IS THE SSPX IN HERESY?

The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) is presently in closed-door negotiations with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican to ascertain Catholic doctrine. Yet the SSPX itself could be in heresy according to its website and reports by SSPX priests.

1.If the SSPX does not interpret Lumen Gentium 16 as referring to de jure, implicit salvation, then it is the Kung Deception. If they interpret Lumen Gentium 16 as referring to something defacto-personally-knowable then it is heresy.

If they do not see the Baptism of Desire as implicit then they would contradict the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The dogma refers to explicit entry into the Catholic Church, through the baptism of water and Catholic Faith, which is explicit and objectively verifiable.

The SSPX has been saying correctly that everyone needs to enter the Catholic Church for salvation but have also been using the mantra ‘except for those in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire’.

It would be rational to say everybody(all non Catholics) with no exception need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation (to avoid Hell) and those who are in invincible ignorance or have the baptism of desire known only to God and He only will judge them.

Here is the ex cathedra dogma.

1. “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215). Ex Cathedra

2. “We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 302.). Ex Cathedra

3.“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.) Ex Cathedra

– from the website Catholicism.org and “No Salvation outside the Church”: Link List, the Three Dogmatic Statements Regarding EENS: http://nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/ )

The SSPX needs to clarify its position in public. I have written to them in the past but I  get no reply.

The Baptism of Desire is always implicit. It is hypothetical, subjective and de jure he observed.

So how can the Baptism of desire and invincible ignorance contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus i.e. everybody needs to be an explicit member of the Catholic Church to be saved? And if it did not contradict the dogma it would mean every Jew, Muslim or Buddhist is on the way to Hell.

The infallible teaching says everyone explicitly needs the baptism of water to avoid Hell. It says everyone needs Catholic Faith, which is objective, it has to be learnt and one’s knowledge can be tested explicitly.

So the mantra is a deception when it suggests the baptism of water and invincible ignorance are explicit and can be judged in specific persons.

One cannot say that everyone needs explicit faith for salvation, with no exceptions, according to the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and at the same time say, that people can be saved explicitly through the baptism of desire.

However one can say that everyone needs explicit faith according to the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and at the same time say that people can be saved implicitly, in principle, as a theory, a concept, through the baptism of desire.

So Fr. Leonard Feeney said as did popes, Councils and saints over the centuries that everybody needs to explicitly be a member of the Catholic Church to be saved.

The dogma above does not say that only those who know can be saved or those who are in invincible ignorance do not have to enter the Church.

So the Letter of the Holy Office was endorsing the infallible teaching as it is and so was Fr.Leonard Feeney.

It is said that Fr. Leonard Feeney rejected the baptism of desire and so was a heretic. He was saying that there is no baptism of desire that one can know of explicitly. Explicit baptism of desire is the Richard Cushing heresy. It is contrary to the principle of non contradiction.

VATICAN REOPEN THE BOSTON CASE: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN EXPLICIT BAPTISM OF DESIRE

Till today Catholics say those who have the baptism of desire do not have to convert into the Catholic Church. Fr. Leonard Feeney denied the baptism of desire, because there is no explicit baptism of desire that we can know of.

Till today Fr. Hans Kung says Vatican Council Ii has contradicted the dogma extra ecclesaim nulla salus since Lumen Gentium says those in invincible ignorance and with the baptism of desire can be saved. Yet can there be an explicit baptism of desire for us the viewer. Is it objective, verifiable and ‘see able’?

The Baptism of Desire is always implicit for us (the viewer).

This is a pre-Vatican Council II error that has continued when the Archbishop of Boston Richard Cushing criticized Fr. Leonard Feeney for saying those in invincible ignorance or with the baptism of desire cannot be saved.

The Archbishop was giving us a new doctrine, he was saying those saved with implicit faith (baptism of desire etc) are rally explicit cases. They are as explicit and see-able as an adult receiving the baptism of water.

The secular media picked up the error and has maintained it until today. They write that the Catholic Church has changed its ancient teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The Church now teaches everyone does not need explicit salvation(baptism of water) and that those who have the baptism of desire(implicitly) can also be saved .They unfortunately mean that this baptism of desire is explicit, knowable and able to be judged personally. Yet the baptism of desire is something known and accepted only in principle, you cannot give someone the baptism of desire explicitly. It can never be explicit so how fan it contradict the infallible teaching?

If someone has the baptism of desire it will be only known to God. This has been the traditional understanding. Hence everyone needs the Sacraments explicitly.

The media is promoting the lie about the baptism of desire being explicit. This ‘explicit –implicit baptism of desire’ is a Richard Cushing doctrine and not part of the deposit of the faith.

The deposit of the faith is that everybody explicitly needs to enter the Catholic Church; everyone needs to be a member of the Catholic Church ((through the baptism of water and Catholic Faith) for salvation.