The young SSPX priest who offered the Latin Mass at the St. Catherine of Siena chapel in central Rome,today morning said in his homily that the Catholic Church has the full deposit of the Truth.I agree with him but there are such major differences in our understanding of Catholic Truth.
The SSPX Italy's position on Vatican Council II is vague and confusing.There are big gaps.Things they cannot explain.Their ecclesiology has the new theology of the Novus Ordo Mass.It is heretical but the Vatican will not admite it since it is approved by the Left.
Archbishop Lefebvre made the original mistake.He overlooked the error in the second part of the Letter of the Holy Office.No one from the Magisterium helped him.
For the SSPX Italy the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance refer to real and not imaginary cases.Since they are exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.This is the official position of the SSPX.It is there on their English website.
They are unaware of Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and extra ecclesiam nulla salus( Feeneyite).
For them it is has always been Vatican Council II( Cushingite) and extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Cushingite).
They proclaim a Nicene Creed ( Feeneyite) but really refer to a Nicene Creed ( Cushingite).
So in reality the SSPX has changed dogmas and doctrine.
Feeneyism: It is the old theology and philosophical reaoning which says there are no known exceptions past or present, to the dogma EENS.There are no explicit cases to contradict the traditional interpretation of EENS.
Cushingism: It is the new theology and philosophical reasoning, which assumes there are known exceptions, past and present, to the dogma EENS, on the need for all to formally enter the Church.It assumes that the baptism of desire etc are not hypothetical but objectively known.In principle hypothetical cases are objective in the present times.
Baptism of Desire. It refers to the hypothetical case of an unknown catechumen who desires the baptism of water but dies before he receives it and is saved. Since this is an invisible case in our reality it is not relevant to the dogma EENS.
Invincible Ignorance. This refers to the hypothetical case of someone allegedly saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, since he was in ignorance.
Council of Florence.One of the three Councils which defined the dogma EENS.It did not mention any exceptions.
Liberal theologians.They reinterpreted the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, as objective cases, known in the present times.
Vatican Council II(Cushingite). It refers to the interpretation of Vatican Council II with Cushingism.LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer not to hypothetical but known cases in the present times. So Vatican Council II emerges as a break with the dogma EENS.
Vatican Council II (Feeneyite).It refers to the interpretation of Vatican Council II with Feeneyism.LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to hypothetical cases, which are unknown personally in the present times.So Vatican Council II is not a break with EENS, the Syllabus of Errors, ecumenism of return, the Nicene Creed ( Feeneyite-one baptism),the teaching on the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation and the non separation of Church and State( since all need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell)
Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston. It assumed hypothetical cases were defacto known in the present times. So it presented the baptism of desire etc as an explicit exception, to the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS.It censured Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center.Since they did not assume that the baptism of desire referred to a visible instead of invisible case.The Letter made the baptism of desire etc relevant to EENs.From the second part of this Letter has emerged the New Theology.
Baltimore Catechism. It assumed that the desire for the baptism of an unknown catechumen, who dies before receiving it and was saved, was a baptism like the baptism of water. So it was placed in the Baptism Section of the catechism. In other words it was wrongly assumed that the baptism of desire is visible and repeatable like the baptism of water or that we can administer it like the baptism of water.
Catechism of Pope X. It followed the Baltimore Catechism and placed the baptism of desire in the Baptism Section.
Nicene Creed ( Cushingite) It says 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins' and means there are more than three known baptisms. They are water, blood, desire, seeds of the Word etc.
Nicene Creed ( Feeneyite). It says 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins and means there is one known baptism the baptism of water.
New Theology: It refers to the new theology in the Catholic Church based on hypothetical cases being objective in the present times.So it eliminates the dogma EENS.With the dogma EENS made obsolete the ecclesiology of the Church changes. There is a new ecclesiology which is a break with Tradition.
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus ( Cushingite) .It refers to the dogma but with exceptions.All do not need to defacto convert into the Church in the present times, since there are exceptions.
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus ( Feeneyite).It refers to the dogma as it was interpreted over the centuries.There are no known exceptions to all needing to tormally enter the Church, with faith and baptism, to avoid Hell.
Lionel: He affirms Vatican Council II( Feeneyite) and the dogma EENS ( Feeneyite) and , is waiting for the rest of the Church to follow.
John Martignoni: The American Catholic apologist.He says the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance refer to 'zero cases' in our reality. So they are not exceptions to EENS.
Fr.S.Visintin osb: He is the Dean of Theology at the St.Anselm Pontifical University in Rome.He agrees with Martignoni.