eucharistandmission: Michael Sean Winters is probably aware of Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and is afraid and and so mentions it often.

Friday, May 3, 2019

Michael Sean Winters is probably aware of Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and is afraid and and so mentions it often.

It is also clear that this line of argument really finds its roots not in the theology of John Paul II, still less the Second Vatican Council. These are neo-Feeneyites, adhering to the most extreme theological positions held before the Vatican II. (Fr. Leonard Feeney was an arch-conservative, whose views were so extreme he was excommunicated in 1953.) So, for example, they write that "[t]hese heresies are interconnected. The basis of Catholic sexual morality consists in the claim that sexual activity exists for the sake of procreation within marriage and is morally wrong if knowingly engaged outside of this sphere." Except that the Second Vatican Council and every pope since clearly taught that there are two ends of sexual intimacy, procreation and the unity of the spouses. This latter doesn't make the cut for the neo-Feeneyites.- Michael Sean Winters, Heresy accusation letter, deconstructed

Lionel: 'the most extreme theological positions held before the Vatican II' was the official teaching on no salvation outside the Church.Hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) were interpreted by the popes and saint as only being hypothetical. There were interpreted as objective exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).Hypothetical cases are just hypothetical, this is Feeneyism. When the liberals at the NCR interpret hypothetical cases as being objective exceptions to EENS we have Cushingism. Cardinal Cushing was there are Vatican Council II and we can see his influence in the text of the Council. Cushingism is irrational. Since there are no hypothetical cases of BOD, BOB and I.I visible or known in 1965-2019 for them to be relevant or objective exceptions to EENS.

So we can re-interpret Vatican Council II. Here comes the uncomfortable part for Winters and the others at NCR.

I repeat , Vatican Council II can be interpreted with Feeneyism( BOD etc are only hypothetical and not literal cases).

So the Council with Feeneyism supports the 'most extreme theological position held before Vatican II ' The Council is Feeneyite.😊

This is unfortunately the point missed by the signatories of the Open Letter. For then they would be neo-Feeneyites since the Council is Feeneyite.They don't have to cite the dogma EENS and the old catechisms. It is all there in Vatican Council II (Feeneyite).

Winters is probably aware of Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and is afraid and and so mentions it often. Even when there is no connection with the subject he is writing on, as above.

A theolgical winter seems looming ahead for him.

-Lionel Andrades