If
the SSPX Superior General says that the baptism of desire and being saved in
invincible ignorance, without the baptism of water, are invisible , for him in 2024, ( and this is common knowledge) then he becomes a Feeneyite.
If
he says that LG 8, 14, 15, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, in Vatican Council II are
only hypothetical cases and not physically visible people in 2024, he is a
Feeneyite.
If
he says that Vatican Council II is not a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam
nulla salus (Council of Florence 1441) - it is not a break with Tradition in
general, he becomes a Feeneyite.
If
he says that in the Catechism of Pope Pius X, 29Q (invisible cases of being
saved in invincible ignorance etc) is not a rupture with 24Q and 27Q (other
religions are not paths to salvation/outside the Catholic Church there is no
salvation) he becomes a Feeneyite.
He
will be rejected by the political Left and the Vatican. The SSPX General
Chapter Statement 2012 was Feeneyite.It is no more available on the Internet.
- Lionel Andrades
2024
Definition : fake premise, inference and conclusion and the rational premise, inference and conclusion.
The common fake premise is – invisible people are physically visible in 2024.
The common fake inference is – there are physically visible non Catholics in 2024 saved outside the Catholic Church without Catholic faith and the baptism of water.
So the conclusion; the expected false conclusion is that Vatican Council II is a rupture with the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church. This is a New Theology in the Church. It says outside the Church there is known salvation.
All this reasoning I call Cushingism. This process of bad reasoning is common among the Cushingite popes, cardinals and bishops.
The rational premise is – invisible people are invisible in 2024. Lumen Gentium 16 etc refer to hypothetical cases only.
The rational inference is – there are no physically visible non Catholics saved outside the Catholic Church in 2024 without Catholic faith and the baptism of water.
The traditional and rational conclusion is that Vatican Council II is not a rupture with the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. There are no objective exceptions for the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus of the Council of Florence (1441), the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( 24Q,27Q ) and the rest of Tradition.We are back to the old theology of the Roman Missal.
I call this reasoning Feeneyism.
Feeneyism and Cushingism, for me, refer to a way of thinking and not the two well known persons, Cardinal Richard Cushing and Fr. Leonard Feeney.
I interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance with Feeneyism. Cardinal Richard Cushing and the popes from Pius XII interpreted them with Cushingism.
I interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism ( invisible cases of Lumen Gentium 16 etc are invisible in 2024). Pope Paul VI and the popes who followed used Cushingism ( invisible cases of Lumen Gentium 14 are physically visible in 1965-2024).
In the 1920s and 1930's the Catholic Church was Feeneyite. Today it is Cushingite.
-Lionel Andrades
Mary, Mother of the Church
MAY 2, 2024
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre's contribution for Tradition is welcomed : but he made the same error as the liberals
- Lionel Andrades
MAY 2, 2024
It was upon the alleged exceptions in 1949-1965 that Rahner and Ratzinger approved the New Theology. It made Tradition obsolete
BUT IT WAS UPON THE ALLEGED ‘VISIBLE EXCEPTIONS’ IN 1949-1965, THAT RAHNER AND RATZINGER APPROVED THE NEW THEOLOGY. IT MADE EENS, THE ATHANASIUS CREED AND SYLLABUS OF ERRORS, OBSOLETE.
- Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment