According to the Society of St. Pius X Jews, Muslims and other non Catholics need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. According to the Vatican representatives they do not.
Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II supports the SSPX position but they will not cite the text. Ad Gentes 7 refutes the Vatican group’s position and they will ignore it.
Both came to the table without any text from Vatican Council II on this issue.
We need a third group, traditionalist-conservative Catholics who accept Vatican Council II according to Sacred Tradition. For years the Left has made Vatican Council II there political slogan. Now it is backfiring. It’s found that Vatican Council II is in accord with Sacred Tradition.
Here is Vatican Council II and an ex cathedra dogma that the Vatican group would have difficulty with.
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
1. “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215). Ex cathedra.
2.“We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.).Ex cathedra.
3.“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.) Ex cathedra – from the website Catholicism.org
Here we see the confusion the SSPX have with doctrine.MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2010
ARCHBISHOP MARCEL LEFEBVRE CALLED "TO PREACH" THE RIGORIST INTERPRETATION OF "EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS"
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/archbishop-marcel-lefebvre-called-to.html#links
SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2010
ARCHBISHOP MARCEL LEFEBVRE HAD AFFIRMED THE RIGORIST INTERPRETATION OF THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/09/archbishop-marcel-lefebvre-had-affirmed.html#links
_______________________________________________
54 ANSWERS FROM BISHOP FELLAY
Doctrinal Discussions: Part 1
1. Your Excellency, you have decided to attempt doctrinal discussions with Rome. Could you remind us of the purpose?
You have to distinguish between Rome’s purpose and ours. Rome indicated that there were doctrinal problems with the Society [of St. Pius X] and that these problems would have to be cleared up before any canonical recognition, problems which obviously would be up to us to resolve, concerning our acceptance of the [Second Vatican] Council. But for us it is about something else: we hope to tell Rome what the Church has always taught and thereby to show the contradictions between this centuries-old teaching and what has been done in the Church since the Council. As we look at it, this is the only goal that we are pursuing.
2. What sort of talks are these: negotiations, discussions, or doctrinal explanation?
You can’t call them negotiations. That’s not what they’re about at all. There is on the one hand an explanation of doctrine, and on the other hand a discussion, because we have in fact a Roman interlocutor with whom we are discussing the documents and how to understand them. But you can’t call them negotiations, nor a search for a compromise, for it is a question of Faith.
3. Could you recall the method that is used in the work? What topics have already been addressed?
The working method is the written method; texts are composed which then become the basis for further theological discussion. Several topics have been addressed already. But for the moment I will leave that question up in the air. I can simply tell you that we are coming to the conclusion, because we have made the tour of the major questions raised by the Council.
4. Can you describe the Roman panelists?
They are experts, in other words, theology professors who are also consulting members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. One can say that they are “professionals” in theology. One is Swiss, the Rector of the Angelicum, Fr. Morerod, O.P., another is a Jesuit who is somewhat older, Fr. Becker; another is a member of Opus Dei, the Vicar General, Msgr. Ocariz Braña; then Archbishop Ladaria Ferrer, Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and finally the moderator, Msgr. Guido Pozzo, Secretary of the Ecclesia Dei Commission.
5. Has there been a development in the thinking of our dialogue partners since they read the presentations by the SSPX theologians?
I don’t think that you can say that.
(Excerpt from the SSPX website)
Posts
