Franciscan of the Immaculate lawyers need to confirm if their clients are Catholics

There are two groups of the Franciscans of the Immaculate and both sides have their lawyers. It would be useful if their lawyers could clarify that their clients are Catholics.Presently both groups interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise creating a new understanding of the Creeds, Catechism and other Magisterial documents.

The lawyers could clarify that in general the books and articles on Vatican Council II a) are written with a false premise, inference and conclusion 2) and their clients avoid this false premise, inference and conclusion 3) and they interpret Vatican Council II rationally and in harmony with Tradition.

So without this common error, their clients are Catholics for whom LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to only hypothetical and theoretical cases. They are not personally known non Catholics saved outside the Church in 2020.

So Vatican Council II is not a rupture with exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church for their clients.Vatican Council II has a 'hermeneutic of continuity' with EENS, Athanasius Creed, Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX etc.

Their client cannot legally be Catholic and consider invisible people as being visible. This is a false premise.It is a lie.

Then their inference would be wrong.Since there are no known examples of salvation outside the Church based on invisible non Catholics being visible.There would be a false conclusion with the irrational premise.It would be saying that Vatican Council II is a rupture with Tradition.

When the two communities interpret Vatican Council II with a false  premise, inference and conclusion to create a rupture with the Creeds, Catechisms and dogma EENS  then how can they legally be considered Catholics ?

According to Canon Law a Superior, Rector and Parish Priest has to be Catholic.

According to Italian secular law a Superior etc who claims he is a Catholic has to be a practising Catholic, otherwise it is telling a lie.

The judges and magistrates who work with this case have studied at universities where they interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise to create a non traditional conclusion.This has been the objective error of the popes from Paul VI to Francis.

Vatican Council II can be interpreted without the false premise . The premise would be invisible cases of LG 8, LG 16 etc are always invisible.

So Vatican Council II would then not be a rupture with Tradition.It would be in harmony with EENS, Athanasius Creed, Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, Catechism of Pope Pius X( 24 Q, 27 Q)  etc.

The Church would once again teach that it has a superiority and exclusiveness in salvation without rejecting Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades