Saturday, October 31, 2020

Feeneyite network needed to protect traditionalist and conservative Catholic religious

 Michael Matt has mentioned the need for a network.

The network however would have to be Feeneyite to take up the case of traditionalist priests and religious communities, by calling attention to important points.

If Cushingites cite Tradition the liberal bishops will simply call attention to Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and so reject any dialogue.

So it is important to interpret Magisterial documents without the false premise.

DIOCESE OF COMACCHIO-FERRARA, ITALY



Archbishop Giancarlo Perego,Archbishop of Comacchio-Ferrara,Italy and Mons.Daniele Libanori, Auxiliary Bishop of Rome, were involved in the case of the suppression of a religious community there.They transferred  the traditionalist priests.They  could clarify the Church's doctrinal and theological position, the standard set for those young priests who were transferred.

1.They could be asked if the priests transferred needed  to interpret Vatican Council II with LG 8,LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as referring to explicit or implicit cases, objective or subjective cases, visible or invisible people in the present times ?

2.If the two bishops accept LG 8, etc as referring to invisible, subjective and implicit cases then do they accept that LG 8 etc in Vatican Council II, do not contradict the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors and exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.Do they accept them ?

3.Are the bishops supporting Tradition(exclusive salvation) and a rational interpretation of Vatican Council II ?

FR.VAUGHN TRECO



Bishop Stephen Brady,  a member of the USCCB Doctrinal Committee intepreted Vatican Council II with the false premise and inference.He then excommunicated Fr. Vaughn Treco, since he rejected  Vatican Council II with the error.

The three questions above could help clarify doctrine and theology among Bishop Brady and Fr. Vaugn Treco.


FISCHER MORE COLLEGE



Bishop Michael F. Olson, Bishop of Fort Worth, did not interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with magisterial documents, which support the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.Instead he placed restrictions on the Fischer More College, allowing it to collapse.There were many Catholic students enrolled there.He wanted them all to accept Vatican Council II by confusing what is invisible as being visible and so creating a false break with Tradition.
The public issue was Vatican Council II. An injustice was done by the bishop and the CDF, to the faculty and students of the college.

Bishop Michael Olson and the FSSP priests could be asked the three questions. Do they accept Vatican Council II and intepret it rationally ?


BISHOP PETER LIBASCI'S RESTRICTIONS ON SBC



Similarly Bishop Peter Anthony Libasci could be asked to interpret Vatican Council II rationally and affirm EENS like the St. Benedict Center, Still River, MA. 
Restrictions on the traditionalists at the St. Benedict Center, Richmond, N.H in the Diocese of Manchester, must be removed.Since the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in Manchester would be willing to affirm Vatican Council II without the false premise.It would not be in conflict with Feeneyite EENS.

ARCHBISHOP CORRADO LOREFICE AND FR. MINUTELLA

The Archbishop of Palermo, Italy refuses to respond to this issue. However with a network he could be asked to clarify if the priests in his diocese could affirm  Vatican Council II rationally and also Tradition ( EENS etc).
He is presently intepreting Vatican Council II and EENS irrationally and no one is questioning it.He is a Cushingite on Vatican Council II and EENS like the Lefebrists.
Fr.Alexander Minutella is also a Cushingite.
A Feeneyite network is  needed to protect traditionalist and conservative Catholic religious.
-Lionel Andrades

https://twitter.com/vaughntreco?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor


________________


JUNE 28, 2020

Bishop-members of the USCCB Committee on Doctrine interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise and have penalised clergy(Fr.Vaughn Treco) and lay Catholics(Fischer More College faculty) for not doing the same.They now have approved the new Directory on Catechesis.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/06/bishop-members-of-usccb-committe-on.html


JUNE 29, 2020


The popes from Pius XII to Francis have made an official mistake and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith does not issue a formal apology: for 19 years false censures maintained

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/06/the-popes-from-pius-xii-to-francis-have.html


JUNE 28, 2020

Archbishop Viganò to Phil Lawler: Council Fathers “Were the Object ...

The Magisterium cannot make a mistake but the popes can : Vigano and Lawler follow the error of the popes since Pius XII


JUNE 26, 2020


DA investigating allegation against former Harrisburg Bishop Kevin ...

Bishop Kevin Rhoades uses the false premise to interpret Vatican Council II: UCCB Notification on Fr. Peter C.Phan limited

_____________

What is St. Peter and Paul's Day? 
Today is the Feast of St.Peter and St. Paul and at Mass in Italian this evening the priest and the congregation recited the Profession of Faith.It was meaningless since the priest, the religious community and the lay people present,  interpret Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents with a false premise while I do not. So our conclusions are different.
Their concept of catechesis is different from mine.
Their concept of mission is different from mine.
Remembering St. Peter and St. Paul In Scripture On Their Feast Day
There is a parallel Church. There are those who are faithful to the past Magisterium like me and there is the rest of them, in a parallel Church, created with a  false premise.The false premise is used to interpret Vatican Council II, for example, to bring out a hermeneutic of rupture with the past Magisterium on esclusive salvation. They call this magisterial.When the popes since Pius XII use a false premise to interpret EENS etc the liberals and traditionalists call it magisterial.
 But it is not magisterial since the Holy Spirit cannot make an objective mistake. It is the mistake of the liberals and traditionalists, in a human mistake. Both groups use the same false premise to accomodate a parallel Church in 2020.It is the mistake of the popes not in a magisterial state.
June 29: The Feast of *Saint Peter and Paul*
If they did not use the false premise , then there would be no liberalism,at least. There would be no theology; no new theology to accomodate the liberals and the Masons. There would also not be the present-type of traditionalists who interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with the past and then blame the Council.Without the false premise Vatican Council II would be in harmony with the past ecclesiology of the Church. All would simply be Catholic.
So the traditionalists would no more be called schismatic for rejecting Vatican Council II interpreted with the false premise.The Council would be Feeneyite and traditional.
The traditionalists  would be affirming Vatican Council  and the Creeds and Catechism in harmony with exclusive salvation in the Church. This would leave the liberals holding on to an obsolete version of Vatican Council II and still being in schism with the popes over the centuries, on outside the Church there is no salvation.It would be a different Vatican Council II and it would be trouble for them.Now they have it good.
The traditionalists do not realize this. This does not 'sink in'.
So like the bishops of the USCCB Doctrinal Committee even Archbishop Vigano and Bishop Schneider use the false premise to interpret Vatican Council II. So of course there has to be a rupture with Tradition.
So why doesn't Bishop Schneider avoid the false premise when he reads Vatican Council II ? 
He does not do so for the same reason as the liberal bishops of the USCCB. He would be affirming Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). He would be saying that Fr. Leonard Feeney was correct and the CDF(Holy Office) was wrong.He would be saying that the liberals and traditionalists( including Archbishop' Lefebvre) were wrong these 55-plus years.He would draw persecution.
This would be isolation from the Lefebvrists who support him and a break with main line Church which tolerates him as a bishop.It would also put him  at odds with the Jewish Left. 
So they all continue to interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise and inference to create a non traditional conclusion which would be a rupture with St. Peter and the Apostles teaching on there being exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.There is a rupture with the Church Fathers who did not interpret the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance as being an exception to exclusive salvation in Jesus in the Catholic Church.
With the false premise they have brought apostasy in the Church. Since the Creeds,Catechisms and Vatican Council II have been changed. Other related doctrine have also been changed.
Our Lady at some of her apparitions predicted an apostasy in the Church.
Even those Catholics who promote the Fatima message do not want to interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise since they want to protect their blog, website, teaching job or other worldly interest.
They all celebrate the feast day of St. Peter and St.Paul creating division in the Church and bringing in a new revelation which also happens to be politically correct with the Left. -Lionel Andrades

JUNE 29, 2020
Image result for Bishop Michael F. Olson PhotoImage result for Fr. Nicholas Gruner Photo
USCCB Doctrinal Committee wants SBC to interpret Vatican Council II with hypothetical cases being considered practical exceptions to EENS
JUNE 29, 2020
Archbishop Viganò to Phil Lawler: Council Fathers “Were the Object ...Archbishop Carlo Vigano and Phil Lawler must stop talking in vague and general terms about Vatican Council II being a rupture with Tradition and instead they should specify how the false premise creates the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/06/archbishop-carlo-vigano-and-phil-lawler.html
JUNE 29, 2020
Bishop Lopes' Excommunication of Fr. Vaughn Treco is Deceptive ... Catholic religious and laity need to formally challenge the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Doctrinal Committee on its bad decisions with reference to Vatican Council II.
JUNE 29, 2020
Wikipedia needs to correct their ideological report on Fr. Leonard Feeney.
 Canonical recognition for those who use the false premise : Brother Thomas Augustine MICM and St. Benedict Center , Still River approved https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/06/canonical-recognition-for-those-who-use.html

_________________


 OCTOBER 31, 2020

Mons. Daniele Libanori s.j, Auxiliary Bishop of Rome at the Rome Vicariate, went to Commacchio-Ferrara, Italy where the religious community was suppressed. The traditionalist priests were then transferred.He needs to inform the priests who are transferred that they can interpret Vatican Council II with LG 8, LG 16, UR 3 etc as not being objective exceptions to Tradition ( Athanasius Creed, Syllabus of Errors etc). In this way he would be supporting Tradition like a traditionalist and also the rational interpretation of EENS unlike the other Auxiliary Bishops at the Vicariate. This would indicate that there are no doctrinal and theological divisions in the Church between the Jesuits and the traditionalists. Since both would affirm Tradition and Vatican Council II. There would no more be a development of doctrine based upon a false premise

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/10/mons-daniele-libanori-sj-auxiliary.html



Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)