Some 15 years back I discovered that Lumen Gentium 16 (being saved in invincibile
ignorance) etc were always hypothetical. So how could they be exceptions for
Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus? This was a discovery. It meant Vatican
Council II was not a rupture with Tradition.
-Lionel Andrades
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
FEBRUARY 9, 2024
The Discovery
, OCTOBER 21, 2023
The Lionel Andrades Discovery on Vatican Council II is simple
The Lionel Andrades Discovery on Vatican Council II is simple
It’s just this: LG 8, 14, 15, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc always refer to hypothetical cases only. They are always physically invisible in 1965-2023. We cannot meet anyone saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience (LG 16) or with the baptism of desire (LG 14). If anyone was saved as such it would only be known to God.
This changes the interpretation of Vatican Council II. Ecclesiology changes. The Church returns to the past. We are back to the past ecclesiocentrism of the Middle Ages. Since speculative and theoretical cases of LG 8, 14, 15 16 etc, cannot be objective examples of salvation in the present times (2023). They are not practical exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors and the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24 Q, 27Q).
So we have the hermeneutic of continuity with the past exclusivist ecclesiology upon which was based traditional faith, morals and mission.
This is a rational and ethical interpretation of Vatican Council II and the only option the popes, cardinals and bishops now have.
When Alberto Melloni of the FSCIRE ( Bologna School), the professor-priests at the Biblicum, Gregorian, Angelicum and John Lateran Universities interpret LG 8,14, 15,16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, rationally, they automatically affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. This is irrespective if they want to or not want to affirm Feeneyite EENS.
My Parish Priest Fr. Paulo Boumis, at the church San Agapito near Largo Preneste, Rome, the Missionaries of Charity of Mother Teresa-priests, the Auxiliary bishops of Rome and the theologians at the Ecclesia Mater, Rome Vicariate, agree with me. LG 8, 14, 15, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, are always invisible in the present times. This is something obvious said Fr. Aldo Rossi, a former Prior at the SSPX, District Albano, Italy. - Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/10/the-lionel-andrades-discovery-on.html
________________________________
MARCH 12, 2023
A New Discovery : Pope Francis, the CDF has only to announce that LG 8, LG 14. LG 16. UR 3. NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to hypothetical and invisible cases in 2023. Things then fall into place. The Church returns to Tradition.
MARCH 2, 2023
We have a new discovery in the Catholic Church
SEPTEMBER 9, 2023
The discovery
The discovery
We have a discovery today. It’s ‘a small point’ but this small point turns the Council around. From liberalism the Council returns to Tradition. So by ignoring this small point, we have liberalism in the Church. This small point, is the premise: the rational and irrational premise. It decides if Vatican Council II has a continuity or break with Tradition. This is the discovery. We now have a switch. We can turn it off or on. We can choose a continuity with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors or a rupture with Tradition. -Lionel Andrades
Lionel Andrades
former Staff Reporter, daily Morning News, Karachi, Pakistan.
Recipient of the All Pakistan Newspaper Society (APNS) Best Reporter of the Year Award, presented by the Prime Minister of Pakistan Benazir Bhutto.
Recipient of the Pakistan Government's Award for Literature ( Childrens stories).
Teacher of English and Church History at the Catholic Minor Seminary, Rawalpindi.
Bishop Anthony Lobo
Sent to Rome for Ministerial Priesthood by Bishop Anthony Lobo, bishop of Rawalpindi-Islamabad, Pakistan.
He is discriminated against by the pontifical universities and seminaries in Rome.He interprets Vatican Council II rationally and not irrationally. So there is a continuity with Tradition. He is not allowed to study at pontifical universities in Rome, where it is obligatory to interpret Magisterial Documents, irrationally and unethically.Catholic students and seminarians are discriminated against.
The seminarians of the Society of St. Pius X, Albano, are allowed to study at the pontifical universities in Rome since they interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally and this is approved by the Left.
Propaganda Fide only gives schorlarship for all students/ seminarians who are approved by a bishop, who does not interpret Vatican Council II, rationally and expects seminarians to do the same.
However we have a new discovery in the Catholic Church. There are two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is interpreted with the false premise and the other without it. One is Magisterial and the other, the common one, is non Magisterial.How can the Holy Spirit make an objective mistake ? So it is human error and not the Magisterium.
Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not only pastoral, when it is interpreted rationally i.e LG 8,14,15,16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to only hypothetical cases. So they are not objective examples of salvation. They are not objective exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Athanasius Creed.
It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms. There can be two interpretations.Catholics must choose the rational option.The Creeds must not be changed.
Why should Catholics choose an irrational version of the Creeds, Catechisms and Councils, which is heretical, non-traditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional?
It is unethical when the popes, cardinals and bishops choose the Irrational Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents and call it Catholic.
Rahner, Ratzinger, Congar, Murray, Balthazar, Kung, Lefebvre and Paul VI interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally. The popes from Paul VI to Francis did the same. We can today choose to interpret the Council rationally and in harmony with Tradition.
Blog: http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/
Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission)
E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com
Twitter : @LionelAndrades1
Residence temporary : Missionaries of Charity (Contemplative) Men of Madre Teresa, Via di Sant’Agapito, 8, 00177 Roma RM ( near Largo Preneste and Termini) Italy.
ONLY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SOLAMENTE LA CHIESA CATTOLICA
HEART OF THE MATTER
1.If Vatican Council II is a rupture with the dogma EENS then it means that LG 8,14,15,16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, refer to visible examples of salvation outside the Church. So they are exceptions for EENS etc.
2. If Vatican Council II is not a break with the dogma EENS then it means that LG 8, 14, 15, 16 etc refer to invisible cases. They are not visible examples of salvation outside the Church in 1965-2023. Invisible cases cannot be practical exceptions for me.So there is nothing in the text of Vatican Council II to contradict Feeneyite EENS.
A. Similarly if the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance refer to physically visible cases, of salvation outside the Church in 1949-2023, then this is Cushingism. It is irrational. There is a break with the dogma EENS and the ecumenism of return.The Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q,27Q-outside the Church there is no salvation), has exceptions. There is a break with Tradition.
B. But if BOD, BOB and I.I refer to invisible cases, then they do not contradict EENS, the Athanasius Creed, the ecumenism of return and the Catechism of Pope Pius X(24Q,27Q).There is no rupture with Tradition.
- When what is invisible is considered invisible, I call it Feeneyism.
- When what is invisible is considered visible, I call it a Cushingism.
We can interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism or Cushingism.
We can interpret BOD, BOB and I.I with Feeneyism or Cushingism.
So we can interpret the Nicene, Apostles and Athanasius Creed with Feeneyism or Cushingism. When these Creeds refer to BOD, BOB and I.I they can be Feeneyite or Cushingite. For example, (Nicene Creed-I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin ( and not three known baptisms).
The Apostles Creed (the Holy Spirit guides the Holy Catholic Church to say outside the Church there is no salvation and not outside the Church there is known salvation.
All need Catholic faith for salvation (Athanasius Creed).This is Feeneyism. But if it is said all need Catholic faith for salvation with some known exceptions then this is Cushingism.
The only holy Catholic and Apostolic Church (Four Marks, Nicene Creed) in the past taught that outside the Church there is no salvation. What it teaches today depends upon you -if you are a Feeneyite or Cushingite.
In the same way there can two interpretations of Vatican Council II (LG 8,14,15,16 etc). It depends upon how you interpret LG 8 etc, with Feeneyism or Cushingism.
-Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2023/10/the-lionel-andrades-discovery-on.html
Posts
