Edit: some people will remember that we predicted this long ago. It remains to be seen how this will work itself out. Some, who are not as good-willed, think this agreement will mean an end to the Society's significance in the media. Seeing as the Society is one of the most healthy societies in the Church today, I can't imagine seeing it shrink in importance, I can only imagine it growing stronger as its seminaries grow and it continues to build new schools, while unhealthy societies continue to retreat and dwindle into insignificance.
This is Rorate's translation of the usual article from Liberal Le Figaro:
Rome and Écône on the verge of reaching an agreement
by Jean-Marie Guénois
The signing of a document establishing the relations between the Holy See and the disciples of Abp. Lefebvre is a matter of days.http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif
Officially, the Vatican awaits the response of Bp. Bernard Fellay, the chief of the Lefebvrists. As soon as it is received in Rome - "it is a matter of days, and no longer of weeks", - it will be immediately examined. If it conforms to expectations, the Holy See will very quickly announce a historic agreement with this group of faithful, known under the name of "integrists".
But unofficially, and with the greatest discretion, emissaries have worked, from both sides, to "reach an agreement". In the past few weeks, the final adjustments have been concluded between Rome and Écône in order to better respond to the demands of "clarifications" asked for by the Vatican last March 16.
Link to Rorate...
Saturday, April 14, 2012
ReplyDeleteLIGHT OF THE WORLD ERROR SHOWS THAT THERE ARE NO REAL DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE VATICAN AND THE SSPX
Once we realize that we cannot telephone or fax someone saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience the problem is resolved.We have to look at Vatican Council II in a different way.
Why cannot all Catholic religious communities Franciscans, Dominicans, Jesuits, Society of St.Pius X etc affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also implicit baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience, the seeds of the Word etc?
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has just to take the first step to resolve the Society of St.Pius X problem by announcing that :
‘the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience, the seeds of the Word etc are known only to God.’
This is obvious! It is a non controversial statement.Other misundestandings will end.
Example, in the following analysis written by John R. T. Lamont expressly for www.chiesa there are four points of seemingly disunity. (1) In reality there is no disunity.
continued
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/light-of-world-error-shows-that-there.html#links
continued
ReplyDelete1.
John R. T. Lamont "The doctrine on religious liberty, as it is expressed in no. 2 of the Declaration 'Dignitatis humanae,' contradicts the teachings of Gregory XVI in 'Mirari vos' and of Pius IX in 'Quanta cura' as well as those of Pope Leo XIII in 'Immortale Dei' and those of Pope Pius XI in 'Quas primas.'
Lionel:
N.13 Mirari Vos states :'Now We consider another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained…'
Vatican Council II does not opppose the encyclical of Pope Gregory XVI (1832) on this point of religious indifferentism. Since Ad Gentes 7 states all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation (to avoid Hell).This is the same teaching as the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. There are no known exceptions to this teaching since we do not know any case on earth of a non Catholic saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience(LG 16). We accept the possibility of a non Catholic being saved in invicible ignorance but just like the Church Fathers, popes, Councils and saints we do not claim that there are defacto known cases. Vatican Council II also does not make this claim.So the Vatican Council II text does not promote religious indifferentism.
14 Mirari Vos . 'This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone.'
Note well that it is the religious indifferentism which gives rise 'to claims of liberty of conscience' which 'must be maintained for everyone.'
Once we are clear that outside the church there is no salvation and there are no known exceptions (AG 7,LG 14) and that Catholics are 'the new people of God '(NA 4) we realize that everyone is physically free (according to the present laws in many countries) to defacto follow their conscience.However in principle (de jure) every one on earth needs to be a Catholic for salvation(to avoid Hell) according to Vatican Council II (AG 7).
So we accept the Social Reign of Jesus Christ, that Jesus must be the centre of all political and social institions. In principle we hold this belief and in this manner interpret Dignitatis Humane 2.i.e outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation and we have the liberty of conscience to express this ancient teaching ,in principle, while ackowledging that many political states in the present times permit a person to follow his conscience while other countries do not (Islamic,Communist etc).
Vatican Council II states that a non Catholic is free to follow his conscience in the sense that God also leaves us free to follow our conscience good or bad.The Council does not say that we have an obligation to follow evil and a bad conscience.Much of the Council’s writing is positive and orients us towards God and a good conscience. So this is what we need to emphasize.Everyone knows what is good in their heart and we should follow it, we follow the natural law and the teaching of a good conscience. We reject the teaching of a bad conscience and no where does Vatican Council II state that we must follow a bad conscience.
continued
continued
ReplyDelete2.
John R. T. Lamont "The doctrine on the Church, as it is expressed in no. 8 of the Constitution 'Lumen gentium,' contradicts the teachings of Pope Pius XII in 'Mystici corporis' and 'Humani generis.'
Lionel:
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has clarified that the Church of Christ is the Catholic Church (subsistit it).
When Lumen Gentium 8 refers to ‘elements of sanctifciation’ we accept it as a possibility. Only God can know who is saved with elements of sanctification. Since we cannot judge these cases on earth it does not contradict the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
3.
John R. T. Lamont
"The doctrine on ecumenism, as it is expressed in no. 8 of 'Lumen gentium' and no. 3 of the Decree 'Unitatis redintegratio,' contradicts the teachings of Pope Pius IX in propositions 16 and 17 of the 'Syllabus,' those of Leo XIII in 'Satis cognitum,' and those of Pope Pius XI in 'Mortalium animos.'
Lionel:
Unitatis redintegratio n.3 like Lumen Gentium 8 refers to goodness and sanctification which can be founded among Christians. We accept that a Protestant or Orthodox Christian can be saved ‘in certain circumstances’(Letter of the Holy Office 1949) and it will be known only to God. The ordinary means of salvation is Catholic Faith and the baptism of water (AG 7).All Christians need Catholic Faith for salvation (to avoid Hell) (AG 7).So there is no contradiction between UR 3,LG 8 and ‘the dogma’, which Pope Pius XII called an an ‘infallible’statement.(Letter of the Holy Office 1949). The dogma on extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Cantate Domino, Council of Florence states Jews, heretics (Protestants) and schismatics (Orthodox Christians) need to convert into the Church to avoid the fires of Hell.
4.
John R. T. Lamont
"The doctrine on collegiality, as it is expressed in no. 22 of the Constitution 'Lumen gentium,' including no. 3 of the 'Nota praevia' [Explanatory Note], contradicts the teachings of the First Vatican Council on the uniqueness of the subject of supreme power in the Church, in the Constitution 'Pastor aeternus'."
Lionel:
‘All men are called to this union with Christ, who is the light of the world, from whom we go forth, through whom we live, and toward whom our whole life strains.’-Lumen Gentium 3. Yes, as Dominus Iesus 20 says Jesus died for all men and salvation is open to all, it is universal, however to receive it, all need to respond by entering the Church; the Church is necessary. The ordinary means of salvation is the Catholic Church.(AG 7, Redemptoris Missio 55 etc). So there is no contradiction between the First and Second Vatican Council II on this issue. Similarly collegiality as expressed in LG 22 does not conflict with the Church teaching that ‘submission to the Catholic Church and to the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.’(Letter of the Holy Office 1949).
-Lionel Andrades
continued
1.
http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1350219?eng=y
_______________________________________________
continued
ReplyDeleteFriday, April 13, 2012
'Light of the World' p.107 expresses Pope Benedict’s personal opinion or is the ordinary magisterium: the pope wrongly assumes those saved in invincible ignorance are known exceptions to the dogma and the SSPX position on ecumenism and non Catholic religions
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/light-of-world-p107-expresses-pope.html
Friday, April 13, 2012
So would the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican excommunicate me when I say I reject the liberal interpretation of Vatican Council II but accept Vatican Council II according to Tradition and a continuation with the defined dogma ? I can accept the SSPX's position on other religions as being the teaching of Vatican Council II.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/so-would-congregation-for-doctrine-of.html
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
HOLY FATHER ASSUMES THOSE SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE ARE KNOWN TO US: CONTRADICTS VATICAN COUNCIL I AND II
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/holy-father-assumes-those-saved-in.html
The reason Archbishop Lefebvre went ahead with the consecration of the bishops is because he saw a very bad sign from JPII going to Assisi. Since then we have had an Assisi 3. If one understand the crisis in the RCC and prophecy of the darkness of it from Our Lady of Fatima, Akita, LaSalette, etc. they would know like Our Lord warned that there are wolves in sheep's clothing within that have undermined the church before, during, and after VII. As Fr. Kramer's excellent books show, the Novus Ordo is leading catholics into the one world church of antichrist and the false prophet will be one of our own who will apostasize from the faith. We are now living through the apostasy as foretold in the Bible. Many holy priests like Fr. John O'Connor became independent because they upheld the faith before VII so we pray the SSPX doesn't compromise the faith and fail to speak out about the errors of Vatican II.
ReplyDeleteVATICAN COUNCIL II IS IN AGREEMENT WITH THE SSPX POSITION ON RELIGIOUS LIBERTY, ECUMENISM AND OTHER RELIGIONS
ReplyDeleteThe Society of St.Pius X(SSPX) has criticized the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) recent document on religious liberty.Here is the text of their review with brief comments.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/vatican-council-ii-is-in-agreement-with.html