eucharistandmission: Apr 12, 2022

Tuesday, April 12, 2022

Fr.Gianfranco Ghirlanda sj, canonist and new Commissar of the Franciscans of the Immaculate (both groups) must inform the Roma Rota and secular institutions that the Franciscans will only interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise. This is the honest and ethical thing to do

Fr.Gianfranco Ghirlanda sj, the new Commissar of the Franciscans of the Immaculate (both groups) must ask them to interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise (LG 16 refers to a hypothetical cases only in 2022) and not the Irrational Premise (LG 16 refers to an objective and known person in 2022). The Jesuit canonist must inform the Roman Rota and the Jesuit Gregorian University, Rome, where he works, to do the same.

The dividing-issue cannot be Vatican Council II (Irrational) any more. Pope Francis must accept Vatican Council II (Rational). It would be immoral to tell the Franciscan Friars and Sisters of the Immaculate to accept Vatican Council II with the common False Premise (invisible people are visible in 2022).

Secular institutions, judiciary, ecumenical and inter-faith dialogue groups in Italy, must be informed by the Commissar that the Catholic Church no more supports the interpretation of Vatican Council II with a Fake Premise, False Inference and Non Traditional Conclusion.

The rejection of de fide teachings of the Catholic Church can no more be justified with Vatican Council II ( Irrational) since Catholics now know that the Council can be interpreted rationally and it is not a break with Tradition. The irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II by the cardinals and bishops can be checked.

So the Rector of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, approved by Pope Francis, at the seminary situated near Termini, Rome, must also interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise (invisible cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14) are invisible in 2022) and not the False Premise (invisible cases of LG 14 are personally known and visible in the present times). It would be deceptive and dishonest for the seminarians to continue with the lie.

FIRST HOLY COMMUNION AND CONFIRMATION MUST NOT BE A RUPTURE WITH CATHOLIC TRADITION

In Sicily and where the FFI teach in the parishes of Italy, there should be First Holy Communion and Confirmation classes which are not a rupture with Catholic Tradition. So all Magisterial Documents must be interpreted rationally and not irrationally. Then for the the children there will be a continuity with the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the Catechism of Pope Pius X.

It means the Catechism of the Catholic Church has to be interpreted without the modern moral theology of the dissenting Redemptorist priests, Bernard Haring ( Fundamental Option Theory) etc,on mortal sin and irrational and dissenting modern faith theology based upon the False Premise.

FFI SEMINARY ROME COULD HAVE UNITY IN DOCTRINE AND THEOLOGY WITH OTHER SEMINARIES AND UNIVERSITES

The FFI seminary was closed in 2013 by Pope Francis in the diocese of Porta Santa Rufina, Rome where Archbishop Gianluca Ruzza is the Apostolic Administrator. The seminary could be re-opened and allowed to have academic activity as before since now Vatican Council II would no more be an issue, as long as the other seminaries and universities interpret Magisterial Documents rationally. There will be unity in the Church.

CATECHISM CLASSES CAN HAVE A CONTINUITY WITH TRADITION WHEN VATICAN COUNCIL II IS INTERPRETED RATIONALLY

The seminary-parish in Boccea, Rome must have catechism classes for adults and young people, who are shown Vatican Council II as a continuity with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), as it was known to the missionaries in the 12^th to 16 the century. Presently the lay catechists, the Brazilian Joselitos Christo priests and the diocesan priests and religious sisters, teach the children to reject Catholic Tradition by interpreting Vatican Council II with the False Premise (there are physically visible cases of non Catholics saved outside the Catholic Church in the present times). This is not Catholic and neither is it being honest.

CHURCH OF SAN CAMILLO DE LELLIS, SALUSTIANA

Archbishop Ruzza a member of the Italian Bishops Conference himself interprets Vatican Council II with the Fake Premise. He was present at the church San Camillo de Lellis, Salustiana, Rome, where ecumenical groups from different Christian sects, held a common Lenten program. They all interpreted Vatican Council II with the Fake Premise (UR 3 refers to known and visible Christians saved outside the Catholic Church). At San Camillio, the Paulist Fathers would have Holy Mass in English. They continue to use the Fake Premise at the church St. Patrick’s, Rome(St.Patrick's Amercian Catholic Parish in Rome).

EWTN and media correspondents and the faculty of the American College in Rome and also from other seminaries, go for Holy Mass at St.Patricks. All of them see the Council as a break with Tradition.

Archbishop Ruzza could ask them all to correct their error. Also the Minim Fathers at the church Sant Andrea Delle Fratte, near Piazza Spagna, Rome, where he spoke, could be told to affirm Catholic Tradition, like Alphonse Ratisbonne.

Ratisbonne in an apparition of Our Lady was shown the beauty and importance of the Catholic Church for the salvation of all people. He converted after this experience, became a priest and founded two missionary communities in the Middle East.

Those religious organizations were neutralized by the liberals and the Masons who interpreted Vatican Council II with the False Premise and so made the dogma EENS obsolete.

Archbishop Ruzza could inform the non Christians at Sant Andrea Delle Fratte, who are prominent in the security and other affairs of this church, where the Mass is televised, that Vatican Council II is to be interpreted only with the Rational Premise, to return to the exclusivist ecclesiology of Ratisbonne.

St. Maximillian Kolbe offered his first Mass as a priest, in this church. Alphonse Ratisbonne and St. Maximillian Kolbe used the Rational Premise unlike Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj and the Archbishop-Secretaries of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican,who continue with the Fake Premise.-Lionel Andrades

APRIL 28, 2016

The mad theology

Are we really in the same Church whose teachings do not change?

For Cardinal Burke and Joseph Shaw doctrinally and theologically Amoris Laetitia is nothing new.There is no change in moral theology for them. They have no problem also with the new salvation theology.

Note: When a new theology is created it is based on rational constructs.It is based on a common reality, the generally accepted laws of nature.

I cannot imagine there are people on the moon ( whom I have never seen) and then create a new theology for the men on the moon and the earth.This would be absurd.

I cannot imagine or postulate that man has evolved from the monkey and is further evolving, this would be wrong. Since there is no proof for this.It could be that the monkey has devolved from man, in a deviant strain, and the 'evolutionists' are not aware of it.Any way there is no scientific proof to create a new theology assuming man has evolved from the ape.

Similarly I cannot imagine that we humans can see people in Heaven and talk to them.Then I cannot use this premise to create a new theology.This would not be acceptable.Since in our reality we cannot see people in Heaven and we cannot talk to them in 2016.

So if a theology is created whose initial reasoning is being able to see people in Heaven in general, it would be un -real and non traditional.

Similarly I cannot postulate that all men can physically fly like birds,and then with this premise create a theology.This would be absurd.It is irrational to assume that men and women on earth can fly like birds.

It is irrational to assume that we humans in general can see people in Heaven physically.

Yet literally this is what happened in the Church.

A theology was created upon an irrationality.It is supported by Cardinal Burke and taught by Joseph Shaw.It is the theology of Pope Benedict.It is the theology of Cardinal Schonborn, who was praised by Pope Francis as being a great theologian.This is cardinals Koch and Kasper's common theology.

It is based on being able to physically see people in Heaven who are exceptions to the traditional salvation and moral theology of the Church.

Since I cannot physically see people I do not use this premise to mis- interpret traditional moral and salvation theology in the Church.

So even though the Church's teachings ideally, in theory, in principle, do not change, they are changed when this new theology, based upon an irrationality, is applied to them.

So moral and salvation theology is different for Cardinal Burke and me.

Joseph Shaw and I do not interpret the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Vatican Council II, the Nicene Creed....in the same way.

There are no known exceptions for me to the general understanding of mortal sin.I do not know of any de facto exception. If there would be an exception it would only be known to God.

Pope Francis cannot say that a particular couple who is living in manifest mortal sin according to traditional moral theology, would be an exception and would not go to Hell if they died immediately.He couldn't know. He cannot physically see or know exceptions in Heaven.

Yet his moral theology is based upon being able to see people in Heaven who are exceptions to the general rule on mortal sin.It is the same with Cardinal Burke and Joseph Shaw.

Their salvation theology is also based upon being able to see people in Heaven who are exceptions to the general teaching on exclusive salvation i.e the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So for them there are known exceptions to EENS while for me there are no known exceptions to EENS.

For them Vatican Council II is a break with EENs according to the 16 century missionaries.This is not so for me.

Bishop Athanasius Schneider also uses this same theology based on an irrationality.However he rejects Amoris Laetitia based on the teachings of Trent, Veritatis Splendor and tradtional moral theology.

Cardinal Burke and Joseph Shaw are not rejecting AL since for them the new theology, moral and salvation, is the normal theology and it has been in use for a long time.AL is explained away with the new moral theology. So theologically there is nothing new for them and Amoria Laeitia has not directly,contradicted traditional moral theology.However implicitly it is understood that we humans can see and talk to people in Heaven in 2016.So there are known of exceptions to the traditional teaching on salvation and mortal sin.So implicitly a new doctrine has been created in faith (salvation) and morals( mortal sin).

Meanwhile no one is telling Cardinal Burke that he has changed moral theology by using an irrational premise to create an irrational, non traditional and heretical inference.So in this way doctrine has been changed in the Church.AL's 301 is based on the new heretical moral theology.

-Lionel Andrades

We cannot a create a new moral or salvation theology based on an irrationality.Pope Benedict has done this.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/we-cannot-create-new-moral-or-salvation.html

Maike Hickson has not addressed Cardinal Burke and Joseph Shaw's accepting the theology and doctrines of Amoris Laetitia

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/maike-hickson-has-not-addressed.html

Cardinal Raymond Burke and Prof. Joseph Shaw assume hypothetical factors or theories are explicit exceptions to the traditional de fide teaching on faith and morals.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/cardinal-raymond-burke-and-prof-joseph.html

http://catholicforum.forumotion.com/t1278-cardinal-raymond-burke-interprets-church-documents-with-an-irrational-premise-and-conclusion-and-offers-the-traditional-latin-mass

This is all accepted by Fr.John Zuhlsdorf, Cardinal Raymond Burke and Joseph Shaw. They offer/ attend the Traditional Latin Mass with this official heresy

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/this-is-all-accepted-by-frjohn.html

Amoris Laetitia is based on the new doctrine in moral theology i.e known exceptions to the traditional teaching on mortal sin.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/amoris-laetitia-is-based-on-new.html

_____________________________________________________________

Exclusivist ecclesiology?
The new theology is based on being able to see the dead. Remove the premise, which is, "I can see the dead on earth".We then have the old ecclesiology, the exclusivist ecclesiology. The ecclesiology of Vatican Council II is exclusivist. Since it affirms the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in Ad Gentes 7, which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.LG 16,LG 8,UR 3,NA 2 etc are not known exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 or the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. We are left with the old ecclesiology.

Who agrees with you?

Archbishop Thomas E.Gullickson says Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/11/archbishop-thomas-egullickson-says.html

DEAN OF THEOLOGY AT ST. ANSELM SAYS THERE ARE NO KNOWN EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/10/dean-of-theology-at-st-anselm-says.html

Implicit intention, invincible ignorance and a good conscience (LG 16) in Vatican Council II do not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus –John Martigioni
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/11/implicit-intention-invincible-ignorance.html#links

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/contemporary-magisterium-is-in.html
http://reader.creativeminorityreport.com/2015/05/bishop-dewane-families-have-right-to.html

ioceseofvenice.org/our-bishop/bishop-frank-j-dewane/

____________________________

Maike Hickson has not addressed Cardinal Burke and Joseph Shaw's accepting the theology and doctrines of Amoris Laetitia

Maike Hickson writes,'So, here we are. We have a pope who changes the heretofore unchangeable. From all that we gather so far – and in addition to the most scandalous part about the “remarried” divorcees – there are far too many points in Amoris Laetitia that are against the continuous (i.e., irreformable) teaching of the Catholic Church to make it still worth while to try to preserve that document, much less to defend it as a whole. For example: the inversion of the ends of marriage, as described by Professor Roberto de Mattei; the undermining of the father as the head of the family; and, finally, the description of the Sacrament of Marriage as an ideal, and an unrealistic and therefore often destructive ideal...
'What about our prelates? As John-Henry Westen discussed on 25 April, many high-ranking cardinals in Rome now prefer to stay silent..
http://www.onepeterfive.com/we-do-not-need-clarifications-rescind-the-document/

Maike Hickson however does not comment on the statement of Cardinal Raymond Burke and Prof. Joseph Shaw theologically and doctrinally supporting the document.

This is an important point she left out.

Even Steve Skojec is not sure of himself.He writes ,'To the average person — or the willing priest or bishop — it doesn’t matter that the exhortation didn’t change doctrine. If they’re given permission to ignore doctrine through “pastoral” justifications, they will.'.

Joseph Shaw says this is '..not as a case of a Pope teaching heresy'.There is no comment here from Maike Hickson.Nor does she comment on Shaw's statement saying 'Cardinal Burke lays great stress on interpreting Church documents in light of the whole tradition of the Church...'

The LMS Chairmans writes 'To reiterate what I've said a few times, Traditional Catholics, or at least those of us trying to engage with the hierarchy, magisterial documents, and the currently 'officially approved' theology, have become very used to this situation. '

Joseph Shaw confirms here what I have been saying for years and no one wants to comment on it while others do not understand what I am saying.Since they have been so conditioned into thinking that the magisterium cannot be wrong.Then they ask how can every body else be wrong and only you be correct.

I have been saying that there is an error in the officially approved theology, there is a factual error. Shaw refers to the 'officially approved theology' but he does discuss if there is an error or not. Never. Neither does Maike Hickson want to comment here on an otherwise good report.They are unaware of what the mainstream liberal theologians have accepted all these years i.e the error .

So accept for me ( said in all humiity) there is no one identifying the error in the official theology used by Cardinal Burke, Joseph Shaw and the two popes.

How can you ask the cardinals and bishops to protest against Amoris Laeititia when AL is based on knowing exceptions to traditional moral theology, as if this is humanly possible.The error of knowing exceptions to traditional salvation theology is also common.It is mainstream and generally accepted by traditionalists and sedevacantists.
So how can they protest against AL's theology when it is also their irrational theology and they are not aware of it?

Cardinal Burke has said there is nothing contrary to Catholic doctrine in AL and Shaw has said it represents the official and mainstream theology. This is what Shaw teaches at Oxford University. John Lamont and Thomas Pink who speak at traditionalist forums, also teach this new theology in which hypothetical, subjective and theoretical cases are considered objective and personally known.

-Lionel Andrades

____________________________________________

'To the average person — or the willing priest or bishop — it doesn’t matter that the exhortation didn’t change doctrine. If they’re given permission to ignore doctrine through “pastoral” justifications, they will.-Steve Skojec
Lionel:

Amoris Laetitia is using the new moral theology of the Catechism of the Catholic Church which suggests that there are known exceptions to traditional moral theology( mortal sin) and salvation theology( extra ecclesiam nulla salus).

So Pope Francis, Pope Benedict and Cardinal Burke assume they are following the traditional moral teachings of the Catholic Church which you also accept in
the Catechism(1992).

So doctrine has been changed. Pope Benedict confirmed it last month in a statement given to Avvenire on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
He said there were exceptions and so EENS was no more like in the 16th century. Now we have Amoris Laetitiae which says there are exceptions to
acouple living in mortal sin ( irregular situation).He indicates the concept of
mortal sin held in the 16th century is there no more.

So why do you say there is no change in doctrine ?

Cardinal Raymond Burke ignores the new moral theology upon which Amoris Laetitia is based since he and Pope Benedict use the same irrational theology.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/cardinal-raymond-burke-ignores-new.html

_________________________________________________________________

Extracts from the blog LMS Chairman :Skojec and Burke on the significance of Amoris Laetitia...not as a case of a Pope teaching heresy...- Joseph Shaw

Lionel: The new theology is heretical since it uses an irrationality to reject the old theology.The new theology,with the irrationality is used to the interpret Vatican Council II as a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

It assumes there are known exceptions to the dogma EENS.It wrongly assumes hypothetical cases are known exceptions to the exclusivist ecclesiology in the Church.

The irrationality of known exceptions is also used to change the Church's moral teaching. So there is a new moral theology based upon known exceptions to the teaching on mortal sin etc.

Pope Francis has used this moral theology in Amoris Laetitia.This is heresy.

The same new theology is used by Joseph Shaw to teach theology at Oxford University.He uses Cushingism ( there are known exceptions to EENS) to interpret the dogma EENS. He also uses Cushingism to interpret Vatican Council II.

Feeneyism ( there are no known exceptions to EENS) is an option. Joseph Shaw could interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with Feeneyism but he does not do it. Since he will lose his mandatum to teach theology.The English bishops are Cushingites.

So he will teach theology with a lie, heresy and a break with doctrine associated with the Traditional Latin Mass.

____________________________________

Cardinal Burke lays great stress on interpreting Church documents in light of the whole tradition of the Church...

Lionel: Cushingism is not part of the whole Tradition of the Church. Cardinal Burke interprets Vatican Council II and the dogma EENS with Cushingism.

He also uses the moral theology of the Catechism of the Catholic Church which suggests there are known exceptions to the traditional understanding of mortal sin etc.

Amoris Laetitia is based on the new moral theology, the heretical theology.

If we omit the irrationality, the theology of AL changes.

Ask youself whom does the pope know who is living in adultery and who will still go to Heaven ? No one.

So there are no known exceptions to the traditional teaching on mortal sin, concubinage, adultery etc.

_______________________________________

To reiterate what I've said a few times, Traditional Catholics, or at least those of us trying to engage with the hierarchy, magisterial documents, and the currently 'officially approved' theology, have become very used to this situation.

Lionel: The currently 'officially approved' theology is Cushingism. It is heretical. It is irrational and non traditional. It is approved by Cardinal Burke.

_______________________________________

We are deeply interested in setting out our case in way which is comprehensible to mainstream Catholic theologians and people in the Roman Curia...

Lionel: FIUV and Joseph Shaw promote irrational Cushingism as a theology.This is the official theology.It is also the only interpretation of Vatican Council II and EENS understood by Catholic theologians.

________________________________________

They also include the precise theological and canonical assertions a document is and is not making, and the light shed on the issues by the Church's whole teaching and tradition.

Lionel: The present document is based on liberal moral theology approved in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992).

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/cushingism-is-not-part-of-whole.html

___________________________________________________________________________

Cushingism is not part of the whole Tradition of the Church. Cardinal Burke interprets Vatican Council II and the dogma EENS with Cushingism: Amoris Laetitia is based on the new moral theology, the heretical theology.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/cushingism-is-not-part-of-whole.html

MONDAY, APRIL 18, 2016

Father Mathias Guadron, SSPX has got it right : there are no known exceptions to the traditional moral teachings.The new moral theology is based on an irrationality

Comments from the blog post 1Peter5 : SSPX: Amoris Laetitia a “Victory of Subjectivism”

LionelAndrades Ana Milan

Father Mathias Guadron has got it right : there are no known exceptions to the traditional moral teachings.The new moral theology is based on an irrationality

Father Mathias Gaudron:

However, the text continues: “It [the papal document]has opened a breech which puts into question the whole of Catholic morality.”

Lionel:

He is saying that doctrine has changed based on the new moral and salvation theology approved by Pope Benedict and which is being taught in the pontifical universities and

seminaries for a long time.2

__________________

it is still forbidden for those to receive absolution and Holy Communion who live in cohabitation or who are simply united by a new civil marriage, but … now there are exceptions!

Lionel:

When there are conditions for mortal sin and there are exceptions to knowing or judging mortal sin, it is implied that there are known exceptions to the tradtional doctrine on mortal sin.1

AL is the official approval of the new moral theologybased on hypothetical cases being objectively known exceptions, and the exceptions making the new rule.It supports the errors of Fr. Charles Curran and his moral theology professor Bernard Haring, at the pontifical university Alphonsonianum in Rome.2

___________________

One has now to regard the general norms in the face of “all the different particular situations.”

Lionel:

For Pope Francis and Cardinal Schonborn the change was not made 'out of the blue'.They used theology to do it.Theology based on a philosophical error.1

____________________

No one, Gaudron reminds us, can dissolve a validly contracted and consummated sacramental marriage – “not even the pope.”

Lionel:

Cardinal Schonborn accepts the new theology.For him there are known exceptions to the traditional teachings on morals and faith.So this is the doctrine of the Church for him.

He means this is the doctrine of the contemporary magisterium.

The reasoning of this theology is irrational and heretical but it is official.

It is a break with the moral theology of the centuries before the Council of Trent.They did not assume that there were known exceptions, people seen in Heaven, who were there in mortal sin(moral theology) or who were not members of the Catholic Church (new salvation theology). 2

_______________________

And he continues: “These laws do not know or allow any exception and they are valid independent of the circumstances.”

An exception would have to be known to be an exception It has always been taught, according to the SSPX priest, that “the moral range of an action contains therefore something objective and does not finally depend only [or at all]upon the circumstances or the intention of the subject.”

Lionel:

It means not only God can judge who is living in mortal sin and will NOT go to Hell but also of us human beings.1

________________________

Whatever the circumstances or the intentions, to kill an innocent person deliberately “is always an evil deed,” says Father Gaudron. Applied to a situation of adultery, the priest says: “One might well have a certain understanding for a woman who is engaged in a new relationship because of the infidelity or the hardness of heart of her husband, and one could admit that, in such a case, the fault is less grave, but nevertheless adultery remains an evil act in itself.”

Lionel:

In the new moral theology, the view is, it cannot always be said that a couple is living in mortal sin even though it seems manifest.Since that couple could be one of the many 'exceptions' and we humans can judge the exceptions.We know who will not go to Hell.2

_________________________

But if there is a couple who, in their subjective understanding, believes that what they are doing pleases God, Gaudron says, “their conduct still objectively contradicts the Will of God.”

Lionel:

The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) has been rejected. So now when a Catholic marries a Jew or Protestant it is not considered adultery and a mortal sin.Since there is salvation outside the Church ( new salvation theology/Cushingism) and there are known exceptions to mortal sin ( the couple could be an exception for various hypothetical reasons).2.

__________________________

The pope says, according to Gaudron, that one is allowed to live in the state of Grace while living in “an objective situation of sin.” In footnote 351, the pope proposes even the “help of the sacraments” in “certain cases,” as the priest then says.

Lionel:

He means there is no break with the moral theology based on an irrationality (the new moral theology).He assumes we humans can know of Catholics living in manifest mortal sin, but who will not go to Hell.Or he assumes that we can know of people who were living in mortal sin and who are now known to be in Heaven.2

____________________________

Father Gaudron concludes: “In this allowance, the pope distances himself from Catholic moral teaching”

Lionel:

Pope Francis could mean that there are known exceptions to the traditional teaching on mortal sin.Last month Pope Benedict announced via Avvenire that there are known exceptions in Vatican Council II to the 16th century interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

So the new moral theology is that the conditions for mortal sin mentioned in the Catechism edited by Cardinal Ratzinger and Schonborn, refer not to hypothetical cases,known only to God ,but to defacto, objectively known cases which can be identified by us humans.2

-Lionel Andrades

Pope Francis is referring to Cardinal Schonborn as a theologian.So theology is important for him.This issue is theological

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/pope-francis-is-referring-to-cardinal.html

Amoris Laetitia is the official approval of the new moral theology based on hypothetical cases being objectively known exceptions and exceptions make the rule : it supports the errors of Fr.Charles Curran

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/amoris-laetitia-is-official-approval-of.html

http://www.onepeterfive.com/sspx-amoris-laetitia-a-victory-of-subjectivism/

TUESDAY, APRIL 12, 2016

Cushingism is not part of the whole Tradition of the Church. Cardinal Burke interprets Vatican Council II and the dogma EENS with Cushingism: Amoris Laetitia is based on the new moral theology, the heretical theology.

Extracts from the blog LMS Chairman :Skojec and Burke on the significance of Amoris Laetitia
...not as a case of a Pope teaching heresy...- Joseph Shaw