There are conditions for offering the Tridentine Rite Mass. Are they being met by the SSPX ?
The Society of St.Pius X(SSPX) priests offer the Tridentine Rite Mass and consider the baptism of desire and those saved in invincible ignorance as exceptions to the thrice defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.They are in the same position as the priests who offer the Novus Ordo Mass in different languages.
However the SSPX claims on its website that they affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They also imply that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are explicitly known to us and so it is an exception to the dogmatic teaching. This is a denial, a rejection of the dogma.
The baptism of desire is always implicit. It would have to be explicitly known to conflict with the dogma outside the church there is no salvation. Yet this is implied in the articles by Fr.Francois Laisney and Fr.Peter Scott. Since these cases are hidden they are really not exceptions. There are no defacto exceptions. If we consider them as exceptions it would mean we can meet non Catholics on the street saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire. You could say to such a person whom you meet, “ Hi John, I’m glad you were saved with the baptism of desire you arose from the dead and returned to live with us once again. I heard the same thing happened with your sister Francesca”.
Invincible Ignorance and the baptism of desire are not exceptions to the dogma but explicitly known invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are exceptions.So one has to imply that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are explicitly known. We have to assume that we can meet someone on the street saved with the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance. Only because it is ‘explicitly known’ is it an exception to the dogma.If it was implicit it would not be an exception. The SSPX website says Fr.Leonard Feeney was wrong since those saved with the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are exceptions to the dogma.
Fr. Leonard Feeney was correct in saying there were no exceptions to the dogmatic teaching. The dogma does not mention exceptions. Neither does Vatican Council II refer to explicit, visible cases of those saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire. It refers to implicit cases known to God only.
There are conditions for offering the Tridentine Rite Mass. Are they being met by the SSPX ?
-Lionel Andrades
NO TRIDENTINE RITE MASS WITHOUT EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/07/no-tridentine-rite-mass-without-extra.html#linksPRIESTS WHO OFFER TRIDENTINE-RITE AND NOVUS ORDO MASS AGREE THAT WE DO NOT DEFACTO KNOW A SINGLE CASE OF THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE: WE HAVE UNITY ON OUTSIDE THE CHURCH NO SALVATION
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/06/priests-who-offer-tridentine-rite-and.html#links
FR.FRANCOIS LAISNEY OF THE SOCIETY OF ST.PIUS X SAYS THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS HAS EXCEPTIONS. THIS IS HERESY
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/11/frfrancois-laisney-of-society-of-stpius.html#links
SOCIETY OF ST.PIUS X CAUSING CONFUSION ON ECUMENISM
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/11/society-of-stpius-x-causing-confusion.html
NORMS FOR THE TRIDENTINE RITE MASS VIOLATED ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/norms-for-tridentine-rite-mass-violated.html
NON CATHOLICS CAN BE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE, BAPTISM OF DESIRE AND IT DOES NOT CONTRADICT THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS- Daphne McLeod, Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice, England
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/non-catholics-can-be-saved-in.html
INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE AND THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE ARE NOT EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA BUT A BOOK SOLD BY THE SSPX SAYS THEY ARE
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/11/invincible-ignorance-and-baptism-of.html#links
FR. PETER SCOTT, SSPX NEED TO ISSUE A CLARIFICATION: HOW CAN THOSE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE AND THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE BE EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/11/fr-peter-scott-sspx-need-to-issue.html
BISHOP ROBERT FINN, BISHOP RAYMOND BOLAND AFFIRM THE ‘RIGORIST INTERPRETATION’ OF EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS : NO DENIAL FROM KANSAS CITY
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/11/bishop-robert-finn-bishop-raymond.html#links
BISHOP EMERITUS RAYMOND J.BOLAND OF KANSAS CITY CORRESPONDS WITH FR.PETER SCOTT OF THE SSPX ON THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/11/bishop-emeritus-raymond-jboland-of.html#links
SSPX ,CATHOLIC TRADITIONALISTS ARE ANATHEMA ACCORDING TO THE SYLLABUS OF ERRORS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/sspx-catholic-traditionalists-are.html
DAPHNE MCLEOD COMMENT A BOMBSHELL FOR ENGLISH BISHOPS?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/daphne-mcleod-comment-bombshell-for.html
ASSISI INTERFAITH MEETING OCT.27: OLD PROBLEM AMONG TRADITIONALISTS SURFACE
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/assisi-interfaith-meeting-oct27-old.html
SSPX CONSIDERS THOSE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE AND WITH THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE AS DE FACTO KNOWN TO US : DISCERNING LIBERALS MUST BE LAUGHING UP THEIR SLEEVE
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/sspx-considers-those-saved-in_24.html
SSPX CONSIDERS THOSE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE AND WITH THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE AS EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS THIS IS HERESY
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/sspx-considers-those-saved-in.html
SSPX IN HERESY CALLS ATTENTION TO HERESY AT ASSISI
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/07/sspx-in-heresy-calls-attention-to.html#links
SSPX CLARIFY FOR US WHAT IS YOUR DOCTRINAL POSITION ON THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/09/sspx-clarify-for-us-what-is-your.html#links
ARCHBISHOP MARCEL LEFEBVRE CALLED "TO PREACH" THE RIGORIST INTERPRETATION OF "EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS"
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/07/archbishop-marcel-lefebvre-called-to.html#links
SSPX CLARIFY FOR US WHAT IS YOUR DOCTRINAL POSITION ON THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/09/sspx-clarify-for-us-what-is-your.html#links
Michael Voris Hits the Jackpot…that is, “the dogma”- Brother André Marie MICM :RealCatholicTV affirms the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/09/michael-voris-hits-jackpotthat-is-dogma.html#links
CATHOLIC LAY PROFESSOR AT UNIVERSITA EUROPA DI ROMA AFFIRMS DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/catholic-lay-professor-at-universita.html
LEGIONARY OF CHRIST PRIEST FR.RAFAEL PASCUAL AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/legionary-of-christ-priest-frrafael.html
FR.TULLIO ROTONDO AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/08/frtullio-rotondo-affirms-cantate-domino.html#links
CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS IS DE FIDE AND NOT CONTRADICTED BY VATICAN COUNCIL II- Fr. Nevus Marcello O.P
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/07/cantate-domino-council-of-florence-on.html
BRAZILIAN PRIEST SAYS VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT CONTRADICT DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/07/brazilian-priest-says-vatican-council.html#links
PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR CHRISTIAN UNITY INDICATES POPES, SAINTS IN HERESY
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/pontifical-council-for-christian-unity.html
Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity claims Pope Pius XII condemned the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus :suggests those in invincible ignorance are explicitly known to us and so contradicts the dogma
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/pontifical-council-for-promoting.html
Vatican website for clergy promotes 'theology of religions', Kung and Knitter : claims Fr.Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for the same interpretation of the dogma as the popes and saints
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/vatican-webste-for-clergy-promotes.html
CATHOLIC PRIESTS IN ROME AGREE WITH FR.LEONARD FEENEY: THERE IS NO BAPTISM OF DESIRE THAT WE CAN KNOW OF
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/08/catholic-priests-in-rome-agree-with.html#links
CATHOLIC HERALD, U.K: IS IT STILL CATHOLIC?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/11/catholic-herald-uk-is-it-still-catholic.html
ANGELICUM UNIVERSITY IS CHURNING OUT THEOLOGY DEGREES FOR THOSE WHO SAY FR.LEONARD FEENEY WAS EXCOMMUNICATED FOR REJECTING THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/angelicum-university-is-churning-out.html
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/06/sspx-bishops-priests-reject-ex-cathedra.html
BISHOP BERNARD FELLAY AFFIRMS RIGORIST INTERPRETATION OF EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS : CONFUSION ON SEDEVANTIST WEBSITE
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/bishop-bernard-fellay-affirms-rigorist.html
CDF, VATICAN, SSPX, MOST HOLY FAMILY MONASTERY IN TENSION OVER STRAWMAN
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/cdf-vatican-sspx-most-holy-family.html
ARCHBISHOP MARCEL LEFEBVRE HAD AFFIRMED THE RIGORIST INTERPRETATION OF THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/archbishop-marcel-lefebvre-had-affirmed.html
SSPX SUPERIOR CONFIRMS HERESY
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/tridentine-rite-priests-in-rome-using.html
Posts
6 comments:
If one is not a water baptized member of the Church, it does not mean that he is "outside" of the Church. It is true that he is not a "member" of the Church, but being "inside" the Church is not exclusive to "members". Do you agree?
Br.Anthony :If one is not a water baptized member of the Church, it does not mean that he is "outside" of the Church. It is true that he is not a "member" of the Church, but being "inside" the Church is not exclusive to "members". Do you agree?
Lionel:If a person who I know or who lives in the present time is not in the Church with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water he is “outside”.
Hypothetically, as a concept a non Catholic can be saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance and this would be known only to God. We accept this in principle.We do not know any such case in particular so it does not contradict the dogma. The dogma indicates every one needs to convert into the Church or remain within it as a member for salvation.Vatican Council II (LG 14,AG 7) has the same message.
It is true that he is not a "member" of the Church, but being "inside" the Church is not exclusive to "members". Do you agree?
The hypothetical case is not a member but those who are baptized and have Catholic Faith are “members”.
The members can be saved if they live the Gospel according to the Catholic Church and die without mortal sin on their soul. The hypothetical case can be saved in a manner God chooses.
Fr. Francois Laisney writes:
The first error of those who take their doctrine from Rev. Fr. Leonard Feeney, commonly known as "Feeneyites," is that they misrepresent the dogma, "Outside the [Catholic] Church there is no salvation." The Feeneyites misrepresent this as, "Without baptism of water there is no salvation."
The Feeneyites misrepresent this as, "Without baptism of water there is no salvation."
Fr.Francois Laisney is implying here that there is salvation in the present times for someone without the baptism of water.
Note: I use the words ‘in the present time’. It refers to the present reality, the de facto situation i.e when I meet a non Catholic on the street or telephone him.
De facto every one needs the baptism of water for salvation this is the teaching of the dogma. So he denies the dogma here.
His denial is probably not willful but due to confusion between defacto-dejure salvation, implicit and explicit salvation.
Implicitly, and known only to God we know there could be possible exceptions to every one needing Catholic Faith and the baptism of water, before they die, for salvation.
In principle, de jure we accept that a non Catholic can be saved in the way God chooses and this would be an exception. Theoretically there can be ‘exceptions’ de facto there are no exceptions to the dogma. So those who are saved de jure are not exceptions to the dogma.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/11/frfrancois-laisney-of-society-of-stpius.html#links
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
FR.FRANCOIS LAISNEY AND FR.PETER SCOTT OF THE SSPX IMPLY THAT THE LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949 REFERS TO VISIBLE AND KNOWN BAPTISM OF DESIRE: NO MAGISTERIAL DOCUMENT MAKES THIS CLAIM
Fr. Francois Laisney and Fr. Peter Scott imply that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 refers to visible and known baptism of desire since only when it is known and visible can it contradict the dogma outside the church there is no salvation.
SSPX priests imply those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance are explicitly known. Then they assume it contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII only refers to those saved with the baptism of desire. One has to assume that the baptism of desire is visible and known to us and so it contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The text does not say that it contradicts the dogma.
So when Fr. Francois Laisney and Fr. Peter Scott of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) state that the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma they have to imply that the baptism of desire is visible and known and so would be an exception to the dogma.
Similarly when someone says Lumen Gentium 16 on invincible ignorance is an exception to the dogma it must be assumed that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are visible and known to us and so it contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The text of Vatican Council does not say that it contradicts the dogma.-Lionel Andrades
Neither Fr. Laisney nor Fr. Scott say or imply that those saved by baptism of desire are explcitly known. The proof is that they try to convert each and every non-baptized person they meet by preparing those who are interested to receive baptism of water.
Furthermore, neither of them say that it contradicts the dogma. You have yet to prove your accusations.
Bro.Anthony :Neither Fr. Laisney nor Fr. Scott say or imply that those saved by baptism of desire are explictly known.
Lionel: If they consider those saved by the baptism of desire as exceptions to the dogma and that these persons do not have to convert into the Catholic Church then they are assuming that these cases are known to us, they are visible and explicit.
Bro.Anthony : The proof is that they try to convert each and every non-baptized person they meet by preparing those who are interested to receive baptism of water.
Lionel: This could be true and I could believe this. However their website needs to clarify that those saved with the baptism of desire are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and that every one with no exception needs to enter the Church through Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.
Bro.Anthony :Furthermore, neither of them say that it contradicts the dogma.
Lionel:
Fr. Francois Laisney and Fr. Peter Scott imply that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 refers to visible and known baptism of desire since only when it is known and visible can it contradict the dogma outside the church there is no salvation.
SSPX priests imply those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance are explicitly known. Then they assume it contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII only refers to those saved with the baptism of desire. One has to assume that the baptism of desire is visible and known to us and so it contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The text does not say that it contradicts the dogma.
So when Fr. Francois Laisney and Fr. Peter Scott of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) state that the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma they have to imply that the baptism of desire is visible and known and so would be an exception to the dogma.
Bro:Anthony: You have yet to prove your accusations.
Lionel:
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/11/frfrancois-laisney-of-sspxs-denial-is.html
Post a Comment