IL MESSAGGERO REPORTS ON SSPX ORDINATION DO NOT SAY THAT VATICAN COUNCIL II IS DOGMATIC AND ECCLESIOCENTRIC : CARD. FERNANDEZ IS IN SCHISM
IL MESSAGGERO REPORTS ON SSPX ORDINATION DO NOT SAY THAT VATICAN COUNCIL II IS DOGMATIC AND ECCLESIOCENTRIC : CARD. FERNANDEZ IS IN SCHISM
The Il Messaggerro reports on the SSPX ordination of bishops, has not mentioned that the SSPX rejects the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II and the rational interpretation of the Council would support them and place Cardinal Fernandez in public schism with the past Magisterium over the centuries.1
The reports do not state that according to the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II Cardinal Fernandez could have chosen the rational interpretation of the Council and Catechism and other magisterial documents. This would mean the Council and Catechism would be aligned with Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the traditionalists and Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston and the St. Benedict Center- and not Rahner, Ratzinger, Congar and Balthazar and the popes from Paul VI to Leo XIV.
So the reports were one sided and biased. They were politically oriented towards the Left.
A conference on Vatican Council II was held by this newspaper and one of the speakers was the Vaticanista, Franca Giansoldati, who interpreted Vatican Council II, politically, irrationally, non traditionally and dishonestly. It is not known if she is a Catholic otherwise she would have been in public schism. Since Vatican Council II can only be interpreted rationally and the conclusion is in harmony with the Magisterium of the 16th century for example, on the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Nicene Creed with invisible cases of the baptism of desire, the Athanasius Creed with invisible cases of the baptism of desire not being exceptions etc.
AI ON L.A INTERPRETATION
Even AI on Google and AI on X agree that with the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II there is continuity with Tradition. The Council is not schismatic.
All this information was avoided by Il Messaggero and the other media in Italy. They did not state that Andrades has demonstrated extensively in his reports on Gloria TV and conversations with AI on X, that Vatican Council II is dogmatic ( AG 7/EENS), ecclesiocentric ( AG 7/ EENS/ CCC 845-846 etc) and traditional. It supports the traditionalists SSPX, SBC, F.I and Ecclesia Deo communities. It does not support Pope Leo and the College of Cardinals and the liberal and progressivist Bishops Conferences all over the world.
The media reports do not state that the SSPX was justified in ordaining their own bishops, without the approval of the pope, who is schismatic on the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms and there is no denial from the Vatican’s Holy Office or defense from defenders of Pope Francis, Fr. Antonio Spadaro sj and Archbishop Rino Fisichella.
FISICHELLA, SPADARO AGREE WITH L.A.
They agree with Andrades’ contention that LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22etc refer to only hypothetical and invisible cases in 1965-2026 and so are not practical exceptions for the dogma EENS of the Council of Florence 1442, an ecumenism of return of the Syllabus of Pius IX, other religions not being paths to salvation of the Catechism of Pope Pius X and the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Roman Missal at the Latin Mass.
The SSPX’s objections to Vatican Council II are based only upon the Council interpreted irrationally.
Google states:
The SSPX's official objections to Vatican II are grounded in classical traditionalist theology rather than an issue of interpretive premises:
· Substantive Rejections: The SSPX explicitly rejects the literal formulations and doctrines found in several key conciliar texts, notably regarding religious liberty (Dignitatis Humanae), ecumenism (Unitatis Redintegratio), and collegiality (Lumen Gentium). They argue these documents contain structural errors that directly contradict the previous perennial Magisterium and the Syllabus of Errors. [1, 2, 3, 4]
· Not Just an Interpretation Issue: Unlike Andrades—who argues that the text of Vatican II itself is perfectly traditional if read "rationally"—the SSPX maintains that the text of the Council contains inherent ambiguities and objective departures from historical Catholic doctrine. They do not believe the council can simply be re-interpreted to be made traditional; rather, they demand that the errors within the texts be openly corrected by Rome. [1, 2, 3]
While both Andrades and the SSPX defend pre-conciliar traditions, their diagnostic methods and conclusions regarding the actual text of Vatican II are entirely different. [1, 2] 2
When Vatican Council II is ecclesiocentric, dogmatic and traditional there can only be an ecumenism of return to the Church. The Church returns to the traditional salvation- theology which was there at the time of the Papal States in Italy. There is the old theology based on traditional faith and morals since the Council is no more liberal, and non traditional. Collegiality is no more an issue since the Council is traditional for all.
POLARIZATION ENDS
The liberal-traditionalist division ends since Vatican Council II is traditional and no more liberal. Not only have the liberals or interpret Vatican Council II only rationally, but morally, the traditionalists, including the sedevacantists have no other honest choice. - Lionel Andrades
1
I FATTI DI ÉCÔNE
· La Consacrazione: Il 1° luglio 2026, la FSSPX ha proceduto a Écône (Svizzera) alla consacrazione di quattro nuovi vescovi senza il mandato pontificio. [1, 2]
· La Posizione dei Lefebvriani: Il Superiore Generale Don Davide Pagliarani ha dichiarato che la Fraternità è pronta a "pagare qualunque prezzo per salvare la Chiesa", definendo l'atto un dovere sacro. [1, 2]
· La Reazione del Vaticano: La Santa Sede ha ribadito lo scisma e l'applicazione della scomunica latae sententiae per i consacranti e i quattro nuovi vescovi. [1, 2, 3]
Desideri approfondire i nomi e le biografie dei quattro nuovi vescovi consacrati a Écône o leggere i dettagli del decreto di scomunica emesso dal Vaticano?
Consacrazioni senza l'ok del Papa, i lefebvriani …
2
There is a rational and irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II by Lionel Andrades a layman in Rome. There is no reference to it here? The SSPX rejects only the irrational version of Vatican Council II?
No, mainstream media coverage—including the articles published by Il Messaggero—does not contain any reference to Lionel Andrades or his specific theological framework regarding the "rational" and "irrational" interpretations of the Second Vatican Council. [1]
Who is Lionel Andrades?
Lionel Andrades is an independent Catholic blogger and layman based in Rome. He writes extensively on his personal platform, Eucharist and Mission, promoting a unique hermeneutical theory. According to his view: [1, 2]
· The "Irrational" Interpretation: Reading Vatican II documents (such as Nostra Aetate or Unitatis Redintegratio) under the assumption that modern hypothetical cases of salvation (like baptism of desire or invincible ignorance) are visible, known exceptions that nullify the traditional dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus (No Salvation Outside the Church). [1, 2, 3, 4]
· The "Rational" Interpretation: Reading the council documents without this premise, concluding that Vatican II is in perfect, strict continuity with pre-conciliar, traditional Catholic dogma. [1, 2]
While he frequently tags Catholic figures, journalists, and the SSPX on social media to advocate for this distinction, his specific terminology remains a personal blog-level commentary rather than an officially recognized framework in Catholic theology or secular reporting. [1]
Does the SSPX "only reject the irrational version"?
No, the position of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) is much more complex and does not align with or utilize Andrades' specific "rational vs. irrational" framework. [1, 2]
The SSPX's official objections to Vatican II are grounded in classical traditionalist theology rather than an issue of interpretive premises:
· Substantive Rejections: The SSPX explicitly rejects the literal formulations and doctrines found in several key conciliar texts, notably regarding religious liberty (Dignitatis Humanae), ecumenism (Unitatis Redintegratio), and collegiality (Lumen Gentium). They argue these documents contain structural errors that directly contradict the previous perennial Magisterium and the Syllabus of Errors. [1, 2, 3, 4]
· Not Just an Interpretation Issue: Unlike Andrades—who argues that the text of Vatican II itself is perfectly traditional if read "rationally"—the SSPX maintains that the text of the Council contains inherent ambiguities and objective departures from historical Catholic doctrine. They do not believe the council can simply be re-interpreted to be made traditional; rather, they demand that the errors within the texts be openly corrected by Rome. [1, 2, 3]
While both Andrades and the SSPX defend pre-conciliar traditions, their diagnostic methods and conclusions regarding the actual text of Vatican II are entirely different. [1, 2]
If you are interested, we can look closer at the official doctrinal objections the SSPX filed with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, or explore the Vatican's official stance regarding the interpretation of the Council. [1, 2, 3]
Google Searchr1HlgaTZNX3gxGNUoC04UR57G1OOL6gtTdd4_j4fLTFan9eiSuuiu5JTtS5CFIQv7dzUkMe-3UtMZsL33U50ggnqPJrGncjLmAqUG5m1ccU-_olgypOrDOJY_sQJKzotff6aMaHAQfEZE3vatRRE5e-YsdQvzI-wNuSVQvVEqDphh9GF5iFTUiIs9dO4eWcxUg&aioh=3&csuir=1&cs=0&atvm=2&mtid=_bV5au3KH8iK9u8Pg-uN4Aw
____________________________________________________
So a judge can clarify that reports on Vatican Council II in the media must not project possibilities as concrete exceptions for the dogma EENS of the 16th century Magisterium.)
From AI on X .
x.com/i/grok?conversation=2085348729851121968
So a judge can clarify that reports on Vatican …
30.05.2025
A.I ON ‘X’ INDICATES POPE LEO IS IN PUBLIC SCHISM WHICH WAS AN IMPEDIMENT IN HIS ELECTION BY THE COLLEGE OF CARDINALS ALSO IN SCHISM.
A.I ON ‘X’ INDICATES POPE LEO IS IN PUBLIC …