Friday, May 11, 2012

JUST ONE SSPX PRIEST


Just one SSPX (Society of St.Pius X) priest is needed who understands - and will speak out the truth in public.

This good priest just has to announce :-

1. Common sense tells us that we cannot see or know any person on earth, who is already in Heaven and saved. In faith we know it is possible to be saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire but we cannot see these cases in heaven.If they are in heaven they are not on earth.

For instance we know Mother Teresa is in Heaven because the Church has declared her a saint but none of us can say that we see her in Heaven. In general we cannot see her or anybody in Heaven. Some people may have the charism to see people in heaven but in general we cannot. So in principle, in faith we can say that she is in Heaven.Similarly in principle, in faith we can accept that there could be people saved in invincible ignorance etc but in fact, personally ,we cannot see these people in heaven.

So we do not know anyone in heaven saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16), the seeds of the Word (Vatican Council II) etc.We cannot also see them on earth.Personally we do not know who is in Heaven through personal knowledge. In faith we accept that the saints are in heaven.

2.Since the Letter of the Holy Office indicates that the baptism of desire is an explicit exception to the dogma (as the SSPX priests and leaders affirm) then it must be that these cases are known to the leaders of the SSPX. They can see them on earth. Since they can see them on earth or in heaven they are obvious exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma..

3.So if the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 suggests that the baptism of desire etc are exceptions to the dogma then it is irrational. We do not know any exceptions on earth. We cannot know.The Letter of the Holy Office would be wrong. Factually incorrect.

4. Since we do not know any exceptions it would be wrong for the SSPX to assume that Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

5.Since we do not know any exception it would be wrong for the SSPX to assume that Vatican Council II contradicts itself i.e LG 16 contradicts AG 7.

6.So if we come back to the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus and AG 7 and there are no known exceptions on earth, then there are no contradictions to the SSPX position on other religions and ecumenism.All non Catholics need to convert to avoid Hell (for salvation).

7.So Vatican Council II really supports the SSPX position on other religions.

8.It means Cardinal Kurt Koch and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria cannot cite any reference from Vatican Council II (e.g LG 16) to contradict the SSPX traditional position.

So then there can be only one interpretation with references, from the Council.

It’s important that Msgr.Nicola Bux and the Ecclesia Dei clarify in public these eight points.

Signed: .....
(Name of SSPX priest)


Just one priest is needed to ask these questions!

NO DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES WITH THE SSPX


A report on Rorate Caeli states:

Rome-SSPX:
Bp. Arrieta Ochoa, of "Legislative Texts":
"I think we were able to clarify the doctrinal problems"
The Secretary of the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts, Bishop Juan Ignacio Arrieta Ochoa, was in Louvain-la-Neuve spoke to the Belgian daily La Libre… He also had the following to say on … the Society of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX):
…Regarding the problem of the reintegration of the Lefebvrists, I think we were able to clarify the doctrinal problems, even if it is not easy to put all that onto paper. The true problem, the only one for me, is the separation, the human distance dating from 1988."- Rorate Caeli http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/
Is he saying that the baptism of desire,invincibile ignorance,a good conscience, elements of sanctification, seeds of the Word and imperfect communion with the Church -are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Society of St.Pius X position on other religions?

If there are no known exceptions, then Ad Gentes 7 supports the SSPX position on other religions and ecumenism: all need catholic faith and the baptism of water for salvation (AG 7).

However if Ecclesia Dei and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith would continue to assume that we know cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire; an error also of Pope Benedict XVI , then it would mean that there are explicit exceptions to AG 7 and the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It would mean that Vatican Council II contradicts the SSPX position on inter religious dialogue and ecumenism.

If there are exceptions to the dogma then how can you proclaim the Social Kingship of Christ the King for ALL humanity.

There are no doctrinal differences since we do not know any exceptions to AG 7 or the dogma outside the Church no salvation.
-Lionel Andrades








Two U.S Catholic dioceses agree that we can hold the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II (AG 7)


The diocese of Kansas City and Worcester recognize that we do not know any case of a person saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.

Even Catholic priests in Rome agree that we do not know any person in the present times saved with the baptism of desire.Non Catholics can be saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire and it does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus said Daphne McLeod  in England.

The religious in the U.S dioceses and in Rome indicate that all Catholics can hold the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus along with implicit baptism of desire etc.In reality all people need to convert into the Catholic Church and there are no known exceptions.

The men’s religious communities in the dioceses can teach that in reality everyone needs to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation and there are no known exceptions.

Also the women’s religious communities and lay persons in the diocese can affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma and Ad Gentes 7 along with implicit baptism of desire.There are also no known exceptions to AG 7 which says all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.-Lionel Andrades
____________________________________________

Thursday, May 10, 2012
NO DENIAL FROM DIOCESE OF WORCESTER, USA: All religious communities are permitted to hold the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II (AG 7)

KANSAS CITY DIOCESE COULD HAVE SHORT MISSION COURSES BASED ON BISHOP RAYMOND BOLAND’S FIVE POINTS

CATHOLIC PRIESTS IN ROME AGREE WITH FR.LEONARD FEENEY: THERE IS NO BAPTISM OF DESIRE THAT WE CAN KNOW OF

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

DID CARDINAL ALFREDO OTTAVIANI KNOW THAT THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE AND INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE WERE NOT RELEVANT TO THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS ?


There was a lot of confusion among the Jesuits and the Boston Archdiocese clergy when restrictions were placed on Fr.Leonard Feeney.The Archbishop assumed that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance were explicit exceptions to every one needing to enter the Church for salvation.So he placed restrictions on the priestly faculties of Fr.Leonard Feeney.

 It is said that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 did not carry the signature of the then Secretary.It could have been a memo from one bishop to another.

Though the Letter of the Holy Office mentions ' the dogma' , the 'infallible statement'  and so supports Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine there are passages in the Letter critical of the priest and the St.Benedict Center.If they assumed that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance was an explicit exception to the dogma they made a mistake. We know that this was not the fault of Pope Pius XII. Since in Mystici Corporis the pope mentions that a person can have a genuine desire and be saved. He does not state that these cases are known to us or that they are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Cardinal Ottaviani was the Secretary of the Holy Office in the Roman Curia from 1959 to 1966 according to Wikipedia when that dicastery was reorganised as the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, of which he was Pro-Prefect until 1968. During this period the excommunication against Fr.Leonard Feeney was not lifted.

Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated on 13 February 1953  for disobedience to Church authority i.e the bishop. He was reconciled to the  Church in 1972, but was not required to retract or recant his interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
.- Lionel Andrades

IF THEY EXCOMMUNICATED FR.LEONARD FEENEY FOR SAYING THAT THERE WAS NO BAPTISM OF DESIRE THEN THEY MADE A MISTAKE.THERE ARE NO KNOWN EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/05/if-they-excommunicated-frleonard-feeney.html