It was the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing who was in heresy and not Fr.Leonard Feeney.
It was the Magisterium of Pope Pius XII and the Jesuits in Boston who were in heresy and not Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center.Once this is discovered and understood it will be seen that the interpretation of Vatican Council II dramtically changed.
For the traditionalists, sedevacantists and the present magisterium today there are visible cases of the baptism of desire and so the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).So they criticize Fr. Leonard Feeney and support Pope Pius XII.
Now they realize that invisible for us baptism of desire(BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) cannot be an explicit exception to the dogma EENS. This has been confirmed in public my many responsible Catholics.
So when hypothetical cases are not explicit in 2017 there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict 'the strict interpretation' of the dogma EENS.
It means there is no change in the old ecclesiology of the Church. There is no theological basis for the new ecumenism.There is no theolological basis for the Anonymous Christian theory of Rahner and Ratzinger.The Catechism of the Catholic Church (846) should not have said all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church as if BOD and I.I were relevant to the dogma EENS and were exceptions.
For Fr.Nicholas Gruner, John Vennari, Chris Ferrara, the late Mons. Ignacio Barreiro, the SSPX bishops and the FSSP priests it was Fr. Leonard Feeney who was in heresy and not Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits.
The sedevacantists Bishop Sanborn and Pirvanus have also accepted the New Theology based on visible for us baptism of desire being an exception to the dogma EENS as it was known in the 16th century. So their interpretation of Vatican Council II has its foundation on LG 16 etc excluding the baptism of water and being a visible exception to EENS. This is irrational and non traditional. It leads to heresy.
Even the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, the communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney in the diocese of Worcester and Manchester, USA were following the Lefebvrists and the present magisterium in assuming invisible cases (LG 16) were visible exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. Though on EENS they were always correct and it was the SSPX which was wrong.
With Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) and EENS ( Feeneyite) there should be no problem any more for the SSPX regarding Vatican Council II.
It is the liberal cardinals and bishops in England, Germany, Australia,USA etc who will want to reject Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) and EENS ( Feeneyite) since it will not be in harmony with the Mason's New World Order Agenda.
-Lionel Andrades
It was the Magisterium of Pope Pius XII and the Jesuits in Boston who were in heresy and not Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center.Once this is discovered and understood it will be seen that the interpretation of Vatican Council II dramtically changed.
For the traditionalists, sedevacantists and the present magisterium today there are visible cases of the baptism of desire and so the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).So they criticize Fr. Leonard Feeney and support Pope Pius XII.
Now they realize that invisible for us baptism of desire(BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) cannot be an explicit exception to the dogma EENS. This has been confirmed in public my many responsible Catholics.
So when hypothetical cases are not explicit in 2017 there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict 'the strict interpretation' of the dogma EENS.
It means there is no change in the old ecclesiology of the Church. There is no theological basis for the new ecumenism.There is no theolological basis for the Anonymous Christian theory of Rahner and Ratzinger.The Catechism of the Catholic Church (846) should not have said all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church as if BOD and I.I were relevant to the dogma EENS and were exceptions.
For Fr.Nicholas Gruner, John Vennari, Chris Ferrara, the late Mons. Ignacio Barreiro, the SSPX bishops and the FSSP priests it was Fr. Leonard Feeney who was in heresy and not Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits.
The sedevacantists Bishop Sanborn and Pirvanus have also accepted the New Theology based on visible for us baptism of desire being an exception to the dogma EENS as it was known in the 16th century. So their interpretation of Vatican Council II has its foundation on LG 16 etc excluding the baptism of water and being a visible exception to EENS. This is irrational and non traditional. It leads to heresy.
Even the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, the communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney in the diocese of Worcester and Manchester, USA were following the Lefebvrists and the present magisterium in assuming invisible cases (LG 16) were visible exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. Though on EENS they were always correct and it was the SSPX which was wrong.
With Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) and EENS ( Feeneyite) there should be no problem any more for the SSPX regarding Vatican Council II.
It is the liberal cardinals and bishops in England, Germany, Australia,USA etc who will want to reject Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) and EENS ( Feeneyite) since it will not be in harmony with the Mason's New World Order Agenda.
-Lionel Andrades
SEPTEMBER 28, 2016
Heresy is caused by directly not accepting a teaching of the Church which it is necessary to accept. However heresy is also caused if you mix up what is defacto as being dejure ( in principle), is you confuse what is hypothetical as being objective.
JUNE 5, 2017
Two popes in heresy but then so is Chris Ferrara so he does not notice ithttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/06/two-popes-in-heresy-but-then-so-is.html
When Chris Ferrara wrote The Great Facade he did not know Vatican Council II could be interpreted without the irrational premise and the conclusion would be different http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/06/when-chris-ferrara-wrote-great-facade.html
SEPTEMBER 26, 2016
Heresy results also when we assume hypothetical cases are personally known in the present times,example the baptism of desire:Bishop Fellay like the Vatican Curia violates the Principle of Non Contradiction
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/09/heresy-results-also-when-we-assume.html
SEPTEMBER 25, 2016
Bishop Fellay's understanding and interpretation of Vatican Council II is heretical
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/09/the-letter-of-holy-office-1949-has_25.html
SEPTEMBER 24, 2016
CDF/ Ecclesia Dei would have to clarify that Cushingism from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 is heresy and that Feeneyism is Catholic orthodoxy http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/09/cdf-ecclesia-dei-would-have-to-clarify.html
JUNE 13, 2016
The doctrinal position of Bishop Bernard Fellay is heretical. He also contradicts the SSPX doctrinal General Chapter Statement 2012 which affirmed EENS with NO exceptions
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/the-doctrinal-position-of-bishop.html
JULY 12, 2016
Anonymous Catholics object to Amoris Laeitia : Pope not in heresy
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/07/anonymous-catholics-object-to-amoris.html
MARCH 31, 2016
Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II with an irrationality as do the traditionalists: the result is heresyhttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/pope-francis-interprets-vatican-council.html
JANUARY 18, 2016
Pope Francis and Cardinal Muller interpret the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II with irrationality : manifest heresy
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/pope-francis-and-cardinal-muller_18.html
JANUARY 17, 2016
Pope Francis and Cardinal Muller interpret the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II with Cushingism : 'the Church' is in manifest heresy
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/pope-francis-and-cardinal-muller_17.html
Pope Francis and Cardinal Muller interpret the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II with Cushingism : this is manifest heresy
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/pope-francis-and-cardinal-muller.html
JANUARY 15, 2016
For me the clerics in 1949 Rome and Boston were in heresy since there was no baptism of desire case without the baptism of water. There were none known to them and none in past history
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/for-me-clerics-in-1949-rome-and-boston.html
JANUARY 13, 2016
Roberto Mattei accepts this invisible-visible distinction made by the contemporary magisterium. It is not irrational for him.It is not heretical. Since he uses this same reasoning to interpret Vatican Council II
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/roberto-mattei-accepts-this-invisible.html
DECEMBER 11, 2015
No denial from traditionalists : modernism in their liturgy
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/no-denial-from-traditionalists.html
DECEMBER 9, 2015
Latin Mass Societies' Mass is heretical
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/latin-mass-societies-mass-is-heretical.html
NOVEMBER 16, 2015
Sedevacantists are offering/attending the Traditional Latin Mass with heresy an impediment, a sinhttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/11/sedevacantists-are-offeringattending.html
FEBRUARY 17, 2015
The mistake from 1949 was placed in Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14) and also in the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/02/the-mistake-from-1949-was-placed-in.html
JULY 15, 2014
USCCB Secretariate for Divine Worship statement is heresy
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/07/usccb-secretariate-for-divine-worship.html
No comments:
Post a Comment