Bishop Frederick Kicanas and the USCCB bishops are Cushingite. Cushingism is not apostolic.The visitation and investigation of Bishop Joseph Strickland was being done by Bishop Kicanus and the bishops delegation led by Bishop Denis J. Sullivan of Camden, New Jersey, who is also a Cushingite. The Vatican’s Dicastery for Bishops and the United States Conference of Bishops (USCCB) are Cushingite and not Feeneyite.

 

Bishop Frederick Kicanas and the USCCB  bishops are Cushingite. Cushingism is not apostolic.The visitation and investigation of Bishop Joseph Strickland was being done by Bishop Kicanus and the bishops delegation led by Bishop Denis J. Sullivan of Camden, New Jersey, who is also a Cushingite.

The Vatican’s Dicastery for Bishops and the United States Conference of Bishops (USCCB) are Cushingite and not Feeneyite. 

These bishops have no right to investigate bishop Strickland.

A Cushingite cannot hold an ‘apostolic visit’.  There cannot be an ‘apostolic visitation’ by a Cushingite.He cannot evaluate an ecclesiastical institute like  a seminary, diocese, or religious institute.  - Lionel Andrades

 

JULY 14, 2023

By 2025 Kwasniewski and Weston will have to affirm Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and be liberals otherwise they will be pushed out of the Catholic Church. There is no place for traditionalists or conservatives who do not accept the Council, Creeds, Catechisms and EENS, interpreted irrationally

 

The Lefebvrists Peter Kwasniewski and John Henry Weston may not like it for career-reasons but this is the reality of our Faith. This is the Deposit of the Faith which they cannot change especially with their silence on this subject.Vatican Council II is Feeneyite. Archbishop Fernandez is Cushingite like the both of them.

They say Archbishop Fernandez is a wakeup call and something needs to be done. But he is also a wakeup call for the both of them to put the Church before their personal interests.

Both of them to avoid being called a Feeneyite and so Anti Semitic.Both do not tell Bishop Joseph Strickland to affirm Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II and ask Pope Francis and all the cardinals to do the same if they want to be magisterial and apostolic.

When there is an error in the Church, both of them are thinking only of maintaining their lifestyle by being prudently silent. This is their priority. They do not want to correct the error because of the fall out which may effect them.

They do not want to be opposed by the Jewish Left and the Vatican. So they give Archbishop Fernandez the freeway. He is now after Humane Vitae.

By 2025 Kwasniewski and Weston will have to affirm Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and be liberals otherwise they will be pushed out of the Catholic Church. There is no place for traditionalists or conservatives who do not accept the Council, Creeds, Catechisms and EENS, interpreted irrationally.- Lionel Andrades

JULY 13, 2023

Archbishop Victor Fernandez must interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism only. This is being honest. Cushingites use a False Premise ( invisible cases of LG 16 etc are visible). This is a dishonest way to reject Tradition and the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church.

 Archbishop Victor Fernandez must interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism only. This is being honest. Cushingites use a False Premise ( invisible cases of LG 16 etc are visible). This is a dishonest way to reject Tradition and the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church.1

- Lionel Andrades

1

JULY 13, 2023

Vatican Council II ( rational ) is traditionalist and Feeneyite. It is not traditionalist and Lefebvrist : There are two concepts here, Cushingism and Feeneyism and The Red is not an exception for the Blue. They both point to the same thing. This is a discovery. It is seminal.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/07/vatican-council-ii-rational-is.html

JULY 13, 2023

Vatican Council II ( rational ) is traditionalist and Feeneyite. It is not traditionalist and Lefebvrist : There are two concepts here, Cushingism and Feeneyism and The Red is not an exception for the Blue. They both point to the same thing. This is a discovery. It is seminal.

 

There are two concepts here, Cushingism and Feeneyism and The Red is not an exception for the Blue. They both point to the same thing. This is a discovery. It is seminal.

Cushingism says that invisible people are visible. Feeneyism says that invisible people are invisible. These are two names I have chosen, Cushingism and Feeneyism.Others can choose other names to express this concept.

When I refer to The Red not being an exception for the Blue, in Vatican Council II, I am referring to Cushingite passages in red which are not practical exceptions for Feeneyite passages in blue.

I have marked the Cushingite passages in red and the Feeneyite, orthodox passages in blue.

CHURCH FATHERS WERE ALWAYS FEENEYITE 

Over the centuries the Church Fathers, popes and saints were always Feeneyite. But the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston brought Cushingism into the Church in an official and big way.

The 1949 LOHO, issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, now a Dicastery, interpreted the baptism of desire (BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I) with Cushingism and not Feeneyism.

When St. Thomas Aquinas referred to the man in the forest in invincible ignorance who would be saved, he was referring to a Feeneyite case. It was someone invisible and hypothetical,  who was not a practical exception for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which he upheld.

THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE WAS ALWAYS FEENEYITE

When the saints in the Middle Ages referred to the baptism of desire they were referring to a Feeneyite , baptism of desire i.e. someone who was invisible and whoM they considered being invisible. So the saints in the 16^th century, for example, affirmed the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS, with invisible and not visible cases of the BOD and I.I.

But the 1949 LOHO rejected the strict interpretation of EENS by interpreting invisible cases of BOD and I.I as being visible exceptions for traditional EENS. Their approach was Cushingite.

CUSHINGISM FROM THE 1949 LOHO WAS ACCEPTED AT VATICAN COUNCIL II: THIS WAS NOT THE DEPOSIT OF THE FAITH

So this Cushingism was accepted at Vatican Council II by just about everyone, Rahner, Ratzinger, Ottaviani, Lefebvre….

Pope Paul VI and the popes who followed chose Cushingism and not Feeneyism.

But Cushingism is not the Deposit of the Faith. The Deposit of the Faith is only Feeneyism. So I can interpret Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents only with Feeneyism and there will be a continuity with the past theology.

KWASNIEWSKI IS A CUSHINGITE

The Lefebvrists still use Cushingism and think it is the deposit of the faith. Here there is an interview of Peter Kwasniewski by John Henry Weston. Kwasniewski says that the deposit of the faith does not change.

This is false. He is a Cushingite and I am a Feeneyite on Vatican Council II. It would be the same for the Creeds, Councils, Catechisms etc. Kwasniewski interprets all the Catechisms with Cushingism and I choose Feeneyism.

So this is not the same faith.

Archbishop Victor Fernandez must interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism only. This is being honest. Cushingites use a False Premise ( invisible cases of LG 16 etc are visible). This is a dishonest way to reject Tradition and the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church.

Pope Francis and all the cardinals can only be Feeneyite on Vatican Council II, the Creeds, EENS, Councils and Catechisms.-Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/07/vatican-council-ii-rational-is.html