SSPX has been misleading Catholics

Who would have thought that the SSPX members, so sure of themselves, on following Tradition, would make a mistake on Catholic theology and so change traditional doctrine on salvation, I mentioned in a previous blog post.Every one was responding to the false interpretation of everyone else.The ecclesiastics at the Vatican did not issue any correction.

Even the St.Benedict Centers, the communities of Fr. Leonard Feeney, were wrongly following the SSPX and so they rejected the Council.

Now Brother Andre Marie,MICM,in his doctrinal correspondence with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) has seen Vatican Council II as an ally.1 He has quoted the Council (AG 7) to support traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).He has mentioned that invisible cases, for us human beings, like being saved in invincible ignorance(LG 16), are known only to God.So he understands that LG 16, LG 8 etc refer to invisible people in 2016-2019. So they are not exceptions to EENS for him.

The poor Secretaries of the CDF, wrote back to Brother Andre Marie insisting that he must accept being saved in invincible ignorance(LG 16) etc as being an exception to Feeneyite EENS.

The SSPX has been doing just this all along.So Vatican Council II became a rupture with EENS and Tradition.

The Vatican Council II which the traditionalists and conservatives criticize is the one with hypothetical and invisible cases being confused as being personally known. This is what Brother Andre Marie was trying to get through to Archbishops Morandi and Di Noia.

Vatican Council II with hypothetical and invisible people being mistaken as exceptions to EENS I call Vatican Council II ( Cushingite).The Council with hypothetical cases just being hypothetical and so not being objective exceptions to EENS, I call Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite).

The traditionalists are really against Vatican Council II ( Cushingite). The CDF wants them to accept Vatican Council II ( Cushingite).

Brother Andre Marie was interpreting Vatican Council II with Feeneyism. Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) is not a rupture with EENS ( Feeneyite). He know this.

The SSPX interprets Vatican Council II with Cushingism and this was a huge mistake.The New Theology is based on Cushingism.We have discovered the missing link.

The SSPX must acknowledge it.

Then Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) will no more be an issue for them. They can ask the CDF to affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite). Rome must come back to the Faith with Feeneyism.

But how can the Vatican politically affirm EENS and Vatican Council II with Feeneyism?

The CDF and the Diocese of Manchester, USA have not understood this or do not want to understand it.They have an agenda to follow at any cost.Doctrine is no more important.

It is unfortunate that the SSPX too does not proclaim the Catholic Faith any more.

Like the Catholic Bishops Conferences, the SSPX does not affirm Vatican Council II, Feeneyite but only knows of Vatican Council II, Cushingite which is heretical.

They do not affirm the Catechism of the Catholic Church with Feeneyism, but interpret all the Catechisms with irrational Cushingism.

They all,liberals and traditionalists, theologically, do not affirm an ecumenism of return since they reject EENS ( Feeneyite), Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite),Catechisms( Feeneyite)....They do not affirm the past ecclesiology and accept the New Ecclesiology based on hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire, invincible ignorance etc being  objective examples of non Catholics salved outside the Church in the present times.

With an irrational premise and inference there has to be a non traditional conclusion.Then SSPX places the fault on Vatican Council II while the liberal Bishops' Conference praise the Council.

-Lionel Andrades

1


https://catholicism.org/letter-explaining-saint-benedict-centers-doctrinal-stance.html