There can only be a clarification if they agree that there can be an interpretation of Vatican Council II with or without an irrational premise and conclusion?
This is the central thesis of what I am saying.
https://gloria.tv/video/KGTNnspuhZyG6uMAzDyAv4vvJ
SEPTEMBER 17, 2015
Michael Voris does not say Cardinal Ratzinger was in heresy and schism at the time of the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvrehttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/09/michael-voris-does-not-say-cardinal.html
Michael Voris has compromised and wants the SSPX to do the same
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/09/michael-voris-has-compromised-and-want.htmlhttp://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/why-i-left-the-sspx-milieu
Similar to Dominus Iesus and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Cardinal Ratzinger used an irrational inference in Ut Unum Sin
Franciscans of the Immaculate, SSPX note : Cardinal Ratzinger used an irrational inference in the interpretation of Dominus Iesus
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/12/franciscans-of-immaculate-sspx-note.html
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/12/franciscans-of-immaculate-sspx-note.html
No comments:
Post a Comment