Thursday, January 31, 2013

Priestly Fraternity of St.Peter (FSSP) offers Traditional Latin Mass in Canada with false theology: heresy ?


Bishop Frederick Henry will not affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus nor interpret Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church as being in accord with the dogma.When this is brought to his attention he says this is a lie and that he accepts the Catechism of the Catholic Church and Vatican Council II 'in its totality'.When asked again if this means he affirms the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus he does not answer.

On Jan 23,2013 he listed the passages from the Catechism of the Catholic Church which he believed contradicted the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and e-mailed it to me. On Jan 24,2013 I told him that we do not know any one saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire etc so those passages from the Catechism do not contradict the dogma on salvation. He still would not affirm the dogma.


I continued sending him posts from my blog.


On Jan 25 he wrote :
It would seem that you have forgotten that lying, detraction, and calumny are sinful. Pity!
That same day I emailed him mentioning:

For the record you have not denied:


1.That you reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with known exceptions of invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.


2. That you consider Vatican Council II a break with the past because of known exceptions.


3.You hold the same error as the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Cushing.


4.You interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church assuming the dead who are saved, are visible.
On Jan 25 he responded:

I accept the Catechism and Vatican II in their totality – do YOU?
On Jan 26 I responded.


It is meaningless for you to say that you accept the Catechism of the Catholic Church when you assume that the references to invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire cases are visible to us in 2013.So you assume that the Catechism refers to explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The Catechism does not state that these cases are explicit and known to us and neither does it state that these cases are an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is an irrational premise of yours. You are assuming that the dead saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions to the dogma.


So you are still denying an ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and you cannot pretend that there are texts in the Catechism which contradict a teaching which is obligatory for all bishops to affirm.

Also since you use the irrational premise of the dead man walking ,saved in invincible ignorance etc and who is visible to you only, for you ,Vatican Council II also must be a break with the dogma on salvation and the past Magisterial texts.


So in your Profession of Faith ,when you say 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin' (Nicene Creed) you mean there are three known baptisms,water, desire and blood- and not just one known baptism, that of water.

The Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Archbishop Gerhard Muller, recently said that it was heretical when progressives interpret Vatican Council II as a break with the past.

I repeat it is also a heresy to deny the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

On Jan 26 I sent him this blog post.

Saturday, January 26, 2013
BISHOP HENRY UNABLE TO RESPOND TO HERESY CHARGES
He responded with one word:

Nonsense!
On Jan 26 I asked:
Are you saying that you affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?


Are you saying that you interpret invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire mentioned in the Catechism as contradicting the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?

Are you saying that just like Archbishop Richard Cushing you assume that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are known to us, they are visible to us, to be exceptions?

Does invincible ignorance and a good conscience (LG 16), elements of sanctification (LG 8) etc in Vatican Council II also contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?

He has not responded to further messages and blog posts sent to him.

Bishop Frederick Henry will not affirm the dogma while he uses the false premise of being able to see the dead on earth saved.These invisible cases are supposed to be exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.This was the error of the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing in the Fr.Leonard Feeney case.

The bishop of Calgary  announced recently that the Traditional Latin Mass is available in the diocese at St.Anthony's Parish,Calgary.The priests there are from the Priestly Fraternity of St.Peter(FSSP).


1. Are these FSSP priests also using the false theology of Bishop Frederick Henry contradicting the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?


2.Do they also reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also the dogma on the infallibility of the pope ex cathedra?


3.Is it not a public sin to offer Holy Mass after these public denials (of at least the bishop)?


4.Is all this permitted by Canon Law?
-Lionel Andrades

St. Anthony’s Parish

5340 - 4th Street SW
Calgary, Alberta
T2V 0Z5
Tel: (403) 252-1137

FSSP Calgary House:(403) 255-2727

For Vocations Information:
Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary
Rector: Very Rev. Josef Bisig, FSSP
e-mail: seminary@fsspolgs.org
Tel.: 402-797-7700 / 7705 - Fax

In Canada, contact:
Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (Canada) Inc.
Vanier, ON K1L 8E3
e-mail: fsspcanada@cyberus.ca
Tel.: 613-567-0287 / 565-9514 Fax

No comments: