Saturday, December 1, 2012

Is the SSPX heretical?-1

From the SSPX website with comments-L.A

Is the SSPX heretical?


11-30-2012

Archbishop Mueller



Archbishop Mueller

Archbishop Mueller, who is heading the Congregation of the Faith, made some remarks published in L’Osservatore Romano on November 29th, on the occasion of the publication of the 7th volume of the “Opera omnia of Joseph Ratzinger”, which expounds the now-Pope Benedict XVI’s impact during the Second Vatican Council.[1] During this presentation, the man who is the pope’s right arm made a rather forceful declaration in support of his superior regarding the ‘hermeneutic of the reform in continuity’:[2]


This interpretation is the only one possible according to the principles of Catholic theology, in consideration of the indissoluble link between Sacred Scripture, the complete and integral Tradition and the Magisterium, whose highest expression is the Council presided over by the Successor of St. Peter as Head of the visible Church. Outside this sole orthodox interpretation unfortunately exists a heretical interpretation, that is, a hermeneutic of rupture, (found) both on the progressive front and on the traditionalist one. Both agree on refusing the Council; the progressives in their wanting to leave it behind, as if it were a season to abandon in order to get to another church, and the traditionalists in their not wanting to get there, as if it was the winter of Catholicity.

Lionel: All sides are using the false premise of the visible dead saved and so there is a rupture with the past. The SSPX rejects the Council the liberals welcome. The cause is the false premise.Change the premise and the same Vatican Council II changes.

Continuity means permanent correspondence with the origin, not an adaption of whatever has been, which also can lead the wrong way. The often quoted term aggiornamento (updating) does not mean the secularization of the faith, which would lead to its dissolution, but rather making present the message of Jesus Christ. This making present is the reform necessary for every era in constant fidelity to the whole Christ…
Lionel: There cannot be correspondence with the origin when the false premise is used.
The same Council has declared that, “following the tracks of the Councils of Trent and Vatican I, it intends to propose the genuine doctrine on the divine Revelation and its transmission, so that by the message of salvation the entire world listening believes, believing hopes, hoping loves” (dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum1). The Council does not want to announce some other faith but, in continuity with the previous ones, it means to make it present.
Lionel: This is possible when there is no innovation added. The innovation is assuming that all implicit salvation mentioned in the Council text refers to explicit known cases. These cases, it is then implied, are exceptions to Tradition, the dogma on salvation and the Syllabus.
He quotes Dei Verbum again (#8): “This tradition which comes from the Apostles developed in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit.” This produces a “growth in the understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed down” and is obtained by contemplation, study and “preaching of those who have received through episcopal succession the sure gift of truth. For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.”
Lionel:Yes and without the new doctrine implied by the media.Also there is  no reference text in Vatican Council II to support their false interpretation unless they assume that implicit salvation is explicit e.g LG 16 (explicit) contradicts AG 7 which says all need faith and the baptism of water.

Needless to say, this declaration of Archbishop Mueller is not an official statement coming in the extraordinary form of, say, a decree or an anathema. Yet, this statement deserves some attention because it is the faithful echo of Pope Benedict XVI’s thesis of the hermeneutic of continuity, and because of his position in the Church today at the head of the Congregation of the Faith leading the discussions with the SSPX.

It is not the first time that Rome is ‘using’ the SSPX to counterbalance the arch-modernists who want to be ahead of the time and want the revolution of the revolution. It is less usual and rather ironic for the SSPX to be called ‘heretical’ on a par with the avant-garde modernists who reject Vatican II as being outdated. During the doctrinal discussions, as explained by Bishop Fellay, the Roman theologians accused us of having a Protestant attitude because we followed our own judgment against the Church Magisterium, just as we have asserted that they have neo-modernist mentalit!

Lionel: Since the SSPX and the liberals use the false premise, both of them will have a heretical interpretation of Vatican Council II, which is  a break from the past.

No doubt, the Archbishop Mueller's statements do greatly clarify the positions in as much as he basically invokes the harmonious continuity of the entire Deposit of the Faith as a sure symptom of orthodoxy. We cannot be more in agreement with this and yet, here is where Vatican II fails the test in the mind of all traditionalist theologians whose front is getting wider as years go by. After 50 years of implementation of the Council, which have seen the “auto-destruction of the Church” (as aptly spoken by Pope Paul VI) and the virtual agony of Christ’s Spouse, it may be high time to have a close check-up on the validity of the main conciliar tenets.

Lionel: There is an auto destruction since all sides have been using the false premise over  50  years. The auto destruction actually began in Boston in the 1940's and was continued in Vatican Council II by Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits.


 From the doctrinal discussions between Rome and the SSPX, it was clear that the main bone of contention touched on the meaning of Tradition and Magisterium. Here, Archbishop Mueller is kind enough to state clearly the difficulty in the following syllogism:


(Major) Whoever does not accept the integral magisterium of the Church, including Vatican II, is heretical.

(Minor) But the SSPX refuses Vatican II, part of the integral Church teaching.

(Conclusion) Therefore, the SSPX is heretical.

Lionel: The SSPX is using a false premise in its understanding of Vatican Council II. The conclusion is obvious.

It is clear that it will take a little explaining before we sort out the grain from the chaff in this simplistic argument, and we shall do so as a formal reply. Prior to this, we need to stress that, if Bishop Fellay and his priestly society are keeping in touch with the Roman authorities, it is because they believe in Rome, in the Church Magisterium and in papal infallibility. They believe that, outside of Rome, there is no ultimate solution to the gridlock in which the Church and, incidentally, the Society of St. Pius X are found. Unlike the sedevacantist instinct of fleeing away from modernist Rome as if it were already damned and cast off by Christ having lost its pontifical power, we believe that, as the problem comes from the head, the solution can be found only in the head.


This is the mystery of the Church which as Christ is both divine and human, as explained by Bishop Fellay recently:


This is the mystery of the Cross. When Jesus is on the Cross, the Faith obliges us to profess that He is God, that He is All-Powerful, that He is eternal and immortal. He cannot die; He cannot suffer. God is infinitely perfect. It is impossible for God to suffer. And Jesus on the Cross is God. The Faith tells us this. And we are obliged to accept it, totally, without in any way diminishing it. But at the same time human experience tells us that this same Jesus suffers and even that He dies.



Today, in relation to the Church, it is the same problem. In order to remain in the truth, one must keep these two sets of given facts: the facts of the Faith and also the facts noted by reason. This council tried to harmonize itself with the world. It brought the world into the Church, and so now we have disaster. And all these reforms that were made on the basis of the Council, were made by the authorities for this purpose. Today, they talk to us about continuity, but where is it? In Assisi? In the kissing of the Koran? In the suppression of the Catholic States? Where is that continuity?


Hence, we are going to have a close look at the question of the Church magisterium in connection with Tradition, and then apply it to Vatican II to sort out whether or not those who object to some key texts of the Council are heretic and not rather those who follow it integrally.

Lionel: Identify the false premise and then correct it. There will be  a Council which will not be a rupture with the past.

-Lionel Andrades


to be continued...


http://www.sspx.org/sspx_and_rome/is_the_sspx_heretical_1_11-30_2012.htm

Archbishop Muller is correct about Vatican Council II


Archbishop Müller, prefect of the CDF (Photo: CNS)


Archbishop Gerhard Muller has said that it is a heretical interpretation to consider Vatican Council II a rupture with the past.I agree with him. Vatican Council II is in perfect accord with the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, defined three times in Tradition.

Since it is in agreement with the dogma as interpreted by Fr.Leonard Feeney, it is in agreement with the Syllabus of Errors and the rest of Tradition.

Vatican Council II is traditional. It has a traditional ecclesiology with no contradictions.

Since the Council text does not say that we can see the dead who are explicit exceptions to the salvation dogma, there are no contradictions or any ambiguity.Vatican Council II is non-modernist.

Since I do not use any irrational premise in interpreting the Council, Vatican Council II for me is very rational, very traditional and non-modernist.-Lionel Andrades



http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2012/11/30/prefect-of-the-cdf-says-seeing-vatican-ii-as-a-rupture-is-heresy/

Congregation for Catholic Education says Fr.Robert Christian O.P's case should be referred to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith


The American Dominican at the Angelicum University,Rome teaches that cases of persons saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are known to us in the present times.

According to an official of the Congregation for Catholic Education,Vatican we cannot see the dead in 2012 who are saved in invincible ignorance, seeds of the word, elements of sanctification etc.These cases are known only to God.

The professor of ecclesiology at the University of St.Thomas Aquinas (Angelicum),Rome,assumes that we know exceptions to the thrice defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.I was present at the Angelicum University, on the feast day of St.Francis Xavier,a few years back, when he spoke on this subject.



The official, at the office of the Cardinal Prefect, Zenon Grocholewski,said this was a doctrinal issue and it came under the jurisdiction of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican.He agreed that it was irrational for the professor to assume that we can see the dead.

It may be mentioned that this error of Fr.Robert Christian O.P is not likely due to ill will or disobedience but to a general ignorance on this issue.
-Lionel Andrades
First Saturday.

OFFICIALS AT TWO VATICAN CONGREGATIONS CONTRADICT ARCHBISHOP GERHARD MULLER AND AUSGUSTINE DI NOIA OF THE CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH


CDF Archbishops allege we can see the dead saved which makes Vatican Council II a break from the past.Officials from the other Vatican Congregations disagree with the two Archbishops.

Archbishop Müller, prefect of the CDF (Photo: CNS)
A representative of the Prefect of the Congregation for Catholic Education, Vatican indicates that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is responsible for not checking a widespread error in the Church, and especially in Catholic universities.

The CDF is responsible for Catholic universities teaching that we can see the dead on earth saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire, who are known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors.

 
It is with this error, which makes Vatican Council II a 'rupture' from the past, that priests offer Holy Mass and deny a defined dogma, Vatican Council II (AG 7) and the Nicene Creed,I believe in one baptism(of water) for the forgiveness of sins (and not three known baptisms).


It may be mentioned that Archbishop Gerhard Muller ,Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and Archbishop Augustine Di Noia, Vice President,Ecclesia Dei, CDF, were interviewed by the National Catholic Register. The interviews showed that the Archbishops of the CDF  assumed that there were known exceptions in the present times, to a dogma, defined by three Church Councils.Pope Pius XII called this dogma 'an infallible teaching'(Letter of the Holy Office 1949).


It was pointed out to the Congregation for Catholic Education that Fr.Robert Christian O.P at the Angelicum University,Rome considers being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The official said that this was an issue for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith and that I should  contact them.But the CDF Prefect makes the same error in public (NCR interview).So he interprets Vatican Council II with this irrational premise of being able to see the dead alive who are explicit exceptions to a defined dogma of the Church.So Vatican Council II, for him, is a rupture with Tradition.


According to Vatican Council II (AG 7) - all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation. Lutherans do not have Catholic Faith.Protestants do not have Catholic Faith.So Vatican Council II has not changed the Church 's teaching on ecumenism.


In principle we accept the possibility that a non Catholic can be saved, under certain circumstances, however we cannot know a single such case in 2012,to assume and imply , like the Archbishops,that there is salvation outside the Church.


The Vatican Congregations are contradicting each other on this issue.-Lionel Andrades



Vatican Council II does not contradict itself or the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. We cannot see the dead.- Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments,Vatican

ARCHBISHOP MULLER AND HERESY

We cannot see the dead who are saved- Congregation for Catholic Education,Vatican