Friday, December 1, 2017

The lex orandi lex credendi of Catholics today is based on irrational Cushingite theology.The Feeneyite alternative is ignored by all.

The lex orandi lex credendi of Catholics today is based on irrational Cushingite theology.The Feeneyite alternative is ignored by all.
Feeneyism: It is the old theology and philosophical reasoning which says there are no known exceptions past or present, to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).There are no explicit cases to contradict the traditional interpretation of EENS.It is practical. There obviously are  no known cases of the baptism of desire (BOD),baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) in 2017.So there are no practical exceptions to EENS.Neither was BOD,BOB and I.I an exception to Feeneyite EENS in 1949 when the Letter of the Holy Office was issued to the Archbishop of Boston. The cardinals made an objective mistake.Similarly mentioning BOD and I.I in Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14) relative to the traditional teaching on salvation was superflous.


Cushingism: It is the new theology and philosophical reasoning.It 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.

Image result for Photos Letter of the Holy Office 1949

Image result for Photos Letter of the Holy Office 1949























TERMS EXPLAINED
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.They use Cushingism.
Vatican Council II (Cushingite): It refers to the interpretation of Vatican Council II withCushingism.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 withFeeneyism.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.It was Cushingite.
Letter of the Holy Office 1949 ( Feeneyite). It means accepting the Letter as Feeneyite based on the first part,only .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.It can be interpreted with Cushingism or Feeneyism.
Catechism of Pope X: It followed the Baltimore Catechism and placed the baptism of desire in the Baptism Section.It can be interpreted withCushingism or Feeneyism.
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.This is a Cushingite interpretation.
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.It is Feeneyite.
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.It's basis is Cushingism.
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.

________________________


























Repost : No denial from Cardinal Ladaria, CDF : schism from the Left over Vatican Council II 

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/11/no-denial-from-cardinal-ladaria-cdf_28.html


The error is not permanent and Pope Francis and can correct it.No change in the text of Vatican Council II is required.

POPE FRANCIS CAN CORRECT THE ERROR
The error is not permanent and Pope Francis and can correct it.No change in the text of Vatican Council II is required. 1
He has to announce that when reading Vatican Council II, we must interpret references to invisible people as just being invisible.
Hypothetical cases must not be considered to be objectively seen in 2017.He needs to clarify that Vatican Council II is not a development of the dogma EENS as Pope Benedict wrongly stated in March 2016(Avvenire).
Pope Francis must ask the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF)and Ecclesia Dei  to interpret Vatican Council II without the irrational premise.

ALLOW RELIGIOUS COMMUNITIES TO AVOID THE FALSE REASONING
He must also ask the CDF to allow all religious communities, including the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) and the Franciscans of the Immaculate. to avoid the false reasoning in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and also other magisterial documents.
Vatican Council II is in harmony with the SSPX's General Chapter Statement on Doctrine(2012).


POPE FRANCIS' DOCTRINAL ERROR
Catholic doctrine has not changed. The SSPX  General Chapter Statement affirmed EENS without the possibiliy of defaccto, known salvation outside the Church. This has been changed by Pope Francis with the use of the false premise.
The General Chapter Statement indicated that there was no known salvation outside the Church. This has been changed by Pope Francis.
The SSPX General Chapter Statement indicated that references to possibilities in Vatican Council II, and other Church-documents were not exceptions to the dogma EENS. For Pope Francis possibilities(LG 16, LG 14 etc) are exceptions toextra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted by St.Ignatius of Loyola and St. Francis Xavier.-Lionel Andrades


1.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/11/pope-francis-has-made-doctrinal-mistake.html

POPE FRANCIS VIOLATES PRINCIPLE OF NON CONTRADICTION

POPE FRANCIS VIOLATES PRINCIPLE OF NON CONTRADICTION
Ralph Martin, Robert Fastiggi, John Martignoni and Fr.Stefano Visintin osb and many priests in Rome indicate that Pope Francis has violated the Principle of Non Contradiction in his interpretation of Vatican Council II.They agree that someone invisible cannot be visible at the same time.Invisible baptism of desire is not visible in 2017.There cannot be non Catholics,whom one can know personally,who are in invincible ignorance of the Gospel,and are in Heaven without the baptism of water.So they say that invisible people are not visible and then I make the conclusion that this is how Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II and so has made a mistake.
They directly will not comment on the error of Pope Francis and neither have I asked them to do so.
Zero cases of something are not exceptions to EENS says John Martignoni. But for Pope Francis 'zero cases' of LG 16, GS 22, LG 14,UR 3, etc are exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. So they are not 'zero cases' for him.1

1
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/11/pope-francis-has-made-doctrinal-mistake.html

It is an irrationality which forms the lex orandi lex credendi of Catholics during Holy Mass in all Rites

That outside the Church there is no known salvation  should be the traditional theology of the Traditional Latin Mass for FIUV (Una Voce) Latin Mass Societies and Dr.Joseph Shaw -but it isn't.
Instead for all them it is outside the Church there is known salvation,possibilities are actual known cases in the present times,invisible people are visible and so unknown cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) are known exceptions to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) in 2017.
It is with this irrationality Catholics attend Holy Mass in all Rites and it is part of their  lex orandi lex credendi.There is no correction from Joseph Shaw and the Una Voce(FIUV).No position paper on this subject inspite of so many reports on the Internet.
Vatican Council II is interpreted with the irrational, invisible- people -are -visible premise even though there is a rational choice for Una Voce.The choice would not be politically correct and so Joseph Shaw allows Catholics to remain in their ignorance, with heretical and new doctrines to choose from.He supports the Mass in the Extraordinary Form to be offered
with the New Ecclesiology based on invisible cases of BOD,BOB and I.I being visible exceptions to the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church which accompanied the Latin and Greek Mass.
A tutor( professor) of philosophy at leftist Oxford University,U.K he cannot affirm Feeneyite EENS( without the irrational premise),nor Feeneyite Vatican Council II( without the irrational premise).It would be opposed by the university and the laws in England(Ofsted).So Una Voce and the Latin Mass Societies allow Catholics to remain in ignorance.An irrationality in philosophy and theology is part of the 
lex orandi lex credendi 
So the TLM today is not the same as the Latin Mass of the past.The ecclesiology of Joseph Shaw's Latin Mass and that of the one offered in the U.K and the USA is the same as the ecclesiology of the Novus Ordo Mass.Instead there can be a Novus Ordo Mass in which for the priest and community has an  ecclesiology which is exclusivist and pro Vatican Council II( Feeneyite-premise free) and EENS ( Feeneyite-premise free) unlike the Tridentine Rite Mass in general today.

POSITION PAPER
Una Voce could make an announcement.This would be the  first step, to getting back to the old ecclesiology of the Church during the Tridentine Rite Mass.The simply announcement would be that invisible for us baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are not visible exceptions to EENS, as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century during the Latin Mass.There are no known cases of the baptism of desire in 2017. Shaw, a professor of philosophy is aware that this is a violation of the Principle of Non Contradiction. Invisible people cannot be visible at the same time.Then these 'visible' people cannot be put forward as examples of salvation outside the Church.They cannot be objective exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.So in this way there is no obligation to affirm Feeneyite during Holy Mass for Una Voce.
FIUV could affirm the obvious : there are no visible cases of BOD, BOB and I.I in our reality.-Lionel Andrades
 
 
November 30, 2017

With this irrational theology, the new theology of the two popes, there is lex orandi and lex credendi among the traditionalists and liberals

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/11/with-this-irrational-theology-new.html