The SSPX District Superior , Italy, Don Louis Sentagne, in Albano, Italy, Father Federico Montani and the other SSPX priests at Albano, Italy, are still selling books with Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally. This is unethical. It is dishonest.
MAGAZINE TRADIZIONE CATTOLICA IS BASED UPON VATICAN COUNCIL II (IRRATIONAL)
The SSPX must stop publishing magazines (La Tradizione Cattolica etc), with the Council interpreted irrationally and so as a rupture with Tradition. They are doing this even after being informed.
SSPX PRIEST REFUSES TO ANSWER QUESTION
The SSPX priest Fr. Federico Montani, in Rome at the SSPX chapel, when asked about LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc Vatican Council II will not respond. He will not clarify what is common sense i.e. LG 8, LG 14, lG 16, UR 33, NA 2, GS 22 etc, always refer to only hypothetical cases. They refer to invisible people in 2023.So they cannot be objective exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) of Pope Honorius III, who also approved the Order of Preachers of St. Dominic Guzman.
He refuses to answer when asked and tells the youth there to also not answer this question.
NOVUS ORDO MASS CAN HAVE THE 12TH CENTURY ECCLESIOLOGY
The SSPX priests in Rome in their sermons also do not say that at the Novus Ordo Mass - if the priest would interpret Vatican Council II, the Creeds, old Councils and Catechisms and EENS rationally, he would be affirming the past ecclesiology of the Church. The priest at Mass in Italian, for example, would have to affirm the understanding of Church as it was known in the 12th to 16th century. This would be the Novus Ordo Mass having the ecclesiology of the Roman Missal of the 16th century. This would be the Roman Missal used in the SSPX chapel.
CARDINALS ROCHE, SARAH AND ARINZE ARE IRRATIONAL
It is only because Cardinal Arthur Roche interprets Vatican Council II irrationally that there is ‘a new Magisterium’ for him. It is his irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II, by confusing what is invisible as being visible, that he is able to produce a rupture with Tradition.
Now Cardinal Sarah and Cardinal Francis Arinze’ Holy Mass in Italian is based upon the false interpretation of Magisterial Documents ( Creeds, Councils etc) and so there is a false rupture with Tradition, including the Missal used by the SSPX today.
SENTAGNE CANNOT CORRECT THE CARDINALS
The SSPX District Superior, Fr. Louis Sentagne cannot ask Cardinals Sarah, Arinze and Roche to come back to Tradition and interpret the Council rationally - since he himself is interpreting the Council irrationally.
MAINLINE CHURCH'S INNOVATION DEPENDS UPON VATICAN COUNCIL II (IRRATIONAL).
In the main line Church in Rome they give the Eucharist to the divorced and remarried, women living with non Christians and to non Christians in general who come up to receive the Eucharist. This is because Vatican Council II is seen as a break with Tradition. When Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition for the SSPX priests even, then in the main line Church they ask, why cannot they innovate on faith and morals. This creates division in the Church and the SSPX supports it.
TWO INTERPRETATIONS OF VATICAN COUNCIL II
It is important to note, that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational. The majority of people interpret Vatican Council II irrationally. Even the popes, cardinals, bishops and priests in general, interpret LG 8, 14 and 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, irrationally. They confuse these invisible cases as being visible in the present times. With this false premise there is a false non traditional conclusion. So the New Theology says outside the Church there is known salvation; there is salvation..-Lionel Andrades
__________________________________________________
Don Louis Sentagne and Don Federico Montani who offer the Latin Mass at the chapel of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) in Rome are not saying that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to only hypothetical, theoretical, speculative and invisible cases in 1965-2023.This puts an end to so much of non-sense we have been hearing for a long time - the propaganda in the name of the Latin Mass.
I had written and posted the following to Fraternità Sacerdotale San Pio X, Albano last February 2014.
I wrote in a blog post sent to them:
- In an article on extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Vatican Council II and the loss of the missionary spirit in the Catholic Church (1) , the District Superior Fr.Pierpaolo Petrucci assumes imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3) and good and holy things in other religions (NA 2) are explicit for us, known in reality, visible in the flesh,defacto and objective. So for him Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with UR 3, NA 2 etc.
- Then he will not affirm the traditional position on extra ecclesiam nulla salus since he assumes that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are explicit for us, known in reality, visible in the flesh,defacto and objective. They would have to be all these qualities for them to be visible exceptions to the need for all to convert into the Church.1
Then another blog post which was e-mailed to them said :-
- Father Pierpaolo Petrucci, the SSPX District Superior, Italy has made a doctrinal error in an article he has written in Italian. The same error is present in books being distributed by the SSPX, Italy.There is no denial or clarification from the Fraternità Sacerdotale San Pio X (FSSP), Albano.These blog posts have been sent to him.The FSSP Albano usually issues a clarification when they want to support their position or correct a view. 2
Another blog post e-mailed to them said:-- If the SSPX Superior would consider all salvation mentioned in Vatican Council II as implicit, de jure and known only to God, then Vatican Council II would not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the traditional teaching on other religions and Christian communities 3
There was no response to this blog post too.
- In an article on extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Vatican Council II and the loss of the missionary spirit in the Catholic Church (1) , he assumes imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3) and good and holy things in other religions (NA 2) are explicit for us, known in reality, visible in the flesh,defacto and objective. So for him Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with UR 3, NA 2 etc.
- Then he will not affirm the traditional position on extra ecclesiam nulla salus since he assumes that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are explicit for us, known in reality, visible in the flesh,defacto and objective. They would have to be all these qualities for them to be visible exceptions to the need for all to convert into the Church since outside the Church there is no salvation.4
At Albano they continued to assume Vatican Council II contradicted the traditional interpretation of the dogma even after I sent them the following blog post.
- There is no text in Vatican Council II which contradicts Cantate Domino, unless like Fr. Pierpaolo Petrucci, one assumes those saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) etc are visible to us on earth.This is an irrationality in the interpretation of the Council and the fault is not with the Council.
- To consider the dead now saved in Heaven to be visible to us on earth is a factual error. It is a fact that we cannot see the dead. It is this factual error which prevents the SSPX Superior from seeing Vatican Council II as a continuation with Tradition on the issue of ecumenism.5
Over a year has gone by and there has been no response in writing to these reports, from even the SSPX priest in Albano, Fr. Mauro Tranquillo, who participates in theological conferences and regularly criticizes Vatican Council II as a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.6The SSPX,Italy are rejecting Vatican Council II. This is a doctrinal issue. They are unable to say ,that all these years, they had made a factual mistake and the fault was not with the Council but their use of an irrational premise which comes from Cardinal Marchetti Selvaggiani's Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
They are not admitting that they were wrong and neither are they saying that I am correct.They are just keeping silent over this issue.
-Lionel Andrades
1.FEBRUARY 5, 2014
If Fr.Leonard Feeney was correct or wrong, still imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3) and the baptism of desire are not explicit for us : no clarification still from SSPX Italy
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/02/if-frleonard-feeney-was-correct-or.html
2.FEBRUARY 4, 2014 NO CLARIFICATION FROM SSPX DISTRICT SUPERIOR, ITALY
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/02/no-clarification-from-sspx-district.html
3. FEBRUARY 3, 2014 SSPX District Superior unknowingly supports Cardinal Kurt Koch
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/02/sspx-district-superior-unknowingly.html#links
4.FEBRUARY 2, 2014 SSPX District Superior Italy makes the same factual error as Muller, Ladaria, Di Noi, Pozzo, Kaspar and Koch http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/02/sspx-district-superior-italy-makes-same.html#links
5.FEBRUARY 3, 2014 Factual error distorts SSPX District Superior Italy from seeing Vatican Council II as traditional on ecumenism http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/02/factual-error-distorts-sspx-district.html#links
6.JANUARY 14, 2014
Father Mauro Tranquillo where is the exception in Lumen Gentium 8? http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/01/father-mauro-tranquillo-where-is.html#links
Fr.Pierpaolo Petrucci's error has a bearing on the Nicene Creed
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/02/sspx-district-superior-italy-cites.html#links
1
In an article on extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Vatican Council II and the loss of the missionary spirit in the Catholic Church (1) , the District Superior Fr.Pierpaolo Petrucci assumes imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3) and good and holy things in other religions (NA 2) are explicit for us, known in reality, visible in the flesh,defacto and objective. So for him Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with UR 3, NA 2 etc.
Then he will not affirm the traditional position on extra ecclesiam nulla salus since he assumes that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are explicit for us, known in reality, visible in the flesh,defacto and objective. They would have to be all these qualities for them to be visible exceptions to the need for all to convert into the Church.
2.
The District Superior of the SSPX in Italy considers those saved in 'imperfect communion with the Church' (UR 3) as being known, visible, explicit in 2014 and so is unable to say that Vatican Council II says all Christians need to enter the Catholic Church (AG 7) for salvation.
Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door. - Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II. (Emphasis added)
On the website of the Fraternità Sacerdotale San Pio X Fr. Pierpaolo Petrucci comments on the recent ecumenical meeting at the Basilica of St.Paul Outside the Walls at which Pope Francis was present. He writes :
But from whom comes this scandal if not by those who have left the Church, rejecting the authority of the Pope and revealed truth? To repair this scandal why does the pope not invite those who are separated to return to the unity of faith, worship and submission to the legitimate pastors, unity with the Catholic Church which was never lost and so should be found? So the popes, before the last council such as Pius IX at the first Vatican Council, launched an urgent appeal to the Christians dissidents to return to the bosom of the Church. 2
He cites Pius IX and Vatican Council I but omits Vatican Council II since he assumes there are known exceptions. The dead-saved in Heaven are visible exceptions on earth!?
3.
The Society of St.Pius X, Italy (Fraternità Sacerdotale San Pio X), Albano has made available on its website its position on ecumenism. It has quoted a section of the book Catechismo della crisi nella Chiesa, by Fr. Mathias Gaudron FSSPX which will soon be made available in Italian according to the website.
Once again, like the District Superior at Albano, Fr.Pierpaolo Petrucci, it is assumed that 'imperfect communion in the Church'(UR 3) is an explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
The report on ecumenism by Fr.Matthias Gaudron is cited in Fr.Pierpaolo Petrucci's article on the recent ecumenical meeting at the Basilica of St. Paul Outside the Walls, where Pope Francis was present. 3
There is still no clarification from the Fraternita San Pio X on the factual error made in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
If Fr.Leonard Feeney was correct or wrong, still imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3) and the baptism of desire are not explicit for us. So they cannot be exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
If the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston supported or condemned Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine/ dogma,imperfect communion with the Church, being saved in other religions (NA 2) or being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) are not exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma by Fr.Leonard Feeney. - Lionel Andrades
1.
Atti del XX Convegno di Studi Cattolici, Rimini 2012. Concilio Vaticano II e la salvezza delle anime, la morte dello spirit missionario di Don Pierpaolo Petrucci pp.39-58. Published by Fraternita Sacredotale San Pio X in collaboration with La Tradizione Cattolica.
p.39 Fuori dellaChiesa non c'e salvezza.
p.47. Gli errori penetrati nel Concilio.
p.49. Unitatis Redintigratio
p.51. Nostra Aetate 2
2.
Ma da chi viene lo scandalo se non da parte di coloro che hanno abbandonato la Chiesa, rigettando l’autorità dal Papa o una parte delle verità rivelate? Per riparare questo scandalo perché non si invita coloro che si sono separati a ritornare a quell’unità di fede di culto e alla sottomissione ai legittimi pastori, unità che la Chiesa cattolica non ha mai perso e che quindi non deve ritrovare? Così facevano i pontefici prima dell’ultimo concilio come per esempio Pio IX che in occasione del Concilio Vaticano I lanciava un appello accorato ai cristiani dissidenti perché ritornassero nel seno della Chiesa.[1]
3
The Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) must set its doctrinal house in order. The General Chapter Statement 2012 indicates that the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) refer to unknown cases in our reality and so the SSPX affirms Feeneyite EENS in the Statement. While the official website of the SSPX says BOD,BOB and I.I are exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.In other words they are known cases for them to be exceptions.So the 2012 suggests that BOD,BOB and I.I refer to invisible cases while the old website indicates that they are visible cases.
For one or more people at the 2012 General Chapter Meeting BOD, BOB and I.I referred to invisible and unknown people in our realitywhile for Fr.Francois Laisney who has written a book, Is Feeneyism Catholic? and which is sold by the SSPX, BOD,BOB and I.I refer to visible exceptions.
Bishop Bernard Fellay needs to clarify the doctrinal position of the SSPX on this issue.
Since with BOD,BOB and I.I referring to invisible and hypothetical cases it would be easy for the SSPX to affirm Vatican Council II and Tradition and so ask for canonical recognition from the SSPX.
The SSPX priests at Albano, Italy do not want to issue a statement and it seems that they would prefer that the SSPX headquarters make a decision.-Lionel Andrades
Fr. Pier Paolo Petrucci, SSPX District Superior,Italy keeps silent over this issue for over a year : no clarification
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/06/fr-pier-paolo-petrucci-sspx-district.html
FEBRUARY 5, 2014
If Fr.Leonard Feeney was correct or wrong, still imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3) and the baptism of desire are not explicit for us : no clarification still from SSPX Italy
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/02/if-frleonard-feeney-was-correct-or.html
https://www.sanpiox.it/archivio/images/stories/PDF/TC/TC_97.pdf
Posts
