MHFM uses the false premise to interpret Vatican Council II

From the Most Holy Family Monastery website

Christ’s Body

I find your narrow, Pharisaical determination as to who is a member of Christ's Mystical body and who is not, to be presumptuous and hateful.

T G

MHFM: Our position on who is a member of Christ's body is based on Catholic teaching.  Thus, by your words you have denounced the Church's teaching.  That makes you a heretic and puts you out of Christ's body.

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 9), 1896: “St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. “No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic” (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88).

Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi (# 22), June 29, 1943: “Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have received the laver of regeneration and profess the true faith…”

Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi (# 23), June 29, 1943: “For not every offense, although it may be a grave evil, is such as by its very own nature [suapte natura] to sever a man from the Body of the Church [ab Ecclesiae Corpore], as does schism or heresy or apostasy.”

https://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/E-Exchanges.php?utm_source=WPhp&utm_medium=Recent&utm_campaign=Theme2020

The Most Holy Family Monastery (MHFM) use the false premise to interpret Vatican Council II.

So there is a rupture with extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). This would be heresy?

There is a rupture with the past popes on EENS.This would be schism?

-Lionel Andrades

 JULY 14, 2020

The St.Benedict Centers could affirm EENS without the Lefebvrist theology

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/07/the-stbenedict-centers-could-affirm.html

_______________________________

The St.Benedict Centers could affirm EENS and Vatican Council II without the Lefebvrist theology

The St.Benedict Centers could support Fr. Leonard Feeney's strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) but why has it to be with Lefbvrist theology ? Lefebvrist theology comes from their irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II. Similarly there is also a liberal theology, approved by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF).It is also created with their irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.

If the Lefebvrists and liberals did not know use their New Theology, they could go back to the 16th century EENS along with Vatican Council II interpreted rationally.Now it is EENS and Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally.

For instance, I could go for Holy Mass in Latin at the FSSP church Trinita dei Pelligrini, Rome without being a Lefbvrist or liberal.I could affirm 16th century EENS, with the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) not being exceptions.I could also affirm Vatican Council II with LG 8, GS 22, UR 3, NA 2 etc not being exceptions to EENS.

Similarly I could attend Holy Mass in Italian  with the Franciscans of the Immaculate, Boccea, Rome and also affirm Feeneyite EENS, without the Lefbvrist theology. So it would be EENS with BOD, BOB and I.I not being exceptions. I could also affirm the  Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, the Catechism of Pope Pius X, the Athanasius Creed and other Magisterial documents.The old rational theology is not restricted to the liturgy.
Those who attend Mass at the St.Benedict Centers could do the same.Also those who attend the Latin Mass with the Franciscans of the Immaculate, could do the same. They can affirm Tradition without the Lefebvrist theology. They have a new option.

Presently Lefebvrists are traditionalists on the liturgy and modernists with their new theology based on the irrational interpretation of BOD, BOB and I.I and  LG 8, UR 3 etc.

At a Lepanto Foundation conference a few years back two of the speakers criticized the New Theology but both of them use the same New Theology to interpret Vatican Council II and EENS irrationally.Then they reject the conclusion. -Lionel Andrades 








_______________________________

Interviste ai pellegrini che hanno partecipato alla "Marcia della Pace" ...

Il Sole a Medjugorje che non acceca ma riempie l'anima di Pace

Crisis for bishops Sanborn and Pivarunas

Now there is a crisis for sedevacantist bishops Donald Sanborn and Mark Pivarunas in the USA since there sedevaantism was based upon Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally.There is also a crisis for the liberals like professor of theology, Robert Fastiggi at the Sacred Heart Major seminary, Detroit, USA.His liberalism was also based upon Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally.

For bishops Sanborn and Pivarunas LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc in Vatican Council II were exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. The baptism of desire(LG 14) and invincible ignorance(I.I) were exceptions to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).So they implied that these were visible non Catholics saved outside the Church in the present times.This was a false premise. If they were invisible they could not be exceptions in 2020. 

But now we know that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc are are only hypothetical cases. So the bishops used a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II and then project the Council as a rupture with Tradition( Athanasius Creed etc).

Here is a citation from the CMRI website home page.

Theological Position: Sede Vacante

The Roman Catholic priests of the Religious Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen profess and adhere to the Catholic Faith as it has been consistently 

taught throughout the centuries since the time of Christ. With the death of Pope Pius XII and with the convocation of the Second Vatican Council, an unprecedented situation has befallen the Church, which threatens her very doctrines and worship.(Vatican Council II interpreted with and not without the false premise ) In order to provide for the preservation of the Catholic Faith and the traditional Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and Sacraments, the following statement has been drawn up for the purpose of clearly defining the actual position that these priests have taken.

I. VATICAN COUNCIL II: Convoked by John XXIII for the purpose of “updating” the Church, this council (held from 1962-65) decreed and implemented teachings which had been previously condemned by the Infallible Teaching Magisterium of the Church.(With the false premise there is a rupture with Tradition, which has been listed here.) The Second Vatican Council’s heretical teachings were primarily in the areas of religious liberty and false ecumenism. These were previously condemned by:

   Pope Gregory XVI in Mirari Vos (1832)

   Pope Pius IX in Quanta Cura and Syllabus of Errors (1864)

   Pope Leo XIII in Immortale Dei (1865) and Libertas Humana (1888)

   Pope Pius XI in Quas Primas (1925) and Mortalium Animos (1928)

   Pope Pius XII in Mystici Corporis (1943)

(Without the false premise the Council does not contradict any of the above Magisterial documents )

THEREFORE, the Second Vatican Council is to be rejected as a false council because it has erred in its teachings on faith and morals.

 Now we know that Vatican Council II can be interpreted without the false premise and there is no rupture with Tradition. So there is no basis for sedevacantism.

The two bishops criticized Fr. Leonard Feeney but now they know that without the false premise the Councils supports the strict interpretation of EENS, with no exceptions. The baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance were never exceptions to EENS.The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made an objective  mistake.

The two bishops do not want to affirm Feeneyite EENS and neither can they defend their sedevacantism before their supporters.

-Lionel Andrades

JULY 2, 2018

The Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen(CMRI) needs to correct the error on their website and come out of the sedevacantism based on Vatican Council II.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/07/the-congregation-of-mary-immaculate.html

JULY 1, 2018

Sedevacantism based upon the rejection of Vatican Council II is now obsolete ( Graphics)  http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/07/sedevacantism-based-upon-rejection-of.html

JUNE 30, 2018

Bishops Schneider, Sanborn and Pivarunas contradict the Syllabus of Errors while the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X are a rupture with the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church for them

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/06/bishops-schneider-sanborn-and-pivarunas_30.html

JUNE 30, 2018

Bishops Schneider, Sanborn and Pivarunas contradict the Syllabus of Errors while the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X are a rupture with the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church for them

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/06/bishops-schneider-sanborn-and-pivarunas_30.html