At the Coetus Patrem International Discussion on Vatican Council II yesterday none of the speakers said that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II and Pope Francis in Traditionis Custode chose the irrational one

At the Coetus Patrem International Discussion on Vatican Council II yesterday none of the speakers said that there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II and Pope Francis in Traditionis Custode chose the irrational one.

Also none of them said that in Dijone, France, 

Bishop Roland Minnerath continues to interpret 

Vatican Council II with the Fake Premise.He  does not choose the Rational Premise which would make him a traditionalist like the Ecclesia Dei communities.

It would be the same for the American bishops.

A recent stage of this dynamic was constituted by Vatican Council II where the Catholic episcopate came together to listen and to discern the path for the Church indicated by the Holy Spirit. To doubt the Council is to doubt the intentioins of the very Fathers who exercised their collegial power in a solemn manner cum Pietro et sub Pietro in an ecumenical council, and, in the final analysisi, to doubt the Holy Spirit himself who guides the Church - Letter of Pope Francis which accompanies Traditionis Custode.

 Pope Francis in Traditionis Custode interpreted Vatican Council II with the False Premise and this cannot be the work of the Holy Spirit. So Traditionis Custode is not Magisterial on Vatican Council II. Pope Francis has to interpret Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents  with the Rational Premise and then there is no more a New Magisterium.

Recently Archbishop Arthur Roche, Prefect of Congregation for Divine Worship said that the the Latin Mass clashed with the New Magisterium, which came from Vatican Council II. He meant the Council interpreted with the False Premise.

But with the Rational Premise there is harmony with the past Magisterium of the Catholic Church and the ecclesiology of the Church is exclusivist before and after Vatican Council II.

Pope Francis needs to also inform Alberto Melloni of the Bologna School in Italy, to interpret Vatican Council II ethically.

Similarly the New Evangelisation of Cardinal Ragle and Bishop Robert Barron must be based upon Vatican Council II, Feeneyite and not Cushingite.

All this was missing in the discussion whose participants are still stuck in 1965 and those times.

Pope Benedict was not told that all his books on Vatican Council II, Ecclesiology etc, carry the Cushingite germ.There is an epidemic in the Church and the official heresy and schism has to be controlled.The virus is also there among the traditionalist and conservative Catholics.

Bishop Robert Barron and Massimo Faggioli among 

others wrote books on Vatican Council II 

interpreted with the Fake Premise and not the 

Rational Premise.The error needs to be 

acknowledged.Instead, one of the participants in 

the discussion Robert Fastiggi, indicated that he will continue to write books, articles  and teach Catholic theology with the Irrational Premise, False Inference and Non Traditional Conclusion. -Lionel Andrades

___________________________________________

   

  

___________________________________