Cardinals Muller ,Burke and Arinze interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise even after being informed. Bishop Schneider, Archbishop Bruno Forte and Bishop Marcello Semeraro do the same. They are all part of the Cushingite Conciliar Church.Cushingism as a philosophy and theology creates the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.
So they all interpret papal documents, the Creeds and Catechisms with Cushingism i.e they assume hypothetical cases are non hypothetical and objective non Catholics known in the present times.In this way they can be projected as exceptions to the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.
In contrast Feeneyism refers to hypothetical cases just being hypothetical.So they cannot be objective exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS),the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.The Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors are not contradicted in real life with theoretical and hypothetical cases.
Archbishop Bruno Forte offers Mass in Italian and Bishop Schneider in Latin and their ecclesiology is the same. It is a rupture with the past. For them the Church is communion, Sacrament, people of God, mystery etc but not like the Ark of Noah that saves and in which all need to enter, with no exceptions.There are exceptions for them. Many.So they offer Mass in Italian and Latin and are part of the same Cushingite Conciliar Church.
There is no difference between the Novus Ordo and Latin Mass Church here. Irrespective of the liturgy, there ecclesiology is a break with the past ecclesiology.
Thousands of priests and religious sisters lost their vocation at the time of Vatican Council II since Pope Paul VI interpreted the Council with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism.He could easily have have used Feeneyism as a philosophy and theology, and the conclusion would be traditional. All needed to interpret the Council with hypothetical cases just being hypothetical.They would then not contradict the traditional ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.But Pope Paul VI and the cardinals did not tell them about it and neither did Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.
Thousands of priests and religious sisters lost their vocation at the time of Vatican Council II since Pope Paul VI interpreted the Council with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism.He could easily have have used Feeneyism as a philosophy and theology, and the conclusion would be traditional. All needed to interpret the Council with hypothetical cases just being hypothetical.They would then not contradict the traditional ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.But Pope Paul VI and the cardinals did not tell them about it and neither did Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.
Until today, the popes, the bishops of the Society of St. Pius X and the sedevacantist bishops, interpret the Council with Cushingism and do not seem to be aware of it.
Jesus' Church was changed completely. It was not even Protestant.It was made into something else.All this was done with the use of one, small premise.
One little premise, produced a false inference and a non traditional conclusion and the popes, cardinals and bishops did not detect it.
All the big names did not notice it: Joseph Clifford Fenton, William Most, Cardinal Ottaviani, Rahner, Ratzinger and Karol Wojtyla....
What was the simple mistake which de-railed the Council ?
The mistake which the Council Fathers did not announce in public was : that there are no personally known and phyisically visible cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) outside the Church.
"ZERO CASES" SAYS JOHN MARTIGNONI
BOD, BOB and I.I are "zero cases", observed John Martignoni.There are no known cases of BOD, BOB and I.I.
BOD, BOB and I.I are not exceptions to EENS says Archbishop Thomas E. Gullickson.
We do not know of any one saved with BOD, BOB and I.I in the present times says Fr. Stefano Visintin osb, Rector, University of St. Anselm, Rome.
LUMEN GENTIUM NEVER WAS AN EXCEPTION TO EENS
So LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc never ever were exceptions to the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. Vatican Council II is Christological and also ecclesiocentric.There are no exceptions to the old exclusive ecclesiology of the Church.
But for the popes since Paul VI Vatican Council II is only Christological.The popes from Paul VI to Francis assumed that BOD, BOB and I.I were exceptions to the traditional ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.They extended the false reasoning to Vatican Council II.
NO MORE THE ARK OF NOAH
So all those religious who left the Church after 1965 believed that the pope was saying membership in the Church with faith and baptism was no more necessary for salvation.Every one did not need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation. The Church was no more like the Ark of Noah that saves in the Flood and in which all need to enter.
The Catholic Church had become another denomination like the other Christian churches and just believing in Jesus was enough for salvation.It was Jesus without the Church- and this had become official.
The popes were obviously in heresy for thousands of religious.The popes who would follow would also apostasize.
With the false premise suggesting that is known salvation outside the Church, the Creeds and Catechisms were changed. They were re-interpreted with the irrationality.The dogma EENS was made obsolete. The Athanasius Creed whichs says outside the Church there is no salvation had become a thing of the past.The Syllabus of Errors was out-dated.The Oath Against Modernism was meaningless since the Council was interpreted as a rupture with Tradition and this was accepted by Pope Paul VI.
MASS IN ALL RITES A SACRILEGE FOR ALL
This was official heresy. The Mass in all rites became a sacrilege for the priests and congregation in heresy. This was a heresy which had spread throughout the Church. The Church had gone into schism with the past popes on EENS etc.
All this could have been avoided if someone important could have announced that there is no known salvation outside the Church for us human beings. So the Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO) made a mistake and Fr. Leonard Feeney was correct.There were no practical exceptions to EENS. But no one did it!Even today after being informed the ecclesiastics keep silent.
CARDINALS MULLER, BURKE, ARINZE SILENT
This is a major theological error in the Catholic Church and Bishop Schneider did not mention it in his new book presented the other day in Rome.
Cardinals Burke, Muller and Arinze did not say anything even though there are hundreds of reports on this subject on the Internet and on this blog.
Posts
