Pope Benedict excommunicated Bishop Richard Williamson and Fr. Florian Abrahamowich for political reasons. He was following the orders of the Jewish Anti Defamation League(ADL).Bishop Bernard Fellay also expelled Williamson and Abrahamowich to appease the Jewish Left and protect the SSPX’s temporal interests. Pope Benedict and Bishop Fellay also interpreted Vatican Council II with, and not without, the Boston Heresy of Pius XII, Cardinal Richard Cushing and the American Jesuits. This was political. It still is political-left for Fr. Davide Pagliarani the SSPX Superior General, who does not interpret the Council rationally.
In general
the books on Vatican Council II, published by the Angelus Press, like those
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Fr. Franz Schmidberger were political and dishonest.
Since the Boston Heresy produces a fake break with Tradition. This can be
avoided. But may be they were just ignorant. There was no ill will.
The books by
Christopher Ferrara, Roberto dei Mattei, Fr. Jean Marie Gleize, Fr. Francois
Laisney, Christina Siccardi and many others, chose to interpret the Council
irrationally. This was probably due to ignorance.
But there
are many supporters of the SSPX who are informed and yet they interpret the
Council irrationally and not rationally.
Taylor
Marshall and Eric Sammons are looking after their family interests. Since
affirming the Council rationally would be considered Anti Semitic. So they
choose to interpret Vatican Council II with the Boston Heresy. They choose to
confuse what is invisible as being visible.
Louie
Verrecchio says he has a family to support. So he will interpret LG 8, LG 14,
LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, as referring to physically visible and not
invisible cases in 1949-2023.
Like Bishop
Robert Barron and Pope Francis who know about the rational option, they will
allow Catholics to remain in ignorance.
Archbishop
Carlo Vigano is a rich man and so if he is labeled Anti Semitic, he will be
expelled from the Church and his financial freedom will be restricted.
Fr. John
Zuhlsdorf and Michael Voris like the SSPX are prudent on Vatican Council II.
The American bishops of the USCCB in its inter-religious programs do not inform non Catholics that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc., can be interpreted as being only hypothetical and so not practical exceptions for Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).
The excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney was
lifted during his lifetime without him having to recant. He simply had to
recite the Creed and he chose the Athanasius Creed which says outside the
Church there is no salvation.
EWTN
apologists like Raymond Arroyo like the American bishops do not state that LG
8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, do not really contradict the Athanasius
Creed and EENS according to Fr. Leonard Feeney. Instead there is continuity
with the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the Catechisms of Pius X and
Trent, on traditional EENS.
So if EWTN
and Pope Francis and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj interpreted Vatican Council II rationally
there would no more be liberalism in the Catholic Church.
Instead
liberalism was supported when Archbishop Augustine di Noia and Archbishop
Giacomo Morandi issued a Decree of Prohibitions against the St. Benedict Center
in New Hampshire, for not interpreting the Catechism of the Catholic Church (847-848
on invincible ignorance) irrationally. Their error is there in public on the
website of the Diocese of Manchester, USA. This is the communication with
Brother Andre Marie micm. This is public heresy and schism and it is official
and political.
For the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible
ignorance) is an objective case in the present times. It is an alleged
practical example of salvation outside the Catholic Church. So the strict
interpretation of EENS of the St. Benedict Center, NH, is obsolete for the CDF,
as it was for Pope Benedict.
So when the
SSPX say that they reject Vatican Council II, they prudently do not clarify
that they reject the Council with LG 8 etc, being hypothetical only. If the
SSPX said that LG 8 etc do not refer to objective cases in the present times
(1965-2023) they would be rational and honest. But they will be opposed by the
ADL.
Even Pope Pius XII and Archbishop Lefebvre chose to be irrational and political when they accepted the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston. So the SSPX interprets Vatican Council II like Bishop Robert Barron.
So now we
have two interpretations of Vatican Council II. We have the interpretation of
the SSPX, with the false premise and we have the interpretation of the St.
Benedict Center, NH, without the false premise. The SSPX, like the conservative
blogs like Rorate Caeili are keeping Catholics in ignorance and are not telling
them about the rational option they have in the interpretation of Vatican
Council.
The
conspiracy continues.
- Lionel Andrades
APRIL 15, 2023
Bishop Fellay remains part of the conspiracy on Vatican Council II
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment