A professor of Ecclesiology of the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) who participated in the SSPX-Vatican doctrinal talks has written a book with an incorrect observation of Pope Pius XII's Mystici Corporis.
Fr.Jean Marie Glleize claims that in Mystici Corporis Pope Pius XII says ' in the exceptional way one can be saved outside the visible limits of the Catholic Church.' (1)
The exceptional way? How can there be an exceptional way? How can there be any exception to all needing to be a visible member of the Catholic Church for salvation? Where is the text in Mystici Corporis which uses the word exception or indicates there are exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus? How can there be exceptions when we do not know any such case. We cannot name any such case in 2013.
There is no such text in Mystici Corporis which says there are exceptions!
Fr.Gleize has made the same error as Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J and Bishop Charles Morerord O.P his liberal counterparts in the doctrinal talks.This is the error of Cushingism. This is also the error made by Pope Francis in his encyclical when he assumed that Christians have ecclesial faith. He contradicted his statement in May this year, when he said we cannot find Jesus outside the Catholic Church, citing Pope Paul VI and St.Igantius of Loyola.
Magisterial documents only mention the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance.They do not state that these cases are exceptions to the dogma.They can be accepted as possibilities or something probable but not defacto, known cases in the present times.
Fr.Gleaze assumes they are visible to us, de facto and so they are 'exceptions'. He says this is an exceptional way, when we do not know if there was a single case of the baptism of desire etc over the last 60 years or more.
If a way implies a path one can take, then the baptism of desire etc is not a way.Since we cannot choose to be saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance. In principle the baptism of desire is a means of salvation but defacto it is not a way of salvation.So de facto it is not an exceptional way.It is not an exceptional or regular way of salvation.
Upon this factual error,of being able to see the dead saved who are exceptions, Fr.Gleaze has built his theology, which ends up with the rejection of Vatican Council II. Since for him all salvation mentioned or alluded to in Vatican Council II would be explicit and so an exception to the dogma on salvation, the Syllabus of Errors etc.He uses a false premise which results in a hermeneutic of rupture. The fault is not with Vatican Council II.
The book Vaticano II- Un Dibattito Aperto (Editrice Ichthys) 2013 is published by the SSPX District Italy, Albano,Rome.It has a preface written by Bishop Bernard Fellay.
According to the blurb on the back cover of this book being sold by the SSPX Fr.Gleize is a priest of their community and has been a professor of Fundamental Theology at the SSPX seminary in Econe, Switzerland.From 2009-2011 he has been active as an expert in ecclesiology in the doctrinal talks with the Holy See,requested by Pope Benedict XVI.
One can interpret Mystici Corporis with Feeneyism (there are no known exceptions) or with Cushingism (there are known exceptions to the dogma). The SSPX's Fr.Gleize, Peter Scott, Francois Laisney and others have always used the irrational Cushingism.
-Lionel Andrades
1.
'19.Risposta alla terza obiezione: in Mystici corporis Pio XII dice che in via eccezionale ci si può salvare al di fuori dei limiti visibili della Chiessa Cattolica...'-Don J.M Gleize FSSPX (p.152. Editrice Ichthys.VIII Il 'Subsistit in'-Status Quaestionis),Vaticano II-Un Dibattito Aperto Questioni disputate sul XXI Concilio Ecumenico
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment