Catechisms cannot be interpreted with Feeneyism or Cushingism and the conclusions are different

     

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

12. In your view, which traditional catechism is the best?

How should one evaluate a catechism - by its breadth? Brevity? Endurance? Suitability for a given audience? The level of magisterial authority involved in its publication? Inclusion of examples, anecdotes, and other teaching aids? We may work toward a kind of "rating" for each catechism in the future, but at present we can at least heartily recommend the Catechism of the Council of Trent, which remains the most authoritative catechism in print: the work of an Ecumenical Council, composed by learned and holy bishops directly overseen by St. Charles Borromeo, promulgated with papal authority, repeatedly required and endorsed by centuries of subsequent synods and popes, and declared "far removed from every danger of error" by Pope Clement XIII in 1761.   https://www.tradivox.com/faq

Lionel:

In the past there was the website Whispers of Restoration which made available many old Catechisms and the confusion remained.Since the organisers of that website  did not want to address the issue of Feeneyism and Cushingism in the interpretation of the Catechisms.

Similarly the Catechism of the Council of Trent can be interpreted with Feeneyism or the common Cushingism and the conclusion would be different.The Cushingites would claim they are magisterial and the Feeneyites would point out to the past popes over the centuries and make the same claim.

1.For example the Catechism of the Council of Trent refers to 'the desire thereof' .It is commonly referred to today as the baptism of desire.

For Cushingites 'the desire thereof' refers to an exception to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). For Cardinal Ratzinger and Bishop Fellay the baptism of desire (LG 14) is an exception to Feeneyite EENS. 

For Feeneyites 'the desire theoreof' is not an exception to the strict interpretation of EENS. Since the baptism of desire is a hypothetical case, always. It never ever was an exception to 16th century EENS.

So it is the same Catechism of the Council of Trent  but there are two different interpretations.For the Feeneyites this Catechism affirms the strict interpretation of EENS with no known exceptions  and for the Cushingites this Catechism affirms  EENS but with exceptions and they consider this traditional. Since when the popes and saints referred to the baptism of desire, it was interpreted as known and visible non Catholics saved outside the Church. So with a Cushingite perspective they review Tradition.
However for a Feeneyite, Mystici Corporis and Quanta Cura were Feeneyite.

2.The Catechism of Pope Pius X refers to being saved in invincible ignorance and it also supports the strict and traditional interpretation of EENS in 24 Q and 27 Q.

For a Cushingite, invincible ignorance would be an exception to 24 Q and 27 Q .So there would be known exceptions to the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.An exception has to be seen and known for it to be an exception. A person who does not exist in our reality cannot be an exception to all needing to enter the Church for salvation.

For a Feeneyite like me, invincible ignorance would always refer to a hypothetical case and so it could not be an objective exception to EENS in 1965-2020.

3.The old Catechisms were Feeneyite but the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) was Cushingite for its authors.However I can interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church with Feeneyism and it would be in harmony with the pre-1920 Catechisms of the Catholic Church on EENS, ecumenism etc.Again, we are looking at the same Catechism but our interpretation is determined by the premise we use.

We cannot go back to the past until this issue of Feeneyism and Cushingism is resolved.Since if our theology is different in the Church, the doctrines will also be different.

The new theology of Rahner and Ratzinger is based upon Cushingism. The old theology did not use the false premise of the Cushingites.

4.The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and Vatican Council II are Cushingite but the old Catechisms are Feeneyite.So for the traditionalists, most of them, Vatican Council II would be a rupture with the theology of the old catechisms.

Since Vatican Council II is Feeneyite for me it would be in harmony with the theology of the old Catechisms and the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1994) interpreted without the false premise, inference and conclusion i.e without Cushingism.-Lionel Andrades


FROM THE RIGHT HAND BAR. CLICK TO ACCESS

• Whispers of Restoration (10)
• Whispers of Restoration(WR) (2)