LUMEN GENTIUM 14 AND LUMEN GENTIUM 16 ARE HYPOTHETICAL: FERNANDEZ WAS IN SCHISM AND NOT VIGANO’S …

LUMEN GENTIUM 14 AND LUMEN GENTIUM 16 ARE HYPOTHETICAL: FERNANDEZ WAS IN SCHISM AND NOT VIGANO’S TRADITION: A RE –TRIAL IS NEEDED BY POPE LEO

31.10.2025
LUMEN GENTIUM 14 AND LUMEN GENTIUM 16 ARE HYPOTHETICAL: FERNANDEZ WAS IN SCHISM AND NOT VIGANO’S TRADITION: A RE –TRIAL IS NEEDED BY POPE LEO
An appeal has to be made to Pope Leo pointing out that LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2 GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II refer to invisible cases in 1965-2025.So they do not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Pope Pius IX etc. It was Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez who was not affirming the Athanasius Creed and the rest of Tradition. He was interpreting Vatican Council II, irrationally. LG 8,14, 16 etc referred to visible exceptions for the dogma EENS etc, fr hm. He did not affirm and EENS and neither Vatican Council II, rational (LG 16 invisible), during the trial for schism of Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano..

So for Archbishop Vigano to accept Vatican Council II, Pope Leo must clarify that LG 8, 14, 16 etc refer to hypothetical cases only. They do not contradict the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms in the original.As they were interpreted over the centuries. Vatican Council II, (LG 8, 14, 16 etc) also does not contradict Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation. All. So Vatican Council II has a continuity with the Catechism of Pope Pius X and also the ecclesiology of the Roman Missal.
So the liberals like Fernandez who do not affirm de fide teachings and who interpret Vatican Council II dishonestly, are really in schism.
Archbishop Vigano must not be forced to accept a pope and Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, who interprets Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church dishonestly and so non traditionally.
There must be a re-trial of the Vigano case.
All the ecclesiastics must choose to be ethical on Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Presently, they interpret the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms, irrationally in public (LG 16 is visible) and there is no denial from them, for political-left reasons.
There should be a visitation of Vatican departments and those who are employed there. There should be a visitation of the Archdiocese of Chicago and Cardinal Cupich in his new office at the Vatican, the same for Cardinal Brian Farrell and the Legion of Christ at their universities and seminaries.

There must be a visitation of the Archdiocese of Paris and the new bishop at Frejuf Toulon, France. They must be asked to affirm Vatican Council II interpreted rationally only and also the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX. The Syllabus is no more contradicted by Vatican Council II. The FSSP and Emmanuel community must do the same.

How can the present new bishop of Frejuf Toulon be part of a visitation of the Emmanuel community, when he interprets Magisterial Documents irrationally and does not deny it? He then offers Mass in this condition and the monks in Alcuin Reid’s community have to attend and receive the Eucharist from him.

If the French bishops would interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise ( invisible people are visible), then theologically, they would be traditionalists, affirming the past ecclesiocentricism of the Church. All of them.

Don Pietro Leone for example, who features often on the web-blog Rorate Caeili, interprets Vatican Council II irrationally like Bishop Robert Barron and the liberals. Conservative modernists - are also a problem in the Church.- Lionel Andrades