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
No comments:
Post a Comment