Vatican Council II is no more only Christological it is also Ecclesiocentric.It has an eccleiocentric ecclesiology.This is not being reported by the media.The Amazon Synod Working Paper avoids this issue.LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, refer to hypothetical cases only.They are not objective exceptions in the present times(1965-2019) to the old exclusivist ecclesiolgy and an ecumenism of return.So the interpretation of Vatican Council II by the Synod is limited and wrong.
The media has to recognise basically that Lumen Gentium does not contradict the past ecclesiology.Ad Gentes does not contradict traditional mission based upon exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. Unitatis Redintigratio does not contradict the ecumenism of return and Dignitatis Redintigratio does not oppose the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation in a Catholic State.
The media must make the invisible-visible distinction to prevent the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition( Athanasius Creed, Syllabus of Errors, Catechism of Pope Pius X etc).
Vatican Council II supports an exclusive ecclesiology and it is not only Christological.Jesus and membership in the Catholic Church are necessary for salvation. Dominus Iesus tells us that we cannot separate Jesus from the Church.Neither can be separate the Church from the Kingdom of God.
The Council when interpreted rationally has a hermeneutic of continuity with the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.Misson doctrine is traditional since Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism. We do not know any one saved in in invincible ignorance, who did not know about Jesus and the Church. So LG 14 is not an exception to AG 7.
So when it is said all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church(CCC 846) this does not contradict exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church and all needing to be members with faith and baptism to avoid Hell(for salvation).
This is really Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church interpeted with Feeneyism i.e hypothetical cases are just hypothetical.Hypothetical cases are not confused as being objective people seen in the present times(2019).We cannot see a baptism of desire case.It's hypothetical.
So even if Pope Benedict and Cardinal Walter Kasper see the Church as communion, people of God, Sacrament, Mystical Body of Christ etc, the Church still is the only Ark of Noah that saves in the flood, outside of which there is no salvation.
So there should be traditional mission and outreach, to non Catholics,when Vatican Council II is interpreted rationally with Feeneyism.
The present two popes and the Amazon Synod cardinals and bishops interpret Vatican Council II with a lie, a falsehood.They interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise and conclusion to create a rupture with Tradition and the past exclusivist ecclesiology.The subterfuge is seen at the pontifical universities in Rome at semesters in Ecclesiology.
The New Evangelisation project was based upon this deception and so was the Placuet Deo Press Conference on March 1,2018.
Without Feeneyism as an interpretative tool the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1257-The Necessity of Baptism) would contradict itself.It would be saying all need the baptism of water for salvation but some do not.
Similarly the Catechism of Pope Pius X would contradict itself.It would be saying all need to enter the Church as members for salvation but those in invincible ignorance do not .
The Left has made the teaching of Rahner's theology obligatory in the seminaries . There is no Anonymous Christian known to us saved outside the Church. If a Protestant was saved outside the Church he would only be known to God.So the Anonymous Christian of Karl Rahner, is not a practical exception to exclusive salvation.All still need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation among the Christian communities.There are numerous Christologies in the Christian religions which support abortion, contraceptives,divorce and other mortal sins which lead to Hell.
Cardinal Ratzinger's Dominus Iesus and Redemptoris Missio etc all avoid Feeneyism as a philosophy and theology.Vatican Council II was interpreted by Congar,Rahner, Ratzinger and Cushing, with Cushingism.So there were Christological passages (blue passages) along with ambigous Cushingite passages( red passages).
The Cushingite passages should not have been inserted in Vatican Council II.They were a mistake of the Council Fathers.
They are, as John Martignoni the apologist describes them, "zero cases".
The red passages, which refer to the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance, were never exceptions to EENS according to the magisterium of the 16th century.This is recognised by Bishop Thomas E.Gullickson.
All this is a central issue to the Catholic faith which the media does not report or discuss since the Left does not permit it.The media would be threathened with Leftist anti Semitic and other laws.While the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, along with the ADL and SPLC, would label rational Catholics, as 'legally not being Catholic.'
This is the present status of the St. Benedict Center,New Hampshire, USA.Brother Andre Marie MICM, the Prior , of the SBC, interprets Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus, rationally.-Lionel Andrades
Vatican Council II and EENS(2)
Vatican Council II but interpreted with two different theologies(2)
Vatican Council II Cushigite(1)
Vatican Council II Cushingite(1)
Vatican Council II Development(1)
Vatican Council II Feeneyite(4)
Vatican.Extra ecclesiam nulla salus(premise free)(1)
Vatican Council II is Feeneyite(11)
Vatican Council II in harmony with EENS( Feeneyite)(1)
Catechism of the Catholic Church ( Cushingite)(2)
Catechism of the Catholic Church (Feeneyite)(2)
Feeneyite EENS(1)
Feeneyite EENS Vatican Council II(Feeneyite)(3)
Feeneyite Theology(1)
Feeneyite Vatican Council II(1)
Feeneyite-Cushingite Model(1)
The media has to recognise basically that Lumen Gentium does not contradict the past ecclesiology.Ad Gentes does not contradict traditional mission based upon exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. Unitatis Redintigratio does not contradict the ecumenism of return and Dignitatis Redintigratio does not oppose the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation in a Catholic State.
The media must make the invisible-visible distinction to prevent the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition( Athanasius Creed, Syllabus of Errors, Catechism of Pope Pius X etc).
Vatican Council II supports an exclusive ecclesiology and it is not only Christological.Jesus and membership in the Catholic Church are necessary for salvation. Dominus Iesus tells us that we cannot separate Jesus from the Church.Neither can be separate the Church from the Kingdom of God.
The Council when interpreted rationally has a hermeneutic of continuity with the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.Misson doctrine is traditional since Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism. We do not know any one saved in in invincible ignorance, who did not know about Jesus and the Church. So LG 14 is not an exception to AG 7.
So when it is said all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church(CCC 846) this does not contradict exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church and all needing to be members with faith and baptism to avoid Hell(for salvation).
This is really Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church interpeted with Feeneyism i.e hypothetical cases are just hypothetical.Hypothetical cases are not confused as being objective people seen in the present times(2019).We cannot see a baptism of desire case.It's hypothetical.
So even if Pope Benedict and Cardinal Walter Kasper see the Church as communion, people of God, Sacrament, Mystical Body of Christ etc, the Church still is the only Ark of Noah that saves in the flood, outside of which there is no salvation.
So there should be traditional mission and outreach, to non Catholics,when Vatican Council II is interpreted rationally with Feeneyism.
The present two popes and the Amazon Synod cardinals and bishops interpret Vatican Council II with a lie, a falsehood.They interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise and conclusion to create a rupture with Tradition and the past exclusivist ecclesiology.The subterfuge is seen at the pontifical universities in Rome at semesters in Ecclesiology.
The New Evangelisation project was based upon this deception and so was the Placuet Deo Press Conference on March 1,2018.
Without Feeneyism as an interpretative tool the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1257-The Necessity of Baptism) would contradict itself.It would be saying all need the baptism of water for salvation but some do not.
Similarly the Catechism of Pope Pius X would contradict itself.It would be saying all need to enter the Church as members for salvation but those in invincible ignorance do not .
The Left has made the teaching of Rahner's theology obligatory in the seminaries . There is no Anonymous Christian known to us saved outside the Church. If a Protestant was saved outside the Church he would only be known to God.So the Anonymous Christian of Karl Rahner, is not a practical exception to exclusive salvation.All still need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation among the Christian communities.There are numerous Christologies in the Christian religions which support abortion, contraceptives,divorce and other mortal sins which lead to Hell.
Cardinal Ratzinger's Dominus Iesus and Redemptoris Missio etc all avoid Feeneyism as a philosophy and theology.Vatican Council II was interpreted by Congar,Rahner, Ratzinger and Cushing, with Cushingism.So there were Christological passages (blue passages) along with ambigous Cushingite passages( red passages).
The Cushingite passages should not have been inserted in Vatican Council II.They were a mistake of the Council Fathers.
They are, as John Martignoni the apologist describes them, "zero cases".
The red passages, which refer to the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance, were never exceptions to EENS according to the magisterium of the 16th century.This is recognised by Bishop Thomas E.Gullickson.
All this is a central issue to the Catholic faith which the media does not report or discuss since the Left does not permit it.The media would be threathened with Leftist anti Semitic and other laws.While the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, along with the ADL and SPLC, would label rational Catholics, as 'legally not being Catholic.'
This is the present status of the St. Benedict Center,New Hampshire, USA.Brother Andre Marie MICM, the Prior , of the SBC, interprets Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus, rationally.-Lionel Andrades
JANUARY 27, 2018
What is Feeneyism? (Graphics)
RELEVANT LABELS/ TAGS ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THIS BLOG
Vatican Council II( premise free)(2)
Vatican Council II(Cushingite).(5)
Vatican Council II(Feeneyite)(8)
Vatican Council II(premise free)(2)
Vatican Council II(premise-free)(6)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment