Sunday, April 10, 2016

The Catechism of the Council of Trent is free of the error of assuming hypothetical cases are general exceptions to the traditional moral teachings of the Church: other catechisms have made a mistake

Related image
The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not mention the baptism of desire in the baptism section. We do not know of any baptism of desire case.No one in the past also knew of a baptism or desire case, with or without the baptism of water. I don't know of any any such case in 2016.
So the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992) made a mistake when it mentioned the baptism of desire relative extra ecclesiam nulla salus (CCC 846,1257).

Related imageRelated imageRelated image

The Baltimore Catechism and the Catechism of Pope Pius X also made the same mistake. They considered a hypothetical case as being explicit and personally known.Then it is was inferred to be an exception to the dogma EENS. It was inferred that the desire for the baptism of water by a catechumen who dies before receiving it was like the baptism of water. It had the same results for them, as if they knew of a particular case.
Since the Baltimore Catechism we see this pattern of error in the Catholic Church. Hypothetical cases are considered objectively known and then are presumed to be exceptions to the centuries old interpretation of the dogma EENS.
The irrationality in Salvation Theology was extended to Moral Theology.
Cardinal Christoph Schonborn (right)  and Cardinal Lorenxo Baldisseri hold a copy of Pope Francis's apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia (CNS)
This irrationality, assuming people in Heaven are saved without the baptism of water,in cases visible on earth, was made part of a new Catholic moral theology in the Catechism of the Church (1992) and now it has been repeated in the Apostolic Exhoration Amoris Laetitiae (2016).An alleged known exception to all going to Hell was made part of Moral Theology.

Note the three conditions of mortal sin in the Catechism (1992) 1. It should make us ask why is 'full knowledge' and 'complete consent' mentioned.Since they cannot be judged by us.They cannot be identified by us humans.They are always hypothetical and theoretical.Speculative.
Why also is 'unintentional ignorance' mentioned. Whom do we know who has not gone to Hell because he was in 'unintentional ignorance' but also in mortal sin?.
These are hypothethical references and they were placed relative to mortal sin.They have nothing to do with our understanding of mortal sin.
This is the new moral theology.It projects a hypothetical case to blur our understanding of mortal sin.
Pope Francis uses this approach in AL.


In certain cases, this can include the help of the sacraments -  Amoris Laetitiae (351).
Hence it is (sic) can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace." (#301).'.
He is saying that we can know in certain cases when a couple is living in concubinage and adultery that they are exceptions to the moral law ( on mortal sin and adultery) and so they will not go to Hell.
How can you assume that there is a couple living in adultery who will not go to Heaven because of not having 'full knowledge' of mortal sin ? How can it be judged that someone will not go to Hell since 'complete consent' was not there? So why was this mentioned in the Catechism(1992) with reference to mortal sin? It should not have been there.
Related imageRelated image
This is like Fr.Charles Curran thinking out a whole list of creative situations which would be exceptions to the moral law.He puts it in a book which is part of Moral Theology at the pontifical universities in Rome. How can he know how God will judge on the Day of Judgement ? How can he know which of his many exceptions Jesus would take into consideration to say that a sin was not mortal and there was an exception?
None. There is no way we can assume that a certain circumstance removes the effect of mortal sin, which is eternal death. The Church tells us that only way mortal sin can be forgiven is through absolution in the Sacrament of Confession.
So when we see hypothetical cases being put forward as an exception in moral and salvation theology, we know it is the work of the devil.It is irrational, non traditional and heretical.It is the foundation stone of the new theology, in morals and faith( salvation).
The Catechism of the Council of Trent is free of this error.It does not assume hypothetical cases are general exceptions to the traditional moral teachings of the Church.The Catechisms which follow Trent have used an irrational premise (known cases of Catholics in exceptional cases who did not go to Heaven) and inference ( the exceptions refute the old rule and create a new one) to present exceptions and a new theology ( based on knowing people in Heaven who are exceptions to the moral and faith teachings of the Church).
-Lionel Andrades

1857 For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent."131
1858 Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: "Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother."132 The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.
1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God's law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart133 do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.
1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.-Catechism of the Catholic Church

One major casue of liberalism in faith and morals is the Richard Cushing Error

Fr.William Most and Mons. Joseph Clifford Fenton assumed that there were exceptions to the dogma. So they were wrong at the onset


EWTN, Trinity Communications, Jefferey Mirus suggest Native Americans before the arrival of the missionaries were saved

Monsignor Roderick Strange at the Pontifical Beda College, Rome
Protestant salvation and moral theology is being used in the Catholic Church

In faith he assumes there are known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. In morals he assumes there are known exceptions to mortal sin

The Holy See's Press Office is promoting Fr.Charles Curran's moral theology.It is also making the same error as Cardinal Richard Cushing on the issue of salvation

Script for video The Magisterial Heresy -4

The present two popes are heretical and non traditional since they interpret EENS and Vatican Council II with Cushingism. So Vatican Council II (Cushingite) emerges as a break with EENS ( Feeneyite)

The present two popes are heretical and non traditional since they interpret EENS and Vatican Council II with Cushingism. So Vatican Council II (Cushingite) emerges as a break with EENS ( Feeneyite).

Heresy, Schism and Apostasy

DefinitionsThe Catechism of the Catholic Church defines these
 three sins against the faith in this way:
2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the
willful refusal to assent to it. 
Lionel: The dogma extra ecclesiam
 nulla  salus (EENS) as  it was known 
in  the 16th century and previous 
centuries  is rejected according to
 Pope Benedict in a recent 
interview with Avvenire.
The dogma was revealed truth 
based on John 3:5 and Mark 16:16.
"Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of 
some truth which must be believed with divine and
catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt
 concerning the same; 
Lionel: Pope Benedict has 
refused to affirm the 
dogma EENS as it was
 interpreted over the
apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; 
schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman  
Pontiff or of communion with the members of the
Church subject to him." [Code of Canon Law c.751]
The Church's moral theology has always distinguished
 between objective ormaterial sin and formal sin. 
Lionel: The moral theology 
of the Church before
 and after the Council of 
Trent is not the same.

The person who holds something contrary to the Catholic

 faith is materially a heretic. 
Lionel: Since the dogma EENS is
 no more  affirmed by 
the contemporary magisterium 
it is the Catholic faith which 
has been changed. It is
members of the 
magisterium who are in 

They possess the matter of heresy, theological error. 
Lionel: The contemporary
 magisterium uses an 
irrational premise and
 inference to create a
 new  theology, which
 is a break with the
 pre-Council  of Trent
 magisterium. This is heresy.

Thus, prior to the Second Vatican Council it was quite 
common to speak of non-Catholic Christians as 
heretics, since many of their doctrines are objectively
 contrary to Catholic teaching. 
Lionel: They were heretics 
according to the old 
ecclesiology  based
 on the dogma EENS.

This theological distinction remains true, though

 in keeping with the pastoral charity of the Council
 today we use the term heretic only to describe those 
who willingly embrace what they know to be
 contrary to revealed truth. Such persons are formally
 (in their conscience before God) guilty of heresy. Thus,
 the person who is objectively in heresy is not formally
 guilty of heresy if 1) their ignorance of the truth is due 
to their upbringing in a particular religious tradition (to 
which they may even be scrupulously faithful), and 2)
 they are not morally responsible for their ignorance 
of the truth. This is the principle of invincible 
ignorance, which Catholic theology has always
 recognized as excusing before God.
Lionel: The concept of invincible 
ignorance in the new theology
 is based on the use of an 
irrational premise and inference 
to create  a non traditional
 and heretical outcome.
The concept of invincible
 ignorance is heretical.It is 
an irrationality used to reject 
the dogma EENS.
The same is true of apostasy. The person who leaves
 not just the Catholic Church but who abandons Christ
 Himself is materially an apostate. He is formally an
 apostate through willful, and therefore culpable,
 repudiation of the Christian faith.
Finally, the person who refuses submission to 
the Roman Pontiff, whom Vatican I defined as
 having a universal primacy of authority over the
 whole Church, is at least a material schismatic.
Lionel: Presently we have Pope
 Benedict and Pope Francis
 rejecting the dogma EENS as 
it was accepted by the
 popes over the centuries.
They also interpret Vatican 
Council II with  irrational 
Cushingism instead of rational
 and  traditional Feeneyism
 which is  still an option
 which they reject.
They use the same irrational 
premise and inference to
 suggest that there are known
 exceptions in moral
 theology, to the traditional
 teaching on mortal sin
 and Hell.In other words,
 they know of people 
who are living in manifest
 sin but will not be going to
So now the primacy of 
authority is there with
 popes in public heresy.

 It was thus common in the past to speak

 of the schismatic Orthodox Churches who broke
 with Rome in 1054. As with heresy, we no 
longer assume the moral culpability of those who
 belong to Churches in schism from Rome, and
 thus no long refer to them as schismatics.
Lionel: They are no longer
 referred to as schismatics
 since the popes today no 
more affirm the dogma EENS
as did the popes 
over the centuries.


When it comes to Catholics who are formally 
guilty of heresy, apostasy or schism, the
 Church applies the penalty of excommunication. 
The 1983 Code of Canon Law,repeating 
the sanctions of the earlier 1917 Code, states,
c. 1364
1. With due regard for can. 194, part 1, n. 2, an 
apostate from the faith, a heretic or a schismatic 
incurs automatic (latae sententiae) excommunication
 and if a cleric, he can also be punished by the
 penalties mentioned in can. 1336, part 1, nn. 1, 2,
 and 3.

Cardinal Christoph Schonborn (right)  and Cardinal Lorenxo Baldisseri hold a copy of Pope Francis's apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia (CNS)
Lionel: When Pope Benedict
 XVI does not  affirm 
the dogma EENS according
 to traditional Feeneyism it is
 heresy. When he interprets 
the dogma EENS with irrational
Cushingism, it is heresy.
When Pope Francis states
in Amoris Laeitiae 
'  Hence it is (sic) can no longer simply be 
said that all those in any “irregular” situation 
are living in a state of mortal sin and are 
deprived of sanctifying grace." (#301).', 
this is heresy.
He cannot know anyone who
is living in concubinage or
 adultery who will not go 
to Hell and so will be an 
exception to traditional 
moral teachings.

2. If long lasting contumacy or the seriousness
 of scandal warrants it, other penalties can be
 added including dismissal from the clerical state. 
This canon is saying that once a person
 willingly repudiates Christ, embraces a heresy,
 knowing it to be contrary to divine and Catholic
 faith, or refuses submission to the Roman Pontiff 
(or communion with the members of the Church 
subject to him), by virtue of the law itself
 they are automatically excommunicated. No 
ecclesiastical act is necessary and  no public
Lionel: This would be saying
 that our popes, cardinals and
 bishops are automatically
 excommunicated since
 they interpret EENS  with 
Cushingism and not as the  
popes over the centuries,
 before the Council of Trent.
The Special Danger of Ultra-Traditionalist
There is within the Church today a special 
danger for those who, often for seemingly
 legitimate reasons (abuses of the liturgy, 
the open promotion of heresy even by 
clergy, and similar causes), have sought
 refuge in traditionalist movements on the 
margins of the Church. These groups,
 distinguishable from those who love the
 Tridentine tradition of the Mass and
 sacraments and who celebrate them in
 Communion with the Pope, go their 
own way outside of the laws of the Church.
 They typically rationalize their 
disobedience by attacking  the 
Second Vatican Council, the current
 liturgical rites, ecumenical and 
interreligious dialogue, and often 
Pope John Paul II personally, never
 distinguishing between teaching and 
law on the one hand, and the abuse
 of it by dissenters and the disobedient 
on the other. 
Related image
Lionel: Archbishop Marcel
 Lefebvre was protesting 
against a Vatican Council 
II interpreted with 
Cushingism as a theology.
He was not aware that 
Vatican Council II could 
also be interpreted
 with Feeneyism.The
 CDF did not inform
 him.He was correct.
 Vatican Council
 II interpreted with a 
false premise and 
inference (Cushingism)
 results in a non
 traditional and heretical 
He was excommunicated
by the CDF Prefect,
 Cardinal Raztzinger.
It was the responsibility
of the CDF Prefect 
to show him the option.
These groups, such as the Society of St. Pius X, 
of Pius V, the "We Resist You to Your Face" 
movement, Br. Dimond and Holy Family 
Monastery, make ready use of scandals to 
gain support among the unwary, who, 
discouraged by their local situation, 
may think they are joining a more 
perfect orthodoxy and a more loyal 
remnant of Catholics. 
Lionel:They are protesting 
against a Vatican Council II 
interpreted with Cushingism
 i.e there are known
 exceptions to the dogma
If the contemporary 
Magisterium would interpret 
Vatican Council II 
with Feeneyism, the 
traditionalists  could
change their present view of
 the Council.

Thankfully such motives may excuse
 the average person who takes comfort
 in such groups, at least initially, though 
as St. Thomas Aquinas teaches to take
 scandal in other's sins is itself sinful. 
However, there is a great danger that
 starting from the material schism of
 refusing submission to the Pope, that 
all these groups have in common, the
 Catholic cannot long maintain the 
schizophrenic position of saying 
they are being submissive to the 
Pope while disobeying him. At 
some point they must choose 
and formally adhere to the schism
 of the group. In some cases the
 group identity depends on some
 formal repudiation of the "Novus
 Ordo" Church, very effectively 
hastening the spiritual demise of 
the lay adherent. 
Lionel: Today we have
 two popes who interpret 
the dogma EENS 
with Cushingism and 
not Feeneyism.
 Pope Benedict in the 
interview with Avvenire
lamented over the lost of
 the faith and the dogma
 EENS according to the 
16th century missionaries
( who used the theology 
of Feeneyism).Inspite
 of his disappointment, 
he would not affirm EENS
 in that interview, 
with the Feeneyite
Also unfortunate for such souls 
is the fact that these ultra-traditionalist 
groups profess to be doctrinally orthodox,
  an orthodoxy which necessarily includes
 the teaching that Outside the Church 
There Is No Salvation.

Lionel: They say they
 affirm EENS but most 
of them interpret EENS 
with Cushingism.
The traditionalists
 Slaves of the Immaculate 
Heart of Mary at the St.
Benedict Centers, 
USA are an exception.

 This means that someone who has formally 

separated himself from the Church through 
heresy or schism, or knowing the Church
 to be true failed to enter her, cannot
 be saved, unless of course they renounce 
their own will and reconcile with the Church.
Lionel: Apparantly EWTN here 
considers all the traditionalists
 as affirming EENS according 
to Feeneyism which is 
considered heretical.
While EWTN interprets
 EENS with Cushingism and 
considers this magisterial.

 Unlike the non-Catholic Christian,

 can the super-orthodox claim invincible
 ignorance of this teaching? 
Lionel: The contemporary
 magisterium can make 
things clear for all.They 
could clarify that EENS can
 be interpreted with or
 without an irrational premise 
and inference, with Cushingism
 or Feeneyism. They can make
 the same distinction for Vatican
 Council II.
Perhaps Pope Francis realizes 
that the magisterium made a 
mistake in the interpretation
 of Vatican Council
 II ( Cushingism). So now he
 is inviting the SSPX into
 the Church with Vatican
 Council II not being an issue.
He also needs to apologize 
for the excommunication 
of Archbishop Lefevbre
 who was rejecting a 
Cushingite Vatican Council
 II. He could also 
apologize for the Holy 
Office(1949) excommunicating
 Fr.Leonard Feeney
 for rejecting a Cushingite 

Can they escape the condemnation of 

Pope Boniface VIII, who in first elaborating 
it said, "this authority, although it is given
 to man and is exercised by man, is not 
human, but rather divine, and has been 
given by the divine Word to Peter himself 
and to his successors in him, whom the 
Lord acknowledged an established rock,
 when he said to Peter himself: 
Whatsoever you shall bind etc. [Matt. 16:19]. 
Therefore, whosoever resists this power so 
ordained by God, resists the order of God ...? 
Lionel: Pope Boniface VIII
 approved the dogma 
extra ecclesiam nulla salus
in the Council of
 Florence 1441.It was 
Feeneyite!.It is being
 rejected by EWTN today.

 No wonder that given enough time such

 groups inevitably produce those who claim 
that the See of Peter is vacant, since the logic 
of their schismatic attitude is ultimately 
irreconcilable with the doctrine of papal 
primacy, as enunciated by both Pope
 Boniface and Vatican I.
Lionel: Pope Boniface and
 the pope and cardinals 
at Vatican 1 were Feeneyite
 on EENS.The present two
popes are heretical 
and non traditional since 
they interpret EENS 
and Vatican Council II with 
Cushingism. So Vatican
 Council II (Cushingite)
 emerges as a break
 with EENS ( Feeneyite).
-Lionel Andrades

Pope Benedict's Avvenire interview contradicts
 the SSPX General Chapter Statement on 
extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican
 Council II

Crisis Magazine's photo.

For there to be an exception to EENS it
 would mean there is a known case, a
 physically known case in the present 
times, who made it to Heaven 
without the baptism of water.An
 invisible case cannot be an exception.

Heresy in Amoris Latitiae ?