Sunday, April 22, 2012

SSPX -DICI SAYS ECCLESIA DEI HAS ASKED THE INSTITUTE OF THE GOOD SHEPHARD TO FOLLOW THE CATECHISM


Which interpretation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church is to be followed according to Ecclesia Dei, by this traditionalist Catholic community in full communion with the Holy See ? (1)

The Catechism of the Catholic Church endorses the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Secondly the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance mentioned in the Catechism ,are not explicit exceptions to the dogma outside the church no salvation .Neither are they known exceptions to Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II. AG 7 says all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.All means there is no known exception on earth.

Is Ecclesia Dei ready to say in public that the Catechism of the Catholic Church 846 says all need to enter the Church ‘as through a door’ ( AG 7) and CCC 845 says the Church is the only Ark of Salvation that saves in the Flood...while there are no known exceptions (LG16 etc) mentioned in Vatican Council II?

So like the popes, Councils and saints the Catechism is saying like Fr.Leonard Feeney that every one needs to be a ‘visible’ member of the Church for salvation i.e with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water (AG 7).

Another version of the Faith, and the Catechism says the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.(At least the Catechism does not say it but this is the general assumption made). So everyone does not have to enter the Church it is said as was taught in previous Catechisms. This interpretation says that the Church no more teaches that there is exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church. This interpretation of the Catechism says Fr.Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for saying that the baptism of desire does not exist (with respect to the dogma). They concede that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 of Pope Pius XII does not say that he was excommunicated for heresy and neither can we know cases personally of those saved in invincible ignorance etc.

It is this version of the Catechism that the Institute of the Good Shepherd (IGS) would be expected to accept since Cardinal Luiz Ladaria holds this liberal interpretation.On the website of the International Theological Commission (ITC) Cardinal Ladaria the Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith says that the church no more teaches exclusive salvation.He assumes that there are explicit exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II and the documnts of Pope Pius XII.So the Institute would have to accept this Ecclesia Dei- CDF version of the Catechism.

A part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 is critical of Fr.Leonard Feeney. If they (Cardinal Ottaviani or whomever) assumed that the baptism of desire etc were explicit exceptions to the dogma and the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney then they were wrong. This would be an objective,factual error on their part. A faulty observation.This error would have to be accepted by all traditionalist communities in full communion with the Holy See.

The irony is that the IGS like the SSPX’s traditional position on ecumenism, inter religious dialogue etc is in agreement with the text of the Catechism and Vatican Council II. It is in agreement  when the Council is interpreted as a continuation of Tradition and  the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The SSPX rejects a Vatican Council II and a Catechism as interpreted by the liberals as  a break from Tradition and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

So when the SSPX says they reject Vatican Council II they mean they reject Vatican Council II as interpreted by the liberals including Cardinal Ladaria the Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Then why have the traditionalists not been able to express its agreement with the Magisterium with whom it was negotiating, on the issue of Vatican Council II ?

Since the SSPX at least perhaps unknowingly has picked up one of the liberal errors and is using it to interpret Vatican Council II and so assumes that the Council contradicts Tradition.This is an error that is specific, it can be erradicated immediately and every thing will be clear.

The error is that the SSPX like Cardinal Ladaria and also Pope Benedict XVI assumes that there can be non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire. So far so good! This is true! However the SSPX like the Cardinal goes one step further and assumes that these cases are known to us in real life. They are known to us personlly and so they contradict the dogma!?. (This can be confirmed in the writings of Fr.Peter Scott and Fr.Francois Laisney of the SSPX and on pro SSPX traditionalist forums).

Rationality tells us that we do not know any of these cases.They are known only in Heaven. So they cannot be a known exception to the dogma.

Once this error is identified and erradicated we realize that there are no known exceptions to the traditional understanding of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Once we have this defined dogma in its literal interpretation  there is nothing in Vatican Council II or the writings of Pope Pius XII to contradict the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of the dogma.

So if Vatican Council II affirms the rigorist interpretation of outside the church no salvation then the text of Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14) is in agreement with the position of the SSPX.So is the Catechism. It’s in agreement with Tradition. AG 7 says all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation( to avoid Hell).

So the SSPX is really in agreement with the Magisterium; according to the text of Magisterial documents. IGS is in agreement with the Catechism of the Catholic Church as interpreted according to the text of the Catechisms and Vatican Council II.

Once the SSPX makes this position clear in public the pope and the cardinals cannot demand the excommunication of the SSPX since the SSPX is endorsing Vatican Council II, and also their traditional positions.

It’s the liberal interpreation which will be on the defensive since there are no known exceptions and they cannot quote LG 16 (invicible ignorance ) etc. They have no quotations from Vatican Council II to support their liberal inerpretation of the Council.

The SSPX could seek full communion with the Holy See just like the IGS and after three years Ecclesia Dei cannot demand that they accept the interpretation of the Catechism with no supporting texts from this magisterial documents. It is important that the IGS, the SSPX and other traditionalist communities clarify this issue now-Lionel Andrades

1.


According to DICI the news agency of the SSPX


The prudence and vigilance of the Superior General of the Society are understandable when one knows that currently posted at several European websites is a Note from the Ecclesia Dei Commission dated March 23, following their canonical visitation to the Institut du Bon Pasteur [Good Shepherd Institute, a society of apostolic life in France]. In this document we can read that the professors of the seminary in Courtalain must direct their efforts “concerning the transmission of the Church’s patrimony in its entirety, while insisting on the hermeneutic of renewal in continuity and relying on Catholic doctrine as a whole as set forth by the Catechism of the Catholic Church,” rather than on “a critique of Vatican II, even a ‘serious and constructive’ one”. – DICI News. Rome – Society of Saint Pius X: Press review 20-04-2012
______________________________________________________
Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church is in agreement with the rigorist interpretation of outside the church no salvation
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/02/blog-post.html#links