Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Vatican-SSPX reconciliation is possible just by announcing that the baptism of desire does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

With a simple announcement Vatican Council II  would be in accord with the Syllabus of Errors.Without the Cushing Error Vatican Council II is traditional.It has the ‘hermeneutic of continuity’.


If the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican really wants to, they could begin the reconciliation with the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX). They have only to announce the truth.


The truth is that without the Richard Cushing Error Vatican Council II s in agreement with the SSPX values on other religions, ecumenism and religious liberty. With the Cushing Error Vatican Council II is modernist and progressive.


If the CDF wants a reconciliation they just have to announce that they accept the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance (it can only be accepted in principle because of its nature) and there  are no known cases. In reality we do not know any one saved as such. So they are not exceptions to the dogma on salvation; the Syllabus of Errors and Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7) .AG 7 says all need faith and baptism.AG 7 has the same message as the dogma on salvation. When Vatican Council II agrees with the dogma on exclusive salvation it means,ecclesiology is ecclesiocentric.


So if the CDF really wants a reconciliation with the SSPX, the next time Archbishop Gerhard Muller says the SSPX needs to accept Vatican Council II, he should also add, “without the Richard Cushing Error”.
-Lionel Andrades

Vatican Prefect's criticism of the ‘hermeneutic of discontinuity’ refers to the Vatican Curia’s interpretation

Cardinal Mauro Piacenza, Prefect for the Congregation for the Clergy has criticized the ‘hermeneutic of discontinuity’ when interpreting Vatican Council II.(1)

Today we have  Mass  being offered by priests, bishops and cardinals who assume that we know the dead- saved, who are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So they assume that there is salvation outside the Church.They reject the traditional interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation.

Then they assume that Vatican Council II (LG 16 etc) contradicts the dogma. This is the ‘hermeneutic of discontinuity’. It’s also heresy. -Lionel Andrades

Traditionalist forums are still not discussing the baptism of desire philosophically: the issue is at the heart of the SSPX reconciliation
Without a rational approach to extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the ‘exceptions’ there is no hermeneutic of continuity in Vatican Council II.


1.
Vatican prefect strongly criticizes 'hermeneutic of discontinuity'

Calling for an attentive reading of the texts of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), the prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy said that Catholics must reject the "hermeneutic of discontinuity" in interpreting them.

"The Holy Father has recently defined as 'unacceptable' the hermeneutic of discontinuity," said Cardinal Mauro Piacenza, referring to a May 24 papal address.

He added:

The continuity of the one Body of the Church, prior to being a hermeneutic criterion, that is a manner by which to interpret texts, is a theological reality, which is deeply rooted in the selfsame act of faith which prompts us to profess "I believe in One Church." For such a reason, some sort of dichotomy between pre- and post-Vatican II is unthinkable, and certainly one must refute both the positions of those who see in the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council a "new beginning" of the Church as well as those who discern the "true Church" only prior to this historical Council. No one can arbitrarily decide whether and when the "true Church" started. Sprung forth from the side of Christ, and fortified by the effusion of the Spirit at Pentecost, the Church is One and Only, until the consummation of history, and within the communion by means of which will come to be actualized in eternity.

"Certainly a desacralized liturgy, or that reduced to a 'human representation,' in which the Christological and theological dimensions vanish until they are displaced, is not what the letter and spirit of Sacrosanctum Concilium intended," Cardinal Piacenza added, referring to the Council's Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. "This does not justify, nonetheless, the position of those who in their own turn have also wed themselves to the hermeneutic of discontinuity, denying Conciliar reform, considering them as betrayals of a longed-for 'true Church.'"-EWTN

Traditionalist forums are still not discussing the baptism of desire philosophically: the issue is at the heart of the SSPX reconciliation

Without a rational approach to extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the ‘exceptions’ there is no hermeneutic of continuity in Vatican Council II.

Traditionalist forums discuss extra ecclesiam nulla salus theologically only. So theologically some will assume that implicit desire is an exception to the dogma. Others will say it is not.

If they use a philosophical, intellectual approach and then look at the ‘exceptions’ per se, there are no exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation being there in only the Catholic Church.

In 2012 there is no known case of the baptism of desire/implicit desire. We do not know any case over the last 100 years or more. Neither do we know any such case saved in invincible ignorance.

So in reality there are no exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

No magisterial document also says there are exceptions to the dogma or that implicit desire etc is explicit.

This is not theology. This is an empirical, objective observation. We do not know the dead- saved.

The implications of this is that Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

If the Council is traditional and in accord with the dogma on salvation then there is the hermeneutic of continuity.

It means the traditionalist’s interpretation of the Council has the hermeneutic of continuity. Th interpretation of the Vatican Curia is without the hermenutic of continuity. The Vatican Curia assumes that there are exceptions to the dogma and so the Council is a break with continuity,with Tradition.

Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in two theological papers of the International Theological Commission attributes this break to the Fr. Leonard Feeney case.

He assumes, like Cardinal Richard Cushing, that the baptism of desire etc are explicit exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma. This was the Cushing error.

Since then the traditionalists have also accepted this error and have argued over it. Philosophically we can see the Curia‘s position as heresy.It's a break with Tradition. There is no hermeneutic of continuity.-Lionel Andrades



Traditional Catholic forum - message board for Catholics


Jeff Mirus could be asked if he knows anyone saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire in 2012. If he does not, then how can the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance be an exception to Fr. Leonard Feeney?

Jeff Mirus could be asked if he knows anyone saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire in 2012. If he does not, then how can the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance be an exception to Fr. Leonard Feeney?

There has been a good theological response by Mr. Brian Kelly to a controversial report by Mr. Jeff Mirus on the salvation dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the baptism of desire etc. He uses theology and Scripture and the text of the dogma itself, to show that there is no salvation outside the Church.


In More Catholic Than the Popes  (July 23, 2012) (1) however he could also have brought out the point that the baptism of desire/ implicit desire is not relevant to the dogma since we do not know any explicit case.


So Jeff Mirus should not consider the baptism of desire or being saved in invincible ignorance as exceptions, to the dogma Cantate Domino, Council of Florence.


Aside from the theological approach if you see this issue philosophically, there are no known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.


Jeff Mirus’ Trinity Communications has placed a report on the internet over the last few years,Tragic Errors of Fr. Leonard Feeney   The report by Fr. William Most, assumes that the baptism of desire etc is an exception to the interpretation of the dogma by Fr. Leonard Feeney.

This is an objective error. It is a factual error. We cannot see anyone saved with the baptism of desire. When this error is repeated even after being informed and being understood it becomes a lie.

So it  is this objective approach which could also be used when discussing the dogma on exlcusive salvation. Rationally Jeff Mirus' position doesn't make sense.

Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits in Boston made an objective error when they assumed that being saved with implcit  desire was relevant to the dogma  extra ecclesiam nulla salus.


Jeff Mirus could be asked if he knows anyone saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire in 2012. If he does not, then how can the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance be an exception to Fr. Leonard Feeney?


If he claims that the Magisterium of the Church suggests it is an exception, then would he be saying that the Magisterium made a mistake? In the report of Mirus being reviewed by Brian Kelly the pope is criticized as being careless. Jeffrey Mirus says Pope Pius XI was ‘a bit careless’.

So was the magisterium also careless in assuming that the baptism of desire is an exception to the literal interpretation of the dogma according to the Church Fathers, the Councils, popes and saints?


Similarly when Fr.Francois Laisney and others assume that the baptism of desire etc are exceptions to the dogma, they could be asked to reason out, how can implicit desire which is always implicit and a possibility known only to God and unknown to us, be an explicit exception to Cantate Domino and Fr.Leonard Feeney.

There will be a Saint Benedict Center Conference next month and this would be a good opportunity to discuss this issue.-Lionel Andrades


1.
http://catholicism.org/more-catholic-than-the-popes.html


Bro.Francis MICM's Opening Remarks at the SBC Conference