FR.FRANZ SCHMIDBERGER COULD ASK THE POPE

According to Fr.Franz Schmidberger German matematician and District Superior of the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) (1) the SSPX  asked at the Vatican if Pope Benedict  personally approved the new theological requirements the SSPX had to accept. The answer was yes. The new demands were from the pope and not one of the Vatican Curia cardinals, Fr. Schmidber said.

They have their lines of communication open and this is good.Now Fr.Schmidberger could ask the pope the following questions which are relevant to the SSPX-Vatican talks and the theological conditions:

1. The baptism of desire is not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?

2. Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?

3. So if Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston supported or rejected the baptism of desire it makes no difference?

4.If the Holy Office in 1949 in the Letter to the Archbishop of Boston assumed that the baptism of desire was an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus then they made an objective error ?

5.We do not know any case of the dead saved on earth in 2012 who are visible to us?

6.If the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are not exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church, then there is no theological basis for the theology of religions and ecclesiology of communion which the pope wants the SSPX to accept ?

PAPAL RESPONSE

1.If the pope responds to Question N.1 and says that the baptism of desire is not an exception to the dogma it means Vatican Council II is a traditional council just like Trent. The entire interpretation of the Council changes.

2.If he then realizes that  Vatican Council II does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus it means the Council is in agreement with St.Robert Bellarmine and  the Syllabus of Errors.

3.If Fr.Leonard Feeney supported or rejected the baptism of desire and  makes no difference, then the pope is still saying Vatican Council II says outside the church there is no salvation and it is in agreement with Fr.Leonard Feeney's literal interpretation.

4.If the Letter of the Holy Office lends itself to confusion then the confusion needs to be removed. An objective error is obvious to all.It is not theology.A Vatican spokesman could deal with the confusion by announcing that the baptism of desire is known only to God and we do not know any case which could be an explicit exception to the dogma.

5.That we cannot see the dead is an objective fact on which the pope must agree.

6.According to the International Theological Commission posiiton paper Christianity and the World Religions and The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without baptism the ITC assumes there is salvation outside the Church. This is  due to its interpretation of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 with reference to Fr.Leonard Feeney.This error of being able to see the dead and then assuming that these 'ghosts' were exception to the dogma was was the theological basis for the 'theology of religions' and 'ecclesiology of communion' in  the two  ITC papers.

We now know that this was a factual error. It was the Archbishop of Boston Richard Cushing who was wrong in assuming that the baptism of desire etc was an explicit exception to the literal and traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.

INFORM THE MEDIA

The SSPX could ask someone to  sponsor a large announcement/advertisment in the newspapers in Rome in the Year of the Faith, with the following logic.

1. The dead are not visible to us.

2. We cannot see the dead saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire in the present times (2012).

3.We do not know any non Catholic who does not need to convert into the Catholic Church because of the baptism of desire or being saved in potential invincible ignorance.

4.We cannot meet such cases on the street and neither telephone them.

5.Since we cannot know such cases or meet them the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are not known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

6.Since we cannot know anyone on earth saved in invincible ignorance,the baptism of desire, a good conscience, seeds of the Word, imperfect communion with the Church, elements of sanctification etc, there are no exceptions  in Vatican Council II to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

7.Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma on salvation.

8.Vatican Council II is in agreement with the dogma on salvation as interpreted by St.Robert Bellarmine.It is in agreement with the Syllabus of Errors and  Sacred Tradition.

9.Vatican Council II is in agreement with SSPX values on other religions, ecumenism and religious liberty when the false and irrational theory,of being able to see the dead alive and saved on earth in the present times,is omitted.

10.Vatican Council II is a traditional Council with a traditional understanding of Church (ecclesiology). So there can be no theological basis for the 'theology of religions' and an 'ecclesiology of communion'.

-Lionel Andrades

1.

PIUSFILM of the SSPX's German District has posted a brief video interview of Fr. Franz Schmidberger (conducted by Fr. Andreas Steiner) that discusses the current situation between the Society and Rome