THE SSPX ACCEPTS VATICAN COUNIL II ACCORDING TO TRADITION (DOGMA): SECONDARY ISSUES PREVENT RECONCILIATION
The SSPX accepts Vatican Council according to Tradition and rejects the Council as a break from Tradition and so will criticize the non traditional version which rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
According to Vatican Insider there are three conditions presented by the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) to the Vatican before they can accept Vatican Council II and receive canonical recognition.
Here are the conditions:
1.“The freedom to preserve, share and teach the sound doctrine of the constant Magisterium of the Church and the unchanging truth of the divine tradition and the freedom to accuse and even to correct the promoters of the errors or the innovations of modernism, liberalism, and Vatican II and its aftermath.” Discerning Catholics will always criticize the we-can-see-the-dead-version of Vatican Council II.
The Muller-Koch-Ladaria-Di Noia version of Vatican Council II claims those dead and saved in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire,elements of sanctification tc are known exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation. This results in a new interpretation of Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
They want the SSPX to accept this error and not criticize them for their irrationality.
2. The exclusive use of the Liturgy of 1962. The retention of the sacramental practice that we currently maintain (including: orders, confirmation, and marriage).
3.‘The letter also includes other conditions which are considered desirable but not essential: the possibility of having a separate ecclesiastical court of the first instance; the exemption of the houses of the Society of St. Pius X from the diocesan bishops and a Pontifical Commission for the tradition of Rome, which depends directly from the Pope, with the majority of the members and the president in favour of tradition.’
The SSPX has accepted Vatican Council II with the hermeneutic of continuity, they are in accord with Tradition (the dogma).
The issue really is no more Vatican Council II which the SSPX accepts according to the dogma as indicated in their communique of July 19,2012. Here it is:
This is why its seems to us opportune to reaffirm our faith in the Roman Catholic Church, the only Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ, outside of which there is no salvation and no possibility of finding the means that lead to it; in its monarchical constitution, willed by Our Lord, which means that the supreme power of governance over the whole Church belongs to the pope alone, the Vicar of Christ on earth; in the universal kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the creator of the natural and supernatural order, to whom every human being and all society must submit. - SSPX Communique (Emphasis added). According to the SSPX version of Vatican Council II all non Catholics need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation (to avoid Hell) and there can only be an ecumenism of return.-Lionel Andrades
SSPX ASK BISHOP GERHARD MULLER TO ANSWER THE TWO QUESTIONS WHICH CARDINAL SEAN O'MALLEY WILL NOT : ENTIRE CONCEPT OF VATICAN COUNCIL II CHANGES
The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) communique ( July 19, 2012) supports the priest from Boston on whom the Archdiocese placed sanctions.
This is why its seems to us opportune to reaffirm our faith in the Roman Catholic Church, the only Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ, outside of which there is no salvation and no possibility of finding the means that lead to it; in its monarchical constitution, willed by Our Lord, which means that the supreme power of governance over the whole Church belongs to the pope alone, the Vicar of Christ on earth; in the universal kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the creator of the natural and supernatural order, to whom every human being and all society must submit. - SSPX Communique(Emphasis added). The SSPX communique is saying there is no possibility of finding the means of salvation outside the Catholic Church. It is not possible to know anyone with implicit desire or who will be saved in invincible ignorance. Humanly this is not real.
It is possible to accept in theory, in faith and in pricniple that someone can be saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience (LG 16) but not as a known possibility on earth. The SSPX is affirming the literal interpretation of the dogma as was done by Fr.Leonad Feeney. So they are answering positively the two questions asked of the Archdiocese of Boston weeks back and to which there is no response. The two questions are:
1) Do we personally know the dead saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) etc ?
2) Since we do not know any of these cases, there are no known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?
If the SSPX would ask Bishop Gerhard Muller to respond to these two questions the CDF Prefect would have the same understanding of Vatican Council II as the SSPX.Probably this frightens the Archdiocese of Boston .
We now know that Fr.Leonard Feeney the priest from Boston answered the two questions in harmony with Tradition and was falsely penalized for rejecting the baptism of desire, as if the baptism of desire was relevant to the literal interpretation of the dogma.
If Cardinal Gerhard Muller says that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston rejected the literal interpretation of the dogma, then it means there was an objective mistake made by the Holy Office.The baptism of desire is not an exception to the dogma. It is irrelevant to the dogma.
If Cardinal Muller agrees that we do not know the dead saved then it means LG 16 is not an exception to the dogma.So there is nothing in Vatican Council II or the Catechism of the Catholic Chruch which contradicts the literal interpretation of the dogma as expressed in the SSPX communique. We do not know anyone saved with 'elements of sanctification' (LG 8), seeds of the Word, in imperfect communion with the Church and other implicit cases known only to God.
So holding the literal interpretation of the dogma is an affirmation of Vatican Council II according to Tradition. Ad Gentes 7 supports Fr.Leonard Feeney and the SSPX position while LG 16, LG 8 etc are not known exceptions.-Lionel Andrades
WHEN WILL THE BISHOPS OF THE WORLD REALIZE THAT WE DO NOT KNOW ANY VISIBLE DEAD SO VATICAN COUNCIL II IS A PRO SSPX TRADITIONAL DOCUMENT ?
There is no dead person visible who has been saved with the baptism desire. So if the Holy Office in 1949 assumed there were, it was a mistake. It was a factual mistake since we cannot see such a person.
Do all the bishops in the world agree that we cannot see the dead saved in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire, imperfect communion with the Church, seeds of the Word and a good conscience ?
So if we cannot see all these deceased then there are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.If nothing in Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma outside the church there is no salvation then we are back to exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church.
If Vatican Council II says outside the church there is no salvation (Ad Gentes says all need Catholic Faith) then the Society of St Pius X (SSPX) have a traditional Vatican Council II before them. There are traditional Conciliar values on other religions and ecumenism. The ecclesiology is once again traditional.
The bishops through out the world must realize that it is the traditionalists who are affirming Vatican Council II and it is Bishop Gerhard Muller and Archbishop Augustine Di Noia who are denying the traditional interpretation. They are denying it because they assume that Lumen Gentium 16 is an exception to the dogma and to Ad Gentes 7. And why do they assume that ? Since for them, we can see the dead-visible. They can see the deceased saved in invincible ignorance etc who are exceptions to the dogma!.
Can the bishops see all this?
Can they state in public that Vatican Council II is a traditional document in agreement with the SSPX communique (July 19, 2012) affirming that outside the Church there is no salvation and endorsing the uninterrupted magisterium of the Catholic Church.
This is not just an SSPX issue. It is a problem, all the bishops must face. Firstly we do not know the deceased who are saved and are alive and who could be exceptions to the dogma. Secondly, since there are no exceptions Vatican Council II (AG 7) affirms the dogma outside the church there is no salvation.Thirdly, we still have the traditional ecclesiology , ecumenism, evangelisation etc. These SSPX values are pro-Vatican Council II.
So when the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Prefect says the SSPX must accept Vatican Council II the answer is "Yes , they have! But what about you Bishop Muller ?".
That three SSPX bishops also do not know all this is part of the problem.-Lionel Andrades 1. APPEAL TO BISHOP MULLER TO ACCEPT VATICAN COUNCIL II http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/07/appeal-to-bishop-muller-to-accept.html
CAN THE ARCHDIOCESE OF BOSTON AND WASHINGTON SUPPORT THE SSPX BY SAYING VATICAN COUNCIL II IS A TRADITIONAL DOCUMENT WITH TRADITIONAL VALUES? http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/07/can-archdiocese-of-boston-and.html
3 comments:
THE SSPX ACCEPTS VATICAN COUNIL II ACCORDING TO TRADITION (DOGMA): SECONDARY ISSUES PREVENT RECONCILIATION
The SSPX accepts Vatican Council according to Tradition and rejects the Council as a break from Tradition and so will criticize the non traditional version which rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
According to Vatican Insider there are three conditions presented by the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) to the Vatican before they can accept Vatican Council II and receive canonical recognition.
Here are the conditions:
1.“The freedom to preserve, share and teach the sound doctrine of the constant Magisterium of the Church and the unchanging truth of the divine tradition and the freedom to accuse and even to correct the promoters of the errors or the innovations of modernism, liberalism, and Vatican II and its aftermath.” Discerning Catholics will always criticize the we-can-see-the-dead-version of Vatican Council II.
The Muller-Koch-Ladaria-Di Noia version of Vatican Council II claims those dead and saved in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire,elements of sanctification tc are known exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation. This results in a new interpretation of Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
They want the SSPX to accept this error and not criticize them for their irrationality.
2. The exclusive use of the Liturgy of 1962. The retention of the sacramental practice that we currently maintain (including: orders, confirmation, and marriage).
3.‘The letter also includes other conditions which are considered desirable but not essential: the possibility of having a separate ecclesiastical court of the first instance; the exemption of the houses of the Society of St. Pius X from the diocesan bishops and a Pontifical Commission for the tradition of Rome, which depends directly from the Pope, with the majority of the members and the president in favour of tradition.’
The SSPX has accepted Vatican Council II with the hermeneutic of continuity, they are in accord with Tradition (the dogma).
The issue really is no more Vatican Council II which the SSPX accepts according to the dogma as indicated in their communique of July 19,2012. Here it is:
This is why its seems to us opportune to reaffirm our faith in the Roman Catholic Church, the only Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ, outside of which there is no salvation and no possibility of finding the means that lead to it; in its monarchical constitution, willed by Our Lord, which means that the supreme power of governance over the whole Church belongs to the pope alone, the Vicar of Christ on earth; in the universal kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the creator of the natural and supernatural order, to whom every human being and all society must submit. - SSPX Communique (Emphasis added).
According to the SSPX version of Vatican Council II all non Catholics need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation (to avoid Hell) and there can only be an ecumenism of return.-Lionel Andrades
SSPX ASK BISHOP GERHARD MULLER TO ANSWER THE TWO QUESTIONS WHICH CARDINAL SEAN O'MALLEY WILL NOT : ENTIRE CONCEPT OF VATICAN COUNCIL II CHANGES
The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) communique ( July 19, 2012) supports the priest from Boston on whom the Archdiocese placed sanctions.
This is why its seems to us opportune to reaffirm our faith in the Roman Catholic Church, the only Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ, outside of which there is no salvation and no possibility of finding the means that lead to it; in its monarchical constitution, willed by Our Lord, which means that the supreme power of governance over the whole Church belongs to the pope alone, the Vicar of Christ on earth; in the universal kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the creator of the natural and supernatural order, to whom every human being and all society must submit. - SSPX Communique(Emphasis added).
The SSPX communique is saying there is no possibility of finding the means of salvation outside the Catholic Church. It is not possible to know anyone with implicit desire or who will be saved in invincible ignorance. Humanly this is not real.
It is possible to accept in theory, in faith and in pricniple that someone can be saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience (LG 16) but not as a known possibility on earth. The SSPX is affirming the literal interpretation of the dogma as was done by Fr.Leonad Feeney. So they are answering positively the two questions asked of the Archdiocese of Boston weeks back and to which there is no response. The two questions are:
1) Do we personally know the dead saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) etc ?
2) Since we do not know any of these cases, there are no known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?
If the SSPX would ask Bishop Gerhard Muller to respond to these two questions the CDF Prefect would have the same understanding of Vatican Council II as the SSPX.Probably this frightens the Archdiocese of Boston .
We now know that Fr.Leonard Feeney the priest from Boston answered the two questions in harmony with Tradition and was falsely penalized for rejecting the baptism of desire, as if the baptism of desire was relevant to the literal interpretation of the dogma.
If Cardinal Gerhard Muller says that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston rejected the literal interpretation of the dogma, then it means there was an objective mistake made by the Holy Office.The baptism of desire is not an exception to the dogma. It is irrelevant to the dogma.
If Cardinal Muller agrees that we do not know the dead saved then it means LG 16 is not an exception to the dogma.So there is nothing in Vatican Council II or the Catechism of the Catholic Chruch which contradicts the literal interpretation of the dogma as expressed in the SSPX communique. We do not know anyone saved with 'elements of sanctification' (LG 8), seeds of the Word, in imperfect communion with the Church and other implicit cases known only to God.
So holding the literal interpretation of the dogma is an affirmation of Vatican Council II according to Tradition. Ad Gentes 7 supports Fr.Leonard Feeney and the SSPX position while LG 16, LG 8 etc are not known exceptions.-Lionel Andrades
WHEN WILL THE BISHOPS OF THE WORLD REALIZE THAT WE DO NOT KNOW ANY VISIBLE DEAD SO VATICAN COUNCIL II IS A PRO SSPX TRADITIONAL DOCUMENT ?
There is no dead person visible who has been saved with the baptism desire. So if the Holy Office in 1949 assumed there were, it was a mistake. It was a factual mistake since we cannot see such a person.
Do all the bishops in the world agree that we cannot see the dead saved in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire, imperfect communion with the Church, seeds of the Word and a good conscience ?
So if we cannot see all these deceased then there are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.If nothing in Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma outside the church there is no salvation then we are back to exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church.
If Vatican Council II says outside the church there is no salvation (Ad Gentes says all need Catholic Faith) then the Society of St Pius X (SSPX) have a traditional Vatican Council II before them. There are traditional Conciliar values on other religions and ecumenism. The ecclesiology is once again traditional.
The bishops through out the world must realize that it is the traditionalists who are affirming Vatican Council II and it is Bishop Gerhard Muller and Archbishop Augustine Di Noia who are denying the traditional interpretation. They are denying it because they assume that Lumen Gentium 16 is an exception to the dogma and to Ad Gentes 7. And why do they assume that ? Since for them, we can see the dead-visible. They can see the deceased saved in invincible ignorance etc who are exceptions to the dogma!.
Can the bishops see all this?
Can they state in public that Vatican Council II is a traditional document in agreement with the SSPX communique (July 19, 2012) affirming that outside the Church there is no salvation and endorsing the uninterrupted magisterium of the Catholic Church.
This is not just an SSPX issue. It is a problem, all the bishops must face. Firstly we do not know the deceased who are saved and are alive and who could be exceptions to the dogma. Secondly, since there are no exceptions Vatican Council II (AG 7) affirms the dogma outside the church there is no salvation.Thirdly, we still have the traditional ecclesiology , ecumenism, evangelisation etc. These SSPX values are pro-Vatican Council II.
So when the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Prefect says the SSPX must accept Vatican Council II the answer is "Yes , they have! But what about you Bishop Muller ?".
That three SSPX bishops also do not know all this is part of the problem.-Lionel Andrades
1.
APPEAL TO BISHOP MULLER TO ACCEPT VATICAN COUNCIL II
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/07/appeal-to-bishop-muller-to-accept.html
CAN THE ARCHDIOCESE OF BOSTON AND WASHINGTON SUPPORT THE SSPX BY SAYING VATICAN COUNCIL II IS A TRADITIONAL DOCUMENT WITH TRADITIONAL VALUES?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/07/can-archdiocese-of-boston-and.html
Post a Comment