SSPX ARE MODERNISTS. THEY DO NOT DENY IT.
This is modernism and a glimpse of it can be seen regularly in the series of articles written by Don Pietro Leone on the blog Rorate Caeili. Leone and F.G ( Rorate Caeili) are unable to address this issue of the False and Rational Premise Since then they would have to admit that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops made an objective error.Also the Jewish Left rabbi at the Angelicum will warn F.G once again that he is not allowed to use the Rational Premise to interpret the Council.
FORMATION OF 700 SSPX PRIESTS WITH THE FALSE PREMISE PRODUCES MODERNISM
So presently the SSPX has over 700 priests and their formation is modernist, heretical and schismatic, the same as the liberals and the present two popes. It is the False Premise which creates the break with Tradition.
With the Rational Premise, the Council is not a break with Tradition. But some 700-SSPX priests cannot use the Rational Premise. It is expected of them to use the False Premise to view the Council.
Here is some more of the usual stuff from Don Leone and Rorate Caeili with comments from me.
The Council and the Eclipse of God – Don Pietro Leone – Chapter 9 - A) METAPHYSICAL ANALYSIS (part 1)
a) There is such a thing as Being and it can be known in this life
Lionel : Yes there is such a thing as being and it can be known in this life and I have known it at a personal level.
The true Metaphysics is realist, and holds, in other words, that there is such a thing as objective reality, namely Being, and that a rational subject is capable of knowing it. The Council speaks instead of ‘the search for Truth.’
Lionel : Yes there is being at a personal level and
there is an awareness of the Transcendent Being
and there is a search for unity, in all its fulness, with the Transcendent Being , this everlasting Truth.The Council has not contradicted it here.
_______________
It harbors doubts, it is skeptical, about Being, about Truth: Truth, namely, of the supernatural order, the Faith. Why otherwise does it not state the Faith with courage and with pride? Did Our Blessed Lord not die for love of us? Did our ancestors not die for love of Him? Is this nothing to them? How otherwise can we explain:
Lionel: This is a subjective, personal interpretation. The Council does not explicitly deny it here. Don Leone is stretching it.
1. its failure to proclaim before the non-Catholic Christian denominations that the Catholic Faith is the one true Faith [4];
Lionel: The Council Fathers (1965) could not proclaim it directly and clearly since the popes, like Archbishop
Marcel Lefebvre, accepted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.The Letter projected
practical exceptions for Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So EENS was
made obsolete and this error was accepted by Pope Paul VI. LG 8, LG 14, LG 16,
UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc were exceptions for Feeneyite EENS for Archbishop Lefebvre too.
However this is not a
permanent error. If we accept LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in
Vatican Council II, as referring to only speculative and hypothetical cases
then they cannot be objective exceptions for the dogma EENS. The Letter of the
Holy Office 1949 was wrong to project invisible cases as being visible examples
of salvation outside the Catholic Church and physically visible exceptions for
EENS in 1949 or 1965.There are no such cases in real life which we humans can
know.
2. its failure to proclaim before the followers of the other religions that it is the one true Religion [5];
Lionel: With there being no objective exception for the dogma EENS in Unitatis Redintigratio the Council is affirming EENS.It is saying all Christians need to convert into the Catholic C Church with Catholic faith, which would include the baptism of water.There are no practical exceptions and none mentioned in Vatican Council II.
The Council is also saying that there are no exceptions in Ad Gentes 7, Lumen Gentium 14 and Unitatis Redintigratio for the past ecclesiocentrism. The Council no where contradicts Feeneyite EENS. Of course , this is interpreting Vatican Council II rationally and not like Don Leone and Rorate Caeili or Pope Francis and Pope Benedict.
_____________
3. its failure to proclaim the doctrine that Outside the Church there is no Salvation;
Lionel: See above. Also see the other responses on this blog EucharistandMission, to these series of reports by Done Leone on Rorate Caeili. He has not responded to a single of my blog posts. Now he is going to publish another book with Vatican Council II interpreted with the False and not Ralse Premise as if there are not enough books with this error.
__________
4. its failure to teach that the Church alone has a right to Religious Liberty [6];
Lionel : Religious Liberty is not an issue when the Church once agains affirms exclusive salvation. There is no change in the doctrines of the Catholic Church when this error is avoided.The work of John Courtney Murray would be meaningless when Vatican Council II is interpreted with the Rational Premise.
5. its failure to fulfill the Church’s duty to condemn falsehood and error [7];
Lionel: We cannot judge them and blame them at time ( 1965) when the SSPX and conservative blogs do not do not correct falsehood, for politically correct reasons today. It is, like, Michael Matt always criticizing Pope Francis, but he will not say anything controversial, he will not affirm the Catholic faith in public.He does not want to go underground just yet.Also his Catholic Identity Conferences are politically correct with the use of the False Premise.He does not affirm Feeneyite, salutes the Left and allows himself to be called a traditionalist which he rejects Tradition, with the False Premise, like the liberals.
______________
6. its failure to preach the doctrine of Christ the King to the World;
Lionel : Pope Benedict once asked, what was the purpose of Mission when the Council says there is (known) salvation outside the Church. So when Don Leone and F.G ( Rorate Caeili) interpret Vatican Council II with the False and not Rational Premise they are projecting False Exceptions for EENS. So if there is salvation outside the Church, it is asked, why proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics? People are being saved who are not Catholic, it is said.
But this is false if Vatican Council II is interpreted with the Rational Premise i.e if LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc refer to only invisible cases in 2022.Then there are no known cases of salvation outside the Church in 1965-2022. So there is a priority to proclaim outside the Church there is no salvation and Christ must be at the center of all politics in society, with the non separation of Church and State. Now with Don Leone intepreting Vatican Council II with the False Premise, like the Masons, it is not possible to proclam Quas Primas based upon the Council ( Irrational).
_________
7. its failure explicitly to condemn Communism [8];
8. its failure explicitly to condemn contraception and the impurity of the modern age [9].
Lionel : When Vatican Council II is being interpreted with a False Premise creating a break with traditional faith teachings, it is then asked by the liberals, why cannot any thing and everything be changed. This was the argument for Amoris Laetitia and no one contested it. Since even the conservative Catholics are using the same False Premise as the SSPX. We can see it in these articles of Don Leone.
_______________
St. Cyprian writes: ‘…and does he think that he is a Christian who is either ashamed or afraid to be a Christian? How can he be one with Christ who either blushes or fears to belong to Christ?’ [10]
Lionel :
How can he be one with Christ who either blushes or fears to belong to Christ?’
Then why does Rorate Caeili not interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with the Rational Premise? For over 10 years F.G has been protecting his web blog and pleasing the Left. Recently he and Roberto dei Mattei also disowned Archbishop Carlo Vigano.
-Lionel Andrades
Posts
