In a A MAJOR SSPX CLARIFICATION: Towards a Doctrinal Agreement? by Fr.Jean Marie Gleize in the Remnant Newspaper the writer has made the usual objective errors on Vatican Council II with reference to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. He did the same in 2009 during the doctrinal talks with the Vatican.
In the article posted on the Remnant he repeats the same Cushingite errors which he held during the talks.Here are four points. There were others.I have mentioned them in a previous blog post.As expected he has not addressed the issue.Perhaps its unbelievable for him, that the error was there always right before him and he did not notice it.
I had written about these errors of the SSPX even during the SSPX-Vatican doctrinal talks held during the pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI but Fr. Gleize did nothing.Since 2009 he has ignored this issue.
In his article for the Remant Newspaper he makes the following errors.
1. The religious liberty of Dignitatis Humanae and the positive secularism of Gaudium et Spes are condemned by Quanta Cura of Pius IX.
Lionel: False. DH is not a rupture with the dogma EENS( Feeneyite).So it is not a break with the past ecclesiocentrism.Upon the old ecclesiology was based the non separation of Church and State and the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation.
Since there is known salvation outside the Church for Fr.Gleize, as there is for Pope Benedict,Dignitatis Humanae has to be a rupture with EENS (Feeneyite) and the past ecclesiology of the Church.He is a liberal on this issue, without knowing it.It is his irrational theology which creates new doctrine. It is approved by the magisterium.
With Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) Gaudium et Spess 22 are not exceptions to the dogma EENS and the old ecclesiology of the Church. He interprets Vatican Council II with Cushingism. So there is a rupture with Tradition.
2.The new ecumenical ecclesiology of Lumen Gentium is condemned by Pius XII in Mystici Corporis and Humani Generis because of the absolutely false principle which would like to establish a real distinction between the Church of Christ and the Catholic Church.
Lionel: With Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) Lumen Gentium 16,14 and 8 does not contradict Mystici Corporis etc. So there is no change in the ecclesiology of the Church before and after Vatican Council II.
Since Fr.Gleize only knows of Vatican Council II( Cushingite)there is a rupture with Tradition.
He refers to a 'false principle' but he does not know what is the false principle specifically He knows that Vatican Council II( Cushingite) is rupture with the past, and one can agree with him.However he has to switch to Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) which supports the old doctrines of the Church.
3. The ecumenism of Unitatis Redintegratio is condemned by Pius XI inMortalium Animos.
Lionel: No.It is not condemned with Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite).UR 3 is hypothetical and so it is not an explicit exception, or relevant, to the dogma EENS.
Fr.Gleize needs to explore Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and then his perspective will change.
4.The collegiality of Lumen Gentium, in that it denies the unicity of the subject of the Primacy, falls under the condemnation of Vatican I.
Lionel: This is his Cushingite interpretation. If there is unity of doctrine and theology with Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite), collegiality is not a problem.There will only be unity when Vatican Council II and EENS is interpreted without invisible cases confused as being visible. 1
In 2009, Pope Benedict XVI gave the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, then headed by Cardinal William Levada the task of continuing the dialogue with the Society of St Pius X on theological issues in the hope of attaining reconciliation.
The team responsible for the dialogue with the Society of St. Pius X on behalf of the Catholic Church included Charles Morerod, former Rector Magnificus and theology and philosophy professor of the Pontifical University of Saint Thomas Aquinas, Angelicum. 2
Like the liberal Fr.Charles Morerod, Fr.Jean Marie Gleize was interpreting Vatican Council II in particular and all magisterial documents in general with irrational Cushingism philosophy and theology.Instead of using Feeneyite philosophy and theology and exposing the errors of Bishop Morerod, doctrinally, he remained 'on the other side'.He was a liberal.