CNA, AP, Reuters do not report that Vatican Council II is Feeneyite and aligned with the St. Benedict Center in New Hampshire USA.
CNA, AP, Reuters do not report that Vatican Council II is Feeneyite and aligned with the St. Benedict Center in New Hampshire USA.
Cardinal Fernandez, Bishop Peter Libasci, the bishop of Manchester in New Hampshire and Fr. Georges de Laire the Judicial Vicar in NH, interprets LG 8, 14 16, UR 3 NA 2 Gs 22 etc in Vatican Council II as physically visible cases then places restrictions on the St. Benedict Center (SBC).But if they are physically visible cases then the decree of Prohibitions now placed upon the SBC, would apply to them. Since they would be affirming Feeneyite EENS in harmony with Feeneyite Vatican Council II.
There is a legal issue in New Hampshire, USA. In public Cardinal Fernandez and Bishop Libasci confuse implicit cases as being explicit exceptions for Feeneyite EENS. Then they coerced the St.Benedict Center with and a secular Decree of Prohibitions for not accepting the falsehood.
In the ongoing Michael Voris Fr. Georges de Laire legal case , Fr. Laire still interprets Vatican Council II unethically like Cardinal Fernandez and Bishop Peter Libasci. The NH Curia does not interpret the Creeds, rationally.
There is false reporting by Simcha and Damien Fisher in New Hampshire. The SBC is not a sect. They affirm Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church rationally unlike Bishop Peter Libasci, Fr. Georges de Laire, Cardinal Fernandez and Pope Leo.
LG 16 visible is false. There is no such case at Newton’s level of matter in 2026. It is an empirical error and not Catholic theology. Fernandez made a factual mistake.
I interpret Vatican Council II not like the SSPX and neither like Pope Leo and Cardinal Fernandez but like Lionel Andrades. I have discovered Rat zinger’s hidden Secret. LG 16 is invisible for me but visible for the pope.
L.A APOLOGETICS
The important points in the Lionel Andrades apologetics are:-
1. AG 7 is aligned with EENS and LG 8, 14, 16 etc are not exceptions for AG 7 or EENS.
2. LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, are always hypothetical and invisible cases in 2026-2027.
3. So Vatican Council II is Ecclesiocentric with the hermeneutic continuity with Tradition (EENS etc).
4. Vatican Council II is dogmatic, apostolic, and magisterial. It can be interpreted rationally and so traditionally.
5. Vatican Council II is dogmatic when implicit cases (LG 16 invisible etc) are not confused as being explicit exceptions for the dogma EENS of the Council of Florence Florence 1442 etc.They are not visible exceptions in 2026 for the Athanasius Creed.
6. Today there is a Feeneyite and Cushingite Tradition. LG 16 is invisible or invisible today in the Creeds Councils and Catechisms. With LG 16 visible we have the Cushingite interpretation of the SSPX and Pope Leo.With LG 16 invisible we have the Feeneyite interpretation of the St. Benedict Center in New Hampshire.
7. Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church interpreted rationally (LG 16 invisible) is magisterial and apostolic and aligned with Tradition.
The interpretation of Vatican Council II by Cardinal Fernandez and Bishop Gilbert in Aberdeen, Scotland is dishonest. They confuse what is invisible as being visible. They contradict the above seven points. The Transalpine Redemptorists in Scotland can do nothing about this since they interpret the Council irrationally.
L.A INTERPRETATION TRADITIONAL
With the L.A interpretation of Vatican Council II we return to Tradition without having to reject Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
1. Ecclesiology is the same as at the time of the Papal States in Europe.
2. Mission and Evangelisation is Ecclesiocentric and Christocentric and not just Christocentric. The New Evangelisation today is only Christo centric.
3. There is an ecumenism of return to the Catholic Church with AG 7 aligned with EENS.
4. Inter- Religious Dialogue is missionary and is based upon AG 7 aligned with EENS and LG 16 etc not being explicit exceptions for either, AG 7 or EENS..
5. Religious liberty is based upon EENS /AG 7 and according to the ecclesiology and times of the Papal States in Europe. The Council is traditional and ecclesiocenric and has a continuity with the Middle Ages.
6. Collegiality is traditional since the Council is traditional. Collegiality would be an issue only if the Council was liberal.
7. The Catechism of the Catholic Church is aligned with all the old Catechisms.
I go for the Novus Ordo Mass with Vatican Council II interpreted rationally in harmony with the past ecclesiology. The Novus Ordo Mass is Magisterial and Apostolic in the lex orandi and is the same as the Latin Mass for me. The Novus Ordo Mass also is the Sacrifice of Jesus enacted in a bloody way.
When the traditionalists, including the SBC, interpret Vatican Council II rationally, they are in opposition with Card. Fernandez and the Vatican. Fernandez interprets the Council schismatically and so there is schism with the centuries. The traditionalists cannot oppose this since they too interpret the Council irrationally. This was Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre’s mistake along with bishop Galaratta and Fellay.
Lionel Andrades is a Feeneyite theologically aligned with the SBC and not the SSPX. There now is a Feeneyite and Cushingite Tradition. For the SSPX (and the liberals) Tradition is Cushingite. For the SBC in NH, Tradition is Feeneyite.
Fernandez repeated the Rahner LG 16 visible factual error in the schism charge, against the SSPX. Vatican Council II can be interpreted with LG 16 invisible. The choice can be given to the SSPX.
Remember Fernandez’s schism-charge against the SSPX, Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano and the Discalced Carmelite nuns in Arlington, Texas, confused what is invisible as being visible. This is an objective error. It is a secular error. LG 16 irrational is not part of the deposit of the faith.
CNA, AP, Reuters do not report that Vatican Council II is Feeneyite and aligned with the St. Benedict Center in New Hampshire USA and not Cardinal Fernandez.
- Lionel Andrades