Saturday, June 8, 2024

There cannot be any more reforms based upon Vatican Council II, irrational and Cushingite

 

Progressive Catholics have always hoped for significant changes in the church. Yes, the reforms of the Second Vatican Council were great, but they were seen as the beginning, not the end of reform. They hoped for married priests, women priests and changes in the church's teaching on LGBTQ people, birth control and divorce. –Fr.Thomas Reese, Pope Francis disappoints progressives. He will do so again. The National Catholic Reporter

 https://www.ncronline.org/opinion/guest-voices/pope-francis-disappoints-progressives-he-will-do-so-again


There cannot be any more reforms based upon Vatican Council II, irrational and Cushingite. The Council has to be interpreted only with Vatican Council II, rational and Feeneyite.- Lionel Andrades




MAY 20, 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






















Cushingism produces division. 

Feeneyism has unity with Tradition.Vatican Council II is Feeneyite ( for me).

 

Cushingism confuses what is invisible as being visible.

Feeneyism sees what is invisible as being invisible only. So we can interpret LG 8, 14, 15, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II with Cushingism or Feeneyism.

 

  •   Cushingism depends upon an irrational premise and inference.
  • Feeneyism depends upon a rational premise and inference.

 

 

Since Cushingite Pope Paul VI, Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and others interpreted LG 8, 14, 15, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc; with Cushingism the conclusion was nontraditional. Vatican Council II became a rupture with Tradition. The dogma EENS had alleged practical exceptions. There was alleged known salvation outside the Church.

With Feeneyism Pope Paul VI and others would have been interpreting LG 8, 14, 15, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, rationally. They, LG 8 etc, would simply be invisible cases. They would only be hypothetical always. So the conclusion would be traditional. Vatican Council II would not be a rupture with Tradition. The dogma EENS could not have practical exceptions. There was no known salvation outside the Church in particular cases. We could not meet or see someone on earth saved outside the Catholic Church without 'faith and baptism'(Ad Gentes 7).

 






Cushingism produces division. 

Feeneyism has unity with Tradition.Vatican Council II is Feeneyite ( for me).

 

Cushingism confuses what is invisible as being visible.

Feeneyism sees what is invisible as being invisible only. So we can interpret LG 8, 14, 15, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II with Cushingism or Feeneyism.

 

 

 

Cushingism depends upon an irrational premise and inference.

Feeneyism depends upon a rational premise and inference.





APRIL 8, 2021



The Lefebvrists, Thucs and Feeneyites are interpreting Vatican Council II with a false premise like Bishop Steven J. Lopes is the first bishop of the Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter and pastor to all its members and clergy in the United States and Canada. So nothing can be done by them regarding the case of Fr. Vaughn Treco

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-lefebvrists-thucs-and-feneeyites.html


_________________________________





MARCH 28, 2024

The correspondents of the National Catholic Reporter agree with me. They are Feeneyites on extra ecclesiam nulla salus when they interpret Vatican Council II, rationally and honestly. They have the same theological position as the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Richmond, New Hampshire, on the dogma EENS and Vatican Council II (rational).There is no denial from any one at the liberal left National Catholic Reporter.

 

The correspondents of the National Catholic Reporter agree with me. They are Feeneyites on extra ecclesiam nulla salus when they interpret Vatican Council II, rationally and honestly. They have the same theological position as the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Richmond, New Hampshire, on the dogma EENS and Vatican Council II (rational).There is no denial from any one at the liberal left National Catholic Reporter.

When Vatican Council II is interpreted with LG 8,14,15,16,UR 3, NA 2 and GS 22 being only hypothetical cases in 2024 and so non objective cases and so not exceptions for the dogma EENS, the exclusivist Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the ecclesiocentric Athanasius Creed, they hold the same doctrines on salvation as the traditionalists. The NCR affirms the ecclesiology of the Latin Mass of the 16th century. They are in harmony with the St.Benedict Centers in the USA. -Lionel Andrades



MARCH 27, 2024



We are all saying the same thing when Vatican Council II is interpreted rationally : Brother Andre Marie micm, Fr. Georges de Laire and the correspondents of the National Catholic Reporter : All are Feeneyites on EENS

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2024/03/we-are-all-saying-same-thing-when.html


 Heidi Schlumpf  hschlumpf@ncronline.org 
Christopher White    cwhite@ncronline.org
Brian Faga  bfraga@ncronline.org
 Michael Sean Winters mswkna@aol.com
Stephanie Yeagle   syeagle@ncronline.org
 Joshua McElwee  jmcelwee@ncronline.org



DECEMBER 6, 2019

NOVEMBER 5, 2019

These are great days- when I say that Michael Sean Winters and Massimo Faggioli interpret Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) like the traditionalist Brother Andre Marie MICM- and there is no denial from them. https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/11/these-are-great-days-when-i-say-that.html

NOVEMBER 4, 2019
Michael Sean Winters affirms the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) since if asked he would say that the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) and LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to invisible and not visible people in 2019. So they are not practical exceptions to the past ecclesiology, an ecumenism of return and exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. I have sent him e-mails of these posts and there is no contradiction from him. https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/11/michael-sean-winters-affirms-strict.html

 NOVEMBER 3, 2019
Michael Sean Winters affirms Vatican Council II and also the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) since the Council supports Feeneyite EENS when it is interpreted rationally.The Council is Feeneyite.He agrees with me.When he supports Fr. Leonard Feeney on EENS he is not in schism since the Council does the same when interpreted rationally. https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/11/michael-sean-winters-affirms-vatican.html

_____________________
The National Catholic Reporter cannot keep posting  reviews of books on Vatican Council II,  in which the authors make the same mistake ( Graphics ) https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-national-catholic-reporter-cannot.html

FALSE PREMISE DEFINED  
Their false premise is:-
1. Invisible people are visible. 
2.Unknown case of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are personally known.
3.The unknown case of the catechumen who desired the baptism of water but dies before he received it and is saved, is a personally known person.
4.There is known salvation outside the Catholic Church for us human beings.
5.We can see people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water.
6.We can physically see non Catholics in Heaven and on earth who are saved without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7).
7.There are non Catholics who are dead- men visible and walking  who are saved outside the Church.
8.There are known people in invincible ignorance through no fault of their own, who are saved.
9.There are some Anglicans and Protestants whom we know who are going to Heaven even though they are outside the Catholic Church.
10.There are some non Catholics whom we know, who are dead, and now are in Heaven, even though they were not Catholic.

 With the false premise there are 'objective exceptions' to EENS. There are visible exceptions to the Athanasius Creed, the Nicene Creed is changed, there is a new understanding of the Nicene Creed etc :-
1. The Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation is contradicted.
2. The Nicene Creed in which we say, 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins' over the centuries referred  to only one known baptism, the baptism of water.The baptism of desire etc cannot be given to someone like the baptism of water.But now the understanding is ' I believe in three or more known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins ( desire,blood and ignorance) and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church'.
3. The Apostles Creed says ' we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church'. Over the centuries it was understood that the Holy Spirit guided the Catholic Church and taught that there was no salvation outside the Church.Now  unknown cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, and LG 8, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, are assumd to be objective examples of salvation outside the Church.
4.In the past three Church Councils defined the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) in the extraordinary Magisterium .It was an 'infallible teaching' for Pope Pius X( Letter of the Holy Offie 1949).Now it is obsolete with their being alleged known salvation outside the Church.
5.Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are interpreted with the false premise so they become a rupture with EENS( Feeneyite), the Syllabus of Errors, Athanasius Creed etc.
6.With the false premise the Catechism of Pope Pius X contradict itself. It affirms the strict interpretation of EENS while invincible invincible ignorance is intepreted as referring to personally known non Catholics saved outside the Chuch.Invincible ignorance is not seen as a hypothetical case only.
7.Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus, Ecclesia in Asia, Balamand Declaration  etc were all written upholding the false premise. They did not support exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. So in a subtle way they contradicted EENS(Feeneyite), the Athanasius Creed etc. They did not support the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.They are Christological without the traditional ecclesiocentric ecclesiology. It's Christ without the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church for salvation.
8. Traditional mission based upon exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church is rejected. Since with the false premise, there is salvation outside the Church.
9.Inter faith marriages which are not Sacraments are common held.It is no more adultery. Since the non Catholic spouse could be saved outside the Church it is assumed. A posibility which could only be known to God is assumed to be a practical exception to EENS and a literally known case of salvation outside the Church in a personal case.
10. There is a new heretical ecclesiology at Holy Mass in all the rites and liturgies. The Latin Mass today does not have the same exclusivist ecclesiology of the Tridentine Rite Mass of the missionaries in the 16th century.

___________________________

NOVEMBER 20, 2019 
The National Catholic Reporter reviews of the books  by Fr. Jared Wicks sj and Prof. Paul Lakeland on  Vatican Council II were flawed. The authors made  a mistake ( Graphics)  https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-national-catholic-reporter-reviews.html
__________________________________________



Posted by at
Labels:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)