Tradivox, Whispers of Restoration, Voice of the Family, Kwasniewski, Ferrara and Mattei, blog 1Peter5, Lepanto Foundation and Msgr. Schneider interpret the Catechisms and Church Documents ir-rationally : No Restoration is possible with Cushingism
Peter Kwasniewski and Whispers of Restoration do not know how to handle it : they violate the Principle of Non Contradiction and are in a swamp
KWASNIEWSKI MADE AN OBJECTIVE ERROR
For Peter Kwasniewski a professor of philosophy and theology, whose articles are recommended by the young menbers at Whispers of Restoration, all that is important are the rubrics, vestments and rituals of the Latin Mass even if the theology and doctrines are heretical.This is also the understanding of the volunters at Whispers of Restoration(Whispers of Restoration).
They have given us a list of old Catechisms which is appreciated but they interpret these catechisms with the false premise and inference to create a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX on extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), an ecumenism of return etc.
So they actually interpret the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation) as a rupture with EENS.They wrongly assume that the baptism of desire(BOD),baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) are objective exceptions to EENS and the Catechism of Pope Pius X.
So the Catechism of Pope Pius X would be a rupture with the Syllabus fo Errors and also EENS as it was interpreted by the Magisterium in the Middle Ages.
NEW THEOLOGY OF THE TRADITIONALISTS
This is also the New Theology of Fr.John Zuhlsdorf, Chris Ferrara, Roberto dei Mattei, Joseph Shaw, John Lamont, Thomas Pink,Fr.Brian Harrison, Rorate Caeli correspondents and the SSPX bishops and priests.It is the same for cardinals Kasper and Koch, Cardinal Ladaria and Archbishop Guido Pozzo.
It is with the false premise and inference that Peter Kwasniewski interprets Vatican Council II as a rupture with the past and then rejects the Council.
Kwasniewski referred to as a Thomistic scholar, on the website 1Peter5, would interpret St. Thomas Aquinas like the liberals. Aquinas affirms the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. However when he mentions the case of the man in the jungle living in ignorance or the catechumen who desires the baptism of water but dies before he receives it, he is referring to an allegedly known person saved outside the Church for Kwasniewski and the traditionalists. So what was hypothetical for Aquinas is a concrete exception to EENS for Kwasniewski.
This is also the false reasoning of the liberals and the faculty at the Franciscan University of Steubenville where Peter Kwasneiwski taught.He writes regularly for New Liturgical Movement, OnePeterFive, LifeSiteNews, and Rorate Caeli.
OFFERS THE LATIN MASS WITH THE NEW ECCLESIOLOGY
He offers Mass in Latin while affirming the New ecclesiology based on BOD, BOB and I.I being exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.This is schism with the past popes who did not see BOD, BOB and I.I as being known people saved outside the Catholic Church.It was the liberal theologians who made this error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO) and then repeated it at Vatican Council II.
POLITICALLY CORRECT ON EENS AND VATICAN COUNCIL II
So Kwasneiwski is politically correct with the Left,like other traditionalists, and will not interpret EENS like Fr.Leonard Feeney for whom BOD, BOB and I.I literally did not exist.
He is also politically correct with the Left on Vatican Council II. Since he interprets LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3 as being exceptinos to EENS as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century. He had no criticism when Cardinal Luiz Ladaria interpreted Lument Gentium 8 as an exception to the past exclusivist ecclesiology(Placquet Deo Press Conference). He also had no comment when Pope Benedict interpreted Vatican Council as a rupture with EENS(Avvenire, March 2016)
So it is no surprise that the young volunters at Whispers of Restoration are confused.They came to this good project with a lot of good will.
But Kwasniewski cannot help them and neither can Roberto Dei Mattei, Chris Ferrara or Steve Skoject. Since none of them want to affirm the taboo Feeneyite interpretation of EENS or my interpretation of Vatican Council II in harmony with Feeneyite EENS.
They are aware that the Catechisms contradict each other and there is doctrinal confusion.This would be normal since they are violating the Principle of Non Contradiction but it is politically correct with the Left and the Vatican.
Traditional Catechisms on Whispers of Restoration support the old exclusivist ecclesiology but the team at the website interpret these catechisms as a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors,EENS and the rest of Tradition
No Restoration with Cushingism. Not possible. There is not going to be a Restoration with Cushingism.Mattei and Ferrara are part of the problem. So is Whispers of Restoration and 1Peter5 .
Can there be two interpretations of Vatican Council II? No answer.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 has been teaching heresy when it says every one does not need to be a member of the Catholic Church, for salvation.Since the Letter reasons wrongly that invisible and unknown cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance are objective and practical exceptions to the de fide teaching, on all needing to be a member of the Church for salvation( Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441).How can invisible cases of non Catholics be an an exception to traditional EENS according to the old catechisms? Yet this is how Ferrara and Mattei reason.So they have nothing to say. This is how they reasoned for 50 years.
They are not allowed to think in any other way.
It's the same story on the website 1Peter5 and traditionalist bloggers.The only food they serve at their tables is Cushingite.No choice.They interpret all magisterial documents in only one way.
Someone said ,"This is what the Church teaches ".But the Church also supports Vatican Council II (Cushingite) so why do they reject it?
If they feel obliged to follow Pius XII they why not also John XXIII and Paul VI ?
The interpretation of Vatican Council II according to the Left and the present two popes is heretical.It is the same with EENS.
The website Whispers of Restoration presents itself as being traditionalist but they support the official and liberal heresy on salvation. If they avoid the LOHO mistake it's a new Vatican Council II.It would not be the traditionalism of Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops who supported Cardinal Richard Cushing and Pope Pius XII.
Today's 'traditionalists' are not really traditional especially the Lefebvrist school.Since they are in a rupture with the old ecclesiology of the Church which was Feeneyite and is expressed in the traditional Catechisms available on the website Whispers of Restoration.
They are in a rupture with EENS and the past ecclesiology since BOD,BOB and I.I are exceptions to EENS for them.
FR.CEKADA POLITICALLY CORRECT
I think of Fr. Anthony Cekada who knew that there are no known cases of BOD, BOB and I.I in the present times and there were none in the past.But he kept repeating his old line on 'Feeneyism', since it is politically correct.He did not have it in him to apologize and correct himself and others on this issue.
If he announces that he has started to interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with Feeneyism, in which hypothetical cases are just hypothetical and not objective exceptions to EENS, the Left may not have allowwd him to teach. It is the same with Bishop Donald Sanborn who has politically correct articles on Feeneyism(according to the Left) on line. So their sedevacantist seminary and that of the 'Novus Ordo' seminaries in Florida,which they criticize have the same Cushingite approach to Vatican Council II etc.There is no difference in theology, new doctrines and worldly prudence among both groups there.So they are given the mandatum to teach from the bishops and the local secular authorities.They have compromised on doctrine and theology in real life.
Similarly it seems difficult for Louis Verrecchio to say that UR 3 in Vatican Council II refers to a hypothetical case.I e-mailed him the correction.This was not the first time. There is no comment from him, for or against. It's as if he does not understand.
He will continue to interpret UR 3 as being a non Catholic who has been saved outside the Church and is known personally to him. So of course it becomes a rupture with the dogma EENS.
There is not going to be a Restoration with Cushingism. Mattei and Ferrara are part of the problem. So is Whispers of Restoration and1Peter5.
New Online Library: 1000 Years of Catechisms is flawed. Since it can be interpreted with Cushingism or Feeneyism, with the irrational premise or the rational premise and the conclusion is different.
So in the Catechism of Pope Pius X, 24Q (invincible ignorance) would contradict 27 Q and 29Q (other religions are not paths to salvation, outside the Church there is no salvation), for them- but not for me.
For them 29 Q would be a visible case of someone saved outside the Catholic Church but for me it is an invisible case. They are irrational and I am rational. For them the Catechism contradicts itself but for me there is no contradiction.
Similarly they would accept the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston which indicates that invisible cases of the baptism of desire are visible exceptions for Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Similarly Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance) and Lumen Gentium 14(being saved with the baptism of desire) would be exceptions for the dogma EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors for them - but not for me.
Since are premises are different are conclusions are different. For them invisible people are visible and for me they are invisible only.
For them invisible people are visible exceptions for the dogma EENS. For me invisible cases cannot be exceptions for the dogma EENS.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider announced the launch of a website called TradiVox.com.
CathVox.com would have been a much better name. It digitises and republishes dozens of historical catechisms written over the last 1000 years. The software works like a chatbot with AI. After entering a question, the user can choose which catechisms to consult for the answer.
TRADIVOX - Giving Voice to Tradition!
Msgr. Schneider explained that the project demonstrates the continuity of Catholic teaching through time and is a tool for people seeking the truth. The pproject remains Cushingite and not Feeneyite. It changes Catholic doctrine and is politically correct with the Lefrt. -Lionel Andrades