Thursday, May 19, 2016

The Vatican is not permitting the FSSP priests to affirm the traditional teaching on salvation.The prohibition will be extended to the SSPX

On August 1,2013 on this blog I stated that Fr. Ripperger has to protect his interests. So how can he state that Vatican Council II supports the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.
He is not affirming the official teaching of the Catholic Church which says all non Catholics need to convert into the Catholic Church with 'faith and baptism' (AG 7)  and with no known exceptions (LG 16,LG 8 not being known exceptions), This is the official teaching of the Catholic Church according to magisterial documents.
The Vatican is not permitting the FSSP priests to affirm the traditional teaching on salvation. It is being denied by Fr.Kramer , the FSSP Rector  in Rome and also Mons. Ignacio Barreiro (ex- FSSP).
Catholics do not know their Faith and the FSSP priests like those who offer Mass in the vernacular are not going to teach them it and risk their position and interests.
The FSSP priests would not be willing to provide their telephone number  or an e-mail address  for a   pamphlet using traditional Church-texts , after Vatican Council II , on the subject of exclusive salvation being there in only the Catholic Church.
The priests who offer the Traditional Latin Rite Mass in Rome are using the same apologetics  as the priests who offer the Novus Ordo Mass. On the issue of salvation and other religions there is no difference.
Now Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Superior of the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) will be citing a document vaguely accepting Vatican Council II. He will be accepted into the Church like the FSSP priests. Then the SSPX will have to continue, to protect their interests liek Fr.Chad and the FSSP. So they will be banned from saying that Vatican Council II supports the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.
Edward Pentin
In the recent interview with Edward Pentin ( see video) Bishop Fellay says that even if there is no change by the Vatican to correct this error he will be patient and hope they will come.
3:17 Edward Pentin : And then of course the demands for the Council..the problems you had with the Council..Are you happy to just let the problems carry on or would you make some sort of insistence that they be changed..
Bishop Fellay : It is foreseen by Rome that discussions on these points will go on.And yes we will maintain the urgency to make corrections.In part I think that they have started to recognise that urgency
3:53 Edward Pentin :And if there aren't corrections in Vatican Council II, if you do not see any movement on that basis
Bishop Fellay : Well we'll be patient. They will come.

Bishop Fellay did not criticize the recent Vatican Document on inter religious dialogue with the Jews. It  said Jews do not need to convert into the Catholic Church.He now is not saying that Vatican Council II supports the literal interpretation of the dogma EENS according to Fr. Leonard Feeney. So why will he speak in future ? 

When Pope Benedict said that the dogma EENS can no more be interpreted according to the 16 th century missionaries, he was really criticizing the SSPX General Chapter Statement 2012 which said there are no exceptions to EENS.Bishop Fellay did not comment since he perhaps was not allowed to comment.

In an interview with Edward Pentin a few years back Cardinal Muller was asked about extra ecclesiam nulla salus.He told Pentin with reference to EENSa salus ' Every person has the right to act according to his or her own conscience'  The dogma says all those without faith and baptism are on the way to Hell. This is objective reality.Yet for him there is salvation for those who follow their individual conscience.There was no comment from any one in the SSPX.

He tells Pentin there has been a development .
Cardinal Muller tells Pentin that on extra ecclesiam nulla salus 'the perspective is different between then and now' . Doctrine changes with time! In the past they held the rigorist interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church now they do not do so .
 In the past all who did not have faith and baptism were on the way to Hell, now it is only those 'who know'. Now individual conscience is supreme for Cardinal Muller.

Cardinal  Muller says in the interview, 'He who is aware of the presence of Revelation is obliged by his conscience to belong publicly'. So he who is not aware is not obliged? He will not be going to Hell? The doctrine has changed for him! He assumes that we know and can know of an exception. We can know of someone in incuplable ignorance who dies without faith and baptism and will be saved

The liberal German cardinal, confirms the change in doctrine when he says , 'but we cannot say that those who are inculpably ignorant of this truth are necessarily condemned for that reason.'
 In other words he knows of an explicit case. He knows of someone who in ignorance is saved or will be saved without faith and baptism.So for him this hypothetical will  not be condemned.He would have to personally know this person. Since the dogma says all in the present time need faith and baptism for salvation and he would have to know someone in the present times, saved without faith and baptism,  who did not need it for salvation.
Where was the SSPX when he was saying all this nonsense?

So we have a new doctrine on salvation approved by the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Cardinal Muller and Bishop Fellay said nothing. He also did not correct the Synod cardinals for saying that conscience is supreme. Since this  is what Pope Francis  told Eugenio Scalfari.
This is not just a change in discipline this is a change in doctrine. There is a new doctrine on salvation approved by the present Magisterium.

Doctrine has been changed on salvation and Bishop Fellay does not want to be politically incorrect.So he keeps quiet.

On another blog post I stated that the  Vatican Press Office has not denied that the Franciscans of the Immaculate , among them relatives of Fr.Stefano Manelli F.I,  have to endorse Vatican Council II, in which references to salvation (NA 2, UR 3 etc) must be considered to be visible and known in reality in the present times (2014-2105) for them to be exceptions to traditional outside the Church there is no salvation.
These persons, though dead, are living exceptions, the F.I must accept, to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church and the Syllabus of Errors.So they have to allege that all Jews, Muslims and other non Catholics do not have to enter the Catholic Church for salvation.This was the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II taught also to lay members of the Third Order of the F.I.
When this error of the dead being exceptions to Tradition, was pointed out to Fr.Frederico Lombardi , I received the general letter sent to many. He said this is a 'sensitive subject'. He did not address any specific point on my blog.
He did not deny that the F.I are being forced to interpret Vatican Council II with an irrational premise.This makes the Council a break with the doctrines associated with the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM). No one from the SSPX commented.
The real objection it seems is not to the TLM, but  extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Pope Benedict XVI issued Summorum Pontificum knowing that Vatican Council II would be interpreted with the  irrational premise and conclusion.This is acceptable to the political Left.This was the norm for Fr.Fidenzio Volpi, Cardinal Braz de Avez, Cardinal Gerhard Muller, Cardinal Luiz Ladaria and Archbishop Augustine de Noia.They impose a lie upon all Catholics.This can be verified on line in two theological papers of the International Theological Commission(ITC).
Why must Catholics accept Vatican Council II with this irrationality ? Fr.Lombardi will not answer.
Catholics are being forced to proclaim a lieand are persecuted if they do not conform.This is coercion. It is illegal.The SSPX too has now to accept this coercion and sign an agreement with the Vatican to get canonical status.


Cardinal Gerhard Muller has said that a separation between doctrinal theory and practise is heresy. The Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has still not called the new Department of the Theology of Religions at the GregorianUniversity, Rome -  heretical.1

Fr.Francois-Xavier Dumortier SJ , Rector of the Pontifical Gregorian University still remains the Pro-Dean of this  Department with  Fr. Bryan Lobo S.J the Director.
This department contradicts  Church- doctrine in Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7) which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.So there cannot be a theology of religions.
It also contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. We do not know any one in 2014 saved outside the Church i.e without Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.
This department contradicts the Nicene Creed in which we pray, " I believe in one baptism for the forgivness of sin". The reference is to the baptism of water, the only known baptism. We do not know of any one saved this year with the baptism of desire .We do not know anyone saved  in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water. There are no exceptions to the traditional teaching in the Nicene Creed. 
This department also contradicts the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation and all need the Catholic faith.
So ' in practise' this is a heretical department at the Jesuit's Gregorian University. According to the statement made by Cardinal Muller at the meeting of the International Theological Commission in Rome, a theology of religions is heresy. 
Bishop Fellay will continue to accept this heretical department to get canonical status.

Pope Francis, Cardinal Muller and Cardinal Ladaria are refusing to interpret Vatican Council II in which Lumen Gentium 16 ( saved in invincible ignorance) are not seen as invisible on earth for us,, but as referring to seen in the flesh cases in 2014. So they conclude that Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II  is a visible exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.They want the SSPX to interpret and accept Vatican Council II with this irrationality.This is unethical. It is also dishonest. This is a lie by Catholic religious.

Cardinal Gerhard Muller and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith are not going to announce that Vatican Council II can be interpreted without the irrational premise and this interpretation will be traditional. They are not going to say that without the irrational premise Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7) indicates all Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, Protestants and other non Catholics need to formally enter the Church.
Neither are not going to say that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made an objective mistake when it inferred that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance were explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Instead the Holy See wants to pretend that Vatican Council II can only be interpreted with the irrational inference and the SSPX has to accept this irrationality .

In the recent interview with the National Catholic Register Bishop Fellay said on the video that survived and has not fallen in the abyss.They have not been prohibited, banned by the Left.For the sake of security and the future of the SSPX he does not want to affirm traditional Feeneyism as a theology and will allow a change in doctrine in the Church.This is acceptable for the Masons and Bishop Bernard Fellay has come in line.
-Lionel Andrades

Part 3/3: SSPX's Bishop Fellay Speaks Exclusively to the National Catholic Register

Cardinal Gerhard Müller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, attends the Christmas tree lighting in St. Peter's Square, Dec. 18, 2015. Credit: Alexey Gotovskiy/CNA.
Cardinal Gerhard Muller assumes there are practical exceptions to the Church's traditional teachings on morals and faith : overlooks this error in Amoris Laetitia

Fr.Chad Ripperger and FSSP priests not permitted by the Vatican to affirm the traditional teaching on salvation

Bishop Fellay wants to sign a politically correct agreement

Edward PentinBishop Fellay and the SSPX Superiors know that there was a mistake in the Fr.Leonard Feeney case when hypothetical cases ( baptism of desire etc) were  wrongly assumed to be objective exceptions  to all needing to formally enter the Catholic Church.Yet they will not support the Feeneyite interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).They do not  want to be called Feeneyites.
They removed Bishop Williamson and other SSPX priests from the SSPX,  who were not willing to accept the Jewish Left doctrines and theology approved for the Catholic Church  and also the politically acceptable figure of the Holocaust deaths.
Bishop Fellay also did not criticize the recent Vatican Document on inter religious dialogue with the Jews. It  said Jews do not need to convert into the Catholic Church.It 
also approved a new theology for Catholics.
In the recent interview with the National Catholic Register he mentioned that the SSPX has all these years survived.It avoided falling into the abysss on the left or the right ( see video).So to not fall into the abyss, not to be prohibited by the Left, Bishop Fellay is not saying hypothetical cases cannot be exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of  EENS.For the sake of security and the future of the SSPX he does not want to affirm traditional Feeneyism as a theology.Instead he will use the slogan Pope Pius XII condemned Fr.Leonard Feeney. Since this is acceptable to the Masons.
He is now about to sign a document accepting Vatican Council II  and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston, interpreting hypothetical cases as referring to seen in the flesh people in 2016.He will expediently confuse what is invisible as being visible.For him what is obviously implicit would be explicit and he will mix up what is subjective as being objective.
Nor does he comment on the persecution of the traditionalists who do not deny that they are Feeneyites, with respect to the interpretation of EENS.
It has been noticed that for the last few years the communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney in the USA, have not held an annual conference on the subject of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.They have probably got a warning from an external source. No Catholic organisation has been able to organise a conference on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
So Bishop Fellay understands.
He does not want to say that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made an objective mistake and there are no known exceptions to the traditional Feeneyite interpretation of EENS.
When Vatican Council II  mentions being saved invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire with reference to EENS (AG 7, LG 14)it was a mistake.This is an objective error.Hypothetical cases have nothing to do with all needing to be formal members of the Church, all needing 'faith and baptism' for salvation.
There is also no comment from the SSPX on the General Chapter Statement 2012 which was never addressed or supported by the CDF/Ecclesia Dei.Possibly it was unthinkable for the politically correct cardinals and bishops at the CDF.-Lionel Andrades



Edward PentinBishop Bernard Fellay has sold out.He is going to accept Vatican Council II interpreted with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism, hypothetical cases being objective and so known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).He approves a general subjectivism in Vatican Council II as being objective.The very same approach which he criticizes in Amoris Laetitia.
Before he signs an agreement with the Vatican he is not willing to affirm the SSPX General Chapter Statement 2012. It said there are no known exceptions to the dogma EENS (Feeneyism).
Bishop Fellay has set 'the party line'. To avoid being Anti-Semitic and being opposed by the Jewish Left he will not interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism ( there are no known exceptions to EENS in Vatican Council II) .Instead he uses Cushingism as theology( i.e LG 16 is a known exception to EENS.He will not announce that hypothetical cases (LG 16) cannot be objectively seen in 2016. So it is not a known exception to the dogma EENS.
If he did affirm Vatican Council II according to Feeneyism it would mean all Jews, and other non Catholics, who have good and holy things in their religion(NA 2) are on the way to the fires of Hell, without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7, LG 14)- and there are no known exceptions in 2016.

Since there are no known exceptions to the dogma EENS and to AG 7 and LG 14 ( all need faith and baptism), there cannot be a separation of Church and State since all need to be Catholic to avoid Hell.There is also no change in the old ecclesiology on other religions and Christian communities with reference to salvation, since the dogma EENS is not contradicted.

The issue of religious liberty, ecumenism and liturgical reform (with the new ecclesiology) would be superflous if Vatican Council II is interpreted with Feeneyism.There are only an issue when Cushingism is used as a theology and traditional EENS is contradicted.

To remain politically correct with the Left, Bishop Fellay like the two popes, is rejecting rationality and traditional Catholic doctrine, in exchange for security.
A reconciliation with the Vatican is necessary and important but without the compromised interpretation of Vatican Council II.
 Bishop Fellay could ask Rome to come back to the Faith and interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism.Make this a condition for signing , the 'fundamental agreement' , which Pope Francis referred to.
-Lionel Andrades

If Bishop Fellay interprets Vatican Council II with Feeneyism instead of Cushingism he will be considered anti-Semitic.Instead he is willing to reach an agreement with Rome in which Vatican Council II will continue to be interpreted with an irrational premise to produce a non traditional conclusion.