Friday, October 12, 2012

SSPX DISTRICT ITALY CONFERENCE ON VATICAN COUNCIL II TO USE THE FALSE PREMISE


The District of Italy of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) is organizing its 20th Rimini Conference, to be held on October 19-21, 2012, on the theme “Vatican Council II: Tradition or Revolution? At the origin of the Crisis in the Church”. according to the DICI news.

Lionel : The speakers do not  know that it depends on the premise used which will decide if Vatican Council II is according to Tradition or revolution. At 'the origin of the Crisis in the Church' is the false premise being used by the SSPX speakers. They imply  that the dead saved in heaven are visible on earth to us and so they are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors.Hence they will elaborate on how Vatican Council II contradicts tradition ( dogma on salvation and Syllabus of Errors)  not knowing that it is they who contradict tradition by using a false premise which originated with the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing.

The website states “… The debate on the Council remains essential:

Lionel: The debate will be held with the false premise.The conclusion is obvious.

 it is necessary to examine the documents in greater depth, to bring to light the errors that have infiltrated them,

Lionel: Of course there will be errors. Since the wrong premise is used throughout. It is assumes that the dead saved are known to us and are exceptions to the dogma on salvation and the Syllabus. For the SSPX speakers LG 16 contradicts the dogma.

 and their direct consequences on the liturgical reform, the de-Christianization of society and the death of the missionary spirit.

Lionel: This is a direct consequence of the wrong premise used.This false premise was also used against Fr.Leonard Feeney.SSPX  websites criticize Fr.Leonard Feeney since they are not aware of the false premise they are using .The baptism of desire etc is supposed to be known to them and so it contradicts Fr.Leonard Feeney's interpretation of the dogma.

 Only the rejection of the Council’s errors

Lionel: The error has to be identified by the SSPX. It is also being used by the SSPX in the interpretation of the Council.
Without the error, the Council is traditional and in accord with the SSPX values on other religions etc.It's so simple but after so many years of discussion the SSPX could perhaps not believe that it could be true. Change the premise and everything changes. It is as easy as that.

and a return to the traditional teaching will unleash the supernatural forces of the Church to regenerate souls and society as a whole. This year our Conference wishes to make its contribution to that cause, and we invite you to participate in it.”

Lionel: I have sent numerous e-mails to the Italian District of the SSPX over the years but no one will answer.

Questions for the SSPX speakers:
1. Do we know in the year 2012 any one saved in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire, a good conscience, seeds of the word (AG 7), imperfect communion with the Church ?

2. If we do not know any of these cases in 2012 can they be considered exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors? 
-Lionel Andrades

According to their website:

This conference is an opportunity to hear the following talks (in Italian):

Alessandro Fiore: “The tree is judged by its fruits – The Consequences of the Council”


Don Pierpaolo Petrucci, Superior of the SSPX District of Italy: “The Second Vatican Council and the Salvation of Souls—The Death of the Missionary Spirit”


Presentation of the book by Bp. Bernard Tissier de Mallerais: “The Strange Theology of Benedictc XVI – Hermeneutic of Continuity or Rupture?”


Alessandro Gnocchi: “From the language of revolution to the revolution of language – What new things the Vatican says and what it no longer says”


Don Mauro Tranquillo: “The Denial of Roman Tradition – New Rites for a New Church?”


Matteo D’Amico: “ ‘The Sacred Council exhorts the whole world to forget the past’ – Nostra Aetate and the New Theology of the Relation between the Catholic Church and Judaism”

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

LIONEL, THE SSPX BELIEVES THAT THERE IS SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CHURCH AND THEY ALWAYS HAVE. LEFEBVRE BELIEVED THAT AND THE SSPX HAVE PERSECUTED THE FEENEYITES CONSTANTLY ABOUT THEIR STAND FOR THE DOGMA. THE DIFERENCE BETWEEN THE VATICAN AND THE SSPX IS ONLY A MATTER OF DEGREE AND NOT OF KIND.

Catholic Mission said...

FATHER LEONARD FEENEY'S COMMUNITY WEBSITE

Soon there could be a report on the website of the community of Fr. Leonard Feeney. It will be defending the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They have been admirably defending the dogma for all of us all these years, while we have been confused with the baptism of desire and being saved with invincible ignorance.

The report on their website defending the dogma however will be restricted to theology. Theologically it will be critical of the baptism of desire. Only in theology.

The report will not mention that we do not know any case of the baptism of desire in 2012.So it is not an issue with the dogma.This point is not mentioned when the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) cites the baptism of desire and are critical of Fr. Leonard Feeney.Neither have they used this approach with Jeff Mirus at Catholic Culture.

If the SSPX, Fr. Francois Laisney etc, are similar to the Vatican on this issue, it is also because the SSPX was never told that the baptism of desire is not a known exception in the present times(2012).

So the SSPX counters with theology that assumes implicit desire is explicit and known to us. Jeff Mirus has theology with explicitly known baptism of desire. Since Mirus believes the baptism of desire etc are explicit for us, he goes further and assumes that Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma on exclusive salvation.

Theologically I can agree with the supporters of Fr. Leonard Feeney, the St. Benedict Centers. Since they hold on to the dogma and the traditional teachings on this issue, none of which mention an explicitly known baptism of desire.

They could still continue with their good theological approach (without the explicit baptism of desire) and also mention there are no cases of implicit desire or being saved in invincible ignorance that we know of in 2012. So there are no known exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church-Lionel Andrades