eucharistandmission: The way you look at St. Emerentiana decides how you interpret Vatican Council II

Tuesday, January 30, 2018

The way you look at St. Emerentiana decides how you interpret Vatican Council II

The way you look at St. Emerentiana decides how you interpret Vatican Council II

So 'the Church' made a mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and Vatican Council (1965) since there were no objective cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood (BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I).

BOD,BOB and I.I cases can only be hypothetical and speculative. No one could have seen St. Emerentiana in Heaven without the baptism of water.

It is the same with St. Victor and the usual names cited as exceptions to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).

For Ann Barnhardt BOD,BOB and I.I refer to known people saved outside the Church.For her BOD, BOB and I.I refers to physically visible cases. This is her understanding of 'Feeneyism'.Feeneyism is heresy for her since it does not accomodate 'the exceptions' of BOD, BOB, I.I and these are real exceptons for her,concrete people saved with the BOD,BOB and I.I outside the Catholic Church.

So of course she is critical of Vatican Council II since the Council suggests for her that there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the old ecclesiology of the Church associated with the Traditional Latin Mass.Of course the Council has to be a break with Tradition for her, since BOD,BOB and I.I are exceptions to 'Feeneyism'.

She is not in heresy, according to her,since she is following 'the Church'.The Church like her, supports the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, since BOD ,BOB and I.I are visible exceptions to EENS. If they were not visible they would not be exceptions. If they were not known they would not be exceptions.

The Church, like her, supports Vatican Council II(Cushingite) since BOD(LG 14), I.I(LG 16 ) etc are known exceptions to EENS. If they were not known in personal cases, or course, they could not be exceptions to EENS.

So for the popes, the CDF and the Left, Ann Barnhardt is not in heresy- and neither even a traditionalist, even though she attends the Traditional Latin Mass. Since like the two popes, her ecclesiology is liberal and new.It is not that of the missionaries and magisterium of the 16th century.They were Feeneyites and not Cushingites like her and the two popes.

Since BOD, BOB and I.I do not refer to visible cases, it makes me a Feeneyite. I interpret Vatican Council II , the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Nicene Creed differently from her.

Since there are no known exceptions to the past ecclesiology for me, there can only be an ecumenism of return and no salvation outside the Church, with no known exceptions.

For me St. Emerentiana is a saint in Heaven and so is there with the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. If she did not have the baptism of water in the Catholic Church she could not be in Heaven and so not a saint
By affirming Feeneyism as a theology,I am not in heresy, since I do not deny any magisterial documents.
For me Cushingism is heresy and this is the theology used by Ann Barnhardt.

It is important to note that the Catholic Church's dogmas and doctrines are a reflection of objective reality at the supernatual level and conversely the supernatural level is reflected in the dogmas and doctrines. So a small change is noticeable and it corrects itself or has to be corrected.The truth asserts itself.-Lionel Andrades

January 29, 2018

So 'the Church' was wrong in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. Similarly at Vatican Council 'the Church' assumed there were known cases of BOD, BOB and I.I and 'the Church 'was wrong.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/01/so-church-was-wrong-in-letter-of-holy.html