Pope Benedict needs to be honest and apologize to the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX)

Pope Benedict needs to be honest and apologize to the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) . He demanded that they interpret Vatican Council II and Magisterial documents with the common false premise ( invisible people are visible in the present times) and accept the non traditional conclusion for canonical recognition.

This interpretation of Vatican Council II is deceptive and unethical. This was brought out by Bishop Athansius Schneider when interviewed by Dr. Taylor Marshall.The bishop avoids the fake premise.He says that there are no objective cases of the baptism of desire in the present times.

Lumen Gentium 14( baptism of desire )in Vatican Council II refers to a hypothetical case and not an objective and known person saved outside the Church in 1965-2021.It would be the same for LG 8,LG 16, UR 3, GS 22 etc.

Pope Benedict’s interpretation of the baptism of desire, Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) is still based upon a lie. He must correct the scandal.It is unethical even by secular standards.

 Pope Benedict must also ask the Regina Apostolorum and John Latran universities in Rome, to stop offering courses and academic degrees, on his theology.Since he has made a major mistake in the interpretation of Magisterial documents. Even Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus were written with this error, so also his book on Ecclesiology and Vatican Council II.He was forcing all this bad theology, with deception, upon the SSPX, in exchange for regularizing their status in the Church.

It was Pope Paul VI who interpreted Vatican Council II with the false  premise.Cardinal Ratzinger, as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, did not correct the error.

Instead he excommunicated Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre who would not accept Vatican Council II with a non traditional conclusion.

There was no apology from Cardinal Ratzinger for the CDF’s excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney.The Jesuit brave priest from Boston would not say that unknown cases of the baptism of desire were known exceptions to 16^th century EENS.For him there were no practical exceptions for the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.

He was excommunicated for some 19 years and the CDF never acknowledged their error(Holy Office 1949) even after the death of the priest.-Lionel Andrades

 AUGUST 30, 2021

Don Pietro Leone and Rorate Caeili interpret Vatican Council II like Fr. John Courtney Murray sj : Lumen Gentium 14 ( Baptism of desire) is an exception to Tradition for them

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/don-pietro-leone-and-rorate-caeili.html

Gesù toglimi il cuore di pietra e dammi un cuore di carne affinché diventi misericordioso come Te

Don Pietro Leone and Rorate Caeili interpret Vatican Council II like Fr. John Courtney Murray sj : Lumen Gentium 14 ( Baptism of desire) is an exception to Tradition for them

 DON PIETRO LEONE AND RORATE CAEILI INTERPRET VATICAN COUNCIL II LIKE FR. JOHN COURTNEY MURRAY SJ : LUMEN GENTIUM 14(BAPTISM OF DESIRE) IS AN EXCEPTION TO TRADITION FOR THEM.

'The Council and The Eclipse of God' by Don Pietro Leone - Part XIV: The Church and The State’ on the weblog Rorate Caeili seems like the last death knell for the Lefebvrist and liberal interpretation of Vatican Council II which Bishop Athanasius Schneider corrected in his latest interview by Dr.Taylor Marshall.

Don Pietro Leone writing from his ivory tower built some 50 years back has interpreted the Council with Lumen Gentium 14 ( baptism of desire) referring to physically visible examples of salvation outside the Church since 1965.Then with this false premise, he rejects the traditional ecumenism of return of the Syllabus of Errors(he cites UR 3 as an exception in a previous installment of this series). He rejects the teaching on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church according to the Athanasius Creed and the traditional ecclesiocentrism as Mass in Greek during the first four centuries.This is there in black and white in earlier blog posts on Rorate Caeili.

His non traditional interpretation of the Council,with the false premise(visible baptism of desire etc), like the popes from Paul VI, supports Fr.John Courtney Murray and Cardinal Richard Cushing in the separation of Church and State.
The liberals still ask, « Why should there be the non separation of Church and State and why should we proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King in all political legislation, when non Catholics can be saved outside the Church ? ».Don Pietro Leone would agree with their reasoning. He is saying the same thing.
Pope Benedict also asked the same question. In an interview with the Italian daily Avvenire he said that EENS was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century. There was a development with Vatican Council II. He also questioned the need for Mission. Since Vatican Council II says ( according to Pope Benedict and Don Pietro Leone) that there is salvation outside the Church.
He means with visible cases of the baptism of desire, of course.This is the salvation outside the Church he has always been supporting.
Rorate says:
In Chapter 4, Don Pietro turns to consider the Council’s teaching on the Church and State. He explains how the Church has a duty not only to Her members, but also to the entire world. Her role in regard to the State is to guide Kings and governors to promote the best interests of their citizens, i.e. in the final analysis the attainment of eternal life in Heaven, such as has been the constant teaching of Holy Mother Church. (Lionel : This cannot be done when Don Leone, Rorate Caeili and Pope Benedict interpret Lumen Gentium 14 with a false premise unlike Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall ). Readers will be amazed to learn that an entirely new political vision was to supplant this teaching, a vision which originates in Freemasonry and of which the most notable fruits are the Declarations of the French Revolution and the American Constitution, namely, the total separation of Church and State.(Lionel : It was made possible theologically with the error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing) The genius behind this devastating work of destruction was the American Jesuit, Father John Courtney Murray, who, unbelievably, was the author of all the speeches of the five bishops calling for these changes. F.R.

Fr. Murray sj could do nothing if Pope Paul VI interpreted Vatican Council II with the rational premise. The Council would be traditional. So religious liberty, ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue would no longer be an issue.The Church would still proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King based upon the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.-Lionel Andrades

AUGUST 29, 2021

Bishop Kevin Rhoades, the Chairman of the USCCB Doctinal Committee, interprets Lumen Gentium 14 ( baptism of desire) with a false premise. Bishop Athanasius Schnedier and Dr. Taylor Marshall avoid it

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/08/bishop-kevin-rhoades-chairman-of-usccb.html