Friday, January 25, 2013

Bishop Frederick Henry does not deny heresy charge

I have sent the last blog post (1) to the bishop of Calgary,Canada as I had also done with the previous one(2).I do not expect a response.Perhaps for the first time someone has pointed out to the bishop that there is no explicit-for-us baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance.So when Bishop Frederick Henry, the bishop of Calgary denies the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with allegedly being able to see the dead who are saved , it would be an innocent mistake.Something unintentional because it was unknown.


So we cannot expect him to say that there are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and to Ad Gentes 7 because ' we can see the dead saved on earth' or ' the dead are visible'.


It would be irrational.If he corrects this error it would mean Vatican Council II is not a break with the past; the dogma on salvation and the Syllabus of Errors.


It would also mean he is in agreement with the position of Fr.Leonard Feeney and not that of the Archbishop of Boston Richard Cushing.It would also mean that he holds the same position on other religions and ecumenism, as the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) members at the St.Dennis Catholic Church,Calgary.


According to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, defined three times, Protestants and Orthodox Christians need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation.This is also indicated by Vatican Council II(AG 7).So this would be Bishop Henry's position on ecumenism.


There is no contradiction between Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441,Vatican Council II (AG 7) and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (846).

At issue is the Eucharist.Bishop Henry offers Holy Mass while he rejects the dogma on salvation,suggests Vatican Council II and the Catechism contradict Magisterial documents of the past and he assumes that there is not one known baptism for the forgiveness of sins (Nicene Creed) but three or more known baptisms (baptism of desire,invincible ignorance etc).

If a lay man would deny these teachings in public he would have to go for Confession, affirm the faith in public and then receive the Eucharist at Mass. May be not in Bishop Henry's diocese, whose website promotes the National Catholic Reporter , whose Catholic staff members deny most Church teachings .

When I use the word heresy here I am not using it in a pejorative sense or in any manner reflecting on the bishops personality or character. I am referring to the Catechism of the Catholic Church mentioning heresy and the need to believe in certain teachings of the Catholic Church which is obligatory for all.
2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. "Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."-Catechism of the Catholic Church
-Lionel Andrades

1
BISHOP FREDERICK HENRY AND THE SSPX INTERPRET VATICAN COUNCIL II AS BREAK WITH THE PAST : THEY ASSUME THE DEAD ARE VISIBLE AS DID THE ARCHBISHOP OF BOSTON RICHARD CUSHING
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/01/bishop-frederick-henry-and-sspx.html#links

2
BISHOP FREDERICK HENRY AND THE SSPX INTERPRET VATICAN COUNCIL II AS BREAK WITH THE PAST : THEY ASSUME THE DEAD ARE VISIBLE AS DID THE ARCHBISHOP OF BOSTON RICHARD CUSHING
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/01/bishop-fredrick-henry-of-calgarycanada.html#links

BISHOP FREDERICK HENRY AND THE SSPX INTERPRET VATICAN COUNCIL II AS BREAK WITH THE PAST : THEY ASSUME THE DEAD ARE VISIBLE AS DID THE ARCHBISHOP OF BOSTON RICHARD CUSHING

The Archbishop of Boston was in heresy for denying 'the infallible statement' with allegedly being able to see the dead saved who did not have to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation. He contradicted the centuries old dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Similarly when Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre says there could be a Hindu in Tibet saved in his religion, through Jesus and the Church,he is referring to a possibility. This is acceptable since implicit to us salvation, as in the case of the Hindu in Tibet, can only be accepted in principle.These cases can never be known personally. HoweverThe Society of St.Pius (SSPX) has always assumed that this case of the Hindu in Tibet was  known in the present times and so an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is the same heresy as Archbishop Richard Cushing .

There are no known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus and those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance are known only to God.So if Fr.Leonard Feeney rejected the baptism of desire as being an explicit exception he was correct.


Bishop Federick Henry of Calgary,Canada has also misinterpreted the Catechism of the Catholic Church like many Catholics.The Catechism of the Catholic Church does not state that invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or to Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.So when he implies that invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are exceptions, he makes the same error as the Archbishop of Boston.



Without his misinterpretation, the Catechism and Vatican Council II, is in agreement with the Society of St.Pius X's position on other religions and ecumenism.


The bishop is in heresy for firstly denying the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and then assuming that Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church is a break with the extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors; a break with the past.

Archbishop Gerhard Muller has said that those who interpret Vatican Council II as a break with the past are heretical.He referred to progressives and traditionalists.In this case Bishop Frederick Henry and the SSPX are interpreting the  Council II as a break with the past.They both assume that the dead saved are visible to us and so are an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.-Lionel Andrades

BISHOP FREDRICK HENRY OF CALGARY,CANADA RESPONDS: SSPX
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/01/bishop-fredrick-henry-of-calgarycanada.html#links
  Archbishop Gerhard Muller,Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican has got it right!
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/12/archbishop-gerhard-mullerprefect-of.html#links


ARCHBISHOP,CATHOLIC PRIESTS AND LAY APOLOGIST SAY VATICAN COUNCIL II DOES NOT CONTRADICT THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS AND THE SYLLABUS OF ERRORS : "We don't know any case of the baptism of desire or invincible ignorance.Only Jesus can judge"

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/11/archbishopcatholic-priests-and-lay.html#links