Monday, May 21, 2018

Jimmy Akins writes a book on salvation which does not comment on the issue of Cushingism and Feeenyism in the interpretation of EENS, Vatican Council II and other Magisterial documents

Even though there are so many reports on line which mention interpreting Vatican Council II with a false premise or without it, with Cushingism or Feeneyism, as a rupture with Tradition or in harmony with Tradition Jimmy Akins has not dealt with this issue in his book The Drama of Salvation written in 2015.
I have also been sending him e-mails over the last few years on this subject and he has not replied a single one.
He continues to interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism and so creates a rupture with the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.
He ignores me when I tell him that I interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism and so there is no rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century.I do not use the false premise as he does. I am not a Cushingite.
He has no advice or correction for me.
In the video above he vaguely and in general says that the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation.He does not say directly that every one needs to be a member of the Catholic Church and there are no known exceptions in the present times.So he avoids the traditional exclusivist ecclesiocentric interpretation known to the popes and saints over the centuries.
Instead he quotes Christological passages from the Bible.So  with the New Ecumenism, based upon the New Theology and visible- for- us- baptism of desire, invincible ignorance etc, he is saying that there is salvation in only Jesus Christ irrespective if you are a Protestant or Pentecostal.
For Jimmy Akins, Fr. Leonard Feeney was in heresy and not the Archbishop of Boston and Pope Pius XII.In other words, Cushingism is orthodoxy for him and Feeneyism is heresy.
At about the time 3:35 on the video he correctly says that the Church Fathers said that there was no salvation outside the Church.
Fine. He should have left it at that.
But he then says the early Christians( he means Catholics) recognised that many people are not in that situation, they may not have joined the Church but it may not have been through any fault of their own.
So the inference here is that these are known people saved outside the Church without being members of the Church. It is because they are known and not invisible and unknown they become exceptions to the dogma EENS for him. This is Cushingism.
He infers that possibilities of salvation are actual people known to be in Heaven without the baptism of water and someone on earth saw them there.This is Cushingism. It is irrational. How can a possibility in the past, for example, a St. Emerentiana, who is often cited,be an objective exception to the dogma EENS in 2018? This is faulty reasoning.Upon this irrationality Jimmy Akins infers that there is salvation outside the Church.Unknown cases are known people saved outside the Church and so the dogma EENS has become obsolete for him. It has to be interpreted with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism.
Even if there was a person saved with a good conscience it still is a case which is physically invisible. Invisible people cannot be exceptions to EENS. It is an unknown case for us human beings. So how is this relevant to the Feeneyite interpretation of no salvation outside the Church? But Jimmy Akins mentions it since it refers to known people saved as such and so it is an exception to traditional EENS for him. This is Cushingism. He will then use this same irrational reasoning to interpret Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1994) as a rupture with EENS and the past ecclesiology.
Even if someone was saved because he lived according to reason or the Logos it would be an exception known only to God.It would be an invisible case for us humans. This is my Feeneyite way of looking at it.But Jimmy Akins has mentioned this with reference to the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church as a known person saved outside the Church. This is innovative theology based upon an irrationality.
So at the time 2:58 on the video he affirms Feeneyism and Cushingism together. Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 do the same.
The first part of the Letter is Feeneyite and the second part is Cushingite and contradicts the first part. 
Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14 ) says all need faith and baptism and also mentions the unknown catechuman with the desire for the baptism of water which he does not receive and is believed to be saved and the unknown case of the person in invincible ignorance who is saved outside the Church.
The Cushingite references in the Letter, Vatican Council II, Catechism(1994) are non traditional, irrational and heresy.It is repeated by Jimmy Akins.
The issue become serious when the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) for example like Jimmy Akins has to interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism to receive canonical status.
It is serious when all religious communities in the Catholic Church, are not allowed (like Jimmy Akins?) to interpet Vatican Council II with Feeneyism.
It is serious when EWTN and Catholic Answers even after being informed many times choose to interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism creating a schism with the past popes on extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So today the Franciscans are theologically and doctrinally in a rupture with St. Francis of Assisi on no salvation outside the Church, it is the same with the Carmnelites and St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross who were Feeneyites.It is the same with the Dominicans and St. Dominic who held the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS etc.-Lionel Andrades

Catholic Answers still uses Cushingism which creates a rupture with Tradition




Catholic Answers apologist Trent Horn uses Cushingism instead of Feeneyism to interpret magisterial documents especially Vatican Council II and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).He is a Cushingite.
Cushingism causes a rupture with Tradition.
For Cushingites there is known salvation outside the Church. Invisible cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) are visible exceptions to the dogma EENS.
For Feeneyites there is no known salvation outside the Church. Invisible cases of BOD,BOB and I.I are not visible exceptions to the dogma EENS.They are simply invisible.So there is no salvation outside the Church for us humans.Feeneyites evangelise knowing that all non Catholics are oriented to Hell unless they enter the Catholic Church.
We can interpret Vatican Council II, with Feeneyism or Cushingism.
For me Feeneyism is rational and does not create a rupture with Tradition.Since LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to invisible and unknown people in 2018.
For Catholic Answers (see the two videos) BOD,BOB and I.I refer to known people saved outside the Church. Also LG 8,LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to physically visible people saved outside the Catholic Church. This is an irrational premise. With it the dogma EENS(Feeneyite) is rejected by them.
Apologist Trent Horn mentions invincible ignorance.For me it is theoretical,hypothetical and speculative.That's all it can be.It never was an exception to the dogma EENS.
So for me the Catholic Church today is still saying through Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7) and the dogma EENS that everyone with no known exceptions in 2018 need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation.I am using Feeneyism as a philosophy and theology.
It is with this understanding that we must evangelize. This was the missionary motivation of the Jesuits in the 16th century. They knew that the ordinary way of salvation was faith and baptism in the Catholic Church and not invincible ignorance. If there were exceptions to the ordinary way of salvation it would be known only to God.
So all the natives in the Americas before Columbas went there were oriented to Hell and not just those who knew.
All the natives in India before St.Francis Xavier went there were on the way to Hell.
The liberal theologians made a  mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 when they assumed unknown cases of being saved in invincible ignorance were known exceptions to traditional EENS. So this New Theology was repeated in Vatican Council II.Lumen Gentium 14 wrongly refers to only those who know as if we can know who will be saved in invincible ignorance.
So the dogma EENS has been rejected by Catholic Answers which is Cushingite.It has also been rejected by the present two popes,who are also Cushingites and interpret Vatican Council II with the hermeneutic of rupture.
So now Pope Benedict and Bishop Robert Barron call for evangelization not based on the dogma EENS as it was known in the 16th century but by calling attention to the beauty of the face of Jesus or to beauty in general in the Catholic Church.
Proclamation of the dogma EENS would be for me ,initiating an evangelization , based on the truth.- Lionel Andrades 

Dr.Taylor Marshall's New St. Thomas Institute uses irrational Cushingism as a theology : Fischer More College theological mistake still not corrected


Dr.Taylor Marshall's New St. Thomas Institute offers a one year course on apologetics in which all magisterial documents are interpreted with irrational and innovative Cushingism instead of the traditional Feeneyite theology of St. Thomas Aquinas. So he interprets Vatican Council II as a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) as it was known to the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century.
Dr.Marshall wants to be faithful to the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church and especially Aquinas. But he causes a rupture with Tradition when he uses a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II.
This was also the issue at the traditional Fischer More College where he was a professor.He did not want to reject Vatican Council II as did some of the faculty members who wanted to remain faithful to Tradition.
He did not know that Vatican Council II interpreted with the invisible- people- are- visible- premise causes a rupture with Tradition. Vatican Council II interpreted without this premise, does not result in a break with the dogma EENS or the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.
So it was possible for the Fischer More College to affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and also affirm Tradition. They would have to reject Vatican Council II (Cushingite) only which was causing the breach and which was magisterial and accepted by the local bishop and FSSP priests.But it was not known at that time.
Dr. Marshall is offering his apologetics course based on Vatican Council II (Cushingite) and this still seems the only interpretation of the Council he knows.
-Lionel Andrades

Pope Benedict XVI and Bishop Robert Barron use a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with extra ecclesiam nulla salus : then they call for mission based on beauty

Bishop Robert Barron has put aside the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). He uses a  false premise to interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with EENS.Since EENS is obsolete for him he cannot call for the traditional evangelisation based on the dogma EENS.He has to seek new reasons for evangelisation. He cannot say all non Catholics, Christians included, are on the way to Hell in general,according to Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7- all need faith and baptism for salvation).He knows most people die without Catholic faith.So he calls for evangelisation based on beauty or goodness.

BISHOP BARRON CONFUSES WHAT IS IMPLICIT AS EXPLICIT, INVISIBLE AS VISIBLE
 His fault is mixing up what is invisible as being visible, what is implicit as being explicit. He assumes invisible cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are not invisible but physically visible. Then he infers that these  visible and known people are saved outside the Catholic Church.He then  concludes that this is an exception to all needing to formally enter the Catholic Church as a member.Why? Since there are known examples of salvation outside the Church for him. So the dogma EENS becomes obsolete for him. It is contradicted by Vatican Council II ( LG  16 etc).He confuses unknown people saved in invincible ignorance and without Catholic faith as being as being visible and personally known. This irrationality is very important for his New Theology. So only with this false premise can Vatican Council II can be interpreted as being a rupture with the past exclusivist ecclesiolgy.
The past ecclesiology was a motivation over the centuries, for mission.
Similarly with the same false premise Pope Benedict interprets Vatican Council II as ' a development' of EENS.He said that the dogma EENS today is no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century( March 2016 Avvenire).
Pope Benedict used the false premise to interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with EENS and the past exclusivist eclesiology, which motivated the Jesuits to go to distant lands on mission in the 16th century.They knew that all the natives in China and India were on the way to Hell in general and that they could not know of any exceptions if there were any.
But for Cardinal Ratzinger LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc also refer to exceptions to EENS. EENS is obsolete for him. He calls EENS an 'aphorism' in the Catechism and an 'adage' in one of the papers of the International Theological Commission.
So Cardinal Ratzinger called for mission based on the beautiful face of Jesus.

CARDINAL ANGELO AMATO CALLS FOR TRADITIONAL MISSION BASED ON VATICAN COUNCIL II
Cardinal Angelo Amato however called for evangelisation based on Vatican Council II ( AG 7, LG 14) which says all need faith and baptism for salvation. I had been sending him my e-mails. This would be an evangelisation based on truth. It would be Biblical(John 3:5, 16:16), traditional ( Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441) and post Vatican Council II( CCC 845,846,1257 etc), Ecclesia di Eucarestia etc.-Lionel Andrades 


MAY 20, 2018


Mission Motivation : The Catholic Faith - 1- 3  

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/05/the-catholic-faith-1-3.html

Hell - unexpected deaths


















Sunday, May 20, 2018

Mission Motivation : The Catholic Faith - 1- 3

MAY 20, 2018

The Catholic Faith - 1
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/05/the-catholic-faith-1.html



MAY 20, 2018

The Catholic Faith - 2
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/05/the-catholic-faith-2.html

MAY 6, 2018

La Fede Cattolica -3
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/05/la-fede-cattolica-3.html
-Lionel Andrades




MAY 20, 2018

Image result for xPhoto Pentecost with Our Lady famous paintings

Happy Pentecost.Happy Evangelisation. Happy Mission

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/05/happy-evangelisation-happy-mission.html

MAY 20, 2018


For Bishop Robert Barron Lumen Gentium 16( invincible ignorance) refers to objectively seen non Catholics saved outside the Church.So for him and Pope Benedict the dogma EENS is obsolete and they search for substitute reasons to evangelize  http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/05/bishop-robert-barron-lumen-gentium-16.html

MAY 20, 2018


Reasons why we evangelize as Catholics

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/05/reasons-why-we-evangelize-as-catholics.html




MAY 18, 2018






Pentecost May 20, 2018 : Catholic parents when you teach your children avoid the error made by the International Theological Commission, Vatican

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/05/pentecost-may-20-2018-catholic-parents.html


MAY 18, 2018

The International Theological Commission(ITC), Vatican made an objective error in two of its theological papers and Catholic parents can correct the error when teaching the Faith to their children : Voice of the Family , Rome Life Forum ignores this family issue
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/05/the-international-theological.html





________________________________








JULY 4, 2017

Rational and traditional Catholic apologetics based on Feeneyism and not Cushingism  http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/07/rational-and-traditional-catholic.html

DECEMBER 1, 2017

The lex orandi lex credendi of Catholics today is based on irrational Cushingite theology.The Feeneyite alternative is ignored by all
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/12/the-lex-orandi-lex-credendi-of_1.html




JANUARY 6, 2018

'He that believeth in him is not judged. But he that doth not believe, is already judged: because he believeth not in the name of the only begotten Son of God.'   http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/01/he-that-believeth-in-him-is-not-judged.html

Pentecost Sunday May 20,2018

ONLY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH             SOLAMENTE LA CHIESA CATTOLICA


 MAY 15, 2018

Pentecost May 20 2018 : Invisible cases of the baptism of desire or invincible ignorance are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus : Invisibili casi di battesimo di desiderio,invincible ignorance ecc.non sono eccezione per il dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/05/pentecost-2018-invisible-cases-of.html

The Catholic Faith - 3


They tell lies to change the teachings of the Catholic Church with reference to extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and to the Second Vatican Council.
It is not ethical. also in the universities and schools of the Catholic Church.
The Courts must be asked.
1) Can we humans see people in Paradise in general?
2) Can we see people in Paradise saved without water baptism and Catholic faith?
The judge will say "No".
This is a common sense answer.
The judge will ask "Where is the proof?"

HERE IS THE PROOF
1) For Catholics in general there are exceptions. All must not be incorporated into the Catholic Church as members with 'faith and baptism' for salvation according to them. Vatican Council II says that everyone needs faith and baptism for salvation (to avoid hell). They say no, not every one.

2) For them there are exceptions to the dogmaextra ecclesiam nulla salus as interpreted by the missionaries and the Magisterium of the sixteenth century.

3) They reject the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church based upon the old ecumenism, the old ecclesiology, the old theology and the old Evangelization.

4) Since there is no salvation outside the Church known to them, that is, they can not see or meet people in the flesh and bones saved without faith and baptism. But they created a new ecumenism, new ecclesiology, New Evangelization and the New Theology. All this is based on blind non-Catholics, saved outside the Catholic Church.

5) For them the Second Vatican Council and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) interpreted with this irrational premise. So they are a break with the popes of the past. They created a schism.

The judge can not establish the connection and may ask again: "So, where is the proof". So it must be explained to him as follows.


EXPLAIN THE PROOF

1a) Since for them there are exceptions to the traditional teaching on all needing to be incorporated into the Church as members for the salvation, they are really inferring that there are known persons saved outside the Church.Otherwise how can there be exceptions. This is the inference. They personally know other people that could be exceptions, for example, in 2018?

2a) They teach that there are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation) and there are personally known people saved outside the Church. This is the inference when they teach the faith.

They can see or meet non Catholics who are dead and now are saved in Heaven. For them there are exceptions to the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation.There are exceptions like invincible ignorance, baptism of desire, baptism of blood etc., which are all theoretical possibilities only for us humans and they could be known only to God.

3a) Because they reject the exclusivist past ecclesiology of the Catholic Church, there are for them personally seen and known, not visible Catholics, outside the Catholic Church. They are saved without 'faith and baptism'. They indirectly imply that a) we see people in beings humans in heaven in general b) we see people in Paradise saved without water baptism and Catholic faith.

4a) Since there is known salvation outside the Catholic Church they have created, with this irrationality, a new ecumenism, new evangelization, new ecclesiology and the new theology.They are all based on the irrational premise that is - unseen non-Catholics are saved and personally known.

5a) Then they interpret the Second Vatican Council and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) with this irrational premise to create a non-traditional conclusion. The innovative conclusion is a break with traditional Church -teachings. There is a schism with the Popes of the past. Catholics wrongly believe that 1) human beings are able to see people in Heaven in general and that 2) we are able to see people in Heaven who are saved without the  baptism of water and Catholic faith.
These five points are the proof. They are not denied by the bishops and cardinals.- Lionel Andrades



MAY 6, 2018


La Fede Cattolica -3

Dicono menzogne ​​per cambiare gli insegnamenti della Chiesa Cattolica con riferimento a extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) e al Concilio Vaticano II.
Non è etico anche nelle università e nelle scuole della Chiesa Cattolica.
I tribunali devono essere richiesti:
1) Possiamo noi umani vedere le persone in Paradiso in generale?
2) Possiamo vedere le persone in Paradiso salvate senza il battesimo dell'acqua e la fede cattolica?
Il giudice dirà "No".
Questa è una risposta di buon senso.
Il giudice chiederà "Dov'è la prova?"

QUI È LA PROVA
1) Per Cattolici ci sono eccezioni.Tutti non devono essere incorporati nella Chiesa Cattolica come membri con 'la fede e il battesimo' per salvezza.Concilio Vaticano II dice che tutti hanno bisogno di fede e il battesimo per la salvezza (per evitare l'inferno). Dicono no, non tutti.
2) Per loro ci sono eccezioni al dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus come è stato interpretato dai missionari e dal Magistero del XVI secolo.
3) Rifiutano il passato ecclesiologia esclusivista della Chiesa Cattolica quale basava sul vecchio ecumenismo, il vecchio ecclesiologia, il vecchio teologia e il vecchio Evangelizzazione .
4) Poiché non c'e salvezza al di fuori della Chiesa noto per loro, cioè no possono vedere o incontrare persone in carne ed ossa salvati senza la fede e il battesimo.Ma hanno creato un nuovo ecumenismo, nuova ecclesiologia, Nuova Evangelizzazione e la Nuova Teologia. Tutto ciò si basa su non vedenti non cattolici, salvati al di fuori della Chiesa cattolica.
5) Per loro il Concilio Vaticano II e il Catechismo della Chiesa Cattolica (1994) interpretati con questa premessa irrazionale.Cosi loro  sono una rottura con i papi del passato. Hanno creato uno scisma.
Il giudice non può stabilire la connessione e potrebbe chiedere nuovamente: "Allora, dov'è la prova". Quindi deve essere spiegato a lui come segue.

SPIEGARE LA PROVA
1a) Poiché per loro ci sono delle eccezioni all'insegnamento tradizionale su tutti coloro che hanno bisogno di essere incorporati nella Chiesa come membri per la salvezza, in realtà stanno inferendo che ci sono persone conosciute salvate fuori dalla Chiesa. Altrimenti, come possono esserci delle eccezioni. Questa è l'inferenza. Conoscono personalmente altre persone che potrebbero essere eccezioni, ad esempio, nel 2018 ?
2a) Insegnano che ci sono eccezioni al dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (al di fuori della Chiesa cattolica non c'è salvezza) e ci sono persone conosciute personalmente salvate al di fuori della Chiesa. Questa è l'inferenza quando insegnano la fede.
Possono vedere o incontrare non cattolici che sono morti e ora sono salvati in Paradiso. Per loro ci sono eccezioni al dogma fuori della Chiesa, non c'è salvezza. Vi sono eccezioni come l'invincibile ignoranza, il battesimo del desiderio, il battesimo del sangue ecc., che sono tutte possibilità teoriche solo per noi umani e potrebbero essere conosciute solo da Dio .

3a) Perchè loro rifiutano il passato esclusivista  ecclesiologia della Chiesa Cattolica, ci sono per loro personalmente visto e conosciuto, non cattolici visibile, fuori della Chiesa Cattolica.Loro sono salvati senza 'fede e battisma'.Implicano indirettamente che a) vediamo persone negli esseri umani in cielo in generale b) vediamo le persone in Paradiso salvate senza il battesimo dell'acqua e la fede cattolica.
4a) Poiché c'è salvezza conosciuto al di fuori della Chiesa Cattolica loro hanno creato, con questa irrazionalità, un nuovo ecumenismo, nuova evangelizzazione, nuova ecclesiologia e la nuova teologia.E tutto basato sulla premessa irrazionale che e - un invisibile non cattolici sono  salvati e conosciuti personalmente.
5a) Quindi interpretano il Concilio Vaticano II e il Catechismo della Chiesa Cattolica (1994) con questa premessa irrazionale per creare una conclusione non tradizionale. La conclusione innovativa è una rottura con le insegnamenti tradizionali della Chiesa. C'è uno scisma con i Papi del passato. I cattolici credono erroneamente che 1) umani siano in grado di vedere le persone in cielo in generale e che 2) siamo in grado di vedere le persone in cielo che sono salvate senza il battesimo dell'acqua e la fede Cattolica.
Questi cinque punti sono la prova. Non sono negati dai vescovi e dai cardinali.-Lionel Andrades