Fr.Davide Pagliarani, the new Superior General of the SSPX must know that in doctrinal talks Cardinal Luiz Ladaria and Archbishop Guido Pozzo have a lot to hide.Their position is false and not Catholic. They can only get away through deception.
This is why they have not responded to numerous posts on this blog many addressed to them directly and also e-mailed to them.
2012 GENERAL CHAPTER STATEMENT A MODEL
2012 GENERAL CHAPTER STATEMENT A MODEL
The SSPX must be represented in these talks by someone who was responsible-or the person responsible- for the excellent SSPX General Chapter Statement 2012.They had it right. I don't think it was Bishop Bernard Fellay since he still interprets Vatican Council II as a rupture with the strict interpretation of EENS.He also interprets UR 3 and LG 8 as a rupture with EENS.
Fr.Jean Marie Gleize who was present at the last failed talks, is a Cushingite who uses the same irrational premise and inference as Archbishop Pozzo. He makes the same mistake as the CDF and Ecclesia Dei.Fr.Gleize would be part of the problem.He has never commented on these blog posts addressed to him. It is the same with Fr. Francois Laisney who should be kept far away from these talks. Since they both are in doctrinal and theological error and when it is pointed out to them they cannot respond.
VATICAN COUNCIL II MUST BE INTERPRETED RATIONALLY
Fr.Jean Marie Gleize who was present at the last failed talks, is a Cushingite who uses the same irrational premise and inference as Archbishop Pozzo. He makes the same mistake as the CDF and Ecclesia Dei.Fr.Gleize would be part of the problem.He has never commented on these blog posts addressed to him. It is the same with Fr. Francois Laisney who should be kept far away from these talks. Since they both are in doctrinal and theological error and when it is pointed out to them they cannot respond.
VATICAN COUNCIL II MUST BE INTERPRETED RATIONALLY
The aim of the talks must be to approve a rational interpretation of Vatican Council II in harmony with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the past ecclesiology of the Church.Then everything will fall into place.The ecclesiology of the Church before and after Vatican Council II will be the same on traditional salvation theology.With the old ecclesiology intact there can only be an ecumenism of return.It would be a return to the past traditional theology.The new theology would automatically become obsolete with the error identified. There would only be traditional Mission doctrine based on a rational interpretation of Vatican Council II which would not be a rupture with the old ecclesiology and the traditional strict interpretation of EENS. Upon the past ecclesiology would be be proclaimed the Social Reign of Christ the King and the non separation of Church and State.
Collegiality will not be an issue when the theology and ecclesiology of the Church is once again orthodox. Religious liberty will not be an issue when a Catholic State with the ecclesiology being traditional is the ideal.
BOD, BOB AND I.I MUST INTERPRETED RATIONALLY
Collegiality will not be an issue when the theology and ecclesiology of the Church is once again orthodox. Religious liberty will not be an issue when a Catholic State with the ecclesiology being traditional is the ideal.
BOD, BOB AND I.I MUST INTERPRETED RATIONALLY
For all this to happen,the baptism of desire (BOD),baptism of blood ( BOB) and invincible ignorance (I.I) must be interpreted as being invisible and not visible, implicit and not explicit, hypothetical and not objective,personally unknown and not personally known.It's as simply as this.
Once this is clear for the SSPX team they can begin doctrinal talks.
BEWARE OF POZZO'S DECEPTION
BEWARE OF POZZO'S DECEPTION
Archbishop Guido Pozzo during the meeting will say that the CDF affirms Vatican Council II in harmony with Tradition.There is a hermeneutic of continuity.This is false.
By Tradition he means EENS, the past ecclesiology, the Nicene and Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors and all Catechisms interpreted with BOD, BOB and I.I referring to visible and objective non Catholics, saved outside the Church.This is deception.He really supports a rupture with Tradition. It is heresy.It is schism with the past popes on EENS etc.
By Tradition he means EENS, the past ecclesiology, the Nicene and Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors and all Catechisms interpreted with BOD, BOB and I.I referring to visible and objective non Catholics, saved outside the Church.This is deception.He really supports a rupture with Tradition. It is heresy.It is schism with the past popes on EENS etc.
For him EENS must be interpreted with BOD,BOB and I.I being exceptions.
So Vatican Council II will also be interpreted with LG 16( invincible ignorance), LG 14 ( case of the catechumen) etc as being exceptions to EENS.
For Archbishop Pozzo, Cardinal Ladaria and the present two popes, BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 16, LG 14, LG 8 etc, have to be interpreted as not invisible but visible, explicit and not implicit, not hypothetical but objective.
APPEAL FOR A RATIONAL INTERPRETATION FROM THE CDF
So Archbishop Pozzo must be asked if BOD, BOB and I.I can be interpreted as referring to only hypothetical and theoretical cases and not objective people saved in the present times (2018) outside the Church. He could answer this question even before the talks start.
So Vatican Council II will also be interpreted with LG 16( invincible ignorance), LG 14 ( case of the catechumen) etc as being exceptions to EENS.
For Archbishop Pozzo, Cardinal Ladaria and the present two popes, BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 16, LG 14, LG 8 etc, have to be interpreted as not invisible but visible, explicit and not implicit, not hypothetical but objective.
APPEAL FOR A RATIONAL INTERPRETATION FROM THE CDF
So Archbishop Pozzo must be asked if BOD, BOB and I.I can be interpreted as referring to only hypothetical and theoretical cases and not objective people saved in the present times (2018) outside the Church. He could answer this question even before the talks start.
If he says YES that the CDF affirms all magisterial documents in harmony with Tradition (EENS, Syllabus of Errors) and BOD, BOB and I.I refer to only invisible and hypothetical cases in the present times (2018) the talks can proceed.There is hope that 'Rome will now come back to the Faith'. If he says NO then it is the end of the talks again.It means he wants to use the same irrationality ( invisible cases are visible) to interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition. He chooses the hermeneutic of discontinuity.
Nothing can be done.The SSPX cannot condone heresy and sacrilege at Mass. The SSPX must not accept a particular leftist version of Vatican Council II.
SSPX COULD CLARIFY DOCTRINE AND THEOLOGY BEFORE THE TALKS
SSPX COULD CLARIFY DOCTRINE AND THEOLOGY BEFORE THE TALKS
However at the onset, even before the talks it would be useful for the SSPX to clarify their position on doctrine and and theology and answer these two questions.
1.There are no physically visible cases of the BOD,BOB and I.I in 2018 ?
YES or NO.
2.LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, NA 2, UR 3,GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to only hypothetical cases.They are not physically visible non Catholics saved outside the Church in 2018.?
The SSPX could clarify these two points I repeat, before the doctrinal talks begin.Presently the SSPX bishops and priests are interpreting EENS with BOD, BOB and I.I being exceptions. This is the understanding of Fr. Gleise and Fr. Laisney.
FOR ME BOD, BOB AND I.I ARE NOT EXCEPTIONS TO EENS : NO PHYSICALLY VISIBLE CASES
For me BOD, BOB and I.I would refer to invisible people in 2018 and so would not be an exception to EENS as it was known to the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century. Fr. Gleize and Fr. Laisney would say that I am a Feeneyite and Archbishop Lefebvre rejected Feeneyism.However the SSPX 2012 General Chapter Statement was Feeneyite on EENS.So there is hope that the SSPX would choose a rational interpretation of EENS and BOD, BOB and I.I.
FOR ME LG 9, LG 16, UR 3 ETC ARE NOT EXCEPTIONS TO EENS
Similarly for me LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc refer to invisible people in 2018.So Vatican Council II is not a rupture with the traditional interpretation of EENS.Pope Paul VI and Archbishop Lefebvre did not know this. They interpreted LG 8 etc as referring to known people saved outside the Church.So they created exceptions to the past ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.They contradicted the Catechism of Pope Pius X whichs says all need to be members of the Church for salvation.
FOR THE SSPX AND THE CDF CATECHISMS CONTRADICTS SYLLABUS
So now the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( invincible ignorance) would contradict the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX( ecumenism of return) for the SSPX.The Catechism of Pope Pius X would also contradict itself. Since it affirms EENS and invincible ignorance, for example, is interpreted as known and visible people saved outside the boundaries of the Church,saved without 'faith and baptism'.So invincible ignorance is an exception to traditional, orthodox theology on salvation.
BREAKING NEW GROUND
The information which I have provided here would be new for the talks and would be breaking new ground.
Even if Archbishop Pozzo,for political reasons, does not choose to interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with the strict interpretation of EENS, the SSPX could clarify that Vatican Council II is no more an issue for them. Since interpreted without the irrationality, the Council does not contradict the strict interpretation of EENS and the past ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.So they would be affirming Vatican Council II and Tradition.
POPE BENEDICT AND CARD. LADARIA REJECTED A RATIONAL INTERPRETATION
Pope Benedict and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria during the last talks did not accept the strict interpretation of EENS.For them BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions. They also did not accept Vatican Council II interpreted without the irrationality. The Council had to be a rupture with the past for them.
FR.GLEIZE LET THE VATICAN SIDE GET AWAY
Fr.Jean Marie Gleize, the head of the SSPX team in the doctrinal talks was not aware of the mistake they were all making and allowed the Vatican side to get away with the deception.He could have asked where are the BOD, BOB and I.I cases in real life ? What are the names of the non Catholics saved outside the Church in invincible ignorance (LG 16) or elements of sanctification and truth ? Whom do we know in Rome saved outside the Church because God is not limited to the Sacraments(CCC 1257)? etc.This would have exposed the error of the 'magisterium'.
A (Feeneyite)
B (Cushingite)
-Lionel Andrades
FOR ME BOD, BOB AND I.I ARE NOT EXCEPTIONS TO EENS : NO PHYSICALLY VISIBLE CASES
For me BOD, BOB and I.I would refer to invisible people in 2018 and so would not be an exception to EENS as it was known to the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century. Fr. Gleize and Fr. Laisney would say that I am a Feeneyite and Archbishop Lefebvre rejected Feeneyism.However the SSPX 2012 General Chapter Statement was Feeneyite on EENS.So there is hope that the SSPX would choose a rational interpretation of EENS and BOD, BOB and I.I.
FOR ME LG 9, LG 16, UR 3 ETC ARE NOT EXCEPTIONS TO EENS
Similarly for me LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc refer to invisible people in 2018.So Vatican Council II is not a rupture with the traditional interpretation of EENS.Pope Paul VI and Archbishop Lefebvre did not know this. They interpreted LG 8 etc as referring to known people saved outside the Church.So they created exceptions to the past ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.They contradicted the Catechism of Pope Pius X whichs says all need to be members of the Church for salvation.
FOR THE SSPX AND THE CDF CATECHISMS CONTRADICTS SYLLABUS
So now the Catechism of Pope Pius X ( invincible ignorance) would contradict the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX( ecumenism of return) for the SSPX.The Catechism of Pope Pius X would also contradict itself. Since it affirms EENS and invincible ignorance, for example, is interpreted as known and visible people saved outside the boundaries of the Church,saved without 'faith and baptism'.So invincible ignorance is an exception to traditional, orthodox theology on salvation.
BREAKING NEW GROUND
The information which I have provided here would be new for the talks and would be breaking new ground.
Even if Archbishop Pozzo,for political reasons, does not choose to interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with the strict interpretation of EENS, the SSPX could clarify that Vatican Council II is no more an issue for them. Since interpreted without the irrationality, the Council does not contradict the strict interpretation of EENS and the past ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.So they would be affirming Vatican Council II and Tradition.
POPE BENEDICT AND CARD. LADARIA REJECTED A RATIONAL INTERPRETATION
Pope Benedict and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria during the last talks did not accept the strict interpretation of EENS.For them BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions. They also did not accept Vatican Council II interpreted without the irrationality. The Council had to be a rupture with the past for them.
FR.GLEIZE LET THE VATICAN SIDE GET AWAY
Fr.Jean Marie Gleize, the head of the SSPX team in the doctrinal talks was not aware of the mistake they were all making and allowed the Vatican side to get away with the deception.He could have asked where are the BOD, BOB and I.I cases in real life ? What are the names of the non Catholics saved outside the Church in invincible ignorance (LG 16) or elements of sanctification and truth ? Whom do we know in Rome saved outside the Church because God is not limited to the Sacraments(CCC 1257)? etc.This would have exposed the error of the 'magisterium'.
A (Feeneyite)
B (Cushingite)
-Lionel Andrades
Posts
