Wednesday, November 2, 2016

If everyone would 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.

If all of them would 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
Lionel:
1.Fr.Leonard Feeney said that there were no exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
2.For him there were no exceptions of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance.
3.For him hypothetical cases could not be objective exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in the present times.This is something objective and factual.Example, people now in Heaven allegedly saved without the baptism of water are hypothetical cass for us. So they cannot be known exceptions on earth in the present times to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
4.Similarly if someone died allegedly without the baptism of desire in the past centuries, cannot be a known exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in 2016.
This is Feeneyism for me.
So with Feeneyism:
1.There are no exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus since humanly speaking there cannot be an exceptions. We cannot know someone who will be saved or has been saved without the baptism of water.This is something known only to God.
2.There are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus mentioned in Vatican Council II.There cannot be any.
3.The baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance mentioned in Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) is not a known exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.It refers to a hypothetical case which objectively cannot be known.
So with Feeneyism, the conclusion for me, is that there are no exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. There cannot be any exceptions known to us on earth.
So in Vatican Council II there are no exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors ( on ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue), the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( outside the Church there is no salvation), the Nicene Creed( I believe in one known baptism for the forgivess of sins and it is the baptism of water.I  do not believe in three or more baptisms for the forgiveness of sins. The baptism of desire for example is not a known baptism.I cannot repeat it. I cannot see it being given. I cannot give it to someone.

So if everyone would 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.
-Lionel Andrades

Do you think that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was using Cushingism instead of Feeneyism?


Do you think that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre also made a mistake in theology and lost the truth?

Lionel:

Do you think that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was using Cushingism instead of Feeneyism?
______________________________



Cardinal Ratzinger and Archbishop Lefebvre did not know : with Feeneyism Vatican Council II affirms an Ecumenism of Return, Social Reign of Christ the King and no known salvation outside the Church

Lionel:
Do you think that since they were using Cushingism Vatican Council II was a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So there was known salvation outside the Church. Since there was known salvation outside the Church there are exceptions to an ecumenism of return, the need for the Social Reign of Christ the King and the need for all non Christians to formally convert into the Catholic Church.
Do you think that if they were using Feeneyism Vatican Council II was not a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. There was noknown salvation outside the Church. Since there was no known salvation outside the Church there are no exceptions to an ecumenism of return, the need to teach the Social Reign of Christ the King and the need for all non Christians to formally convert into the Catholic Church.

_________________________________



Cardinal Ratzinger did not know that with Feeneyism Vatican Council II does not have a hermeneutic of rupture ?

Lionel:
For Cardinal Ratzinger the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is no more like it was for the 16th century missionaries. He said this in the daily Avvenire.
So for him there are exceptions.
This is Cushingism.
In the theological paper of the International Theological Commission on 'Christianity and the World Religions' he says Pope Pius XII corrected the error of Fr.Leonard Feeney on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
So for the ITC there are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
So this is Cushingism.
-Lionel Andrades


Could you identify the irrational premise and conclusion for me ?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/could-you-identify-irrational-premise.html


Do you agree that there can be an interpretation of Vatican Council II with or without an irrational premise and conclusion?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/do-you-agree-that-there-can-be.html

When an irrational premise is used I refer to it as Cushingism. When there is a rational premise, I refer to it as Feeneyism.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/when-irrational-premise-is-used-i-refer.html

https://gloria.tv/video/KGTNnspuhZyG6uMAzDyAv4vvJ

When an irrational premise is used I refer to it as Cushingism. When there is a rational premise, I refer to it as Feeneyism.


IRRATIONAL PREMISE
The irrational premise is that invisible things or persons are visible.
RATIONAL PREMISE
The rational premise is that invisible things or persons are visible.
_______________________
IRRATIONAL PREMISE
The irrational premise is that hypothetical cases are objectively visible in 2016.
RATIONAL PREMISE
The rational premise is that hypothetical cases are objectively invisible in 2016.
___________________________
IRRATIONAL PREMISE
The irrational premise is that the baptism of desire refers to personally known cases in 2016.
RATIONAL PREMISE
The rational premise is that the baptism of desire refers to an unknown cases in 2016.There is no personally known case.
__________________________
IRRATIONAL PREMISE
The irrational premise is assuming there are objectively seen and known cases of being saved in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water in 2016.
RATIONAL PREMISE
The rational premise is assuming others (in general) cannot see invisible cases in the present and the past.It is assuming that the baptism of desire refers to an unknown and invisible case in the present or past.
_______________________________________

When an irrational premise is used I refer to it as Cushingism.
When there is a rational premise, I refer to it as Feeneyism.
-Lionel Andrades

https://gloria.tv/video/KGTNnspuhZyG6uMAzDyAv4vvJ

Do you agree that there can be an interpretation of Vatican Council II with or without an irrational premise and conclusion?


Do you agree that there can be an interpretation of Vatican Council II with or without an irrational premise and conclusion?
Lionel:
IRRATIONAL PREMISES
The irrational premise is that invisible things or persons are visible.
The irrational premise is that hypothetical cases are objectively visible in 2016.
The irrational premise is that the baptism of desire refers to personally known cases in 2016.
The irrational premise is assuming there are objectively seen and known cases of being saved in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water in 2016.
The irrational premise is assuming others could see invisible cases in the present and the past.It was assuming that the baptism of desire refers to a known case in the past.
_______________________________________

CONCLUSIONS
IRRATIONAL CONCLUSION:
So every one does not need to be incorporated into the Catholic Church in 2016 since there are exceptions.There are known people saved without the baptism of water.
RATIONAL CONCLUSION:
So every one does need to be incorporated into the Catholic Church in 2016 since there are no exceptions.There are no known cases of people saved without the baptism of water.
___________________________________

IRRATIONAL CONCLUSION
So every Protestant does not need to formally enter the Catholic Church for salvation because there are known cases in 2016 for Protestants saved 'in imperfect communion with the Church'(UR 3).
RATIONAL CONCLUSION
So every Protestant does need to formally enter the Catholic Church for salvation as taught by the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus because there are known cases in 2016 of Protestants saved 'in imperfect communion with the Church'(UR 3).
___________________________________

IRRATIONAL CONCLUSION
The Catholic Church has rejected Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salussince there are known cases in 2016 of persons saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire.
RATIONAL CONCLUSION
The Catholic Church has not rejected Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salussince there are no known cases in 2016 of persons saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire.There are no visible exceptions.
_________________________________

IRRATIONAL CONCLUSION
Pope Benedict XVI said that extra ecclesiam nulla salus is no more like it was for the 16th century missionaries since there is a development with Vatican Council II, LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to known cases in 2016 and so they are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

RATIONAL CONCLUSION
Pope Benedict XVI said that extra ecclesiam nulla salus is no more like it was for the 16th century missionaries since there is a development with Vatican Council II, LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to known cases in 2016 and so they are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The pope was wrong. Since there are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in 2016.
____________________________________

IRRATIONAL CONCLUSION
Archbishop Augustine di Noia told Edward Pentin that not every one needs to enter the Church since Vatican Council II (LG 8) says there are 'elements of sanctification and truth' in other religions.So it is implied that LG 8 refers to known cases of persons saved without the baptism of water, which are exceptions to all needing to enter the Catholic Church for salvation.

RATIONAL CONCLUSION
Archbishop Augustine di Noia told Edward Pentin that not every one needs to enter the Church since Vatican Council II (LG 8) says there are 'elements of sanctification and truth' in other religions.So it is implied that LG 8 refers to known cases of persons saved without the baptism of water, which are exceptions to all needing to enter the Catholic Church for salvation.
He was wrong. There are no known cases in 2016 of person saved with 'elements of sanctification and truth'.So there are no exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus in Vatican Council II (LG 8).
________________________________

IRRATIONAL CONCLUSION
Since invisible cases are visible in the present times and there are visible cases of the baptism of desire etc every one does not need to be a formal member of the Church, with faith and baptism, as was taught by Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441, on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

RATIONAL CONCLUSION
Since invisible cases are NOT visible in the present times and there are NO visible cases of the baptism of desire etc every one does need to be a formal member of the Church, with faith and baptism, as was taught by Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441, on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
-Lionel Andrades

https://gloria.tv/video/KGTNnspuhZyG6uMAzDyAv4vvJ

Could you identify the irrational premise and conclusion for me ?


Could you identify the irrational premise and conclusion for me,so that I am sure you understand me and agree with me ?
Lionel:

premise
1.

LOGIC

a previous statement or proposition from which another is inferred or follows as a conclusion.
"if the premise is true, then the conclusion must be true"

1.

base an argument, theory, or undertaking on.
"the reforms were premised on our findings"


IRRATIONAL PREMISES
The irrational premise is that invisible things or persons are visible.
The irrational premise is that hypothetical cases are objectively visible in 2016.
The irrational premise is that the baptism of desire refers to personally known cases in 2016.
The irrational premise is assuming there are objectively seen and known cases of being saved in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water in 2016.
The irrational premise is assuming others could see invisible cases in the present and the past.It was assuming that the baptism of desire refers to a known case in the past.
_______________________________________



IRRATIONAL CONCLUSIONS
So every one does not need to be incorporated into the Catholic Church in 2016 since there are exceptions.There are known people saved without the baptism of water.
So every Protestant does not need to formally enter the Catholic Church for salvation because there are known cases in 2016 for Protestants saved 'in imperfect communion with the Church'(UR 3).
The Catholic Church has rejected Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus since there are known cases in 2016 of persons saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire.
Pope Benedict XVI said that extra ecclesiam nulla salus is no more like it was for the 16th century missionaries since there is a development with Vatican Council II, LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to known cases in 2016 and so they are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Archbishop Augustine di Noia told Edward Pentin that not every one needs to enter the Church since Vatican Council II (LG 8) says there are 'elements of sanctification and truth' in other religions.So it is implied that LG 8 refers to known cases of persons saved without the baptism of water, which are exceptions to all needing to enter the Catholic Church for salvation.
Since invisible cases are visible in the present times and there are visible cases of the baptism of desire etc every one does not need to be a formal member of the Church, with faith and baptism, as was taught by Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441, on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
-Lionel Andrades

https://gloria.tv/video/KGTNnspuhZyG6uMAzDyAv4vvJ

The Lutheran Church of Sweden is:pro-contraception, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, pro-female clergy, doesn’t believe in Transubstantiation, or the the Real Presence of Our Lord,and much, much, more!

The Lutheran Church of Sweden is:

pro-contraception,

pro-abortion,

pro-homosexual,

pro-female clergy,

doesn’t believe in Transubstantiation,

or the the Real Presence of Our Lord,

and much, much, more!


https://gloria.tv/article/CpQhQT7c4ync6KuXdrMNjVPDC

“A Spirit All on Fire”: An Obscure 14th C. Saint’s Terrifying Vision of Purgatory

“A Spirit All on Fire”: An Obscure 14th C. Saint’s Terrifying Vision of Purgatory


by  - 
Public Domain, Wikipedia / ChurchPOP
Haven’t heard of St. Lidwina of Schiedam? That’s okay – she’s not exactly the most famous saint of the Church. But, boy, did she have quite the vision of Purgatory!
St. Lidwina was a 15th century Dutch mystic. As a teenager, she fell and broke a rib while iceskating and never fully recovered. She devoted the rest of her life to prayer and fasting and became well-known as a holy woman.
A sinful man was converted by her prayers and counsel shortly before his death. She asked her guardian angel what became of him in the next life and was blessed with the incredible vision of Purgatory described below.
Note that, as with all private revelations, her vision is not a part of the deposit of faith and no Catholic is obliged to believe it. It can, however, build up one’s faith in the teachings of the Church.

“An Immense Prison”

“Is this, then, hell, my brother?” St. Lidwina asked the angel upon entering a terrifying place. “No, sister,” the angel answered, “but this part of purgatory is bordering upon hell.”
Here’s what she saw first: “Looking around on all sides, she saw what resembled an immense prison surrounded with walls of a prodigious height, the blackness of which, together with the monstrous stones, inspired her with horror.”
Then she started hearing dreadful sounds: “Approaching this dismal enclosure, she heard a confused noise of lamenting voices, cries of fury, chains, instruments of torture, violent blows which the executioners discharged upon their victims. This noise was such that all the tumult of the world, in tempest or battle, could bear no comparison to it.”
She found the man she was looking for in a dark well. When they removed the cover of the well, “a cloud of flames, together with the most plaintive cries, came forth.” The man looked like “a spirit all on fire, resembling incandescent metal.”
“The sight of this soul, a prey to the most terrible torment of fire,” the account says, “gave our saint such a shock that the cincture which she wore around her body was rent in twain; and, no longer able to endure the sight, she awoke suddenly from her ecstasy.”
St. Lidwina committed herself from then on to do penance to aid the man to leave purgatory and make it to heaven.

Here’s the full account of her vision:

“‘He is there,’ said her angel, ‘and he suffers much. Would you be willing to endure some pain in order to diminish his?’ ‘Certainly,’ she replied, ‘I am ready to suffer anything to assist him.’ Instantly her angel conducted her into a place of frightful torture. ‘Is this, then, hell, my brother?’ asked the holy maiden, seized with horror. ‘No, sister,’ answered the angel, ‘but this part of purgatory is bordering upon hell.’
“Looking around on all sides, she saw what resembled an immense prison surrounded with walls of a prodigious height, the blackness of which, together with the monstrous stones, inspired her with horror. Approaching this dismal enclosure, she heard a confused noise of lamenting voices, cries of fury, chains, instruments of torture, violent blows which the executioners discharged upon their victims.
“This noise was such that all the tumult of the world, in tempest or battle, could bear no comparison to it. ‘What, then, is that horrible place?’ asked St. Lidwina of her good angel. ‘Do you wish me to show it to you?’ ‘No, I beseech you,’ said she, recoiling with terror, ‘the noise I hear is so frightful that I can no longer bear it ; how, then, could I endure the sight of those horrors?’
“Continuing her mysterious route, she saw an angel seated sadly on the curb of a well. ‘Who is that angel?’ she asked of her guide. ‘It is,’ he replied, ‘the angel-guardian of the sinner in whose lot you are interested. His soul is in this well, where it has a special purgatory.’ At these words Lidwina cast an inquiring glance at her angel; she desired to see that soul which was dear to her, and endeavor to release it from that frightful pit.
“Her angel, who understood her, having taken off the cover of the well, a cloud of flames, together with the most plaintive cries, came forth. ‘Do you recognize that voice?’ said the angel to her. ‘Alas! yes,’ answered the servant of God. ‘Do you desire to see that soul?’ he continued. On her replying in the affirmative, he called him by his name; and immediately our virgin saw appear at the mouth of the pit a spirit all on fire, resembling incandescent metal, which said to her in a voice scarcely audible, ‘O Lidwina, servant of God, who will give me to contemplate the face of the Most High?’
“The sight of this soul, a prey to the most terrible torment of fire, gave our saint such a shock that the cincture which she wore around her body was rent in twain; and, no longer able to endure the sight, she awoke suddenly from her ecstasy. The persons present, perceiving her fear, asked her its cause. ‘Alas!” she replied, ‘how frightful are the prisons of Purgatory! It was to assist the souls that I consented to descend thither. Without this motive, if the whole world were given to me, I would not undergo the terror which that horrible spectacle inspired.’
“Some days later, the same angel whom she had seen so dejected appeared to her with a joyful countenance; he told her that the soul of his protégé had left the pit and passed into the ordinary purgatory. This partial alleviation did not suffice the charity of Lidwina; she continued to pray for the poor patient, and to apply to him the merits of her sufferings, until she saw the gates of heaven opened to him.” (Purgatory, by Fr. F. X. Schouppe, SJ, 16–19).
https://churchpop.com/2016/11/01/a-spirit-all-on-fire-an-obscure-14th-c-saints-terrifying-vision-of-purgatory/