Cushingite signatories unaware of Vatican Council II (Cushingite) ploy : repeat same mistake.
Vatican Council II (Cushingite) is a rupture with traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). It is a break with the old ecclesiology and the Syllabus of Errors. It has made the Athanasius Creed , on outside the Church there is no salvation, obsolete.
So traditional doctrine on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church did not exist any more for Pope Francis, at the Abu Dhabi meeting.He was referring to Vatican Council II (Cushingite) which is the only way the traditionalists, sedevacantists and conservatives interpret the Council. Just like him!!
So his response once again to the group of 19 Catholic priests and academics who have issued a 20- page open letter to the bishops,1 and who are Cushingites,is, Vatican Council II.It will always be Vatican Council II( Cushingite) until they get smart.
Similarly his response to the dubbia cardinals on Amoris Laetitia would again be Vatican Council II( Cushingite) !!!
Vatican Council II Cushingite and not Vatican Council II Feeneyite.
For Cardinals Burke and Brandmuller unknown cases of being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I), the baptism of desire(BOD) and the baptism of blood(BOB) are visible and known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.This is Cushingism.So EENS has exceptions for the dubbia cardinals.
For them hypothetical cases, known only to God, referred to in LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are objective and known exceptions to EENS.Cushingism again.
So ecclesiology has been changed for the dubbia cardinals.It is new.They accept the New Ecclesiology based upon cases known only to God also being known to human beings.They believe that there are known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
So if ecclesiology can be changed said Cardinal Kasper-very directly, in an interview, then so can the Eucharist be given to the divorced and remarried.
So it was the same with Amoris Laetitia.The exception makes the rule. Subjectivity is assumed to be objective.
Amoris Laetitia suggests that a priest can know in a particular case( which would otherwise be known only to God) when some one in mortal sin is not in mortal sin.
Sounds familiar?!
Someone else defending Amoris Laetitia said that it had the same moral theology of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
On mortal sin, the Catechism refers to those 'who know'. There is no more an objective mortal sin only.Mortal sin is not always a mortal sin anymore but depends upon conditions, which allegedly can be known to us human beings.
Sounds familiar?!
For Pope Benedict every one does not need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation but only those who know.
Why only those who know?
Since for Cardinal Ratzinger, Cardinal Kasper,Fr. Rahner and other liberal theologians at Vatican Council II, there were known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.The excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney was still not lifted by Cardinal Richard Cushing, who was active at Vatican Council II.
So there were also known exceptions for Cardinal Ratzinger, to the traditional moral theology, which was black and white, and which Pope John Paul II tried to salvation with Veritatis Splendor.
In faith( salvation) and morals( mortal sin) it is assumed that there are exceptions.It was also presumed wrongly that we humans could judge an exception.
This is Cushingism in faith and morals.The ecclesiastics used the same technique to change traditional teachings.
Now this bad reasoning is also used by the 19 signatories to interpret Vatican Council II not knowing that with Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) the Council does not contradict EENS.
So the next time when the pope , cardinals, bishops and the Left, refer to Vatican Council II, it is hoped that they will be aware that the reference is not to Vatican Council II (Feeneyite).
To interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism is heresy -but it is also the heresy of the signatories.
They first need to interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with Feeneyite EENS and then ask the two popes and the CDF to do the same.They can then ask the cardinals and bishops to do likewise.
Then Ecclesiastical Masonry can no more say that Vatican Council II is a rupture with Tradition and the spirit of Vatican Council II supports, heresy, sacrilege and schism.
It is important that the signatories clarify this point - at least before the next petition.
For instance Prof. Massimo Faggioli has said that there is very little critique of Pope Francis' theology. There is no critique ! How can Cushingites critique a Cushingite ? Faggioli himself can only interpet Vatican Council II with Cushingism. He knows there is an alternative but he will not write about it.He could have an ideological interest.
But this is not the problem with the signatories.
The same mistake was made in the 2017 Filial Correction.2
-Lionel Andrades
Vatican Council II Cushingite and not Vatican Council II Feeneyite.
For Cardinals Burke and Brandmuller unknown cases of being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I), the baptism of desire(BOD) and the baptism of blood(BOB) are visible and known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.This is Cushingism.So EENS has exceptions for the dubbia cardinals.
For them hypothetical cases, known only to God, referred to in LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are objective and known exceptions to EENS.Cushingism again.
So ecclesiology has been changed for the dubbia cardinals.It is new.They accept the New Ecclesiology based upon cases known only to God also being known to human beings.They believe that there are known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
So if ecclesiology can be changed said Cardinal Kasper-very directly, in an interview, then so can the Eucharist be given to the divorced and remarried.
So it was the same with Amoris Laetitia.The exception makes the rule. Subjectivity is assumed to be objective.
Amoris Laetitia suggests that a priest can know in a particular case( which would otherwise be known only to God) when some one in mortal sin is not in mortal sin.
Sounds familiar?!
Someone else defending Amoris Laetitia said that it had the same moral theology of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
On mortal sin, the Catechism refers to those 'who know'. There is no more an objective mortal sin only.Mortal sin is not always a mortal sin anymore but depends upon conditions, which allegedly can be known to us human beings.
Sounds familiar?!
For Pope Benedict every one does not need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation but only those who know.
Why only those who know?
Since for Cardinal Ratzinger, Cardinal Kasper,Fr. Rahner and other liberal theologians at Vatican Council II, there were known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.The excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney was still not lifted by Cardinal Richard Cushing, who was active at Vatican Council II.
So there were also known exceptions for Cardinal Ratzinger, to the traditional moral theology, which was black and white, and which Pope John Paul II tried to salvation with Veritatis Splendor.
In faith( salvation) and morals( mortal sin) it is assumed that there are exceptions.It was also presumed wrongly that we humans could judge an exception.
This is Cushingism in faith and morals.The ecclesiastics used the same technique to change traditional teachings.
Now this bad reasoning is also used by the 19 signatories to interpret Vatican Council II not knowing that with Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) the Council does not contradict EENS.
So the next time when the pope , cardinals, bishops and the Left, refer to Vatican Council II, it is hoped that they will be aware that the reference is not to Vatican Council II (Feeneyite).
To interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism is heresy -but it is also the heresy of the signatories.
They first need to interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with Feeneyite EENS and then ask the two popes and the CDF to do the same.They can then ask the cardinals and bishops to do likewise.
Then Ecclesiastical Masonry can no more say that Vatican Council II is a rupture with Tradition and the spirit of Vatican Council II supports, heresy, sacrilege and schism.
It is important that the signatories clarify this point - at least before the next petition.
For instance Prof. Massimo Faggioli has said that there is very little critique of Pope Francis' theology. There is no critique ! How can Cushingites critique a Cushingite ? Faggioli himself can only interpet Vatican Council II with Cushingism. He knows there is an alternative but he will not write about it.He could have an ideological interest.
But this is not the problem with the signatories.
The same mistake was made in the 2017 Filial Correction.2
-Lionel Andrades
1
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5983408-Open-Letter-to-the-Bishops-of-the-Catholic.html
2
http://www.correctiofilialis.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Correctio-filialis_English_1.pdf
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment