Sunday, September 2, 2012

BISHOP RICHARD WILLIAMSON IS NOT ANSWERING THE TWO QUESTIONS

Either he does not have the confidence to answer them now and needs to study the issue more, or,it will show up that  Vatican Council II does not contradict the Syllabus of Errors or extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

In a series of videos recently, unaware of the Richard Cushing Error, he showed how Vatican Council II contradicted the Syllabus of Errors. He was correct. Since with the Cushing misunderstanding the Council is modernist with new doctrines some of which are irrational and contradict each other.

Without the Cushing  error the Council does not contradict itself nor the Syllabus.

The two questions which he will not answer are:-

1) Do we personally know the dead saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) etc ?

2) Since we do not know any of these cases, there are no known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?

If he says that being saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience, the baptism of desire etc are exceptions to the dogma then - there is nothing in Vatican Council II which contradicts the dogma.Vatican Council I is 'in line ' with Tradition.

In one of the videos he has said that if Rome comes 'in line with Tradition' he would consider returning.The answer to these two questions, is a way of helping Rome come back in line with Tradition.

I had sent the two questions to him through three different sources with whom he is in contact with. There has been no acknowledgement.

-Lionel Andrades

THE SSPX SHOULD REAFFIRM THEIR SUPPORT OF POPE BENEDICT XVI AND SAY THEY ARE NOT IN SCHISM AND CLARIFY THEY CANNOT ACCEPT VATICAN COUNCIL II WHEN BASED ON THE RICHARD CUSHING ERROR

The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) should reaffirm their support in Pope Benedict XVI, clarify that they are not in schism but they cannot accept teachings which are irrational, new and non traditional and which are applied to Vatican  Council II.


They can affirm Vatican Council II interpreted in accord with the Syllabus of Errors and extra ecclesiam nulla salus and without the Richard Cushing Error of being able to see the dead alive on earth.


This will knock the wind out of the campaign by the leftist media and the Vatican Curia. The false propaganda says the SSPX does not accept Vatican Council II and implies there is only one interpretation of the Council.

Since the Vatican Curia has accepted the irrational, heretical version of the Council the SSPX has the right to reject it to avoid sin.To  deny the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is a sin. Pope Pius XII referred to  'the dogma', the 'infallible teaching.'


Since Vatican Council II does not state there is salvation outside the church the theology of religions and ecclesiology of communion is irrelevant and non Catholic. This new theology has no basis in theology since it is based on an objective factual error of being able to see the dead.


Vatican Council II (NA 4) says Catholics are the new people of God and all need faith and baptism for salvation (AG 7) . LG 16 (invincible ignorance ) has not contradicted AG 7, the Syllabus of Errors or the dogma on exclusive salvation unless one has fallen into the Cushing misunderstanding.-Lionel Andrades






BISHOP RICHARD WILLIAMSON ORGANIZES OPPOSITION TO THE SIX CONDITIONS OF THE SSPX CHAPTER MEETING

Eleison Comments 268: SIX CONDITIONS
Posted on September 1, 2012 
Number CCLXVIII (268)
1 September 2012


SIX CONDITIONS
http://ghyheart.wordpress.com/2012/09/01/eleison-comments-268-six-conditions/

In an official letter of July 18 to Superiors of the Society of St Pius X, its General Secretary revealed the six “Conditions” for any future agreement between the SSPX and Rome. These were hammered out by discussion amongst the 39 capitulants of early July. Surely these Conditions demonstrate an alarming weakness on the part of the Society’s leaders as a whole.


The first “essential requirement” is freedom for the Society to teach the unchanging truth of Catholic Tradition, and to criticize those responsible for the errors of modernism, liberalism and Vatican II. Well and good. But notice how the Chapter’s vision has changed from that of Archbishop Lefebvre. No longer “Rome must convert because Truth is absolute”, but now merely “The SSPX demands freedom for itself to tell the Truth.” Instead of attacking the Conciliar treachery, the SSPX now wants the traitors to give it permission to tell the Truth ? “O, what a fall was there !”

Lionel: If  the bishop would answer two questions it would help Rome convert. Conversion also means accepting the truth. Even when the truth is that Vatican Council II does not contradict the Sylabus as the bishops alleges because the of the Eichard Cushing  Error.


The second condition requires exclusive use of the 1962 liturgy. Again, well and good, insofar as the 1962 liturgy is no such betrayal of the Faith as is the Conciliar liturgy imposed by Rome from 1969 onwards. But do we not right now see Rome preparing to impose on Traditional Congregations that have submitted to its authority a “mutual enrichment” Missal, mixing Tradition and the Novus Ordo? Once the SSPX were to have submitted to Rome, why should it be any more protected ?


The third condition requires the guarantee of at least one bishop. The key question here is, who will choose him ? Readers, in the text of any future “agreement” with Rome, go straight for the paragraph about the appointment of bishops. In 1988 Rome proposed that the Archbishop present a selection of three candidates for Rome to choose one. Rome then rejected all three. When will people get it ? Catholics must fight and fight in this titanic war between the religion of God and the religion of man.


The fourth condition desires that the Society have its own tribunals of the first instance. But if any higher tribunal is of the official Church and can undo the lower tribunals’ decisions, what Catholic decision of any Society tribunal will still have any force at all ?


The fifth condition desires exemption of SSPX houses from control by diocesan bishops. Unbelievable ! For nigh on 40 years the SSPX has been fighting to save the Faith by protecting its true practice from interference by the local Conciliar bishops, and now comes the General Chapter merely desiring independence from them ? The Society is not what it was, dear readers. It is in the hands of people quite different from Archbishop Lefebvre !


The sixth and last condition desires a Commission to be set up in Rome to look after Tradition, with a a strong representation from Tradition, but “dependent on the Pope”. Dependent on the Pope ? But have the Conciliar Popes not been ringleaders of Conciliarism ? Is Conciliarism no longer a problem ?

Lionel: Answering those two questions could begin the end of 'Conciliarism'.


In conclusion, these six conditions are excessively grave. Unless the Society’s leadership is shaken out of its dream of peace with Conciliar Rome as revealed by them, then the last worldwide bastion of Catholic Tradition risks being on its way to surrendering to the enemies of the Faith. Maybe bastions are out of date.


Friends, prepare to fight for the Faith from within your homes. Fortify your homes.