exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Church, with faith and baptism, to avoid Hell.
Catechism of the Catholic Church ( Cushingite): CCC 1257 contradicts the Principle of Non Contraduction. Also CCC 848 is based on the new theology and so is a rupture with the dogma EENS( Feeneyite).
Catechism of the Catholic Church ( Feeneyite): CCC 1257 does not contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction since there are no known exceptions to all needing the baptism of water for salvation. There are no known exceptions, since God is not limited to the Sacraments.
When CCC 846 states all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church,CCC 846 does not contradict the dogmatic teaching on all needin to formally enter the Church. CCC 846 does not contradict Ad Gentes 7 which states all need faith and baptism for salvatioon.