The St.Benedict Centers condone Vatican Council II interpreted with an irrational premise and do not affirm Vatican Council II without the irrationality: liberal bishop considers this 'as authentically taught and defined by the Church's teaching magisterium'

The St.Benedict Centers, the communities of Fr. Leonard Feeney, in the U.S dioceses of Worcester and Manchester do not state that the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) are not physically visible cases in reality, in the present times. This is something obvious.It is the same with the SSPX priests and bishops and their lay supporters.They cannot get themselves to say the obvious, what is common knowledge.

So whatever is the theology of these two groups(SBC and SSPX) there are no practical exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus, since we humans cannot see or meet a BOD, BOB and I.I case.This is something objective. It is independent of their theologies.

So we can theorize and speculate about BOD, BOB and I.I.But BOD, BOB and I.I must not be considered an  exception to EENS.This is the mistake of Bishop Robert J.McManus and Bishop Peter J.Libasci, the bishops of Worcester and Manchester, respectively.

The bishops have made an objective error and it is condoned by the St. Benedict Centers in the two dioceses.

No correction is expected from the traditionalists. This is also the mistake made by the SSPX priests and bishops and the sedevacantists who have had their formation under Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.They are all irrational on this issue and so their conclusions are liberal and heretical.The traditionalists make this error and there is no denial from them.

 They SSPX traditionalists, theorize about BOD, BOB and I.I and then project BOD, BOB and I.I as being explicit and known and  examples of salvation outside the Church. Then they conclude that outside the Church there is salvation.

The problem is that the St. Benedict Centers, make the same error with Vatican Council II. They first assume that LG 14 ( desire of the catechumen) and LG 16 ( invincible ignorance) refer to explicit and objective exceptions to the dogma EENS.Then they reject Vatican Council II as being a rupture with EENS.

So there are two groups with different theologies on the baptism of desire etc.However on Vatican Council II, there is only one group - and they are in error.They both make the same error.

For me EENS, and Vatican Council II is Feeneyite i.e invisible cases of non Catholics are invisible. Since UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to hypothetical, non visible and theoretical cases ( like BOD, BOB and I.I), I am interpreting them with Feeneyism(according to L.A).They are not examples of known salvation outside the Church.They are not practical exceptions to EENS and the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.

But for the  St.Benedict Center, Still River, Mass., which has been granted canonical status in the diocese of Worcester, it is different. Vatican Council II is interpreted as a rupture with EENS.This is also the irrational understanding of Vatican Council II and EENS held by Bishop Robert J.McManus, the bishop of Worcester.

Brother Thomas Augustine MICM,Prior, at the St.Benedict Center, Still River, in the diocese of Worcester,  does not tell Bishop McManus that the SBC interprets Vatican Council II without the irrational premise.So the SBC  accepts Vatican Council II in harmony with the strict interpretation of EENS.The SBC does not do it! So he cannot say it.

They interpret Vatican Council II like the rest of the liberal, diocese.

The diocese of Worcester does not have a problem with the SBC community since the SBC accepts Vatican Council II as  a rupture with Tradition. This is magisterial. The decree which grants the SBC canonical status states that the SBC  teaches doctrines of the Church 'as authentically taught and defined by the Church's teaching magisterium'. 1

Read that again.

In the original Decree it was said that the SBC accepts Vatican Council II .Then that line was removed.

It is the same in the Diocese of Manchester.This is also the understanding there.The SBC community of Fr. Leonard Feeney is recognised by the bishop of Manchester. For the SBC in Manchester, Vatican Council II is not in harmony with Feeneyite EENS but is a rupture.This is the magisterial teaching for the FSSP priests in the diocese who offer the Traditional Latin Mass.For Bishop Peter A.Libasci, the Bishop of Manchester,  Vatican Council II is a rupture with the dogma EENS and this error is not corrected by the SBC community.This is the 'authentically taught'  and 'defined by the Church',  'teaching magisterium' accepted by the SBC.

-Lionel Andrades

1.

http://www.ipadre.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Decree-Most-Rev-Rober-J.-McManus.pdf

DECEMBER 18, 2017

Bishop Thomas Augustine MICM, and the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Still River,MA have compromised on Vatican Council II and EENS

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/bishop-thomas-augustine-micm-and-slaves.html

MAY 22, 2016

Manchester not  united 

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/05/manchester-not-united.html

 MAY 24, 2015

Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary liberalism: same as Cardinal Walter Kaspar http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/05/slaves-of-immaculate-heart-of-mary.html

 APRIL 5, 2018

St.Benedict Centers need to correct their position on Vatican Council II with reference to EENS   http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/04/stbenedict-centers-need-to-correct.html

 DECEMBER 21, 2017

Priors at the St.Benedict Centers,USA promote Cushingism instead of the Feeneyism of the founders of the communityhttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/priors-at-stbenedict-centersusa-promote.html

DECEMBER 20, 2017

Bishop Robert McMahon Bishop of Worcester makes change in Decree on St. Benedict Center deletes original reference to Vatican Council II ?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/bishop-robert-mcmahon-bishop-of.html

DECEMBER 20, 2017

I do not reject the baptism of desire like the traditionalists (Peter and Michael Dimond at MHFM) and neither do I accept the baptism of desire like the liberals(Cardinal Ladaria and Pope Benedict).Both groups use an irrational premise

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/i-do-not-reject-baptism-of-desire-like.html

 DECEMBER 20, 2017

Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, St.Benedict Centers : the baptism of desire is always a possibility for us human beings and only God can know actual cases

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/slaves-of-immaculate-heart-of-mary.html

DECEMBER 19, 2017

In this year of the 100 anniversary of the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima, 'the dogma of the faith has been lost' even with the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and other traditionalists denying it

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/in-this-year-of-100-anniversary-of.html

DECEMBER 19, 2017

Priors at the St.Benedict Centers will not affirm Feeneyite Vatican Council II opposed by their bishops.They continue to support Vatican Council II(Cushingite) which is a rupture with EENS(Feeneyite)

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/priors-at-stbenedict-centers-will-not.html

DECEMBER 18, 2017

Brother Thomas Augustine MICM, and the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Still River,MA have compromised on Vatican Council II and EENS

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/bishop-thomas-augustine-micm-and-slaves.html

DECEMBER 18, 2017

Brother Thomas Augustine MICM, Prior at the St. Benedict Center, Still River,MA, USA,a traditionalist, has compromised

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/brother-thomas-augustine-micm-prior-at.html

DECEMBER 16, 2017

The traditionalists are blocking the reconciliation of the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) with the CDF/Ecclesia Dei since the bloggers are unable to affirm Feeneyte extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS),which is central to the doctrinal crisis in the Catholic Church.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/the-traditionalists-are-blocking.html

DECEMBER 16, 2017

Traditionalists are not affirming the Catholic Faith to protect their worldly interests and are asking for donations

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/traditionalists-are-not-affirming.html

DECEMBER 15, 2017

Without Feeneyite EENS Vatican Council II becomes a rupture with Tradition

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/without-feeneyite-eens-vatican-council.html

DECEMBER 15, 2017

The traditionalists in general have made an error.They have made a major error in theology and doctrine

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/the-traditionalists-in-general-have.html

NOVEMBER 14, 2017

Communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney in the USA when they interpret Vatican Council II with the irrational premise deny the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/11/communities-of-frleonard-feeney-in-usa.html

Can you look at this issue without the models used by the SSPX and the MICM ?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/05/can-you-look-at-this-issue-without.html

CMTV could announce that they affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS with hypothetical for us BOD, BOB and I.I in harmony with Vatican Council II and the Catechism(1994)

I don't know what is keeping Michael Voris and the CMTV Staff from affirming the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) along with hypothetical-for-us baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I).They are compatible. We do not have to choose between the one and the other.Choosing between one and the other was a mistake of the liberals.

The difference between the Archdiocese of Detroit and Michael Voris would then be that even though the both of them affirm all magisterial documents/teachings, Michael Voris would be saying that BOD, BOB and I.I refer to invisible and hypothetical cases accepted theoretically, in faith as a concept, while the Archdiocese and the Congregation for the Doctrine for the Faith, Vatican,would hold that BOD, BOB and I.I refer to visible, known and objective people saved outside the Catholic Church.

It would be easy for CMTV to see who is irrational, non traditional and heretical and they would be able to help others to also see the difference.

So CMTV could announce that they are affirming the traditional and perennial Magisterium of the Catholic Church along with , Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1994) interpreted rationally, that is without the false premise( invisible non Catholics are physically visible).

CMTV should not be expected to say by the present Magisterium that they can see people in Heaven and also physically see them on earth and that too, without faith and baptism in the Catholic Church.(AG 7,LG 14).

They should not be expected, by the Archbishop of Detroit, to affirm that people in Heaven allegedly saved outside the Church are also on earth.

They should not be expected to go into schism with the past popes and Church Councils on EENS.

CMTV should not have to interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition instead of a continuity with the past exclusivist ecclesiology , an ecumenism of return, the Syllabus of Errors and the rest of Tradition.-Lionel Andrades

The liberal theologians Rahner, Kung, Ratzinger etc were wrong to suggest there was known salvation outside the Catholic Church and so change the theology of the Church from exclusivist ecclesiocentrism to a vague and general Christology

We have to realize that there are no known cases of non Catholics saved outside the Catholic Church.We humans on earth cannot physically see anyone saved in Heaven.This could only be known to God.It can be known to Catholics who are in Heaven.So for there to be exceptions to the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation, there would have to be known people saved outside the Church- and we cannot know of any one saved in this way.If there is no physically visible person in 2017-2018 for example, who  is saved outside the Catholic Church, then we do not know anyone saved outside the Church.This is a physical reality. There are no practical exceptions to EENS.

A possibility of someone being saved outside the Church in the past, is not a visible exception in the present times (2018) to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.We do not know if St. Emerentiana, now in Heaven, is saved without the baptism of water and instead with the baptism of desire or blood.We cannot physically know.



In faith we can choose to believe what we want but we cannot suggest that it is an exception to the dogma EENS.So this is important to note : an exception has to exist in our time and space for it to be an exception.If there is a box of oranges with an apple in the middle of the box, the apple is an exception there not only because it is different but because it exists there in that box.If it was not in the box at that time it would not be an exception.

 So we can believe that St.Emerentiana is a saint in Heaven but we cannot say that she is an exception to EENS. If she was an exception it could only be known to God.

So the liberal theologians Rahner, Kung, Ratzinger and many others, were wrong to suggest that there was known salvation outside the Catholic Church and so change the theology of the Church from exclusivist ecclesiocentrism to a vague and general Christology.-Lionel Andrades