RATZINGER DID NOT TELL LEFEBVRE ABOUT RAHNER’S LG 16 ERROR: HE WAS EXCOMMUNICATED WHEN VC2 WAS TRADITIONAL: NO COMMENT FROM SSPX
RATZINGER DID NOT TELL LEFEBVRE ABOUT RAHNER’S LG 16 ERROR: HE WAS EXCOMMUNICATED WHEN VC2 WAS TRADITIONAL: NO COMMENT FROM SSPX
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was not told that the Council could have been interpreted without the Rahnerian LG 16-mistake.Instead they excommunicated him and the bishops of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX).Even today, the SSPX is not told to accept Vatican Council II (VC2) rational i.e. without the Rahner mistake, found in his book The Christian of the Future.
Pope Leo kept all this a secret from Fr. John Berg, the Superior General of the FSSP (Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter), whom he met the other day. The original members of the FSSP had their religious formation with the SSPX. They were affected by the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre.
When Pope Benedict issued Summorum Pontificum, the SSPX was still not told that they could have full canonical recognition if they accepted Vatican Council II, rationally, without the Rahnerian factual mistake. It would indicate then, that the popes and the liberals, mostly those who attend the Novus Ordo Mass would be in schism.
So instead, in the Church, there was ‘a grand silence’.
Pope Leo gave a catechesis on Vatican Council II this month during the Consistory and did not announce that LG 16 referred to a theoretical case. It was only hypothetical.So with Ad Gentes 7 (all need faith and baptism for salvation), VC II is aligned with Tradition (EENS etc) and LG 16 is not an explicit exception in the present time. An invisible case cannot be an exception.
Also hypothetical cases of LG 8, 14, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, in Vatican Council II, are not exceptions for the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Roman Missal of the 16th century.VC 2 is ecclesiocentric and traditional.
The Council supports the FSSP, SSPX and sedevacantists MHT, CMRI, MHFM and not cardinal Koch on the New Ecumenism, Cardinal Tagle on the New Evangelization and Cardinal Roche on the New Missal which does not say outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation.
All this was not known to Lefebvre before he died. He did not observe the mistake in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston, which was overlooked by also Pope Pius XII.
Cardinal Cushing and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Rome, excommunicated Fr. Leonard Feeney for not accepting ‘visible baptism of desire’. For the hierarchy in Boston and Rome there were ‘explicit cases’ of people being saved in invincible ignorance at that time. Irrational.
So Lefebvre too had to accept visible cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as being explicit exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Long after Vatican Council II, Fr. Leonard Feeney’s excommunication was lifted without him having to recant on EENS. Pope Paul VI interpreted Vatican Council II with the LG 16 confusion and so the Council emerged as a break with Feeneyite EENS.
Now Vatican Council II with Rahner’s LG 16 errror is being imposed upon the FSSP with a Visitation.
Visitations, books on Vatican Council II and Church Documents like Amoris Laetitia, Fiducia Supplicans and Traditionis Custode carry the LG 16 error. They are obsolete since we can now interpret and accept Vatican Council II without the common mistake.
Fr. John Berg accepts Vatican Council II irrational unlike the SSPX which rejects Vatican Council II irrational. So at the Latin Mass the FSSP theology is schismatic. Rahner’s False Premise (LG 16 invisible cases are physically visible) creates the rupture with the popes of the Middle Ages and the Church Fathers on EENS etc.
At Digon, France, the FSSP had simply to interpret Vatican Council II rationally and then ask the liberal bishop to do the same at the Novus Ordo Mass in French. Instead, they left the diocese silently.
At Frejuf-Toulon, France, after a Visitation by ecclesiastics who interpret the Council irrationally, and so as a break with Tradition, Bishop Dominque Rey left the diocese in their hands. He moved to the Archdiocese of Paris where they don’t interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise and so oppose the liberalism of Macron.
Archbishop Lefebvre looked on as the new LG 16 visible Church spread in France.
He wanted Rome to come back to the Faith, to the original LG 16 is invisible Church. This was not only the traditional theology- it was common sense.
The SSPX must now ask why they ‘out’ are and the liberal cardinals and bishops ‘in’ when the Council is traditional without Rahnerian theology.
It is based upon the implicit-explicit confusion that cardinals Grech, Hollerich, Muller and Marx get their New Theology, liberal theology.
Archbishop Lefebvre was not told that the Council was traditionalist. It was Rahner, Ratzinger, Balthazar, Kung, Lehmann, Lubac, Congar, Guardini and others who interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally and accepted the nontraditional conclusion, who were in schism and should have been excommunicated.
It is Cardinal Walter Kasper who should be excommunicated for not interpreting Vatican Council II rationally and honestly and doing the same with the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms. - Lionel Andrades