Friday, May 4, 2018

Probably this appeal too to the SSPX will be in vain.

Diocese Denies SSPX Couple to Become Godparents

A married couple attending mass in the church of the Society of Saint Pius X in New York was denied to be the godparents of their niece in Buffalo diocese.
Lionel: Understandable. Since the SSPX rejects Vatican Council II interpreted with the false premise, with Cushingite theology and also rejects the conclusion of this false interpretation and do not affirm the rational alternative interpretation which is also traditional.
However the fault with the SSPX is that they do not announce that they endorse Vatican Council II without the false premise, without Cushingite theology and then the conclusion would be traditional.There would be no rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and nor with the past ecclesiology of the Catholic Church upon which was based the Old Ecumenism of Return.
So the onus lies with the SSPX. There have been numerous reports on-line, mentioning and explaining this issue.

According to (May 1) the decision was made by Sister Regina Murphy, the interim chancellor of the diocese, and confirmed by auxiliary Bishop Edward Grosz.

Sister Regina wrote that the couple practices its “Catholic faith within a church that is not in union with the Church of Rome and which has rejected the absolute [sic!] authority of the Holy Father and many of the reforms of the Second Vatican Council”.

Lionel: Sister Regina, the Chancellor in the Diocese of Buffalo,N.Y is correct about Vatican Council II. Also the two popes affirm Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition by using the false premise( invisible baptism of desire is a visible exception to EENS, unknown cases of invincible ignorance(LG 16) and elements of sanctification and truth(LG 8) are not hypothetical but known people saved outside the Catholic Church).

There is no correction from the SSPX.
Pope Benedict has said that the SSPX problem is a doctrinal problem.He has also said that EENS is no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century(Avvenire March 2016)  since there was a develpment with Vatican Council II(Cushingite).Again he was using the false premise and there was no correction from the SSPX.He wanted the SSPX to affirm Vatican Council II and EENS with the false premise as he does and considers this doctrinally correct.
The SSPX does not issue a correction.
Then in March 1,2018 Cardinal Luiz Ladaria s.j at the Press Conference for Placuit Deo openly indicated that unknown cases of being saved with elements of sanctificatioin and truth(LG 8) were known examples of salvation outside the Church. So for him the Church no more teaches that it has the superiority and eclusiveness in salvation. This is irrational and heretical. Yet there was no correction from the SSPX.
The SSPX could have asked the CDF Prefect, "Where are the cases of non Catholics saved in 2017-2018 outside the Catholic Church with elements of sanctification and truth, with or without the baptism of water? Where are the cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church , where the true Church allegedly subsists in (LG 8)?
They SSPX accepted this false theology and new doctrines.They are part of the problem. So no correction was made by them.
So then why complain against Sister Regina and the bishop at Buffalo?
There are so many faithful at the SSPX chapels who have a similar problem since the SSPX does not want to discuss or comment on this issue, due to ignorance or fear....
The responsibilty lies with the SSPX to show the  Vatican that the Council without the irrational premise which they will not use in the future, is not a rupture with Tradition. So they will in future also affirm this interpretation of Vatican Council II and would expect the CDF and the two popes to do the same, to end doctrinal confusion in the Church. In this way Rome would come back to the Faith as Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre wanted.
This would be saying that all Jews in the present times need to convert into the Catholic Church with ' faith and baptism '(AG 7) for salvation.Also LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 ,UR 3, NA 2 etc are not explicit .So they cannot be objective exceptions to the traditional teaching on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. This means that the Vatican made a mistake in the last document on the Jews, which suggested that the Jews have their own covenant and so Jews do not have to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation.
This is a change in doctrine on salvation theology with the use of a false premise i.e known cases of salvation outside the Catholic Church.Hypothetical possibilities are considered objectives to Tradition(EENS. Syllabus of Errors). This is the false philosophical reasoning of Pope Benedict and Cardinal Ladaria, Cardinal Muller and the bishops at Ecclesia Dei, which has not been called out yet by the SSPX.
The SSPX can still clarify all these doctrinal issues on which their bishops have kept silent.

The child was finally baptized in a chapel of the Society of Saint Pius X on April 15 with the selected godparents.

The U.S. District of the Society of Saint Pius X has informed the Vatican of this and hopes [probably in vain] for a clarification.
Lionel: The SSPX needs to issue a clarification first affirming the Catholic Faith. There are so many reports on the Internet pointing out the theological and doctrinal error made by the SSPX which is the same as that of the liberals and the present Magisterium and is a rupture with the past popes on EENS.
Probably this appeal to will be in vain.-Lionel Andrades

No comments: