JANUARY 26, 2017
An innovation, a false premise was brought into the Church - Card.Cushing drafted Nostra Aetate with an ecumenical Christology and without the old ecclesiology
Cardinal Richard Cushing brought in a revolution in the Catholic Church.In Nostra Aetate,Vatican Council II he replaced traditional exclusivist ecclesiology with a vague Christology.He did it by simply assuming invisible cases were visible.They were then inferred to be examples of salvation without membership in the Church.So there now was known salvation outside the Church and so the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus was put aside.FOUNDATIONAL DOGMA ELIMINATED
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus which was a foundational dogma for other doctrines was suddenly eliminated. It had its effect on ecumenism, mission, inter religious dialogue, Social Reign of Christ the King over all political systems, non separation of Church and State, inter-faith marriages, Canon Law etc.
Cardinal Richard Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston played ' a vital role in drafting Nostra Aetate I mentioned in a previous post.1
CUSHING APPROVED THE LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE ADDRESSED TO HIM
Cardinal Richard Cushing had accepted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 addressed to him.It assumed that there were known cases of the baptism of desire which were explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, as held by Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center in Boston.So there was salvation outside the Church for him. Non Catholics could be saved without beinging incorporated into the Church as members.
Cardinal Richard Cushing had accepted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 addressed to him.It assumed that there were known cases of the baptism of desire which were explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, as held by Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center in Boston.So there was salvation outside the Church for him. Non Catholics could be saved without beinging incorporated into the Church as members.
But there are no such cases, past or present!
This was a mistake in the Letter 1949 which has been repeated in Nostra Aetate.
THE LETTER CONTRADICTS THE DOGMA EENS
THE LETTER CONTRADICTS THE DOGMA EENS
The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus over the centuries taught that every one needed to be incorporated into the Church as members. The Letter says the opposite and it was accepted by Cardinal Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston...
CUSHING,NOSTRA AETATE AND THE LETTER PROCLAIMS CHRIST WITHOUT THE NECESSITY OF MEMBERSHIP IN THE CHURCH
Nostra Aetate proclaims Christ without the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church.Since Cardinal Cushing had accepted that there was known salvation outside the Church. In other words at that time or in the past, someone in Rome or the Archdiocese of Boston knew the name and surname of someone saved outside the Church; without faith and baptism.This is irrational and non traditional.How could there be known exceptions?
HERETICAL
HERETICAL
It is also heretical since it is rejecting a defined dogma by assuming invisible people saved outside the Church were visible.Then it is inferred that they were exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, as it was known over the centuries....
KNOWN CASES OF BEING SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE
Cushing assumed that being saved in invincible ignorance referred to personally known cases.These known people were saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church,for him. This was the reasoning in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 addressed to him.
NEW DOCTRINE WITH NEW THEOLOGY BASED ON IRRATIONAL PHILOSOPHICAL REASONING.
NEW DOCTRINE WITH NEW THEOLOGY BASED ON IRRATIONAL PHILOSOPHICAL REASONING.
So Ad Gentes 7 says those men cannot be saved ' who though aware'....In other words not every one with no exception needs to enter the Church for salvation but only those who are aware of Jesus and the Church.Notice the new doctrine created with the new theology based on invisible cases being visible exceptions to the old ecclesiology.
ALL MAGISTERIAL DOCUMENTS WITHOUT EENS
ALL MAGISTERIAL DOCUMENTS WITHOUT EENS
So after Vatican Council II all magisterial documents avoided the ecclesiocentrism of the past for an ecumenical Christology.All magisterial documents are without the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
DOGMA MISSING IN REDEMPTORIS MISSIO
DOGMA MISSING IN REDEMPTORIS MISSIO
See it in Redemptoris Missio.
The commitment of the laity to the work of evangelization is changing ecclesial life, while particular churches are more willing to meet with the members of other Christian churches and other religions, and to enter into dialogue and cooperation with them. Above all, there is a new awareness that missionary activity is a matter for all Christians, for all dioceses and parishes, Church institutions and associations.-Redemptoris Missio 2.
Missionary activity is a matter for all Christians says Cardinal Ratzinger in Redemptoros Missio 2. He does not state that all Christians need to formally enter the Church as members.
Cardinal Ratzinger in Redemptoris Missio continues to present salvation only in Jesus and without the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church.
Cardinal Ratzinger in Redemptoris Missio continues to present salvation only in Jesus and without the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church.
This is a major shift in doctrine.It is a complete break away from the ecclesiocentrism of the past.
This was possible since Cardinal Cushing had still maintained the excommunication on Fr. Leonard Feeney and Rome did not defend the priest.For some 19 years the excommunication was not lifted.
So the world wide impression was that there were known exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It was wrongly assumed that there were personally known, objectively seen cases of non Catholics saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
VIOLATES PRINCIPLE OF NON CONTRADICTION
This is irrational. It is an objective error.It violates the Principle of Non Contradiction and upon this error a new theology is created in Nostra Aetate.
VIOLATES PRINCIPLE OF NON CONTRADICTION
This is irrational. It is an objective error.It violates the Principle of Non Contradiction and upon this error a new theology is created in Nostra Aetate.
With a false premise making Vatican Council II(NA) a break with Tradition there was a non traditional conclusion, a new doctrine which was accepted in the Church. This was an innovation based on an irrationality and so it could not be the work of the Holy Spirit.
Cushing made an error, a human error.
Cushing made an error, a human error.
Upon this innovation Cushing and the Jesuits presented Nostra Aetate with an ecumenical Christology and rejected the centruries old ecclesiology of the Church.
-Lionel Andrades
1
January 25, 2017
Cardinal Richard Cushing and Nostra Aetate picked up the objective error from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/01/cardinal-richard-cushing-and-nostra.html
SUNDAY, OCTOBER 17, 2021
Card. Richard Cushing and Nostra Aetate picked up the objective error from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Card. Richard Cushing and Nostra Aetate picked up the objective error from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949
SUNDAY, JUNE 16, 2013
Cardinal Walter Kaspar has drawn upon the Richard Cushing Confusion
Cardinal Walter Kaspar has drawn upon the Richard Cushing Confusion and traditionalists have accepted it hook,line and sinker.The liberal cardinal says Vatican Council II is ambigous. Yes it is, but only, if one reads it with the Richard Cushing Confusion. This results in dual meanings. He interprets the Council with the Richard Cushing Error, which is,the dead who are saved are personally known and visible to us.
One has to be aware of this basic error of Cardinal Richard Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston.He helped insert sentences in Vatican Council II which are irrelevant deadwood and can cause confusion.
The dead wood are statements or references, which are an irrelevancy to the main point being made in a Council text.
For example Ad Gentes 7 says 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation. This is the main point. The dead wood is ' those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it". This is meaningful at the dejure, in principle level. At the defacto ( in reality) level it is meaningless. It is relevant theoretically. Practically, personally, we do not know any such case.So it is irrelevant.
Similarly we do not know any one saved 'inculpably ignorant of the Gospel'(AG 7) In reality we do not know any such case. So it does not contradict the main point. In reality every one needs faith and baptism for salvation.
Cardinal Kaspar interprets Vatican Councl II as having a dual meaning.In other words the dead-saved are physically visible (Richard Cushing Error) and so Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 contradict itself.(Richard Cushing Confusion).Vatican Council II becomes confusing and ambigous.
So when a Catholic asks 'Why must the Gospel be annonced in the whole world if salvation is also possible outside the Church?', this is a question based on the Richard Cushing Error.The questioner assumes that there are known exceptions. These irrational cases, of the dead being saved and visible, are 'exceptions' for the Gospel to be proclaimed to every one with no exception in the present times'
Cardinal Daneels, Cardinal Kurt Koch, Fr.Hans Kung, the late Fr.Karl Rahner S.J and others have interpreted the Council ambigously with the Richard Cushing Confusion.
The Gospel must be announced in the the whole world since if salvation is also possible outside the Church we do not know of any case in reality.
-Lionel Andrades
THURSDAY, AUGUST 30, 2018
Repost : Pope Benedict wrongly assumed Robert Kennedy, Richard Cushing and the Vatican ( Holy Office'49) were objectively correct and Fr.Leonard Feeney made a mistake
MAY 21, 2016
It was Robert Kennedy who asked Cardinal Cushing to suppress Fr.Leonard Feeney according to the memoirs of the late Sen. Edward Kennedy who was present when his father Joseph Kennedy called up his friend,the Archbishop of Boston.
Yes, it looks like all four played historic roles in the shaping of Christian theology. Reading Teddy Kennedy’s memoir, True Compass, just published today and already No. 2 on Amazon, I discovered a remarkable anecdote about how Bobby Kennedy may have been a crucial figure in the suppression of the controversial Boston Jesuit, Fr. Leonard Feeney. In Senator Ted’s account, Bobby, while a student at Harvard, was outraged at hearing Feeney declare that no non-Catholic can be saved:
[Bobby] discussed it with our father one weekend at the Cape house. I well remember the conversation.
Dad could not believe that Bobby had heard Father Feeney correctly. “But,” he said, “if you feel strongly that you did, I’m going to go into the other room and call Richard. Maybe he’ll want you to go up to Boston and see him.”
“Richard” was Richard Cardinal Cushing. Dad and the cardinal enjoyed a long and profound friendship. . . .
Bobby said he felt strongly indeed. Bang! Dad called up “Richard” and arranged for Bobby to visit him. The cardinal, as nonplussed as Dad, sent some of his people over to hear Father Feeney’s Thursday evening lecture. When he found that my brother was right, Cushing banned Feeney from speaking there; Feeney refused to obey the order, and in September 1949 the archdiocese formally condemned the priest’s teaching. . . . In February 1952, Father Feeney was excommunicated. 1
The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus was eliminated.The new salvation doctrine was placed in Vatican Council II. The Council reflects the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney.
The Letter(1949) discarded the traditional Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma.To do this it had to assume invisible cases ( baptism of desire etc) were physically visible.Hypothetical theories were supposed to be 'practically known'.With this irrationality they wrongly reasoned that there were physically known exceptions to centuries old understanding of extra ecclesiam nulla salus,which was defined by three Councils.
THEY BROUGHT A NEW PREMISE INTO THEOLOGY
They brought into the Catholic Church a new premise ( there are physically known cases of persons saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church) and a new conclusion ( so outside the Church there is known salvation, all do not need to formally convert into the Church to avoid Hell).
Cardinal Cushing and the Jesuits placed this new concept of salvation in the text of Vatican Council II. The new concept was that hypothetical cases of 'seeds of the Word' (AG 11), 'elements of sanctification and truth'( LG 8), 'imperfect communion with the Church' (UR 3), 'a ray of that Truth' (NA 2) etc were 'practical exceptions' to the Feeneyite interpretation on exclusive salvation in the Church.
LUMEN GENTIUM 14 BASED ON THE LETTER IN THE FR. LEONARD FEENEY CASE
So they concluded in Lumen Gentium 14 that not every one needs to enter the Church for salvation but only those who know, those who were not in invincible ignorance. This was the conclusion, the inference, of the Letter's false premise.
Those who were in invincible ignorance, it was speculated, thorugh no fault of thier own could be saved, and these cases were for them, objectively known.This is the rub. They were suppposed to be physically seen to be relevant to the traditional exclusivist ecclesiology.
The irony is that inspite of all this confusion in Vatican Council II, the Council can still be interpreted in harmony with the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation.To do this, we only have to be aware of hypothetical cases and know that they are not exceptions to the dogma opposed by the Kennedys.
Since we know there cannot be any known exception to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus, for us humans, there cannot be anything in Vatican Council II which contradicts Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St. Benedict Center.The magisterium made a mistake.
There cannot be ' a development' with Vatican Council II since there cannot be any objective exception to the dogma.So there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus as interpreted by the 16th century missionaries.
Outside the Church there is no salvation since there is no known salvation outside the Church. There are no known exceptions. There canot be exceptions in Vatican Council II.
So when Pope Benedict recently said in the interview with Avvenire, that there was a development with extra ecclesiam nulla salus, and it was no more like in the 16th century, he was supporting the error of the Holy Office and Cardinal Cushing, after the Kennedy intervention.
Pope Benedict assumed Robert Kennedy, Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Holy Office 1949 were objectively correct and that Fr.Leonard Feeney overlooked the baptism of desire, which for Pope Benedict, is objective and seen in the flesh.-Lionel Andrades
1.
ROBERT KENNEDY ASKED RICHARD CUSHING TO SUPPRESS FR.LEONARD FEENEY
Posts
