Wednesday, May 30, 2018

Who really is in schism?

From the Church Militant TV website

Former canonist for Holy See confirms Society is in material schism


Marc Balestrieri, JCL, president of Canonical Aid, Inc. and former canonist in the Holy See, spoke with ChurchMilitant.com to clarify issues surrounding the current status of the Society of St. Pius X. 
CM: The SSPX makes much of the fact that it is not in formal schism, but Pope St. John Paul II declared the group "schismatic" in his 1988 motu proprio, the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts in a letter also called the group in schism, and Cdl. Gerhard Müller of the CDF has publicly stated in an interview that the SSPX is in schism. We also have it on good authority that the former prefect of the Apostolic Signatura has said the SSPX is in schism. In your studied opinion, is the SSPX in schism? 
MB: Having reviewed all of the available public declarations of the Holy See in the matter, it is my professional opinion that the members of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) are per se in a state of material schism. It is the more probable opinion among approved authors that refusal of obedience of a Catholic to the Pope which is not predicated upon a rejection of the principle of his authority as Roman Pontiff as Caput Romanae Ecclesiae constitutes material, not formal schism. However, if those lay faithful receiving the Sacraments from them at any one point in time also severed themselves entirely from, or refused submission in principle to, the Roman Pontiff and per can. 1330 of the Code of Canon Law manifested in word or in deed externally such actions, then they are presumed to have descended into formal schism. 
Lionel: The SSPX recognises the popes and so are not in formal schism. For me the popes are interpreting Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents with a false premise, to create a rupture with Tradition. This is formal schism.There is a new understanding of the Nicene Creed and an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).A new theology,Cushingite theology, replaces the traditional Feeneyite theology.So new doctrines are created which are heretical and a schism with the past popes.So it is the present two popes who are in heresy and schism and they want to enforce it on Catholics in general.
________________________
The Code of Canon Law provides that the judgment as to whether any individual Bishop has committed formal schism and thereby been excommunicated is reserved to the Pope alone (cf. can. 1405, § 1, 3o). It states that in all other cases not expressly excepted in law, meaning, for example, regarding SSPX priests and lay faithful exclusively affiliated with them, the judge is the Bishop of the Diocese in which they are domiciled or quasi-domiciled (cf. can. 1419, § 1).
Lionel: All the bishops like the present two popes are interpreting magisterial documents, with irrational Cushingite theology and so there is a rupture with EENS ( Feeneyite) and the Syllabus of Errors on ecumenism etc.This is material schism. This is public heresy and mortal sin.It is a rupture with Magisterium of the past, for example, the 16th century.
_________________________
It was confirmed in an explanatory note issued on 24 August 1996 by the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts that the immediate cause of the excommunications of Archbishop Lefebvre, and Bishops de Castro Mayer, Tissier de Mallerais, Williamson, de Galarreta, and Fellay was the episcopal consecration confected without pontifical mandate against the express prohibition of the Supreme Pontiff in violation of the proscription of can. 1382 CIC. 
Lionel: There was the consecration of bishops by Archbishop Lefebvre since Vatican Council II(Cushingite) interpreted with an irrational premise was obviously a rupture with the dogma EENS and other magisterial documents,
This heresy and schism was accepted by the hierarchy.
They refused to interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism; without the false premise.They have imposed this public sin upon the whole Church. The SSPX correctly rebelled.
_________________________

The Pontifical Council states that there do not appear to be circumstances attenuating the imputability (subjective responsibility) of the actions of the clergy affiliated with the Society of St. Pius X.
Lionel: They were avoiding the Cushingite interpretation of Vatican Council II and EENS.This is something all Catholics should do, and especially those who work in the pontifical offices.Avoiding heresy and schism is 'an attenuating factor'.
_________________________
 On the other hand, the Note does invite caution to be applied regarding those faithful frequenting SSPX chapels who do not participate exclusively in the liturgical actions celebrated by SSPX clergy, and who do not share in the dissenting positions advanced by the superiors of the Society, explaining that only a "case-by-case" analysis and judgment of their actions would be appropriate in their regard. Such case-by-case analysis is consonant with the norm of can. 1419.
As for the attribution made to Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, I am only aware of an interview given in Italian on 22 December 2013 to the newspaper Corriere della Sera. On that occasion, he appears to have spoken only as a private doctor when he stated (my translation): 
The canonical excommunication incurred by reason of the illicit ordinations was lifted from the Bishops, but there remains the sacramental one, de facto, for the schism: They have distanced themselves from [being in] communion with the Church.
Lionel: They have distanced themselves from Vatican Council II (Cushingite) and this is to their credit. However they must now ask the hierarchy to first affirm Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) so that they can follow.
________________________
The Prefect's use of the term de facto emphasizes the factual divide in communion between the Holy See and the SSPX Bishops. If he had intended to emphasize clearly the existence of formal schism on their part, he most likely would have employed the term de iure given the context of the assertion. 
The absence of the use of such term on his part, however, does nothing to mitigate the gravity of the material schism by which souls are at grave risk of not being saved for as long as the situation perdures.
CM: The SSPX has responded by essentially claiming the Pope's concession is unnecessary, and that the state of emergency has always supplied jurisdiction for SSPX priests to absolve sins. In fact, SSPX supporters are claiming the Pope's acts confirm the SSPX's legitimate status in the Church. What are the ramifications of Pope Francis' concession granting the SSPX the ability to absolve sins during the Jubilee Year of Mercy?
MB: According to some canonists, Pope Francis has granted implicitly and directly to all SSPX priests, only during the Jubilee Year of Mercy, the faculty to absolve from sin the faithful who would approach said priests for absolution. Other expert canonists assert that the Pope has granted to all of the faithful who would confess their sins to an SSPX priest a temporary privilege to do so, but not a faculty to the SSPX confessor to grant absolution from sin. Due to the succinct wording of the Pope's decree, the exact categorization of Pope Francis' act is still being debated amongst canonists as I write. The implication of Pope Francis' motu proprio is that the priests of the Society of St. Pius X do not per se possess the faculty required of them to absolve a faithful from sin validly outside of the danger of death. 
Lionel: Pope Francis permits them to hear Confession and absolve sins and so this is no more an issue.
_________________________

CM: First, does the SSPX have extraordinary jurisdiction to absolve sins?
MB: SSPX priests are presumed at Universal Law only to possess jurisdiction or the faculty to absolve from sin in two exceptional circumstances.  First, pursuant to the norm of can. 976, "Any priest, even though he lacks the faculty to hear confessions, can validly and lawfully absolve any penitents who are in danger of death, from any censures and sins, even if an approved priest is present." "Any priest" according to this norm would include validly ordained SSPX priests. Second, in conformity with the norm of can. 144, § 1, whenever (1) Common Error of Fact or Law and (2) Positive and Probable Doubt of Fact or Law have been verified to exist in a certain fact pattern, the Church "supplies" a iure universali the faculty required for SSPX priests to absolve from sins validly. "Error" in this norm means a state of erroneous judgment; "doubt" in this canon means a grave, positive and probable doubt asserted by numerous doctors of Canon Law of unimpaired reputation extant on the part of the SSPX priest acting as confessor.  
While canonists find no controversy in the assertion that SSPX priests who are validly ordained and not otherwise impeded have the faculty to absolve the faithful from sin in danger of death of a penitent (cf. can. 976), the jurisprudence of the Roman Rota does provide some rare official light into the other question of whether SSPX priests possess the jurisdiction required to witness marriage validly.
The Tribunal of the Roman Rota has issued, per my count, five judgments declaring the nullity of marriage of those faithful who exchange vows before an SSPX priest. The legal rationale for such judgments has been the ground of Defect of Canonical Form (cf. can. 1108).  
Lionel: This is coercion so that the faithful will accept the heretical and schismatic interpretation of Vatican Council II instead of the rational alternative, which the Vatican does not affirm for political reasons.
_______________________
The Code of Canon Law states:
Only those marriages are valid which are contracted in the presence of the local Ordinary or parish priest [pastor] or of the priest or deacon delegated by either of them, who, in the presence of two witnesses, assists ... . (cf. can. 1108, § 1)
In layman's terms, this means that if a Catholic couple exchange vows between each other before any priest who has not received delegation from an authority indicated in the canon, or the supply of said faculty by operation of can. 144, then such a marriage is presumed to be invalid according to the norms of the Code of Canon Law.
Lionel: The new Code of Canon Law has an impediment. It makes it obligatory for a juridical person to affirm all Church teachings interpreted with irrational and non traditional Cushingism, philosophy and theology which is an innovation in the Church and not part of the Deposit of the Faith.
________________________
Whenever these norms have been applied to cases where an SSPX priest witnessed the exchange of vows of two Catholic faithful appearing before him, the Judges of the Roman Rota, the Catholic Church's universal court of appeal, have, to my knowledge, without exception, always declared such marriages to be utterly null and void. An abstract of just such a judgment was released by the Roman Rota in 2010 (my translation):
An affirmative sentence has recognized the nullity of marriage by reason of defect of delegation in the celebrating priest belonging to the "Society of Saint Pius X" (the so-called Lefebvrians). According to the panel of judges [Turnus], on the part of the faithful who follow schismatic pastors — as an aside, the Lefebvrian community is qualified as dissident but not separated from the Church — one cannot automatically presume the will to defect from the Catholic Church (from the moment that their choice could have been influenced more by liturgical preference than by the refusal of papal authority) and therefore these [individuals] remain bound by canonical form (can. 1117 in the text preceding the reform introduced by the Motu Proprio Omnium in mentem of 26 October 2009; A. 95/09).
Lionel: They could defect from the Church because of a malafide interpretation of Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents to create a rupture with Tradition. Without the malafide interpretation of Vatican Council II, the Council is not a rupture with EENS and the Syllabus of Errors. But Pope Benedict does not want to affirm EENS and the Syllabus of Errors.He is promoting heresy and wants it to be considered orthodoxy.
____________________
This jurisprudence of the Roman Rota is entirely consonant with the decision of Pope St. John Paul II in 1988 to grant to the Cardinal President of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei the faculty to sanate in radice marriages witnessed by SSPX priests: "b) sanandi in radice matrimonia nulla ob defectum formae can. 1108 requisitae, coram iisdem Sacerdotibus celebrata," translated: "b) of sanating in radice marriages null by reason of defect of form required by can. 1108, celebrated before the same Priests."

CM: Second, does the Pope's act confirm that the SSPX normally does not have faculties to absolve sins?
MB: Apart from the circumstances foreseen by canons 976, 144 and the temporary circumstances described in the letter written by Pope Francis on 1 September 2015 to Archbishop Rino Fisichella, President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization, SSPX priests do not ordinarily possess the faculty required to absolve a faithful validly from sin.
CM: Pope Benedict in his 2009 motu proprio made clear the SSPX has "no canonical status" in the Church and exercises "no legitimate ministry." But SSPX supporters cite Cdl. Darios Castrillon Hoyos, who said the SSPX has "irregular canonical status." Is there a difference between no canonical status and irregular canonical status?
Lionel: The popes are granting canonical recognition only to those religious communities which interpret Vatican Council II and all magisterial documents, with Cushingism. Also permission to teach theology is only given to those Catholics who interpret Vatican Council II, EENS, Catechisms etc with irrational Cushingite theology, to create a rupture with EENS and the Syllabus of Errors.
_________________
The explanatory Nota issued by the Secretariat of State of the Holy See on 4 February 2009 (AAS CI [2009] 145-146) states, more precisely, the following (English translation mine):
The loosening of the excommunication has freed the four Bishops from a most grave canonical penalty, but it has not changed the juridical situation of the Society of Saint Pius X, which, at the actual moment, does not enjoy any canonical recognition within the Catholic Church. Also the four Bishops, even though they be loosened from excommunication, do not have a canonical function within the Church and do not exercise a ministry in her legitimately. (italicization mine)
Lionel: The SSPX like the Franciscans of the Immaculate, are correctly refusing to affirm Vatican Council II Cushingite.It is  a rupture with Tradition on EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc. The priests and lay people in general along with the two popes, have an alternative. They can affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) which will not be a rupture with EENS and the Syllabus of Errors. But they refuse to do so.This is heresy and schism. They do not want to affirm an  an ecumenism of return, for example, and prefer the New Ecumenism. This would not be possble with Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and the past ecclesiology.So they have a personal interest in all this deception, this theology based upon a lie.
________________________
The above quotation of the Secretariat of State indicates that the Society of Saint Pius X as an entity does not enjoy any recognition of its existence on the part of the Catholic Church from a canonical point of view. This means that the Catholic Church, while perhaps acknowledging its de facto existence according to the norms of Civil Law, does not ascribe any canonical recognition to the Society. As for the Bishops, the Holy See holds that they have not been granted any official munus to fulfill by the Church. Consequently, it follows that any ministry ordinarily exercised by them is not authorized by the Church.
Lionel: The Secretariate of State for political reasons wants the SSPX not to affirm Vatican Council II( Feeneyite) since then there could only be the old ecclesiology, the old ecumenism etc.They support heresy and schism by demanding that the SSPX accept Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite).
_______________________
CM: The SSPX admits it is not in full communion with the Church. Some say this language implies they are schismatic. What does "not in full communion with the Church" mean? 
MB: The expression connotes that the members of the Society are not in complete harmony with the official teachings and discipline of the Roman Catholic Church. The Society both officially dissents from certain doctrines pronounced by the Magisterium since the Second Vatican Council, and rejects certain disciplinary norms of Universal Law enshrined in the Code of Canon Law promulgated in 1983.
Lionel: 'The Society both officially dissents from certain doctrines pronounced by the Magisterium since the Second Vatican Council' , yes and they should keep rejecting Vatican Council II (Cushingite). This is a heretical and schismatic interpretation of the Council being forced upon all Catholics by the political Left.
Pope Benedict's interpretation of the dogma EENS is not the official teaching of the Catholic Church but his personal and political interpretation. He admits it is a rupture with the Magisterium of the 16th century.He said it officially in March 2016 (Avvenire).
Also the error of assuming unknown cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance being known exceptions to traditional EENS is an objective error. This factual error was incorporated into the Code of Canon Law 1983 by Cardinal Ratzinger.The same Cushingite theology marks Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus.
_____________________

CM: Pope Benedict made clear in 2009 that all SSPX clergy remain suspended a divinis. We understand that means that no clergy are allowed to offer the sacraments publicly under pain of mortal sin. What is the canonical penalty for violating their suspension and offering the sacraments publicly?
Lionel: Pope Benedict is in mortal sin for rejecting the dogma EENS with his visible- for -him cases of BOD, BOB and I.I.
He is also in mortal sin for affirming Vatican Council II as a rupture with EENS by inferring that LG 8, LG 16, GS 22 etc refer to known people saved outside the Church, who are visible and known exceptions to traditional EENS.
He has changed the interpretation of EENS, Vatican Council II, Catechisms, BOD, BOB and I.I , the Nicene Creed etc.He needs to go for Confession. He is presently a pope automatically excommunicated.
_______________________________
MB: Pursuant to the norm of can. 1378, § 2, 2º, an SSPX priest appears to incur a distinct latae sententiae censure of suspension every single time that without the ability to do so validly, he attempts to impart sacramental absolution, or at least attempts to hear confessions outside of the danger of death of the penitent. The multiplication of latae sententiae censures in such a fact pattern is a little-known but operative presumption that is obtained in application of the norms of cann. 1321, § 3 coll. can. 15, § 2.
CM: Does it place the SSPX clergy in mortal sin, or in danger of mortal sin?
MB: Clearly at least in an objective danger of mortal sin, but not just the SSPX priest. Any Catholic faithful who seeks in genere to receive a sacrament from an SSPX priest, and in specie to receive absolution from sins confessed to an SSPX priest outside of the danger of death and the Jubilee Year of Mercy decreed by the Holy Father, per se does not receive validly and licitly the benefit of the sacrament. The norm of can. 1335 cannot be invoked to demonstrate the supplying of faculties to a priest to absolve from sin validly. All that the norm of can. 1335 does is remove pro temporethe canonical prohibition extant on the part of the SSPX priest from celebrating a sacrament, thereby returning a priest under, for example, the censure of excommunication or suspension to the canonical state he was in prior to having incurred the censure. This means that if he did not possess any faculty to absolve from sin before incurring suspension, then he still does not possess such a faculty unless it be given to him by the competent ecclesiastical authority, who normally is the territorial Bishop the SSPX priest finds himself in. For any priest, not just an SSPX priest, to celebrate the Sacred Mysteries illicitly is to risk not just his own spiritual ruin, but that of the individual faithful he attempts to assist, for the reasons that have been expounded.
Lionel: Pope Francis permits them to hear Confessions in general. -Lionel Andrades
18 September 2015
Marc Balestrieri, JCL
President and Senior Canonical Counsel
Canonical Aid, Inc.

Marc Balestrieri received his degree in canon law from the Pontifical Gregorian University in 1998. He has served as staff canonist in the Holy See (the Vatican), and in various archdioceses of the United States, England and France. His past offices include Collegial Judge in 1st and 2nd Instance, Promoter of Justice, Defender of the Bond, Auditor and Penal Investigator. He currently serves as President of Canonical Aid, Inc.


Image result for Graphics Vatican Council II Feeneyite and Cushingite Photos

Image result for Graphics Vatican Council II Feeneyite and Cushingite Photos

Image result for Graphics Vatican Council II Feeneyite and Cushingite Photos



Michael Voris and the two popes remain heretical and schismatic, but politically correct with the Left and so are non controversial

From the CMTV website

The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX)

Lionel: The Holy Father Pope Benedict like the SSPX and CMTV(Church Militant TV) interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism instead of irrational and traditional Feeneyite theology. So there is a schism with the past popes and there is a heretical rupture with Tradition. The SSPX rejects this conclusion and the others accept it.
They all do not know that with the theology of Feeneyism there would be no rupture with Tradition and no schism with the past popes.
___________________

The position of ChurchMilitant.com concerning the SSPX is that of the Holy Father, Emeritus Pope Benedict XVI, as expressed in the motu proprio Ecclesiae Unitatem, issued July 2, 2009:
Lionel: I have mentioned it often and there is no clarification from the Vatican or CMTV.There can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is a rupture and the other is a continuity with Tradition. If hypothetical cases are considered simply hypothetical or if they are wrongly assumed to be known people saved outside the Church, determines the interpretation.
So for me the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance refer to unknown non Catholics, physically invisible people in 2018. So they are not objective exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
Similarly LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, refer to hypothetical cases only, theoretical possibilities for me, so Vatican Council II is  not a rupture with the dogma EENS ( Feeneyite).
So for me EENS and Vatican Council II are Feeneyite. Similarly BOD,BOB and I.I are also Feeneyite.
But for Pope Benedict and Michael Voris BOD, BOB and I.I refer to known people saved outside the Church. BOD, BOB and I.I are objective exceptions to Feeneyiite EENS. So they are Cushingites , for me.If there were no known people saved outside the Church there would not be exceptions to EENS for them.
Likewise LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, NA 2, GS 22 ,UR e etc refer to known people saved outside the Church and so are objective exceptions to EENS ( Feeneyite).So this is Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) for them.If these were references to unknown and invisible people for them in 2018, then of course there would be no exceptions to EENS and the past exclusivist ecclesiology.
Upon the past exclusivist ecclesiology ( Feeneyite theology) depended the ecumenism or return, traditional Mission etc.
Upon the new non exclusivist ecclesiology( Cushingite theology) depends the new ecumenism, new evangelisation etc.
So we have Vatican Council II  (Feeneyite or Cushingite), EENS( Feeneyite or Cushingite), BOD, BOB and I.I( Feeneyite or Cushingite).
Pope Benedict has always been a Cushingite and he wants the SSPX to accept Vatican Council II (Cushingite) just as CMTV, has compromised.
____________________
In the same spirit and with the same commitment to encouraging the resolution of all fractures and divisions in the Church and to healing a wound in the ecclesial fabric that was more and more painfully felt, I wished to remit the excommunication of the four Bishops illicitly ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre. With this decision I intended to remove an impediment that might have jeopardized the opening of a door to dialogue and thereby to invite the Bishops and the "Society of St. Pius X" to rediscover the path to full communion with the Church​. As I explained in my Letter to the Catholic Bishops of last 10 March, the remission of the excommunication was a measure taken in the context of ecclesiastical discipline to free the individuals from the burden of conscience constituted by the most serious of ecclesiastical penalties. However, the doctrinal questions obviously remain and until they are clarified the Society has no canonical status in the Church and its ministers cannot legitimately exercise any ministry. (emphasis added) 
Lionel: So ' the path to full communion' for Pope Benedict is the SSPX accepting Vatican Council II and EENS Cushingite which is heretical and a schism with the past popes. 
Pope Benedict is free to affirm Vatican Council II and EENS Feeneyite but he will not do so.
In March 2016(Avvenire) he affirmed in public Vatican Council II and EENS, Cushingite.He had an option, like me. He could have endorsed EENS and Vatican Council II, Feeneyite. Then EENS today would not be a rupture with EENS as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century. Also Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) would not be a rupture with EENS ( Feeneyite), as it was known in the 16th century.
So with EENS and Vatican Council II (Cushingite), Pope Benedict created a rupture with the Magisterium of the 16th century on EENS( Feeneyite).
_______________________
The SSPX bishops were excommunicated and their illicit consecrations defined as schismatic in the motu proprio Ecclesia Dei issued July 2, 1988. The excommunications have been lifted, but the canonical status of the SSPX remains unchanged. 
Lionel: The SSPX must continue to reject Vatican Council II (Cushingite) and they must ask Pope Benedict to set an example and affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and also EENS( Feeneyite).
____________________
There are two important points here:
1. The SSPX is not in full communion with the Church and is invited by the Church to rediscover this path. 
Lionel: The 'Church' is not in full communion with 'the Church' of the past, example the 16th century. Pope Benedict was in public heresy in March 2016 when he said that EENS according to the Magisterium of the 16th century was for him no more the EENS of today.
_________________________
2. The SSPX has no canonical status in the Church and its ministers cannot legitimately exercise any ministry.
Lionel: They need to affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) which is a continuation with Tradition and then show the present Magisteriium, that they are in schism and heresy, in an unprecedented, 'magisterial heresy' and this cannot be the work of the Holy Spirit.
_______________________
The SSPX, for all its many good qualities, does not consist of faithful Roman Catholics because communion with the Chair of Peter is a constitutive part of Roman Catholicism — something the SSPX accepts in principle but rejects in practice.
Lionel: The present two popes also seem to accept it in principle but reject it in practice.
_______________________
 The SSPX has "no canonical status," "no legitimate ministry," is "invited to rediscover the path to full communion," has no faculties from any bishop, is not part of the divinely ordained hierarchical structure of the Church, and all its priests are suspended a divinis. No individual or group can seriously claim to be Catholic and have all this true of themselves.
Lionel: They are in an irregular situation since we have an irregular magisterium.It enforces heresy and schism in the Church.It ignores a rational and traditional theology, only to be politically correct with the Left and the other enemies of the Church.
______________________
We are well aware of ongoing dialogue between the SSPX and Rome. It is to be fervently hoped that this dialogue results in a return of the SSPX to full communion with the Church, granting its bishops and clergy canonical status and the authority to exercise ministry.
Lionel: CMTV could help by discussing the difference between Cushingism and Feeneyism as a philosophy and theology and how it affects the interpretation of Vatican Council II. May be they could do an F.B.I program on this. I would be glad to help.They can e-mail me for any information.
____________________________
 Reconciliation of the SSPX with the Church would be a great blessing for the Church but most especially for the SSPX. The SSPX has consistently refused the most generous and magnanimous invitations from the Church to reconcile and place itself under the authority of the Vicar of Christ, rejecting his dogmatically defined "full power of shepherding, ruling and governing the universal Church," a power "ordinary and immediate over all the churches and over each and every member of the faithful" ("The Pope Exercises Supreme Jurisdiction" [Original Italian here]).
Lionel: The present two popes first need to reconcile themselves with a rational and traditional theology. Then they need to affirm the doctrines which emerge. This would mean a return to the past exclusivist ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return....
__________________________
Perhaps the SSPX fears it will be crushed by an unsympathetic hierarchy and pope.
Lionel: If the Pope and the hierarchy interpret magisterial documents with a rational theology the SSPX has nothing to fear, since the conclusion would be traditional.Rome would have come back to the Faith as Archbishop Lefebvre wanted.
________________________
 Perhaps it is justified in such fearful apprehensions. But there is precedent in the history of the Church — in the lives of the saints, in the life of Our Lord Himself — for risking or allowing oneself to be crushed by obedience. 
Lionel: CMTV could take a risk and comment on what I mean by Feeneyism and Cushingism and how CMTV was  wrong all these years with their Cushingite interpretation of Vatican Council II and EENS.
_______________________
Until such time as the SSPX chooses to reconcile with the Church, ChurchMilitant.com must support the judgment of the Holy Father and the Church concerning its status.
Lionel: CMTV and the popes are Cushingites. For them BOD, BOB and I.I refer to hypothetical cases in 2018 and so there is a rupture with EENS in 2018. This is fantasy theology  and not the teaching of the Holy Spirit. Also for CMTV and the popes, LG 8 etc refer to objective people, known in 2018 saved outside the Church.This is irrational.
So CMTV and the two popes remain heretical and schismatic, but politically correct with the enemies of the Church and so are not controversial.In this way CMTV can defend itself and tell their liberal opponents that they follow 'the teachings of the Magisterium'.-Lionel Andrades
https://www.churchmilitant.com/main/generic/sspx

Image result for Graphics Vatican Council II Feeneyite and Cushingite Photos







Cardinal Raymond Burke had said the SSPX is in schism and referred to the SSPX not accepting Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) : He now affirms EENS and Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) : Michael Voris' Resistance Webinar on the SSPX is schismatic like the present magisterium


Cardinal Raymond Burke had said that the SSPX is in schism. He is referring to the SSPX not accepting Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and rejecting Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) 1
 He will not have expressed it with these terms but this is the message of his address at the Voice of the Family Conference on May 18, 2018.He said that other religions are false religions(this is Feeneyism), the one true Church of Christ subsists in only the Catholic Church(this is Feeneyism) and he proclaimed the Social Reign of Christ the King(based upon Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus) and asked others, Catholics, and non Catholics also,  to do the same.
So he was affirming Tradition(Feeneyite EENS, Syllabus of Errors, past ecclesiology), like the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) but was not affirming Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) which would have been a rupture with Tradition(Feeneyite EENS etc). He could only endorse Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite).There was no other option.There was no other way he could have been at home with Tradition( past ecclesiology) and also Vatican Council II. LG 8, LG 16 had to refer to unknown people ( Feeneyism), for him, otherwise there would be a rupture with EENS and the past ecclesiology of the Church.
For Pope Benedict the SSPX  would have to affirm Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) and so like him and Cardinal Ladaria, be in schism with the past popes.This would be a heretical interpretation of Vatican Council II.In the past this was the only interpretation of Vatican Council II also known to Cardinal Raymond Burke.So from this Cushingite perspective the SSPX would be in schism, for him,  for not affirming Vatican Council II interpreted with a false premise, to create a rupture with Tradition.
So for the schismatic present Magisterium too there was only one interpretation of Vatican Council II known to them. They would not comment on Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) inspite of so many reports on line explaining it over the last six or more years.They are still maintaining their politically correct silence.
So for Michael Voris the SSPX is in schism since like him they have not accepted Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) which is a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors, extra ecclesiam nulla salus( Feeneyite) and the Catechisms, interpreted with Cushingism.Church Militant TV continues to say outside the Church there is no salvation but refuses to say that the BOD, BOB and I.I are not explicit exceptions to traditional EENS. They are in line with the Cushingite Archbishop of Detroit and the Left there.
So the SSPX must continue to reject Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) as Cardinal Raymond Burke has now done .
The SSPX is correct. Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) is a schism with the popes of the past.With the false premise it becomes a rupture with Tradition( Syllabus, old ecclesiology).But for some reason the SSPX is not affirming  Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) or even discussing it. None of their priests comment upon it. There is no Press Release explaining their position with reference to Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite).
Why? Is it because Pope Pius XII and Archbishop Lefebvre interpreted extra ecclesiam nulla salus with Cushingism instead of the traditional Feeneyism?
Is it because Archbishop Lefebvre wrongly interpreted Vatican Council II with Cushingism and did not seem to know about Vatican Council II( Feeneyite) ?
Was it because Cardinal Raymond Burke and all the other cardinals and bishops in the past only knew of Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) and so for them the SSPX would be in schism for rejecting Vatican Council II (Cushingite) ?
We now know that the reading of Vatican Council II with only the Cushingite model is obsolete. It is obsolete for the traditionalists and the liberals.
The average Catholic would be able to see that the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) refer to invisible people, unknown people and so they cannot be mistaken as known people saved outside the Church.They will know that they have a choice . They can interpret BOD, BOB and I.I as referring to unknown people in 2018 and they have a different interpretation of Vatican Council II from that of Michael Voris or the cardinals and popes, who are presently in schism.
This is the next step that the SSPX must take. They must show the two popes that the both of them, like the popes since Paul VI, were in heresy and in schism, for not affirming Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and the popes since Pius XII were also in heresy and schism for not affirming extra ecclesiam nulla salus( Feeneyite) and wrongly replacing it with extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Cushingite).-Lionel Andrades




1.
https://www.churchmilitant.com/resistance-webinar?utm_source=CM.com+Email+Subscribers&utm_campaign=b9cd8c343d-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_05_28_11_38_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6225e731a9-b9cd8c343d-62449253





MAY 28, 2018

Image result for Photo of Cardinal Raymond Burke at the march for life 2018


Cardinal Raymond Burke endorses Tradition and Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite).If the SSPX follow him, this is a simple way to canonical recognition http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/05/cardinal-ratymond-burke-is-endorsing.html


MAY 28, 2018


Cardinal Raymond Burke's statement at the Voice of the Family Conference is sound orthodoxy in harmony with Vatican Council II

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/05/cardinal-raymond-burkes-statement-at.html



MAY 27, 2018


Cardinal Burke has set a new theological and doctrinal model for sedevacantists and traditionalists.They can affirm tradition and Vatican Council II(Feeneyite). He indicates liberals can no more cite Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition, by using a false premise

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/05/cardinal-burke-has-set-new-theological.html



Vision: I was shown the lake of fire

Hell - lake of fire on earth

EX-GAYS GAINING TRACTION IN CALIFORNIA - Former homosexuals challenge law banning reparative therapy

Ex-Gays Gaining Traction in California
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (ChurchMilitant.com) - Eight former homosexuals and transgender individuals are fighting a California bill that would ban reparative therapy for same-sex attracted adults. 
Assembly Bill 2943 is a proposed amendment to the state consumer code that would criminalize "sexual orientation change efforts," including the selling of books and the offering of counseling services that help someone overcome unwanted same-sex attraction or gender identity confusion. 
The measure passed the California Assembly 50–18 last month and has moved to the Senate where it was referred to the Committees on Judiciary and Appropriations on May 3. 
But a video has been released that presents contrary evidence to the narrative that gays are "born that way" and "can't change." Eight individuals are claiming they have overcome same-sex attraction through counseling and healing through Jesus Christ. 

One woman in the video, Elizabeth Woning, said, "I picked up a Bible, highlighting every passage about an amazing God that was so beautiful and excellent in every way." After growing in her faith life, she began having affections for a man. Now, she is has been married for 13 years. 
The video debunks the bill's language defining counseling to rid unwanted same-sex attractions as "consumer fraud." 
Tony Perkins' Family Research Council acknowledges that "the movement by LGBT activists to abolish the practice of 'sexual orientation efforts' [including reparative therapy] has gotten a big boost with the push to pass California's AB 2943" which "would ban it for any client or any type of counselor (including a religious one) if there's any exchange of money."  
Christians have said that the bill could be interpreted to include the banning of any book that promotes the biblical view of human sexuality, including the Bible
Past Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, a devout Christian, noted that California is "bracing for one of the most dramatic ideological shifts away from the First Amendment in our nation's history" since the measure "destroys the foundations of liberty and a free society." 
The bill 'destroys the foundations of liberty and a free society.'
Tweet
"This is a massive attack on Christianity. It should alarm us that the constitutional problems inherent in the bill were not obvious to those in the California Assembly," he insisted. "This means the sale of any book that states the practice of homosexuality or transgender identification as immoral actions would be illegal in California. … This could include the Bible!" 
Jeff Myers, president of Summit Ministries, a Colorado-based Christian group that provides students with "an intelligent, defensible Christian worldview before they go to college" called the California bill "a dog whistle to the [L]eft that intelligent Christians holding traditional views are fair game for discrimination, smears and frivolous lawsuits." 
Summit Ministries has canceled its June 10–23 and June 24–July 7 sessions at Biola University near Los Angeles owing to "concerns that California will forbid some of what it teaches." 
Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) listed examples in its analysis of activities the bill would outlaw: 
A bookstore (including online bookstores like Amazon) could not sell many recently published books challenging gender identity ideology and advocating that these beliefs should be rejected by society; and [a] pastor paid to speak at an event addressing current social topics could not encourage attendees that they can prevail over same-sex desires or feelings that they were born the wrong sex.
"At its core, AB 2943 outlaws speech, whether offered by a licensed counselor, a best-selling author, or even a minister or religious leader," continues ADF's analysis. The measure "labels such faith-driven activity as fraudulent and deceptive practices, subjecting anyone who engages in them to ruinous lawsuits, punitive damages and attorneys' fees." 
Longtime New Testament professor Robert A.J. Gagnon, the author of The Bible and Homosexual Practice, wrote in The Federalist last month that there is "nothing in the bill that exempts such practices from prosecution by the state. We have learned on LGBTQ matters what is exempted is not exempted for long and what is not exempted has no exemption." 
The sale of any book that states the practice of homosexuality or transgender identification as immoral actions would be illegal in California.
Tweet
"Consequently, selling religious or secular books (pamphlets, videos, audios, etc.), holding conferences, teaching courses in a college or seminary where tuition is paid, giving a speech at a paid venue, counseling people for a fee, or perhaps even posting online articles in a site that requires a paid subscription" that attest "it is morally wrong for people to engage in homosexual practice or identify as 'gay' or 'transgender,' all could be treated as a violation of California Assembly Bill 2943," continued Gagnon. 
The late Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, a Catholic pioneer in reparative therapy, showed that it helped reduce stress and improve emotional and physical well-being.   
"Homosexuality is not about sex," Nicolosi emphasized. "It is about a person's sense of himself, about his relationships, how he forms and establishes relationships, his self-identity, his self-image, personal shame, his ability to sustain intimacy."

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/ex-gays-gaining-traction-in-california