SSPX (Italy) priests accept Vatican Council II as a happening and interpret it according to Tradition

It is the responsibility of the CDF and Ecclesia Dei to comment on their being no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which is the basis of the tension over Vatican Councl II.

 

Recently Fr.John Zuhlsdorf said that we could attend a Mass of the Society of St.Pius X(SSPX), it was valid.He has now made a correction in that report.

Bishop Bernard Fellay , it must be noted, accepts Vatican Council II as an event, a happening, a reality.The SSPX has clarified this quite a few times.The bishop  however rejects the interpretation of Vatican Council II.

Meanwhile there are SSPX Italian priests who interpret the text of Vatican Council II, in line with Tradition.For them the Council, according to the text, is in agreement with the Syllabus of Errors and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So the Council is not a rupture with Tradition, according to the text.

These priests however because of obedience  to their superiors still say that the Council is a break with Tradition and they will not provide any reference text to support this view. It is true that the Council is a break with Tradition when interpreted with Cushingism. Econe, the SSPX Headquarters, is familiar with only  Cushingism.They are not aware that the Council can be interpreted with Feeneyism.

The SSPX priests with whom I have spoken to in Rome do not make a distinction in public between Vatican Council II according to the text and Vatican Council II according to their superiors.

So in Rome we have priests who accept Vatican Council II as a happening (and this is also the formal position of Econe) and  who interpret the text of the Council, according to Tradition.

The Vatican Curia accepts the Council as a happening but interprets it with Cushingism i.e that there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so the Council is a break with Tradition.

So there still is no unity  in the Church on this subject since the Vatican and  Econe are using irrational Cushingism. The Vatican Curia welcomes the result of the Cushing interpretation of the Council  and the SSPX rejects it.

The difference in the interpretaion of the Council according to the SSPX priests to whom I have spoken to and the Vatican(CDF/Ecclesia Dei) is the difference between Cushingism and Feeneyism, the dead-saved are visible to us or the dead-saved in invincible ignorance etc are not visible to us on earth.

 

On such an irrational, un-real subject( being able to see the dead) there is so much of confusion on Vatican Council II among literate adults.

According to Fr.Gabriel, who offered the Traditional Latin Mass yesterday, Mission Sunday, at the SSPX chapel in Rome, there are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So even if someone says there is a known exception this year, he would reject it.

Fr.Gabriel said that he also interprets the Nicene Creed, "I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin" as referring to not three known baptisms but one known baptism, the baptism of water.

 

So here we have SSPX  priests, including the SSPX Prior  Fr.Aldo Rossi accepting Vatican Council II as a happening and interpreting it in agreement with Tradition and in disagreement with the interpretation of the Vatican.

It is the responsibilitty of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and Ecclesia Dei to comment on this Rome happening.Probably for political reasons the CDF is silent.

The SSPX is not at fault, at least not the priests to whom I have spoken to. They accept Vatican Council II as a happening, a historical  event and  they interpret it in accord with the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church and the Syllabus of Errors.

The issue now is will the CDF accept the SSPX priests interpretation of Vatican Council II.A Council in agreement with traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors.

-Lionel Andrades