FERNANDEZ VIOLATES SECULAR AND MORAL LAWS
FERNANDEZ VIOLATES SECULAR AND MORAL LAWS
Pope Leo and Cardinal Fernandez have excommunicated six bishops of the SSPX since the bishops do not accept Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally and schismatically, as do the cardinals and bishops in the mainline Catholic Church.There are legal restrictions on the SSPX, like those placed upon the religious community, Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St. Benedict Center in New Hampshire, USA.In both cases, Cardinal Fernandez uses a false premise and inference to interpret Vatican Council II and produce a non traditional conclusion. He then coerces Catholics who do not do so.
To be accepted by Cardinal Fernandez,it is obligatory for Catholics, to lie and project Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition. This is even though the Council is really Ecclesiocentric and Christocentric, in harmony with the past Church Councils, the Catechisms and the Creeds.
The ABC News, like other media, for example, refer to the SSPX as ‘ultra traditionalists’ when it is Vatican Council II interpreted rationally, which is ‘ultra traditionalist’. This would be embarrassing for Pope Leo and Cardinal Fernandez.So they do not affirm Vatican Council II interpreted with a rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion.
Maintaining a lie and deception in public, with the use of force, for secular objectives, and also religious ones, could be coercion. It could be a misdemeanour in some countries.
Pope Leo and Cardinal Fernandez do not interpret Vatican Council II, the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms rationally for political reasons. Now they force there new doctrines upon Catholics, with the assistance of secular lobbies.
Invisible cases of the baptism of desire, for example, and being saved in invincible ignorance, outside the visible boundaries of the Church, without faith and baptism, cannot be projected as visible exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They are not exceptions for the Athanasius Creed, the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Roman Missal and an ecumenism of return of the Syllabus of Pius IX. Confusing what is implicit as being explicit in the interpretation of Vatican Council II was a mistake made also by Cardinal Fernandez during the schism-trial of Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano.
How can the pope imply that invisible people in 2026 are visible for him on earth and Heaven and then suggest that they are exceptions for traditional teachings, de fide teachings?.This is a moral issue even by secular standards. It is a scandal by social standards.
This is not the Catholic Church.
No one has filed an appeal against Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez’s values, his priorities and morals according to Italian social standards and the Italian Constitution.
2. How can he claim, people who are dead ( saved with I.I or BOD) and who are now visible only to God, are exceptions for de fide teachings. He suggests that these dead and saved people, are visible to him on earth and Heaven. They are saved outside the Catholic Church and are exceptions for traditional teachings of the Catholic Church on salvation. He can see them in Heaven and on earth at the same time, clashing with the Principle of Non Contradiction of Aristotle. He can see dead people on earth who are objective exceptions for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, clashing with Newtons laws of Physics.
I repeat , how can a cardinal who does not affirm the Nicene, Apostles and Athanasius Creed in the original, file a schism charge against the SSPX and priests and religious sisters. He is in schism when he is unable to affirm the Athanasius Creed, for example which says all need to be Catholic for salvation. This Creed has no explicit exception mentioned in Vatican Council II.
THEORETICAL CASES ARE PRACTICAL EXCEPTIONS FOR EENS ETC
How can he claim people who are dead ( saved in invincible ignorance etc) and now are visible only to God, be exceptions in 2026, for de fide teachings. Theoretical cases are practical exceptions for an ecumenism of return and the teaching on outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation, of the catechisms.
3. How can he maintain a legal Decree of Prohibitions against the St. Benedict Center in New Hampshire, USA who held the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS of the Council of Florence 1442. For them EENS is aligned with Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church interpreted rationally and traditionally. They affirm all the Creeds in the original and do not deny it in public like Pope Leo and the College of Cardinals and the bishops’ conferences.
4. How could Cardinal Fernandez interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and, perhaps illegally condemn the Arlington Carmelite Discalced Sisters in Texas, who do not follow his deception, with Vatican Council II , irrational.? It clashes with their Carmelite spirituality and tradition. Does the US Constitution permit this?
Why is the traditionalist Fr. Alexander M. Minutella side lined and not the Archbishop of Palermo?
5. La Sapienza and the John Lateran University Department of Canon Law maintain the secular deception on Vatican Council II, of Cardinal Fernandez and so students who do not accept it cannot be admitted at Catholic universities in Rome. Seminarians are coerced.
MEDIA TELLS A LIE ON VATICAN COUNCIL II
6. It has been over a year now that the news agency Reuters at their office in Rome, have reported on Vatican Council II with the common lie i.e Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition. Phillip Pullela and Joshua McElwee persist even after being informed. It is the same with the Associated Press who follow ideology and not objectivety and honesty. There has been no correction or denial from the Holy See Press Office over the year.
7. Fernandez’s interpretation of Vatican Council II has legal ramifications.How can he accept a judge to say that LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 are visible and objective cases in the present times instead of theoretical and hypothetical cases, which can be known only to God . Since they are visible, they are visible for Cardinal Fernandez, they are objective exceptions for the SSPX concept of Tradition. A judge is expected to lie, too. ? -Lionel Andrades
AI on X indicates Pope Leo and Cardinal …
TRANSALPINE REDEMPTORISTS MUST CHOOSE THE RATIONAL VERSION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II BEFORE CARD.. FERNANDEZ AND BISHOP GILBERT ATTACK
TRANSALPINE REDEMPTORISTS MUST CHOOSE THE …
Fr. Georges de Laire did not tell Michael Voris and Bro. Andre Marie micm that with LG 8,14,16 invisible Vatican Council II supports Feeneyite EENS. This was Ratzinger's Secret.
Fr. Georges de Laire did not tell Michael Voris …
ARCHBISHOP VIGANO MUST APPEAL AGAINST ERRORS IN HIS SCHISM- TRIAL: VATICAN COUNCIL II RATIONAL IS NO MORE AN ISSUE FOR THE TRADITIONALISTS.
ARCHBISHOP VIGANO MUST APPEAL AGAINST ERRORS IN …
THE LIONEL ANDRADES INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II IS DOGMATIC, MAGISTERIAL, APOSTOLIC, RATIONAL AND ETHICAL: POPE LEO MUST ADAPT
THE LIONEL ANDRADES INTERPRETATION OF VATICAN …
Cardinal Ratzinger did not tell Lefebvre and Feeney that VC 2 was traditional when the orthodox blue passages were not contradicted by the hypothetical red passages. Pope Leo and cardinals Fernandez, Muller and Ladaria maintain the secret today
Cardinal Ratzinger did not tell Lefebvre and …
POPE LEO HIDES RATZINGER’S SECRET FROM FR. DAVIDE PAGLIARANI: AG 7 IS ALIGNED WITH EENS AND LG 16 IS NOT AN EXPLICIT EXCEPTION FOR AG7 AND EENS. VATICAN COUNCIL II IS ECCLESIOCENTRIC
POPE LEO HIDES RATZINGER’S SECRET FROM FR. …
NEW SSPX BISHOPS VOW OBEDIENCE TO POPE LEO ON SACRED TRADITION AND NOT VATICAN COUNCIL II, IRRATIONAL
NEW SSPX BISHOPS VOW OBEDIENCE TO POPE LEO ON …
TIME TO FILE CANONICAL PETITIONS AGAINST CARDINAL FERNANDEZ AND THE BISHOPS AND PRIESTS
TIME TO FILE CANONICAL PETITIONS AGAINST …
Fr. Georges de Laire did not tell Michael Voris …