Wednesday, January 13, 2016

The basic error of the traditionalists and sedevacantists in the interpretation of Vatican Council II : the reason many have chosen sedevacantism is not being discussed


Image result for Photo of Fr.Francois Laisney

Fr.Francois Laisney has written a review for the controversial book True or False Pope by  John Salza and Robert Siscoe.There was a review recently in Italian at Correspondenza Romano of Roberto de Mattei.Now Rorate Caeli has another promo. All the SSPX forums are not addressing the basic error of the traditionalists and sedevacantists in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and which is the reason many have chosen sedevacantism.
Nor are they discussing if Vatican Council II can be interpreted with Feeneyism and then the Council would emerge traditional with the old ecclesiology. This would mean Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops made a mistake all these years on the interpretation of Vatican Council.
True or False Pope - Refuting Sedevacantism and Other Modern Errors


By Fr. Francois Laisney (SSPX):

I have read the whole book – much to my satisfaction. This book addresses each and every argument of sedevacantists, and adequately refutes it! The arguments are solid and cogent.  
Lionel:
Fr. Francois Laisney like the sedevacantists and the authors of this book assumes that the baptism  of desire refers to visible cases in the present times and so is an explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). How can people in Heaven be explicit on earth? And if they are not visible how can they be exceptions to the old ecclesiology 
So for all of them, pro-SSPX, Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance) is an exception to the strict interpretation of the dogma. This was the position of Archbishop Lefebvre  too.
So they all reject Vatican Council II as a break with EENS and the old ecclesiology.The sedevacantists chose to go into sedevacantism because of this error while the SSPX priests vaguely say they reject Vatican Council II but accept Pope Francis.
For me Lumen Gentium 16 refers to an invisible and not a visible case and so it is not an explicit exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma, with the traditional ecclesiology.
__________________
One of the authors is an attorney, who by his professional training is used to strict reasoning, and both authors employ this strict and logical reasoning throughout the book. 
Lionel:
It is not logical reasoning to assume people in Heaven are visible on earth who are explicit exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Church for salvation. It is irrational to assume there are known baptism of desire cases, who are saved without the baptism of water.
It is also irrational to infer that a saint in the past is a visible exception in 2016 to all needing to be 'card carrying members ' of the Church for salvation.
Yet this was the reasoning of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which was accepted by Fr. Francois Laisney, the authors of the book and the SSPX bishops.
__________________

Image result for Photo Bishop bernard Fellay
Their honesty and thoroughness is a great value for this book.
Lionel:
It has been many years now. I have been writing on this same subject. I have addressed Fr. Francois Laisney so many times. He has never responded. He has not said that there are no known cases of the baptism of desire and so physically the baptism of desire cannot be a known exception to all needing to formally enter the Church for salvation.
He could not say that this was his false reasoning in the book he wrote against Fr.Leonard Feeney.
_____________________
Image result for Photo False Premise
 It is a very thorough and very well documented book, solidly grounded in the doctrine of the Magisterium of all times and of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, as well as Catholic theologians.
Lionel:
This is false.
The authors of the book, like Fr. Laisney use an irrational premise and inference to interpret magisterial documents as do the sedevacantists.
Integrity would mean having to say that there can be another interpretation of Vatican Council II, a rational one and the conclusion would be traditional.
______________________
Related image
Given the fact that, at the root of sedevacantism, there is often pride, even such solid arguments still need much prayer in order to obtain the light of grace touching their heart and souls, so that with this grace they will be able to correct themselves.
Lionel:
The root of their sedevacantism is interpreting Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition.They do this by using an irrational premise and inference.So they produce a non traditional conclusion.
______________________

Related image
 This is indeed the first goal of this book, to help many of them to correct their erroneous position, a position that puts their own faith in great danger and ultimately their eternal salvation. So we pray that this excellent book have many good fruits of conversions.
Lionel:
We can also hope that all associated with this book, in the SSPX, religious and laypersons, will be honest and admit that they interpreted Vatican Council II with a factual error.
______________________
Image result for Photo False Premise
Yet this book is useful for others. First it is highly useful to those who might be tempted by sedevacantism, in order to enable them to reject it right away for its many flaws.
 Secondly it is of great help for all Catholics in general, to help them understand better the present crisis of the Church, and the true Traditional position. It will remain the reference book on sedevacantism for many years to come.
Lionel:
The book is being recommended by those who have made a mistake in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents and will not comment upon it.
-Lionel Andrades

REMNANT NEWSPAPER LIKE FR. FRANCOIS LAISNEY ALSO SEES 'THE GHOSTS' http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/11/remnant-newspaper-like-fr-francois.html


Fr. Francois Laisney indicates that for the SSPX the Church is no more ecclesiocentric since there are explicit exceptions to the dogma on salvation
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/fr-francois-laisney-indicates-that-for.html#links


Fr. Francois Laisney, Fr. Peter Scott like Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J is saying that the Catholic Church is no more Exclusivist ecclesiocentric: SSPX priests and liberals agree that there are explicit exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma outside the church no salvation
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/fr-francois-laisney-fr-peter-scott-like.html

SSPX SELLS HERETICAL BOOK BASED ON THE IRRATIONALITY OF THE DEAD MAN WALKING THEORY

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/12/sspx-sells-heretical-book-based-on.html

DOCTRINAL ERROR OF ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE AND SSPX BISHOPS POSTED A NEW ON U.S WEBSITE

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/12/doctrinal-error-of-archbishop-lefebvre.html


SSPX(USA): it's an issue of integrity

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/07/sspxusa-its-issue-of-integrity.html

The Council of Trent, Mystici Corporis no where says that these cases are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus : Rome made a mistake in 1949 http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/the-council-of-trent-mystici-corporis.html
Remnant newspaper and Fr.Francois Laisney (SSPX) contradict the General Chapter Statement 2012 which said there are no exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/09/remnant-newspaper-and-frfrancois.html

Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) still assumes on its USA website that the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/01/society-of-stpius-x-sspx-still-assumes.html

Where does the SSPX say there are defacto exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus ? Here it is : it's irrational

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/07/where-does-sspx-say-there-are-defacto.html

If the 'magisterium' of 1949 inferred Catholics could see the dead it was an objective error

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/if-magisterium-of-1949-inferred.html


Lady at SSPX chapel does not know how to handle this
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/lady-at-sspx-chapel-does-not-know-how.html

Bishop Bernard Fellay could check the non traditional, irrational errors in SSPX books http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/10/bishop-bernard-fellay-could-check-non.html


Roberto Mattei accepts this invisible-visible distinction made by the contemporary magisterium. It is not irrational for him.It is not heretical. Since he uses this same reasoning to interpret Vatican Council II
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/roberto-mattei-accepts-this-invisible.html

TO INTERPRET IMPLICIT FAITH (BAPTISM OF DESIRE ETC) AS REFERRING TO DE FACTO SALVATION WOULD BE HERESY- Don Massimiliano dei Gaspari F.I, Superior and Italian priest in Romehttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2010/04/to-interpret-implicit-faith-baptism

No comments: