Thursday, August 6, 2015

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was doctrinally wrong his spiritual heirs must admit for a reconciliation with the truth

Immagine correlata
Bishop Dolan during an ordination
The same mistake on the sedevacantist Most Holy Trinity seminary website 1 is being made by Pope Francis, the Vatican Curia and the SSPX. This was also the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II by Pope Benedict XVI.He wanted the SSPX to sign a doctrinal preamble which would see Vatican Council II as a break with extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and the Syllabus of Errors.
The SSPX is already using the 1949 Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani  error  as does Pope Francis and Cardinal Muller, to interpret Vatican Council II.The difference is that the SSPX rejects Vatican Council II ( with the Marchetti error) while Pope Francis accepts Vatican Council II (with the Marchetti error used in the interpretation)
The SSPX should go ahead and accept Vatican Council II and clarify that it is without the irrational premise and inference.
They should also clarify that the Holy Office 1949 was wrong since in 2015 they do not know of any exceptions i.e non Catholics who have been saved or will be saved, without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.They cannot name any one who will go to Heaven this year without 'faith and baptism'.
Once they make this clarification then it is to be seen if Pope Francis  and the Vatican Curia will accept Vatican Council II without the irrational interpretation.
The SSPX has simply to announce that they accept Vatican Council II ( without the irrational premise and inference)  and they also accept  the rigorist interpretation of EENS(according to the SSPX General Chapter Statement 2012). Then watch the world wide reaction.
Though, the SSPX would also be saying that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre made the same doctrinal error as Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani.
I don't see the SSPX and sedevacantists saying their teacher made a mistake.
 Archbishop Lefebvre was responsible for the religious formation of Bishop Bernard Fellay the Superior General of the SSPX and also of the now sedevacantists Bishop Donald Sanborn and Fr.Anthony Cekada.
They in turn have passed on Marchetti's reasoning to numerous other Catholic traditionalists and sedevacantists.This was modernism and liberalism among the traditionalists.The heretical trads were accusing the liberals of heresy unaware that they were using the same basic reasoning to interpret Church documents after 1949.
The enemies of the Church are now waiting and watching.They want the SSPX to sign the doctrinal preamble and maintain their present silence.
They are also happy with the sedevacantists since they are intepreting Vatican Council II with Marchetti's irrationality. The sedes are not aware that Vatican Council II affirms the rigorist interpretation of EENS.
 They are happy with Catholics in general  who reject Feeneyism, thinking it is heresy. Catholics do not know that Feeneyism was the official teaching of the Catholic Church for centuries before the Boston Case in the 1940's.The magisterium is not going to tell them this. For political reasons the magisterium will let the error continue.
Have you noticed that over the last few months the Jewish Left media, as if on cue, have not been critcizing the SSPX? The spider is watching as the insect flies closer to its web.
The spiritual heirs of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre can still turn things around.They must identify Marchettis's error which is a factual one. It is not a theological error. The factual error became the basis for a new theology.
They could simply announce that there are no known cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance in 2015.There are no known and living cases of non Catholics referred to in LG 16, UR 3, NA 2 etc.
So Archbishop Lefebvre made a mistake, the common  mistake.He was wrong.Vatican Council II does not contradict the rigorist interpretation of the dogma EENS.
Feeneyism is the official teaching of the Catholic Church according to magisterial  texts, before and after Vatican Council II ( Ad Gentes 7, Lumen Gentium 14, Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257,Dominus Iesus 20, Redemptoris Missio 55 etc).Yet Feeneyism is rejected by the contemporary magisterium and the traditionalists and sedevacantists.
An announcement is needed :-
1. There are no known exceptions to Feeneyism in 2015.
2.  Before 1949 no magisterial document says the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are explicit and so are exceptions to EENS.
3. Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani made a factual error. He did not know of anyone saved outside the Church i.e without faith and baptism.So there was no salvation outside the Catholic Church.
4.Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre accepted the  Cardinal Marchetti Selvaggiani factual error.It is a fact of life that the dead-saved are not visible and known  on earth for them to be exceptions to EENS.
5.There is  nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict Feeneyism.
-Lionel Andrades

Sedevacantist seminary is not aware of superflous passages in Vatican Council II originating from the 1949 Marchetti error

Sedevacantist seminary is not aware of superflous passages in Vatican Council II originating from the 1949 Marchetti error

Bishop Dolan during an ordinationThe sedevacantist Most Holy Trinity seminary,Florida,USA  criticizes Vatican Council II unaware of superflous passages  in the Council, which should not have been placed there.These passages are not exceptions to the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) but they can be misunderstood and misinterpreted.The website of the seminary shows that these passages are misinterpreted.There is a mix up.Since what is invisible is considered visible.Implicit is  seen as being explicit.Hypothetical cases are real. What is explicit for God only is seen as also being explicit for us.
For instance the following passages should not have been placed in Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14.
Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."(17) Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6),..- Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II

Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved...
Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own...- Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II.

These passages are not exceptions to the preceding orthodox passages placed in Vatican Council II. Here are two orthodox passages in Vatican Council II which are in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and the Syllabus of  Errors.

Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.- Ad  Gentes 7

Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church.- Lumen Gentium 14.

These passages on those who are 'inculpably ignorant 'or those 'with an explicit intention to be incorporated' should not have been inserted in Vatican Council II. They are mentioned though, since Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani who issued the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 assumed  there was salvation outside the Church. This Letter sent to the Archbishop of Boston ( who was later active at Vatican Council II)  took it for granted  that the baptism of desire (BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I)  are exceptions  to the dogma EENS.In other words, these cases are explicit. He inferred that they were objective for him in 1949.
This was overlooked by three popes.Over the centuries Church documents only mentioned BOD and I.I, which reason tells us are implicit for us  and known only to God. Since they are not objectively seen, they are not relevant to the dogma EENS which says every one needs to be a formal member of the Church to avoid Hell.
For Cardinal Richard Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston and the Jesuits at Vatican Council II,  these cases were explicit and so they penalised Fr.Leonard Feeney.They had him excommunicated for some 19 years.Even during Vatican Council II they did not lift the excommunication.The liberal Jesuits permanently expelled him.Since for the Jesuits there was known salvation outside the Church even though they personally did not know of any such case i.e someone saved without 'faith and baptism'.They contradicted their founder St.Ignatius of Loyola and the Jesuit missionaries. This was a break with the pre-1949 magisterium of the Church to which Fr.Leonard Feeney was faithful.
The Boston cardinal, the Jesuits and the Holy Office accepted  the error of 1949 and we can see it expressed in so many passages of Vatican Council II.
Here are some:
This is the one Church of Christ which in the Creed is professed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic, (12*) which our Saviour, after His Resurrection, commissioned Peter to shepherd,(74) and him and the other apostles to extend and direct with authority,(75) which He erected for all ages as "the pillar and mainstay of the truth".(76) This Church constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him,(13*) although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure. These elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward catholic unity.-Lumen Gentium 8
11. The Church must be present in these groups through her children, who dwell among them or who are sent to them. For all Christians, wherever they live, are bound to show forth, by the example of their lives and by the witness of the word, that new man put on at baptism and that power of the Holy Spirit by which they have been strengthened at Conformation. Thus other men, observing their good works, can glorify the Father (cf. Matt. ES:16) and can perceive more fully the real meaning of human life and the universal bond of the community of mankind.

In order that they may be able to bear more fruitful witness to Christ, let them be joined to those men by esteem and love; let them acknowledge themselves to be members of the group of men among whom they live; let them share in cultural and social life by the various. undertakings and enterprises of human living; let them be familiar with their national and religious traditions; let them gladly and reverently lay bare the seeds of the Word which lie hidden among their fellows.-Ad Gentes 11
The lines emphasised in the two passages above are based on the irrationality of the 1949 Letter of  Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani to the Archbishop of Boston.These lines must  not be considered as referring to  defacto, objective cases in the present times. There are no objective cases ìn 2015 of non Catholics saved with 'elements of sanctification and of truth' or 'seeds of the Word' and without Catholic Faith with the baptism of water.
So it must not be assumed that Vatican Council II has brought a 'new revelation' in the Church, a 'new doctrine'.When reading Vatican Council II we have to be careful to keep in mind Cardinal Marchetti's  error, his irrational premise ( dead-saved are visible on earth) and inference( they are known exceptions to EENS).Otherwise the Council will emerge as a new revelation, a  revolution in the Church.
Rev. Anthony Cekada
On the seminary webpage Fr.Anthony Cekada considers  the baptism of desire as an exception to EENS and so criticizes Feeneyism.This is an indication that he interprets Vatican Council II as having exceptions to EENS.LG 16, UR 3, NA 2 etc would be explicit for him.So they would be exceptions to the dogma.
Bishop Donald Sanborn on the seminary website has a problem with Lumen Gentium.For him LG 8 ( subsist it) would indicate known persons saved outside the Church.UR 3 would be saying for him that there are Protestants saved without Catholic faith and they are known, explicit cases.So UR 3 would be a break with traditional ecumenism and the dogma EENS.
He is not careful. He does not read Vatican Council II aware of the Cardinal Marchetti error.
For me the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are not explicit in 2015.This is something obvious. LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc  do not refer to known cases, seen in the flesh. This would be obvious to all who reasoned it out.So Vatican Council II does not contradict EENS or the Syllabus of Errors.-Lionel Andrades

Sedevantist seminary Most Holy Trinity's theology uses the irrational premise and inference to interpret Lumen Gentium, Vatican Council II

Most Rev. Donald Sanborn, Fr. Cekada, Fr. Joseph Selway, Fr. Nicolas Désposito, Rev. Julian Larrabee.- ALL SILENT

 New Seminary rendering

There is a mistake on the webpage of the sedevacantist Most Holy Trinity seminary. No one issues a correction/clarification