Repost : Pope Francis simply has to interpret the BOD, BOB and I.I as not being exceptions to EENS : heresy and sacrilege end (Graphics )

NOVEMBER 23, 2018

Pope Francis simply has to interpret the BOD, BOB and I.I as not being exceptions to EENS : heresy and sacrilege end (Graphics )

-Lionel Andrades

NOVEMBER 23, 2018

Should not the cardinals and bishops also interpret BOD, BOB and I.I rationally and set an example for the pope?

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/11/should-not-cardinals-and-bishops-also.html

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/11/pope-francis-sumply-has-to-interpret.html

Repost : Bishop Fellay does not realize that he is confused between Feeneyism and Cushingism

 

APRIL 28, 2017

Bishop Fellay does not realize that he is confused between Feeneyism and Cushingism

The dogma “Outside the Church there is no salvation” has been changed surreptitiously by confused ideas wrote Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX).1 He does not realize that it is he, who is confused between Cushingism and Feeneyism in the interpretation of the dogma. That same confusion he extends to Vatican Council II.He then makes the same error in the interpretation of the Catechism of Pope Pius X and the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1995).

Feeneyism: It is the old theology and philosophical reaoning which says there are no known exceptions past or present, to the dogma EENS.There are no explicit cases to contradict the traditional interpretation of EENS.

Cushingism: It is the new theology and philosophical reasoning, which assumes there are known exceptions, past and present, to the dogma EENS, on the need for all to formally enter the Church.It assumes that the baptism of desire etc are not hypothetical but objectively known.In principle hypothetical cases are objective in the present times.

 

 So when he interprets invincible ignorance in the Catechism of Pope Pius X he assumes it refers to a visible case and so is an exception to outside the Church no salvation ( Feeneyite).

When I interpret invincible ignorance for example, in the Catechism of Pope Pius X it refers to an invisible case.

For Father Pier Paulo Petrucci, Superior, SSPX, Italy the baptism of desire refers to a visible case. So Vatican Council II has a rupture with the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation( Feeneyite).He is a Cushingite like Bishop Bernard Fellay.

For me Lionel, the baptism of desire and blood with or without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church refers to a physically invisible case. So it cannot be relevant or an exception to the dogma EENS, as it was known to the 16th century missionaries.2 

Bishop Bernard Fellay could also clarify that I Lionel Andrades interpret Vatican Council II without an irrational premise and so my conclusion is different from his and the SSPX bishops and priests.It is the same with the dogma EENS.

 This is Vatican Council II Feeneyite for me with these diagrams.

-Lionel Andrades

1.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/04/the-dogma-outside-church-there-is-no.html

2.

January 12, 2016

If the SSPX bishops and Fr.Pierpaulo Petrucci would admit that the baptism of desire refers to invisible cases in 2016, the entire interpretation of Vatican Council changes : error in the article

Fr. Pier Paolo Petrucci, Superior General,SSPX ,Italy makes the familiar SSPX error http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/fr-pier-paolo-petrucci-superior.html

JULY 20, 2015

No response from Fraternita Sacerdotale San Pio X (SSPX Italy) : doctrinal messhttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/07/no-response-from-fraternita-sacerdotale.html

 ________________________________________________________

October 18, 2012

FATHER NIKLAUS PFLUGER IN FIRST CLASS HERESY ?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/10/father-niklaus-pfluger-in-first-class.html

 

 

October 19, 2012

RAMPANT HERESY IN THE SSPX

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/10/rampant-heresy-in-sspx.html

SSPX DISTRICT ITALY CONFERENCE ON VATICAN COUNCIL II TO USE THE FALSE PREMISE

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/10/sspc-district-italy-conference-

Repost : The Catholic Church is still Feeneyite

 DECEMBER 2, 2018

The Catholic Church is still Feeneyite

Comments on the blog Vox Cantoris,It's about the doctrine, it always was and remains so!

Peter Lamb said...

Dear Lionel,

I have no truck with Feeneyites, or Feeneyism. Come back to the Church. You could do so much good on the right track. May God bless you. :)

________________________

Lionel:

I depends upon what you mean by Feeneyites.

St. Thomas Aquinas was a Feeneyite since he affirmed the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also mentioned hypothetical cases of a person in invincible ignorance and and another hypothetical cases of someone who desired the baptism of water, both of which are not exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Invisible cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) cannot be visible exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made an objective mistake.

Then the Catechism of Pope Pius X was also Feeneyite since it said that all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation and it did not mention any exception. This Catechism for example did mention being saved in invincible ignorance, which is not an exception. Since hypothetical cases cannot be seen objectively seem  in the present times, for them to be exceptions to EENS amd of someone is not there he is not an exception.

Then Vatican Council II is Feeneyite since it says all need faith and baptism for salvation and the Council does not mention any exceptions.Hypothetical cases of LG 8,LG 14,LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc cannot be objective examples of salvation outside the Church. Since if they did exist they would only be known to God. For us humans there are no such cases for example in 2018.There were none in 1965 or 1949.

So the Church is still Feeneyite as was the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century.It is a section of the traditionalits and sedevacantists who are outside the Church with heresy.

Since they reject EENS by assuming non existing cases of BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions.

They reject the Nicene Creed by assuming there are three or more known baptisms and all without the baptism of water.

They reject the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation. For them outside the Church there is known salvation.

They do not interpret the Apostles Creed like the Magisterium in the 16th century.

They reject the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX( ecumenism of return) by assuming that the Catechism of Pope Pius X contradicts it with visible and known cases, of non Catholics saved outside the Church in invincible ignorance etc.

So it is important to clarify what do you mean by Feeneyism. Since the St. Benedict Centers, the communities of Fr. Leonard Feeney, traditionalists, also make some of these errors.1

However I agree with Bro. Andre Marie MICM when he says that to be a Catholic is to be a Feeneyite.

-Lionel Andrades
1
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/11/prior-in-scandal.html
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/scandal.html

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/the-catholic-church-is-still-feeneyite.html

Repost : I am a Feeneyite.I accept Vatican Council II.I also accept Pope Francis as pope.I also affirm the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance.I affirm other magisterial documents(All the Creeds, Vatican Council II and the Catechisms). I attend Mass in English, Italian and Latin. For me the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century were also Feeneyite.So was St. Thomas Aquinas and the popes.

DECEMBER 3, 2018

I am a Feeneyite.I accept Vatican Council II.I also accept Pope Francis as pope.I also affirm the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance.I affirm other magisterial documents(All the Creeds, Vatican Council II and the Catechisms). I attend Mass in English, Italian and Latin. For me the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century were also Feeneyite.So was St. Thomas Aquinas and the popes.

 Comments from the blog Vox Cantoris

Peter Lamb said...
Dear Tom, I think you misinterpreted what I wrote. I don't think any conciliarists are Feeneyites. Feeneyites are a distinctive heretical group and have nothing to do with conciliarists. However, sadly, they and the loons are all lumped with us "Catholics
sedes" because we are all sedevacantists - i.e. we all recognize that the conciliar "popes" are false.

Lionel:
I am a Feeneyite.
I accept Vatican Council II.
I also accept Pope Francis as pope.
I also affirm the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance.
I affirm other magisterial documents(All the Creeds, Vatican Council II and the Catechisms).
I attend Mass in English, Italian and Latin.
For me the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century were also Feeneyite.So was St. Thomas Aquinas and the popes.
The popes affirmed the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS like me and BOD, BOB and I.I were hypothetical cases for them, and for me, and so BOD,BOB and I.I were not exceptions to what the secular media call the rigorist interpretation of the dogma EENS.
-Lionel Andrades
 http://voxcantor.blogspot.com/2018/11/its-about-doctrine-it-always-was-and.html

DECEMBER 3, 2018

So I am not saying anything new and neither am I rejecting Vatican Council II. I am citing Magisterial documents and affirming the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church. 

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/so-i-am-not-saying-anything-new-and.html

 

JULY 5, 2018

These points should be clarified by the religious communities who are in communication with the CDF and Ecclesia Dei.Ask them if everyone can interpret Vatican Council II and EENS as does the blogger on Lionel's Blog. 

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/07/these-points-should-be-clarified-by.html

 

JULY 5, 2018

Reiterate
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/07/reiterate.html

These points should be clarified by the religious communities who are in communication with the CDF and Ecclesia Dei.Ask them if everyone can interpret Vatican Council II and EENS as does the blogger on Lionel's Blog.

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/07/these-points-should-be-clarified-by.html

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/i-am-feeneyitei-accept-vatican-council.html

Repost : I support Tradition by re-interpreting Vatican Council II rationally.

 DECEMBER 6, 2018

I support Tradition by re-interpreting Vatican Council II rationally.

Comment on the blog Vox Cantoris - awaiting approval
Vox,
This is  a comment on doctrine.
This is how I interpret Vatican Council II. Do you have any comments on it.

I re-interpret Vatican Council II rationally and traditionally.

ECUMENISM OF RETURN
Based on Vatican Council II, I affirm an ecumenism of return.Since Ad Gentes 7 says all need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation.

EENS ACCORDING TO THE 16TH CENTURY
Based on Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7) I affirm the strict interpretation of outside the Church there is no salvation. Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation. 

7. 

This missionary activity derives its reason from the will of God, "who wishes all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, Himself a man, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim. 2:45), "neither is there salvation in any other" (Acts 4:12).

Therefore, all must be converted to Him...and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door...

By means of this activity, the Mystical Body of Christ unceasingly gathers and directs its forces toward its own growth (cf. Eph. 4:11-16). The members of the Church are impelled to carry on such missionary activity by reason of the love with which they love God and by which they desire to share with all men the spiritual goods of both its life and the life to come.

Finally, by means of this missionary activity, God is fully glorified, provided that men fully and consciously accept His work of salvation, which He has accomplished in Christ.-Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II

PAST ECCLESIOLOGY SUPPORTED

With the  strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and the rational interpretation of  Vatican Council II for me there is only the  past exclusìvist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church based on Ad Gentes 7.

 LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to hypothetical and invisible cases only. So they do not contradict Ad Gentes 7  and  EENS according to the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century.

SOCIAL REIGN OF CHRIST THE KING BASED ON AD GENTES 7

So the priority for me would be the Social Reign of Christ the King  since outside the Church there is no salvation(AG 7).

NON SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE BASED ON EENS

I would support the non separation of Church and State since every one needs to be a member of the Catholic Church for salvation (AG 7).

TRADITIONAL MISSION DOCTRINE RETURNS

I support mission programs since Vatican Council II (AG 7) indicates all non Catholics are oriented to Hell unless they enter the Church before death with 'faith and baptism'.Most people die outside the Church and so they are in Hell. The Church is saying in Vatican Council II that most people are in Hell. 

So I support Tradition by re-interpreting Vatican Council II rationally.

-Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/so-i-support-tradition-by-re.html

Repost : Mass offered by the Dominican priest Fr.Thomas Crean at the TMC chapel may be valid but it is in scandal. There is an impediment which is not denied by the TMC faculty.

DECEMBER 10, 2018

Mass offered by the Dominican priest Fr.Thomas Crean at the TMC chapel may be valid but it is in scandal. There is an impediment which is not denied by the TMC faculty.

Fr.Thomas Crean op is on the faculty of the Thomas More College of Liberal Arts(TMC) and was a speaker at the Rome Life Forum in May 2018.He offers Holy Mass interpreting St. Thomas Aquinas as contradicting himself and Tradition.Like the Cushingite Dominicans, he holds the liberal position on Vatican Council II.It is interpreted as a rupture with the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).He reaches this conclusion by using a false premise and inference.So the understanding of the Creeds are changed and there is a doctrinal mess.

AQUINAS CONTRADICTS HIMSELF FOR TMC
The TMC is non-traditional and a rupture with St. Thomas Aquinas who held the strict interpretation of EENS.Hypothetical and speculative cases of BOD,BOB and I.I could only be speculative.They were not objective exceptions to his traditional understanding of no salvation outside the Church.They were not exceptions to his 'Feeneyite' understanding of EENS.The TMC would misinterpret Aquinas when he mentions the speculative man in the forest in ignorance or the case of the unknown catechumen saved with only the desire for the baptism of water. 1

CATECHISM OF PIUS X CONTRADICTS ITSELF 
The TMC faculty also teach the Catechism of Pope Pius X which says all need to be members of the Church for salvation. This Catechism is Feeneyite. Since when it mentions invincible ignorance, it is not a reference to a visible and practically known exception to EENS.But the Catechisms are interpreted with Cushingism.This is the teaching norm at TMC.2 So the Catechism of Pope Pius X would contradict the Syllabus of Errors ( ecuemnism of return etc.) The Catechisms and other Church documents are interpreted with the hermeneutic of rupture, even though a rational choice is available.

This is the doctrine that the two popes and Fr. Thomas Crean reject by using a false premise and inference.

1.Nicene Creed.

2.Athanasius Creed.

3.Apostles Creed.

4.Extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

5.Vatican Council II.

6.Catechism of the Catholic Church.

7.Catechism of the Council of Trent and other Catechisms.

VIOLATES THE PRINCIPLE OF NON CONTRADICTION

They violate the Principle of Non Contradiction.
There is is a factual error. It is a fact of life that we cannot physically see people saved in Heaven and neither in general can we see them on earth.So people saved in Heaven with the baptism of desire(BOD),baptism of blood( BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) who cannot be seen on earth  cannot be objective examples of salvation outside the Church. They cannot be exceptions to the traditional teaching on all needing to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation.People who do not exist in our reality cannot be exceptions.

HERMENEUTIC OF CONTINUITY FOR ME

For me there  is no rupture between Vatican Council II  and the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. Similarly the Catechisms are also interpreted with the hermeneutic of continuity.

This would not be true for the Dominican priest. He rejects EENS as it was known to the Jesuits in the 16th century.He rejects EENS as it was known to St. Dominic.This is the norm for the Dominicans today.

I do not interpret the Creeds as contradicting themselves.This is an an error of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican.

For me the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 is irrational and heretical. However it is acceptable for the two popes, the CDF and the Domicans.

I affirm EENS like the Magisterium and missionaries in the 16th century.They do not do the same.
 SACRILEGE
For me they are in public heresy and the popes, cardinals and bishops offer Holy Mass in sacrilege. In public they, like Fr. Crean op,  will not affirm Magisterial documents of the Catholic Church rationally and traditionally.Instead they will choose a hermeneutic of rupture.

The Mass offered by the Dominican priest at the TMC chapel may be valid but it is in scandal. There is an impediment which is not denied by the TMC faculty.-Lionel Andrades

1

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/thomas-more-college-of-liberal-arts-tmc.html

2

ibid

 DECEMBER 8, 2018

Thomas More College of Liberal Arts rejects Catholic Tradition by irrationally interpreting Vatican Council II. This has the approval of the two popes, the political Left and the college accreditors :I support Tradition by re-interpreting Vatican Council II rationally

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/thomas-more-college-of-liberal-arts.html

DECEMBER 8, 2018

Thomas More College of Liberal Arts rejects Catholic Tradition by irrationally interpreting Vatican Council II. This has the approval of the two popes, the political Left and the college accreditors :I support Tradition by re-interpreting Vatican Council II rationally.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/thomas-more-college-of-liberal-arts.html

DECEMBER 7, 2018

Alleged faithful college coming to New England,USA is Cushingite and not Feeneyite : interprets Vatican Council II and Catechism with an irrational premise to create a hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/alleged-faithful-college-coming-to-new.html




















___________________________________
___________________________________
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/12/so-mass-offered-by-dominican-priest.html