US bishops should drop everything and focus on preventing schism
by Michael Sean Winters, National Catholic Reporter.
I have a modest proposal for the U.S. bishops' conference. They should scrap their entire agenda for the upcoming November plenary and address a single question: To what degree are the seeds of a de facto schism being sown within the U.S. church?
Lionel: They should address the issue of schism in the Catholic Church created with the interpretation of magisterial documents with irrational Cushingism, especially Vatican Council II.
______________________
Last week, a friend called my attention to a website called "Faithful Shepherds" that was launched a year ago by LifeSiteNews. They state that their purpose is to provide a "one-stop database" about where Catholic bishops stand on certain issues and to "encourage bishops to be faithful to Christ..."
Lionel: The website Faithful Shepherds should also address this issue.
________________________
"For too long, lay Catholics have been without an authoritative accountability tool for U.S. bishops, especially those who deviate from the Church's magisterium," they write. Seeing as Francis is now the embodiment of the church's magisterium, the fact that they applaud bishops who have criticized Amoris Laetitia and denounce those who have supported it is a bit rich.
Lionel: Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II, the Catechisms and Creeds and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). This is not the magisterial teaching of the popes over the centuries before Pius XII. In fact it is heresy and schism.The pope and the National Catholic Reporter needs to correct this error.
________________________
I do not believe that any bishop, not even the bishop of Rome, is beyond criticism. But what makes this Faithful Shepherds website so nefarious, and indeed what makes LifeSiteNews and other conservative outlets so nefarious these days, is that fidelity is defined as being in opposition to the pope. They do not cite a single instance in which agreement with the pope is a mark of fidelity. Silly me. All these years, I thought being in communion with the successor of Peter was a significant mark of Roman Catholicism...
Lionel: Yes being in communion with the successor of Peter when he is in communion with the previous successors of Peter is a mark of Roman Catholicism.Being in communion with Peter when he interprets Vatican Council II, the Catechisms, Creeds and dogma EENS as a rupture with the popes of the past is heresy and a mortal sin of faith.Catholics are not obliged to support public schism and sacrilege.
_________________________
The Faithful Shepherds website does not only include bishops LifeSteNews derides. It also includes many bishops they applaud. Of course, Cardinal Raymond Burke gets nothing but plaudits. They also lavish praise on Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, the archbishop of Galveston-Houston, and on Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield, Illinois, Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix, Arizona, Bishop Michael Burbidge of Arlington, Virginia, and many others. Do these bishops approve of LifeSiteNews' method of dividing the hierarchy? Do they agree that opposition to Francis is a mark of fidelity? Will they publicly disassociate themselves from this project? Any of the bishops on the list can contact me if they wish to publicly denounce this insidious effort and its shoddy theology.
Lionel: These bishops can comment on how the popes since Paul VI chose to interpret Vatican Council II with irrational Cushingism instead of rational and traditional Feeneyism. These popes chose to interpret all magisterial documents with a false premise to change the understanding of the Creeds and Catechisms.They chose schism with the past popes on the exclusive salvation ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.This was all done with the use of a false premise as an interpretative tool to create a false inference and conclusion.The popes, cardinals and bishops must discuss this cause of schism and heresy.It is official in the Church.
______________________________
I recall a bishop telling me about an ad limina visit during the pontificate of Pope St. John Paul II. During a meeting with then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, a bishop commented upon efforts to divide the hierarchy by labeling some bishops orthodox and other heterodox. Ratzinger replied that all the bishops were orthodox. Criticism of bishops — even amongst themselves — should never entail questioning each other's fidelity to the Gospel. It is possible to disagree with one another and still be Catholic. The LifeSiteNews project does not recognize the difference...
Lionel: Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger interpreted Vatican Council II with the false premise. He chose to interpret the Council with Cushingism instead of rational Feeneyism.This is official heresy and schism.
_________________________________
I confess I am not sure what the hierarchy should do about groups like LifeSiteNews and Church Militant. I do not think ignoring them works. They are well-funded and well organized. Church Militant now operates out of impressive-looking studios. Changes in technology allow these groups to spread their divisiveness, so the seeds of schism might sprout more quickly and more comprehensively than before.
Lionel: Division is caused when the popes, cardinals and bishops interpret Vatican Council II with an irrationality to create a division and rupture with Tradition (EENS, Syllabus of Errors). This is also the policy of the National Catholic Reporter.
_______________________________
I do know this: It is difficult to see how any other issue is more clamant upon the bishops' attention. My fear is that there is a significant minority of bishops who agree with some of the LifeSiteNews craziness. Unity within our church, however, is not founded on any ideology, liberal or conservative. The Petrine ministry exists to serve the unity of the church. It would be impossible to imagine any ecclesial unity founded on opposition to Peter. This autumn, when the U.S. bishops begin their ad limina visits to the Vatican and as they plan their plenary meeting in Baltimore, they need to start forging a response that is pastoral but decisive.
Lionel: They could begin by explaing the difference between Vatican Council II interpreted with a false premise and a Council interpreted without it.They could then show how Vatican Council II with the false premise is divisive and schismatic.-Lionel Andrades
[Michael Sean Winters covers the nexus of religion and politics for NCR.]
Should not the cardinals and bishops also interpret BOD, BOB and I.I rationally and set an example for the pope? https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/11/should-not-cardinals-and-bishops-also.html
GERMAN TROUBLE (Graphics)
-Lionel Andrades
THE GERMAN PROBLEM
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/09/the-german-problem.html
_____________________________________
FROM THE RIGHT HAND SIDE BAR/ CLICK TO ACCESS
_______________________
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2015/01/frmarco-hausmann-fssp-frp-stefano.html
Masimo Faggioli, Michael Sean Winters interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism and justify so many changes in the Church
Massimo Faggioli and Michael Sean Winters interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism and so do not correct the error made by Pope Paul VI. They also interpret extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism and so do not correct the error made by Pope John XXIII
Massimo Faggioli, Michael Sean Winters and the other Cushingites support heresy when they reject the Athanasius Creed , change the interpretation of the Nicene and Apostles Creed, change the interpretation of Vatican Council II and all the Catechisms and reject traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS ) based upon rational Feeneyism.They are in a general rupture with the past Magisterium, when they use Cushingism as a philosophy and theology
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/08/massimo-faggioli-michael-sean-winters.html
Liberals tell traditionalists that they are disobedient to this liberal pope and to Vatican Council II(Cushingite).It is the liberals and the present two popes who must be asked to follow Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) and accept its conclusions.Do not interpret the Council with an irrational premise and then expect the whole Church to follow. It is Vatican Council II(Feeneyite) which the disobedient liberals reject. Since it is in harmony with the Syllabus of Errors, Athanasius Creed, the past exclusivist ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return
Feeneyites accept Vatican Council II. They accept that the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) can only be hypothetical cases. They affirm the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) which is not contradicted by hypothetical cases of LG 8, UR 3, GS 22 etc.
______________________________________
Posts
