There is not a single report on Traditionis Custode which
informs Pope Francis that all the books on Vatican Council II are written with
a fake premise instead of a rational premise, inference and traditional
conclusion.
Peter Kwasniewski did not mention it in his talk at Denver and
he recommended books by the Lefebvrists,who also do not interpret Vatican
Council II with the rational premise.They are politically correct like the
liberals.
Kwasniewski uses a false premise to create a fake rupture with
Tradition and does not deny it since this is expected of him, by the Left. If
the other Lefebvrists ( Schneider, Mattei, Marshall, Vigano, Matt and Burke)
did not use the fake premise to interpret Vatican Council II they would be
affirming extra ecclesiam nulla salus( with no exceptions mentioned in the
Council-text), the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( with no exceptions for
an ecumenism of return) and the Athanasius Creed ( which is no more
contradicted by Lumen Gentium).
If they are rational on Vatican Council II then they know that
they will be persecuted like the St. Benedict Center, NH, USA.
So the alleged traditionalists have compromised and do not write
or talk about Vatican Council II interpreted with a rational premise.
Don Pietro Leone on
Rorate Caeili does not make the invisible-visible distinction when writing on
Vatican Council II in harmony with the popes . Sometimes it is said or asked
,in correspondence, ‘Why should we make the invisible-visible distinction? And I
respond, ‘ You are already making the invisible-visible distinction
unknowingly. I am calling attention to it. If LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2,
GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II are exceptions for Feeneyite EENS or the
Syllabus of Errors for you, then in your mind you project them as being visible’.If
LG 8, LG 16 etc were invisible cases in 2021, as they are for me, then the
Lefebvrists and liberals would be affirming the Catechism of Pope Pius X (
24Q,27Q) with invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire not being
exceptions. The Catechism would not contradict itself.
We cannot physically and visibly, in Newton’s time and space,
see someone saved in invincible ignorance. It can only be known to God.
For Bishop Donald Sanborn and the sedevacantists CMRI and MHFM,
Vatican Council II is a rupture with Tradition. So they are telling us that LG
8, LG 16, UR 3 etc refer to physically visible cases of salvation outside the
Catholic Church, in specfic and known cases, in 1965-2021. This is the New
Theology of the liberals and the popes.It is also shared by Peter Kwasniewski.
There cannot be a Restoration in the Church because the
Lefebvrists are the biggest asset of the progressivists. Pope Francis in
Traditionis Custode interpreted Vatican Council II like the both of them.-Lionel Andrades
No comments:
Post a Comment