NOW THAT POPE LEO AND THE CARDINALS AGREE THAT LG 16 IS HYPOTHETICAL AND SO VC2 IS TRADITIONAL THE SSPX WITH TRADITION CANNOT BE IN SCHISM
NOW THAT POPE LEO AND THE CARDINALS AGREE THAT LG 16 IS HYPOTHETICAL AND SO VC2 IS TRADITIONAL THE SSPX WITH TRADITION CANNOT BE IN SCHISM
The SSPX cannot be in schism when Vatican Council II and the pope are traditional. The ecclesial hierarchy supports the SSPX.
The pope and cardinals cannot choose the Irrational Premise and the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II now that they know that there is a rational option. It would be unethical to continue to interpret Vatican Council II with the Irrational Premise now that the Rational Premise has been discovered.
Not only Pope Leo, but also cardinals Cupich, Roche, Tobin, Hollerich, Grech, Radcliffe, McElroy and Parolin agree with me. They agree that Lumen Gentium 16 refers to an invisible and theoretical case in 1965-2026.
So with the Rational Premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II, the future bishops consecrated by the SSPX and Pope Leo would be traditional.
There is no denial from Archbishop Rino Fisichella, Paulo Ruffini and Matteo Bruni.
When the SSPX and the pope choose the Rational Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and the conclusion has to be traditional and ecclesiocentric then the pope and the SSPX are on the same wavelength. The mainline Catholic Church is traditional and no more liberal.
I say this when not only Pope Leo, but also cardinals Cupich, Roche, Tobin, Hollerich, Grech, Radcliffe, McElroy and Parolin agree with me. They agree that Lumen Gentium 16 refers to an invisible and theoretical case in 1965-2026.It would be the same for the bishops who are familiar with what I have been writing for over a year on X and Gloria TV. There is no denial. There is no denial from Cardinal Zuppi and Baldasarre in Italy. There is no denial from the bishop in the sector of Rome where I live and neither from the Parish Priest here. They agree with me.
I keep saying that there are no physically visible cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14) and being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) and they agree with me.
There is no denial from Archbishop Rino Fisichella, Paulo Ruffini and Matteo Bruni.
So with the Rational Premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II, the future bishops consecrated by the SSPX and Pope Leo would be traditional. It would be unethical to continue to interpret Vatican Council II with the Irrational Premise now that the Rational Premise has been discovered.
Future Apostolic Visitations would have to be traditional and based upon the rational and honest interpretation of Vatican Council II. It would be meaningless for the bishops to choose sedevacantism when the Council and the pope are traditional.
Collegiality is no more an issue since all bishops and cardinals and the pope would have to be only traditional since Vatican Council II is no more liberal.
Also inter- religious dialogue and ecumenism would be based upon Vatican Council II rational and traditional and so there would be no change in faith, morals, mission, ecclesiology etc. Religious liberty would be the same as at the time of the Papal States when they held the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which is now aligned with Ad Gentes
7.
The SSPX cannot be in schism when Vatican Council II and the pope are traditional. Vatican Council II rational is magisterial and apostolic but Vatican Council II irrational is not magisterial or apostolic. . It is schismatic.
Vatican Council II, rational does not leave any room for the LGBT agenda. So if cardinals Radcliffe and McElroy do not accept Vatican Council II, interpreted rationally and neither the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms in harmony with Vatican Council II, interpreted with the Rational Premise, they would be in schism. The progressivists would be in schism when the Council is traditional.
So it would mean Rahner, Ratzinger, Congar and Balthazar are in schism with Rahner’s LG 16 visible premise. It would be the same for Larry Chapp, Mark Lambert and Bishop Barron. They do not affirm the Athanasius Creed for example, which does not have any explicit exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II. They choose to interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and unethically when they have a rational, traditional and ethical option.
With the Rational Premise the SSPX would be in the main line Church since Vatican Council II, rational would be apostolic and magisterial. This is irrespective if the pope and cardinals are in schism when they continue with the Irrational Premise. – Lionel Andrades
10.03.2025
POPE LEO AND THE CARDINALS AND BISHOPS AGREE WITH ME : VATICAN COUNCIL II IS ALIGNED WITH THE ROMAN MISSAL OF THE LATIN MASS
POPE LEO AND THE CARDINALS AND BISHOPS AGREE …