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

Vatican Council II agrees with the SSPX's St.Dennis Catholic Church, Calgary on 'other religions' :it contradicts Bishop Frederick Henry

There is a lot of importance given to Vatican Council II on the website of the Catholic Diocese of Calgary.The bishop of Calgary, Bishop Frederick Henry assumes that invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So Vatican Council II would be a break with the past since they use this false premise.
The false premise of being able to see the dead was used by the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing in the Fr.Leonard Feeney case in the 1940's. It is repeated in the diocese of Calgary and perhaps also the SSPX church St.Dennis Catholic Church,Calgary.

There are no exceptions of implicit desire and invincible ignorance since we do not know of any such case in the Year of Faith.Vatican Council II states all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation (Ad Gentes 7).(1) This is in agreement with ‘the dogma’ the ‘infallible teaching’ which Pope Pius XII mentioned when referring to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.(2)

The dogma is based on John 3:5 (on the necessity of the baptism of water for salvation) and Mark 16:16 (on the necessity of the church). Mark 9:38-40 ( those who are not visible members of the Church and not against us) does not contradict Mark 16:16 (those who do not believe will be condemned). Thos who are not against us and who are saved are known only to Jesus. So they do not contradict the dogma. While everyone on earth needs the baptism of water and Catholic Faith and those who do not believe after being informed will be condemned.(LG 14).

The Bible, the Letter of the Holy Office nor Vatican Council II (LG 16) contradict the dogma on exclusive salvation.Since we do not know any one in 2013 who is an exception. If something does not exist in real life it cannot be an exception.We cannot name anyone today saved with implicit desire, invincible ignorance or a good conscience.There may not even be a single case over the last 100 years.We don't know.

There are no known exceptions of implicit desire, invincible ignorance(LG 16) , seeds of the Word (AG), elements of sanctification(LG 8), imperfect communion with the church(UR) or 'good and holy' non Catholics saved (NA)-   who are known to us personally.They are known only to God.So they are irrelevant to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Vatican Council II (AG 7) also says outside the church there is no salvation. It says all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation (AG 7). ALL.Protestants have the baptism of water but do not have Catholic Faith.According to Vatican Council II (AG 7) Protestants in the Diocese of Calgary are oriented to Hell unless they convert into the Catholic Church. They do not have access to the Sacrament of Confession and cannot receive the Eucharist.They know about the Church and yet do not enter.According to Lumen Gentium 14 they are on the way to Hell unless they convert before death.

Ad Gentes 7 indicates all Protestants need Catholic Faith for salvation. AG 7 is not contradicted by Lumen Gentium 16 (3) since we do not know any one saved in invincible ignorance and with a good conscience(LG 16).Neither does the Council claim that these cases are known in the present times.We accept them as possibilities. De facto (explicitly) we can never know the dead saved who are now visible to us  as they are in Heaven.

Lumen Gentium 16 is not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus defined by three Church Councils.So the liberal interpretation of Vatican Council II in the Diocese of Calgary with the false premise - is false.

The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston supported Fr.Leonard Feeney when it mentiond ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible teaching’. It does not mention any ‘exceptions’.Th priest said that there were no exceptions. There were no explicit or implicit exceptions.

If the Letter of the Holy Office  assumed that implicit baptism of desire  and being saved in invincible ignorance etc were explicit exceptions to the dogma then it made an objective mistake.Since we cannot see the dead. We do not know anyone on earth, dead and saved and who are exceptions to the dogma. We cannot name anyone who is an exception to Fr.Leonard Feeney’s understanding of the dogma.

We cannot see the deceased saved, for them to be exceptions. This was the error of Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits at Boston and it is the error now of Bishop Frederick Henry.They all assume that implicit desire is an exception to the dogma.

Superficially it may appear that the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma and many Catholics make this mistake.In the Year of the Faith we can avoid this error and affirm the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus being in accord with Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

We can have two interpretations of Vatican Council II,just as we can have two interpretations of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. One is with the visible dead on earth theory and the other without it.One interpretation is rational (without the visible dead claim) and with the hermeneutic of continuity . The other is irrational and with a break with Tradition.One affirms the dogma on salvation, the writings of St.Robert Bellarmine and the Syllabus of Errors. The other is heretical, it denies a defined dogma with ‘exceptions’, this is the one used by the bishop of Calgary.

So affirm the Faith, outside of which there is no salvation and in which all people need to enter visibly (with faith and baptism) to avoid Hell and to go to Heaven (for salvation). This is Vatican Council II without the claim of being able to see 'ghosts' in 2013. We can affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma along with implicit desire. This is possible for all Catholics, lay and religious.

Immagine di copertina
Vatican Council II is in accord with the traditional teaching on other religions and ecumenism as held by the Society of St.Pius X's St.Dennis Catholic Church,Calgary.The Council is traditional.

 
It is unfortunate that the SSPX understands the Council only as does the Bishop of Calgary while at the same time saying that non Catholic religions are false paths to salvation.This is the confusion with the SSPX.
-Lionel Andrades.


1.
Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.-Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II.

2.
Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.

However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church.- Letter of the Holy Office 1949

3.
Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God. In the first place we must recall the people to whom the testament and the promises were given and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh.On account of their fathers this people remains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts He makes nor of the calls He issues. But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator.-Lumen Gentium 16

"Baptism of Desire," to the extent that it is operative in the World, is an unknown. We cannot observe it, just as we cannot observe "perfect contrition" either- Jehanne. Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus Forum

That "Baptism of Desire," to the extent that it is operative in the World, is an unknown. We cannot observe it, just as we cannot observe "perfect contrition" either. That the One and Triune God would even allow someone with the proper dispositions to end this life without sacramental Baptism is also an unknown, and if He does allow that occur, how often such occurs is anyone's guess.

One the other hand, we can observe the Sacraments in action, and in the case of infant Baptism, it's a 100% guarantee! For adults, we can have a "certain hope," even beyond a "good hope" that if the Sacrament was administered correctly with the proper dispositions, then the individual in question received the divine graces through the merits of Jesus Christ..
One the other hand, we can observe the Sacraments in action, and in the case of infant Baptism, it's a 100% guarantee! For adults, we can have a "certain hope," even beyond a "good hope" that if the Sacrament was administered correctly with the proper dispositions, then the individual in question received the divine graces through the merits of Jesus Christ..
  from the Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus Forum http://catholicforum.forumotion.com/t1008-traditionalists-at-the-stbenedict-centers-usa-could-come-to-the-aid-of-the-sspx#8784