If they did make the leap it would be a disappointment for Cardinals Marx, Nicols and Kasper. Since they would be up against a new problem. The trads would not only be accepting the Council but interpreting it in harmony with the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology, an ecumenism of return and Feeneyite EENS.

The SSPX system is clogged.Jammed. They don't know how to respond to me. 'How to answer ?'- they ask themselves. The issue is Vatican Council II and not Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus only.

They cannot brush me off as a Feeneyite, since the issue is LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc which are not exceptions to the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return. For Bishop Bernard Fellay and Archbishop Lefebvre they were exceptions. LG 8, LG 14 and LG 16 were exceptions to traditional EENS for them.UR 3 was an exception to the past ecumenism of the Catholic Church.These were exceptions to EENS for them, I repeat.The evidence is there in black and white on the Internet in articles, books and talks.

Now the SSPX knows that UR 3 is not an exception to the past ecumenism of return and so I am correct and the SSPX bishops were always wrong.

So how do they say that they were wrong all these years?How do they admit that they were wrong what is the process? How do they bring this out? Their system is jammed.

They are waiting. The have sat this one out and years have passed and the problem has not gone away.Fr.Franz Schmidberger knows that he has made a theological and doctrinal mistake but how can he say this in public to SSPX supporters?

Then how can he support Feeneyite EENS and oppose the Left? They deserted Bishop Williamson to please the Left.

In the past they could speak vaguely about Vatican Council II  and get away with it . Now the debate is fine tuned.You are either a Feeneyite or Cushingite on EENS and Vatican Council II.

You criticize the ecumenism of Vatican Council II but you are referring to Vatican Council II Cushingite and not Vatican Council II, Feeneyite.

You criticize Vatican Council II on other religions - but you are referring to Vatican Council II with the false premise and not without it.

You criticize the concept of collegiality but your referring to Vatican Council II Cushingite. Since with Vatican Council II, Feeneyite, the ecclesiology of the Church does not change.So collegiality is no more an issue.If the College of Cardinals are in harmony with EENS, the past ecclesiology, an ecumenism of return, the Social Reign of Christ the King and Vatican Council II(Feeneyite) where is the problem  with collegiality. This is no more an issue.

So how can SSPX make the leap and say that Vatican Council II is traditional ? I don't know.

If they did make the leap it would be a disappointment for Cardinals Marx, Nicols and Kasper. Since they would be up against a new problem. The trads would not only be accepting the Council but interpreting it in harmony with the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology, an ecumenism of return and Feeneyite EENS.All this was the theological basis for the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King in law and politics and the non separation of Church and State.-Lionel Andrades