Tuesday, March 26, 2013

SSPX replies to yesterday's renewed demand by CDF head for Vatican II acceptance

Vatican City (KNA / The Vatican is expecting in the words of Curial Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller the SSPX to give an unconditional recognition of the Church's teachings.

Every Pope must insist on acceptance of all councils, including the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), the prefect of the CDF, said on Monday to the Catholic News Agency (KNA).

"Anyone who does not recognize them, is not a Catholic," said Müller. If the SSPX wants to return to the union with the Church, the signing of the doctrinal preamble presented by the CDF was a prerequisite.
Archbishop Mueller has asked for this some time ago. On 21 July 2012, he told the Süddeutsche Zeitung that the statements of the Council on freedom of religion, Judaism and human rights had "dogmatic implications" ( reported )

So here again is a brief overview of what the SSPX does not accept of the conciliar attitude.
1) The SSPX recognizes human rights. But it holds: The Church can not rely on the human rights, as they were historically too late in appearance. The Church has maintained the human rights in the form of the 10 Commandments for 2000 years, and when one factors in the time of the divine election of Israel, then for more than 3000 years.

If people would stick to the 10 Commandments, there would be no violence against any people on earth. In addition, the 10 commandments are far more comprehensive, because they involve not only the rights of the people (4th to 10th Commandment), but also the rights of God.

Historically educated people also know that human rights were set up deliberately by the freethinkers of the Enlightenment in opposition to the precepts of the Church. Whoever more accurately viewed the course of history needs to admit that the first human rights of the modern age have been formulated by the Church. The Dominican monk Bartholome de Las Casas uses in 1552 for the first time the word "human rights" in a letter to the Indies Council in defense of the Peruvian natives when dealing with the issue of slavery. He speaks of the principles of the rights of the people and is therefore also historically the actual founder of human rights practice.

Brief exposure: The SSPX recognizes human rights, but wants more: As in the preamble of the German Constitution, she wants "responsibility before God," and thus the commandments of God for an increasingly materialistic and hedonistic society.

Second The SSPX wants real religious freedom. True religious freedom is that no one should, also in a Catholic country, be prevented from his personal choice of faith.

This teaching was not invented by the Council, as many think, but was formulated 750 years ago by Thomas Aquinas in the High Middle Ages. But this refers back already to 1000 years of Christianity, for he quotes Augustine, who articulated true religious freedom for the first time in a simple phrase: "Credere nonnisi volens" - "The act of faith is simply impossible unless it is voluntary" (St. Augustine , In Io tr 26 super 6.44).
SSPX notes, however: The Council is promotes something called "freedom of religion" which is in clear contradiction to constitutional protection in Germany.

German Interior Minister Friedrich is currently active against the Salafists in Germany. The Salafists could nevertheless rely easily on the ill-defined religious freedom of Vatican II: It says "Nor, on the other hand, is he to be restrained from acting in accordance with his conscience, especially in matters religious."(Dignitatis Humanae). The Salafist is convinced in conscience that he complies with the rules of his religion, which commands him in Surah 9:5: "Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters ( wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.)" (Cathcon- I add the whole verse- SSPX just uses the quote outside the brackets)

- The problem remains unresolved by the addition of the council "within due limits" as for the violent Muslim everything allowed Sharia is "within due limits".. Summary: The SSPX is for true religious freedom: There is no compulsion in the personal choice of faith, not even in a Catholic state. However, it is against government indifference which puts violent beliefs on the same level with Christianity.

Third On the question of the position of the SSPX on Judaism, please read: "What is the position of the SSPX on Judaism? " Incidentally, there is a widespread misconception that the Church had announced at the council a separate path to salvation for the Jewish people. The passage of Nostra Aetate speaks clearly of the fact that Jesus' own people would have to recognize him as the Savior:

Nostra Aetate 4
Indeed, the Church believes that by His cross Christ, Our Peace, reconciled Jews and Gentiles. making both one in Himself....
As Holy Scripture testifies, Jerusalem did not recognize the time of her visitation, nor did the Jews in large number, accept the Gospel; indeed not a few opposed its spreading.....
In company with the Prophets and the same Apostle, the Church awaits that day, known to God alone, on which all peoples will address the Lord in a single voice and "serve him shoulder to shoulder" (Soph. 3:9).

Fourth- the SSPX advocates respectful dialogue and dialogue with other religions and philosophies. But what the Council declared as "ecumenism" is basically a form of self-sacrifice of the Catholic Church: All religions of the world have a kind of effectiveness for salvation. In the spirit of free thinkers all worldviews are considered as equal paths for mankind. For every human being has a right to their particular form of religiosity - depending on their culture, their country, their way of life.

This position directly contravenes the First commandment of God: "Hear, O Israel, I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt have no other gods before me." (Ex 20:3) It directly contravenes the Gospel: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved who does not believe will be condemned." (Mark 16:16) and "No one comes to the Father except through me" ( Jn 14.6)

Thus the predecessor of the current Pope, Leo XIII had exactly 111 years ago still the courage to proclaim in public the claim of the Church to be the true religion and the salvation of humanity while now in Rome non- Christian worldviews are shared- rather they should worship the true God :

"Do you want to bring peoples shattered by the fall back to true and full salvation, they must return to the bosom of the one, holy, Catholic and apostolic church. Because the Church alone is the bearer of all Christendom, a very spiritual and perfect society, which is the Mystical Body of Christ and whose visible head is the Bishop of Rome, the successor of the Apostles. She, as the completer of his work and as the dispenser of the salvation entrusted to them, presents the Redeemer of the human race and spreads the Gospel over the earth, and defend it with their blood, and in reliance upon the most sacred promises and the everlasting divine assistance that they will be free from all error in order that the doctrine of Christ will be preserved to the end of times unadulterated. " (Encyclical Annum ingressi sumus , 1902)

The important question is what does Archbishop Müller's calling for an "unconditional recognition of the Church's teaching" mean?

If the recognition of the Catholic Church as the only true religion endowed by God, and the essential belief in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and Savior of all (!) People is meant, then the SSPX will follow with joy the wishes of the Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith.

But so if the free-thinking religion of all religions is meant - in which all regardless of their personal religious beliefs - are saved, then the SSPX will be proud with all the Popes in history, especially with Pope Pius XI. to confess:

".....for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, which is visible to all, and which is to remain, according to the will of its Author, exactly the same as He instituted it. During the lapse of centuries, the mystical Spouse of Christ has never been contaminated, nor can she ever in the future be contaminated, as Cyprian bears witness: "The Bride of Christ cannot be made false to her Spouse: she is incorrupt and modest. " ( Mortalium Animos , Pius XI, 1928.)

These words of Pope Pius XI one can truly quote Archbishop Müller: "Anyone who does not recognize them is not a Catholic."


Cathcon- so far no sign of a fresh approach by the head of the CDF.


Londiniensis said...

I understand that the late Abp Lefebvre signed all the Council documents. Are the SSPX "plus Lefebvriste que Lefebvre"?

Now if they stopped whinging about Vatican II and turned their guns on Bologna, the CDF might even supply the heavy artillery!

Floreat said...

If Londiniensis bothered to read the Council documents and compared the contents to the Church's prior teachings, he might not make such stupid remarks.

As for this news article, claims that it is reporting new news from the Catholic News Agency. If this is the case, why does CNA have no details of the story?

Here's a CNA site search of all news concerning Muller...this story does not appear, so what efforts were made to verify?