Tuesday, April 24, 2012

Cardinal Koch: SSPX Has to Accept Vatican II

Edit: does this mean that the SSPX will have to give hearty assent to the vague and novel formulations which have no substantial foundation in Church history or doctrine before the 1960s according to Cardinal Koch?

Vienna (kath.net/KAP) Pope Benedict XVI is dealing with the reconciliation of the Society of St. Pius X as a theologian and one who knows Church history.  "Because he knew that till now every Council had a schism in its wake, it is for him a consideration , in avoiding anything, that he would not want this to repeat where he is responsible": That was quoted from the President of the Vatican Council for Ecumenism, Cardinal Kurt Koch, at a press conference in Vienna on Tuesday.  "Now it falls upon the Society to answer definitively,"  says Koch.  This touches specifically on their position on the Council.

The two answers of November and March which were known to him were considered insufficient: the most recent of the 17th of November is "not known to him."  What is clear, however, is that it won't be enough "if they reject 65 percent of the Council".  The second Vatican Council, which opened 50 years ago and in which the present Pope had functioned as an adviser, forms for the Swiss born President for Unity the great test in ecumenism.  But what is clear after 50 years, "is that the unity needed more time than we thought then".

Today there is an uncertainty over the goal.  Many protestant leaders only want that "all church properties are recognized as Church".  A deeper unity in this case then falls from view.

An important voice, namely the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, is quick to remind that the forms of consensus seeking in important questions of life like peace or environment would not be everything.  Patriarch Bartholomeos is one who seeks after a true unity of the Church.  But he also stresses:  "We need time".  One has "lived through 1,000 years apart".  Many points of divergence are not even theological, rather much more of a historical and cultural type, which never the less don't have easy solutions.

Open Problems in Ecumenical Dialog

In view of the barriers to unity, Cardinal Koch, noted "the Office of the Papacy",  which inn relation to Orthodoxy presents even more problems than with the churches of the Reformation.  Because Orthodoxy has theological arguments against the Papal Office, because it is a jurisdiction without sacramentality. Evangelical theologians and some Catholics like Hans Kung seek on the other hand after a primacy of honor similar to the Anglican Primate.  This is precisely the present breaking test within the Anglican Communion but is also a good example for this, that such a symbolic office functions "only in good weather".

Fundamentally all of the more deeper running steps toward unity need a first gesture of mutual forgiveness and reconciliation, said Cardinal Koch.  One fundamental problem is that most Christians don't see division as a sin and a scandal. In dialog meetings with Orthodox representatives  this is painfully evident that the Orthodox side will not offer small gestures of reconciliation like a kiss of peace because these in Orthodoxy are a precondition for Eucharistic communion.

Considerations of the Reformation with Offers of Reconciliation?

Even the upcoming "Reformation Jubilee" will only bring ecumenical progress, "if it is bound with a mutual recognition of wrongdoing".    As an archetype for reconciliation is Pope John Paul II in the Holy Year of 2,000; "I hope that just that takes place in 2017".

One shouldn't speak then of a 'Jubilee' but of a Reformation Memorial, because we couldn't celebrate a  sin".  It is also known to him that this expression has earned him the description of "anti-ecumenicist".  If, however, 2017 involves this common understanding, then there will be on his side openness to the question, "what greater signs could be set".

Koch went also addressed a widely disseminated falsehood, where Benedict XVI. gives more priority to ecumenism with the Orthodox than the Reform churches.  This is historically false because Joseph Ratzinger has already worked a great deal in Reform theology.

It is also true that Ratzinger had been the one who saved the 1998 Augsburg "Common Declaration on Justification" (1999), a milestone of Ecumenism between Catholics and Lutherans.  The current Pope is since traveled to Regesburg since 1998, where he participated with the assembled Lutheran church worldwide.  The result was approved and highlighted in a document on understanding in the clarity of the  unmistakable and fundamental truth of the teaching on justification.   It was still further stressed that the mutual doctrinal condemnations of the 16th century do not concern today's Church.  In this sense it is pointedly clear that people are justified and saved by grace alone.

Cardinal Koch expressed himself in a press conference also on relations to Judaism, especially on missionary work with the Jews.  Catholic belief is that the bond with the people of Israel is "an important",  at the same time is however "become something new with Jesus" .  How that will happen, is not something easily addressed "in a half minute during a press conference".  Because of this complex interaction the Church looks upon it as an explicit mission to the Jews.  The individual witnesses of Christians to their faith is however a requirement for Evangelism in that which also depends on the belief that the Gospel must be preached to the Jews.

Link to original...

8 comments:

Catholic Mission said...

Wednesday, April 25, 2012
PROFESSORS AT THE LEGIONARIES OF CHRIST UNIVERSITIES IN ROME SUPPORT THE SSPX POSITION ON OTHER RELIGIONS
Fr.Rafael Pascual L.C, Dean of Philosophy at the University Pontificial Regina Apostolorum(UPRA) and Mr. Corrada Gnerre a Professor of Philophical Anthropology at the Universita Europa di Roma affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

They also know that we do not know any case of a non Catholic saved who can be an exception to the defined dogma. The text of the dogma also does not mention invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire since they know at that possibilities were not defacto exceptions to the dogma which says all need to convert into the Church for salvation.

The dogma is in agreement with Vatican Council II(AG 7) and LG 16 is not an exception as is often claimed.

So Vatican Council II is in agreement with the traditional teaching of the church on ecumenism and other religions which has also been that of the traditionalists Society of St.Pius X, Institute of the Good Shepherd and the Priestly Fraternity of St.Peter (FSSP).-Lionel Andrades

LEGIONARY OF CHRIST PRIEST FR.RAFAEL PASCUAL AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/10/legionary-of-christ-priest-frrafael.html


CATHOLIC LAY PROFESSOR AT UNIVERSITA EUROPA DI ROMA AFFIRMS DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2011/10/catholic-lay-professor-at-universita.html#links

Catholic Mission said...

CATHOLIC PRIESTS IN ROME WHO OFFER THE NOVUS ORDO MASS IN ITALIAN UNKNOWINGLY SUPPORT THE SSPX POSITION ON OTHER RELIGIONS: THEY CONFIRM THAT THERE IS NO CASE KNOWN OF BEING SAVED IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE (LG 16)IN THE PRESENT TIME
So if the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 assumes that the baptism of desire contradicted the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus they made a mistake.

The participants in the Vatican-SSPX talks also did not realize that there are no explicit exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II, to the centuries old interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Catholic priests in Rome to whom I spoke to, say that there is no known case of a non Catholic saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire.Some say quite plainly that the baptism of desire etc do not contradict the literal intepretation of the dogma. Others do not want to comment further.

They know that we have returned to the centuries old intepretation of the thrice defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and this is essentially the positon of the Society of St.Pius X on ecumenism and inter religious dialogue.

It means Vatican Council II (AG 7) says all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation-just as the SSPX teaches,and there are no known exceptions, this includes invincible ignorance and a good conscience (LG 16).

So the priests are really saying, but do not want to put it into words, that Vatican Council II holds to the traditional teaching on Hindus,Jews, Buddhists,Muslims etc.

While priests who offer Mass in Italian here admit there is no visible baptism of desire there is no such comment from SSPX theologians.The SSPX bishops still believe that Vatican Council II contradicts the traditional teaching on ecumenism and other religions.Since, the bishops assume, there is a visible baptism of desire.

The Novus Ordo-priests are pointing to the traditional teaching in Vatican Council II.
-Lionel Andrades

Catholic Mission said...

Rome’s Msgr. Fernando Ocariz and the SSPX’s Fr. Jean-Michel Gleize assumed Lumen Gentium 16 refers to a known exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so to the SSPX position on other religions, ecumenism etc
Even theologian John Lamont who teaches theology in Sydney with the archdiocese approval did not notice it.(1)

Msgr. Fernando Ocariz an Opus Dei theologian and Fr. Jean-Michel Gleize an SSPX seminary professor of ecclesiology at Econe did not notice a key point in Vatican Council II. They just assumed that Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so does Pope Pius XII.

Based on their interchange and failed conclusion the theologian John Lamont has written an account but also assuming the irrational, that is, we can actually know people in Heaven and somehow they are exceptions to the dogma which says there is exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. Knowing people saved in invincible ignorance and other cases in Heaven it was assumed by Gleize, Ocariz and Lamont meant there is no more exclusive salvation in the Church. There are known exceptions (LG 16) etc.

Even the ecclesiology professor at Econe like his counterparts at the Angelicum and Gregorian University in Rome holds the liberal version of the Council and that too based on an irrationality.-Lionel Andrades

1.
Is recognizing the SSPX questioning the Council?
http://www.sspx.org/theological_commission/is_recognizing_sspx_questioning_the_council_4-19-2012.htm

PREFECT OF THE SUPREME TRIBUNAL: CAN THERE BE AN ‘ECCLESIAL RUPTURE’ FOR NOT AFFIRMING ‘ A VISIBLE BAPTISM OF DESIRE’ AND A LIBERAL, IRRATIONAL INTERPRETATION OF THE CATECHISM AND VATICAN COUNCIL II ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/prefect-of-supreme-tribunal-can-there.html#links

ECCLESIA DEI’S ADVICE TO THE INSTITUTE OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD IS SCARY
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/ecclesia-deis-advice-to-institute-of.html

SSPX -DICI SAYS ECCLESIA DEI HAS ASKED THE INSTITUTE OF THE GOOD SHEPHARD TO FOLLOW THE CATECHISM
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/sspx-dici-says-ecclesia-dei-has-asked.html

DOMINICAN, FRANCISCAN FRIARS OF THE IMMACULATE AND DIOCESAN PRIESTS NEGATE POPE BENEDICT’S OVERSIGHT AND THAT OF THE CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/dominican-franciscan-friars-of.html

Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, Bishop Charles Morerod O.P Oath of Fidelity: to dissent
Profession of Faith allows for dissent on ecclesiology and baptism
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/cardinal-luiz-ladaria-bishop-charles.html

Dan said...

It's quite clever for this snake-in-the-grass Cardinal Koch to suggest that there were schisms "after every Council". Really, Your Eminence? Would you kindly give us some particulars on this statement, citing dates and specific cases?

Yes, Eminence, we know that there were schisms after SOME Councils, but not all. And we also know, Your Eminence, that Vatican 2 was itself a sort of schism in that its ambiguities allowed a clear break with past Church teachings.

I say "sort of" because, again quite cleverly, this miserable, misguided Council never came out with an explicit heresy, of course, but it ALLOWED heterodox opinions to grow exponentially without putting any brakes on these schisms and heresies. We can all show that in most cases the Council came down on the side of tradition...BUT it was ambiguous enough to allow a severe doctrinal rot to set in without providing any mechanism to stop the rot.

I hope God's will is done in these negotiations. It would be straining credibility, however, to suggest that Cardinal Koch is doing God's will in this matter. He is sounding "like a dockyard bully" anxious only to force his lousy Council (and more importantly, its shady interpretations) down the throats of the SSPX. I do hope God overrules these arrogant Cardinals like Koch.

Cardinal Koch wants the SSPX "to accept the Council"...well, I don't accept Cardinal Koch. Period.

Catholic Mission said...

Cardinal Koch needs to accept the traditional interpretation of Vatican Council II: the SSPX rejects the version of the Council of Christian Unity,Vatican

Vatican Council II like Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441 says heretics and schismatics need to convert for salvation (AG 7).

Cardinal Kurt Koch assumes that his interpretation of Vatican Council II is the only one and all of us should accept it.

When the SSPX says they reject Vatican Council II they mean they reject the Koch-liberal version. When they say that they affirm ecumenism and inter religious dialogue according to Tradition, they mean they affirm in reality the traditional intepretation of Vatican Council II.

There can be no known cases of Orthodox Christians or Protestants saved in imperfect communion, the seeds of the Word or a good conscience etc as the liberal version claims.


In a a press conference on Tuesday in Vienna Cardinal Koch, the President of the Vatican Council for ecumenism said the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) needs to accept Vatican Council II, as if, implying that he and his Vatican office for ecumenism does so.They do not accept the traditional interpretation of Vatican Council II.

The cardinal cannot provide references from Vatican Council II to support his liberal interpretation with reference to ecumenism.

I can provide citations from Vatican Council II for my traditional intepretation of the Council. So could SSPX and the other traditonalists if they wanted to.

The liberals in Vienna are unable to cite any reference since Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance/good conscience) is not an exception to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Vatican Council II does not mention a single explicit reference to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So there can only be one interpretation of the Council- the traditional one. It is supported by AG 7 and LG 16 does not contradict it.

So it is important ,honesty demands it, that Cardinal Kurt Koch and the Council for Christian Unity,Vatican accept Vatican Council II according to Tradition and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

It’s time to say clearly that Vatican Council II says all Protestants and Orthodox Christians do not have Catholic Faith and and so they are oriented to Hell (AG 7).
-Lionel Andrades

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/cardinal-koch-needs-to-accept.html#links

Catholic Mission said...

DO YOU HAVE A VOCATION: DO YOU WANT TO AVOID BEING PUSHED INTO A FALSE ECUMENISM OUT OF OBEDIENCE ?
THERE IS A COMMUNITY!

DO YOU HAVE A VOCATION ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/do-you-have-vocation.html#links

Are you called to change your religious community ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/are-you-called-to-change-your-religious.html#links

DOES YOUR COMMUNITY BELIEVE IN A VISIBLE BAPTISM OF DESIRE ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/does-your-community-believe-in-visible.html

ARE YOU CALLED?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/are-you-called.html#links

Unknown said...

Who in their right Roman Catholic mind would pay any attention to this cardinal who is a liberal modernist and already condemned by "Pascendi...." by a truly holy Holy Father? You are not a reliable friend of the church. The SSPX should keep well away from any agreements with such people until the councils are open to the just criticism they merit. They are the origin of all the disunity in the church at present. Collegiality; primacy of conscience; ecumenism; interconfessionalism; the vernacularised revolutionary liturgy; feminisation of the presbyterate and indeed the list is long....are not Roman Catholic norms. The chief indicators demonstrate that since the councils the church has done little else but decline in every aspect except indiscipline; disunity with liturgical and pastoral chaos.
The best strategy for The Society at present is to ignore the cunning and wiles of the incumbent ecclesiastical masonic regime in Rome and maintain their usual missionary spirit leaving the crisis in the liberal modernist ranks to eventually kill it off naturally of old age and final death. May it come soon!

Tancred said...

I mostly just report this information. I am for the accord, however, and can't see how the physical or institutional Church can be so vitiated that it no longer carries the charism given to it when it was established by Christ.