Thursday, July 18, 2013

The SSPX is really rejecting Vatican Council II with the Richard Cushing Error: so am I

The difference between the SSPX and me is that I accept Vatican Council II without the Richard Cushing Error
 
When the CDF tells the SSPX that they must accept Vatican Council II they are careful not to say without the Richard Cushing Error. They want the SSPX to continue to accept the Council with the Richard Cushing premise just as they do and the rest of the liberal Left. So it would be a big victory if the SSPX also caves like the Vatican and justifies a Council interpreted by mixing up and confusing de jure and de facto statements in the Council.
 
I am just a lay man and no one tells me that I am obligated to accept Vatican Council with the usual tag along nonsense.I would simply say that I accept the Council without the dead man visible theory  while the SSPX and the rest of the world make the common error.
 
I accept Ad Gentes 7, (faith and baptism needed for salvation) in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The Vatican Curia and the SSPX do not .
 
I accept Lumen Gentium 16 as being implicit and so in agreement with Ad Gentes7- at least not contradicting it. The Vatican Curia and the SSPX interpret LG 16 as referring to visible-to-us cases, dead and now saved, who are exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 and to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
 
This is the difference between me and all of them.
 
It's a pity that the SSPX is not aware of what  I am saying or for political reasons does not wish to affirm the Council in agreement with the dogma. Or may be they do not want to appear anti Semitic and be targeted financially by the Jewish Left.
 
If they accept Vatican Council II without the Cushing Error they will be in harmony with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and then the Jewish Left will threathen them.
 
They have already suspended SSPX priests who opposed the Jewish Left via the media.They have also removed a lot of material from their websites.Now, by supporting  a Vatican Council II without telling us all that they can see the dead saved in invincible ignorance, they will be head on against those whom Bishop Bernard Fellay has called the enemies of the Church.

In my case it doesn't make a difference if I am targeted by the Jewish Left. I lead a simple life here and any change in my lifestyle would be an improvement.
-Lionel Andrades
 
 
 
Photo: Old woman and cat leading a simple life. Things are not as bad for me yet.

Changes nothing?

In response to the last post (1) I have received this comment.
Hmm! Changes nothing though if they saw anything at all which recent events indicate they haven't. They're still schismatics and neo-heretics and confessions and marriages with this group are still invalid having fooled many people who are now living in sin. 
 
What about a person like me, who also attends Mass in Italian and is not a formal member of the SSPX. Why should I support the Vatican Curia for whom there are known exceptions to the dogma! I do not know any one in 2013 who is an exception and the CDF archbishops and cardinal cannot name any case. Would you say they have fooled many people and are now living in sin? Archbishop Gerhard Muller and Archbishop Augustine Di Noia ?
On the other hand the SSPX Chapter Statement is rational and is in  line with the popes. It is in agreement with Tradition as taught by the Holy Spirit.It's traditional position on other religions is in accord with Vatican Council II without the Cushing error.
 
The position of the Vatican Curia is against the teachings of the Holy Spirit, as taught over the  all these years. The Curia is still interpreting Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition.So what is their credibility if tomorrow they claim that SSPX weddings etc are not valid. Are they valid if they are not in accord with the popes, Church Councils, Tradition and the Magisterium up to Pope John Paul II ?
 
To deny an ex cathedra dogma with an irrational premise, supposedly being able to see exceptions, is a mortal sin.This is what Catholics are being taught and so it is a scandal- another sin. The CDF offiicals  are officiating at weddings etc in this condition of mortal sin.
 
So far I have not attended an SSPX Mass and received the Eucharist. But only so far...
-Lionel Andrades
 
1.
July 18, 2013
The SSPX members who met at the General Chapter Meeting saw through the ruse
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/07/the-sspx-members-who-met-at-general.html#links

The SSPX members who met at the General Chapter Meeting saw through the ruse

It is a year for the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) General Chapter Statement (1) and there still is a fundamental difference on the interpretation of Vatican Council II. The General Chapter said there are no exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. For the Vatican Curia there are known exceptions.

 For this reason it seems opportune that we reaffirm our faith in the Roman Catholic Church, the unique Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ, outside of which there is no salvation nor possibility to find the means leading to salvation; our faith in its monarchical constitution, desired by Our Lord Himself, by which the supreme power of government over the universal Church belongs only to the Pope, Vicar of Christ on earth; our faith in the universal Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Creator of both the natural and the supernatural orders, to Whom every man and every society must submit.-SSPX General Chapter Statement (July 14, 2012)
 
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican assumes there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So they reject the traditional teaching on other religions, they reject the traditional teaching on ecumenism assuming there are known exceptions. They reject the concept of a Catholic State since they assume that non Catholics are saved in the present times that these cases are visible and personally known.So the dogma is now obsolete.
 
Collegiality does not consider the literal interpretation of the dogma and the Primacy of the pope is questioned assuming that the Orthodox Christians are saved in general in their religion.
 
The SSPX  General Chapter understood correctly that the problem of modernism comes from assuming that there are defacto known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
 
If there are no known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus,we cannot see the dead in 2013, then the Catholic teaching on other religions is still traditional, the teaching on ecumenism knows no exceptions, there is a moral obligation to work for a Catholic State, there can only be the Primacy of the pope over the Orthodox Christians and Collegiality must take into consideration the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
 
For the Jewish Left it is imprortant that there is confusion on extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The SSPX members who met at the General Chapter Meeting saw through the ruse.
-Lionel Andrades

 
1.
http://www.dici.org/en/news/society-of-st-pius-x-general-chapter-statement/

SSPX position 'vindicated'








The SSPX's position that the Second Vatican Council has errors has once again been vindicated - and this time by a bishop in good standing.-SSPX USA

Even a young boy  in school will know Vatican Council II will contain errors, and be a break with Tradition, if the visible dead theory is being used.If an irrational premise is used in any Church document it will emerge ambigous and confusing.
The Society of St.Pius X (USA) website assumes  there are known exceptions in 2013 to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They are using this irrationality in the interpretation of the Lettter of the Holy Office 1949 relative to Fr.Leonard Feeney.
 
The Letter of the Holy Office mentions the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus 'the infallible teaching' and also mentions the possibility of being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.
 
The Letter does state that Fr.Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy (SSPX assumes it does), it does not state the baptism of desire is visible to us on earth(SSPX assumes it does) it does not state that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are defacto, known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus(SSPX assumes it is). So with all this irrationality the SSPX has interpreted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and then has extended it to Vatican Council II.

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre mentioned that a Hindu in Tibet could be saved in his religion and the  SSPX bishops and priests assume that this Hindu in Tibet was a known exception to the  dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The Hindu in Tibet, if he is saved, is only a possibility for , it can only be a possibility for us, since it is known to God only.The SSPX bishops and priests interpreted the Hindu in Tibet as being a known reality.
 
So with this heresy of allegedly  knowing  exceptions to the dogma on salvation the SSPX USA has also contradictd the SSPX General Chapter Statement last July which stated there are no exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
 
It is unfortunate that the SSPX error is widespread in the Catholic Church and is shared by the liberals and also Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Michael Voris.
-Lionel Andrades


SSPX (District USA) SUPPORTS DEAD ARE VISIBLE THEORY

According to the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX), District USA, Communications Office the Holy Office in 1049  assumed that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance cases are visible exceptions to the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney. In an e-mail received from Mr.Louis Tifori (ltofari@sspx.org
the Holy Office 'condemned the errors of Fr.Leonard Feeney'.

I had originally asked Mr.Tifori to please answer two questions and let me know the position of the SSPX (District USA) on this issue. They refuse to answer the two questions and mentioned that the Holy Office has condemned the errors of Fr.Leonard Feeney.

In other words the Holy Office in 1949 during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII, assumed that there were visible to us baptism of desire etc. They assumed we could see the dead on earth and this was not being acknowledged by Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Fr.Leonard Feeney could not see the dead on earth and so he would not acknowledge that there were known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma on salvation.

Even the Church Councils, popes and saints were not able to see in real life any known exceptions. So they did not mention any exceptions being there to the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
The SSPX (USA)  assume that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignroance which is accepted in principle only has to also be accepted as defacto, known in in the present times. So in 2013 the SSPX (USA) are sure they can see the dead who are exceptions to the need for all to convert into the church with no known exceptions.

The SSPX (District USA) has this same message on web pages with articles by Fr.Francois Laisney. They are at odds with the SSPX priests in Rome (District Italy) who say that they do not know  anyone in Rome saved with implicit desire or invincible ignorance.So these cases are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The General Chapter of the SSPX last July also affirmed the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with no exceptions but are at odds with the SSPX (District USA).
-Lionel Andrades