Vatican Council II - from Wikipedia

 Vatican Council II

...the sixteen magisterial documents produced by the council proposed significant developments in doctrine and practice, notably

Lionel: There were developments since Vatican Council II was being interpreted with a false premise, with Cushingism. With a rational premise, with Feeneyism there is no development. There is no liberalism. The Council is in harmony with Tradition.

______________________

·         Lumen gentium, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church on "the universal call to holiness"

·         Lionel: It does not contradict the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.It is the same with the following Magisterial Documents which are in harmony with Tradition.

·         ________________

·          

·         Apostolicam actuositatem, a decree on The Apostolate of the Laity

·         Orientalium Ecclesiarum, a decree On Eastern Catholic Churches

·         Dei verbum, the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation emphasized the study of scripture as "the soul of theology"

·         Sacrosanctum concilium, the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy to restore "the full and active participation by all the people"

·         Gaudium et spes, the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World concerned the promotion of peace, the gift of self, and the Churches mission to non-Catholics

·         Dignitatis humanae, a declaration on religious freedom

·         Unitatis redintegratio, a decree on Christian ecumenism

·         Nostra aetate, a declaration about non-Christian religions

The council had a significant impact on the Church due to the scope and variety of issues it addressed.^[2] Some of the most notable changes were in performance of the Mass, including that vernacular languages could be authorized as well as the Latin.

Background

[edit]

Biblical movement

[edit]

Pope Pius XII's 1943 encyclical Divino afflante spiritu^[3] gave a renewed impetus to Catholic Bible studies and encouraged the production of new Bible translations from the original languages. This led to a pastoral attempt to get ordinary Catholics to re-discover the Bible, to read it, to make it a source of their spiritual life. This found a response in very limited circles. By 1960, the movement was still in its infancy.^[4][5]

Ressourcement and Nouvelle théologie

[edit]

Main article: Nouvelle théologie

By the 1930s, mainstream theology based on neo-scholasticism and papal encyclicals was being rejected by some theologians as dry and uninspiring. Thus was born the movement called ressourcement, the return to the sources: basing theology directly on the Bible and the Church Fathers.

Lionel: The Bible and the Church Fathers support the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Vatican Council II when interpreted with Lumen Gentium 16 etc being an objective exception for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, produces the New Theology. Otherwise the Council has a continuity with the Old Theology, the past exclusivist ecclesiology.

__________________

 

 Some theologians also began to discuss new topics, such as the historical dimension of theology, the theology of work, ecumenism, the theology of the laity and the theology of "earthly realities".^[6] All these writings in a new style came to be called "la nouvelle théologie", and they soon attracted Rome's attention.

The reaction came in 1950. That year Pius XII published Humani generis, an encyclical "concerning some false opinions threatening to undermine the foundations of Catholic doctrine". Without citing specific individuals, he criticized those who advocated new schools of theology. It was generally understood that the encyclical was directly against the nouvelle théologie as well as developments in ecumenism and Bible studies. Some of these works were placed on the Index of Prohibited Books, and some of the authors were forbidden to teach or to publish. Those who suffered most were the Henri de Lubac SJ and Yves Congar OP, who were unable to teach or publish until the death of Pius XII in 1958. By the early 1960s, other theologians under suspicion included Karl Rahner SJ and the young Hans Küng

Lionel: The change came with the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office which had an objective error and which was not corrected by the popes from Pius XII to Paul VI. So the Council was interpreted by Pope Paul VI and the Holy Office (CDF), by confusing invisible cases ( LG 16 etc) as being visible examples of salvation outside the Church, making the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus obsolete.This still is being called a revolution and a new revelation in the Catholic Church.The mistake is not being corrected in the media or by the Vatican.

_____________________

 

^Lione

In addition, there was the unfinished business of the First Vatican Council (1869–70). When it had been cut short by the Italian Army's entry into Rome at the end of Italian unification, the only topics that had been completed were the theology of the papacy and the relationship of faith and reason, while the theology of the episcopate and of the laity were left unaddressed.^[7][8] The role of the Second Vatican Council in continuing and completing the work of the first was noted by Pope Paul VI in his encyclical letter Ecclesiam Suam (1964).^[9]

At the same time, the world's bishops were facing challenges driven by political, social, economic, and technological change. Some of these bishops were seeking new ways of addressing those challenges. So, when Pope John announced that he would convene a General Council of the Church, many wondered if he wanted to break down the "fortress Church" mentality and make room for these tentative movements for renewal that had been developing over the previous few decades

Lionel. The bottom line is that if LG 8,14,15,16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are interpreted as being hypothetical cases only and so no more exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Athanasius Creed, then the Council and the Church return to Tradition. It is the end of liberalism in the Church based upon Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and not rationally.

The interpretation of Vatican Council II in the Vigano schism trial was irrational and dishonest. It was political.Also the College of Cardinals must interpret Vatican Council II only rationally before they are eligible to elect a new pope. This is the ethical thing to do. – Lionel Andrades

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Vatican_Council

SEPTEMBER 16, 2024

Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2024/09/slaves-of-immaculate-heart-of-mary-fine.html

SEPTEMBER 17, 2024

Feeneyism - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2024/09/feeneyism-from-wikipedia-free.html

SEPTEMBER 16, 2024

Archbishop Viganò EXCOMMUNICATED: Shocking Controversy Explored!

 SEPTEMBER 15, 2024

The foreign embassies at the Vatican need to seek justice for Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano

 

The foreign embassies at the Vatican need to seek justice for Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano.An appeal could be made to the Russian, Italian, U.S and other embassies at the Vatican, to ask Pope Francis to interpret Vatican Council II rationally and so honestly and so do justice for the former Italian nuncio to the USA.

Cardinal Fernandez interpreted Vatican Council II dishonestly during the trial of Archbishop Vigano and then accused the Archbishop of schism and excommunicated him.This is political. The foreign ambassies at the Vatican must call for justice for Archbishop Vigano.

The Vatican Office for Inter-religious dialogue is also misinforming non Catholics on Vatican Council II. Lumen Gentium 16 is not an exception for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the rest of Catholic Tradition.-Lionel Andrades

SEPTEMBER 15, 2024

It is Cardinal Fernandez who should be excommunicated for rejecting the Athanasius Creed and the dogma EENS, changing the interpretation of the Nicene and Apostles Creed, re-interpreting Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church irrationally and creating a false doctrinal rupture with the CDF before 1949.

 

It is important to reiterate that:

1.It is not obligatory for Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano  to accept Pope Francis as the pope when the pope does not affirm Vatican Council II ( AG 7, with Lumen Gentium 16 not being an exception) and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (845,846,1257 with 847-848 not being an exception).

2.It is not obligatory for Archbishop Vigano to accept Vatican Council II with Lumen Gentium 16 interpreted as visible exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). Lumen Gentium 16 refers to invisible cases in 1965-2024.

3. Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez and the other ecclesiastics at the Dicastry for the Doctrine for the Faith, Vatican, were not eligible to conduct the schism-trial, since they do not affirm the Athanasius Creed, which does not have any exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II. The DCF also does not accept the dogma EENS because of Lumen Gentium 16 being an alleged exception.This is public heresy. They have changed the interpretation of the Nicene and Apostles Creed, when there is a reference to the baptism of desire.

The DCF does not have a continuity with the pre-1949, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which affirms the Athanasius Creed and the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS.

Cardinal Fernandez is in heresy and schism for not affirming the Athanasius Creed, the dogma EENS and Vatican Council II and all the Catechisms interpreted only rationally. It is the same for Pope Francis and the College of Cardinals.

It is Cardinal Fernandez  who should be excommunicated for rejecting the Athanasius Creed and the dogma EENS, changing the interpretation of the Nicene and Apostles Creed, re-interpreting Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church irrationally and creating a false doctrinal rupture with the CDF before 1949. He has been supporting the objective and factual error of the popes from Paul VI to Francis and so there is a new liberal theology in the Church. 

PUBLIC MORTAL SIN

It may be mentioned that for me, Pope Francis is the pope but he is in public mortal sin and so IS not in communion with Jesus and the Catholic Church. He is the pope for me, since there is no other pope. Mortal sins of faith take a person to Hell. He needs to end the scandal and receive absolution in the confessional.

I do not hold the position of Cionici, Barnhardt and other sedevcantists.

I also accept Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church but interpret them rationally unlike Pope Franics.- Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2024/09/archbishop-vigano-excommunicated.html

Feeneyism - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Feeneyism

Fine modulo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Feeneyism is a Christian doctrine, associated with Leonard Feeney, which advocates an interpretation of the dogma extra Ecclesiam nulla salus ("outside the Church there is no salvation") which is that only Catholics can go to heaven and that only those baptised with water can go to heaven. Feeneyism opposes the doctrines of baptism of desire and baptism of blood as well as the view that non-Catholics can go to heaven.

Lionel: False. There are no literal cases of the baptism of desire said Bishop Athanasius Schneider in an interview with Dr.Taylor Marshall. There are no explicit cases of St. Thomas Aquinas’ implicit baptism of desire said Marshall. So the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance would not be known in particular cases, for us human beings. They can only be known to God. So they never ever were, over the centuries, objective exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Council of Florence 1442).

________________________

Feeneyism is considered a heresy by the Catholic Church; some Catholics refer to Feeneyism as the Boston heresy.

Lionel. For Cardinal Richard Cushing, the archbishop of Boston, the Jesuits of that time and Pope Pius XII and the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office, invisible cases of the baptism of desire were considered visible exceptions for the dogma EENS. So the 1949 LOHO concluded that not everyone needed to enter the Church for salvation, as if there were known exceptions in 1949. This is irrational and deceptive. This is dishonesty. It is not traditional. It is heretical because it rejects the thrice defined dogma EENS, it rejects the Athanasius Creed by positing nonexistent cases in the human reality, as practical exceptions for the past ecclesiocentrism. So with the irrationality the dogma EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors (ecumenism of return etc) was made obsolete.

Now we know that Lumen Gentium 16 is not an exception for Feeneyite EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors. Vatican Council II has continuity with the past ecclesiocentrism. The Council supports Feeneyism and not Cushing’s. The Council is Feeneyite.

___________________

Leonard Feeney

[edit]

Main article: Leonard Feeney

Feeney was a Roman Catholic priest and a member of the Jesuit order. The order dismissed Feeney in 1949 for disobedience; later, on 4 February 1953, the Holy Office declared him excommunicated "on account of grave disobedience to Church Authority, being unmoved by repeated warnings".^[1][2]

Lionel: The excommunication was lifted by Pope Paul VI after Fr. Leonard Feeney chose to recite the Creed, the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation.

Doctrine

[edit]

The doctrine of Feeneyism is associated with the position of Leonard Feeney (1897–1978), a Jesuit priest of Boston, on the doctrine extra Ecclesiam nulla salus. Feeneyism's interpretation of the doctrine extra Ecclesiam nulla salus ("outside the Church there is no salvation") is that only Catholics can go to heaven and that only those baptised with water can go to heaven. Feeneyism opposes the doctrines of baptism of desire and baptism of blood as well as the view that non-Catholics can go to heaven.^[4][5][6][7]

^{Lionel: According to Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II, all need faith and baptism for salvation. All. So the Council indicates that in Heaven there are only Catholics. Ad Gentes 7 is placed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church under the title Outside the Church there is no salvation (CCC 846).}

Feeneyism is considered a heresy by the Catholic Church; some Catholics refer to Feeneyism as the Boston heresy.^[4][5][6]

^Lionel : Fr. Leonard Feeney was affirming the traditional, centuries old interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Over the years, it was common knowledge, that there were no objective cases of the baptism of desire. So there were no known practical exceptions for EENS. 

_______________

Feeney rejected what was the definition of the Catholic Church of baptism of desire at the time, i.e. the idea that people who openly affiliated with the Catholic Church as well as those spiritually linked to the Catholic Church through an implicit desire could be saved.^[5][6]

^{Lionel: Those linked to the Church with an} implicit desire and who are saved are hypothetical and theoretical cases.They can only be known to God. The Catholic norm for salvation is faith and the baptism of water ( Ad Gentes 7). The Church is necessary for salvation ( Dominus Iesus 20), membership in the Church is necessary for salvation, all are oriented to the Church ( CDF, Notification, Dupuis,2001), other religions are not paths to salvation ( Catechism of Pope Pius X, 24 Q, 27Q), Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257( The Necessity of Baptism). The Church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water.It is given to adults with Catholic faith.

__________________

Condemnation of Feeneyism

[edit]

In a 1949 letter to Cardinal Cushing, Archbishop of Boston, the Holy Office condemned Feeney's teaching that only those formally baptized in the Catholic Church can be saved. The Holy Office affirmed that those baptized by their desire can be saved. This letter was sent by Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani to Cardinal Cushing. This letter stated among other things:^[8][9]

^{Lionel: The 1949 Letter assumes physically} invisible cases of the baptism of desire are visible exceptions for Feeneyite EENS in 1949. This bad philosphy.It is an empirical error, an error in observation. It is bad theology. Based upon there being objective exceptions for the dogma EENS, a new theology was created which said outside the Church there is salvation, there is known salvation and so not all needed to enter the Church to be saved from Hell.

The old theology was rejected, even at the schism trial of Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano when invisible cases of Lumen Gentium 16 were projected as visible exceptions for Tradition ( EENS etc).

__________

The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as She is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member,( This is heresy. Since there are no known exceptions of the baptism of desire and here the dogma EENS is being rejected. The  Athanasius Creed is also being rejected and new versions are created for the Nicene and Apostles Creed)  but it is necessary that at least he be united to Her by desire and longing. However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God. These things are clearly taught in that dogmatic letter which was issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943, On the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ (AAS, Vol. 35, an. 1943, p. 193 ff.). For in this letter the Sovereign Pontiff clearly distinguishes between those who are actually incorporated into the Church as members, and those who are united to the Church only by desire.

— Letter of the Holy Office

This letter is referenced in a footnote of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, in its section "Outside the Church there is no salvation", paragraph 847,^[10] as well as in a footnote in Lumen gentium.^[11]

The 1949 Letter has an objective and factual error and is referenced in Vatican Council and the Catechism of the Catholic Church and placed in the Denzinger.It is not Magisterial. The Holy Spirit cannot make an objective mistake and contradict the traditional teaching of the Church. This is human error. - Lionel Andrades

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feeneyism