Traditionis Custode creates division on the Eucharist it supports sacrilege and scandal when it changes the interpretation of Vatican Council II with a False Premise to produce political liberalism in the Church.

 

Traditionis Custode creates division on the Eucharist it supports sacrilege and scandal when it changes the interpretation of Vatican Council II with a False Premise to produce political liberalism in the Church.

If the popes from Paul VI had interpreted Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise there would not be a new ecclesiology, new ecumenism, etc since the Council would support the Athanasius Creed which states Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith unless every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.

Now with the Fake Premise (invisible cases are physically visible in 1965-2021, Lumen Gentium 16(invincible ignorance), for example, is an example of visible salvation outside the Church and a practical exception for the Athanasius Creed, dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) etc), the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church is made obsolete.

So Cardinal Walter Kasper could say that since the ecclesiology of the Church had been changed with Vatican Council II (interpreted with the False Premise) the Eucharist could also be given to the divorced and remarried.

But in Vatican Council II interpreted with the Rational Premise (invisible cases are physically invisible in 1965-2021, Lumen Gentium 16(invincible ignorance), for example, is an example of an invisible person and so not an objective example of salvation, outside the Church and so is not a practical exception for the Athanasius Creed, dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) etc.So the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church is not obsolete and is still valid. So Cardinal Walter Kasper cannot say that since the ecclesiology of the Church has been changed with Vatican Council II (interpreted with the Rational Premise)  the Eucharist could also be given to the divorced and remarried.The ecclesiology of the Church has not been changed with Vatican Council II ( interpreted with a Rational Premise ).

Similarly Cardinal Reinhardt Marx cites Vatican Council II ( False Premise) to justify a change in the ecclesiology of the Church. He cites Vatican Council II ( False Premise) to rationalise the German Synodal Way and giving the Eucharist at the Novus Ordo Mass, to Protestants and other non believers. For him outside the Church there is known salvation, LG 8,LG 14, LG 16 etc in Vatican Council II are objective exceptions for EENS and the Athanasius Creed. This is the New Theology which says outside the Church there is salvation.

But if he chose Vatican Council II ( Rational Premise ) there would be no New Theology and the Church would still teach, for  him, the old theology which says outside the Church there is no salvation. So again the issue is the Eucharist. The New Theology and the old theology are related to who receives the Eucharist.

So now  when a bishop interprets Vatican Council II with the False Premise instead of the Rational Premise and gives the Eucharist  to non Christians, the laity must know that he really interprets the Council II irrationally, with the Fake Premise and expects them to the same. This is the message of Traditionis Custode.It interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and creates ecclesial division on the Eucharist etc.

They must ask the bishop to reject Traditionis Custode and interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise, this would be Magisterial and the bishop would preserve the traditional teachings on the Eucharist.

Traditionis Custode promotes ecclesial division on the Eucharist with the Fake Premise and the laity are obliged to reject it and ask Pope Francis to interpret Vatican Council II ( Rationally) and this would be Magisterial. The objective error, with the Fake Premise, cannot be the work of the Holy Spirit but is political error..-Lionel Andrades