Friday, October 6, 2017

Cardinal Raymond Burke interprets Vatican Council II with the same reasoning as Massimo Faggioli and Fr.James Martin s.j

In 2015 leftist politicians asked the New York Times not to allow Ross Douthet to write on Catholic theology since it differed from their official one approved by the Jewish Left for the Catholic Church.1 Among them is Massimo Faggioli.He considers the old traditional theology and ecclesiology of the Catholic Church as being 'criminal' and he will bring out the 'hate card' he keeps in his pocket and  show it to you. This is what happened in his criticism of Ross Douthet who wrote on Pope Francis' Plot to change Catholicism 2.

Image result for Photo of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Fr. Leonard Feeney

Boniface on the blog Unam Sanctam Catholicam,observes 
See...here's the problem. This line of reasoning suggests that some theological views once were Catholic, but are no longer so. That's blatantly erroneous. Obviously, if a theological view was ever "Catholic", then it remains so today and forever. This is not a complex idea...its like, basic ecclesiology. "What is believed everywhere, always, by all," to quote the famous formula of St. Vincent of Lerins.


Faggioli means that the old theological views are not Catholic anymore because of Vatican  Council II (Cushingite).This is Vatican Council II interpreted with a false premise to produce a non traditional conclusion.This is common place for the School of Bologna which reportedly has influenced Faggioli.This is also the thinking of the popes since Paul VI.

POPE BENEDICT AGREES WITH FAGGIOLI
This was the message of Pope Benedict last year when he said that extra ecclesiam nulla salus is no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. There was 'a development' with Vatican Council II for him. This is the new theology of Pope Benedict and Massimo Faggioli.

The leftists are saying that  they now have the sole narrative on theology after Vatican Council II(Cushingite) and any one who does not agree with them ' does not know theology'.
Image result for Photos of Ross DouthatImage result for Photos of Edward Pentin
Massimo Faggioli tells Ross Douthat that the latter does not know theology and Fr.Norbert Hoffman sdb, Secretary at the Vatican office for relations with the Jews,  suggests the same to Edward Pentin.

DOUTHAT AND PENTIN UNAWARE OF THE FALSE PREMISE
Douthat, the New York Times columnist and Edward Pentin, correspondent at the National Catholic Register are not aware of Vatican Council II Feeneyite and they are not telling the Left that the 'new theology' in the Catholic Church is based on an irrational premise and inference.
The leftist professors of theology were telling Ross Douthat  that with Vatican Council II ( Cushingism version)  there is no old ecclesiology. They mean it sincerely.

FEENEYITE EENS AND VATICAN COUNCIL II UNKNOWN
They can only intepret Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus, with the Cusningite premise and inference. While Douthat cannot correct them since he does not know that there is a Feeneyite alternative and the Magisterium will not mention it for political reasons.4 Douthat and Pentin also use the same false premise.
The School of Bologna like the popes from Pius XII interpret the dogma EENS and Vatican Council II with an irrational premise and no one corrects them - except for myself.

Naturally, the enthusiasm of Faggioli and of his interviewers is explained by the fact that they identify Francis’s interpretation of Vatican II with that of the “school of Bologna.”
Lionel:
The School of Bologna interprets the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II with Cushingism i.e there are known exceptions to the dogma EENS. They refuse to interpret Vatcan Council II with traditional Feeneyism i.e there are no known exceptions to the traditional interpretation of EENS. Neither are there known exceptions mentioned in the text of  Vatican Council to the traditional, strict interpretation of EENS 5

TWO FUNDAMENTAL MISTAKES OF FAGGIOLI AND MARTIN
We have to be aware that Massimo Faggioli and Fr. James Martin s.j make two fundamental mistakes.
1.They interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) as referring to known people saved outside the Church.So philosophically they are saying that we can see and know people in 2017 or the past, who have been saved with BOD, BOB and I.I without being members of the Church.
Theologically they then conclude that BOD,BOB and I.I are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nullas salus. There are known exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS.So their new philosophy and theology, which is now magisterial, is based on invisible people being visible at the same time.Faggioli and Martin violate the Principle of Non Contradiction here.
How can people saved in Heaven and known only to God be also on earth exceptions to the old theology, which said outside the Church there is no salvation? The new theology for them now says outside the Church there is known salvation and so the old theology is 'no more Catholic' for Faggioli.He rejects the old ecclesiology of the Church and there is a development,also for him.It is all based on  visible for him cases of BOD, BOB and I.I.

IN PRINCIPLE ERROR
For them, in principle, hypothetical and theoretical cases (BOD,BOB and I.I) are practical exceptions to EENS.In other words these are personally known people, living in the flesh, for them to be exceptions to traditional EENS and the 'old theology'.

2.Since in principle, hypothetical cases are not hypothetical but objectively seen and known for Faggioli and Martin they have an irrational conclusion.In Vatican Council II LG 16, LG 8, LG 14,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22, AG 7, AG 11 etc are not hypothetical cases.Instead they are known people saved outside the Church, they are examples of exceptions to the old exclusivist ecclesiology.So Vatican Council II is a rupture with the past ecclesiology.So Faggioli sincerely says 'they are theological views which are not Catholic any more'.Or, like Pope Benedict, who uses the same reasoning, says, EENS is no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. He means LG 16 etc refer to visible and personally known people who are practical exceptions to the 16th century interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation.
Image result for Photo of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Fr. Leonard Feeney
Image result for Photo of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Fr. Leonard FeeneyWe now know know that BOD, BOB and I.I refer to invisible people. So there was a mistake in the excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney.
We know that LG 16, UR 3 etc refer to invisible people. When Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger interpreted Vatican Council II with LG 16 etc referring to visible people it was an objective mistake.With his false premise Vatican Council II emerges as a rupture with EENS and Tradition. Archbishop Lefebvre was correct.So he should not have been excommunicated for not accepting Vatican Council II with this irrational interpretation.

The Vatican should apologize for the excommunication of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Fr.Leonard Feeney.We  now know they were doctrinally correct. 6

Similarly the SSPX is correct today in rejecting Vatican Council II with LG 16 etc being considered known cases saved outside the Church.They should not be accused of being in schism.While Cardinal Raymond Burke who interprets Vatican Council II with the same reasoning as Faggioli and Martin, should be asked to affirm the Council without the irrational premise.
He could set an example for Faggioli and Martin and affirm Feeneyite EENS and reject Cushingite EENS.-Lionel Andrades 






1
http://thinkprogress.org/culture/2015/10/28/3717003/ross-douthat-could-you-not/

http://americamagazine.org/content/dispatches/catholic-theologians-condemn-ross-douthats-recent-piece-pope

http://womenintheology.org/2015/10/27/why-i-signed-the-letter-to-the-nytimes-about-ross-douthat/

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/the-mccarthyism-of-liberal-catholic-elites/

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/thin-skinned-theologians-douthat/

2.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/18/opinion/sunday/the-plot-to-change-catholicism.html

JANUARY 28, 2016


Vatican Council II is 'hate' without an irrationality used in the interpretation : Fr. James Martin S.J will not affirm this Councilhttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/vatican-council-ii-is-hate-without.html





Ross Douthat needed to tell Fr.James Martin S.J that it is only with the use of an irrationality to interpret Vatican Council II that the Council 'develops doctrine'

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/ross-douthat-needed-to-tell-frjames.html


JANUARY 26, 2016


The text of Vatican Council II as it stands today does not contradict the dogma EENS.Dignitatis Humane does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The Council can be interpreted with Cushingism or Feeneyism.The conclusion is differenthttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/the-text-of-vatican-council-ii-as-it.html

JANUARY 25, 2016

A simple theological response to the learned members of the Academy
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/a-simple-theological-response-to.html

3.

http://unamsanctamcatholicam.blogspot.it/2017/10/massimo-faggioli.html
4.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/you-dont-know-theology-ross-douthat-and.html
5.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/possibly-prof-massimo-faggioli-thinks.html
6.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/vatican-should-apologize-for.html




"This is for You" - By Debi Byham (the lady in white)

"This is for You" - Debi Byham
Debi with her shawl in 1997

Debi with her white shawl

...All of a sudden, I saw a white light over to my right. As I looked at the light, I saw a woman come out of the light and sit down on a rock near us. She was wearing a long white dress and white veil. She was sitting in a listening pose, her head bent towards us. She looked like a statue: the folds in her dress did not move, her head did not turn. She reminded me of Michelangelo's statue of the Pieta, the Madonna, because she was in that kind of a pose. She seemed to be lit from within – illuminated and glowing. (I am embarrassed to admit that I thought she was rude to sit there and listen to all of the pain in our lives.)
Vicka right before she prayed over Debi
Vicka right before she prayed over Debi
One of the guys, noticing the time, said it was time to leave. Joe and Tom carried Paul right past this 'lady in white' and walked to the bottom of Apparition Hill. I did not want to walk by her, because I knew she heard everything I said, and I was ashamed. However, the moment I stood, so did she. She walked right up to me and said, "This is for you." I did not even look to see what she was giving me. I was so overwhelmed by her compassion, that I put my arms around her and hugged her. I laid my head on her shoulder and cried. Jeff, standing behind me, kept saying: "Come on, Debi, it's time to go," and he pulled me away from her. When I looked down, I saw that she had given me her white shawl, made of the same fabric as her dress and veil. It was very soft. As I held it, I thought, 'I will always remember what compassion feels like!' Then I looked up into her face and said, "Thank you." She gave me the most wonderful smile, like she loved me.
Later, on our way to Vicka's to hear her testimony, I asked Joe who he thought the lady in white was who appeared to us at the Blue Cross. "I think it was the Blessed Mother," he said. When we assembled at Vicka's house, the interpreter was talking about Mary's messages to us. The hardest part of the message, for me, was hearing about forgiveness, because I believed that I would never be able to forgive myself for causing so much pain in so many people's lives. I felt like I was light years away from peace.
As Vicka was praying over the group, a conversation that Debbie 's mom had with me that night in the restaurant, that I had blocked out of my mind, came back to me clearly. She had told me that she took a room across from the hospital so that she could go back-and-forth every day to visit her daughter in the burn unit. She always stopped at the chapel to pray to our Blessed Mother. She said that she had a close relationship with Mary because Mary knew what it was like to see Her child suffer and die. (I was really troubled by that story.) One day, while kneeling in the chapel and praying to Our Lady of Perpetual Help, someone tapped Debbie 's mom on the back. She turned around and saw a lady in white standing there. The lady said to her, "Do you have somebody here in the hospital?" She said, "Yes, my daughter is here." This lady in white said to her: "You don't need to pray for your daughter. It is God's Will what happened. You need to pray that you have the grace to accept God's will for your daughter." Then this lady disappeared. She did not walk out of the chapel; she just disappeared.
After Debbie died, her mom said, "I know that God sent that lady to me to let me know that Debbie was going to be in Heaven." She told me she never had to go to a support group for parents who have lost a child, because she knew God called her daughter to be with Him.
Here I am, standing in front of Vicka, KNOWING that God sent that same lady in white to me. The lady who appeared to my friend's mom in the hospital chapel in 1969 was now appearing to me in 1997. And I knew, without a doubt, that THAT was the 'great big sign' that had my name on it! That was the moment that I knew God was real and that He loved me. When Vicka reached out and prayed over me, I knew God was confirming that He really did send me help from Heaven. The shawl that I was given was truly a gift from the LORD!
We went back to the Blue Cross that evening, and this time it was me that wanted to pray. Tom said, "I have to tell you a story". Five years earlier, his uncle, a priest, took a group of pilgrims to Medjugorje. As they climbed Mount Krizevac, they saw a lady in white effortlessly walking above the rocks while everyone else was struggling to climb over the rocks. The pilgrims wanted to talk to her, but they could not catch up to her. The priest told the pilgrims that he would ask Vicka who the 'lady in white' was that everyone saw. Vicka said it was the Blessed Mother, who climbs the mountain every day, praying for peace. That was the moment I knew I would never spend another moment hating myself. I figured that if God loved me that much – that He would send this special lady to me – I needed to forgive myself, and allow God to heal me.
One week after I got home, on the night before the anniversary of the car accident, my husband and I drove to a nearby town to pick up his car. I confided to him that I was nervous about going to work the next day, as that anniversary date was always so painful to me. I was afraid my memories would crash over me and I would lose my composure at work. As I pulled out of the parking lot of the car dealer, I could not see out my windshield. Even though it wasn't dark yet, I couldn't see the road. I stopped my car, put my window down, and looked out to see what the problem could be. I saw the sun spinning; it was pulsating and the colors were radiating out from it. The sun was leaving the sky and coming right up to my face. I thought, 'Wow! The miracle of the sun at home! I thought Mary lived in Medjugorje!'
That night I consecrated myself and my family to God and to the Blessed Mother. I knew She was saying that I was going to be all right tomorrow, the anniversary date of the accident, and through all of my tomorrows, because She would be with me.
When I woke up the next day, instead of thinking about the car accident, I thought about the beauty and awesomeness of seeing the miracle of the sun in my hometown. That image got me through the whole day. When I got home from work, I went upstairs to my room and got all of the medication out of my drawer and I threw it away. I then called the psychiatrist and said, "I need to come down one more time. I want to say goodbye." Even though this doctor was not Catholic, he believed every word I shared and was moved by my story. He said, "I am so happy for you, but I am so sad that it took 27 years for you to experience peace." I happily reminded him that indeed, 27 years is a long time to suffer. But in God's time, 27 years is a blink of the eye!...

Satan wishes to destroy the family.There must be family prayer. Pray the rosary together-Vicka, on MaryTV, Medugorje

TEA WITH ROSIE

AUDIO ONLY
(DOWNLOAD FOR OFFLINE USE)

Medjugorje Apparition in Slow-Motion - Oct. 2, 2017

Medjugorje Apparition in Slow-Motion - Oct. 2, 2017



Our Lady of Medjugorje ❤️Message October 2, 2017




Medjugorje - Aparición a Mirjana del 2 de octubre de 2017

Vatican should apologize for the excommunication of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Fr.Leonard Feeney : we now know they were doctrinally correct



The Vatican should apologize for the excommunication of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Fr.Leonard Feeney.Since we now know that they both were doctrinally correct.Invisible for us baptism of desire,baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance cannot be visible exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).There are no practical exceptions to EENS in 2017.
Image result for Photo of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Fr. Leonard FeeneyImage result for Photo of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Fr. Leonard Feeney
Similarly Lumen Gentium 16, Lumen Gentium 8, Unitatis Redintigratio 3, Nostra Aetate 2 etc in Vatican Council II are not known cases of someone saved outside the Church.So Vatican Council II is not a rupture with EENS(Feeneyite), the Syllabus of Errors and the rest of Tradition.Vatican Council II has a hermeneutic of continuity with the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS.Pre and post Vatican Council II exclusivist ecclesiology is the same.
The popes since Pius XII however made a mistake.New doctrines were created with hypothetical cases mistaken for being  objective exceptions, to the centuries old interpretation of EENS.
So there was a new EENS with BOD, BOB and I.I being exceptions (Letter of the Holy Office 1949).Until today officially there is still a Vatican Council II with Lumen Gentium 16(invincible ignorance) being a visible and known case of someone saved outside the Church.This is false.There is no such known person.
Image result for Photo Fr. Stefano Visintin osb, Rector of the University of St. Anselm
There are no no known cases of the baptism of desire etc which are exceptions to the dogma EENS said Fr. Stefano Visintin osb, Rector of the University of St. Anselm, Rome.He is an an Italian scientist and Benedictine priest. He reminds me of the late Fr.Stanley Jaki, also a Benedictine priest and scientist.What Fr.Stefano is saying is no rocket science.It is common sense that invisible cases of the baptism of desire etc cannot be visible exceptions to all needing to be incorporated into the Church for salvation with no exceptions(EENS).
Last year Pope Benedict in a public mistake announced that EENS was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century.He stated in the daily  Avvenire that there was a development with Vatican Council II.
Pope Benedict has also stated that the SSPX has no canonical status until  'the doctrinal issue' is settled.He meant that they have to affirm Vatican Council II with LG 16 etc being visible and known. So the Council then becomes a rupture with EENS and the rest of Tradition.This is acceptable doctrine for him.
With the new salvation doctrine, based on invisible and hypothetical cases being objective and exceptions  to all needing 'faith and baptism'(AG 7, LG 14) in the Catholic Church for salvation,Pope Benedict has also changed our understanding of the Nicene Creed.With the new doctrine(only those who know need to enter the Church and not every one in general) based on the new theology(outside the Church there is known salvation) whose foundation is a philosophical error( invisible people are visible) he has also put away the Athanasius Creed.It  states outside the Church there is no salvation.
This is all a  first class heresy in the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II.The meaning of the Nicene Creed cannot be changed.
Pope John Paul II however, also overlooked this error in the Catholic Church.-Lionel Andrades


OCTOBER 5, 2017


God bless Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre for rejecting irrational Vatican Council II (Cushingite) and opposing a magisterium in heresy, in schism with the past magisterium

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/god-bless-archbishop-marcel-lefebvre-or.html