TRADITIONALISTS NOW HAVE A NEW VERSION OF VATICAN COUNCIL II. THE COUNCIL IS ALIGNED WITH THE MIDDLE AGES
15.12.2025Traditionalists now have a new version of Vatican Council II which transmutes the old liberal version with a conservative and orthodox one.The text is still the same but the conclusion is different.Now when Cardinal Gerhardt Muller gives another interview to the German media or to EWTN The World Over, and makes the traditionalist-liberal division, traditionalists must check him in public. Show him that the Council is no more progressivist. Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation) is aligned with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS)., while invisible and hypothetical cases of LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II are not explicit exceptions for AG 7 or EENS. They are not explicit exceptions for the Athanasius Creed, the ecumenism of return of the Syllabus of Pope Pius IX and the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q, 27Q).
Bishop Michael Olsen, in Fort Worth, Texas must be asked how can he remain a bishop when he does not affirm Vatican Council II in harmony with the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Roman Missal, the Athanasius Creed, the dogma EENS etc.
Without the False Premise (invisible cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are visible in 2025) where is the theology in Vatican Council II to support the Synods or the LGBT ideology?
It is now the traditionalists who will be asking questions since the Council is right up their alley. The Council is comfortable with Tradition. We know how to produce the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition- always. It is as easy as turning a light switch on. We simply look at LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as hypothetical cases. The rest will follow in time.
Vatican Council II has changed it is no more the same.
If Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez still interprets Vatican Council II irrationally the rank and file Catholic will know that he is dishonest.He can no more support all types of liberalism in the name of Vatican Council II.
In the Catechism of Pope Pius X, 24Q and 29Q are no more contradicted by 29Q.In the Catechism of Pope John Paul II, 845-846 is no more contradicted by CCC 847-848. The world has moved on.There is nothing in Lumen Gentium, Nostra Aetate and Gaudium et Specs to contradict Ad Gentes 7 or EENS.
Bishop Barron must be shown how Hans Urs Balthazar used the False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and so liberally. It was the same with Rahner, Ratzinger, Congar, Lubac, Lehmann, Kung and Giardini. And also Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Michael Davies, Dietrich von Hildebrand, Romano Amerio, Plineo Correa D’Oliveira, Atila Guimares, Fr. Nicholas Gruner, Christopher Ferrara, John Vennari. They did not correct the interpretation of Pope Paul VI with the False Premise. There was also no comment from Fr. Leonard Feeney, Catherine Clarke Goddard and Brother Francis Maluf micm. They did not affirm the traditional teachings of the Church in harmony with Vatican Council II interpreted rationally i.e. by not confusing what is invisible as being visible.
Whatever is your opinion about Fr. Leonard Feeney, Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church still have to be interpreted rationally and so traditionally. The Council supports ‘the strict interpretation ‘of EENS.
So I am affirming the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church in harmony with the Bible, Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I mostly go for Holy Mass in Italian and English and sometimes in Latin.At the Novus Ordo Mass my ecclesiology is traditional.
It is now known that the Council interpreted irrationally is a rupture with Tradition. They must interpret the Council rationally in harmony with Tradition, as I have done. – Lionel Andrades