Cushingism today in the Catholic Church is like the Arian heresy of the past. It is widespread. It is heretical yet it is supported by the present two popes.

• rporal
• 
• 
• Posts: 407
• Thanked: 555 times
• Religion: Catholic

Re: Church Militant promoting Fr. Feeney

« Reply #137 on: May 08, 2019, 07:58:27 PM »

Quote from: Counter Revolutionary on May 08, 2019, 06:11:22 PM

It is incredible how dishonest the liberals on this forum are when they give the impression that Fr. Feeney was the first Catholic to teach that Baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation. 

This is so funny it actually made my night. I mean you do realize St. Augustine explicitly taught BOD and Ambrose BOD as well. If you think I'm wrong read Denzinger 388 where Pope Innocent II explains their meaning. 

Lionel: Yes - but only as hypothetical cases.Speculation with good will. 

Not as exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).

Some one who does not exist in our reality cannot be  a practical exception to EENS.

___________________

But since St. John Chrysostum and St. Gregory Nazienzen have been cited let's do it:

St. John Chrysostom:

Do not wonder that I called martyrdom a baptism: indeed there  too  the  Spirit  comes  with  much  abundance,  and  worksthere the remission of sins and a wonderful and astonishing purification of the soul; and as those who are baptized by waters[are washed], so those who suffer martyrdom are washed in their own blood.

Lionel.: Again only as speculation for us human being.The saint could not see someone in Heaven or earth saved without the baptism of water.The baptism of blood was never an exception to EENS.

________________________

LIBERAL!!!!

St. Gregory Nazianzen Orat. 39, In Sancta Lumina, 17; P.G.35, 356.I know also a Fourth Baptism (besides that of Moses, John,and  Jesus)—that  by  Martyrdom  and  blood,  which  also  Christ Himself  underwent;—and  this  one  is  far  more  august  than  all the others, inasmuch as it cannot be defiled by after-stains.

LIBERAL!!!

Took me 3 minutes on Google.

No one agrees with Feeney's view on Trent during or after the Council:

Lionel: Those who interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) as referring to personally known people saved outside the Church, would be irrational. There are not such people in our reality. I call this Cushingism.

Cushingites assumes hypothetical cases of BOD, BOB and I.I are not non hypothetical and objective.

On the other hand, Feeneyites see hypothetical cases of BOD,BOB and I.I as being hypotetical cases only. So they are not exceptions to EENS, the past exclusive ecclesiology of the Catholic Church and an ecumenism of return.

Cushingism today in the Catholic Church is like the Arian heresy of the past. It is widespread. It is heretical yet it is  supported by the present two popes.

Not 1 theologian
Not 1 catechism
Not 1 pope
Not 1 saint
Not 1 seminary

Lionel: Fr.Leonard Feeney was saying that there are no literal cases of the BOD, BOB and I.I.Neither did any pope  state that there are literal cases of the BOD, BOB and I.I known to him which would be an exception to the dogma EENS.So Fr. Leonard Feeney was not the first to maintain  that every one needed the baptism of water and Catholic faith for salvation and there are no literally known exceptions.-Lionel Andrades

The dogma and the saints taught that the baptism of water in the Catholic Church was absolutely necessary for salvation : Fr. Leonard Feeney was not the first

 Counter Revolutionary

• Vizekorporal
• 
• 
• Posts: 149
• Thanked: 158 times
• • 

Re: Church Militant promoting Fr. Feeney

« Reply #136 on: May 08, 2019, 06:11:22 PM »

It is incredible how dishonest the liberals on this forum are when they give the impression that Fr. Feeney was the first Catholic to teach that Baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation. 

St. John Chrysostom taught: “For the Catechumen is a stranger to the Faithful. He has not the same Head, he has not the same Father, he has not the same City, nor Food, nor Raiment, nor Table, nor House, but all are different; all are on earth to the former, to the latter all are in heaven. One has Christ for his King; the other, sin and the devil; the food of one is Christ, of the other, that meat which decays and perishes; one has worms' work for his raiment, the other the Lord of angels; heaven is the city of one, earth of the other...If it should come to pass, (which God forbid!) that through the sudden arrival of death we depart hence uninitiated, though we have ten thousand virtues, our portion will be no other than hell, and the venomous worm, and fire unquenchable, and bonds indissoluble.” (Homily 25 on the Gospel of St. John)

St Gregory Nazianzen taught: “If you were able to judge a man who intends to commit murder solely by his intention and without any act of murder, then you could likewise reckon as baptized one who desired baptism. But, since you cannot do the former, how can you do the latter? If you prefer, we will put it this way: If, in your opinion, desire has equal power with actual baptism, then make the same judgment in regard to glory. You would then be satisfied to desire glory, as though that longing itself were glory. Do you suffer any damage by not attaining the actual glory, as long as you have a desire for it? I cannot see it!”  (Oration on Divine Light, XL, #23)

St. Ambrose taught: “One is the Baptism which the Church administers: the Baptism of water and the Holy Ghost, with which catechumens need to be baptized…Nor does the mystery of regeneration exist at all without water: ‘For unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom.’ Now, even the catechumen believes in the cross of the Lord Jesus, with which he also signs himself; but, unless he be baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, he cannot receive remission of his sins nor the gift of spiritual grace.” (De Mysteriis, The Divine Office)

St. Augustine taught: “I care naught that today of all days you expect to hear something pleasant from me. I must warn you in the words of Holy Scripture: ‘Defer it not from day to day, for his wrath shall come on a sudden.’ God knows that I tremble in my cathedra myself when I hear those words. I must not, I cannot, be silent. I am compelled to preach to you on this matter and to make you fearful, being myself full of fear. How dangerous is every delay! How many rascals are saved by being baptized on their deathbeds? And how many earnest catechumens die unbaptized and are lost forever?” (quoted in Augustine the Bishop by F. Van der Meer)

These kinds of quotes from saints could be multiplied indefinitely, but the reason we "Feeneyites" do not often engage in the quote war is because the main difference between us and our liberal enemies is that we adhere to dogma as the rule of faith and not theologians. Dogma is the rule of faith and this is proven by the definition of a heretic as a baptized person who refuses to believe a dogma of the faith. A heretic is not defined as a baptized person who refuses to believe a particular teaching of certain theologians. "If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater" (1 St. John 5:9). Dogmas are divine testimonies; they are greater than the testimonies of men.

https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=21825.135

Suscipe Domine St. Benedict Center

Traditionalists and liberals go back over centuries and re-interpret the baptism of desire as being personally known people saved outside the Church and not hypothetical and speculative cases

 Non Nobis

• Why are you fearful?
• Mary Garden
• Feldwebel
• 
• 
• Posts: 4428
• Thanked: 3070 times
• Religion: Roman Catholic

Re: Church Militant promoting Fr. Feeney

« Reply #155 on: May 13, 2019, 02:42:14 AM »

Gerard, Kreuzritter,  (This post is in response to one of Kreuzritter's from long ago, but it is pertinent to both of you)

I simply cannot understand how the Council of Trent is not talking precisely about Baptism of Desire in the texts I consider below. I hope you will address my thinking below even though I have not kept in sync with this thread.

Quote from: FOR FUTURE REFERENCE - Key Points in My Understanding  of Baptism of Desire

(This is ONLY here you so you know "where I am coming from". Please DON'T argue yet)

As I understand it, St. Thomas and theologians hold the following:

* They acknowledge: Baptism of Desire IS NOT THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM. Nobody (St. Thomas or theologians) is claiming it is.

* They acknowledge that Baptism of Desire does not impart the Sacramental character. (If a man lives, he must still receive the Sacrament)

* They say: Baptism of Desire is called Baptism because there is a certain unity between it and the Sacrament: both effect justification, and derive their efficacy from Christ's Passion.

* They assert as De Fide: Justification is sufficient for salvation if it is persevered in (or always returned to) until death.  

* They (post-Trent) note as obvious:  The Council of Trent does not use the words "Baptism of Desire". They (and St. Thomas) think the phrase fitting because of the noted unity.

* They believe the desire is the desire of the SACRAMENT, not a desire to be nice, as modern Catholics and the world think. The desire and the time when it is acceptable (e.g. during martyrdom) is judged by God, not man. Baptism of Desire is not an option for man to choose, but God's prerogative to justify a man without the Sacrament.

* They believe that Baptism of Desire supplies the lack of the Sacrament, doing all that is needed for justification, when God has chosen to take this prerogative. It is a substitute that Christ Himself supplies.

* They have read Christ's words "unless a man be born again of water ..."  many times, but  have not found that they disprove  Baptism of Desire.

Please save these points for later discussion. This post has a narrower scope.

They also acknowledge,over the centuries,  that the baptism of desire refers to hypothetical cases only for us human beings. They can only be theoretical and speculative.Hypothetical and theoretical cases in 1965-2019 cannot be practical and objective exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).

This fact is not understood by most of those taking part in this discussion.

The baptism of desire is always hypothetical. This was known in the Church for centuries.However since the pontificate of Pope Pius XII the baptism of desire has been interpreted as an exception to EENS. In other words they refer to personally known people known saved outside the Church. They are not just hypothetical.

Sadly this was also the understanding of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops.

So they follow this Tradition of the Church from some 50 years back. They interpret the baptism of desire as being personally known people saved outside the Church. This is the understanding expressed in the second part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.

THEY THEN GO BACK OVER HISTORY, OVER THE CENTURIES AND RE-INTERPRET REFERENCES TO THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE, AS BEING PERSONALLY KNOWN PEOPLE. SO OVER HISTORY THEY INTERPRET THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE AS NOT BEING HYPOTHETICAL.

Then they criticize Fr. Leonard Feeney who said there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire.

Then the traditionalists like the liberal theologians interpret Vatican Council II  also by assuming hypothetical and theoretical cases are practical and personally known in the present times . So there is this confusion in the Church today.-Lionel Andrades 

The Holy Innocents (as all OT saints) have no connection to baptism as the sacrament was not in place nor was the New Covenant. St. Dismas is potentially the same case, since Jesus had yet to die on the cross - its also very likely that St. Dismas was a baptized disciple

From the forum Suscipe Domine

 Davis Blank - EG

• St. Joseph's Workbench
• Korporal
• 
• Posts: 446
• Thanked: 543 times
• Religion: Roman Catholic

Re: Church Militant promoting Fr. Feeney

« Reply #61 on: April 14, 2019, 11:34:12 PM »

Quote

Well, there is no way they could be saved if one must have a water Baptism to be saved. Because any Salvation after the Sacrament of Baptism or after death would negate water Baptism as an absolute necessity for Salvation.

I do not understand, please elaborate.  To clarify my belief, the Holy Innocents (as all OT saints) have no connection to baptism as the sacrament was not in place nor was the New Covenant.  St. Dismas is potentially the same case, since Jesus had yet to die on the cross - its also very likely that St. Dismas was a baptized disciple given how much he knew of this otherwise random Jew hanging on a cross next to him.

Quote

Saint Xi Guizi
Saint Huailu Zhang
Saint Rhaid of Alexandria
Saint Perpetua
Saint Felicity

As for these martyr saints (although I could not find anything on Saint Rhaid, is that a typo?) - is there an infallible decree that these people died without water baptism?  If not, then here is what we do know:

1) they were martyred

2) we do not have record of water baptism

3) they are in Heaven

From this how does it follow that they absolutely never received water baptism?  They could have been baptized by friends or by angels, who knows.  Besides, that they are described as catechumen does not mean that they were not already water baptized.  After an adult is baptized he still continues on in catechetical class as a catechumenate.

What we do know is the clear text of Scripture, and also our Creeds.

"Confíteor unum baptísma in remissiónem peccatórum."

And so I believe it unfounded to throw clear text out the window for theological speculation built upon speculation built upon more speculation.  Instead I propose the prudent thing to do is confess one baptism (water) and note that there are subsets of baptism, all being the same water baptism.  Some obvious subsets are infant baptism and adult baptism.  Less common ones are water baptisms done in emergency by the laity, or baptisms done by heretics.  Other subsets would be blood and desire, in which God miraculously water baptizes before the faithful depart to their reward in Heaven.  All the same baptism, all are salvific, all involve water.  Its merely that in the latter two subsets it is unclear to our visible eyes that these saints were ever water baptized.

I still have not heard a response from Mr. Philip G. or your good self as to why this is unacceptable.

Edit:

I think Innocent Smith's comment on baptism of blood / desire being a misuse of language is also worth considering.
https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=21825.60

Brazil Supreme Court draws fire for silencing critics

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-politics-court/brazil-supreme-court-draws-fire-for-silencing-critics-idUSKCN1RS29K

Alphonse Ratisbonne wanted to know when he could receive baptism, without which he would not know how to live..."

Ratisbonne, Baptism

The Miraculous Conversion of Alphonse Ratisbonne

Hello MHFM,

After re-reading the article on the conversion of Fr. Ratisbonne, it looks like his conversion would refute baptism of desire. Fr. Ratisbonne was given by Our Lady the gift of Infused Knowledge about the Catholic faith.

On page 19 of the testimony of baron de Bussière about Fr. Ratisbonne, who helped his conversion: "Ratisbonne wants to know when he can receive baptism, without which he would not know how to live..."

Fr. Ratisbonne himself said on p. 29 in his own relation about what he learned at the very moment the blessed Mother graced him with the gift: "Alas! So many men... are wrapped in horrible darkness;... and my family, my fiancee, my poor sisters!!!!... It is to you, whom I thought of, whom I love that I gave my first prayers!... the Savior of the world, whose Blood has wiped away the original sin! Oh, how the mark of this stain is hideous! It renders completely unrecognizable the creature which was created in the image of God!... I was asked how I learned those truths because I never opened any religious book..."

Out of all of the knowledge, why was this particularly the one given by Our Lady, and one especially highlighted by the Fr., if it is not the necessity of the baptism itself!  Later on, when his baptism was to be delayed, he insisted: "What?! The Jews who heard the apostles' preaching were immediately baptized, and you want to delay mine, after I heard the Queen of Apostles!"

I find that interesting. Thank you for putting the story online!

K.

 https://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/miraculous-conversion-of-alphonse-ratisbonne/

https://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/E-Exchanges.php?utm_source=WPc&utm_medium=Exchanges-grey&utm_campaign=WP

Donald Trump of India wins in elections

ROME - In the United States, political chatter right now is dominated by the Democratic contest to take on President Donald Trump in 2020, while those of us living in Europe are focused on elections for the next European Parliament that wrap up today and the extent to which anti-immigrant populists may add to their heft on the Old Continent.

One can make a good case, however, that the most important political news of the past week didn’t come anywhere in the West but literally half a world away in India, where Prime Minister Narendra Modi obliterated his opposition and swept to reelection in the world’s largest democracy.

Modi rode a wave of nationalism sparked by a mid-February suicide bombing in which Pakistani militants killed 40 Indian security personnel, followed by mutual airstrikes by each country in the other’s territory. The BJP, along with allied parties, won 353 seats in parliament, paving the way for Modi to become the first prime minister in decades to return to government with an even stronger majority after completing his entire tenure in office.

That’s a noteworthy development for all sorts of reasons, but seen through a Christian lens it raises pressing questions about the future for religious minorities in one of the world’s emerging superpowers.

Modi’s background is as a leader in the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, or RSS, a right-wing Hindu nationalist group, and later as a rising star in the Bharatiya Janata Party, or BJP, which is the RSS’s political wing. In effect, Modi is the Donald Trump of India - he appeals to an “India for the Indians” mentality, in part by identifying what it means to be Indian with Hinduism.

By extension, minority groups are styled as, to greater and lesser extents, “un-Indian,” tolerated in good moments and actively persecuted in bad ones.

Today, India’s fault lines are increasingly defined by a force for which the country has invented a new bit of political argot: “saffronization.” Saffron is the color of the robes worn by Hindu sages, so “saffronization” has been coined to mean a drive to foster Hindu values and practices, even to give them the force of law, resulting in what critics see as virtually a Hindu version of Islamic sharia.

While all minorities are thus potentially at risk in the wake of Modi’s triumph, I’ll focus here on what it means for the country’s small Christian community, which has already faced severe threats.

India’s northeastern state of Orissa, in the region of Kandhamal, was the scene of the most violent anti-Christian pogrom of the early 21^st century. In 2008, a series of riots ended with as many as 500 Christians killed, many hacked to death by machete-wielding Hindu radicals, and thousands more injured and at least 50,000 left homeless.

Continued  

https://cruxnow.com/news-analysis/2019/05/26/indias-political-earthquake-could-jeopardize-christian-minority/

The new role of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith( CDF) will be to uphold the interpretation of Vatican Council II and all magisterial documents with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism. So heresy will continue to be the norm.

VATICAN |  MAY. 29, 2019

Draft of Vatican’s New Curial Constitution Would Reform Lines of Authority

VATICAN CITY — According to a draft of a new constitution for the Roman Curia, almost all Vatican departments will become known as “dicasteries,” and the newly named Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith will shift from being the second- to the third-most important Vatican department.

The draft places new and significant emphasis on mission and charitable works as the Vatican’s key duties. It also reveals a shift toward greater authority for episcopal conferences, one which modifies the relationship between Curial officials, bishops and the Pope as part of a push toward decentralization.

The Roman Curia, based on the “ecclesiology of Vatican II,” exercises its service to the bishops “in respect to collegiality, synodality and subsidiarity due to the successors of the apostles,” the draft states...

Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith

The dicastery will continue many of the same roles it had before to “promote and protect the integrity of Catholic doctrine on faith and morals,” but with some changes.

Article 68.1 states that the dicastery is to “encourage and support the study and reflection on the understanding of the faith and on the development of theology in different cultures, in the life of challenges of the signs of the times, in such a way as provide an answer to the questions that arise from the progress of science and the evolution of civilizations.”

The following article (69.1) says the dicastery will work “in close contact” with bishops and bishops’ conferences “who have the first responsibility in the particular Churches and are also subjects of concrete attributions, also including some authentic doctrinal authority.”

Such cooperation between the dicastery and the bishops “applies above all to the granting of permission to teach in the Church, where the dicastery will be active in the sense of subsidiarity.”

On safeguarding the truth, the text says the dicastery “examines writings and opinions that appear contrary to the right faith or dangerous; seeks dialogue with their authors, and presents appropriate remedies to be provided.” Article 70 (A) says it must “works to ensure that dangerous errors and doctrines, which may have been spread among the Christian people, are not spread without adequate refutation.”(Emphasis added)

The new role of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith( CDF) will be to uphold the interpretation of Vatican Council II and all magisterial documents with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism. So heresy will continue to be the norm.

Those Catholics who object to this heresy will not be given permission to teach theology.The dicastery will examine their writings and opinions if they appear contrary to the right faith'.

The right faith for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) last March 1 was to interpret Lumen Gentium 8 as referring to known non Catholics saved outside the Church. So they were postulated as being exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. 

Then in March 2016 Pope Benedict confirmed that extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century, for him. Since there was 'a development' with Vatican Council II,interpreted by him with Cushingism. This is the right faith, also, for Pope Francis, even if it was heretical for the Magisterium in the 16th century.

So presently Dr. John Rao, Prof. Joseph Shaw, Thomas Pink,Phil Lawler, Anthony Esolen and John Lamont and so many other Catholics are given permission to teach philosophy and theology since they interpret Vatican Council II like Pope Benedict and Pope Francis.

Since the Sacraments of the Church are not necessary in general for salvation for the present two popes, the dicastery is to “encourage and support the study and reflection on the understanding of the faith and on the development of theology in different cultures', in the Amazon Jesus will be proclaimed without the moral and faith teachings of the Catholic Church.

Similarly the new single international service, Charis – Catholic Charismatic Renewal International Service will be inaugurated officially on 9th June next, the Solemnity of Pentecost. On the same day, ICCRS and Catholic Fraternity will cease to exist. Charis, established at the request of Pope Francis, will mark a new stage in the Catholic charismatic Renewal as a current of grace in the heart of the Church.It will be open to other Christian communities too.-Lionel Andrades

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/draft-of-vaticans-new-curial-constitution-would-reform-lines-of-authority

http://www.laityfamilylife.va/content/laityfamilylife/en/news/2019/entra-in-azione-charis--il-servizio-unico-internazionale-al-rinn.html

JUNE 3, 2019

A false concept of mission and salvation is expected to be announced this June 29th, the feast of St. Peter and St. Paul.It will be heretical. All Catholics will have to follow it or be legally declared non Catholic

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/06/a-false-concept-of-mission-and.html

JUNE 5, 2019

Fr. Gabriele Rossi, who has a doctorate in Canon Law has signed the Open Letter to the Bishops accusing Pope Francis of heresy 

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/06/fr-gabriele-rossi-who-has-doctorate-in.html

Bishop Paprocki bars pro-abortion Illinois lawmakers from Holy Communion

Springfield, Ill., Jun 6, 2019 / 04:05 am (CNA).- The Bishop of Springfield, Illinois, has decreed that state legislative leaders may not be admitted to Holy Communion within his diocese, because of their work to pass the state Reproductive Health Act. The bishop also directed the Catholic legislators who have voted for legislation promoting abortion should not present themselves to recieve Holy Communiion until they have first gone to confession.

“In accord with canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law...Illinois Senate President John Cullerton and Speaker of the House Michael J. Madigan, who facilitated the passage of the Act Concerning Abortion of 2017 (House Bill 40) as well as the Reproductive Health Act of 2019 (Senate Bill 25), are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in the Diocese of Springfield in Illinois because they have obstinately persisted in promoting the abominable crime and very grave sin of abortion as evidenced by the influence they exerted in their leadership roles and their repeated votes and obdurate public support for abortion rights over an extended period of time,” Bishop Thomas Paprocki wrote in a June 2 decree.

“These persons may be readmitted to Holy Communion only after they have truly repented these grave sins and furthermore have made suitable reparation for damages and scandal, or at least have seriously promised to do so, as determined in my judgment or in the judgment of their diocesan bishop in consultation with me or my successor,” the bishop added.

Illinois’ Reproductive Health Act was passed by the state’s House and Senate just days ago, and observers credited the advocacy of Cullerton and Madigan with helping to secure passage. It is expected to be signed by Illinois’ Gov. J.B. Pritzker.

The bill declares abortion to be a “fundamental right” in the state and would remove regulations on abortion clinics and doctors.

Among the provisions that the bill would remove are regulations for abortion clinics, required waiting periods to obtain an abortion, and a ban on partial-birth abortion. In addition, it would lift criminal penalties for performing abortions and would prevent any further state regulation of abortion.

The legislation would require all private health insurance plans to cover elective abortions, and eliminate reporting requirements as well as regulations requiring the investigation of maternal deaths due to abortion.

Paprocki’s decree formally instructs priests and deacons in the Diocese of Springfield to refrain from administering the sacrament of the Eucharist to Cullerton and Madigan, both Catholics. The bishop also instructed other Catholic lawmakers not to approach Holy Communion, but did prohibit priests from administering the sacrament to them.

“I declare that Catholic legislators of the Illinois General Assembly who have cooperated in evil and committed grave sin by voting for any legislation that promotes abortion are not to present themselves to receive Holy Communion without first being reconciled to Christ and the Church in accord with canon 916 of the Code of Canon Law,” Paprocki wrote.

In a statement issued June 6, the bishop said that “in issuing this decree, I anticipate that some will point out the Church’s own failings with regard to the abuse of children.”

Continued

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/bishop-paprocki-bars-pro-abortion-illinois-lawmakers-from-holy-communion-97103

The present two popes and the cardinals and bishops are in heresy for accepting Vatican Council II( Cushingite) and not Vatican Council II( Feeneyite). There is no denial from the Vatican Press Office.

The present two popes and the cardinals and bishops are in heresy for accepting Vatican Council II( Cushingite) and not Vatican Council II( Feeneyite). There is no denial from the Vatican Press Office.

So it is false for cardinals to cite Vatican Council II, to justify Pope Francis and Pope Benedict heresy.Since the popes refer to Vatican Council II (Cushingite), which is irrational, non traditional and heretical.They are both automatically excommunicated. According to Pope John Paul's Veritatis Splendor  the lesser of two evils is still evil

I have mentioned this many times before and no one disagrees with me.For political reasons they continue with the heresy.

They do not want to accept Vatican Council II( Feeneyite) since Vatican Council II(Feeneyite) would indicate that the members and religious leaders of other religions are oriented to Hell.They have died  without faith and baptism(AG 7).While LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are only hypothetical cases  and so are not exceptions to AG 7.

It also means that LG 8 etc are not exceptions to the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).So Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston was correct and the Holy Office 1949 was wrong. 

It is also difficult for the traditionalists to accept that the baptism of desire(BOD) etc is always hypothetical for us human beings. This is a given.So BOD never ever was an exception to Feeneyite EENS.

The Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) has interpreted LG 16( invincible ignorance), LG 8(elements of sanctification and truth),LG 14( case of the unknown catechumen) as being exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.These are not hypothetical cases for them in 1965-2019.Now for political reasons, and   self interest the SSPX will not proclaim the Catholic faith and affirm Feeneyite EENS.

Their condition has deteriorated, it is so bad, that they could not state that the Open Letter to the Bishops was correct and Pope Francis had committed mortal sins of faith and morals.Over the years,they made it appear that doctrine was important for them  and they wanted doctrinal talks   on Vatican Council II, without making the distinction between Vatican Council II(Cushingite) and Vatican Council II(Feeneyite).

Fr. Jean Marie Gleize  of the SSPX does not want to say in public that according to Vatican Council II(Feeneyite),Mohammad is lost forever.Since he died without faith and baptism(AG 7), he did not enter the Church even though he knew about it (LG 14) and LG 8, LG 16 etc are not exceptions to AG 7.He did not  want to say that Vatican Council II is Feeneyite.

When Michael Voris went to the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire, he was affirming traditional Feeneyite doctrine. It was not the common Cushingite heretical version of today.No cardinal, bishop or traditionalist commented,neither did the SSPX.Since they interpret EENS and Vatican Council II with Cushingism, just like the liberals and the Masons.

Similarly none of them commented when the Secretaries of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) heretically interpreted Vatican Council II and EENS with Cushingism.It is public on the diocese of Manchester website.This is a manifest mortals sin of faith.
 

Since the cardinals, bishops and traditionalists, for political reasons,also interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with Cushingism, as does Archbishops Morandi and Di Noia at the CDF, they have ignored this heresy of the CDF Secretaries.

They too assume unknown non Catholics referenced in LG 16, CCC 847-848 (invincible ignorance) are exceptions to EENS.So it cannot be said,for them, that in Heaven there are only Catholics.

When a pope assumes unknown cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3,NA 2, GS 22 etc are known and objective examples of salvation in 2019 and so are practical exceptions to 16th century  EENS, it is irrational-but it is also heresy.The pope who supports heresy is a heretic.

The popes who call for mission-along with Lutherans and Methodists and who do not affirm the dogma EENS, are heretics. They rejects the Athanasius Creed, which says outside the Church there is no salvation.This is a mortal sin of faith.He also changes the meaning of the Nicene and Apostles Creed and re-interprets Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) as a rupture with the Creeds, Catechisms and EENS.This is first class heresy on faith ( salvation) according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II.

Vatican Council II( Feeneyite) is telling us that Muslims and Lutherans do not have Catholic faith,needed to avoid Hell.Similarly members of the Jewish Left are outside the Church. But in the present general apostasy predicted by Our Lady at Fatima, even the traditionalists do not want to affirm Vatican Council II (Feeneyite).They are comfortable with the Council interpreted with Cushingism.
 

Sedevacantis Bishop Donald Sanborn who has property in Florida will not affirm Vatican Council II(Feeneyite).

Similarly journalists with Vatican Insider, the Italian media, Commonweal, National Catholic Reporter, National Catholic Register and the The Tablet will choose not to affirm Vatican Council II( Feeneyite).They choose to interpret all magisterial document's with Cushingism.This is heresy and it is public.-Lionel Andrades 

June 2, 2019

  

 

 

Individual Catholics need to determine when something is magisterial and when it is not.The useful help is Sacred Tradition.If a pope opposes the past popes and rejects Tradition on de fide teachings he is in heresy and we are not obliged to follow him on that particular issue 

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/06/individual-catholic-need-to-determine.html

 

June 3, 2019

A false concept of mission and salvation is expected to be announced this June 29th, the feast of St. Peter and St. Paul.It will be heretical. All Catholics will have to follow it or be legally declared non Catholic

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/06/a-false-concept-of-mission-and.html

June 5, 2019

Fr. Gabriele Rossi, who has a doctorate in Canon Law has signed the Open Letter to the Bishops accusing Pope Francis of heresy 

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/06/fr-gabriele-rossi-who-has-doctorate-in.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

David Lynn OFFICIAL Press release

The REAL reason why David Lynn was arrested

  

 https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/police-arrest-and-ban-preacher-from-toronto-gay-district-after-lgbt-crowd-mobs-him