Why must the Franciscans Sisters of the Immaculate and all Catholic religious communities have to accept BOD and I.I as being visible,objective,explicit and seen in the flesh in personal cases, for them to be accepted by Pope Francis and Cardinal Braz de Avez?.

If you consider the baptism of desire as being invisible or visible decides how you interpret Vatican Council II.

If you infer that the baptism of desire is visible you have a Vatican Council II which I call Cushingite.

If you infer that the baptism of desire is physically invisible for us human beings, then you have a Vatican Council II which I call Feeneyite.

If the baptism of desire is visible then Fr. Leonard Feeney was in heresy and the magisterium in 1949 was correct.Since there would be exceptions to Tradition which he refused to acknowledge.

If the baptism of desire is invisible then it is the magisterium which was in heresy and Fr. Leonard Feeney was repeating orthodoxy.

It's as simple as this!

Cardinals Bugnini, Bea, Ottaviani etc were not responsible for the interpretation of Vatican Council II. Simply inverse the visible-invisible distinction and the interpretaton changes.

It is true that Fr.Karl Rahner S.j,Fr.Hans Kung and others decided the narrative of Vatican Council II,approved by the magisterium of Cardinal Ratzinger, but the Council can still be interpreted today independent of them.Change your perspective and the Council changes.Change the premise and you change the Church.

We've found the missing link. 

The secret is out.We are back to the old ecclesiology of the Church.

Most Catholics today,magisterium-included, whether they know it or not, infer that the BOD is visible for us human beings in 2017. So Vatican Council II (Cushingite) becomes a rupture with Tradition, it is a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) as it was known over the centuries.
IRRATIONALITY APPLIED TO AQUINAS

So we have an innovation with EENS.This is important to note.The liberals have re-interpreted the historical references to EENS.They re-interpret St. Thomas Aquinas(visible for us man in the forest in ignorance) etc.

We have visible for us baptism of desire(BOD) which is an explicit, seen in the flesh exception to the dogma EENS(Feeneyite).

So there is now an EENS with exceptions. I call it EENS(Cushingite).

EENS with no exceptions is the traditional Feeneyite EENS, as it was known  to the 16th century missionaries.

So today we have a Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) and an EENS(Cushingite). 
CUSHINGISM IS ILLOGICAL
Cushingism is based on hypothetical cases being not hypothetical. In other words BOD and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) refer to known cases of people saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.This is irrational.They are in Heaven so how can they be known on earth. How can I also say that a saint in Heaven is a saint known to be there with the baptism of desire and without the baptism of water. Or without the baptism of desire but with invincible ignorance.How could someone in the past too make this claim.Physically no one in the past too could see people in Heaven there with the baptism of desire and the Church does not claim that any one had this special gift. This is also non traditional and heretical.

Vatican Council II and EENS , Cushingite,is defeatist, free-thinking,Lodge-theology, approved by the Masons.It is not Catholic.
VATICAN COUNCIL II FEENEYITE RIGID FOR POPE FRANCIS

Vatican Council II and EENS, Feeneyite is rational, traditional and non heretical. For Pope Francis it would be rigid, fundamentalist and triumphalistic.It would be restorationist.

He does not want the Franciscans of the Immaculate and the Society of St. Pius X  to affirm Vatican Council II and EENS, Feeneyite.

The Society of St.Pius X has chosen to look the other way at Cushingism in Vatican Council II and EENS, to receive a personal prelature, with no questions asked by them(SSPX).

The Franciscans of the Immaculate and all religious communities will have to accept the defeatist, free thinking and fantasy theology, to remain in good standing in the Catholic Church with a magisterium which is in heresy and in opposition to the teachings of the Holy Spirit expressed in the magisterium of the centuries.

Blogger-priest Fr.John Zuhlsdorf has to affirm Vatican Council II and EENS Cushingite and so he does not mention Vatican Council II and EENS, Feeneyite.He cannot say that the baptism of desire is obviously invisible and so it cannot be an exception to the dogma EENS.
APPROVES INTER-FAITH ADULTERY
Since there is known salvation outside the Church for Fr. Zuhlsdorf, like the liberals, he approves inter-faith marriages with a dispensation.

The exception makes the rule for him.If there could be one known person saved outside the Church i.e  without  Catholic faith and the baptism of water,then there can be many.So the non Catholic in an inter faith marriage with a dispensation, could not be in adultery but could be one of the many people saved outside the Church.For Fr. Zuhlsdorf outside the Church there is salvation and Vatican Council II (Cushingite) contradicts the dogma EENS(Feeneyite).For him and Pope Benedict XVI, there is ' a development' with Vatican Council II(Avvenire, March 2016, extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II).

So we have the magisterium today teaching heresy and Mason-approved theology and it is being supported by Fr.John Zuhlsdorf,Rorate Caeili,LMS Chairman, Vox Cantoris, Remnant TV,Fatima Center(Chris Ferrara),Michael Voris, Raymond Arroyo,Sandro Magister,Roberto de Mattei,Edard Pentin,St. Benedict Centers USA,FSSP...The Lefbvrists, i.e those who interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with Cushingism,like Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, are in line with the liberals.

So I repeat: if you consider the BOD and I.I as being visible or invisible decides how you will interpret Vatican Council II.

Archbishop Thomas E.Gullickson, Fr.Stefano Visintin osb and John Martignoni among many others say that the BOD and I.I are physically invisible for us.They are saying the obvious.Obviously also for me these cases are invisible.

So why cannot this also be said by Fr.John Zuhlsdorf, Rorate Caeli...?

Why must the Franciscans Sisters of the Immaculate and all Catholic religious communities have to accept BOD and I.I as being visible,objective,explicit and seen in the flesh in personal cases, for them to be accepted by Pope Francis and Cardinal Braz de Avez?.

-Lionel Andrades

https://www.facebook.com/franciscansoftheimmaculate/



__________________________________________

Update:

http://www.mycatholicsource.com/mcs/cg/latin_mass_and_catholic_tradition/summary_of_changes_since_vatican_ii.htm

I have received a link to a website which lists the changes in the Church after Vatican Council II (Cushingite).This confirms my point. That with an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II this was the result. The shepherds in the Church were a sleep. They did not announce a Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite).Even today the cardinals and bishops at the CDF/Ecclesia Dei for political reasons want to maintain the narrative on Vatican Council II.So they ignore what I write on this blog. For them hypothetical cases must be interpreted as being non hypothetical and so the conclusion is non traditional and heretical. It is the only narrative known by the traditionalists also.It can be seen on this website MyCatholicSource.com