Friday, January 26, 2018

Pope Benedict needs to recant and end the doctrinal deception in the Church



Pope Benedict needs to recant his errors.They are errors according to the teachings of the Church. He is automatically excommunicated and is in manifest heresy.Most of his life he used Cushingism as a theology, to reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).At Vatican Council II he did not correct the use of Cushingism among the Council Fathers.As Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith he supported the error. He enforced it in the whole Church.
He took advantage of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre's ignorance if he was not ignorant himself.Vatican Council II(Cushingite) is a rupture with Tradition, so the Archbishop was correct.
The Prefect of the CDF did not tell him that Vatican Council II could be interpreted with the Feeneyism as a philosophy and theology.The premise and conclusion would be different.

Now even though there are so many reports on the Internet on this issue, along with archbishops Guido Pozzo and Augustine di Noia of Ecclesia Dei, Pope Benedict wants the Society of St.Pius X(SSPX) to affirm Vatican Council II(Cushingite) for canonical recognition.
Similarly the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St. Benedict Center in diocese of Worcester, USA were granted canonical status with the approval of the Vatican.Bishop Robert J.McManus, the bishop of Worcester, did not tell them that they could affirm Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) instead of Vatican Council II(Cushingite).
Vatican Council II(Feeneyite) would be in harmony with the ecclesiology of the Church affirmed by Fr. Leonard Feeney and the founders of the St.Benedict Centers.
All this doctrinal deception and confusion is there since Pope Benedict will not recant and correct his theological error.
Image result for Photos of Archbishop Lefebvre and Fr.Leonard Feeney
Pope Benedict needs to say the obvious, which is,there are no practical exceptions to EENS in 2018.The baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) never were relevant or exceptions to EENS.Secondly, Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II is in harmony with the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS.
With Feeneyite theology LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, GS 22,NA 2 etc are not known and visible cases in 2018.So they do not contradict EENS as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century. 
Pope Benedict made a mistake in March 2016 in the Avvenire interview when he said that EENS was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. Since there was 'a development' with Vatican Council II for him. He suggested that there was known salvation outside the Church and questioned the need for mission.
Now we now know that Vatican Council II does not contradict itself, LG 16 does not contradict AG 7.
Also EENS is not contradicted by LG 16 and GS 22 as it was wrongly suggested by Cardinal Ratzinger  when he approved the theological paper Christianity and the World Religions of the International Theological Commission.He was assisted in the error by the then Fr. Luiz Ladaria s.j, who is the present Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Pope Benedict needs to correct the error. He also needs to acknowledge the theology of Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus is Cushingite and not Feeneyite.
-Lionel Andrades

















We as Catholics must profess to all that there in NO Salvation Outside the Catholic Church -George Brenner



Image result for Photos of extra ecclesiam nulla salus
We as Catholics must profess to all that there in NO Salvation Outside the Catholic Church. We must never do as Cardinal Cushing  did and profess that his relatives who were Protestant or Jewish were  saved. That is totally wrong and sinful. We as Catholics must give the same credence to the Saints and Popes who proclaimed throughout all centuries that there is no Salvation Outside of the Catholic Church.
Image result for Photos of extra ecclesiam nulla salus
 Even when someone is saved by God who used what the Catholic Church teaches as through BOB, BOD or II, then they too become Catholic in the afterlife otherwise there is no meaning to the expression that there is NO Salvation Outside of the Catholic Church.



I think the quote in question (God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism by water, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments) is a good way to state the obvious. Our Lord is not bound by anything. However, we shouldn't let such statements make us question or deny the ecclesiological  foundations of our faith. That's precisely what has happened within the Roman Church, which now includes virtually everyone on the planet as a visible or invisible member of the Body of Christ in one way or another. 

 We are members WITHIN the Catholic Church and have the right and duty before God to tell ALL peoples that they must belong , without time limitations to the one , holy Catholic and apostolic Church which is needed for Salvation and leave the rest to God himself. Either way ALL that are saved will be Catholic in Heaven. We must never infer that a person other than a Catholic has or will be saved, always by God's graces.
-George Brenner 


 "  LETTER OF THE SACRED CONGREGATION OF THE HOLY OFFICE

Archbishop Richard J. Cushing


Given on August 8, 1949 explaining the true sense of Catholic doctrine that there is no salvation outside the Church.
This important Letter of the Holy Office is introduced by a letter of the Most Reverend Archbishop of Boston.
The Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office has examined again the problem of Father Leonard Feeney and St. Benedict Center. Having studied carefully the publications issued by the Center, and having considered all the circumstances of this case, the Sacred Congregation has ordered me to publish, in its entirety, the letter which the same Congregation sent me on the 8th of August, 1949. The Supreme Pontiff, His Holiness, Pope Pius XII, has given full approval to this decision. In due obedience, therefore, we publish, in its entirety, the Latin text of the letter as received from the Holy Office with an English translation of the same approved by the Holy See.
Given at Boston, Mass., the 4th day of September, 1952.
Walter J. Furlong, Chancellor
Richard J. Cushing, Archbishop of Boston.

LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE
From the Headquarters of the Holy Office, Aug. 8, 1949.
Your Excellency:
This Supreme Sacred Congregation has followed very attentively the rise and the course of the grave controversy stirred up by certain associates of "St. Benedict Center" and "Boston College" in regard to the interpretation of that axiom: "Outside the Church there is no salvation."
After having examined all the documents that are necessary or useful in this matter, among them information from your Chancery, as well as appeals and reports in which the associates of "St. Benedict Center" explain their opinions and complaints, and also many other documents pertinent to the controversy, officially collected, the same Sacred Congregation is convinced that the unfortunate controversy arose from the fact that the axiom, "outside the Church there is no salvation," was not correctly understood and weighed, and that the same controversy was rendered more bitter by serious disturbance of discipline arising from the fact that some of the associates of the institutions mentioned above refused reverence and obedience to legitimate authorities.
Accordingly, the Most Eminent and Most Reverend Cardinals of this Supreme Congregation, in a plenary session held on Wednesday, July 27, 1949, decreed, and the august Pontiff in an audience on the following Thursday, July 28, 1949, deigned to give his approval, that the following explanations pertinent to the doctrine, and also that invitations and exhortations relevant to discipline be given:
We are bound by divine and Catholic faith to believe all those things which are contained in the word of God, whether it be Scripture or Tradition, and are proposed by the Church to be believed as divinely revealed, not only through solemn judgment but also through the ordinary and universal teaching office (, n. 1792).
Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.
However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church.
Now, in the first place, the Church teaches that in this matter there is question of a most strict command of Jesus Christ. For He explicitly enjoined on His apostles to teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever He Himself had commanded (Matt. 28: 19-20).
Now, among the commandments of Christ, that one holds not the least place by which we are commanded to be incorporated by baptism into the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, and to remain united to Christ and to His Vicar, through whom He Himself in a visible manner governs the Church on earth.

Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.
Not only did the Savior command that all nations should enter the Church, but He also decreed the Church to be a means of salvation without which no one can enter the kingdom of eternal glory.
In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the sacrament of regeneration and in reference to the sacrament of penance (, nn. 797, 807).
The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.

However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.
These things are clearly taught in that dogmatic letter which was issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943, (AAS, Vol. 35, an. 1943, p. 193 ff.). For in this letter the Sovereign Pontiff clearly distinguishes between those who are actually incorporated into the Church as members, and those who are united to the Church only by desire.
Discussing the members of which the Mystical Body is-composed here on earth, the same august Pontiff says: "Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed."
Toward the end of this same encyclical letter, when most affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions those who "are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire," and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but on the other hand states that they are in a condition "in which they cannot be sure of their salvation" since "they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church" (AAS, 1. c., p. 243). With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire, and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally well in every religion (cf. Pope Pius IX, Allocution, , in , n. 1641 ff.; also Pope Pius IX in the encyclical letter, , in , n. 1677).
But it must not be thought that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated by perfect charity. Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person has supernatural faith: "For he who comes to God must believe that God exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him" (Heb. 11:6). The Council of Trent declares (Session VI, chap. 8): "Faith is the beginning of man's salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and attain to the fellowship of His children" (Denzinger, n. 801).
From what has been said it is evident that those things which are proposed in the periodical , fascicle 3, as the genuine teaching of the Catholic Church are far from being such and are very harmful both to those within the Church and those without.
From these declarations which pertain to doctrine, certain conclusions follow which regard discipline and conduct, and which cannot be unknown to those who vigorously defend the necessity by which all are bound' of belonging to the true Church and of submitting to the authority of the Roman Pontiff and of the Bishops "whom the Holy Ghost has placed . . . to rule the Church" (Acts 20:28).
Hence, one cannot understand how the St. Benedict Center can consistently claim to be a Catholic school and wish to be accounted such, and yet not conform to the prescriptions of canons 1381 and 1382 of the Code of Canon Law, and continue to exist as a source of discord and rebellion against ecclesiastical authority and as a source of the disturbance of many consciences.
Furthermore, it is beyond understanding how a member of a religious Institute, namely Father Feeney, presents himself as a "Defender of the Faith," and at the same time does not hesitate to attack the catechetical instruction proposed by lawful authorities, and has not even feared to incur grave sanctions threatened by the sacred canons because of his serious violations of his duties as a religious, a priest, and an ordinary member of the Church.
Finally, it is in no wise to be tolerated that certain Catholics shall claim for themselves the right to publish a periodical, for the purpose of spreading theological doctrines, without the permission of competent Church authority, called the "" which is prescribed by the sacred canons.
Therefore, let them who in grave peril are ranged against the Church seriously bear in mind that after "Rome has spoken" they cannot be excused even by reasons of good faith. Certainly, their bond and duty of obedience toward the Church is much graver than that of those who as yet are related to the Church "only by an unconscious desire." Let them realize that they are children of the Church, lovingly nourished by her with the milk of doctrine and the sacraments, and hence, having heard the clear voice of their Mother, they cannot be excused from culpable ignorance, and therefore to them apply without any restriction that principle: submission to the Catholic Church and to the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.
In sending this letter, I declare my profound esteem, and remain,
Your Excellency's most devoted,
F. Cardinal Marchetti-Selvaggiani.
A. Ottaviani, Assessor.
(Private); Holy Office, 8 Aug., 1949.

_____________________________


Image result for Photos of extra ecclesiam nulla salus


Related image

This is how the magisterium presently wrongly interprets magisterial documents

I use Feeneyism and Pope Benedict XVI, Cardinal Muller, Bishop Bernard Fellay, Bishop Mark Pirvanus, Bishop Donald Sanborn and the sedevacantists Michael and Peter Dimond   use Cushingism.
Image result for Photos of Bishop Mark PivarunasImage result for Photos of Bishop Sanborn
For me the Baptism of Desire is Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite.For me Invincible Ignorance is Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite.For me Vatican 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 the Dimond Brothers extra ecclesiam nulla salus is Feeneyite but they reject the baptism of desire which is Cushingite for them.In  other words it refers to known and visible people. This is the inference.

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 Boston is Feeneyite in the first part  and Cushingite in the second part.For them it is Cushingite and acceptable.





I avoid the New Theology, while they use it.The New Theology is Cushingism.It's philosophy is Cushingite.

For me the Catechism of the Catholic Church is Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite.
The Download
For Hans Urs von Balthasar, Bishop Robert Barron, Michael Voris and CMTV the baptism of desire(BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) is Cushingite and so it contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Feeneyite).So they are left with a new version of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), it is EENS (Cushingite).So now they support the BOD and I.I (Cushingite) and EENS (Cushingite).Their interpretation of Vatican Council II, with Cushingite LG 16( invincible ignorance) and Cushingite LG 14 ( baptism of desire) is  a rupture with Tradition (EENS(Feeneyite),Syllabus of Errors,Feeneyite past eccclesiology of the Catholic Church etc).
So their philosophical and theological position is an innovation in the Church with BOD and I.I, EENS and Vatican Council II all being Cushingite.



For me BOD and I.I are not visible.So they are Feeneyite. They do not refer to personally known cases in the present times. They are always hypothetical and theoretical in the past and present.So they cannot physically be exceptions to EENS (Feeneyite).
BOD and I.I were and are always Feeneyite.
So for me  Vatican Council II is Feeneyite since it it is not a rupture with EENS(Feeneyite).It does not contradict the Syllabus of Errors with the old ecclesiocentrism.
For me BOD and I.I, EENS, Vatican Council II, Syllabus of Errors etc are always Feeneyite.They have a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.
I do not mix up what is invisible as being visible. So we do not have the hermeneutic of rupture.Since Pope Benedict and Archbishops Guido Pozzo and Augustine di Noia are Cushingites, Vatican Council II has to have a hermeneutic of rupture.
Similarly I would interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church with Feeneyism instead of Cushingism. CCC 846 and 1257 would not be a break with EENS (Feeneyite).However for the Cushingites CCC 846(Outside the Church No Salvation) and CCC 1257(The Necessity of Baptism) would be a rupture with Tradition ( EENS,Feeneyite).For me CCC 846 and 1257 would refer to invisible cases of BOD and I.I and 'God not being limited to the Sacraments'. Cushingites would infer that they know of specific cases of persons saved outside the Church i.e without Catholic faith and the baptism of water.
Since CCC 846 says all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church, Cushingites would say there are known cases of BOD and I.I. 'All who are saved are saved through Jesus and Church' is the line which suggests that there are known cases of BOD,BOB and I.I.It is misleading.
The terms Cushingism and Feeneyism are useful. It tells us when someone is  referring to EENS, Vatican Council II, BOD and I.I etc, being invisible or visible.Presently unknowingly, Catholics assume invisible cases are visible.This is how the magisterium  wrongly interprets magisterial documents.
-Lionel Andrades



























Hilary White and Massimo Faggioli interpret the Catechism, Vatican Council II and Letter of the Holy Office with hypothetical cases not being hypothetical : so there is a rupture with Tradition (with graphics)


EXAMPLES OF THE HYPOTHETICAL REFERENCES IN THE CATECHISM FOR THEM WHICH ARE NOT HYPOTHETICAL.
1. 'God is not limited to the Sacraments'(CCC 1257)
'2.all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body'(CC(CCC 846).
3. Those 'justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians'(CCC 818).
4. They are 'joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."(CCC 838).
5. 'the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims'(CCC 841).

__________________________________


EXAMPLES OF HYPOTHETICAL REFERENCES IN VATICAN COUNCIL II FOR THEM WHICH ARE NOT HYPOTHETICAL.
1. 'elements of sanctification and truth'in other religions(LG 8),
2..'good and holy' things in other religions(NA 2),
3..'a ray of that Truth which enlightens' all men(NA 2),
4.'imperfect communion with the Church(UR 3),
5.' people of good will in other religions'(GS 22),
6.' seeds of the Word'(AG 11),
7.'invincible ignorance'(LG 16),
8.'a good conscience'(LG 16) etc.





HYPOTHETICAL REFERENCES IN THE LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949 TO THE ARCHBISHOP O
OF BOSTON WHICH FOR THEM ARE NOT HYPOTHETICAL.
1.Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.(We do not know who this person is in particular so it is a hypothetical case.)
2.In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing.(We do not know any one in particular as such so this is a hypothetical case.)
3.Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.( If there is any such person he or she would only be known to God. So this passage is irrelevant to the dogma EENS. It cannot be an exception.Since it is a reference to an invisible person for us.)
4.However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.(This is a reference to an unknown catechumen)


 5.For in this letter the Sovereign Pontiff clearly distinguishes between those who are actually incorporated into the Church as members, and those who are united to the Church only by desire.( Again we have a theoretical and hypothetical reference. We do not know who is united to the Church only in desire and will be saved.) -Lionel Andrades



JANUARY 25, 2018


Traditionalists cannot tell Faggioli Vatican Council II can be interpreted in harmony with the past ecclesiology of the Church. This is unknown or unthinkable.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/01/traditionalists-cannot-tell-faggioli.html