Peter Kwasniewki and Brian McCall still interpret Magisterial documents with a false premise and this is a dis-service to the websites Whispers of Restoration and Catholic Family News. - Lionel Andrades
JUNE 29, 2018
Catholic Family News uses Cushingism which is heretical ,irrational and non traditional. It is supported by the liberals, the Vatican and the Left and is a rupture with the past Magisterium of the Catholic Church
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 4, 2018
Repost Catholic Family News uses wrong premise : mistake of John Vennari with Cushingite, New Theology
AUGUST 22, 2012
CATHOLIC FAMILY NEWS USES WRONG PREMISE
Note on Dominus Jesus
TUESDAY, MARCH 17, 2015
John Vennari assumes being saved in invincble ignorance is an exception to the dogma
Every exception to all needing the baptism of water for salvation has to happen today.Otherwise it will not be an exception today.
-Lionel Andrades
CATHOLIC FAMILY NEWS USES WRONG PREMISE
SUNDAY, AUGUST 16, 2020
John Vennari did not know that Vatican Council II could be interpreted without the false premise and then there would be no rupture with Tradition. Also Fr. Nicholas Gruner, Christopher Ferrara and Roberto dei Mattei did not know.Now that the editor of Catholic Family News knows about it he is not going to affirm the Council rationally without the false premise, since Vennari did not do so.
John Vennari did not know that Vatican Council II could be interpreted without the false premise and then there would be no rupture with Tradition. Also Fr. Nicholas Gruner, Christopher Ferrara and Roberto dei Mattei did not know.Now that the editor of Catholic Family News knows about it he is not going to affirm the Council rationally without the false premise, since Vennari did not do so. -Lionel Andrades
______________________
OCTOBER 22, 2020
Like the website Whispers of Restoration the Voice of the Family mentions the Baltimore Catechism without differentiating between Cushingism and Feeneyism.They also interpret all the Catechisms with Cushingism.So they maintain the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition
Like the website Whispers of Restoration the Voice of the Family mentions the Baltimore Catechism without differentiating between Cushingism and Feeneyism.They also interpret all the Catechisms with Cushingism.So they maintain the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.
For me there is no rupture with the Athanasius Creed. When the Baltimore Catechism mentions the Baptism of Desire it does not contradict the Athanasius Creed. For me EENS ha no objective exceptions . This I call Feeneyism.-Lionel Andrades
JANUARY 3, 2019
Peter Kwasniewski and Whispers of Restoration do not know how to handle it : they violate the Principle of Non Contradiction and are in a swamp
The apologists at the website Whispers of Restoration have not responded to so many posts on this blog and are now thinking of having a paid-employee. They will produce more of the same stuff as the Catholics who interpret magisterial documents with an irrational premise and inference and do not deny it.
So they actually interpret the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation) as a rupture with EENS.They wrongly assume that the baptism of desire(BOD),baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) are objective exceptions to EENS and the Catechism of Pope Pius X.
NEW THEOLOGY OF THE TRADITIONALISTS
AQUINAS CONTRADICTS HIMSELF FOR WR AND KWASNIEWSKI
NO RESTORATION WITH HERESY AND CONFUSION
AUGUST 9, 2018
Traditional Catechisms on Whispers of Restoration support the old exclusivist ecclesiology but the team at the website interpret these catechisms as a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors,EENS and the rest of Traditionhttps://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/08/traditional-catechisms-on-website.html
THURSDAY, AUGUST 9, 2018
Repost : No Restoration with Cushingism.Not possible : There is not going to be a Restoration with Cushingism.Mattei and Ferrara are part of the problem. So is Whispers of Restoration and 1Peter5
AUGUST 5, 2018
There is not going to be a Restoration with Cushingism.Mattei and Ferrara are part of the problem. So is Whispers of Restoration and 1Peter5
Today's 'traditionalists' are not really traditional especially the Lefebvrist school.Since they are in a rupture with the old ecclesiology of the Church which was Feeneyite and is expressed in the traditional Catechisms available on the website Whispers of Restoration.
FR.CEKADA POLITICALLY CORRECT
I think of Fr. Anthony Cekada who now knows that there are no known cases of BOD, BOB and I.I in the present times and there were none in the past.But he keeps repeating his old line on 'Feeneyism',since it is politically correct.He does not have it in him to apologize and correct himself and others on this issue.
It was the same at the recent Lepanto FoundationConference in Rome when the New Theology was being criticized by the speakers, who in reality use the New Theology, Cushingism, to interpret Vatican Council II, the Catechisms and EENS.Roberto dei Mattei and John Lamont like Fr. Anthony Cekada remain politically correct with the Left.All is well. It is as if they use the LOHO mistake to stay alive.
UR 3 refers to a hypothetical and theoretical cases for us and not someone practically seen in Heaven, saved as a Protestant in his religion.What's so difficult to understand about this?
He will continue to interpret UR 3 as being a non Catholic who has been saved outside the Church and is known personally to him. So of course it becomes a rupture with the dogma EENS.
WEDNESDAY, JULY 25, 2018
If I had created this website I would not have to hide my name.Since I affirm Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) which is not a rupture with the old catechisms.For me there is no change in ecclesiology in the Church from 1555 to 2018.
Interestingly the team which has created the website Whispers of Restoration have kept their names hidden.Probably because the catechisms since 1555 with traditional Feeneyite theology would be a rupture with Vatican Council II.The present two popes interpret the Council with Cushingism.
JULY 25, 2018
JULY 25, 2018
JULY 24, 2018
JULY 23, 2018
JULY 23, 2018
Pope John Paul II prohibited a theology of religions and it is being taught at the Angelicum University
JULY 23, 2018
Voice of the Family Conference speaker recommends the New Theology
JUNE 11, 2021
Vatican Council II is dogmatic
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE LIONEL ANDRADES INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
1.What's so special about the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II ?
It is the listing of the rational and irrational premise, inference and conclusion. It identifies two different premises with two different conclusions. So the rational premise produces a traditional conclusion and the Vatican Council II is in harmony with Tradition. It has a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition even though Rahner, Congar, Rarzinger and Cushing were present at the Council in 1965.
Collegiality, ecumenism and religious liberty are no more an issue for the conservatives , when Vatican Council II is traditional.
Lumen Gentium 8, Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16 ecc. oin Vatican Council II refer to only physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.
12.Vatican Council II is dogmatic ?
Yes. Pope Paul VI and the liberals call Vatican Council II "pastoral" and not dogmatic. Since they do not want to affirm the rigorous interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).
Ad Gentes 7 (all need faith and baptism for salvation) supports the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) while the hypothetical cases mentioned in LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NS 2, GS 22 etc. cannot be objective exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 in 1965-2021. So there is nothing in the text of the Council that contradicts 16th century EENS or the Athanasius Creed or the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX on there being exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
The Second Vatican Council affirms the dogma EENS with Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 .While the Council does not contradict EENS or Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14, with LG 8, LG 16, UR 3, GS 22 etc. Since if someone was saved outside the Church, he would be known only to God. They are not part of our reality. They are invisible in 1965-2021.
When Pope Francis says that the Second Vatican Council is the Magisterium of the Church he must refer to a pro-EENS dogmatic Council with the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.
Without their false premise the Council is dogmatic. It supports the rigorous interpretation of EENS.This was EENS according to the missionaries and the Magisterium of the sixteenth century. LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NS 2, GS 22 etc., in the Second Vatican Council, if interpreted rationally, cannot be practical exceptions to EENS. Invisible cases in our reality cannot be objective exceptions to EENS. For example, to get on the bus you have to be present at the bus station. If you are not physically at the bus stop it is not possible to get on the bus.
Another example is, if there is an apple in a box of oranges, the apple is an exception since it is there in the box. If it was not there in that box it would not be an exception. Similarly LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3 etc.,refer only to hypothetical cases. We cannot meet or see anyone saved outside the Church, without faith and the baptism of water. So the Council is not referring to real people, known people in the present times.
Unknown and invisible cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14) and of being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) cannot be objective exceptions for EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.There is no conflict.
So when Vatican Council II is interpreted rationally it is dogmatic. -Lionel Andrades
No comments:
Post a Comment