All religious communities need to choose only Feeneyism ( invisible people are invisible ) to interpret Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

 

The Father General of the Missonaries of Charity ( Contemplative) Brothers of Mother Teresa in Rome, is Fr. Ramon m.c and Fr. Sebastian Vazhakhala m.c is the founder. They both have to be Feeneyite on Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church since this is the only ethical option. All religious communities need to choose Feeneyism to interpret Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

The Missionaries of Charity Sisters of Mother Teresa at Casilina, Rome, are saying, when they interpret Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church with Feeneyism, that other religions are not paths to salvation. There is salvation in only Jesus and in only the Catholic Church.

This is what they would be saying only when they choose Feeneyism and not Cushingism as a philosophical and theological model. Though it may be politically incorrect with the Left, who can be fascists. So these priests and sisters  may not choose to speak the truths of the Faith in public. However according to Magisterial texts interpreted rationally, this would be their Magisterial position and only ethical choice.

All the religious communities need to interpret Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church with Feeneyism and not Cushingism.Ethically, Feeneyism is the only option they have, as Cushingism is dishonest.

When the Superiors and founders of religious communities interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism, they are saying, I repeat,  that other religions are not paths to salvation.

Mother Teresa was a Cushingite on Vatican Council II and so was Chiara Lubich the founder of the Focolare Movement. Andrea Riccardi of the Sant Egidio community in Rome interpreted the Council and Catechism with irrational Cushingism and not rational Feeneyism.

If he was Feeneyite on Vatican Council II, that is, Lumen Gentium 16 etc refer to hypothetical cases only in 2024, then he would be saying that all need faith and baptism for salvation, and invisible cases of LG 16 etc, are not practical cases in the present times. So the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is not made obsolete with Vatican Council II ( LG 16 etc).So it means that all Jews, Muslims and other non Catholics, need Catholic faith and the baptism of water  to avoid the fires of Hell.

I say the same. For me Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are Feeneyite for me. So Jewish Left adherents and the members of the religion of Mohammad, in general, are oriented to the fires of Hell, for me, unless they die with ‘faith and baptism’ (AG 7).This is not just my opinion. This is the Catholic Magisterial teaching according to Church Documents interpreted only rationally.I am repeating what the Catholic Church has taught for centuries and what is confirmed today in Vatican Council II and the Catechism of Pope John Paul II. 

This isalso the official message of the bishop’s conferences in Italy (CDI) and the USA (USSCB), when they are Feeneyite on Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. This is also the Church teaching, expressed by the Vicar General and Auxiliary Bishops of Rome and the priests at the churches Sant Agapito and San Leone 1, in the Prenestina area, where I live.

Pope Francis and Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez would be saying the same when they choose Feeneyism as a philosophy (invisible people are observed to be always nvisible in our human reality) and the old theology (outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation, there is no known salvation).

So the New Theology, New Ecumenism, New Ecclesiology and new Moral Theology are based upon Vatican Council II Cushingite. They are meaningless and obsolete today. We have new information which was not there in 1965 and some 50 plus years later.

Religious communities can now petition the Signatura and the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, to interpret Vatican Council II only rationally. They can also inform the DDF that they refuse to interpret the Council irrationally. They can demand that the DDF affirm the Athanasius Creed and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (with no known exceptions) to avoid being heretical and schismatic. The DDF must also affirm the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the Catechism of Pope Pius X which are not contradicted by hypothetical cases mentioned in Vatican Council II.

So it would mean that the Catholic Church, in Magisterial Documents today, is saying that Islamism and Judaism are not paths to salvation (AG 7, LG 14, CCC 845,846 etc) and in Heaven there are only Catholics without mortal sin on their soul (CCC 845,846), that only in the Catholic Church is there is true worship, the Church being a continuation of the Old Testament Judaism.

It would mean according to Vatican Council II, all need faith and baptism for salvation and this would include the founder of the religion of Mohammad. He died without faith and the baptism of water. Vatican Council II tells us that those who know about Jesus and the Church and yet do not enter are oriented to Hell (LG 14). Mohammad knew. Dante saw him lost because it was not the will of God for him to found a new religion.

                                                                    https://en.pisai.it/academics/dialogue/

The Pontifical Institute for Arabic and Islamic Studies (PISAI) was founded by the Society of the Missionaries of Africa (White Fathers) who interpreted all Magisterial Documents (Creeds, Councils, Catechisms etc) with Feeneyism. But PISAI today is Cushingite. 

                                                      https://en.pisai.it/the-pisai/about-us/

So the dialogue of PISAI is with false Cushingism and not traditional and rational Feeneyism. This is immoral. It is political and not Catholic. The White Fathers, missionaries, who have their Mother House near Cornelia, Rome, need to clarify their position on this issue, as a religious community.They must choose Feeneyism once again, the like the founders of their religious community.- Lionel Andrades

JULY 26, 2024

A Catholic cannot be a Cushingite

 

- Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2024/07/blog-post.html

JULY 26, 2024

Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano cannot appeal against his excommunication until he interprets Vatican Council II rationally and shows Cardinal Fernandez that morally, there is no obligation for a Catholic, to interpret Vatican Council II, irrationally, as does the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), Vatican.

 

Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano cannot appeal against his excommunication until he interprets Vatican Council II rationally and shows Cardinal Fernandez that morally, there is no obligation for a Catholic, to interpret Vatican Council II, irrationally, as does the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), Vatican.Since, now, in an appeal, if Archbishop Vigano presents arguements against Fiducia Supplicans and Amoris Laetitia drawing upon Tradition, Fernandez will simply cite Vatican Council II ( irrational) as a break with Tradition ( EENS, Syllabus etc).Then he will say that if Vatican Council II, irrational, could change the past exclusivist ecclesiology, everything is open for change.He will say the liberalism, is Magisterial, and the work of the Holy Spirit today.

Archbishop Vigano has to show Cardinal Fernandez the difference between Vatican Council II , rational and irrational and how Vatican Council II, rational, does not contradict the past exclusivist ecclesiology , the old traditional theology on salvation.

Since invisible cases of LG 8,14,15,16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, do not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX. 

For there to be an exception for EENS etc, the person, the exception, must be physically visible. He must be present. Hypothetical cases are not present in 1965-2024.

If Cardinal Fernandez puts the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) bishops and superior general on trial, they will all cave in. They will lose. They will not be able to defend themselves as in the case of Archbishop Vigano. Since the SSPX bishops interpret Vatican Council II irrationally, like the DDF and Cardinal Fernandez uses Vatican Council II (irrational) to rationalize liberalism, heresy, schism etc. The SSPX must put Vatican Council II (irrational) out of the way. Vatican Council II, rational, the only moral choice available for the DDF, supports Tradition. - Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2024/07/archbishop-carlo-maria-vigano-cannot.html

JULY 25, 2024

Pope Francis and Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano are Cushingites. Cushingism produces heresy and schism irrespective if the person who uses it is a liberal or schism.

 

Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano must interpret Vatican Council II, rationally. This must be a priority. It is then that he can appeal to the DDF to interpret the Council rationally. Once the DDF does this, the Church comes back to Tradition. The DDF interpretation of Vatican Council II will then be traditional. Pope Francis also will have to interpret Vatican Council II rationally. There will be no need for sedevacantism when Vatican Council II and Pope Francis are traditional.

Presently both Pope Francis and Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano are Cushingites. Cushingism produces heresy and schism irrespective if the person who uses it is a liberal or schism.

- Lionel Andrades

Veneration of the Holy Cross at Medugorje - 26/7/2024

 

https://video.marytv.tv/watch/mciG2LspOqM?ctx=yDj3O1j6sO8%2CmP9bEiEsi5K

Cancelled priests now have a new theological and doctrinal model with which to work with

 

The Foundation Exsurge Domini assists consecrated Catholic religious who have been cancelled. These religious now have a new theological and doctrinal model, explained on this blog, Eucharist and Mission,  to canonically, inform their bishop that they, the bishops,  are in heresy and schism, when they choose to use the irrational and not rational model of Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.Here it is. 1

This model is shown in this blog  post: A cardinal in public heresy and schism is not authorized to conduct a trial on behalf of the DDF. He does not meet the juridical conditions. The DDF has not denied these specific charges posted on social media over the years

It can be used against the liberal and schismatic Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), and the local bishop, who supports political liberalism and dissent against Jesus and His Mystical Body the Catholic Church, based upon Vatican Council II (irrational).

1. The DDF accepts Vatican Council II, irrational only and not Vatican Council II rational i.e. with LG 8, 14, 15, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc being hypothetical, physically invisible cases in 2024.So the DDF, like Pope Francis, is not in communion with the popes over the centuries, before 1949. There is no continuity.

2.The DDF, chooses the irrational premise, Cushingism,  to interpret Magisterial Documents and the CDF before 1949 interpreted all Magisterial Documents only with the rational premise i.e. for example, the baptism of desire refers to a hypothetical case only. 

3. So the CDF before 1949 was Feeneyite and the DDF today is Cushingite. 

4. Cushingism, produces heresy and schism, irrespective of who uses it. So there can be a liberal or traditionalist, Cushingite.The DDF today is not the same, doctrinally and theologically, as the CDF before 1949. There is no continuity. 

5.The DDF lacks authority and competence. It cannot interpret Magisterial Documents irrationally and be Magisterial.So it does not represent the pre-1949 CDF. There is also a break with the teachings of the Apostles and the Church Fathers.

6.The canonical conditions required for the trial do not exist.The plaintiffs are Cushingites and so are the judges.

These six points must be considered by canonists and presented to the local bishop and the DDF by cancelled priests.

Fr. Alessandro M. Minutella, for example, and other cancelled priests, must demand that Archbishop Corrado Lorefice, the archbishop of Palermo, appointed by Pope Francis in 2015, must interpret Vatican Council II, only rationally. Once he does this, he returns to the Tradition of the cancelled priests here.

Legally, in the secular courts the Archbishop Lorefice, cannot continue to interpret LG 8, 14, 15, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, as being physically invisible cases in 2024. He must admit that they are only hypothetical cases.

The Curia at Palermo, Italy must also interpret Magisterial Documents ( Creeds, Councils, Catechisms  etc) with Feeneyism ( invisible people are invisible in 2024) and not Cushingism ( invisible cases are visible in 2024).

Similarly in the USA, the Coalition for Cancelled Priests/ Alliance for Cancelled Priests can approach the liberal USCCB by using the L.A interpretation of Vatican Council II and Magisterial Documents.- Lionel Andrades

1

JULY 25, 2024

A cardinal in public heresy and schism is not authorized to conduct a trial on behalf of the DDF. He does not meet the juridical conditions. The DDF has not denied these specific charges posted on social media over the years

 

Before any schism trial is initiated the  Catholic defendant  must inform the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), Vatican that 1) he accepts Vatican Council II rational and not Vatican Council II, irrational. 2) He accepts and interprets rationally all Magisterial Documents ( Creeds, Councils, Catechisms etc). 3) He is in communion with all the popes over the centuries before 1949, who were Feeneyite and not Cushingite.

When what is invisible is considered invisible only I call it Feeneyism. When what is invisible is considered visible, I call it Cushingism. So Vatican Council II ( LG 16 etc) can be interpreted with Feeneyism or Cushingism and the conclusion will be traditional or non traditional.

The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney, was Cushingite.

The Athanasius Creed, when it was issued, was Feeneyite i.e there were no exceptions for the de fide teaching on all needing to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation. There were no defacto exceptions, no visible-on-earth exceptions.

The DDF must be informed that it is the understanding of the defendant that the DDF is in heresy and schism since 1) the DDF accepts Vatican Council II, irrational only and not Vatican Council II rational i.e. with LG 8, 14, 15, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc being hypothetical, physically invisible cases in 2024.So the DDF, like Pope Francis, is not in communion with the popes over the centuries, before 1949. There is no continuity.The DDF, chooses the irrational premise, Cushingism,  to interpret Magisterial Documents and the CDF before 1949 interpreted all Magisterial Documents only with the rational premise i.e. for example, the baptism of desire refers to a hypothetical case only. So the CDF before 1949 was Feeneyite and the DDF today is Cushingite. 

Cushingism, produces heresy and schism, irrespective of who uses it. So there can be a liberal or traditionalist, Cushingite.

The DDF today is not the same, doctrinally and theologically, as the CDF before 1949. There is no continuity. The DDF lacks authority and competence. It cannot interpret Magisterial Documents irrationally and be Magisterial.So it does not represent the pre-1949 CDF. There is also a break with the teachings of the Apostles and the Church Fathers.

The canonical conditions required for the trial do not exist.The plaintiffs are Cushingites and so are the judges.

A cardinal in public heresy and schism is not authorized to conduct a trial on behalf of the DDF. The Secretaries and other members of the DDF do not meet the juridical conditions mentioned above. 

The DDF has not denied these specific charges posted on social media over the years.-Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2024/07/before-any-schism-trial-is-initiated.html

https://exsurgedomine.it/    https://exsurgedomineusa.org/