FSSP INTERPRETS VCII IRRATIONALLY, ACCEPTS SCHISMATIC CONCLUSION : AUDIENCE GRANTED.
24.01.2026FSSP INTERPRETS VCII IRRATIONALLY, ACCEPTS SCHISMATIC CONCLUSION : AUDIENCE GRANTED.
Pope Leo cannot dialogue with Bishop Fellay and Bishop Sanborn and offer to interpret Vatican Council II rationally with an ecclesiocentric conclusion. This would not be politically correct with the Left. So a schismatic pope cannot meet the schismatic FSSP. The FSSP also interprets Vatican Council II irrationally like the pope and accepts the non traditional conclusion. They were granted an audience with the pope.
NO DIALOGUE IN THE CHURCH
With good will Pope Leo cannot invite the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St. Benedict Center in New Hampshire, for talks, or into the Church. Since they interpret Vatican Council II rationally and accept the ecclesiocentric conclusion which is in harmony with Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS); the EENS of the Council of Florence 1442. No audience or dialogue with them.
Neither can there be an outreach to Bishop Mark Pivarunas, who has hundreds of Catholic religious in his sedevacantist Catholic community in the USA. Pivarunas interprets Vatican Council II irrationally like the pope, but rejects the schismatic conclusion, which Archbishop Rino Fisichella and Fr. Antonio Spadero accept. Fisichella and Spadero are welcomed at the Vatican.
The Dicasteries at the Vatican do not accept the dogma EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Catechism of Pope Pius X, with no known exceptions, as do the traditionalists in harmony with Vatican Council II ecclesiocentric. The Dicasteries do not accept Vatican Council II ecclesiocentric.
Not affirming the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms rationally and so traditionally is first class heresy (on the Creeds) and schism with the Magisterium over the centuries.
Edward Fraser, Peter Kwasniewski, Michael Lofton, Joseph Shaw, Austin Ivereigh and others are all interpreting Church Documents schismatically.They could ask for an audience with the pope.
Why should Catholics accept the decisions of the Synods and Consistories which are schismatic on the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms? They are not Catholic, canonically.
The cardinals Sarah, Burke and Muller do not have unity, with me, on the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms, and we are in the same Church. How can we all be in the same, one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church? The cardinals Sarah, Burke and Muller interpret Vatican Council II irrationally like the pope. So does Bishop Athanasius Schneider.
They all follow the Rahner LG 16- visible objective mistake in the interpretation of the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms. This was the mistake in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston (LOHO). The LOHO confused invisible cases of being saved with the baptism of desire as being visible exceptions for the dogma EENS of the Council of Florence. This mistake is repeated by Rahner in his book The Christian of the Future.
Undoubtedly a certain insight was promoted in regard to such questions as… how the necessity of the Church for salvation is compatible with the possibility of salvation of a human being who does not belong to it …Development of dogma took place in these matters without prejudice to existing dogma ‘ . P.24. the Changing Church, The Christian of the Future.
A POSIBILITY IS NOT CONCRETE IN 2026
How can a possibility of salvation be an exception for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in 1965-2025? How can it be an exception for the massa damnata of Augustine which he mentions in this book? There were no known exceptions known to him.
What connection is there between a possibility of salvation outside the Church, which is theoretical and exists only in our mind and is known only to God in specific cases - with the teaching on all needing faith and baptism for salvation ( Ad Gentes 7) in 2026?
None. Yet upon this irrational reasoning Rahner put forward a New Theology which is accepted by Pope Leo and the SSPX and the sedevacantists ( visible LG 16 etc). They differ only on the conclusion. The SSPX and the sedevacantists reject Vatican Council II interpreted with Rahner’s mistake while Pope Leo and the cardinals accept the schismatic conclusion. - Lionel Andrades
22.01.2026
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 …