Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Go down

Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Lionel A on Thu Feb 14, 2013 10:55 am


The recent statement by Archbishop Gerhard Muller on their patience being limited indicates that the Vatican does not want a doctrinal solution to the SSPX issue which will say that the Council is traditional and in accord with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors.

Instead the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Archbishop Muller wants the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) to accept a false Vatican Council II in which salvation in Heaven is considered visible to us all on earth.This premise makes the Council modernist.

The SSPX and all good, non political Catholics are correct in rejecting this version of the Council.A reconciliation with the SSPX is possible if the CDF and the SSPX could acknowledge these three steps:
1. There is no explicit to us salvation, in the present times (2013) mentioned in Vatican Council II.
2. Since there is no explicit to us, physically visible salvation LG 16 etc does not contradict Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.
3. So LG 16 etc does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus or the traditional teaching on other religions, both sides could agree upon this.
The doctrinal issue would be cleared up and the conditions created for the SSPX to review the Council.This though would not be acceptable to the Jewish Left who have been putting pressure on the Vatican.To prevent political tension the Archbishop has to accept a Vatican Council II which says those who are saved are physically visible to him on earth.

Archbishop Augustine Di Noia Vice President of Ecclesia Dei said elements of sanctification (LG Cool are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So this is a break with the past.He mentioned this in the interview with Edward Pentin of the National Catholic Register. Those saved with 'elements of sanctification' in other religions are physically visible to the American Archbishop of Ecclesia Dei.So every one does not have to be a visible member of the Church for him. For him this irrationality(the dead who are saved are physically visible) is a contradiction to the dogma on salvation and to Vatican Council II (AG 7) .

This is the Vatican Council II which Archbishop Di Noia wants the SSPX to accept and which is pleasing to the Left.

Bishop Gerhard Muller himself endorsed this leftist, irrational version of Vatican Council II in another interview with Edward Pentin.He said those saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions to the dogma. So for him the dogma is no more relevant for the present times.Invisible cases are exceptions.

Obviously a matured, rational German Archbishop is saying that he can physically see the dead saved in invincible ignorance. Otherwise how could invisible cases be an exception to the dogma ?

This is the irrational, political version of the Council which the SSPX has to accept or the CDF Prefect will lose his patience.

This version of the Council is a break with the past. The Archbishop himself recently said that those who interpret the Council as a break with the past, traditionalists and progressivists, are heretical.Archbishop Muller interpreted the Council to Edward Pentin as a break with the past.This was when he suggested that LG 16 (invincible ignorance) is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Since the SSPX affirmed the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in their General Chapter Statement (July 19,2012) the SSPX should have called a Press Conference to point out the CDF Prefect's doctrinal error. How can invincible ignorance be an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Ad Gentes 7 when these cases are invisible for us ?How can Archbishop Muller interpret the Council as a break with the past when he suggested that LG 16 (invincible ignorance) is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?

If the CDF penalizes the SSPX it will be for not accepting the dead man walking version of Vatican Council II. The CDF Prefect will have lost his patience because the SSPX will not say 'Yes' to a Vatican Council II which says we can see the dead who are exceptions to the Syllabus of Errors and extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Simply - ask the Vatican which version of the Council they want the SSPX to accept ? With the dead man walking premise or without it.-Lionel Andrades

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Admin on Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:02 pm

Archbishop Muller is also contradicting the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

If what the CCC stated in orange above is, indeed, true, how could it not apply to Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, agnostics, etc., etc.? And, how could we ever observe someone whom "Gospel had not been proclaimed and who did not have the possibility of asking for this sacrament"?

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Lionel A on Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:24 pm

CCC 1257 :Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament.

Possibly he like many others would agree with 1257 and say the baptism of water is necessary for these cases. They would not disagree here but then they would also say this does not apply to those in invincible ignorance. So those saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions to all needing faith and baptism for salvation (AG 7) in 2013. They are exceptions to the dogma on salvation.

We are back to the old problem.

If what the CCC stated in orange above is, indeed, true, how could it not apply to Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, agnostics, etc., etc.? And, how could we ever observe someone whom "Gospel had not been proclaimed and who did not have the possibility of asking for this sacrament"?

They would say in a vague way that it applies to the non Catholics...but there are exceptions. And how can there be exceptions when these cases are not known to us? How can we observe someone who did not have the possibility...?!


Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Admin on Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:37 pm

Lionel,

Of course, as we know, "invincible ignorance" is not salvific! How could "not knowing" something save anyone??? Those who are in "invincible ignorance" can be saved in only a limited number of scenarios:

1) The One and Triune God delivers a person from his/her "invincibly ignorant" state; that person receives Christian Baptism, and is by that very fact, visibly joined to the Catholic Church, assuming, of course, that his/her Baptism, in addition to being valid, was also "fruitful".

Scenario 1 is observable to us, at least in part.

2) The "invincible ignorant" person receives salutary repentance at death's door.

Scenario 2 is not observable to us.

3) The "invincibly ignorant" person was, unknown to him/her, validly baptized in his/her infancy, and by that very fact, was explicitly joined to the Catholic Church.

Scenario 3 is not observable to us, unless we were the ones baptizing the person and/or being a witness to that.

4) The "invincibly ignorant" person was, known to him/her, validly baptized in his/her infancy, and by that very fact, was explicitly joined to the Catholic Church, but as an adult, does not profess the Catholic Faith.

Scenario 4 is not observable to us, as we cannot tell if the person in question is in a state of mortal sin.

5) The "invincibly ignorant" person has perfect charity of the Creator of the Universe along with supernatural faith in Him, but for whatever reason, the One and Triune God does not deliver that person from his/her "invincibly ignorant" state.

Scenario 5 is not observable to us at all.

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Lionel A on Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:48 pm

And the Bishop of Calgary cited the Catechism of the Catholic Church in correspondence with me, suggesting that those saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions to the dogma, as if these cases were observable to us all.And he just leaves it at that !
So does Joan Lewis of EWTN.
So does Jeff Mirus of Catholic Culture and EWTN in the on line report Tragic Errors of Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Admin on Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:59 pm

If you talk to them again, ask them to name some names of these "visible exceptions." And, ask them why the Catholic Church has not canonized any of these folks (at least those who have died) if they are so certain that they are, in fact, "visible exceptions" to EENS.

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by columba on Thu Feb 14, 2013 7:46 pm

Even if we were to acknowledged that there were exceptions to water Baptism (namely, invincible ignorance and bod), we would also -at the same time- acknowledge that these would be known only to God and therefore unknown to us. We must conclude then, that every living, non-baptized soul we meet is in need of Baptism. It follows that we must preach Baptism for the remission of sins and deny every view to the contrary.

I sometimes place myself in the position of someone who has not received the sacrament of Baptism and who is oblivious to its necessity. I for one would want to be preached to and told that without it (Baptism) I cannot be saved. I thank God every day that He brought me to the waters of Baptism. I have at the least a hope of salvation.

columba

Posts : 8
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Admin on Thu Feb 14, 2013 7:55 pm

Absolutely, Columba! 10/10!! Problem with Catholic modernism is that it is self-contradictory and illogical, not to mention the fact that it is in contradiction to 1900+ years of Catholic Tradition. Indeed, Saint Thomas taught us:

"Everyone is bound to believe something explicitly...even if someone is brought up in the forest or among wild beasts. For it pertains to Divine Providence to furnish everyone with what is necessary for salvation, provided that on his part there is no hindrance. Thus, if someone so brought up followed the direction of natural reason in seeking good and avoiding evil, we must most certainly hold that God would either reveal to him through internal inspiration what had to be believed, or he would send some preacher of the faith to him as He sent Peter to Cornelius (Acts 10:20)." (The Disputed Questions on Truth, q.14, a.11)

So, it is completely reasonable that since the One and Triune God, a Perfect and Infinite Being, is Truth that anyone who sincerely desires to know Him will find Him in the One True Faith and One True Church.

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Lionel A on Fri Feb 15, 2013 9:38 am

Columba
Even if we were to acknowledged that there were exceptions to water Baptism (namely, invincible ignorance and bod), we would also -at the same time- acknowledge that these would be known only to God and therefore unknown to us. We must conclude then, that every living, non-baptized soul we meet is in need of Baptism. It follows that we must preach Baptism for the remission of sins and deny every view to the contrary.

Lionel:
Yes Columba I agree with you that acknowledge that these would be known only to God and therefore unknown to us.

Columba
Even if we were to acknowledged that there were exceptions to water Baptism (namely, invincible ignorance and bod),
Lionel
Here is the problem with the bishop of Calgary, Joan Lewis of EWTN and others.

1.They do not acknowledge that these cases would be known only to God and therefore unknown to us.This is even after being informed.
2. They consider invincible ignorance and bod as 'exceptions' to the dogma.

You will realize that this is not rational. Yet these are responsible people. I mean the bishop makes demands on the priests and lay people and expects them to follow rules.Canon Law is followed etc.

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Admin on Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:52 am

Then they do not agree with the 1949 Holy Office Letter:

We are bound by divine and Catholic faith to believe all those things which are contained in the word of God, whether it be Scripture or Tradition, and are proposed by the Church to be believed as divinely revealed, not only through solemn judgment but also through the ordinary and universal teaching office (<Denzinger>, n. 1792).

Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.

However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church.

Now, in the first place, the Church teaches that in this matter there is question of a most strict command of Jesus Christ. For He explicitly enjoined on His apostles to teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever He Himself had commanded (Matt. 28: 19-20).

Now, among the commandments of Christ, that one holds not the least place by which we are commanded to be incorporated by baptism into the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, and to remain united to Christ and to His Vicar, through whom He Himself in a visible manner governs the Church on earth.

Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.

Not only did the Savior command that all nations should enter the Church, but He also decreed the Church to be a means of salvation without which no one can enter the kingdom of eternal glory.

In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the sacrament of regeneration and in reference to the sacrament of penance (<Denzinger>, nn. 797, 807).

The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.

However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.

Well, if it's not "explicit" to them, how could it possibly be "explicit" to us??? Of course, we could assume that it is present in someone, but what if we are wrong, and as a consequence of our indifferentism, that individual dies and goes to Hell forever? Will we have committed an injustice to that person, an eternal injustice?!

Besides, how is telling someone, that is, a particular individual, that he/she needs to be a visible member of the Catholic Church harming that person in any way? If the "Savior command that all nations should enter the Church" should not we proclaim that command "from the housetops"?!!

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Lionel A on Sat Feb 16, 2013 6:44 am

Well, if it's not "explicit" to them, how could it possibly be "explicit" to us??? Of course, we could assume that it is present in someone, but what if we are wrong, and as a consequence of our indifferentism, that individual dies and goes to Hell forever? Will we have committed an injustice to that person, an eternal injustice?!

Yes! How could we know also?

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Admin on Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:50 am

We could never know, at least in this life. It's Pascal's Wager:

1) Tell someone who is invincibly ignorant that he/she needs to convert to the One Truth Faith, which is Roman Catholicism. What injustice will we have committed towards such a person? Answer: absolutely none.

2) Tell someone who is vincibly ignorant that he/she does not need to convert to the One Truth Faith, which is Roman Catholicism. What injustice will we have committed towards such a person? Answer: an eternal injustice!

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Lionel A on Sat Feb 16, 2013 3:41 pm

We could never know!

Yet on the board True Catholic Fr.John George is insisting that we can know!
This conversation have been going on for a few years. He just will not affirm the dogma.
Now he is implying that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made a mistake by saying that the baptism of desire was known to us; physically visible to us. He says the Letter of the Holy Office said that Fr.Leonard Feeney was wrong because there is a baptism of desire and it is an exception to the dogma. In other words if the Letter is a magisterial document then the Magisterium made a mistake!!!

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Admin on Sat Feb 16, 2013 5:33 pm

Ask Father John to "name some names..." Who are these people? And, why has the Catholic Church not canonized any of them?

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Lionel A on Sun Feb 17, 2013 1:02 pm

I have.
I have posted it.

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Admin on Sun Feb 17, 2013 2:06 pm

Great. Let me know what he says, if anything. Also, invite him here!

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Lionel A on Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:35 am


He does not want to affirm the dogma and would rather believe that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made a mistake.
He still is assuming that being saved in invincible ignorance etc is an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus and that this is what the Holy Office said. Very convenient!

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Admin on Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:01 am

Ultimately, Lionel, it does not matter what he thinks. If he cannot produce a name, any examples, etc., of those individuals who have been saved in "invincible ignorance," then his argument is fallacious and you have better things to do with your time. If he appeals to the 1949 Holy Office Letter as supporting his beliefs, he needs to ask himself why, if these individuals are, in fact, "known" to us, why the Catholic Church, in the 60 years since the 1949 Holy Office Letter, has not canonized any of these "invincibly ignorant" folks, or even begun the process of their canonization. And, of course, Catholics have "come and gone" since 1949 whom the Church has canonized.

I hope that you see my point here.

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

And this is all permitted under Canon Law?

Post by Lionel A on Wed Feb 20, 2013 4:50 am

He denies the dogma misinterprets the Catechism and Vatican Council II offers Holy Mass in this condition and also expects the SSPX to accept his irrational version of Vatican Council...

And this is all permitted under Canon Law?

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Vatican not sincere in seeking a doctrinal solution with the SSPX

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum