Pages

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

Cardinal Archbishop wants his seminary run by the SSPX

Reactions 
Kardinal Ranjith will sein Priesterseminar der Piusbruderschaft übergeben › Katholisches:
he Archbishop of Colombo, Albert Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith Patabedinge would be ready to entrust the management and training of the seminarians of his Archdiocese to the SSPX. Such a step, according to the Cardinal would be possible if the SSPX is accepted and canonically erected. The The Cardinal expects this project to improve training of future priests. The reports come from the Roman Rite website Messa in latino.

The District Superior of the SSPX in the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg, Father Benoît Waillez made this known in a sermon last Sunday. He stressed that the motives, concerns and arguments of tradition begin to spread in the Catholic Church.

Cardinal Ranjith Patabedinge was appointed by the Pope as Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments of the Roman Curia. Since June 2009 he is the Archbishop of Colombo in Sri Lanka and was made Cardinal in November 2010.

11 comments:

David L Alexander said...

I'd wait a few years and see how things develop before sending recruiters to Econe. Otherwise you'll be trading one set of problems for another.

Catholic Mission said...

Thursday, May 17, 2012
Pope Benedict XVI has rejected Vatican Council II (AG 7) in Light of the World p.107: Also Cardinals Bertone, Bagnasco, Koch and Ladaria. Yet three SSPX bishops could be excommunicated for only ‘saying’ they reject the Council

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone,Vatican Secretary of State says Jews do not have to convert in the present times in a Letter to the Chief Rabbinate of Israel. This contradicts Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II.

Cardinal Bagnasco ,President of the Italian Bishops Conference, in an official directive says Jews do not have to convert. He contradicts Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II which says all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.

Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,Vatican assumes invincible ignorance and being saved with a good conscience (LG 16) are explicitly known exceptions to AG 7, Vatican Council II.

Cardinal Kurt Koch, President of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity and relations with the Jews, rejects the SSPX position on Judaism and ecumenism. He contradicts AG 7 which indicates all people, Orthodox Christians and Protestants too, need Catholic Faith for salvation.

The pope and his Curia have accepted these heretical positions under pressure from Talmud Jews. Newspapers have reported threats from the Chief Rabbinate of Israel.

Now they are trying to thrust it upon the SSPX bishops with threats of excommunication. They themelf in reality do not accept Vatican Council II.
continued

Catholic Mission said...

continued

Bishop Richard Williamson and the other SSPX bishops are in agreement with AG 7, Vatican Council II on ecumenism, Judaism and other religions. They only ‘say’ they reject Vatican Council II when in reality their traditional Catholic values are those of Vatican Council II. They do reject the Koch-Ladaria version of Vatican Council II which is a break from tradition with their explicitly known invincible ignorance, a good conscience etc.

Pope Benedict XVI in Light of the World (Ignatius p.107) has repeated that Jews do not have to convert in the present times. This is contrary to Vatican Council II, the Nicene Creed (‘I believe in one baptism…), the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Bible (John 3:5, Mk.16:16 etc).

In his ‘one channel’ of salvation (p.107) Pope Benedict XVI suggests those who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church. This is fine. However he is implying every one does not have to convert into the Church for salvation. Since he assumes that those saved in invincible ignorance and a good conscience (LG 16) are know to us and so are exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and to AG 7, Vatican Council II.
continued

Catholic Mission said...

continued
Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J says that the Church no more teaches an ecclesiocentric ecclesiology or the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Since Pope Pius XII in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 corrected Fr. Leonard Feeney.(Christianity and the World Religions 1997,ITC). If Pope Pius XIII or the cardinals believed that the baptism of desire was an explicit exception to the dogma, then they obviously made an objective, factual error. The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 however, Cardinal Ladaria does not admit, supported Fr. Leonard Feeney in the first pragagraphs. It refers to ‘the dogma’, ‘the infallible teaching’. The text of the dogma a, addressed to the Archbishop of Boston, indicates all Jews in Boston, and the rest of he world, need to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid the pains of Hell.

This is also the message of Vatican Council II but no one from the Vatican Curia admits it in public, Instead they want to axe the three SSPX bishops.
-Lionel Andrades
___________________________________

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,Vatican Council II.

Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16

Wednesday, May 16, 2012
CONFUSED CDF MEETS TODAY
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/05/confused-cdf-meets-today.html#links

Tuesday, May 15, 2012
CATHOLICS COULD CONDUCT AN EDUCATION CAMPAIGN OUTSIDE GERMAN EMBASSIES SAYING : ‘Don’t tell us how to interpret Vatican Council II.Neither tells us our faith and what we should believe in !’
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/05/catholics-could-conduct-education.html

Frank Carleton said...

This attitude on the part of a Cardinal Archbishop may prove to be significant.
If the episcopate begins to break ranks on the "dreaded" Society of St. Pius X e.g. offer churches to the Society we may begin to see the much desired end of the heroic, glorious and ever invincible post Vatican II era and an end to bishops who enunciate platitudinous drivel in lieu of the Catholic Faith

Catholic Mission said...

SSPX’S BASIC PROBLEM IS ECCLESIOLOGY

Vatican Council II is ecclesiocentric since those saved with the seeds of the Word, in imperfect communion, a good conscience … are not known to us on earth.
In the Vatican-SSPX talks Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J and Bishop Charles Morerod O.P rejected the ecclesiocentric model. Since they assumed, and the SSPX agreed, that the baptism of desire etc were explicit. So for them there were exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) did not realize the common error at that time or they could have called for a correction in the two theological papers of the International Theological Commission.(1) The President and Secretary of the ITC were Fr. Luiz Ladaria S.J and Fr.Charles Morerod O.P.(2)

Even the SSPX bishops accepted this new doctrine and assumed that Lumen Gentium 16 was a contradiction of the traditional teaching on other religions and ecumenism.

A new liberal understanding of Church (ecclesiology) emerged and Vatican Council II a traditionalist Council was given liberal interpretations.
continued

Catholic Mission said...

continued
The religious communities of Fr. Leonard Feeney in the USA who hold the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and reject the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are criticized. Critics include the SSPX.

So the basic problem of the SSPX with regard to Vatican Council II is ecclesiology. They need to see the ecclesiology of the Council is as traditional (AG 7). (3)

The SSPX can affirm traditional ecclesiology with the literal interpretation of the dogma outside the church no salvation and also implicit baptism of desire, known only to God. In fact all religious communities can accept the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus along with implicit baptism of desire. This is the interpretation of the Church Fathers, Church Councils, popes, saints, Catechisms and Vatican Council I and II.

If the Vatican faults the SSPX it would be an error since over time the theological and doctrinal implications of this issue will be known to Catholics. The SSPX could make things easier for the Vatican and acknowledge in the public the Richard Cushing Error. They also need to remove WebPages (‘three baptisms’ etc) which criticize Fr. Leonard Feeney and assume there are three forms of baptism-all explicit.
-Lionel Andrades

1.

10. Exclusivist ecclesiocentrism—the fruit of a specific theological system or of a mistaken understanding of the phrase extra ecclesiam nulla salus—is no longer defended by Catholic theologians after the clear statements of Pius XII and Vatican Council II on the possibility of salvation for those who do not belong visibly to the Church (cf, e.g., LG 16; GS 22).-International Theological Commission, Christianity and the World Religions 1997.

continued

Catholic Mission said...

continued
1.

10. Exclusivist ecclesiocentrism—the fruit of a specific theological system or of a mistaken understanding of the phrase extra ecclesiam nulla salus—is no longer defended by Catholic theologians after the clear statements of Pius XII and Vatican Council II on the possibility of salvation for those who do not belong visibly to the Church (cf, e.g., LG 16; GS 22).-International Theological Commission, Christianity and the World Religions 1997.

62…A theological evaluation of the religions was impeded over a long time because of the principle extra ecclesiam nulla salus, understood in an exclusivist sense.- Christianity and the World Religions.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_1997_cristianesimo-religioni_en.html

58. In the face of new problems and situations and of an exclusive interpretation of the adage: “salus extra ecclesiam non est”the magisterium, in recent times, has articulated a more nuanced understanding as to the manner in which a saving relationship with the Church can be realized. The Allocution of Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quadam (1854) clearly states the issues involved: “It must, of course, be held as a matter of faith that outside the apostolic Roman Church no one can be saved, that the Church is the only ark of salvation, and that whoever does not enter it, will perish in the flood. On the other hand, it must likewise be held as certain that those who live in ignorance of the true religion, if such ignorance be invincible, are not subject to any guilt in this matter before the eyes of the Lord”.

59. The Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston (1949) offers further specifications. “To gain eternal salvation, it is not always required that a person be incorporated in reality (reapse) as a member of the Church, but it is necessary that one belong to it at least in desire and longing (voto et desiderio). It is not always necessary that this desire be explicit as it is with catechumens. When one is invincibly ignorant, God also accepts an implicit desire, so called because it is contained in the good disposition of soul by which a person wants his or her will to be conformed to God’s will”.-The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without Baptism-2007 ITC.
(http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_index-doc-pubbl_en.html )
continued

Catholic Mission said...

continued
2.

Cardinal Luis Ladaria S.J Secretary Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith does away with the defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Limbo and Original Sin in the International Theological Commission position papers: CDF expects the Society of St.Pius X to accept all this
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/03/cardinal-luis-ladaria-sj-secretary.html

International Theological Commission (ITC) makes an objective, factual error in two of its published documents. Could they also be wrong about Limbo?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/03/international-theological-commission_2687.html

VATICAN'S INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MAKES AN ERROR IN ITS POSITION PAPER CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/03/vaticans-international-theological.html#links

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION USES PREMISE THAT IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT : LIMBO
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/03/international-theological-commission_29.html


The International Theological Commission's position paper Christianity and the World Religions 1997 has an objective factual error and is approved by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger : invincible ignorance is not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/03/international-theological-commissions.html

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION ASSUMES ‘SEEDS OF THE WORD’ (VATICAN COUNCIL II ) IN OTHER RELIGIONS ARE KNOWN TO US AND THIS IS AN EXPLICIT EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/03/international-theological-commission.html

VATICAN'S INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION MAKES AN ERROR IN ITS POSITION PAPER CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/03/vaticans-international-theological.html

VATICAN COUNCIL II REJECTS THE THEOLOGY OF RELIGIONS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/03/vatican-council-ii-rejects-theology-of.html

Former Secretary of the International Theological Commission holds that those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance are known to us and so an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/02/secretary-of-international-theological.html#links


3.
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,Vatican Council II.

Nostra Aetate does not contradict Ad Gentes 7
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/05/nostra-aetate-does-not-contradict-ad.html#links

Paul said...

By denying the possiblity of salvation for those who are not baptised, the Lefebvrists are roundly implying that Jesus was lying, when he described the Last Judgment in Mattheww's Gospel.

Elsewhere, Christ stressed the imperative need for baptism, but quite the contrary in that sole description of the Last Judgment, itself, in the whole of Judaeo-Christian scripture. And we (not to mention Vatican II) are talking specifically about the Last Judgment in its own context, the discursive description of it by Christ.

Moreover, it must always be born in mind in such controversies that Jesus always spoke in extreme terms.

Obviously for the best of reasons, since we never cease in our quest for the thin end of a wedge, our inclination to water down his fundamental message, to backslide and rationalise our luke-warmness.

When he actually decribed the Last Judgment he evidently felt it was time to stress the REAL 'bottom line' in his Gospel teachings, namely, that self-sacrificing love, charity, is the fulness of the law.

Formal religious commitment is an aid, a priceless aid, like the scripture and tradition that informs it, but it is not a 'sine qua non'. Love, alone, is the sine qua non.

Had Vatican II taken place and been embraced in the twenties, the fascist regimes in Europe would would almost certainly not risen to power. Nor, evidently, those in the Americas, either.

Catholic Mission said...

WHEN WILL THE BISHOPS OF THE WORLD REALIZE THAT WE DO NOT KNOW ANY VISIBLE DEAD SO VATICAN COUNCIL II IS A PRO SSPX TRADITIONAL DOCUMENT ?

There is no dead person visible who has been saved with the baptism desire. So if the Holy Office in 1949 assumed there were, it was a mistake. It was a factual mistake since we cannot see such a person.

Do all the bishops in the world agree that we cannot see the dead saved in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire, imperfect communion with the Church, seeds of the Word and a good conscience ?

So if we cannot see all these deceased then there are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.If nothing in Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma outside the church there is no salvation then we are back to exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church.

If Vatican Council II says outside the church there is no salvation (Ad Gentes says all need Catholic Faith) then the Society of St Pius X (SSPX) have a traditional Vatican Council II before them. There are traditional Conciliar values on other religions and ecumenism. The ecclesiology is once again traditional.

The bishops through out the world must realize that it is the traditionalists who are affirming Vatican Council II and it is Bishop Gerhard Muller and Archbishop Augustine Di Noia who are denying the traditional interpretation. They are denying it because they assume that Lumen Gentium 16 is an exception to the dogma and to Ad Gentes 7. And why do they assume that ? Since for them, we can see the dead-visible. They can see the deceased saved in invincible ignorance etc who are exceptions to the dogma!.

Can the bishops see all this?

Can they state in public that Vatican Council II is a traditional document in agreement with the SSPX communique (July 19, 2012) affirming that outside the Church there is no salvation and endorsing the uninterrupted magisterium of the Catholic Church.

This is not just an SSPX issue. It is a problem, all the bishops must face. Firstly we do not know the deceased who are saved and are alive and who could be exceptions to the dogma. Secondly, since there are no exceptions Vatican Council II (AG 7) affirms the dogma outside the church there is no salvation.Thirdly, we still have the traditional ecclesiology , ecumenism, evangelisation etc. These SSPX values are pro-Vatican Council II.

So when the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Prefect says the SSPX must accept Vatican Council II the answer is "Yes , they have! But what about you Bishop Muller ?".

That three SSPX bishops also do not know all this is part of the problem.-Lionel Andrades
1.

APPEAL TO BISHOP MULLER TO ACCEPT VATICAN COUNCIL II
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/07/appeal-to-bishop-muller-to-accept.html

CAN THE ARCHDIOCESE OF BOSTON AND WASHINGTON SUPPORT THE SSPX BY SAYING VATICAN COUNCIL II IS A TRADITIONAL DOCUMENT WITH TRADITIONAL VALUES?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/07/can-archdiocese-of-boston-and.html