SSPX ASK THE VATICAN IF THE LIONEL ANDRADES INTERPRETATION OF VC 2 IS ACCEPTABLE. THE FALSE PREMISE IS AVOIDED
SSPX ASK THE VATICAN IF THE LIONEL ANDRADES INTERPRETATION OF VC 2 IS ACCEPTABLE. THE FALSE PREMISE IS AVOIDED
The SSPX through its media must ask Pope Leo if the interpretation of Vatican Council II by Lionel Andrades is acceptable. There is enough material on line for the pope to make a judgement. Pope Leo then must announce that LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, are always hypothetical and theoretical only. Then the interpretation and conclusion of the interpretation of Vatican Council II changes. The Council is traditional and ecclesiocentric with AG 7 while LG 8, 14, 16 etc are not practical exceptions for AG 7 or the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus of the Council of Florence 1442.
The traditionalists must stop being apologetical on Vatican Council II. Antony Stine interviewed Brother Andre Marie micm, and did not say that Vatican Council II is traditional and ecclesiocentric, it is Feeneyite.
So how can the National Catholic Reporter and the US Catholic News Agencies, criticize the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire, when the Council and Catechism, interpreted rationally, support
them ?
The other day Eric Sammons when interviewed by Catholic Un-Scripted said that he believes everyone will go to Heaven, aligning himself with George Weigel, whom he earlier criticizes for not accepting the dogma EENS. Then he himself rejects the same dogma EENS.
For me the Novus Ordo Mass is the original Sacrifice of Jesues repeated in an un-bloody way. It neutralises sin and stress in the world today. Holy Mass should be offered not only for the souls in Purgatory but also for the living.
Vatican Council II interpreted rationally supports the SSPX and not Pope Leo.
The Creeds, Councils and Catechisms interpreted rationally are traditional like the SSPX ‘ Profession of Faith. They are not liberal like the Synods. The ‘blue passages’ dominate in Vatican Council II, for example, since ‘the red passages ‘ are hypothetical and theoretical and so are not practical exceptions for the blue orthodox passages, which are aligned with EENS.
This is a big doctrinal U-turn in the Catholic Church. It is a new discovery.
The SSPX can now control the hermeneutic of continuity or discontinuity, they have the key. Pope Leo can do the same if he wants to. Presently, the pope chooses the hermeneutic of discontinuity. This is schism. It is created with a false premise (LG 16 refers to visible people saved outside the Church in 2026 with faith and baptism).
For me Vatican Council II has the hermeneutic of continuity (LG 16 invisible). So I expect the SSPX to cite Vatican Council II rational in their Profession of Faith. The Council interpreted rationally is their strong point. It is the weak point of the liberals. Since when the Council is traditional and ecclesiocentric the Council does not support liberalism.
We Vatican Council II rational we oppose the Masons and Satanists. With Vatican Council II irrational we go along with them.
They support quick divorces, easy annulments, and the stuff of the Synods all in the name of Vatican Council II irrational. Free abortion, Satanic worship, contraceptive machines, pornography on the phone take a person to Hell. This is all welcomed by the free thinkers, the liberals in the name of a false interpretation of the Council.
We now know that Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church support the teaching outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation. This is a view from ‘within the Church’. This is not the sedevacantists citing only the dogma EENS, the old catechisms and the pope of the Middle Ages. Something has changed in the Church over the last 60 years. This is not the interpretation of Vatican Council II by George Weigel and the US. State Department. – Lionel Andrades