Latest topics
Tue Oct 16, 2018 8:38 am by Paul

» SSPX cannot accept Vatican Council II because of the restrictions placed by the Jewish Left
Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:55 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Vatican (CDF/Ecclesia Dei) has no objection if the SSPX and all religious communities affirm Vatican Council II (without the premise)
Sun Dec 10, 2017 8:29 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Piazza Spagna - mission
Sun Dec 10, 2017 8:06 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Fund,Catholic organisation needed to help Catholic priests in Italy like Fr. Alessandro Minutella
Sun Dec 10, 2017 7:52 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Catholic theocracy- Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Feeneyite) essential
Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:57 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» The Social Reign of Christ the King can be seen based on Cushingite or Feeneyite theology, Vatican Council II with the false premise or without it
Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:52 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» When Card. Ladaria and Bp Fellay meet a non Catholic they know he or she is oriented to Hell because the Church lic Church inspired by the Holy Spirit teaches this
Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:49 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» No denial from Cardinal Ladaria and Bishop Fellay : two interpretations of Vatican Council II and theirs is the irrational one
Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:44 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Ask Cardinal Ladaria a few questions when you meet him
Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:42 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Now it is the time for cardinals Kasper and Marx to reject Vatican Council II
Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:37 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» No denial from Cardinal Ladaria, CDF : schism from the Left over Vatican Council II
Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:35 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Schism over Vatican Council II ?
Sat Nov 25, 2017 9:30 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» SSPX recognises that Abp.Lefebvre's writings are obsolete : seminaries have to make the correction
Thu Nov 23, 2017 9:25 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Polish traditionalists handicapped : Archbishop Lefebvre made a mistake
Wed Nov 15, 2017 8:20 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney in the USA when they interpret Vatican Council II with the irrational premise deny the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:18 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Bishop Robert J.McManus and Brother Thomas Augustine MICM,Superior,St.Benedict Center,Still River,MA, interpret Vatican Council II with the 'possibilites are exceptions' error
Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:47 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» SSPX must be aware of the deception of Abp.Guido Pozzo and confront it
Tue Oct 31, 2017 11:57 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Two popes must ask all Catholics to affirm Vatican Council II (premise-free) as they do
Mon Oct 30, 2017 5:16 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary Still River Ma., could lose canomical status because of Feeneyism
Sat Oct 28, 2017 5:54 am by Lionel L. Andrades

Official statement from SSPX awaited : Fr.Gleize and other theologians have got it wrong

Go down

Official statement from SSPX awaited : Fr.Gleize and other theologians have got it wrong

Post  Lionel L. Andrades on Sat Jun 24, 2017 10:10 am

JUNE 24, 2017

Official statement from SSPX awaited : Fr.Gleize and other theologians have got it wrong

[At this point in the original French article, Father Gleize interrupts his reasoning and carries out a long and detailed analysis of the main litigious points of Vatican II – religious liberty, collegiality, ecumenism – as well as the Conciliar and Post-Conciliar magisterium, the Novus Ordo Missae and the New Code of Canon Law. He then resumes:]
Lionel: Fr.Jean Marie Gleize the SSPX professor of Ecclesiology at Econe, Switzerland like his counterparts at the Pontifical Universities in Rome has been interpreting Vatican Council II as a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Feeneyite) since he only understands Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) and doesn't seem to have a clue to Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite). This was the same problem with Archbishop Lefebvre.
So I do not see how theologically he will change his interpretation of Vatican Council II even after he has been informed numerous times about his error. He has no response.


The public profession of the Faith is more important than canonical normality. “ What interests us first of all is to maintain the Catholic Faith. That is our combat. So the canonical question, which is purely exterior and public in the Church, is secondary. What is important is to remain in the Church... in the Church, that is to say in the Catholic Faith of all time and in the true priesthood, and in the true Mass, and in the true sacraments, in the Catechism of all time, with the Bible of all time. That is what interests us. That is what the Church is. To be recognized publicly, that is secondary. So, we mustn't seek secondary things by losing what is fundamental, what is the primary object of our combat ”.
Lionel: He refers to the public profession of the faith in which he will assume invisible for us baptism of desire is a visible exception to the dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus and the Syllabus of Errors.Like Pope Benedict XVI he will not affirm Vatican Council II (Feeneyite).


The question can be summed up by asking if it is prudent to place oneself under the authority of the members of the Hierarchy of the Church such as they are in the present situation, that is to say (for the most part) still imbued with false principles which are contrary to the Catholic Faith.
Lionel: He still does not know what are those false principles. Since he like members of the Hierarchy at the Vatican and leaders of the SSPX at Econe, interpret magisterial documents with a false premise.

by Quanta Cura of Pius IX.

Lionel: False. DH is not a rupture with the dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus( Feeneyite) and so it is not a break with the past ecclesiocentrism, upon which was based the non separation of Church and State and the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation.
Since there is known salvation outside the Church, as it is for Pope Benedict,DH would be a rupture with Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus (Feeneyite) and the past ecclesiology of the Church.He is a liberal on this issue, without knowing it.It is his irrational theology which creates new doctrine. It is approved by the magisterium.

The new ecumenical ecclesiology of Lumen Gentium is condemned by Pius XII in Mystici Corporis and Humani Generis because of the absolutely false principle which would like to establish a real distinction between the Church of Christ and the Catholic Church.
Lionel: With Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) Lumen Gentium 16,14 and 8 does not contradict Mystici Corporis etc. So there is  no change in the ecclesiology of the Church before and after Vatican Council II.
Since Fr.Gleize only knows of Vatican Council II( Cushingite)there is a rupture with Tradition.


The ecumenism of Unitatis Redintegratio is condemned by Pius XI in Mortalium Animos.
Lionel: No.It is not condemned with Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite).UR 3 is hypothetical and so it is not an explicit exception, or relevant, to the dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.
Fr.Gleize needs to switch to Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and then his perspective will change.


The collegiality of Lumen Gentium, in that it denies the unicity of the subject of the Primacy, falls under the condemnation of Vatican I.
Lionel: This is his Cushingite interpretation. If there is unity of doctrine and theology with Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite), collegiality is not a problem.There will only be unity when Vatican Council II and Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus is interpreted without invisible cases confused as being visible.

What should our conclusion be? We would simply say that the “Society of Saint Pius X does not have to negotiate a charitable recognition which would save it from a supposed schism. It has the immense honor, after forty years of exclusion, to be able to witness in favor of the Catholic Faith in the Vatican [5]”  ...while we wait for Rome to finally decide to expel the perfidious Conciliar errors from the midst of the faithful .
Lionel:The SSPX like the Vatican has to expel the interpretation of Vatican Council II with the false premise and the Council will change before their eyes.They simply have to try it.There a few thousand reports on the Internet which show the SSPX its 'perfidious Conciliar error'.
Bishop Fellay in a recent comment on extra ecclesiam nulla salus must be suspecting that his theologians do not have it right on the dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus and Vatican Council II.
An official statement is still awaited.

-Lionel Andrades
VaticanoII un dibattito aperto
October 1, 2013

SSPX Prior says Fr.Jean Marie Gleize's use of the phrase 'via eccezionale' will be clarified by the District Superior,Italy
Monsgr.Guido Pozzo did not know: Fr.Gleize's book shows
SSPX irrational

Gleize makes another mistake
September 16, 2016

Report on Gloria TV, in Italian, by 'Isole de Patmos' also recognises this theological problem, an objective error, among the 'Lefebvrists'

Fr.Jean Marie Gleize makes a doctrinal error in a book published by the SSPX
June 18, 2014
   Linverno_della_Chiesa1copertina Concilio parallelo.indd
Cristina Siccardi ,Paolo Pasqualucci use the irrational inference in the interpretation of Vatican Council II

Lionel L. Andrades

Posts : 60
Reputation : 158
Join date : 2015-05-11

Back to top Go down

Back to top

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum