Monday, February 19, 2018

I am referring to Feeneyism and Cushingism as explained on my blog.The fault does not lie with Vatican Council II in itself. It depends upon how you interpret the Council, whether you use Cushingism or Feeneyism. Cushingism results in the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.

I am referring to Feeneyism and Cushingism as explained on my blog.
I am not referring to Fr. Leonard Feeney and Cardinal Cushing in particular.
I use their names since it has meaning for me. However any other name could have been used.
Feeneyism refers to accepting hypothetical cases as just being hypothetical. Invisible people are simply called invisible.
Cushingism refers to hypothetical cases being concrete and known people in the present times.
So with Feeneyism BOD, BOB and I.I are hypothetical cases only. So they cannot be exceptions to EENS.
With Cushingism BOD,BOB and I.I are not hypothetical and are assumed to be visible people saved outside the Church
and so they become exceptions to EENS.
Similarly with Feeneyism LG 16, LG 14, UR 3, NA 2 ,GS 22 refer to hypothetical cases, invisble people in 2018. So there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict EENS.
With Cushingism LG 16, LG 14, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 refer to real people saved outside the Church and so Vatican Council II is a rupture with the dogma EENS.
So the fault does not lie with Vatican Council II in itself. It depends upon how you interpret the Council, whether you use Cushingism or Feeneyism.
Cushingism results in the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.
The liberals and traditionalists interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with Cushingism.
The St. Benedict Centers interpret EENS with Feeneyism but Vatican Council II with Cushingism.-Lionel Andrades

The fault does not lie with Vatican Council II but how you interpret it,with Cushingism or Feeneyism,with the false premise or without it.

Both St. Thomas Aquinas and the Holy Office under Pius XII speak of baptism of desire.
Lionel:
Yes and I accept the baptism of desire (BOD) since I am aware that only God would know of a BOD case and so BOD would not be an exception to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).So St. Thomas Aquinas like St. Augustine also affirms the ' strict '  interpretation of the dogma EENS.
Regarding the man in the forest in ignorance who was to be saved St. Thomas said God would send a preacher to him.
In Mystici Corporis,Quanta Cura  etc there are references to the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I).The popes and saints have referred to them.
Though Pius XII in Mystici Corporis does not state that the BOD,BOB and I.I refer to known people saved outside the Church.He speaks hypothetically.
Even St. Thomas Aquinas refers to a hypothetical case. Since obviously a real case could only be known to God.
Similarly the Catechism of the Council of Trent only refers to 'the desire therof' without stating that it can be personally known on earth.So I affirm hypothetical- for- us BOD.I would call this BOD ( Feeneyite).
The problem arose with  the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII.It considered BOD, BOB and I.I exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.In other words there are known cases of BOD, BOB and I.I for them to be exceptions to EENS.
For instance, there would have to be someone in particular saved this year with BOD,BOB and I.I and saved without the baptism of water in the Church.Only then we could say,'Hey look there is salvation outside the Church, the dogma EENS has been contradicted. Look at this person Mr. XYZ who is saved without the baptism of water.So it means outside the Church there is salvation'.
But there can be no such case.
So when there was no known salvation outside the Church, the Holy Office 1949 inferred that BOD, BOB and I.I were exceptions.
Objectively there were no known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS, since if someone was saved as such he would be in Heaven and known only to God.
Pius XII and Pope John XXIII instead of correcting the error let it pass. For 19 years they did not lift the excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney.They maintained it right through Vatican Council II.
So when there are no known cases of BOD,BOB and I.I in our reality we have Vatican Council II mentioning them as if they exist.So LG 14( catechumen who desires baptism) and LG 16 ( invincible ignorance) are generally interpreted as being exceptions to the old ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.
This is also mentioned officially in the International Theological Commission's paper Christianity and the World Religions. Cardinal Ratzinger and Fr.Luiz Ladaria criticized Fr. Leonard Feeney and praised Pope Pius XII and they cited 
LG 16 and GS 22 as exceptions  to the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.
This is how even today liberals and traditionalists interpret Vatican Council II and EENS.
But the real issue, the shocker for every one is not this.It is  what if we just accept LG 16,LG 14, GS 22 as referring to hypothetical cases only ? And they really are only hypothetical cases.
You try it and see.
Ask yourself if  BOD, BOB and I.I and Vatican Council II's LG 16, LG 8, UR 3,NA 2 etc can only be examples of hypothetical and physically invisible cases? 
Then can there be exceptions in 2018 to the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church ? Could there have been any known exception in 1965? In 1949 ?
There are no exceptions.
Then it is realised that with hypothetical cases just being hypothetical Vatican Council II is in harmony with the Syllabus of Errors.We are back to an ecumenism of return. Since there is nothing in the Council to contradict the past ecclesiology.
So with hypothetical cases of BOD, the conclusion is a  traditional interpretation of the Council.I call this interpretation Feeneyism.
So the fault does not lie with Vatican Council II but how you interpret it,with Cushingism or Feeneyism,with the false premise or without it.
-Lionel Andrades

Catholics maintain the schism of the two popes

Barnhardt

Remember, no matter what…

Remember, no matter what, that:

It is IMPOSSIBLE to cause, or to enter into schism by the act of holding the Catholic Faith, whole and entire.


Lionel: But what is meant by 'whole and entire' ? Pope Benedict said in March 2016 (Avvenire) that extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. So he admits there was a change.The present Magisterium differs from the past Magisterium on a dogma of the Church defined by three Church Councils.



Image result for Photos of Archbishop Lefebvre and Fr.Leonard Feeney
For me EENS has not changed and Pope Benedict was proclaiming heresy. He was in schism and opposing the Magisterium of the past guided by the Holy Spirit.
In this error he is supported by Pope Francis and all the cardinals.


_______________________________

It is IMPOSSIBLE to cause, or to enter into schism by the act of holding the Catholic Faith, whole and entire.

Lionel: The two popes assume invisible for us baptism of desire (BOD) is a visible exception to the dogma EENS. Where are the practical exceptions to EENS in 2018? There are none.How can people in Heaven be exceptions to EENS on earth? This violates the Principle of Non Contradiction.
With this irrationality the two popes are in schism with the Magisterium of the past. This is a doctrinal rupture with the past.

________________________________

It is IMPOSSIBLE to cause, or to enter into schism by the act of holding the Catholic Faith, whole and entire.

Lionel: So I affirm Feeneyite (EENS), Feeneyite(Vatican Council II), Catechism of the Catholic Church(Feeneyite) and a Feeneyite Nicene Creed. I interpret all the past Catechisms with Feeneyism and I do not reject any Magisterial document. This is not how the two popes and the cardinals interpret Magisterial documents.For me they are in schism.
I hold the Catholic Faith whole and entire.
Pope Francis is the pope for me and I respect Pope Benedict as Emeritus Pope but I am affirming the Catholic Faith and they are not.I am not presenting any thing new.While their Cushngite theology is an innovation. It was created by liberal theologians in 1949- Boston and repeated at Vatican Council II.


_________________________________

It is IMPOSSIBLE to cause, or to enter into schism by the act of holding the Catholic Faith, whole and entire.

Lionel: Neither of the two popes say that all Jews and Muslims in 2018 are oriented to Hell (and there are no known exceptions) unless they enter the Catholic Church with 'faith and baptism'(Ad Gentes 7). This is the teaching of Vatican Council II interpreted with Feeneyite theology. This is how interpret the Council. The popes  cannot say this because they use Cushingite theology. They are misleading the whole Church today. They have caused a rupture with the past Magisterium of the Church.This is schism.It is official.It is pro-Masonic.

________________________________

It is IMPOSSIBLE to cause, or to enter into schism by the act of holding the Catholic Faith, whole and entire.

Lionel: The Catholic Faith is not the same today for the two popes as it was in the past.
Neither is it the same for traditionalists and conservatives because of the error in the Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston case. They follow the error. The Catholic Faith was changed.
Today traditionalists and conservative Catholics can interpret Vatican Council II and other Magisterial documents with the philosophy and theology of Feeneyism. Then the Catholic Faith would be the same before and after Vatican Council II.But conservative and traditionalist Catholics are not doing this. They want to maintain the politically correct schism of the two popes.
-Lionel Andrades
https://www.barnhardt.biz/2018/02/18/remember-no-matter-what/






 











































As a Catholic I affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite-without the premise) in harmony with EENS(Feeneyite), for me the Nicene Creed simply says 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins' and not three known baptisms which exclude the baptism of water in the Church

My response today to a letter.


Dear ...,
Praised be Jesus and Our Lady.
Thanks for your reply but you've missed the point of what I was trying to say.
I know you'll affirm all Magisterial documents and so do I.
Pope Francis is the pope for me.
Having got all this out of the way the point I want to make is that being saved in invincible  ignorance(I.I), the baptism of desire(BOB) and the baptism of blood(BOB), which you , the Magisterium and I affirm, can be interpreted in two ways and the conclusion would be different.
I repeat we both accept that theoretically a person can be saved with BOD, BOB and I.I if God wants it. So BOD, BOB and I.I is not the issue at least for me.
And here I come to the point I want to make and you will find a lot of material on my blog.It is there on the  subject of Cushingism and Feeneyism(according to Lionel Andrades).
This ordinary lay man is saying that with Cushingism( it says BOD,BOB and I.I refers to known people saved outside the Church) there is a different interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
With Feeneyism (BOD etc refer to unknown people saved outside the Church in 2018 for example) the interpretation is traditional, like in the 16th century.
But the heart of the issue is that with Feeneyism the interpretation of Vatican Council II also dramatically changes.
The popes since Paul VI have interpreted Vatican Council II with Cushingism.I use Feeneyism.
So Vatican Council II(Cushingite) is a rupture with the dogma EENS( Feeneyite-traditional).It is also a rupture with Vatican Council II( Feeneyite-traditional).
So Vatican Council has always been a rupture with Tradition for you all there.Since Cushingism produces the hemeneutic of discontinuity.
Of course this would be expected since the Letter of the Holy Office and Vatican Council II itself is Cushingite.
The false premise (BOD refers to visible people saved outside the Church) used in the 1949 Letter in the Fr. Leonard Feeney case was made the new doctrine at Vatican Council II.
So could you all  clarify at  least for me, that BOD, BOB and I.I refer to hypothetical cases in 2018 ? We cannot meet or see someone saved as such?
Probably every one there would respond with a  'Yes, they are hypothetical cases we cannot meet any one saved with BOD, BOB and I.I since they would be in Heaven'.
Then I come to my beliefs as a Catholic. I affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite-without the premise) which is in harmony with EENS(Feeneyite).For me the Nicene Creed simply says 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins' and not three known baptisms which exclude the baptism of water, this would be Cushingite.I interpret Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus with Feeneyism and I am aware that Pope Benedict and Cardinal Ladaria s.j would choose Cushingism.I interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church (Feeneyite) in harmony with the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS.
So I affirm Vatican Council II along with the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS, as it was known to the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century.
Can you all say the same? This is a doctrinal issue.
-Lionel Andrades

Repost :Like the Fatima visionaries, we should meditate on hell - Donal Anthony Foley


A statue of Our Lady of Fatima is carried during a candlelight vigil at the sanctuary in Portugal (AP)
Reflecting on the horrors of hell can help us to avoid ending up there
What are we to make of the vision of hell which was seen by the Fatima children on July 13, 1917?
The vision was revealed in Sister Lucia’s Third Memoir – which was written in the summer of 1941 – when she stated that she was going to reveal the first two parts of the Fatima secret, and that the first part of this secret was the vision of hell.
This is how she describes it:
“Our Lady showed us a great sea of fire which seemed to be under the earth. Plunged in this fire were demons and souls in human form, like transparent burning embers, all blackened or burnished bronze, floating about in the conflagration, now raised into the air by the flames that issued from within themselves together with great clouds of smoke, now falling back on every side like sparks in a huge fire, without weight or equilibrium, and amid shrieks and groans of pain and despair, which horrified us and made us tremble with fear. The demons could be distinguished by their terrifying and repellent likeness to frightful and unknown animals, all black and transparent.”
After this horrifying vision, Sister Lucia went on to say:
“This vision lasted but an instant. How can we ever be grateful enough to our kind heavenly Mother, who had already prepared us by promising, in the first Apparition, to take us to heaven. Otherwise, I think we would have died of fear and terror.”
Clearly, this vision was very brief, but very powerful and indeed terrifying. Sr Lucia then says:
“We then looked up at Our Lady, who said to us so kindly and so sadly: ‘You have seen hell where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart. If what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be peace.’ ”
Our Lady then went on to outline what needed to be done if souls would indeed be saved and peace given to the world – that is the second part of the secret.
The first point to make about this vision is that it strongly affirms the existence of hell, a fact which has been downplayed by some Catholics in recent years; the vision seen by the children, though, and the whole of Catholic tradition are opposed to that type of thinking. And in addition, Jesus mentions hell a number of times in the New Testament, and in quite graphic terms.
For example, in St Mark’s Gospel, after describing various sins that would make a person worthy of going to hell, such as corrupting little children, or using parts of the body for sinful purposes, he says: “And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell, where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.” (Mark 9:42-48)
In St Matthew’s Gospel, in the parable of the sower, Jesus uses the weeds and the wheat of the parable as symbolic of the lost and the saved, saying: “Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn” (Matthew 13:30).
There is a reference to the traditional concept of hell here in the fact that the weeds are burned.
Later on, Jesus explained the meaning of this parable to his disciples, saying:
“Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the close of the age. The Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire; there men will weep and gnash their teeth.” (Matt 13:40-42)
So from these and other scriptural passages we get a general picture of hell as a place of eternal punishment, a punishment involving fire, a never-ending fire, and also as a place of remorse and despair.
Thus the thought of hell is meant to be a sobering one for us, and one we should take seriously. The vision of hell certainly made a very strong impression on the Fatima seers, and particularly on Jacinta, as Sister Lucia further relates:
“The vision of hell filled her with horror to such a degree, that every penance and mortification was as nothing in her eyes, if it could only prevent souls from going there.”
In fact, hell became a preoccupation of young Jacinta. One time she exclaimed:
“Oh, hell! hell! How sorry I am for the souls who go to hell! And the people down there, burning alive, like wood in the fire!”
Lucia tells us that, she would then kneel down with her hands joined, and recite the prayer that Our Lady had taught them: “O my Jesus! Forgive us, save us from the fire of hell. Lead all souls to heaven, especially those who are most in need.”
At other times, she asked her cousin: “Why doesn’t Our Lady show hell to sinners? If they saw it, they would not sin, so as to avoid going there! You must tell Our Lady to show hell to all the people. You’ll see how they will be converted.”
Before she died, Jacinta spent some time at an orphanage in Lisbon. The Sister in charge, who was known as Mother Godinho, was able to talk to Jacinta. In some cases, it seems that the things Jacinta spoke of came from Our Lady, but in others they resulted from the infused wisdom with which the little girl was gifted. In fact, Mother Godinho asked Jacinta about this, saying, ‘Who taught you these things?’ to which she responded, ‘Our Lady, but some of them I thought myself. I love to think.’
Jacinta reportedly told Mother Godinho that many people went to hell because of “sins of the flesh”. She also apparently said that certain fashions would be introduced which would be very offensive to Our Lord.
Clearly we are living in a time when sexual immorality and immodest fashions are widespread, so these points very much apply to our age.
We are not likely to see either heaven or hell in this life, but in the first part of the Fatima secret we have been given a clear reiteration of hell’s existence and horror. Like Jacinta, we need to mediate on hell – in our case so as to ensure that we don’t end up going there.


Donal Anthony Foley is the author of a number of books on Marian  Apparitions, and maintains a related web site at www.theotokos.org.uk. He has also a written a time-travel/adventure book for young people

http://www.m.www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2016/07/21/like-the-fatima-visionaries-we-should-meditate-on-hell/

WEDNESDAY, JULY 27, 2016


Amusement Park (Roller Coaster) Accidents 2016 HD Caught On Camera










The entrance it seems to me  was similar to a very long  and narrow alleyway, like an  oven, low and dark and  confined; the floor seemed  to me to consist of dirty, muddy water emitting foul  stench and swarming with  putrid vermin...The bodily pains were so unbearable  that though I had suffered  excruciating ones in this life  and according to what doctors  say, the worst that can be suffered on earth for all my nerves were shrunken when  I was paralyzed, plus many other sufferings of many kinds  that I endured and even some  as I said, caused by the devil, these were all nothing  in comparison with the ones I experienced there...-St.Teresa of Avila's description of Hell.

http://catholicharboroffaithandmorals.com/St.%20Teresa%20of%20Avila%20combat%20with%20




Description of hell -Medugorje visionaries

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/description-of-hell-medugorje.html
________________________________________________

Sister Josefa Menendez's Description of Hell

http://christtotheworld.blogspot.it/2010/04/sister-josefa-menendezs-description-of.html

______________________________________
“I was led by an Angel to the chasms of hell (...). I would have died at the very sight of these tortures if the omnipotence of God had not supported me. Let the sinner know that he will be tortured throughout all eternity, through those senses which he used to sin. I am writing this at the command of God, so that no soul may find an excuse by saying there is no hell, or that nobody has ever been there, and so no one can say what it is like (...). I noticed that in hell there are most souls that did not believe it exists. I could hardly recover from the fright. How terribly souls suffer there!” (Diary, 741).-St.Faustina Kowalski http://www.divinemercysunday.com/vision.htm
___________________________________________
There was a certain rich  man, who was clothed  in purple and fine  linen; and feasted sumptuously every day.
 And there was a certain beggar, named Lazarus, who lay at his  gate, full of sores,Desiring to be filled  with the crumbs that fell from the rich man' s table, and no one did give  him; moreover the dogs came, and licked his sores.
 And it came to pass, that  the beggar died, and was carried by the angels  into Abraham' s bosom.
 And the rich man also  died: and he was buried in hell. And lifting up his eyes when he was in torments, he saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom: And he cried, and said:
 Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send  Lazarus, that he may  dip the tip of his finger in water, to cool  my tongue: for I am tormented in this flame.
 And Abraham said to him: Son, remember that thou  didst receive good things  in thy lifetime, and likewise Lazarus evil things, but now he is comforted; and thou art tormented. 



And besides all this, between us  and you, there  is fixed a great chaos: so that they who would pass from hence to you, cannot, nor from thence come hither. And he said: Then, father, I beseech thee, that thou wouldst send him to my father' s house,
 for I have five brethren, That he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torments. And Abraham said to him: They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. But he said: No, father Abraham: but if one went to them from the dead, they will do penance. 

And he said to him: If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they believe, if one rise again from the dead. -Luke :19-31,The Rich Man (Dives) and Lazarus.
________________________________