Why should vocations to the religious life in Detroit or lay teachers of Catechism, RCIA , Adult Education and Holy Communion classes, interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise instead of without this irrationality ? - Lionel Andrades
Friday, December 18, 2020
All the religious communities need to be told by CMTV that they can interpret Vatican Council II with or without the false premise, there is a rational or irrational option.
All the religious communities need to be told by CMTV that they can interpret Vatican Council II with or without the false premise, there is a rational or irrational option.
Vatican Council II-rational, is traditional and has a hermeneutic of continuity with the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. There is no break with the ecclesiology of the missionaries of the 16th century. - Lionel Andrades
All the books on Vatican Council II in the library of the Sacred Heart Major Seminary, Detroit are interpreted with a false premise
All the books on Vatican Council II in the library of the Sacred Heart Major Seminary, Detroit are interpreted with a false premise.
All the books on Ecclesiology, after 1965, written by Cardinal Ratzinger /Pope Benedict were written with a false premise to create a break with the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.
All the books on the New Ecumenism, which refer to Vatican Council II, in that library and all the libraries in Detroit, are written with the irrational premise.
It is the same with other categories. -Lionel Andrades
Fr.Joseph Ratzinger used a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II and create a rupture with Catholic Tradition, it has been discovered after some 55 years. So how can his books and articles on theology be accepted ?
Fr.Joseph Ratzinger used a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II and create a rupture with Catholic Tradition, it has been discovered after some 55 years. So how can his books and articles on theology be accepted ? He has not apologised or corrected himself.
Someone should tell him that Vatican Council II can be interpreted with or without the false premise and the conclusion would be non traditional or traditional and that he could now choose the traditional option.-Lionel Andrades
Michael Voris supports Brother Andre Marie MICM and also Jim Russell
Michael Voris would say outside the Church there is no salvation but he would also not state that the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance are not exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).He would not state that he affirms Feeneyite EENs. Also he will not say that LG 8, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, Gs 22 etc in Vatican Council II are not objective cases in the present times. So they cannot be visible exceptions to EENS. They cannot be physically visible examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church.He supports Brother Andre Marie MICM and also Jim Russell. -Lionel Andrades
APRIL 25, 2019
Church Militant TV slanders Brother Andre Marie MICM and Fr. Leonard Feeney by projecting a false theological position upon them : Jim Russell does not know of any BOD, BOB and I.I case during his life time.
Church Militant TV slanders Brother Andre Marie MICM and Fr. Leonard Feeney by projecting a false theological position upon them : Jim Russell does not know of any BOD, BOB and I.I case during his life time.
The Staff at Church Militant TV(CMTV) ignore numerous reports on line, the most recent on the blog The Eponymous Flower, which state that the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) refer to hypothetical and imaginary cases in 2019.So they are not objective examples of salvation.They are not exceptions to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).Brother Andre Marie MICM, covered this point in his correspondence with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF).
CMTV however has posted a report by Jim Russell on Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center's alleged theological position.
CMTV and Russell have not posted any article which mentions that BOD, BOB and I.I are not practical exceptions to EENS.So the SBC does not have to reject BOD, BOB and I.I.
Brother Andre Marie has stated online that there are no personally known cases of being saved in invincible ignorance. They can only be known to God.
Fr. Leonard Feeney also had said that there were no literal cases of BOD. We now know that BOD is not a known Sacrament and cannot be administered like the baptism of water.Russell does not seem to know this.
Jim Russell himself does not know of any literal case of BOD, BOB and I.I in 2019 or during his lifetime.He omitted this central point in his article. CMTV also ignores this error.
For Jim Russell BOD,BOB and I.I are exceptions to EENS.He then assumes this is the theological position of the SBC and Fr. Leonard Feeney.How can unknown people be exceptions to EENS for Brother Andre Marie ?
For the Holy Office 1949 and the Council Fathers at Vatican Council II there were exceptions to EENS .Since hypothetical cases were not hypothetical.However this is not the reasoning of Brother Andre Marie and the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
The doctrine of Fr. Leonard Feeney seems strange since Russell's premise and inference is false.So the conclusion would be strange.It is not that of the SBC.
Traditional doctrines on salvation are not strange.
Russel has repeated the usual Cushingite propaganda and then pegs it on the SBC and Fr. Leonard Feeney.
When Brother Andre Marie says all need the baptism of water with no known exception for salvation, he is repeating the dogmatic teaching.It is not his private theological opinion as Russell suggests.
When Brother Andre Marie says there are no personally known cases of BOD, BOB and I.I this is something obvious and factual.It is common knowledge.It was known to the popes and saints over the centuries.It is not a private opinion.Even a non Christian can confirm this.
These points are not covered in CMTV's article by Russell on Fr. Leonard Feeney's alleged theological position.
After some good programs on the Vortex by Michael Voris , on the problem created by the CDF and the Left, for the SBC in the Diocese of Manchester, the report by Jim Russell slanders Brother Andre Marie MICM and Fr.Leonard Feeney.It does this by projecting a falsehood in their name.
If Bradley Eli and Simon Rafe at CMTV are under pressure to say invisible cases of BOD, BOB and I.I are visible exceptions to 16th-century EENS, they should not slander Fr. Leonard Feeney and the SBC for not mouthing the same irrationality.The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, as good Catholics, are under no obligation to affirm this bad reasoning and deception.It is not their theology.
May be prohibitions would be placed on CMTV if it did not claim, unknown cases in 2019, as referenced in Vatican Council II (LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc) as being known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.So theologically CMTV is forced to say that there is known salvation outside the Church mentioned in Vatican Council II.Obviously there are no such cases.There are none in Detroit.Russell did not mention this.CMTV also has not posted an article discussing these points, even though there are many reports online.-Lionel Andrades
APRIL 24, 2019
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
