SSPX YOUR DOCTRINAL MIRACLE HAS COME THROUGH FROM OUR LADY

Your rosary bouquets and prayers have been answered.

Bishop Bernard Fellay had once said that it would take a miracle to reconcile the SSPX's doctrinal differences with the Vatican. He called for prayers.

Bishop Richard Williamson said it was impossible for the SSPX to reconcile its doctrinal differences with the Vatican.

The SSPX's prayers have been answered and Our Lady has intervened.

You will not have to ask any one for the right to criticize the Council. Vatican Council II can only be accepted as traditional.

-Lionel Andrades
Feast of Our Lady, Mother of God.

THE PREFECTS OF THE CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH WHO OVERLOOKED THE CLAIM OF THERE BEING KNOWN EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/01/the-prefects-of-congregation-for.html#links

RECONCILIATION OF THE SOCIETY OF ST.PIUS X (SSPX) IS NOW POSSIBLE

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/01/reconciliation-of-sspx-is-now-possible.html

ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE DID NOT POINT OUT THE VISIBLE-DEAD ERROR TO CARDINAL OTTAVIANI NEITHER DID THEY MAKE IT KNOWN

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/12/archbishop-lefebvre-did-not-point-out.html

THE PREFECTS OF THE CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH WHO OVERLOOKED THE CLAIM OF THERE BEING KNOWN EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA

They assumed that implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance were known to us in the present times and so contradicted extra ecclesiam nulla salus.There was no apology issued to the communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney.There is still no correction of the error on Wikipedia, many encylopedias and in the secular media.EWTN, Catholic Answers and religious communities repeat this error.

Francesco Marchetti-Selvaggiani

(April 30, 1939-January 13, 1951)

He issued the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII. If he assumed that implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance were exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, he made an objective mistake.

Giuseppe Pizzardo (February 16, 1951-October 12, 1959)

Alfredo Ottaviani (November 7, 1959– December 7, 1965, when he was made Pro-Prefect)

The excommunication of Fr.Leonard Feeney was underway. He never stated that implicit desire and invincible ignorance were irrelevant to the literal interpretation of the dogma by Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Vatican Council II concluded and he still did not say that LG 16 etc were not exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Franjo Šeper (January 8, 1968 - November 25, 1981) (his retirement)

The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) was created in 1970 and its bishops assumed, like Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, there were known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The SSPX held the same position on this issue as the progressives. There was no correction from the CDF Prefect.

Joseph Ratzinger (November 25, 1981 - April 2, 2005) (Pope John Paul II's death) - elected Pope Benedict XVI

-same as above-

Cardinal Ratzinger overlooked implicit desire being irrelevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. He could have assumed that these cases were exceptions to the dogma.

For Fr.Hans Kung s.j, these cases were exceptions to the dogma.So for Fr.Kung the pope was no more infallible. Vatican Council II (LG 16, invincible ignorance etc) contradicted the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441 etc).

Fr.Hans Kung mentioned  this in his earlier books. There was no clarification from the CDF.Fr.Kung is still allowed to offer Holy Mass.

William Levada (May 13, 2005 – July 2, 2012) (his retirement)

-same as above-

Gerhard Ludwig Müller (July 2, 2012 – present)

Archbishop Muller is relatively new in his office.However all these years, he too, just took it for granted that invincible ignorance is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.(See interview with the National Catholic Register).  

-Lionel Andrades

RECONCILIATION OF THE SOCIETY OF ST.PIUS X (SSPX) IS NOW POSSIBLE

Neither did Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani or Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre protest when it was assumed that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance were exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

They allowed the world to say, in the Fr.Leonard Feeney case, that the Catholic Church has changed its traditional teaching on salvation.

Since then the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church is interpreted irrationally. Young religious in formation are being told 'its a mystery' ( and a new one!).

Now that we know that the dead saved with the baptism of desire etc are not exceptions, to the dogma on salvation we have  'solved the mystery'.The reconciliation of the SSPX is now possible. It seems simple.A few announcements have to be made by the Vatican or the SSPX itself.

 

The CDF Prefect seems to understand the problem. A clue was his saying that all need to interpret Vatican Council II according to Tradition otherwise it is heretical.

Simple announcements would be:-

1. Fr.Leonard Feeney was not excommunicated for heresy and invincible ignorance cases are not visible. So they are not exceptions to his literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

2. It is irrational to assume that those saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience(LG 16) are exceptions to all needing Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation (AG 7).So Vatican Council II does not contradict itself.

3.Implicit salvation(seeds of the word, imperfect communion with the church etc) are known only to God.These cases are not exceptions to the traditional teaching on other religions and ecumenism.

4. There can be a rational or irrational interpretation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. We do not know personally any case of a non Catholic saved through Jesus and the Church.So though these cases are accepted in principle as possibilities,they are not exceptions to the traditional teaching on other religions and the ecumenism of return.

Once these concepts are understood by Catholics at large, the SSPX would have to review its position on other religions, ecumenism and religious liberty with reference to Vatican Council II.

Since there are no exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus there is no basis for ' a development of doctrine' on these three issues.

There is no known salvation outside the church so there is no basis for the theology of religions, ecclesiology of communion and an ecumenism of non return.

The book Documenti,with collected theological papers, published by the International Theological Commission with the approval of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican makes this error. It assumes there is known salvation outside the Church. A correction or retraction of the two ITC papers in Documenti is needed.

Non traditionalists cannot cite any reference in the Council to support their irrational opinions.Vatican Council II is traditional. It is in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus , the Syllabus of Errors and the Social Reign of Christ the King.-Lionel Andrades

ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE DID NOT POINT OUT THE VISIBLE-DEAD ERROR TO CARDINAL OTTAVIANI NEITHER DID THEY MAKE IT KNOWN

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/12/archbishop-lefebvre-did-not-point-out.html

SSPX NEVER BROUGHT SCHONBORN'S ERROR TO THE ATTENTION OF CDF PREFECTS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/12/sspx-never-brought-schonborns-error-to.html

ARCHBISHOP MARCEL LEFEBVRE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE FALSE PREMISE ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/12/archbishop-marcel-lefebvre-was-not.html