When Pope Benedict refused to give canonical recognition to the SSPX unless they accepted Vatican Council II schismatically with the false premise it was coercion. Even today the Ecclesia Dei communities have to follow the popes' schismatic interpretation of the Council for canonical recognition and permission to offer the Latin Mass

WHEN POPE BENEDICT REFUSED TO GIVE CANONICAL RECOGNITION TO THE SSPX UNLES THEY ACCEPTED VATICAN COUNCIL SCHISMATICALLY WITH THE FALSE PREMISE IT WAS COERCION.EVEN TODAY THE TWO POPES DO NOT WANT THE WHOLE CHURCH TO INTERPRET MAGISTERIAL DOCUMENTS NON-SCISMATICALLY WITH THE RATIONAL PREMISE.THEY WANT A HERMENEUTIC OF RUPTURE WITH THE PAST.
THEY WANT THE ECCLESIA DEI COMMUNITIES TO FOLLOW THE POPES SCHISMATIC INTERPRETATION OF THE COUNCIL FOR CANONICAL RECOGNITION AND PERMISSION TO OFFER THE LATIN MASS.

If Pope Paul VI interpreted Vatican Council II with the rational premise there would be no liberalism.Ratzinger, Rahner,Cushing and Murray could do nothing.Now if Pope Francis interprets the Council with the rational premise the division, caused by liberalism, ends.It is the false premise which creates the liberal-conservative divide.Without the common fake premise there is no development of doctrine.Extra ecclesiam nulla salus today would be the same as the in the 16th century for Pope Francis, Pope Benedict and me.
With Summorum Pontificum, Pope Benedict hoped that the Society of St. Pius X would accept Vatican Council II interpreted with the false premise and also the non traditional, liberal conclusion.
It did not work out.

He announced that the SSPX problem was a doctrinal issue. They had to interpret Vatican Council II irrationally, accept the non traditional conclusion and then they would not be in schism for rejecting Vatican Council II.

He did not tell them that he was in schism . Since there were two interpretations of the Council, one rational and the other irrational, If the SSPX would accept Vatican Council II with the rational premise there would be no break with the past Magisterium and Tradition.No schism.

If Pope Benedict does not confuse what is invisible as being physically visible in the interpretation of Vatican Council II, he would be Feeneyite on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.He would be ecclesiocentric. Then much of his writings in Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus, which are Christocentric only, would be non Magisterial.He used the false premise and so rejected the ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.There was a New Theology created with the fake premise.

When Pope Benedict refused to give canonical recognition to the SSPX , unless they accepted Vatican Council II with the false premise,it was coercion.Even today the two popes and the Left do not want the SSPX , and the whole Church, to interpret Vatican Council II with the rational premise.

They want the Ecclesia Dei communities to follow the popes’ schismatic interpretation of the Council for canonical recognition and permission to offer the Latin Mass. This is the familiar coercion. -Lionel Andrades

Lionel Andrades

Promoter of the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II.For him the Council is dogmatic and not only pastoral.

Writer on the discovery of the two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one is rational and the other is irrational, one is interpreted with the false premise and the other without it. One is Magisterial and the other, the common one, is non Magisterial.
It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms.
There can be two interpretations.

Why should Catholics choose an irrational version which is heretical, non traditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional ?

Blog: Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission )

E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com