______________________________________________
JULY 23, 2018
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2020
The courses, Joseph Ratzinger- Studies and Spirituality offered at the Legion of Christ University in Rome , Regina Apostolorum, is leftist propaganda. -Lionel Andrades
THURSDAY, JANUARY 7, 2021
Without the false premise the New Theology is naked. -Lionel Andrades
JANUARY 16, 2020
Traditionalists use the false premise and are not aware of it. They use the same new theology of the liberals. The new theology is Cushingite theology.It is based upon the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) being exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
BOD,BOB and I.I are assumed to be visible and known. Then they are projected as exceptions to EENS. So the New Theology says outside the Church there is salvation.
Similarly LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, are interpreted with the New Theology. They were visible and known for Bishop Bernard Fellay and Fr. Pierpaulo Petrucci, the Superior General and District Superior respectively of the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX).
This was the New Theology of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.Fr. Thomas Hardon, Fr.William Most and Msgr.Joseph Clifford Fenton never identified and corrected it.Cardinal Ratzinger and Cardinal Ladaria interpreted Vatican Council II with the New Theology to create a rupture with Tradition.They wanted the SSPX to do the same.The SSPX was interpreting Vatican Council II with the New Theology, Cushingite theology, but were rejecting the conclusion, which was an obvious rupture with EENS, an ecumenism of return etc . Cardinal Ratzinger and Pope Paul VI wanted that rupture.
Cardinal Ratzinger could have put together the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) without the new theology.He could have clarified that BOD, BOB and I.I are always hypothetical and so are not exceptions to EENS. He could have said that Vatican Council II does not contradict the past and that this was a mistake he made when he wrote Redemptoris Missio. But there was no correction from him.He persisted with the error.
In 2016 he announced that EENS was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century since there was ' a development', for him, with Vatican Council II.He meant Vatican Council II interpreted with the false premise and inference.This was also the interpretation of the Lefebvrists.
The Lefebvrists are still not aware that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 is the New Theology.BOD and I.I were projected as being exceptions to EENS.
So at a Lepanto conference in Rome, Roberto dei Mattei and John Lamont criticized the New Theology(nouvelle théologie) not knowing that they themselves use the New Theology and that without the New Theology Vatican Council II would support Feeneyite EENS.
They do not want to affirm Feeneyite EENS. So when Diane Montagna asked Mattei about EENS he projected invincible ignorance as being a literal exception. So he mentioned invincible ignorance with reference to EENS.This was the New Theology. There can only be literal exceptions to EENS, with the New Theology.Invisible cases are projected as being visible in the present times.
At the Lepanto conference talks, they were simply using the term New Theology since the liberals refer to it.Cardinal Ratzinger would have known what was the precise cause of the New Theology but the traditionalists were ignorant about it.
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre did not know the difference between Cushingism and Feeneyism as a philosophy and theology.The Jewish Left only accepts Cushingism. Mattei may now know this. So he will not interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with Feeneyism. He will let the New Theology remain. It is useful.
The real issue never ever was the Latin Mass but the New Theology, Cushingite theology.
The real issue for the Franciscans of the Immaculate and Pope Francis is not the Latin Mass.The real issue was accepting Vatican Council II, the Creeds and Catechisms and EENS with Feeneyism and not Cushingism as a theology i.e with hypothetical cases just being hypothetical in the present times.Unknown non Catholics saved outside the Church are just unknown. This is Feeneyism.
Now both groups of the Franciscans of the Immaculate affirm Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents without Feeneyism.
Fr.Stefano Manelli and Roberto dei Mattei have to make the correction i.e affirm Vatican Council II without the new theology.
Pope Francis and Cardinal Braz de Avez would then have no choice but to accept it.How can they force the average Catholic to use an irrational premise and inference to interpret Vatican Council II ? Why should the average Catholic or the Franciscans, of different communities in the world, see invisible people as being visible in the present times? Now they can get away with it because of the ignorance of the traditionalist and conservative Catholics.
Even if the Franciscans of the Immaculate hand over all their property to the Church and even if all the Franciscans in the world in different communities,are placed under one roof,Vatican Council II is still Feeneyite. There is no way out of this.
Fr. Stefano Manelli F.I must be asked to unite the Franciscans of the Immaculate groups, since irrespective of the Holy Mass offered, Vatican Council II is not a rupture with Tradition.This is a reality which has to be faced.-Lionel Andrades
MONDAY, MARCH 9, 2020
Presently Catholics who follow the Cushingite Prefect and Secretaries of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) follow heresy on the Creeds and Catechisms and Vatican Council II and are in schism with the past popes on extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). For the CDF Secretaries Morandi and Di Noia , EENS is Cushingite but it was Feeneyite for the popes over the centuries.
Cushingism is an objective mistake and cannot be the teaching of the Holy Spirit. It is irrational and deceptive. Archbishop Augustine Di Noia op, for example, no more represents the magisterium, until he corrects the error.Cushingism has spread like the Arian heresy of the past, through out the Church and Di Noia instead of ending it with sincerity, still stokes it.
Just because Di Noia works for the CDF, it does not make him immune from the virus of heresy.It does not mean he cannot teach heresy and schism. Similarly just because Francis and Benedict are popes, it does not mean they cannot be teaching an error in theology and doctrine. They could be as political as Pope Paul VI and give in to ecclesiastical Masonry and powerful lobbies outside the Church.
When the popes and the CDF Secretaries confuse what is invisible as being visible, it is irrational, non traditional and heretical. The conclusion is a rupture with Tradition.Even a pope can violate the Principle of Non Contradiction. ( See links on the right hand side bar for details).
Cushingism is also known as the New Theology, the irrational New Theology and it is being used as a weapon especially against the traditionalists. Without the irrational New Theology, the Church would return to the past exclusivist ecclesiology and there would be unity in doctrine for the traditionalists and all Catholics, who accept Vatican Council II.
1.Now with the irrational New Theology the CDF and the Archbishop of Ferrara-Commacchio, Italy have put the traditionalists Familia Christi on the defensive. They are made to appear heretical and schismatic and the priests are suppressed.Without the Cushingite New Theology, Cardinal Luiz Ladaria and Archbishop Giancarlo Peregro would have to affirm the strict interpretation of EENS.Since the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) would not be practical exceptions to EENS.They would have to affirm the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Church since LG 16 etc in Vatican Council II, would not be exceptions.
2.With the irrational New Theology the CDF and the Bishop Peter Libasci, the archbishop of Manchester, USA have put Brother Andre Marie MICM and the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St. Benedict Center, N.H, on the defensive.They are made to appear as heretics and schismatics. Without the irrational New Theology( based upon invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc being personally known and physically visible in 2020) the CDF and Bishop Libasci would have to affirm the Athanasius Creed.Since BOD, BOB and I.I would not be literal and practical exceptions.Similarly there would be no exceptions to the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX. It would be the traditionalists who would demand that the CDF affirm Vatican Council II rationally.They would demand that he CDF affirm the Creeds and Catechism and EENS , rationally i.e without the false premise, inference and conclusion.Morally there would be pressure on the CDF and the two popes.
3.The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) would no more be on the defensive. They could affirm Vatican Council II without the false premise and ask Archbishop Augustine Di Noia to do the same.Now with the irrational New Theology they are being forced to interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition and accept the conclusion.Cushingite Pope Benedict then says that the problem with the SSPX is 'doctrinal'. He means they are not accepting the irrational New Theology.
Without the irrational New Theology, Cushingite theology, there would then no more be a pre-and-post-Vatican Council-II ecclesiology. The ecclesiology of the Church would be the same at Mass in Latin and the vernacular.Since Vatican Council II would not be a rupture with Tradition.Doctrine on exclusive salvation would not be a break with the founders of the religious communities- St. Francis Assisi, St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Dominic...
The Familia Christi, St. Benedict Center and the SSPX would put the onus for rational and traditional doctrine and theology, on the CDF and the two popes.-Lionel Andrades
MARCH 9, 2020
An injustice is done to the traditionalist Brother Andre Marie MICM and the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, with the irrational New Theology
____________________________________
Posts
