Comments from the blogpost Pope Benedict's heretical interview to Avvenire prepares Catholics to receive a sacrilegeous Synod report after Easter
Friday, April 1, 2016
There is an objective mistake in Vatican Council II. Based on this error Pope Benedict said the dogma EENS has 'developed': avoid the error and we are back to the old ecclesiology with Vatican Council II
Today I walked.I walked passed the chapel of the Benedictine sisters, off via Aurelia, Rome.I was in the chapel for a short while. They have day long Eucharistic Adoration.An international community of English speaking sisters, they have their mother house in England.They are called the Tyburn Sisters.
I then walked passed a huge structure. This I think is general house of a missionary community,the White Fathers. I think Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was associated with them.
MISSIONARIES
They were once a missionary community who held the 16th century concept of the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation.Pope Benedict and Pope Francis reject this dogma.Since may be someone told the popes,as they did with the White Fathers, that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 contradicts the dogma.Then without really thinking they must have agreed.Without really reasoning they must have agreed that there is known salvation outside the Church, people in Heaven are seen on earth,visibly seen, as you would see physical objects.
MOTHER ANGELICA
So the White Fathers, like Mother Angelica the founder of EWTN who will be buried today, was told that the dogma has been contradicted by the Letter(1949) and Vatican Council II (LG 16 etc).They probably accepted this in obedience.Since the magisterium cannot be wrong after all. Again they were not really thinking.
CUSHING ADDITIONS
The same thing could have happened in Rome during Vatican Council II (1962-1965).Cardinal Cushing could have said, "Look. Fr.Leonard Feeney is still excommunicated. Pope Pius XII did not defend him. Cardinal Ottaviani did not defend him. Pope John XXIII and now Pius VI have not defended him.So they have accepted that there is known salvation outside the Church.This is now magisterial.
'So every one does not need to enter the Church but only those 'who know' . Not every one will go to Hell but only those who 'knew' and did not enter formally. The popes understand that a person in invincible ignorance of the Gospel, through no fault of his own, could be saved outside the Church i.e without faith and baptism.
'So this is now magisterial. It is supported by the Letter of the Holy Office and the Baltimore Catechism. Let us place this new doctrine in Lumen Gentium (14).
'Since there is known salvation outside the Church let us make these additions here, which I have prepared along with the Jesuits. The additions can be made at UR 3, NA 2, LG 6,LG 16,LG 14, AG 7...."
OBJECTIVE MISTAKE IN VATICAN COUNCIL II
Now in 2016 we know there is an factual mistake in Vatican Council II. There is an objective mistake in LG 14.There is no way out of this one.
They made the original objective error in the Letter(1949) based on irrational reasoning.Then they inserted the line in LG 14.It says only those who know need to enter the Church, even though we cannot know 'who knows or does not know and is saved.'Yet they placed it in the context of the dogma EENS, that is all needing 'faith and baptism' for salvation (AG 7, LG 14).
But the real mistake was in the Letter.LG 14 is only a carry over.
PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE
In Boston and Rome in 1949 they reasoned that there is salvation outside the Church. For there to be salvation outside the Church it would have meant someone in the past or present, should have seen someone saved without the baptism of water in the Church.They went ahead and assumed there was someone.Even though this was physically impossible.The popes accepted it. The cardinals accepted it. Archbishop Lefebvre accepted. it.
After assuming there were physically visible cases of salvation outside the Church,they postulated that not every one needs to be a card carrying member of the Church.Then they went ahead and said that only those who are not in invincible ignorance of the Gospel and Jesus and the Church would be damned if they did not enter the Church.
They placed this new doctrine based on the non- real reasoning, in Vatican Council II. The principle was hypothetical cases are explicit for us human beings and there are hypothetical-explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known to the 16th century missionaries. Fr.Leonard Feeney move over.
HERESY IN PUBLIC
Now Pope Benedict finally says in public that there is a development of doctrine with Vatican Council II. The Jesuits had accepted this since 1949 and it was probably part of the religious formation of Pope Francis.It is the central reasoning in the Rahner -Ratzinger new theology.
The White Fathers of course had to give up mission based on the dogma. Mother Angelica could also no more proclaim the necessity of formal membership in the Church, for salvation, since she was told the dogma has been contradicted with LG 16 being visible and not invisible.
So Cardinal Kasper has said in an interview that if ecclesiology can be changed then why not the teaching on giving the Eucharist to the divorced and the remarried.
RECTOR OF GREGORIAN UNIVERSITY
Possibly this will be a theology, presented by the Rector of the Gregorian Pontifical University, Rome, when the Exhortation on the Synod is announced. The Rector oversees a new department called 'The Department of the Theology of Religions'. How could there be a theology of religions which Pope John Paul II opposed. How? Since there is salvation outside the Church even though there are no known cases of salvation outside the Church. This was something Pope John Paul II overlooked.
There is now a mistake in Vatican Council II.
I do not mention this so that Vatican Council II is rejected.
LG 14 IS HYPOTHETICAL, INVISIBLE
LG 14 can be seen as a hypothetical case. So it then does not become an exception to EENS as the 16th century missionaries and Fr.Leonard Feeney knew it.There is no development of doctrine based on Vatican Council II since EENS is not contradicted by LG 14, LG 16 etc.
JUDAISM, ISLAM
Ecclesiology has not changed if EENS has not changed. We are back to the old ecclesiology on other religions, Judaism, Islam etc.
Protestants and Orthodox Christians, 'heretics and schismatics' (Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441) need to formally enter the Catholic Church for salvation.
ASK POPES BENEDICT AND FRANCIS
1.Pope Benedict and Pope Francis can be asked if they personally know someone who is an exception to the dogma EENS in 2016. They will have to answer 'no'.
2.When asked if LG 16 and LG 14 refer to known cases in 2016, they will have to answer with a 'no'.
EDWARD PENTIN
May be Edward Pentin could say,"Holy Father you said in the interview with Avvenire that there is a development, an evolution of the dogma EENS with Vatican Council II. Are you referring to LG 16 being explicit or implicit, visible or invisible, objective or hypothetical."
...and with Pope Benedict's answer the Catholic Church will return to the old ecclesiology.
He then can ask Pope Francis, " Can the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate offer the Traditional Latin Mass and affirm that LG 16 refers to invisible and not visible cases.Can the FSSP also do the same?
...and with Pope Francis' answer even Catholic priests who offer the Novus Ordo Mass will have to return to the old ecclesiology, the Feeneyite ecclesiology, since this is the only rational alternative available.
-Lionel Andrades
Pope Benedict's recent interview with Avvenire on extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II was a preparation for the Exhortation on the Synod to be announced this month
There will be a post Synod Exhortation in which the two popes will approve giving the Eucharist to the divorced and remarried as being an acceptable norm.
They will justify this innovation by citing a change in ecclesiology.For the two popes the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has been discarded.This was done by assuming hypothetical cases are visible in the present times. So the two popes accepted that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance,mentioned in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, refers to not hypothetical cases but objectively seen persons in the present times, and so they are exceptions to the interpretation of the dogma EENS according to the 16th century missionaries.So there is a new theology, based on being able to see theoretical cases in the present times. More important, there is a change in ecclesiology now, a dogma has developed.Since LG 16 refers not to invisible but visible cases, Vatican Council II has changed the teaching on EENS. So it will be reasoned by Cardinal Kasper, with the support of the popes,that if ecclesiology can be changed then why not the teaching on giving the Eucharist to Catholics living in mortal sin ?
They will justify this innovation by citing a change in ecclesiology.For the two popes the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has been discarded.This was done by assuming hypothetical cases are visible in the present times. So the two popes accepted that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance,mentioned in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, refers to not hypothetical cases but objectively seen persons in the present times, and so they are exceptions to the interpretation of the dogma EENS according to the 16th century missionaries.So there is a new theology, based on being able to see theoretical cases in the present times. More important, there is a change in ecclesiology now, a dogma has developed.Since LG 16 refers not to invisible but visible cases, Vatican Council II has changed the teaching on EENS. So it will be reasoned by Cardinal Kasper, with the support of the popes,that if ecclesiology can be changed then why not the teaching on giving the Eucharist to Catholics living in mortal sin ?
The traditionalists will be unprepared. Especially those traditionalists who have had their religious formation in some way with Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. They use the same irrational inference to interpret Vatican Council II and EENS, as the two popes.
Pope Benedict's recent interview with Avvenire on extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II was a preparation for the Exhortation on the Synod to be announced this month.Traditionalists instead of criticising it , except for Chris Ferrara, have welcomed it and praised it.-Lionel Andrades
Pope Benedict, Cardinal Kasper's false arguments for Synod Report : Vatican Council II agrees with the dogma extra ecclesiam nullas salus as it was interpreted by the 16th century missionaries
Pope Benedict's heretical interview to Avvenire prepares Catholics to receive a sacrilegeous Synod report after Easter
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/pope-benedicts-heretical-interview-to.html
Pope Benedict must be asked to come back to the faith
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/you-can-interpret-vatican-council-ii.html
Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II with an irrationality as do the traditionalists: the result is heresy
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/pope-francis-interprets-vatican-council.html
Pope Francis, Ethika Politika and the traditionalists interpret Vatican Council II and also the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with an irrational inference
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/pope-francis-ethika-politika-and.html
Pope Benedict must be asked to come back to the faith
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/pope-benedict-must-be-asked-to-come.html
Card. Ratzinger interpreted Vatican Council II with an irrationality when a rational option was available .He then excommunicated Abp. Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops for not accepting this heretical version of the faith
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/card-ratzinger-interpreted-vatican.html
The excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre by the CDF Prefect, like that of Fr.Leonard Feeney by the Holy Office (CDF) in 1949, was an injustice.There was no known salvation outside the Church
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/the-excommunication-of-archbishop.html
You can interpret Vatican Council II without the new theology. Try it and see
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Feeneyism according to Wikipedia : with comments
At the 'New Traditional College' will the faculty interpret magisterial documents with Feeneyism or Cushingism ?
The theology mentioned in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, is meaningless and does not apply.In a way they kind of duped all of us, including me
Traditionalists are still interpreting Lumen Gentium 16 with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism
Traditionalists like Reuters correspondents use Cushingism to interpret Vatican Council II : Feeneyism cannot be part of the dialogue.
The baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance can be interpreted according to Feeneyism or Cushingism, one approach is irrational
Michael Voris could show how Vatican Council II can be interpreted with Cushingism or Feeneyism,with visible exceptions or without them, irrationally or rationally
SSPX priests are using Cushingism instead of Feeneyism as a theology this is a break with the Syllabus of Errors,traditional ecumenism and the old ecclesiology based on the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus