Monday, September 16, 2019

There is no position paper put out by the Federation International Una Voce (FIUV) on the traditionalists at the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire,USA being asked by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) and the Diocese of Manchester, USA,to consider the Catechism of the Catholic Church(CCC 847-848) as being exceptions to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).In other words the Syllabus of Errors with invincible ignorance etc has exceptions to the past exclusivist ecclesiology and ecumenism of return. Also invincible ignorance mentioned in the Catechism of Pope Pius X contradicts exclusive salvation in the Church, mentioned in the same Catechism.

There is no position paper put out by the Federation International Una Voce (FIUV) on the traditionalists at the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire,USA being asked by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF) and the Diocese of Manchester, USA,to consider the Catechism of the Catholic Church(CCC 847-848) as being exceptions to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).In other words the Syllabus of Errors with invincible ignorance etc has exceptions to the past exclusivist ecclesiology and ecumenism of return. Also invincible ignorance mentioned in the Catechism of Pope Pius X contradicts exclusive salvation in the Church, mentioned in the same Catechism.

So the Athanasius Creed which mentions outside the Church there is no salvation has salvation outside the Church with known cases of being saved in invincible ignorance etc.This is first class heresy.

This was not the ecclesiology of the Traditional Latin Mass in the 16th century nor Mass in the Greek Byzantine Rite of the first and second century.

According to the website of the Diocese of Manchester, the CDF Secretaries have asked Brother Andre Marie, MICM, Prior at the St. Benedict Center, to interpret CCC 847-848(invincible ignorance) as being exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. So in other words they refer to objective and literal cases known in the present times,for them to be objective exceptions to exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.Vatican Council II's Lumen Gentium 16( invincible ignorance) would also have to be interpreted in this irrational way.

There is no comment from Dr. Joseph Shaw, Chairman of the Latin Mass Society,of Englans and Wales.He has issued many FIUV position papers.He teaches Philosophy at Oxford University and does not discuss this issue in terms of philosophy and theology.-Lionel Andrades

FIUV Position Papers

The Foederatio Internationalis Una Voce (FIUV: the International Una Voce Federation) is coordinating the preparation of a number of short ‘position papers’ on specific aspects of the 1962 Missal. These are intended as contributions to the debate on the future development of the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite.

The work is being done by a subcommittee of the FIUV Council, the Liturgy and Spirituality Subcommittee, whose Moderator is Dr Joseph Shaw, a FIUV Council member and the Chairman of the Latin Mass Society.

Introduction (revised 19/3/12)

Positio 1: The Service of the Altar by Men and Boys ( published 4/3/12, revised 10/9/16)

Positio 2: Liturgical Piety and Participation ( revised 19/3/12)

Positio 3: The Manner of Receiving Holy Communion (published 1 April 2012)

Positio 4: Liturgical Orientation (published 15 April 2012)

Positio 5: The Vulgate and Ancient Latin Psalters (published 2 May 2012)

Positio 6: Liturgical Pluralism and the Extraordinary Form (published 15 May 2012)

Positio 7: Latin as a Liturgical Language (published 1 June 2012)

Positio 8: Prefaces (published 20 June 2012)

Positio 9: Silence and Inaudibility in the Extraordinary Form (published 6 July 2012)

Positio 10: The Eucharistic Fast (published 15 August 2012)

Positio 11: The Extraordinary Form and Western Culture (published 15 September 2012)

Positio 12: The Teaching of Latin in Seminaries (published 15 October 2012)

Positio 13: Holy Days of Obligation (published 15 November 2012)

Positio 14.1: The Holy Week Reform of 1955: Part 1, General Comments (Published 16 February 2013)

Positio 14.2: The Holy Week Reforms of 1955: Part 2 (Published 3 April 2013)

Positio 15: The Lectionary of the Extraordinary Form (Published 5 May 2013)

Positio 16: Latin Lections in the Extraordinary Form (Published 16 July 2013)

Positio 17: Reception Under the Species of Bread Alone (Published 6 December 2013)

Positio 18: The Missa Lecta (Low Mass with responses made only by the server) (Published 30 January 2014)

Positio 19: The Kiss of Peace (published 6 June 2014)

Positio 20: Septuagesima, Vigils, and Octaves (published 29th October 2014)

Positio 21: The Extraordinary Form and the Eastern Churches (published 18th November 2014)

Positio 22: Headcoverings in Church (published 5th December 2014)

Positio 23: The Extraordinary Form and China (published 24th January 2015)

Positio 24: Prayers for Persecuted Christians and the Leonine Prayers (12th February 2015)

Positio 25: The Extraordinary Form and Africa (published 25th April 2015)

Positio 26: The Extraordinary Form and Men (published 24th July 2015)

Positio 27: Tradition, Reform and Restoration (published August 2015)

Positio 28: The Good Friday Prayer for the Jews (published February 2016)

Positio 29: The Role of the Laity in the Extraordinary Form (published June 2016)

Positio 30: The Participation of Children at the Extraordinary Form (published December 2016)

Positio 31: The Extraordinary Form and New Age (published June 2017)

Positio 32: The Extraordinary Form and Islam (published December 2017)

Positio 33: The Sanctoral Cycle of the Extraordinary Form (published February 2018)

https://unavocecanada.org/fiuv-position-papers-2/
https://lms.org.uk/fiuv

An appeal must be made, based on doctrine and theology, for the revocation of the excommunication of Fr. Vaughn Treco.There is confusion among the traditionalist and conservative Catholics, so they cannot support him rationally.

An appeal must be made, based on doctrine and theology, for the revocation of the excommunication of Fr. Vaughn Treco.There is confusion among the traditionalist and conservative Catholics, so they cannot support him rationally.

The traditionalists are not responding to these blog posts since they really are in a soup and there is no Magisterium today to help them out.

I had mentioned that at the Round table Discussion on the Eve of Amazon Synod , Michael Matt will be there who rejects Vatican Council II interpreted with the irrational premise.Taylor Marshall will also be there who, at a meeting of the Fischer More College, accepted Vatican Council II with the false premise as did the FSSP priests and Bishop Olsen.

But neither of the two choose to interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise.It is the same with the other participants at the discussion. It is the same for Fr. Vaughn Treco and his bishop.

So the participants at the Round table discussion or the Remnant's Identity Conference are unable to tell Fr. Treco to interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise and inference and to ask his bishop to do the same.

The traditionalist and conservative Catholics themselves have to interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise.

Once Fr. Treco endorses Vatican Council II without the false premise, he would be affirming exclusive salvation too, as he already does, without rejecting Vatican Council II nor re-interpreting the Council irrationally like Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

I mentioned in another blog post that Archbishop Lefebvre did not teach Catholic doctrine at his seminaries.Since for him the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance were exceptions to EENS in the Syllabus of Errors. They were also exceptions to EENS in the Athanasius Creed. So he re-interpreted EENS with there being exceptions to the past exclusivist ecclesiology, an ecumenism of return and exclusive salvation as taught in the Catechism of Pope Pius X.

There is no comment from the traditionalist and conservative Catholics since they make the same mistake.

So they need to respond to Fr. Vaughn Treco's excommunication with a rational discussion on doctrine and theology.-Lionel Andrades

Outside the Catholic Church there is salvation for Roberto dei Mattei .This is the new theology. It is accepted by him.He interprets Magtisterial documents with this New Theology

As the authors of the article Maike Hickson and Mathew Cullinan Hoffman highlighted, the Bogotá document threatens to subvert or overturn the fundamental elements of Catholic Doctrine, sustaining that the Church does not have the “monopoly on salvation” and the pluralism and diversity of religions are expressions of a wise divine will; the non-Christian religions are able to bring “salvation” to people and the pagan religious traditions of the indigenous in the Amazon ought to be re-evaluated;...

We are the sons and daughters of a Militant Church, which does not admit and include error, but combats error and defends the truth. A Church that wants to win souls and all of society for Christ. A Church that separates itself from those, in the inside, who profess a different religion. A Church that we entrust to the Most Blessed Virgin Mary, so that with Her Angels She protects it in the upcoming decisive weeks.-Roberto dei Mattei,De Mattei: A Schismatic Synod on the Amazon?1

Roberto dei Mattei in this on Rorate Caeli and other reports, says outside the Church there is no salvation but he assumes that the baptism of desire (BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). It was the same with Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

Mattei also interprets LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II as being exceptions to 16th century EENS. It was the same with Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops.

So outside the Catholic Church there is salvation for him.This is the new theology. It is accepted by him.He interprets Magtisterial documents with this New Theology.

The old theology was outside the Church there is no salvation and BOD, BOB and I.I were not objective exceptions to EENS.

So today Vatican Council II can be interpreted with the old or new theology and he chooses the irrational and heretical one.He supports Cardinal Cushing and the Jesuits and not Fr. Leonard Feeney.

Like the present two popes he is in schism with the past popes over the centuries on EENS and exclusive salvation, the exclusivist ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.EENS has exceptions for him.So he is a traditionalist who is not a Feeneyite like the traditionalists at the St. Benedict Center, USA.He is a Cushingite traditionalist and they are Feeneyite traditionalists.He attends the old Mass with the new theology and ecclesiology and Brother Andre Marie MICM, attends Mass with Vatican Council II not being exceptions to EENS and BOD, BOB and I.I not being exceptions to EENS. So there is only the old ecclesiology.

Roberto dei Mattei is in agreement with the popes since Paul VI who interpreted EENS with BOD, BOB and I.I being exceptions. They followed the second part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, which contradicted the first part of LOHO.

Now if he interprets EENS with BOD, BOB and I.I not being exceptions to EENS, it would be considered Anti Semitic etc. So the EENS he refers to is Cushingite. It has exceptions. This is what he means by outside the Church there is no salvation. It is the same understanding of EENS held by the cardinals and bishops who will be there at the Amazon Synod.-Lionel Andrades

https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2019/09/de-mattei-schismatic-synod-on-amazon.html#more

Cardinal Burke and Bishop Schneider who interpret Vatican Council II and magisterial documents with a false premise and inference, to create heresy and schism,just as Pope Francis and Pope Benedict, are to fast against the heresy and schism of the Amazon Synod.

Cardinal Burke and Bishop Schneider who interpret Vatican Council II and magisterial documents with a false premise and inference, to create heresy and schism, like Pope Francis and Pope Benedict, are to fast against the heresy and schism of the Amazon Synod.They have appealed to other schismatics to do the same.

When they project the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) as being exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and LG 8,UR 3,NA 2, GS 22 etc as also being known non Catholics saved outside the Church and so exceptions to EENS, they profess heresy and schism , which is common in the Church.

Before the Amazon Synod Cardinal Burke and Bishop Schneider could announce that BOD, BOB and I.I are not exceptions to EENS.Possibilities are not objective people in 2019. They do not know any one saved as such.Also there are no known cases of non Catholic saved outside the Church with elements of sanctification and truth(LG 8), seeds of the Word(AG 11), being people of good will(GS 22 ) etc.There no such literal cases.So there are no practical exceptions to EENS, the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return mentioned in Vatican Council II.

Protestants need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation and so also non Christians.Cardinal Burke and Bishop Schneider need to affirm orthodoxy on this issue. They need to clarify that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the bishops of the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) made a mistake e when they assumed BOD, BOB and I.I were exceptions to Feeneyite EENs.

Similarly the Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO) made a mistake when it assumed unknown cases of BOD, BOB and I.I were known exceptions to traditional EENS.

So today Vatican Council II does not contradict, they need to announce, what the media calls the 'rigorist interpretation' of EENS.

-Lionel Andrades