Clicks178
Lionel L. Andrades

Five months and no concrete dialogue between the SSPX and Ecclesia Dei on Vatican Council II (premise-free) and EENS(premise-free)

OCTOBER 12, 2017

Five months and no concrete dialogue between the SSPX and Ecclesia Dei on Vatican Council II (premise-free) and EENS(premise-free)

May 12, 2017
SSPX Spokesman Confirms: "No Date for Reconciliation"
(Paris) Father Alain Lorans, spokesman for the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X. in France, according to AFP press agency, said: "Dialogue continues without timetable." There is no specific date. The FSSPX spokesman thus confirms what Guido Pozzo, the secretary of the Pontifical Commission, Ecclesia Dei, and the Vatican representativr for talks with the Society, said yesterday in an interview with Rome Reports.
Lionel: There is no dialogue on the doctrinal issue of 1) unknown cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are not visible exceptions to the dogmaextra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). So there really were no known exceptions of BOD,BOB and I.I to the interpretation of the dogma EENS according to Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center of that time.So the Holy Office 1949 and the Archbishop of Boston made a factual mistake.2) Also hypothetical cases of LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are not explicit examples of salvation in the present times and so they are not objective exceptions to the dogma EENS. Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma EENS when LG 16 etc are interpreted as only being hypothetical.

So it was an injustice done to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre when Cardinal Ratzinger interpreted Vatican Council II, with LG 16 etc referring to not only hypothetical cases but known people saved outside the Church without the baptism of water.The magisterium once again made a mistake. There was a theologial and doctrinal link with the Fr. Leonard Feeney case.In 1949 and then in 1965 the magisterium assumed that invisible for us BOD, BOB and I.I were visible exceptions to the centuries old interpretation of the dogma EENS.
So there emerged a new theology from this error.
Since there were exceptions to EENS in Vatican Council II there was the new salvation theology.
Since there was alleged known salvation outside the Church there was a new ecclesiology.
With the new ecclesiology there was a new ecumenism and understanding of other religions and salvation.
There was then the new mission which did not see all non Catholics on the way to Hell.It sought other reasons to do mission.
Since there was known salvation outside the Church proclaiming the Social Reign of Christ the King was no more a priority.Also there could be the separation of Church and State since outside the Church there is salvation.

The error in the Fr.Leonard Feeney was case repeated in Vatican Council II and then in the censure of Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX.
The same error is there in the doctrinal preamble which Archbishop Guido Pozzo wants the SSPX wants to sign.
The SSPX can choose to sign the doctrinal preamble with invisible cases of BOD, BOB and I.Inot being visible exceptions to EENS.They choose to accept that Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance) is a hypothetical case and so is not an explicit exception to EENS. So there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.This needs to be discussed by Archbishop Guido Pozzo.
_________________________________
Both sides thus indirectly denied speculation that the erection of the Society as a personal prelature could be announced by Pope Francis tomorrow, May 13, the 100th anniversary of the first apparition of the Virgin Mary in Fatima.

Archbishop Pozzo said yesterday that Monsignor Fellay would first have to sign the doctrinal preamble before the canonical recognition could be passed as a personal prelature.

Lionel: What Archbishop Pozzo does not say is that Bishop Fellay has a choice. Bishop Fellay can interpret Vatican Council II with hypothetical cases just being hypothetical and not explicit and known examples of salvation outside the Church.
He does not state that this Vatican Council II ( premise-free) is also acceptable to him and the CDF.He says nothing on this point.

____________________________________

In the end, seven of the Society's French district and three heads of aligned religious communities had very clearly spoken out against an agreement with Rome at the present time. AFP therefore headlined yesterday: "The Lefebvrian integralists between the road to Rome and an internal crisis."


Lionel: It needs to be clarified within the SSPX that Vatican Council II can be interpreted without the irrational premise or with the irrational premise.The conclusion is different.

__________________________________

eponymousflower.blogspot.ro/…/Archbishop Guid…
______________________________

April 11, 2016


What Rome Expects of the Society of Pius X -- Interview of Archbishop Guido Pozzo
(Rome) What Rome expects from the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) said Curial Archbishop Guido Pozzo, Secretary of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei . The interview was held by Luca Marcolivio for the press Zenit .
About two weeks ago Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the SSPX was received by Pope Francis at the Vatican. The private audience caused quite a stir since it is known that Francis has no strong sympathies for tradition.

New "Doctrinal Preamble"?

Curial Archbishop Pozzo described the meeting as "useful" on the "path" of the SSPX, "towards a full reconciliation" that "will be made a canonical recognition of the institute." Currently it is "primarily" about creating a more trusting and respectful air, "to overcome hardening and distrust".

When asked which "basic requirements" Rome is urging of the SSPX for recognition, Pozzo said that the SSPX would submit a "doctrinal statement" which "at the appropriate moment," is one that will contain all the "essential and necessary points". Pozzo described such points as: "the approval of the creed, the sacramental bond and hierarchical communion with the Roman Pontiff, the head of the episcopal college united with him."


Lionel: It also requires the SSPX to interpret the Nicene Creed, Athanasius Creed, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church with the irrational premise.

It also requires, it seems, that the SSPX not interpret magisterial documents without the irrational premise and then there will a harmony between Vatican Council II and the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS.

This has not been clarified yet.There is no statement from Ecclesia Dei.


_______________________________________

Specifically the Curial Archbishop explained, "that the SSPX is asked to recognize that only the Magisterium of the Church is entrusted with the preservation, defense and interpretation of the
deposit of faith, and the Magisterium is not higher than the Word of God, but this serves only to hand down doctrine."
Lionel: The SSPX has to accept that the present Magisterium of the Church is not in heresy even though they use an irrational premise to interpret Vatican Council II etc.Also they have to accept that the present magisterium is not in schism with the past magisterium even though Pope Benedict last year said that EENS was no more like it was for the past magisterium. He also said that there was a development with Vatican Council II, meaning that when the Council is interpreted with the irrationality it emerges as a break with Tradition, it has the hermeneutic of rupture which he approves of.
______________________________________________
The supreme Magisterium is the "authentic interpreter" even of the previous texts of the Magisterium "in the light of the everlasting tradition," including those of the Second Vatican Council.
Lionel: The present magisterium interprets the Nicene Creed as meaning 'I believe in three known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins, they include the baptism of desire, blood and invincible ignorance and it exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.' This is magisterial heresy.

I,Lionel, interpret Vatican Council II with LG 16 etc referring to hypothetical cases and so LG 16 is not relevant or an exception to traditional EENS. However for the two popes today Vatican Council II, with LG 16 referring to an explicit and known case, is a rupture with the magisterium of the 16th century on EENS. So there is a rupture with Tradition on the subject of EENS for them and not for me.They also put away the Syllabus of Errorsand I do not.They do away with the past exclusivist ecclesiology, I do not .For them there is a new ecumenism for me there is no known salvation outside the Church so theologically there cannot be a new ecumenism.
___________________________________________
So there is no place for "opposing novelties", but only for a deeper understanding of the Depositum fidei, "always in the same doctrine, the same sense and in the same tradition."
Lionel: In a previous blog post I mentioned the following:
Ask him (Archbishop Guido Pozzo) to affirm the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.If he says he will not, since there is known salvation outside the Church with visible cases of the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, then we know that Vatican Council II has the hermeneutic of rupture with the past for him, it contradicts EENS and the Syllabus of Errors.This is how he chooses to interpret Vatican Council.It does not have the hermeneutic of continuity for him.It is always with the irrational premise of invisible cases are visible examples of salvation outside the Church. Now he is unloading it on the SSPX.

ASK HIM TO AFFIRM THE SYLLABUS OF ERRORS AND HE WILL NOT
Ask him to affirm the Syllabus of Errors and he will not do so.Since he has rejected the past exclusivist ecclesiology.He has changed the understanding of EENS. For him EENS has exceptions i.e known cases of the baptism of desire etc which are examples of salvation outside the Church.So there is a breach with the Syllabus. Vatican Council II does not have the hermeneutic of continuity for him.
This is all a doctrinal mess and they want the SSPX to rubber stamp it, as if it is normal.1
____________________________
Discussions have "led to a significant clarification" of Vatican II


Lionel: I don't think the relevant- issue has been discussed.

______________________________________

As for the Second Vatican Council, the trodden path of the "recent years" have "led to a significant clarification," said Pozzo. "The 2nd Vatican Council can only be understood in the context of the entire tradition of the Church and her constant magisterium in an appropriate manner."

Lionel: Pope Benedict said in the daily Avvenire(2016) that EENS was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. This was a public statement.He was saying that the present magisterium is a rupture with the past magisterium.He was affirming that Vatican Council II did not have the hermeneutic of rupture.


Pope Pius XII called EENS an 'infallible teaching' while the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1994) calls it an 'aphorism'.

All this has to be accepted by the SSPX ? This is liberalism and heresy.


_______________________________________

In addition, a different weighting and thus binding of each document is observed. The person in charge of Ecclesia Dei emphasized that there even after "the canonical recognition" the conciliar documents can continue to be discussed.


Lionel: Before any canonical recognition the SSPX must ask Rome to come back to the Faith. Ask them to affirm Vatican Council II( premise-free) and EENS ( premise-free).Let the Vatican set the pace and give all of us an example.Also it is now possible for every Catholic and every religious congregation to affirm Vatican Council II and EENS without the irrational premise.

___________________________________________

The aim of the "discussion, deepening" must be to "avoid any misunderstandings and contradictions" that "to our knowledge are currently spread throughout the Church".


Lionel: Vatican Council II is a rupture with EENS for Archishop Pozzo but not for me.I am affirming Vatican Council II and EENS. He is not.I am affirming the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church and Vatican Council II ( premise-free). He is not.The SSPX can choose my theological model.

________________________________________

Outstanding issues such as religious freedom, ecumenism are not "an obstacle to recognition"


Lionel: When Vatican Council II ( premise-free) and EENS (premise-free) are affirmed we are back to the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church. Upon the old ecclesiology there was only an ecumenism of return and it was the basis for proclaiming the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation and the non separation of Church and State.So there would also be mission knowing that all non Catholics in general are on the way to Hell and not only those whom we think 'know' or 'do not know' about Jesus and the Church.
We would also be able to say that all non Catholics in 2017 are on the way to Hell with no known exceptions unless they are incorporated into the Church as membes,with 'faith and baptism'(Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II). So when I meet a non Catholic I know he is oriented into the Church not because I can judge but because the Catholic Church teaches this, before and after Vatican Council II, for me.


________________________________________

The open questions about the relationship between church and state, freedom of religion, practice of ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue as well as "some aspects of liturgical reform and their actual use" would "be discussed and remain points to be clarified." but however, "they are not an obstacle for the canonical and legal recognition" of the SSPX.


Lionel: When we affirm Vatican Coumcil II and EENS without the irrrational premise, we return to the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.So at Mass in any liturgy and Rite the ecclesiology will be that of the 16th century, for example.Presently Cardinal Raymond Burke, the FSSP and the SSPX offer the Traditional Latin Mass with the new ecclesiology.
There cannot be a new ecumenism since there is no known salvation outside the Church.There is no dogma EENS with an invisible for us BOD, BOB and I.I being a visible exception.This was Cardinal Ratzinger's interpretation of EENS.

I repeat: 1) We will return to the traditional EENS with invisible BOD, BOB and I.I not being exceptions since there are no known cases in our human reality.

2) We will also find a Vatican Council II in which invisible for us LG 16, LG 8, UR 3 etc are not exceptions to traditional EENS(premise-free) and so there will be no change in pre and post Vatican Council II ecclesiology, which would be traditional.So we have a hermeneutic of continuity with the past.

These are the points Archbishop Guido Pozzo needs to comment upon.
-Lionel Andrades

eponymousflower.blogspot.ro/…/Archbishop Guid…

1.

OCTOBER 12, 2017


Abp.Guido Pozzo cannot affirm the Syllabus of Errors nor the past exclusivist ecclesiology since Vatican Council II has a hermeneutic of rupture for him with invisible cases being visible : SSPX priests must correct his error
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/abpguido-pozzo-…