Cardinal Braz de Avez, Archbishops Carbello, Pozzo,Di Noia and the media Reuters, Associated Press, La Stampa could clarify if they are referring to Vatican Council II interpreted with LG 16 being visible or invisible since either way the interpretation of the Council II changes.

1.So now when Reuters, Associated Press, La Stampa and Archbishops Pozzo and Di Noia  say that the SSPX has to accept Vatican Council II for canonical recognition, may be some good soul can help the SSPX out and ask all the parties concerned, in public, if they are referring to Vatican Council II with LG 16 being visible or invisible?

2.Similarly the next time Cardinal Braz de Avez says that the Franciscans of the Immaculate must accept Vatican Council II, may be someone not associated with the traditionalists, who are part of the problem, could clarify if he is referring to a Council with LG 16 being invisible or visible?

3.Likewise when Archbishop Jose Rodriguez Carballo says that the contemplative communities must accept Vatican Council II, may be  a non Catholic who has not been conditioned like educated Catholics, could ask him, in public, if he is referring to Vatican Council II with LG 8, LG 14,LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, seen as known people saved outside the Church in the present times or are they just hypothetical cases? Since either way the interpretation of Vatican Council II changes. The Council supports or rejects the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS, the Syllabus of Errors and the past ecclesiology.
So the interpretation of Vatican Council II depends upon LG 16 etc as referring to visible or invisible people in the present times, saved outside the Church. 1

-Lionel Andrades

1.

JULY 19, 2018

Nicole Winfield of the Associated Press and Phillip Pullela of Reuters continue the propaganda on Vatican Council II by asssuming LG 16 refers to a visible and known person saved outside the Catholic Church    

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/07/nicole-winfield-of-associated-press-and.html