Laity could ask the bishop to provide them with FSSP priests who do not make irrational inferences and change the meaning of the Nicene Creed
I read your very recent note on the FSSP’s celebrating Mass in Rome today, and altering the words of the Creed to include the “other” baptisms. Utterly scandalous.
I mentioned this to a friend who attends the FSSP church here... and he very much doubts the story. I believe you, but I wonder if there has been a follow-up story, something else on the internet.
Can you help me with more information? Yes, it’s a crazy story, but anything is possible now.
July 3, 2017
Ask your friend to who attends the FSSP church in...USA to clarify the issue.
Tell him to simply ask the FSSP priest if he interprets magisterial documents including Vatican Council II with an irrational premise. The Vatican Curia interprets the Nicene Creed with irrational Cushingism and the FSSP does the same. 1. They can avoid doing this if they want to.
There is a choice. The FSSP can interpret magisterial documents including the Nicene Creed without the irrational premise.2 But they do not do so.
The FSSP position at the Traditional Latin Mass is heretical. It is first class heresy.3
In the Nicene Creed we pray 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin' and this refers to the baptism of water, the ordinary means of salvation.
The baptism of desire and blood are not known baptisms,they are not defacto, objectively seen. They cannot be administered . The baptism of water instead is visible and repeatable.
So there are not three known baptisms but only one.If the person is saved with the baptism of desire and blood it would include the baptism of water. If a person is saved without the baptism of water, as many allege because of the confusion in the letter of Cardinal Marchetti Selvaggiani (1949), it would not be known to us. There are
no objective cases.There is no known case of someone saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. There is no known case of salvation outside the Church. A possibility in the past cannot be a concrete exception in 2017 to all needing the baptism of water in the Church for salvation.A possibility is only a possibility. It would be known only to God.
So at the Traditional Latin Mass the FSSP priest understands that there are three known baptisms and so he rejects the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus( EENS). EENs is no more like it was in the 16th century .When they offered the Latin Mass there were no exceptions to all needing the baptism of water for salvation.
Ask any FSSP priest, he will not deny that he believes there are exceptions to the dogma EENS and they include the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, all without the baptism of water.He will agree here.
So in other words there were visible and explicit exceptions to EENS. They would have to be visible and known to be exceptions to EENS.
The FSSP priest will agree that this is the inference. It is their inference too.
So when they teach Catechism to children they say not every body needs to enter the Church for salvation.They will not say that all Jews and Muslims in the present times need to convert to avoid the fires of Hell.There are exceptons for all needing the baptism of water for salvation.So they cannot affirm the Nicene Creed as Catholics did over the centuries.
They are liberals like the present magisterium. They offer the Latin Mass with the new ecclesiology and call it the Tridentine Rite Mass.This is a deception. It is also heresy and a mortal sin.
The laity could ask the bishop to provide them with FSSP priests who do not make irrational inferences and change the meaning of the Nicene Creed.
They also interpret Vatican CouncilII with irrational Cushingism when a rational Feeneyite choice is there.-Lionel Andrades
September 10, 2016
The Vatican Curia interprets the Nicene Creed with irrational Cushingism : 'I believe in three known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins.'
SEPTEMBER 10, 2016
If the magisterium avoids the error Vatican Council II , Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and Catechism of the Catholic Church can be interpreted with rational and traditional Feeneyism :it's a return to the old ecclesiology
In the hierarchy of values of Pope John Paul II, we are dealing with first class heresy