Wednesday, April 11, 2012

CONDITIONS FOR THE SSPX TO 'ENTER THE CHURCH'

I have been asked on a website (Gloria.TV) if the SSPX should enter the Church with full canonical status by accepting Vatican Council II.

I think that the SSPX should ‘enter the Church’ after the following clarifications.

1.

There are two interpretations of Vatican Council II.

1. The Jewish Left liberal interpretation.

2. The interpretation in accord with Tradition and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) should reject the first interpretation of Vatican Council II and accept the second one.

2.

 The SSPX should clarify that we do not know any case of a non Catholic in  2011-2012 who is saved in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire, a good conscience, the seeds of the Word etc. So there is nothing in Vatican Council II which contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

There are no explicit exceptions and the Church has not retracted this dogma which Pope Pius XII called an ‘infallible ‘statement (Letter of the Holy Office 1949).

3.

The SSPX agrees that a non Catholic can be saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire. The SSPX accepts this possibility.

Since the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 also menionted this possibility the SSPX can endorse implicit baptism of desire and implicit invincible ignorance, known only to God,  along with the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
There is no text in Vatican Council II or the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which contradicts the exclusive interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus .

Since there is exclusive salvation in the only the Catholic Church (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence) and this teaching is not contradicted by LG 16 etc, the SSPX maintains its position on ecumenism, other religions and  dialogue. It is in agreement also with Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II which says all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.

So the SSPX is affirming Vatican Council II in accord with Tradition and the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and there is nothing in Vatican Council II or the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to contradict the strict interpretation of the dogma.

(Note: The Letter does not state that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy. It mentions disobedience. The Church lifted the excommunication without him having to recant. The Letter mentions ‘the dogma’. The dogma indicates all non Catholics need to enter the Church to avoid the fires of Hell (Cantate Domino).So the Letter supports Fr. Leonard Feeney here.)

If the cardinals who issued the Letter assumed that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are explicitly known to us then it was an objective error on their part. We don’t know these cases.

SUMMARY

1.The SSPX should announce that they would accept Vatican Council II  interpreted according to Tradition and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and with reference texts from Vatican Council lI. They reject the liberal version of Vatican Council which has no supportive texts, since we do not know cases saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience, seeds of the Word etc.

2. Since Vatican Council II does not mention any explicitly known exceptions to the defined dogma extra eclesiam nulla salus and Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council, the exclusive salvation interpretation of the dogma still stands. So the SSPX does not have to change its traditional position on ecumenism, other religions, inter religious dialogue, religious liberty.

Once these two points are clarified other aspects of Vatican Council II can be interpreted according to Tradition and as Pope Benedict XVI has said, that the Council is not a break from tradition but a continuity.-Lionel Andrades

NEWSPAPER ADVERTISEMENT : APPEAL ON THE SSPX ISSUE








This is a potential newspaper advertisement. Any Catholic is free to use it. Edit it. Change it. Place your name and remove mine. You have my permission. There is no charge. It is free. Place it in a newspaper or media in which it will get the attention of the Holy Father and hopefully the Vatican will respond.

There could soon be an 'ecclesial rupture' because the Vatican does not want to say that there can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II.

If the pope does not know personally of non Catholics saved in 2012 in invincible ignorance and when Vatican Council II does not make this claim of knowing explicit cases in real life how can the magisterium reject the SSPX doctrinal position on other religions, ecumenism and dialogue?

The SSPX (Society of St.Pius X) is not obliged to accept an interpretation of Vatican Council II with no supporting text on ecumenism and inter religious dialogue. Nowhere does Vatican Council II say Judaism is a path to salvation or that Jews are saved in general in their religion. Instead the Magisterium is unable to say in public that Vatican Council II (AG 7) says Judaism and other religions are not paths to salvation and that Catholics are the Chosen People of God (NA 4).

Why does the SSPX have to accept Vatican Council II when the pope and his Curia will not affirm Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II?

The Holy Father is not proclaiming the Faith for political reasons and the falsehood and lies are being repeated by thousands of Catholics to protect their self interest or due to ignorance.

There could soon be an 'ecclesial rupture' because the Vatican does not want to say that there can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II. One according to the text of Vatican Council II and the other due to political necessity and survival and with no references from Vatican Council II text.

I repeat - Vatican Council II does not mention a visible baptism of desire or known- to- us- in- Heaven-cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience or seeds of the Word. So there is no doctrinal basis for rejecting the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II. SSPX was in agreement with Vatican Council II on ecumenism, inter religious dialogue and religious liberty in the Vatican-SSPX failed talks.

The Vatican needs to clarify in public if they know any case of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance, the seeds of the Word and a good conscience.

If the answer is No then they should permit the SSPC not to accept Vatican Council II (Jewish Left version) - with the Vatican agreeing to clarify the issue over time.

Catholics should sign petitions and place advertisements in the newspapers asking a politically oriented Curia how can those saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience in the year 2012, be explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so how can the SSPX position on ecumenism and inter religious dialogue be wrong?

Catechism Teachers should ask the Vatican how can they excommunicate the SSPX for affirming the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (in accord with Vatican Council II) when there is no contradicting text in Vatican Council II to reject the SSPX position on other religions?

Religious communities ask the Vatican why you all cannot accept the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also implicit baptism of desire and invincible ignorance. Until this issue is settled there should not be an 'ecclesial rupture' with the SSPX.

Assuming Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for denying invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire (and he was not!) you can go ahead and affirm implicit invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire and also the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus?

Catholic religious communities who attend the Novus Ordo Mass why cannot you accept the literal interpretation of extra ecclesism nulla salus and also implicit baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance implicitly,this being known only to God ?

It is the magisterium's doctrinal position which is irrational and contrary to common sense? SSPX please ask the Vatican spokesman if he actually knows any case of a non Catholic saved in invincible ignorance. Is there a visible baptism of desire?

If the pope does not know of any person saved in invincible ignorance and now in Heaven and when Vatican Council II does not make this claim of knowing in real life explicit cases  inHeaven, how can the magisterium reject the SSPX doctrinal position on other religions, ecumenism and dialogue?

Even though the SSPX rejects Vatican Council II (Jewish Left version) they should start talking with the Vatican in terms of Vatican Council II: ask the Vatican Curia to cite texts in Vatican Council II which contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?

Also, how can the Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF), Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J , as the former President of the International Theological Commission (ITC) reject the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Nicene Creed, Vatican Council II (AG 7) and still offer Holy Mass ?.This heresy can be viewed on the ITC’s website.

When the pope says in Light of the World (Ignatius) p.107 that all who are saved are saved through Jesus we must note it has two meanings.

1. All who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church and this is our general Catholic belief, which we accept.There is no controversy here.

2. However the theological meaning is that all who are saved are saved either in invincible ignorance, a good conscience, and the baptism of desire etc or with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.

Then the pope also says in Light of the Wolrd p.107 that there is only ‘one channel’ of salvation. he says there is only one way of salvation. implying the one mentioned  above.

This is false theologically since the one channel of salvation in the Catholic Church has always been through Jesus in the Catholic Church. We don’t know any case of a non Catholic saved invincible ignorance etc as the pope would wrongly assume.

When the pope makes an objective, factual error one can expect the rest of the Church to be confused or in error.

I ask Catholic priests these questions and they do not answer. Some say they do not know the answer and others say that they have not specialized in this or that.When I ask them if I can record their answer with my camera they say no.They will agree that one needs to proclaim the Faith and not be ashamed of it.-Lionel Andrades













OVER TEN MILLION HITS IN THREE YEARS: MICHAEL VORIS ONCE AGAIN AFFIRMS OUTSIDE THE CHURCH NO SALVATION