eucharistandmission: Both SSPX groups are having it out among themself and interpreting Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Archbishop Gerhard Muller with the Richard Cushing Error

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

Both SSPX groups are having it out among themself and interpreting Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Archbishop Gerhard Muller with the Richard Cushing Error

The two SSPX (Society of St.Pius X) groups are having it out on the Internet . Unaware they interpret Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Archbishop Gerhard Muller with an irrationality. Also both groups have decided that there will be no dialogue with the Vatican yet they are not united once again.

Archbishop Gerhard Muller,Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) said those who interpret Vatican Councl II as a break with the past are in heresy, traditionalists and progressivists. He himself is in heresy. Since they all, Archbishop Muller included interpret the Council with the Richard Cushing Error. The SSPX (USA) website criticized the CDF Prefect , unaware that what makes the Council a break with Tradition was the use of a false premise.An irrational objective observation.

The SSPX, Archbishop Muller, traditionalists and progressivists interpret the Council with the false premise of being able to physically see the dead. Any Church document interpreted with this factual error will emerge as a break with the past.

Both SSPX groups have quoted Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the SSPX founder, as saying that a Hindu in Tibet can be saved in his religion. Then both groups wrongly reason that this case is an alleged known exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

They know that for someone to be an exception he has to be physically visible. So the Hindu in Tibet is a physically visible exception for them to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Then they reason ( after using the premise of the dead Hindu in Tibet, now saved in Heaven) that since this Hindu is known to them (he is known, since he is an exception) Fr.Leonard Feeney was wrong in not acknowledging a visible-to-us baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance.

SSPX bishops and priests have assumed that this Hindu in Tibet is still physically visible to us in Heaven, he is personally known for him to be an exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma.This is fantasy but it is real for all of them.

The SSPX groups never knew that they had a choice. They could interpret their founder with the false premise or without the false premise.If they interpreted Archbishop Lefebvre without the false premise then it would mean that it is possible for the Hindu in Tibet to be saved in his religion.This is hypothetical and known only to God.We do not personally know any such case and can never know such a case in 2013. So it is not an exception to the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.We physically cannot see any such case.

They could then interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise.They would realize that all salvation mentioned in Vatican Council II is known only to God.Always all salvation in Heaven is physically visible only to God. We cannot physically see or personally meet a single such case in 2013 for them to be exceptions to the dogma on salvation. They are not exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 or the traditional Catholic teaching on other religions.So Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma on salvation.

Presently both SSPX groups are making a doctrinal error regarding Vatican Council II, salvation, other religions and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

-Lionel Andrades