Saturday, July 30, 2016

What Modesty Means to Me... Darcy-Rea Theriault

SSPX should be protesting : how can grown up men expect them to accept this logic, irrational theology and falsehood

Vatican Confirms: SSPX Will Get Personal Prelature

Vatican Confirms: SSPX Will Get Personal Prelature

The head of Ecclesia Dei has confirmed what was reported by Sunesis Press months ago, viz., the regularization of the SSPX and the creation of a Personal Prelature.  From
CW: Why is a reunion with the SSPX to the Catholic Church so important?
Guido Pozzo:
The Church suffers from any lack of unity. The Society of St. Pius X consists of 600 priests, 200 seminarians, and other members and is represented in 70 countries. Given such a significant reality you can not just turn a blind eye to the situation.
C & W: Recently there was an acceleration of relationships, why?
Pozzo:I would not speak of an acceleration, but by a patient process of rapprochement.  The Vatican is not demanding, insisting on ultimatums, instead we jointly planned some steps to reach full reconciliation. Since the stages were agreed upon, the way is easier to tread. We are still interested in clarifying some doctrinal and canonical questions. It is very important to promote a climate of mutual knowledge and understanding. In this respect, much progress has been made.
1.The SSPX has said that they do not reject  Vatican Council II completely. Bishop Fellay has said that they accept 90% of Vatican Council .
2.They also accept Vatican Council II as a historical event. Archbishop Lefebvre participated in it.
3.The SSPX General Chapter 2012 affirmed the Society's doctrinal position when it said they accept the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with no exceptions.This has been rejected by Ecclesia Dei and the Jewish Left.
So the SSPX should keep these three  points before them  their negotiations and also clarify:-
4.LG 16, LG 8, Ur 3 etc refer to hypothetical cases and so they are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So here they would disagree with the Vatican.

So Vatican Council II would affirm the old ecclesiology.This means they would accept Vatican Council II with an ecumenism of return.AG 7 ad LG 14 says all need faith. All need Catholic Faith which includes the Sacraments and the faith and moral teachings of the Church.

Jews and other non Christians need to formally to enter the Church with 'faith and baptism'. This is the teaching of Vatican Council II based on AG 7 an LG 14.
Since LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refe to hypothetical cases they do not contradict the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS.So all non Catholics need to convert into the Church for salvation, they all need to be formal members of the Church to avoid Hell, according to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus( Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441 etc).


There is the non  separation of Church and state based on the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.There is nothing in Dignitatis Redintigratio to contradict it.So the SSPX could  affirm the Social Reign of Christ the King over all legislation based on the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which is not contradicted by Vatican Council II.

Note that on these three points the SSPX is affirming Vatican Council II and also interpreting an ecumenism of return, an exclusivist ecclesiology and the Socal Reign of Christ the King. This would not be acceptable to the Vatican and the Left but at least they can no more say that they SSPX must accept Vatican Council II interpreted with an irrational premise( LG 16 cases without the baptism of water, are visible) and false conclusion ( these visible cases of BOD etc are exceptions to the dogma EENS, so Vatican Council II contradicts EENS and the Syllabus of Errors).
C & W: What has changed in the attitude of the Vatican since the beginning of the pontificate?
Pozzo: Several new perspectives were integrated. 2009 to 2012 was primarily a theological debate in the foreground.  There were doctrinal difficulties which hindered the canonical recognition of the Fraternity. We know, however, that life is more than doctrine. For through the theological discussion in the past three years we have come to know the desire and understand the reality of the Fraternity. 
C & W: How is this managed?
Pozzo:  If you like, instead of discussions in a lecture hall, now we have a cozy fraternal atmosphere, even though the purpose is the same. On behalf of the Vatican, a cardinal and four bishops attended the seminaries and priories of the Fraternity, and saw for themselves the truth. Nothing like this has happened previously, and of course it helped us to understand one another.
C & W: The Brotherhood has long had extremist members in its ranks, such as Bishop Richard Williamson, who denied the Holocaust.  Did this harm the negotiations?
Pozzo: Monsignor Richard Williamson and other extremists and anti-Roman elements were excluded from the fraternity or separated from her. This of course has aided the discussions.
C & W: What instructions has Pope Francis given to you for the negotiations?
Pozzo: Since August 2013 the Pope has entrusted me as Secretary of the Commission Ecclesia Dei, and he directed me to dialogue with patience, decisiveness and without any rush. He laid particular emphasis on the cultivation of personal relationships in order to create a climate of trust.
C & W: Bergoglio knew the Fraternity from Argentina.How crucial is this personal contact for the Pope?
Pozzo: This is certainly an important element. When he was still Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Pope Francis had contacts with the Fraternity. He saw how much effort they put in evangelization and in charitable work. The Fraternity does not, as is often claimed, only value the traditional liturgy, but also has substantive work.
C & W: Francis always stressed the pastoral aspect. Is this also the key to an understanding with the SSPX?
Pozzo: Pastoral and dogmatic theology are inseparable.
Lionel: Understand that the SSPX can accept Vatican Council II in agreement with the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS as explained above.This would be in accord with the mandate of the General Chapter Meeting 2012.However this would be rejected by the Vatican. Since the Vatican wants the SSPX to accept a Vatican Council II in which LG 16, LG 8 , UR 3 etc refer to physically known cases in 2016 and so Vatican Council II becomes a rupture with Tradition. This has to pointed out to Archbishop Pozzo and this has to be rejected.Since it is heresy.
The style and concrete willingness of Pope Francis to help the unity between the people not only to think but also to learn.
Lionel: Pope Francis is interpreting Vatican Council II assuming that LG 16( being saved in invincible ignorance) refers to known cases of people saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church and so is an example of salvation outside the Church.

This means there are people in Heaven who are known to us human beings who have been saved outside the Church. This is irrational. This is fantasy theology by adult and rational people. Imagine grown ups saying that they can physically see people in Heaven who are exceptions to all needing to enter the Church with faith and baptism. These adults, grown up men, with responsible positions are asking the SSPX to accept all this nonsense and only then they will be granted a personal prelature.The SSPX supporters should be protesting outside the Vatican against this nonsense.
Of course, some gestures are important. He has allowed the Priests of the SSPX to hear confessions of  the faithful, he has received the Superior General of the Fraternity, Monsignor Bernard Fellay in private audience. The rapprochement and resumption of talks was all made possible by the excommunication by Benedict XVI.

 Image result for Photo of Fr.Stefano Manelli at Mass

Lionel: He still has closed down the old seminary of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, Boccea,Rome. The  'crypto Lefebvrists' are not allowed to offer the Traditional Latin Mass  and their founder Fr. Stefano Manelli F.I is being persecuted.They are not allowed to affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in accord with Vatican Council II.The adult and responsible men at the Vatican want the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate to say that LG 16 etc refers to visible cases and so are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus acording to the 16th century missionaries.
C & W: Why is a Personal Prelature appropriate for the SSPX?
Pozzo: That seems to be the appropriate canonical form. Monsignor Fellay has accepted the proposal, even if in the coming months details remain to be clarified. Only Opus Dei currently enjoys this canonical structure, which is a big vote of confidence for the SSPX.
Lionel: The Opus Dei and the Institute of Christ the King have compromised with the Vatican.They have accepted Vatican Council  II (Cushingite) in which LG 16 , LG 8, UR 3 , NA 2 etc refer to known cases of persons saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.This is the reasoning of grown ups, educated men.These  'known cases' even though they are in Heaven,are considered to be visible, physically visible on earth. So they are postulated as examples of salvation outside the visible bounds of the Catholic Church.They are examples of salvation outside the Church.
This convulted logic, philosophical subjectivism and fantasy theology has been accepted by the ecclesiastics at the Vatican.They are now forcing the SSPX and every one else to accept it who want to remain in their version of the Catholic Church.
It is clear that the solution of the canonical form requires the solution of the doctrinal questions.
Lionel: The SSPX should demand that the Vatican explain how can they as adults, rational adults, assume that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance refer to persons personally known in 2016, persons seen in the flesh and whom you can meet on the streets when these theoretical cases are only in Heaven.They can only be hypothetical references for us human beings.The SSPX should be protesting at this Vatican-logic.
-Lionel Andrades

Jewish Left, Vatican interpretation of Vatican Council II is based on bad philosophy and theology : Vox Cantoris can reject it and re interpret Vatican Council II

I interpret Vatican Council II without the irrational premise ( BOD is explicit and known) and non traditional conclusion( BOD is an exception or relevant to EENS,Vatican Council II contradicts EENS).The Jewish Left is forcing the SSPX to accept Vatican Council II with the irrational premise and conclusion.Any priest who does not rubber stamp this irrationality cannot be incardinated in Rome.It is only lay Catholics who can freely talk about it.Priests in Rome are afraid even to say that they physically cannot see any baptism of desire( BOD) or being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) case in the city.
I wrote two pieces over the last two days hoping the lay bloggers in general and Vox Cantoris in particular would understand me.But Vox did not.
The error programmed over 50 years is strong in the minds of the traditionalists.They cannot get rid of it and the contemporary magisterium instead of helping out is really enforcing the illusion for political reasons.
Lay Catholics who want to get past this duplicity simply have to ask where are the BOD and I.I cases today? Since if there are no known cases of BOD and I.I in our reality how can these unknown persons be exceptions to all needing to enter the Church; exceptions to EENS? So if the magisterium says BOD and I.I are exceptions to EENS it is a mistake. If Pope Francis or Pope Pius XII said BOD and I.I are exceptions to EENS it still is a mistake. The Letter of the Holy Ofice 1949 made a mistake and it was a mistake for Vatican Council II to accept and not correct the mistake in the Marchetti Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
Vox Cantoris can still be a traditionalist and affirm that there are is no known case and there cannot be any case, of BOD and I.I in 2016.
He can still attend the Traditional Latin Mass  and affirm that we cannot meet someone on the strees saved with BOD and I.I with or without the baptism of water.
He can still interpret and accept all magisterial documents without the irrationality ( new premise and conclusion).

So traditionalists, and all Catholics can reject the recent joint document issued by the Jewish Left and the Vatican on inter religious dialogue.It was based on irrational philosophy and theology.
It's foundation is philosophical subjectivism.It  assumes BOD and I.I can be known and judged in personal cases.Yet we know that this is impossible for us humans.

Then upon this subjectivism a new theology has been created which says there is known salvation outside the visible Church.There is even the Anonymous Christian it is speculated who is saved without being a formal member of the Catholic Church and this person is personally known, he is saved outside the Church.
This is false theology.We cannot see someone in Heaven or on earth saved without 'faith and baptism'.So there cannot be an exception to the dogma EENS.How can any one claim that there is known salvation outside the Church?
We are not denying BOD and I.I.It it exists it will be known only to God.However we are denying that BOD and I.I is an exception to EENS.That's all.
It is similar to Perfect Contrition.I am not denying that a person can be saved with Perfect Contrition.I am only saying that personally we cannot know of someone saved with Perfect Contrition and without the Sacrament of Confession.So Perfect Contrition cannot be considered an exception to all needing the Sacrament of Penance.
When Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church mention BOD and I.I we accept them as being hypothetical cases.We don't reject BOD and I.I we only reject in principle that hypothetical cases of the BOD and I.I can be explicit in the present times, for them to be exceptions to EENS.BOD was never an exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS.
We do not reject the possibility of someone being saved with BOD or I.I( followed by the baptism of water for me) but we reject that they are examples of salvation outside the Church in the present times, in 2016 in Rome for example.
So BOD and I.I were never relevant to all needing faith and baptism(AG 7, LG 14).
This is what the traditionalists need to understand.
Otherwise the liberals will accuse them of being in schism or being dissenters for not accepting an irrational version of Vatican Council II.They need to understand that Vatican Council II does not contradict EENS if BOD and I.I refer only to hypothetical cases.They must know that the magisterium and the Left have made the mistake.It is a doctrinal mistake.-Lionel Andrades
David Domet a dissenter?