Repost : BISHOP BERNARD FELLAY MADE A DOCTRINAL ERROR : CONTRADICTS CATECHISM OF POPE PIUS X

MARCH 24, 2014

BISHOP BERNARD FELLAY MADE A DOCTRINAL ERROR : CONTRADICTS CATECHISM OF POPE PIUS X

27 Q. Can one be saved outside the Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church?A. No, no one can be saved outside the Catholic, Apostolic Roman Church, just as no one could be saved from the flood outside the Ark of Noah, which was a figure of the Church.-Catechism of Pope Pius X 1905,Rome.

29 Q. But if a man through no fault of his own is outside the Church, can he be saved?A. If he is outside the Church through no fault of his, that is, if he is in good faith, and if he has received Baptism, or at least has the implicit desire of Baptism; and if, moreover, he sincerely seeks the truth and does God’s will as best he can such a man is indeed separated from the body of the Church, but is united to the soul of the Church and consequently is on the way of salvation. -Catechism of Pope Pius X, Rome 1905

Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Superior General of the Society of St.Pius (SSPX) made a doctrinal error by confusing implicit for us baptism of desire as being explicit for us. What is invisible for us he implies is visible in the flesh.

In the Catechism of Pope Pius X 27 Qstates  no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. In 29 Q it mentions that a person can be saved under certain conditions with the baptism of desire but does not state that these cases are visible for us.It does not state that 29C contradicts  27 Q and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Reason tells us that the baptism of desire can only be hypothetical for us. It is not known defacto, in reality, in personal cases.

Bishop Bernard Fellay has assumed that the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus implying that these cases are personally and objectively known. Only if they are objectively known can they be exceptions in the present times.

So he had approved a book written by Fr.Francois Laisney and sold by the SSPX(District N.America) titled Is Feeneyism Catholic? (Angelus Press) in which it is assumed that the baptism of desire is an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. In other words it is explicit.

Then on the SSPX  official website he has  approved articles on two web pages written by Fr.Francois Laisney and Fr.Joseph Pfieffer ( now SSPX-SOS) with the same objective error. It is assumed that we can physically see cases of the baptism of desire for them to be exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation and also to 27 Q of the Catechism of Pope Pius X.It is common knowledge that objectively we cannot see the dead who are in Heaven.

In 2012 he approved the SSPX General Chapter Statement in whichextra ecclesiam nulla salus was affirmed and it was stated correctly that there are no exceptions.

However in 2013 Bishop Fellay wrote the preface for the book written by  the SSPX theologian Fr.Jean Marie Gleaze, Vaticano II- Un Dibattito Aperto (Editrice Ichthys). He  recommended the book.

Fr.Jean Marie Glleize says in this book that  in Mystici Corporis Pope Pius XII says ' in the exceptional way one can be saved outside the visible limits of the Catholic Church.' How can there be an exceptional way to the dogmatic teaching? We do not know any explicit, visible case which could be an exception. If there are no known exceptions how can there be an exceptional way.

Fr.Gleize is making the same error as the other priests and bishops of the SSPX in assuming that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, imperfect communion with the Church etc are visible exceptions. In faith we accept the baptism of desire as being implicit. It is a possibility. It is not an exception.If the baptism of desire includes the baptism of water (St.Benedict Centers,USA) or excludes it (SSPX) it is hypothetical and not an exception to 27Q.

Also there is no text in Mystici Corporis which says there is an exceptional way. Neither does the Catechism of Pope Pius X state that there is an exception to 27Q.It does not state that 29Q is an exception.

This is a fundamental and major doctrinal error of the SSPX which was ovelooked at the Vatican-SSPX talks.The same error is being made by the cardinals and archbishop of the Vatican Curia.

Bishop Fellay has said that Vatican Council II contradicts the traditional teaching on other religions and Christian communities. Since  like  Fr.Jean Marie Gleaze, and the SSPX priests in general, he assumes there are explicit, visible in the flesh exceptions to  extra ecclesiam nulla salus mentioned in Vatican Council II. For him, LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc are not implicit but explicit for us.-Lionel Andrades

Is Feeneyism Catholic?

 

Author: 

Fr. François Laisney, SSPX

128 pp., Softcover

Description: 

This book examines these simple truths of our catechism. Quoting heavily the Church's Magisterium, Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, and the writings of the saints, Fr. Laisney explains the Church's teaching on Baptism of Desire. A defense of Catholicism, not of false ecumenism. Father's new edition is twice the size of his original work and is enriched and made more convincing by copious quotations from the writings of the saints.
http://angeluspress.org/Is-Feeneyism-Catholic

The three errors of the Feeneyites 
http://archives.sspx.org/miscellaneous/feeneyism/three_errors_of_feeneyites.htm

The three baptisms 
http://archives.sspx.org/miscellaneous/feeneyism/three_baptisms.htm
http://sspx.org/en/media/books/feeneyism-catholic-2075