Without the false premise the New Theology is naked

 Without the false premise the New Theology is naked. -Lionel Andrades

 JANUARY 16, 2020

The New Theology is used by Diane Montagna, Roberto dei Mattei and traditionalists and liberals.The real issue never ever was the Latin Mass but the New Theology, Cushingite theology.

Traditionalists use the false premise and are not aware of it. They use the same new theology of the liberals. The new theology is Cushingite theology.It is based upon the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) being exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).

BOD,BOB and I.I are assumed to be visible and known. Then they are projected as exceptions to EENS. So the New Theology says outside the Church there is salvation.

 

Similarly LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, are interpreted with the New Theology. They were visible and known for Bishop Bernard Fellay and Fr. Pierpaulo Petrucci, the Superior General and District Superior respectively of the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX).

This was the New Theology of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.Fr. Thomas Hardon, Fr.William Most and Msgr.Joseph Clifford Fenton never identified and corrected it.

Cardinal Ratzinger and Cardinal Ladaria  interpreted Vatican Council II with the New Theology to create a rupture with Tradition.They wanted the SSPX  to do the same.The SSPX was interpreting Vatican Council II with the New Theology, Cushingite theology, but were rejecting the conclusion, which was an obvious rupture with EENS, an ecumenism of return etc . Cardinal Ratzinger and Pope Paul VI wanted that rupture.

Cardinal Ratzinger could have put together  the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) without the new theology.He could have clarified that BOD, BOB and I.I are always hypothetical and so are not exceptions to EENS. He could have said that Vatican Council II does not contradict the past  and that this was a mistake he made when he wrote Redemptoris Missio. But there was no correction from him.He persisted with the error.

In 2016 he announced that EENS was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century since there was ' a development', for him, with Vatican Council II.He meant Vatican Council II interpreted with the false premise and inference.This was also the interpretation of the Lefebvrists.

The Lefebvrists are still not aware that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 is the New Theology.BOD and I.I were projected as being exceptions to EENS.

So at a Lepanto conference in Rome, Roberto dei Mattei and John Lamont  criticized the New Theology(nouvelle théologie) not knowing that they themselves use the New Theology and that without the New Theology Vatican Council II would support Feeneyite EENS.

They do not want to affirm Feeneyite EENS. So when Diane Montagna asked Mattei about EENS he projected invincible ignorance as being a literal exception. So he mentioned invincible ignorance with reference to EENS.This was the New Theology. There can only be literal exceptions to EENS, with the New Theology.Invisible cases are projected as being visible in the present times.

At the Lepanto conference talks, they were simply using the term New Theology since the liberals refer to it.Cardinal Ratzinger would have known what was the precise cause of the New Theology but the traditionalists were ignorant about it.

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre did not know the difference between Cushingism and Feeneyism as a philosophy and theology.The Jewish Left only accepts Cushingism. Mattei may now know this. So he will not interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with Feeneyism. He will let the New Theology remain. It is useful.

The real issue never ever was the Latin Mass but the New Theology, Cushingite theology.

The real issue for the Franciscans of the Immaculate and Pope Francis is not the Latin Mass.The real issue was accepting Vatican Council II, the Creeds and Catechisms and EENS with Feeneyism and not Cushingism as a theology i.e with hypothetical cases just being hypothetical in the present times.Unknown non Catholics saved outside the Church are just unknown. This is Feeneyism.

Now both groups of the Franciscans of the Immaculate affirm Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents without Feeneyism. 

Fr.Stefano Manelli and Roberto dei Mattei have to make the correction i.e affirm Vatican Council II without the new theology.

Pope Francis and Cardinal Braz de Avez would then have no choice but to accept it.How can they force the average Catholic to use an irrational premise and inference to interpret Vatican Council II ? Why should the average Catholic or the Franciscans, of different communities in the world, see invisible people as being visible in the present times? Now they can get away with it because of the ignorance of the traditionalist and conservative Catholics.

Even if the Franciscans of the Immaculate hand over all their property to the Church and even if all the Franciscans in the world in different communities,are placed under one roof,Vatican Council II is still Feeneyite. There is no way out of this.

Fr. Stefano Manelli F.I must be asked to unite the Franciscans of the Immaculate groups, since irrespective of the Holy Mass offered, Vatican Council II is not a rupture with Tradition.This is a reality which has to be faced.-Lionel Andrades 

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2020

Today no one is willing to say that the Ratzinger New Theology is flawed with an objective mistake, which needs to be corrected

 Jesuit Boston College expelled Fr.Leonard Feeney  and four Catholic professors for not saying invisible cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance were visible exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).

One of the professors expelled by Boston College, Brother Francis Maluf MICM, would years later meet with Cardinal Ratzinger.

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger did not ask the Jesuits at Boston College, USA how could unknown cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance be known exceptions to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) ?              

Since this error was the foundation of the New Theology which he and Fr. Karl Rahner sj were promoting.Only with the New Theology they could create a New Ecumenism, New Ecclesiology and New Evangelisation.He could not disclose this to Brother Francis. Pope Benedict's reputation as a theologian depended upon New Theology which came from the Boston Case.

As Archbishop of Munich, Pope Benedict 's books,articles and talks were based on the New Theology which he promoted among German theologians and organisation.

 

As Archbishop of Munich he also promoted the Catholic Integrated Community  (Integrierte Gemeinde) .Prof. Ludwig Weimer and Achim Buckenmaier of the Integrierte Geminde  teach the New Theology created with the false premise. They teach it at the pontifical universities in Rome. There is also now a Ratzinger Foundation and Ratzinger Studies and Spirituality with post graduate courses - all with its foundation in the New Theology.

Pope Francis is also indebted to Pope Benedict for his liberalism. On the return flight from Abu Dhabi, after his initital visit, he said he had not shifted a millimeter ( or centimeter)  from Vatican Council II. He meant Vatican Council II interpreted with the New Theology.

Similarly at the Plaquet Deo Press Conference  when asked by  an Associated Press lady reporter, Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj, suggested that the Church no more taught that it has a superiority and exclusiveness in salvation. He cited LG 8 as an exception.Of course, it was LG 8 interpreted with the New Theology,interpreted with the false premise.

The Jesuits at Boston College and the Gregorian Pontifical University, Rome have gone into all weird theologies, since they were protected by Pope Benedict.

The liberal Pope Benedict consolidated the error in the SSPX case. He said that the problem with the SSPX was doctrinal. Until they resolved it they could not get canonical recognition. He meant that they had to continue to interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with the New Theology but they must accept the non traditional conclusion.

Brother Francis MICM has passed away.Justice was not done. His daughter is the Prioress of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, St. Benedict Center, USA . She, along with Brother Andre Marie MICM, Prior at the St. Benedict Center,  was told by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) Archbishop-Secretaries, that the community was legally not Catholic.The  issue still is doctrinal. They had to interpret EENS  and Vatican Council II with the false premise, and New Theology of Pope Benedict and Pope Francis.

When Pope Benedict resigned the Jewish Left rabbis praised him.He had maintained good relations with them. He officially announced that Jews do not need to convert and enter the Catholic Church for salvation ( since there were known exceptions to EENS for him). He opened the door for Satan in exchange for peace.

Today the Rome Vicariate only incardinates priests who say hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance  are objective exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. 

The local bishops and the Vatican only accept vocations to the religious life, of candidates, who state LG 16 is an objective exception to the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX. This is Pope Benedict's legacy - the New Theology. 

Cardinal Braz de Avez  will not accept the Franciscans of the Immaculate( either group) if they announce that they accept Vatican Council II and interpret it without the New Theology.

Pope Benedict controlled the narrative in the Church even when he was Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Today no one is willing  to say that the Ratzinger New Theology is flawed  with an objective mistake, which needs to be corrected. -Lionel Andrades

DECEMBER 3, 2020

There is an objective mistake in the New Theology of Pope Benedict and Maike Hickson is unaware of it

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/12/hickson-in-her-reports-at-life-site.html

 

DECEMBER 2, 2020

Maike Hickson does not mention that Prof. Achim Buckenmaier, who teaches at the John Lateran and Regina Apostolorum University, Rome interprets Vatican Council II with a false premise.He uses the false New Theology of Pope Benedict based upon a false premise and inference. There is a flaw in the theology of Pope Benedict. This has to be recognised.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/12/maike-hickson-does-not-mention-that.html

MONDAY, MARCH 9, 2020

CDF uses the irrational New Theology as a weapon against the traditonalists

Presently Catholics who follow the Cushingite Prefect and Secretaries of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) follow heresy on the Creeds and Catechisms and Vatican Council II and are in schism with the past popes on extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). For the CDF Secretaries Morandi and Di Noia , EENS is Cushingite but it was Feeneyite for the popes over the centuries.

Cushingism is an objective mistake and cannot be the teaching of the Holy Spirit. It is irrational and deceptive. Archbishop Augustine Di Noia op, for example, no more represents the magisterium, until he corrects the error.Cushingism has spread like the Arian heresy of the past, through out the Church and Di Noia instead of ending it with sincerity, still stokes it.

Just because Di Noia works for the CDF, it does not make him immune from the virus of heresy.It does not mean he cannot teach heresy and schism. Similarly just because Francis and Benedict are popes, it does not mean they cannot be teaching an error in theology and doctrine. They could be as political as Pope Paul VI and give in to ecclesiastical Masonry and powerful lobbies outside the Church.

When the popes and the CDF Secretaries confuse what is invisible as being visible,  it is irrational, non traditional and heretical. The conclusion is a rupture with Tradition.Even a pope can violate the Principle of Non Contradiction. ( See links on the right hand side bar for details).
 

Cushingism is also known as the New Theology, the irrational New Theology and it is being used as a weapon especially against the traditionalists. Without the irrational New Theology, the Church would return to the past exclusivist ecclesiology and there would be unity in doctrine for the traditionalists and all Catholics, who accept Vatican Council II.

1.Now with the irrational New Theology the CDF and the Archbishop of Ferrara-Commacchio, Italy have put the traditionalists Familia Christi on the defensive. They are made to appear  heretical and schismatic and the priests are suppressed.Without the Cushingite New Theology, Cardinal Luiz Ladaria and Archbishop Giancarlo Peregro would have to affirm the strict interpretation of EENS.Since the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) would not be practical exceptions to EENS.They would have to affirm the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Church since LG 16 etc in Vatican Council II, would not be exceptions.

2.With the irrational New Theology the CDF and the Bishop Peter Libasci, the archbishop of Manchester, USA have put Brother Andre Marie MICM and the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St. Benedict Center, N.H, on the defensive.They are made to appear as heretics and schismatics. Without the irrational New Theology( based upon invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc being personally known and physically visible in 2020) the CDF and Bishop Libasci would have to affirm the Athanasius Creed.Since BOD, BOB and I.I would not be literal and practical exceptions.Similarly there would be no exceptions to the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX. It would be the traditionalists who would demand that the CDF affirm Vatican Council II rationally.They would demand that he CDF affirm the Creeds and Catechism and EENS , rationally i.e without the false premise, inference and conclusion.Morally there would be pressure on the CDF and the two popes.

3.The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) would no more be on the defensive. They could affirm Vatican Council II without the false premise and ask Archbishop Augustine Di Noia to do the same.Now with the irrational New Theology they are being forced to interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition and accept the conclusion.Cushingite Pope Benedict then says that the problem with the SSPX is 'doctrinal'. He means they are not accepting the irrational New Theology.
Without the irrational New Theology, Cushingite theology, there would then no more be a pre-and-post-Vatican Council-II ecclesiology. The ecclesiology of the Church would be the same at Mass in Latin and the vernacular.Since Vatican Council II would not be a rupture with Tradition.Doctrine on exclusive salvation would not be a break with the founders of the religious communities- St. Francis Assisi, St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Dominic...

The Familia Christi, St. Benedict Center and the SSPX would put the onus for rational and traditional doctrine and theology, on the CDF and the two popes.-Lionel Andrades





 MARCH 9, 2020

An injustice is done to the traditionalist Brother Andre Marie MICM and the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, with the irrational New Theology

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2020/03/bp-athanasius-schneider-dr-taylor.html



 



 
 


 

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/04/important-points-were-left-out-in.html

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2019

We can now interpret Vatican Council Ii without the New Theology.Lumen Gentium, in its entire text, for example,would not contradict the past exclusivist ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.

The New Theology is created by assuming Lumen Gentium contradicts extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).It is created by assuming BOD, BOB and I.I 1 contradict EENS and exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.It is created by assuming there are non hypothetical cases; objective people, who are examples of salvation outside the Church.

This is false .There are no such people.Supporters of the New Theology assume possibilities of salvation, known only to God, outside the Church, are also known to humans as real people.

They assume someone on earth saw St. Emerentiana in Heaven without the baptism of water.Similarly they assume that someone saw Luther in Heaven saved outside the Catholic Church.

 

The New Theology was criticized by Roberto Matteo and speakers at a Lepanto Foundation conference in Rome and yet all those speakers use the New Theology to interpret Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents.

 

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre interpreted Vatican Council II and EENS with the New Theology and so di Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.Pope Paul Vi  interpreted Vatican Council II with the New Theology and so did Cardinal Ottaviani and the apologists of that time.

We can now interpret Vatican Council Ii without the New Theology.Lumen Gentium, in its entire text, for example, would not contradict the past exclusivist ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.

Pope Francis and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith today approve  the New Theology and so do the ADL, SPLC and the liberal  cardinals and bishops in Germany.

Those who do not affirm the New Theology would be saying the Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO) was wrong and Fr. Leonard Feeney was correct on EENS and BOD, BOB and I.I.

 Conservatives will discuss the Amazon Synod next month and all of them will interpret Vatican Council II heretically, with the New Theology.

-Lionel Andrades

1

BOD(Baptism of desire),baptism of blood( BOB) and I.I (Invincible ignorance).