SSPX Rector at St. Thonas Aquinas seminary USA seems to agree that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, interpreted the Catechism of Pope Pius X as a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors.

Fr. Yves le Roux is the Rector, of the Society of St.Pius X's, St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary and he seems to agree, at least with his silence, that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, interpreted the Catechism of Pope Pius X as a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors. 1

He agrees that since invisible cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) were considered visible exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) for Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who accepted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, he rejected Feeneyite EENS.The SSPX seminarians are also taught to reject Feeneyite EENS.They must accept the liberal interpretation of EENS, which is, BOD, BOB and I.I are exeptions to EENS.So in other words they are objective and known cases, people personally known, who have been saved outside the Church. Otherwise how could they be exceptions?

So like Archbishop Lefebvre the Rector would be saying that  everyone needs to enter the Church as a member for salvation except for those saved outside the Church with BOD,BOB and I.I.The popes and the liberals say the same.

Since hypothetical cases of BOD, BOB and I.I were exceptions to EENS Archbishop Lefebvre used the same reasoning to interpret Vatican Council II as was common in 1965.

Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance) etc were exceptions to EENS.But here instead of accepting Unitatis Redintigratio 3 etc  as being a break with EENS and an ecumenism of return( as he had accepted BOD, BOB and I.I) he criticizes UR 3 etc, for being a rupture with an ecumenism of return.Bishop Fellay does the same today.

It was clear for Archbishop Lefebvre, that  Protestants and non Christians needed to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation.He accepted cases of BOD, BOB and I.I with reference to EENS  but he could not accept hypothetical cases of UR 3 etc in Vatican Council II with reference to an ecumenism of return.

Hypothetical cases ( UR 3, LG 16 etc) were non hypothetical for him.He must have been confused, though obedient to the popes, like the rest of the Church.

But hypothetical cases of invincible ignorance for example, mentioned in the Catechism of Pope Pius X would be an exception to the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX on an ecumenism of return and no salvation outside the Church.

The Catechism of Pope Pius X would contradict the Syllabus for Archbishop Lefebvre.Also this Catechism would contradict the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. Since for him  BOD, BOB and I.I were already exceptions to EENS.

This is also how the SSPX priests in Italy interpret Vatican Council II. It would be the same for the new Superior General Davide Pagliarani  who is also from Italy.

This would also be the reasoning of the Rector of the SSPX seminary in the USA and so he has no comments. He also does not defend Archbishop Lefebvre.

The Catechism of Pope Pius X  refers those saved in invincible ignorance.Being saved in invincible ignorance is an exception to the dogma EENS for Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX.

But the Syllabus of Errors affirms EENS and does not mention any exceptions. Similarly the three Church Councils mention EENS and does not cite any exceptions.

The Syllabus of Errors also affirms an ecumenism of return and the past exlusivist ecclesiology upon which was based the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King.

So when invincible ignorance is assumed to be known people saved outside the Church by Archbishop Lefebvre and the liberals, it would be an exception to the Syllabus of Errors on EENS.

So the Catechism of Pope Pius X would contradict the Syllabus of Errors for Archbishop Lefebvre.

The Catechism of Pope Pius X would also contradict itself for the Archbishop. Since this Catechism says all need to be members of the Church for salvation. It does not state that invincible ignorance is an exception to all needing to be members of the Church.But this is how Archbishop Lefebvre and the present SSPX and liberal Cushingites would interpret it.It would be the same for the St.Benedict Center who interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with EENS.So those whom the SSPX pejoratively call 'Feeneyites', make the same mistake as Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops and priests.So the error is not restricted to only the SSPX.

So the SSPX have to admit that they have made a mistake in the interpretation of the Catechism of Pope Pius X and the Syllabus of Errors. The same mistake they made in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

There is no comment from any of the seminary rectors or Econe and neither from the rector at the seminary in the USA.-Lionel Andrades

1
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/11/sspx-priests-at-albano-italy-do-not.html

NOVEMBER 5, 2018

For Archbishop Lefebvre the Catechism of Pope Pius X was a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX : clarification from the SSPX needed

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/11/for-archbishop-lefebvre-catechism-of.html

Blessed Duns Scotus, Franciscan remembered

Today morning at Holy Mass in Italian the Franciscan priest concluded his homily on the Franciscan philosopher Duns Scotus by saying that he was faithful to the popes and we must remember that the pope is always the centre and unity of the Church irrespective...

This is partially true and in a sense it is false.

Jesus and His teachings in the Catholic Church, His Mystical Body, is the centre of unity, and not a pope who rejects these teachings.He is not a sign of unity in the Church and  must not be followed when he is teaching heresy.

A pope who is a public heretic, a non believer and in disunity with the popes of the past, cannot be a center of unity. A pope who follows the Masons, for whatever reason, follows Satan and so leads people to Hell.Those who are united to this pope in error, are not united with Jesus but with Satan.

Plaque commemorating Duns Scotus in the University Church, Oxford

Duns Scotus was faithful to the pope of his time, Boniface VIII.Boniface gave us the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus what the media today would call the 'rigorist' version.Scotus opposed King Phillip IV of France, who was against the pope.

Today in 2018 the pope supports the secular state which opposes the teachings of the popes of the past on faith and morals.

When Duns Scotus supported the pope he was also supporting the papal state which was truly Catholic on faith and morals.

At that time the pope and state supported Judeo Christian values. There was unity here.Today the state, with the European Union and United Nations, and the two popes, support evil. They are united on this point.The pendulum has swung to the other end.

The secular and religious dimension in the world were united in good in the past. Today they are united in evil.

The present two popes support the state which rejects the primacy and unicity of Jesus as it was known to Scotus.

The secular state and the pope today ask: who are we to judge homosexuals and homosexuality.While the leftists and the pope today have judged good Catholics like Jose Galeat and Fr. Alessandro Minutella, as being worthy of leftist excommunication.

A statue of John Duns Scotus by Frank Tritchlerin the Public Park in the town of Duns erected in 1966

Pope Francis and Eugenio Scalfari  suggest conscience is supreme irrespective of the objective reality. Galeat and Minutella though are not allowed to follow and express their conscience. In good conscience they oppose heresy and Satanic secularism,while the popes do not.

The pope like the Franciscan priest who offered Mass today morning,  does not affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus like Duns Scotus and Pope Boniface VIII,who  was the founder of the La Sapienza University in Rome.

The two popes today and the Franciscan communties would all be in heresy, for Pope Boniface and Duns Scotus.

The Masons label Boniface's exclusive salvation based on Jesus' teachings in John 3:4 and Mark 16:16, as 'triumphalism'.They also reject St. Thomas Aquinas and the 'scholastics', which is not approved at the pontifical universities.

Duns Scotus was not a martyr.But many of the  missionaries, affirmed triumphalism and the scholastics.They chose death, for Jesus and His Church whose teachings do not change.

When the Jesuit missionaries in the 16th century taught catechism they told the children that every one needed to believe in Jesus in the Catholic Church to go to Heaven.This was Jesus' teaching in the Bible, especially in the Gospel of St. John.Every one needed to follow Jesus in the Catholic Church to avoid Hell.But this is not taught any more at catechism classes which are about to conclude here. Ecclesiastical masonry and the two popes, cannot teach this. Neither do the Franciscans who are in a doctrinal rupture with Duns Scotus, whom they admire.-Lionel Andrades

Franciscans produce a movie on the life of Duns Scotus