Thursday, July 20, 2017

It was the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing who was in heresy and not Fr.Leonard Feeney.

It was the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing who was in heresy and not Fr.Leonard Feeney.
It was the Magisterium of Pope Pius XII and the Jesuits in Boston who were in heresy and not Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center.Once this is discovered and understood it will be seen that the interpretation of Vatican Council II dramtically changed.
For the traditionalists, sedevacantists and the present magisterium today there are visible cases of the baptism of desire and so the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).So they criticize Fr. Leonard Feeney and support Pope Pius XII.
Now they realize that invisible for us baptism of desire(BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) cannot be an explicit exception to the dogma EENS. This has been confirmed in public my many responsible Catholics.
So when hypothetical cases are not explicit in 2017 there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict 'the strict interpretation' of the dogma EENS.
It means there is no change in the old ecclesiology of the Church. There is no theological basis for the new ecumenism.There is no theolological basis for the Anonymous Christian theory of Rahner and Ratzinger.The Catechism of the Catholic Church (846) should not have said all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church as if BOD and I.I were relevant to the dogma EENS and were exceptions.
For Fr.Nicholas Gruner, John Vennari, Chris Ferrara, the late Mons. Ignacio Barreiro, the SSPX bishops and the FSSP priests it was Fr. Leonard Feeney who was in heresy and not Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits.
The sedevacantists Bishop Sanborn and Pirvanus have also accepted the New Theology based on visible for us baptism of desire being an exception to the dogma EENS as it was known in the 16th century. So their interpretation of Vatican Council II has its foundation on LG 16 etc excluding the baptism of water and being a visible exception to EENS. This is irrational and non traditional. It leads to heresy.
Even the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, the communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney in the diocese of Worcester and Manchester, USA were following the Lefebvrists and the present magisterium in assuming invisible cases (LG 16) were visible exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. Though on EENS they were always correct and it was the SSPX which was wrong.
With Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) and EENS ( Feeneyite) there should be no problem any more for the SSPX regarding Vatican Council II.
It is the liberal cardinals and bishops in England, Germany, Australia,USA etc who will want to reject Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) and EENS ( Feeneyite) since it will not be in harmony with the Mason's New World Order Agenda.
-Lionel Andrades



SEPTEMBER 28, 2016

Heresy is caused by directly not accepting a teaching of the Church which it is necessary to accept. However heresy is also caused if you mix up what is defacto as being dejure ( in principle), is you confuse what is hypothetical as being objective.


http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/09/heresy-is-caused-by-directly-not.html

JUNE 5, 2017



Two popes in heresy but then so is Chris Ferrara so he does not notice ithttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/06/two-popes-in-heresy-but-then-so-is.html




When Chris Ferrara wrote The Great Facade he did not know Vatican Council II could be interpreted without the irrational premise and the conclusion would be different http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/06/when-chris-ferrara-wrote-great-facade.html

SEPTEMBER 26, 2016



Heresy results also when we assume hypothetical cases are personally known in the present times,example the baptism of desire:Bishop Fellay like the Vatican Curia violates the Principle of Non Contradiction

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/09/heresy-results-also-when-we-assume.html


SEPTEMBER 25, 2016


Bishop Fellay's understanding and interpretation of Vatican Council II is heretical

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/09/the-letter-of-holy-office-1949-has_25.html


SEPTEMBER 24, 2016

CDF/ Ecclesia Dei would have to clarify that Cushingism from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 is heresy and that Feeneyism is Catholic orthodoxy http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/09/cdf-ecclesia-dei-would-have-to-clarify.html



 JUNE 13, 2016


The doctrinal position of Bishop Bernard Fellay is heretical. He also contradicts the SSPX doctrinal General Chapter Statement 2012 which affirmed EENS with NO exceptions

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/06/the-doctrinal-position-of-bishop.html


 JULY 12, 2016


Anonymous Catholics object to Amoris Laeitia : Pope not in heresy

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/07/anonymous-catholics-object-to-amoris.html


 MARCH 31, 2016


Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II with an irrationality as do the traditionalists: the result is heresyhttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/pope-francis-interprets-vatican-council.html



JANUARY 18, 2016


Pope Francis and Cardinal Muller interpret the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II with irrationality : manifest heresy

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/pope-francis-and-cardinal-muller_18.html

JANUARY 17, 2016


Pope Francis and Cardinal Muller interpret the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II with Cushingism : 'the Church' is in manifest heresy

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/pope-francis-and-cardinal-muller_17.html


Pope Francis and Cardinal Muller interpret the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II with Cushingism : this is manifest heresy

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/pope-francis-and-cardinal-muller.html



JANUARY 15, 2016

For me the clerics in 1949 Rome and Boston were in heresy since there was no baptism of desire case without the baptism of water. There were none known to them and none in past history

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/for-me-clerics-in-1949-rome-and-boston.html

JANUARY 13, 2016

Roberto Mattei accepts this invisible-visible distinction made by the contemporary magisterium. It is not irrational for him.It is not heretical. Since he uses this same reasoning to interpret Vatican Council II

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/roberto-mattei-accepts-this-invisible.html


DECEMBER 11, 2015

No denial from traditionalists : modernism in their liturgy

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/no-denial-from-traditionalists.html


DECEMBER 9, 2015

Latin Mass Societies' Mass is heretical

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/12/latin-mass-societies-mass-is-heretical.html

 NOVEMBER 16, 2015

Sedevacantists are offering/attending the Traditional Latin Mass with heresy an impediment, a sinhttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/11/sedevacantists-are-offeringattending.html


FEBRUARY 17, 2015

The mistake from 1949 was placed in Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14) and also in the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/02/the-mistake-from-1949-was-placed-in.html


 JULY 15, 2014

USCCB Secretariate for Divine Worship statement is heresy

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/07/usccb-secretariate-for-divine-worship.html


JUNE 30, 2014

I accept implicit baptism of desire according to Vatican Council II, Mystici Corporis etc.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/i-accept-implicit-baptism-of-desire.html

JUNE 11, 2014

If ' a ray of the Truth' (NA 2) is considered visible or invisible decides heresy

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/if-ray-of-truth-na-2-is-considered.html



Did Pope Benedict intentionally not tell Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre that Vatican Council II was not a rupture with the strict interpretation of EENS ?


Did Pope Benedict intentionally not tell Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre that Vatican Council II was not a rupture with the strict interpretation of EENS ?

In a previous post I mentioned that Fr.Nicholas Gruner did not know about Vatican Council II (Feeneyite). He did not know that with Vatican Council II( Feeneyite) the Council supported the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the Syllabus of Errors.
Similarly Chris Ferrara when he wrote his book The Great Facade he did not know that by switiching the interpretation of the baptism of desire(BOD) for example, you can get a completely different interpretation of EENS. BOD can be interpreted as being visible or invisible, explicit or implicit and the interpretation of the Council is one of continuity or rupture with the past magisterium.
Similarly when Ralph Martin wrote his books on evangelisation and salvation he did not know that Vatican Council II was Feeneyite and that his interpretation of the Council was irrational and Cushingite.
It means all these 50 years every one had the wrong interpretation of Vatican Council II.They were using the irrational premise. They assumed invisible for us baptism of desire was explicit. They also concluded that BOD excluded the baptism of water in the Church.So BOD and I.I (LG 16, AG 7, LG 14 etc) were explicit exceptions to Tradition for them. They wrongly placed the fault on Vatican Council II when the fault was really their premise, visible or invisible BOD and I.I.
So the question is: at the time of the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger know that Vatican Council II (Feeneyite) was in harmony with the dogma EENS and Tradition? If he did know does this mean that he intentionally did not tell Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre that Vatican Council II was not a rupture with the strict interpretation of EENS ? He did not say that Pope Pius XII had made a mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 ?Or was it something he simply overlooked. After all none of the traditionalists corrected him. So the fault cannot be placed fully on him.
I have been writing on this issue for many years. There are thousands of blog posts on the Internet. I have also directly e-mailed the Vatican offices. I have personally sent my writings to the CDF office and to Cardinal Ratzinger. I have also sent him a copy once through an American family whom he met often. He had read what I had written.i have e-mailed Exclesia Dei so many times.
So in the March 2016 in the Avvenire interview did Pope Benedict not know that EENS(Feeneyite) was not ' a development' with the dogma EENS as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century? Why did he say that EENS was ' a development' of EENS as it was known to the 16th century missionaries?
EENS is only a development with Vatican Council II( Cushingite).
Did he intentionally mislead Catholics in general for some reason or was it still an oversight ? After all the traditionalists and sedevacantists have not corrected him.Since they too are Cushingites and use the New Theology based on the false premise.Yesterday Rorate Caeili posted an analysis of Vatican Council II based on Cushngite reasoning. More of the same.
-Lionel Andrades

Fr.Nicholas Gruner and John Vennari did not know

In a previous post I mentioned that Fr.Nicholas Gruner did not know about Vatican Council II (Feeneyite). He did not know that with Vatican Council II( Feeneyite) the Council supported the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the Syllabus of Errors.
Similarly Chris Ferrara when he wrote his book The Great Facade he did not know that by switiching the interpretation of the baptism of desire(BOD) for example, you can get a completely different interpretation of EENS. BOD can be interpreted as being visible or invisible, explicit or implicit and the interpretation of the Council is one of continuity or rupture with the past.
Similarly when Ralph Martin wrote his books on evangelisation and salvation he did not know that Vatican Council II was Feeneyite and that his interpretation of the Council was irrational and Cushingite.
It means all these 50 years every one had the wrong interpretation of Vatican Council II.They were using the irrational premise. They assumed invisible for us baptism of desire was excplicit. They also concluded that BOD excluded the baptism of water in the Church.So BOD and I.I (LG 16, AG 7, LG 14 etc) were explicit
exceptions to Tradition for them. They wrongly placed the fault on Vatican Council II.

Fr.Nicholas Gruner and John Vennari could never understand this.If Chris Ferrara understands it today he is not saying anything.Soon there will be another of his reports on something Pope Francis has said or done, and he will ignore again what I have written here.
Similarly Ralph Martin and Robert Fastiggi , professors of theology at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit, agree that there are no visible for us cases of BOD and I.I in 2017. So there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict the dogma EENS as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century.However they still have to say directly that the two living popes have made an objective mistake. They have violated the Principle of Non Contradiction as have the traditionalits and sedevacantists.
Then so much of Vatican Council II was based on this error.In principle hypothetical cases were assumed to be objective.They are mentioned in the text - LG 16, LG 8, LG 14, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22, AG 7, AG 11 etc.
Cardinal Ottaviani and Archbishop Lefebvre said nothing.Mons. Clifford Fenton, Ludwig Ott and Fr.William Most said nothing.They did not ask themselves how can invisible people be visible exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
So the Council has been built on human error.It is heretical. It is not simply non traditional and irrational.1
-Lionel Andrades

1

July 18, 2017
Everyone agrees Vatican Council II has a major philosophical mistake http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/07/everyone-agrees-vatican-council-ii-has.html


Wednesday, July 19, 2017

Catholic theocracy- Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Feeneyite) essential



Vatican Council II supports a theocracy.Mission and proclamation is needed based on Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and EENS( Feeneyite).
For a Catholic theocracy - Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Feeneyite) is essential.
With Feeneyite Vatican Council II the Catholic Church affirms the Social Reign of Christ the King.
Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) is a foundation. Upon it is  based the traditional teaching on the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation and the non separation of Church and state, also the old ecumenism.When Catholics accept the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted by Fr. Leonard Feeney then Vatican Council II would pastorally be in harmony with Tradition.There can only the old ecumenism. The new ecumenism is founded on there being known salvation outside the Church. Cushingite theology. The New Theology.
The Vatican and the Left presently affirm Cushingite theology with reference to Vatican Council II.Even the traditionalists and sedevacantists are using Cushingite theology. For them there is 'known salvation' outside the Church. Invisible cases of the baptism of desire etc are 'visible exceptions' to Feeneyite EENS.So non Catholics do not always need to convert for salvation.Since they do not need to convert they reason, why should there be the proclamation of the Social Reign of Jesus over all political legislation.Why should there be the non separation of Church and State, why should there be a Catholic theocracy ?
Since the traditionalists and sedevacantists use Cushingite theology they cannot support a theocracy theologically. Their buckets of water have holes.Why do you need a Catholic theocracy when people can allegedly be saved outside the Church? Invisible for us cases are visible, according to the traditionalists and sedevacantists and then they blame the popes and Vatican Council II.

The Catholic Church officially teaches extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Ad Gentes 7, Lumen Gentium 14 Vatican Council II).
It is there in the magisterial documents though not supported by the present magisterium of ecclesiastics.

So all legislation needs to be centered on Jesus, and the Social Kingship of Jesus,there being no separation of Church and State. This is Vatican Council II Feeneyite.
Image result for Fr.Nicholas Gruner Photos
It is something Fr. Nicholas Gruner and John Vennari never knew about.
Chris Ferrara did not know about it when he wrote his book The Great Facade.
Image result for Ralph Martin  Photos
Ralph Martin did not know about it when he wrote any of his many books.
Now they know about it. They have not been informed by the Jesuits or La Civilita Cattolica or the Vatican Secretary of State.
We can work for a Catholic theocracy by interpreting all magisterial documents with rational and traditional Feeneyite theology.No one can say that this is not the teachings of the Catholic Church.
We are affirming all magisterial documents except that we are interpreting them with Feeneyism theology.
The present magisterium also affirms all magisterial documents but they interpret them with Cushingism.This is the difference.

The average Catholic must know that there is no rupture between Vatican Council and the strict interpretation of the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation.Then let him proclaim. Let his mission be based on this traditional doctrine.

According to the Catholic Church, post-Vatican Council II, all non Catholics are on the way to Hell unless they enter the Catholic Church as members.

This must be understood by all Catholic political parties and Catholic religious groups.
635692819810521695

This is important for the Polish government. They must see the link between Vatican Council II(Feeneyite), extra ecclesiam nulla salus(Feeneyite) and a Catholic theocracy. Presently the Polish bishops are interpreting magisterial documents with the New Theology, Cushingite theology.Once they are on track it will be a welcome catechesis.2
-Lionel Andrades
1

JULY 16, 2017

Catholics needs to work for the separation of State and secularism and the non separation of Church and State even if opposed by Fr.Spadero s.j and the Vatican
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/07/catholics-needs-to-work-for-separation.html

2.


JUNE 15, 2017

An ethical and political issue for the Polish Governmenthttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/06/an-ethical-and-political-issue-polish.html

JUNE 14, 2017

Polish Ambassadors to Vatican and Italy ask the Vatican to correct the errors on Wikipedia
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/06/polish-ambassadors-to-vatican-and-italy_14.html
JUNE 13, 2017
Polish Ambassadors to Vatican and Italy need to be asked about Franciscans of the Immaculate and rules for religious communities
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/06/polish-ambassadors-to-vatican-and-italy.html
PAKISTANI CLERICS IN POLAND NOT CHARGED UNDER BLASPHEMY LAWS FOR UPHOLDING QURAN
https://gloria.tv/article/vxqCuhQPr26r1YKfKLjA7ySRP
Polish President Andrzej Duda must note that Cardinal Muller is teaching false doctrine which is politically motivated

POLAND IS CONSECRATED TO CHRIST THE KING BUT THE LAWS ARE SECULAR AND PRO-SATAN



DIGNITATIS HUMANE IS NOT AN ISSUE WITH VATICAN COUNCIL II (FEENEYITE) : ENGLISH BISHOPS ARE CUSHINGITES

POLISH PRESIDENT AND PRIME MINISTER MUST BE AWARE OF IDEOLOGUES OF NEW DOCTRINE
https://gloria.tv/article/8y6DHehJXX1L4v3jTw4zgThaN

https://gloria.tv/article/sRo1ZguveZoG21Tex9fZkg2Q3


Motion in Polish Parliament (Sejm) needed supporting the Tridentine Rite Mass https://gloria.tv/article/JwzueEVdQtHk2wYeTAMvvw73y 

European Parliament approves Traditional Latin Mass with new ideology https://gloria.tv/article/Zyav3jDaqeEE1cZ4gRL1JViB6  

Poland consecration to Christ the King : Collegiality in Vatican Council II is no more an issue when there is unity on correct doctrine https://gloria.tv/article/gtFcoNc4soAR1YVSpb1B7pYGv

POLISH BISHOPS AND PRESIDENT ARE ALSO PART OF 'THE FALSE CHURCH': INTERPRET THE CATECHISM(1995) DIFFERENTLY

OMMON MISTAKE EVEN THE BISHOPS AND PRESIDENT OF POLAND NEED TO ADDRESS
https://gloria.tv/article/Wy3YZ3eZwzjH6dLyeQ2GEpMrU

ISHOP SCHNEIDER DID NOT TELL THE POLISH PEOPLE THAT JOHN PAUL II MADE A THEOLOGICAL MISTAKE.VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT CONTRADICT THE EXCLUSIVIST ECCLESIOLOGY OF THE PAST

On this old ecclesiology in harmony with Vatican Council II Poland, now consecrated to Christ the King, can proclaim His Social Reign over all political legislation

The Polish Church and government could interpret magisterial documents with Feeneyism there would be the ecclesiology of the past with no salvation outside the Church in 2017

NDRZEJ DUDA PRESIDENT OF POLAND DOES NOT NOTE THE SPLIT BETWEEN CHURCH DOCTRINE AND STATE IN POLAND BECAUSE OF CUSHINGISM

Catholic Church in Poland also uses the new theology of Pope Benedict, Cushingite theology: results in separation of Church and State https://gloria.tv/article/g6dn6Ko3XDKN4adP9VsUrpUb4

The non separation of Church and State theologically depends on Feeneyite Vatican Council II and EENS : 'false church' is blocking it 

https://gloria.tv/article/2sS1XEQauRo2AZz91v6EF9xWV

Two popes irrational and in heresy : Archbishop Gullickson, Fr.Visintin osb correct 

https://gloria.tv/article/metY6fnzBKhh1Ms3wskGZ6xdj

____________________________