Sunday, June 30, 2013

There could be a few of us waiting for Rome, the SSPX and sedevacantists to return to Tradition

Here is a continuation of the SSPX Declaration. 
 
The Lefebvrist bishops save their harshest criticism to the Novus Ordo Mass, promulgated in 1969 by Pope Paul VI. “This Mass is penetrated with an ecumenical and Protestant spirit, democratic and humanist, which empties out the sacrifice of the Cross.”
Lionel:
I attend Mass in the vernacular and also the Latin Tridentine Mass and I am aware of the Sacrifice of Jesus, an unbloody Sacrifice reenacted.
I affirm Vatican Council II in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known traditionally for centuries - without any known exceptions.
 
I believe that Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church is in accord with Tradition, since unlike many traditionalists and liberals, I do not use the Richard Cushing Error in the interpretation of any Church document.
 
When I am asked "Do you accept or reject the baptism of desire?" I reply, "I accept an implicit baptism of desire known only to God and I reject a visible to us baptism of desire".So it is here where I avoid the error made by the Archbishop of Boston in the Fr.Leonard Feeney case.
The SSPX has always interpreted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 of Pope Pius XII  as  assuming that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are known exceptions to the traditional interpretation. May be they do this unknowingly.
 
They then carry this error on to Vatican Council II and assume that the traditional teaching on other religions is contradicted with being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16), they assume that we can see the dead saved with a good conscience(LG 16), that Vatican Council II refers to visible cases in Heaven saved with 'seeds of the Word'(AG 11) etc.
Then they reject the Council  because of this irrational premise(seeing the dead in Heaven) which results in a hermeneutic of rupture.

The traditionalist bishops announce that, in practice, the dialogue with the Vatican is over and that from now on, they will wait “either when Rome returns to Tradition and to the Faith of all time – which would re-establish order in the Church.”
Lionel:
There could be a few of us waiting for Rome, the SSPX  and sedevacantists to return to Tradition.
Or, “when she explicitly acknowledges our right to profess integrally the Faith and to reject the errors which oppose it, with the right and the duty for us to oppose publicly the errors and the proponents of these errors, whoever they may be – which would allow the beginning of a re-establishing of order.”

 
Lionel:
Rome and the SSPX are both using the Richard Cushing Error.They even went through doctrinal talks with both sides unaware of the underlying mistake.

Meanwhile “we persevere in the defense of Catholic Tradition and our hope remains entire,” the statement concludes.
 
Lionel:
The Richard Cushing Error is not part of Catholic Tradition. It emerged in the 1940's. It is not there in the writings of St.Maximillian Kolbe.
-Lionel Andrades
 























































































































































































































































































































































































 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
___________________________________________