Archbishop
Carlo Maria Vigano offered Holy Mass in Italian and then was exposed to the
Lefebvrist ideology, which depends upon the False Premise, like the liberal
ideology. He did not know that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre made the same mistake, as the liberals, when he used a False Premise to interpret Vatican Council II. It was the same
mistake made by Pope Paul VI and the following popes, including Pope John
Paul II.
So Archbishop Vigano sees Vatican
Council II as a break with Tradition (EENS, Syllabus etc ) and thinks that the
Lefebvrists are correct and he has often praised Archbishop Lefebvre. The same mistake
is being made by Dr. Taylor Marshall. They do not know that if the Lefebvrists use
the Rational Premise then the Council would be traditional and would
support Feeneyite EENS.Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops did not know this.
Even the religious communities of Fr.
Leonard Feeney, in the USA, the St. Benedict Centers, are Lefebvrist and have
been interpreting Vatican Council II with the False Premise.
Similarly the sedevacantists Michael and
Peter Dimond at the Most Holy Family Monastery, NY, USA, are Feeneyite on EENS
but they have been interpreting Vatican Council II with the False and not
Rational Premise.
So Archbishop Vigano and Dr. Taylor
Marshall have accepted the Leftist propaganda, which is the same as that of the
liberals, not knowing that their ideology is based upon the False Premise.
Without the False Premise which creates
a New Theology, the Church automatically returns to the old theology and the old
exclusivist ecclesiology.
Without Vatican Council II (Irrational)
the Lefebvrists are going back to Tradition and this is a good thing. But they
are using the False Premise of the Letter of the Holy Office (LOHO) 1949 to the
Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney. It used the False Premise
to interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible
ignorance. So with this False Premise the Lefebvrists, like the liberals, are
now interpreting the Creeds, Catechisms and Vatican Council II.They put the blame on the Council and not their lack of the Rational Premise.
When the False Premise is used we have
ideology and not the Catholic Faith.
I was speaking to a young priest of the
Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) in Rome. He was aware of the False Premise but he
had to accept what his superiors at Econe, said about Vatican Council II. He
had to follow the ideology even if he knew it was false, on Vatican Council II.
Econe determined the ideology on Vatican
Council II.
Presently the Lefebrists and liberals are
politically correct with the Left on Vatican Council II. They do not choose the
Rational Premise and say that Vatican Council II is in harmony with Tradition (EENS,
Syllabus etc).
If they affirmed Vatican Council II in
harmony with the ecclesiology of the Roman Missal (1580) it would not be
acceptable for the SSPX bishops or the Vatican.
Vatican Council II must be interpreted by all, as a break with Tradition- even if it is not true. I think Dr. Taylor Marshall understands this and so is interpreting the Council like Pope Francis. The Council has to have the hermeneutic of rupture for him. -Lionel Andrades
MAY 24, 2022
I don't think that the Novus Ordo Mass should be abolished.Neither should Vatican Council II interpreted with the Rational Premise be abolished.
Archbishop Carlo Vigano and Dr. Taylor Marshall are interpreting Vatican Council II with the False and not Rational Premise and so they are supporting a break with the past Magisterium on EENS, the Syllabus of Errors and the Athanasius Creed.
This is heresy and schism with the past Magisterium by these two traditionalists. Traditionalists opposing Tradition.
When the False Premise is used then the Creeds are misinterpreted and this is a mortal sin of faith at the Latin Mass, for them. It would also be a mortal sin, at the Novus Ordo Mass.
I don't think that the Novus Ordo Mass should be abolished.Neither should Vatican Council II interpreted with the Rational Premise be abolished.-Lionel Andrades
WE HAVE TWO INTERPRETATIONS
OF VATICAN COUNCIL II :
Lionel Andrades
Catholic lay man in Rome. 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.How can the Holy Spirit make an objective mistake ? So it is human error and not the Magisterium.
Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not only pastoral.
It is the same for the Creeds and Catechisms. There can be two interpretations.Catholics must choose the rational option.
Why should Catholics choose an irrational version which is heretical, nontraditional and schismatic, when a rational option is there which is traditional?
It is unethical when the popes, cardinals and bishops choose the Irrational Premise to interpret Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents.
Blog: Eucharist and Mission (eucharistandmission)
E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com
Twitter : @LionelAndrades1
___________________
ONLY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
No comments:
Post a Comment