The Congregation for the the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) delegation at the meeting with the Asian Bishops this month in Thailand, has re-interpreted Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.So Catholic salvation theology has been changed.They have created a new Christian theology of religious pluralism and salvation.The Society of St.Pius X(SSPX) will have to accept all this.Then they can get canonical recognition or legally be declared not being Catholic.
The SSPX will have to continue to interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) as referring to personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church and so they are practical examples of exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). They are already doing this.
They will also have to continue to interpret invisible and hypothetical cases,in Vatican Council II (LG 8 etc) as referring to personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church in 2019. So Vatican Council II emerges as a rupture with EENS, as it was known in the 16th century.Generally the SSPX bishops and priests are already doing this.
The SSPX Superior General Fr. Davide Pagliarani, is not allowed to affirm Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church as I do.Since then the Council and Catechism would be in harmony with the past ecclesiology.This can be done simply by avoiding the irrational premise.But they do not interpret magisterial documents as I do. So this is another positive point in the SSPX, for the CDF.
However since they interpret hypothetical cases ( BOD, BOB and I.I/LG 8,LG 16, UR 3 etc) as being objective exceptions to EENS they will have changed the interpretation of the Catechism of Pope Pius X.They will be irrationally interpreting the Catechism of Pope Pius X.Number 16 Q would be contradicted by 29Q ( visible cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance).
Also 29Q would contradict 27Q.
It would be in conflict with 8 and 9 Q ( see below).
But if 29Q refers to only hypothetical cases, theoretical possibilities only and not objectively known people, there is no conflict. There is no confusion.
FROM THE CATECHISM OF POPE PIUS X
16 Q. Is Baptism necessary to salvation?
A. Baptism is absolutely necessary to salvation, for our Lord has expressly said:
"Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into
the Kingdom of God."
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.
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.
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.
8 Q. What is the Catholic Church?
A. The Catholic Church is the Union or Congregation of all the baptised who, still living on earth, profess the same Faith and the same Law of Jesus Christ, participate in the same Sacraments, and obey their lawful Pastors, particularly the Roman Pontiff.
A. The Catholic Church is the Union or Congregation of all the baptised who, still living on earth, profess the same Faith and the same Law of Jesus Christ, participate in the same Sacraments, and obey their lawful Pastors, particularly the Roman Pontiff.
9 Q. State distinctly what is necessary to be a member of the Church?
A. To be a member of the Church it is necessary to be baptised, to believe and
profess the teaching of Jesus Christ, to participate in the same Sacraments, and
to acknowledge the Pope and the other lawful pastors of the Church. 1
Also the Nicene and Apostles Creed will have been changed and this is first class heresy.2 Priests would be in heresy at Holy Mass.
The Athanasius Creed would be rejected since the new doctrine now is outside the Church there is known salvation.3
All the old Catechisms would contradict the past exclusive ecclesiology of the Church. The popes of old would contradict each other. The Catechism of Pope Pius X would contradict the Syllabus of Errors of Pius IX, for the SSPX.
So theologically, no more could there be an ecumenism of return for the SSPX.Since now there is salvation outside the Church with invisible cases being visible.4
With the rejection of the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS, the SSPX will have to accept inter faith marriages as not being adultery.
They will also have to be open to joint mission programs with the Protestants.
RATIONAL ALTERNATIVE
RATIONAL ALTERNATIVE
However if the SSPX accepts hypothetical cases ( BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 8, LG 16, etc ) as being only hypothetical there will no more be exceptions to the strict interpretation of EENS.
They can affirm Vatican Council II and all the Catechisms, including the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994), without them being in conflict with EENS.
They can affirm the Creeds with no heretical change.
They can affirm the past ecclesiology,Syllabus of Errors, ecumenism of return and the strict interpretation of EENS which would not be contradicted by hypothetical cases of BOD,BOB and I.I.
So there would be a harmony in the theology of the Catholic Church before and after Vatican Council II and there would be no rupture with Tradition( Syllabus of Errors etc).
CDF AND THE LEFT WANT A RUPTURE WITH TRADITION
CDF AND THE LEFT WANT A RUPTURE WITH TRADITION
But all this would not be acceptable to the CDF who want a hermeneutic of rupture with Sacred Tradition to appease the Left.
The SSPX is still living in the past. They are 50 years behind time.They need to re-interpret Vatican Council II and all magisterial documents in harmony with EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc and then ask the CDF to do the same.
They must demand that Rome come back to the Faith.
Rome must leave new doctrines on salvation created with an irrational premise.
The deception is over.The red does not contradict the blue.
We now know what makes Vatican Council II a rupture with Tradition and so can re-interpret the Council, rationally.This should have been done in 1965.
-Lionel Andrades
1.
https://www.ewtn.com/library/CATECHSM/PIUSXCAT.HTM
SEPTEMBER 5, 2018
Popes and cardinals like the traditionalists misinterpret magisterial documents like the Catechism of Pope Pius X
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/09/the-popes-and-cardinalds-and-like.html
MARCH 18, 2018
The Catechism of Pope Pius X does not say that invincible ignorance is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiaam nulla salus(EENS). This has to be wrongly inferred by sedevacantists (Graphics)
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/03/the-catechism-of-pope-pius-x-does-not.html
JANUARY 3, 2018
Similarly would you agree that when Mystici Corporis and the Catechisms of Pius X and Trent mentioned BOD, BOB and I.I were also referring to hypothetical cases and so they are not exceptions to EENS? https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/01/similarly-would-you-agree-that-when.html
Similarly would you agree that when Mystici Corporis and the Catechisms of Pius X and Trent mentioned BOD, BOB and I.I were also referring to hypothetical cases and so they are not exceptions to EENS? https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/01/similarly-would-you-agree-that-when.html
OCTOBER 10, 2016
I even interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1995) as being Feeneyite. I use the same reasoning : hypothetical cases are not explicit in the present times.
2.
Nicene Creed (10) Nicene Creed was changed with the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 mistake (6) Nicene Creed-two interpretations (1)
2.
Nicene Creed (10) Nicene Creed was changed with the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 mistake (6) Nicene Creed-two interpretations (1)
Posts
