SSPX SUPERIOR CONFIRMS HERESY

Fr.Peter Scott a Superior of the Society of St.Pius X refers to ‘the possibility of the baptism of desire’and claims that Fr.Leonard Feeney and his community denied it.

Yet they (St.Benedict Center) accept it in principle (dejure).Here it is from their website.

Answer: The following definition of baptism of desire can be made which will be totally consistent with the infallible teaching of the Council of Trent and with the thrice defined dogma of “No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church”. This definition of baptism of desire goes as follows:

In its proper meaning, this consists of an act of perfect contrition or perfect love [that is Charity, which necessarily implies that one has the True Faith], and the simultaneous desire for baptism. It does not imprint an indelible character on the soul and the obligation to receive Baptism by water remains. (From page 126 of The Catholic Concise Encyclopedia , by Robert Broderick, M.A., copyright 1957, Imprimatur by Francis Cardinal Spellman, Archbishop of New York, August 31, 1956) (Emphasis mine)

So they(SBC) do not deny the Baptism of Desire in principle or as a possibility.

Fr.Peter Scott's article is available on the website of the SSPX.The Society of St.Pius X still denies that one has to be a visible member of the Catholic Church for salvation and that there are no exceptions.

The website article Fr.Feeney and Catholic Doctrine indicates the  SSPX is in heresy. The website is saying that the Baptism of Desire is explicit.In principle  there is implicit baptism of desire. So how can implicit baptism of desire contradict the infallible teaching that everyone needs to be a visible member(explicit) of the Church?

Also there is no Church Document as the SSPX website indicates, which states  that Fr.Leonard Feeney was condemned for heresy. This is the propaganda of the Jewish Left media, Wikipedia etc.

He was excommunicated for disobedience.He did not go to Rome to defend himself. He was also disobedient to the Archbishop of Boston Richard Cushing who never affirmed the dogma or corrected the newspaper errors.
Here is the actual ex cathedra dogma. It does not say that those with the baptism of desire do not have to enter the Church for salvation.

1. “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215). Ex Cathedra

2. “We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 302.). Ex Cathedra

3.“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” -(Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.) Ex Cathedra

– from the website Catholicism.org and “No Salvation outside the Church”: Link List, the Three Dogmatic Statements Regarding EENS: http://nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/ )

The emphasis in blue says one has to be an explicit,visible member of the Catholic Church for salvation. This has been the teaching of Fr.Leonard Feeney.

The Society of St.Pius X denies that one has to be a visible member of the Catholic Church for salvation and that there are no exceptions.
____________________________________

Update
Monday, November 14, 2011

IS THE SSPX MASS VALID? YES, BUT THE PRIEST COULD BE IN MORTAL SIN FOR REJECTING A DEFINED DOGMA WITH HIS ‘EXCEPTIONS’
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/11/is-sspx-mass-valid-yes-but-priest-could.html#links