Tuesday, March 28, 2017

On Union With God, Saint Albert The Great, Complete Audiobook, The Roman Catholic Church

Bishop Fellay to condone Cushingism in exchange for Vatican recognition

March 21, 2017

Vatican Official Confirms Agreement with SSPX

Edit: it's comical to see Lawler embrace ideas he's always been resistant to. Some day I'd love to see him kiss Bishop Fellay's ring.
March 20, 2017
[Catholic Culture] The secretary of the Ecclesia Dei commission has confirmed that the Vatican is close to an agreement with the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) that would regularize the status of the traditionalist group.

Archbishop Guido Pozzo told the German newspaper Die Tagespost that the Vatican will ask the SSPX to endorse a formal declaration, resolving some remaining doctrinal issues. However, confirming what SSPX leaders have said, the Archbishop Pozzo acknowledged that the SSPX would be allowed to continue raising questions about some teachings of Vatican II. Over the years, the archbishop observed, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has answered a number of questions about conciliar documents, and “I do not see why this work of clarification and answers to doubts and reservations... could not be carried forward.”
Archbishop Pozzo said that, in interpreting the documents of Vatican II, one clear principle would be continuity: that if an understanding of the Council’s message involves a break with the constant teaching of the Church, “this intepretation must be rejected as false or inadequate.”
The archbishop suggested that the cause of reconciliation for the SSPX should be confided to the care of Our Lady of Fatima, as the Church approaches the 100th anniversary of the apparitions.
http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=31058

I interpret the following terms with Feeneyism and the two popes and the cardinals do so with Cushingism.So does Bishop Bernard Fellay and the SSPX. I use Feeneyism and Pope Benedict XVI, Cardinal Muller, Bishop Bernard Fellay, Bishop Mark Pirvanus, Bishop Donald Sanborn and the sedevacantists Michael and Peter Dimond use Cushingism. For me the Baptism of Desire is Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite.For me Invincible Ignorance is Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite.For me Vatican Council II is Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite.
 For me Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus is Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite.For the Dimond Brothers extra ecclesiam nulla salus is Feeneyite but they reject the baptism of desire which is Cushingite for them.
 For me the Nicene Creed is Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite.
For me the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Bostonis Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite. I avoid the New Theology, while they uses it.
 For me the Catechism of the Catholic Church is Feeneyite and for them it is Cushingite.
For Bishop Fellay and Mons.Pozzo Vatican Council II( Cushingite) is a rupture with Tradition. It is a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(Feeneyite), it is a rupture with Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite). It is a rupture with the Nicene Creed ( Feneeyite) etc.It is heretical and magisterial.-Lionel Andrades
 
TERMS EXPLAINED
Feeneyism: It is the old theology and philosophical reaoning which says there are no known exceptions past or present, to the dogma EENS.There are no explicit cases to contradict the traditional interpretation of EENS.
Cushingism: It is the new theology and philosophical reasoning, which assumes there are known exceptions, past and present, to the dogma EENS, on the need for all to formally enter the Church.It assumes that the baptism of desire etc are not hypothetical but objectively known.In principle hypothetical cases are objective in the present times.
Baptism of Desire (Feeneyite): It refers to the hypothetical case of an unknown catechumen who desires the baptism of water but dies before he receives it and is saved. Since this is an invisible case in our reality it is not relevant to the dogma EENS.
Baptism of Desire (Cushingite): It refers to the known case of a catechumen who desires the baptism of water but dies before he receives it and is saved. Since this is a visible case or the SSPX it is relevant to the dogma EENS.
Invincible Ignorance ( Feeneyite): This refers to the hypothetical case of someone allegedly saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, since he was in ignorance.
Invincible Ignorance (Cushingite): This refers to the explicit case of someone allegedly saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, since he was in ignorance.Since it is an exception to the dogma EENS it is assumed to be objectively known in particular cases.This reasoning is irrational.
Council of Florence: One of the three Councils which defined the dogma EENS.It did not mention any exceptions.It did not mention the baptism of desire. It was Feeneyite.
Liberal theologians: They reinterpreted the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, as objective cases, known in the present times.They use Cushingism.
Vatican Council II (Cushingite): It refers to the interpretation of Vatican Council II with Cushingism.LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer not to hypothetical but known cases in the present times. So Vatican Council II emerges as a break with the dogma EENS.
Vatican Council II (Feeneyite): It refers to the interpretation of Vatican Council II with Feeneyism.LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to hypothetical cases, which are unknown personally in the present times.So Vatican Council II is not a break with EENS, the Syllabus of Errors, ecumenism of return, the Nicene Creed ( Feeneyite-one baptism),the teaching on the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation and the non separation of Church and State( since all need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell).
Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston: It assumed hypothetical cases were defacto known in the present times. So it presented the baptism of desire etc as an explicit exception, to the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS.It censured Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center.Since they did not assume that the baptism of desire referred to a visible instead of invisible case.The Letter made the baptism of desire etc relevant to EENs.From the second part of this Letter has emerged the New Theology.It was Cushingite.
Letter of the Holy Office 1949 ( Feeneyite). It means accepting the Letter as Feeneyite based on the first part,only .It supports Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.The traditional interpretatiion of the dogma EENS does not mention any exceptions.
Letter of the Holy Office ( Cushingite). It is based on the second part of the Letter.It rejects the traditional interpretation of EENS. Since it considers the baptism of desire ( Cushingite-explicit) and being saved in invincible ignorance ( Cushingite-explicit cases) as being exceptions to EENS ( Feeneyite).It worngly assumes hypothetical cases are objectively visible and so they are exceptions to the first part of the Letter.
Baltimore Catechism: It assumed that the desire for the baptism of an unknown catechumen, who dies before receiving it and was saved, was a baptism like the baptism of water. So it was placed in the Baptism Section of the catechism. In other words it was wrongly assumed that the baptism of desire is visible and repeatable like the baptism of water or that we can administer it like the baptism of water.The Baltimore Catechism is accepted with the confusion.It can be interpreted with Cushingism or Feeneyism.
Catechism of Pope X: It followed the Baltimore Catechism and placed the baptism of desire in the Baptism Section.It can be interpreted with Cushingism or Feeneyism.
Nicene Creed ( Cushingite) ; It says 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins' and means there are more than three known baptisms. They are water, blood, desire, seeds of the Word etc.This is a Cushingite interpretation.
Nicene Creed ( Feeneyite): It says 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins and means there is one known baptism the baptism of water.It is Feeneyite.
New Theology: It refers to the new theology in the Catholic Church based on hypothetical cases being objective in the present times.So it eliminates the dogma EENS.With the dogma EENS made obsolete the ecclesiology of the Church changes. There is a new ecclesiology which is a break with Tradition.It's basis is Cushingism.
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus ( Cushingite): .It refers to the dogma but with exceptions.All do not need to defacto convert into the Church in the present times, since there are exceptions.
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus ( Feeneyite): It refers to the dogma as it was interpreted over the centuries.There are no known exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Church, with faith and baptism, to avoid Hell.
Catechism of the Catholic Church ( Cushingite): CCC 1257 contradicts the Principle of Non Contraduction. Also CCC 848 is based on the new theology and so is a rupture with the dogma EENS( Feeneyite).
Catechism of the Catholic Church ( Feeneyite): CCC 1257 does not contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction since there are no known exceptions to all needing the baptism of water for salvation. There are no known exceptions, since God is not limited to the Sacraments.
When CCC 846 states all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church,CCC 846 does not contradict the dogmatic teaching on all needin to formally enter the Church. CCC 846 does not contradict Ad Gentes 7 which states all need faith and baptism for salvatioon.
Council of Trent : A Feeneyite does not separate the baptism of water from the baptism of desire.The baptism of desire will be followed by the baptism of water.
Council of Trent : A Cushingite separates the baptism of water from the baptism of desire. The baptism of desire excludes the baptism of water. -Lionel Andrades
________________________


March 2, 2017
Who am I (Lionel) and what do I believe in ?


 MARCH 21, 2017

Vatican Council II has a continuity with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus but the Angelicum hides this Catholic teaching

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/vatican-council-ii-has-continuity-with.html

MARCH 19, 2017

Rapid Response Team needed at the Angelicum University : unethical academics teach factual and objective errors

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/rapid-response-team-needed-at-angelicum.html

MARCH 20, 2017

VATICAN STOP THE DECEPTION AT THE ANGELICUM UNIVERSITY http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/vatican-stop-deception-at-angelicum.html


MARCH 22, 2017

The Angelicum University does not come to Vatican Council II knowing that the baptism of desire cannot be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus : since then the interpretation of the Council changes

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/03/the-angelicum-university-does-not-come.html

Catholics are bound to believe everything the Pope says in "ex cathedra."This makes you wonder how many Catholics, including priests, really believe this one...why? -Bob Semrod



Catholics are bound to believe everything the Pope says in "ex cathedra."
This makes you wonder how many Catholics, including priests, really believe this one...why?
Because of this....
Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (#7), Aug. 15, 1832: “… nothing of the things appointed ought to be diminished; nothing changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved both as regards expression and meaning.”
....And this....
Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Sess. 3, Chap. 2 on Revelation, 1870,ex cathedra: “Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be a recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding.” (Denz. 1800).
Oh...and this, too...
“Why did Athanasius know he was right? Because he clung to the infallible definition, no matter what everyone else said. Not all the learning in the world, nor all the rank of office, can substitute for the truth of one infallibly defined Catholic teaching. Even the simplest member of the faithful, clinging to an infallible definition, will know more than the most ‘learned’ theologian who denies or undermines the definition. That is the whole purpose of the Church’s infallibly defined teachingto make us independent of the mere opinions of men, however learned, however high their rank.” (The Devil’s Final Battle, p. 183. )
Maybe this will help a lot of confused Catholics, who listen to wayward and liberal priests who teach that a defined dogma doesn't mean, literally, what is actually defined ....in fact...these wayward and liberal priests, go about explaining to their starry-eyed groupies the dogma in such a twisted manner that he ends up teaching just the direct opposite of what the defined dogma says, and intends to teach. Then, yet another priest will flavor that definition by the groupie priest and add a twist or turn to it so that it even extends to that which has been condemned, under the veil of a "deeper meaning" that the lay has not been trained to decipher.
This modern phenomenon is demonstrated here by St. Francis De Sales...
St. Francis De Sales (Doctor of the Church), The Catholic Controversy, c. 1602, p. 228: “The Councils… decide and define some article. If after all this another test has to be tried before their [the Council’s] determination is received, will not another also be wanted? Who will not want to apply his test, andwhenever will the matter be settled?... And why not a third to know if the second is faithful? – and then a fourth, to test the third? Everything must be done over again, and posterity will never trust antiquity but will go ever turning upside down the holiest articles of faith in the wheel oftheir understandingswhat we say is that when a Council has applied this test, our brains have not now to revise but to believe.”
This is where we are in 2017, in today's liberal Catholicism.
Now, having established, from the actual Catholic Traditional Church teachings, what and how we are to believe....let us proceed to some of these defined dogmas that we are not allowed to veer from, in any sense...but, rather...receive them in their literal sense, without any need of interpretation, whatsoever....
Pope Eugene IV,Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441,ex cathedra:
“The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia productive of eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”
And we are able to offer this one....
Pope Eugene IV,Council of Florence, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439,ex cathedra: “Whoeverwishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.– But the Catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in the Trinity, and the Trinity in unity; neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance; for there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Spirit, their glory is equal, their majesty coeternal...and in this Trinity there is nothing first or later, nothing greater or less, but all three persons are coeternal and coequal with one another, so that in every respect, as has already been said above, both unity in Trinity, and Trinity in unity must be worshipped. Therefore let him who wishes to be saved, think thus concerning the Trinity.
“But it is necessary for eternal salvation that he faithfully believe also in the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ...the Son of God is God and man...This is the Catholic faith; unless each one believes this faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.”
You may immediately notice, that no exceptions were ever mentioned in any of the dogmatic definitions on salvation. Quit to the contrary, all exceptions were always excluded, across the board. It is true that people can be ignorant of certain aspects of the Catholic Faith, as in, certain dogmas. However, no one who is willfully ignorant of the essential mysteries of the Catholic Faith – or who rejects another dogma of the Catholic Faith – can ultimately be saved. The Trinity as well as the Incarnation make up the Catholic Faith in terms of its simplest mysteries. No man above the age of reason, no one who “wishes to be saved,” can be saved without a belief in these mysteries of Catholic Faith.
Pope Eugene IV,Council of Florence, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439,ex cathedra: “Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.– But the Catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in the Trinity, and the Trinity in unity; neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance; for there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Spirit, their glory is equal, their majesty coeternal...and in this Trinity there is nothing first or later, nothing greater or less, but all three persons are coeternal and coequal with one another, so that in every respect, as has already been said above, both unity in Trinity, and Trinity in unity must be worshipped. Therefore let him who wishes to be saved, think thus concerning the Trinity.
“But it is necessary for eternal salvation that he faithfully believe also in the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ...the Son of God is God and man...This is the Catholic faith; unless each one believes this faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.”
This ex cathreda definition of the Athanasian Creed at the ecumenical Council of Florence means that this Creed qualifies as a pronouncement from the Chair of St. Peter (an ex cathedra pronouncement).To deny that which is professed in the Athanasian Creed is to no longer be considered a Catholic. The Creed plainly declares that whoever wishes to be saved needs to hold the Catholic Faith as well as believe in the Trinity and the Incarnation. Notice the phrase in the wording, “whoever wishes to be saved” ( the Latin reads quicunque vult salvus esse).
This verbiage is without a doubt the working and inspiration of the Holy Ghost. It says that everyone who can “wish” must believe in the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation in order to be saved.This does not include infants and those below the age of reason,since they cannot wish! Infants are to be considered to be among the Catholic faithful, since they do receive the gift of the Catholic Faith as they, through their sponsors, requested, at the Sacrament of Baptism. This includes Protestant infants who are properly Baptized, as they have not rejected any Catholic truths. Being below the age of reason, they cannot make any act of faith in the Catholic mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation, an act which is absolutely necessary for the salvation of all above the age of reason, for all who wish to be saved. This would also apply to those who are mentally incapable of making the cognizant choices one does who "wishes" to do so. Is it not amazing how God worded this Creed’s teaching on the necessity of belief in the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation in a way that would not include infants? The Creed, therefore, teaches that everyone above the age of reason must have a knowledge and belief in the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation to be saved, and there are no exceptions.This creed, therefore, eliminates the theory of invincible ignorance, that one above the age of reason can be saved without knowing Christ or the true Faith, and further renders those who preach it unable to profess this creed with honesty.
Furthermore, the very fact that no one who wishes to be saved can be saved without a knowledge and belief in the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation is the reason why the Holy Office under Pope Clement XI taught that a missionary must explain these absolutely necessary mysteries to an adult who is at the point of death, before baptism. They can't just go ahead and baptize them without a certain base understanding and acceptance of certain truths.
Response of the Sacred Office to the Bishop of Quebec, Jan. 25, 1703:
Q. Whether a minister is bound, before baptism is conferred on an adult, to explain to him all the mysteries of our faith, especially if he is at the point of death, because this might disturb his mind. Or, whether it is sufficient, if the one at the point of death will promise that when he recovers from the illness, he will take care to be instructed, so that he might put into practice what has been commanded him.
A. A promise is not sufficient, but a missionary is bound to explain to an adult, even a dying one who is not entirely incapacitated,the mysteries of faith which are necessary by a necessity of means, as are especially the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation.” (Denz. 1349a)
 
So...you ask..."How bad does it get?
I'll answer....well...really bad..... read on and see why the SSPX, the FSSP and so many off-shoots of them are, more or less, forced to hold to this heretical position by the founder of the SSPX...
Bishop Marcel Lefebvre (SSPX), Against the Heresies, page 216: “Evidently,certain distinctions must be made. Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.), but not by this religion. There may be souls who, not knowing Our Lord, have by the grace of the good Lord, good interior dispositions, who submit to God...But some of these persons make an act of love which implicitly is equivalent to baptism of desire. It is uniquely by this means that they are able to be saved.”
 
This is simply heretical and is a crass denial of the Catholic Faith, the very foundational dogma of the Faith, extra ecclesium nulla salus. Is it any wonder that so many Traditionalists (almost all, including these poor priests, who, if they do not believe as Archb. Lefebvre, they dare not speak out, as they will immediately be thrown out like they were heretics, and yet, the very opposite is true....the leaders of these groups hold to the heresy.) are in the quagmire of error, since the founder of the Traditionalist movement made it a requirement of all their seminarians to hold to the same heretical error their founder held to?
So...what are faithful Catholics to do? Jesus Christ made it very simple. Believe the defined dogmas "as they are written"....believe them, in spite of any fallible opinions of priests, Bishops, or Council....hold strictly to the Faith, without compromise, and....for the Love of the Truth....
....Go on the offensive....do not be in a defensive mode in this battle for the truth.....stand your ground and graciously, and with calm charitable conviction....explain to any and all who will listen, when the subject can be brought up....or, even bring it up for discussion....and then....don't back down. This is the Faith, "once delivered to the saints"...this is the Faith we can die for....and we are willing to do so, with joy and love of God in our hearts.
-Bob Semrad
Galatians 1: 6 I wonder that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ, unto another gospel.7 Which is not another, only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema.9 As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema.
_____________________________________________

The catechuman needs the baptism of water for salvation.Cushingites deny it

On most pages of Father Feeney's book, Bread of Life, he denies the possibilty of Baptism of Blood or Desire.

Such as " I myself would say, my dear children, that a catechumen who dies before Baptism, is punished. The notion now is that he is rewarded! He is a great hero. What a holy man! That is a queer morbidity, is it not?: Page after page of this?

" And if he goes on to yell at you angrily, “Where are you going to send him — to Hell?”, say: “No, I am not going to send him to Hell because I am not the judge of the living and the dead. I am going to say what Christ said, ‘He cannot go into Heaven unless he is baptized by water. "

" And if he goes on to yell at you angrily, “Where are you going to send him — to Hell?”, say: “No, I am not going to send him to Hell because I am not the judge of the living and the dead. I am going to say what Christ said, ‘He cannot go into Heaven unless he is baptized by water.” 
_____________________________________
Lionel:
You can interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) with Cushingism or Feeneyism.
With Cushingism BOD, BOB and I.I excludes the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
With Feeneyism BOD, BOB and I.I are followed by the baptism of water and its effects in a way known to God.
 


On most pages of Father Feeney's book, Bread of Life, he denies the possibilty of Baptism of Blood or Desire.
Lionel: He only rejects Cushingism.
_____________________________
Such as " I myself would say, my dear children, that a catechumen who dies before Baptism, is punished. The notion now is that he is rewarded! He is a great hero. What a holy man! That is a queer morbidity, is it not?: Page after page of this?
Lionel: Before 1949 the catechuman who died before receiving the baptism of water in the Catholic Church would be on the way to Hell unless God provided the effects of the baptism of water in some way known only to Him.He could have sent the person  back to earth to have him baptised as St. Francis Xavier experienced or send a preacher or angel to him and baptise him as St. Thomas Aquinas said.However in  general he was on the way to Hell.
Now the liberals and pro-Masons would grant this catechuman a burial.Sine they believe that being saved with the baptism of desire is the norm and outside the Church there is the salvation which is also the new norm and so every one does not need to enter the Church to be saved,
______________________________
" And if he goes on to yell at you angrily, “Where are you going to send him — to Hell?”, say: “No, I am not going to send him to Hell because I am not the judge of the living and the dead. I am going to say what Christ said, ‘He cannot go into Heaven unless he is baptized by water. "
Lionel: The catechumen needs the baptism of water for salvation.Cushingites deny it.
______________________________
 
" And if he goes on to yell at you angrily, “Where are you going to send him — to Hell?”, say: “No, I am not going to send him to Hell because I am not the judge of the living and the dead. I am going to say what Christ said, ‘He cannot go into Heaven unless he is baptized by water.”
Lionel: Without the baptism of water he is on the way to Hell.
-Lionel Andrades