If Jimmy Akin and Louie Verrecchio did not use the false premise to interpret Vatican Council II then the former would not contradict Tradition and reject it, supporting liberalism. The latter would not contradict Tradition, and then wrongly put the blame on Vatican Council II and not the false premise

 If Jimmy Akin and Louie Verrecchio did not use the false premise to interpret Vatican Council II then the former  would not contradict Tradition and reject it, supporting liberalism. The latter would not contradict Tradition, and then wrongly put the blame on Vatican Council II and not the false premise. 

It's the false premise which creates the heremeneutic of rupture with Tradition (EENS etc) irrespective if  you are a liberal or Lefebvrist.

Without the false premise and the rupture with Tradition, the present two popes, the SSPX bishops and priests, Michael Voris and the CMTV Staff and Cardinal Kasper and Cardinal Ladaria,  would be affirming Vatican Council II in harmony with the strict interpretation of EENS. Ad Gentes 7 would be in harmony with EENS and LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc would not be exceptions. There would be doctrinal unity. -Lionel Andrades

 DECEMBER 8, 2020

Jimmy Akin and Louie Verrecchio two sides of the same coin

Jimmy Akins is a liberal Cushingite and Louie Verrecchio is a Lefbvrist Cushinigte. They both have the New Theology in common. It is created with a false premise.

Without the false premise there is no theological basis for Akins liberalism.

Without the false premise there is no theological basis for Verrecchio's interpretation of Vatican Council II,creating a rupture with Tradition, which he then rejects.-Lionel Andrades