Il Pontefice annuncia pure che verrà esteso un altro appello ai lefebvriani: “La divisione nella Chiesa è sempre un dolore”
Bractwo Piusa X reprezentuje Kościół Katolicki. Leon posoborową enklawę.
The SSPX is also interpreting Vatican council II irrationally like Pope Leo. They must correct themselves and sto blaming the Council .
Il parle comme quelqu'un qui gère une entreprise, il n'y a rien d'Immuable, on a changé de ligne, on doit "aller de l'avant", sans l'ombre d'une question ! il s'est trompé de poste ...
Après Vatican II, certains ont voulu créer une "religion pastorale", c'est-à-dire où la pastorale prend le pas sur la Tradition, la morale et même sur la Foi.
Ne peut-on se dire
- que cette religion-là - encore contredite par J.P. II et Benoît XVI - est nouvelle, non pas quasi mais "pratiquement hérétique" ?
- qu'elle a été imposée par Narcisse Imbroglio, qui n'était pas vraiment conciliaire mais synodal ? Il a tout fait pour que notre Eglise soit conduite via des soviets manipulables et manipulés par lui.
- que ces dérives vicieuse et ridicules... Son successeur ne semble pas vouloir les corriger ?
Dans cette idée, il ne faut pas prier Ste Catherine de Sienne. mais carrément prier St Hilaire, celui qui lança l'anathème contre le "pape" Libère.
True when VC 2 is interpreted irrationally but not true when the Council is intrepreted rationally. It supports the traditionalists and not Card. Fernandez
Durante la sua recente dichiarazione a Castel Gandolfo, il Santo Padre aveva già indicato la linea da seguire:
«Sto valutando la possibilità di lanciare un nuovo appello, dicendo: non fatelo; cerchiamo di vivere nella comunione della Chiesa. Ma la scelta spetta a loro. Bisogna rendersi conto di cosa ciò significhi per loro e per la Chiesa. Certamente, la divisione tra i cristiani è una questione dolorosa. Tuttavia, essi rifiutano di accettare alcuni elementi fondamentali della Chiesa, a cominciare da diversi punti del Concilio Vaticano II. Se prendono questa decisione, me ne rammarico, ma dobbiamo andare avanti».
Il 70% dei cattolici non crede alla presenza reale di Cristo nell’eucaristia.
E qui pensiamo ai “punti” del concilio Vaticano secondo. No comment
L14 dit faussement "... ils refusent d’accepter certains éléments fondamentaux de l’Église, à commencer par plusieurs points du Concile Vatican II."
Hélas Sa Sainteté Notre Très Saint Père s'efforce de ne pas lister quels seraient ces étranges "éléments fondamentaux" qui seraient notamment "plusieurs points" de ce concile purement pastoral qui seraient soudainement devenus des critères discriminants de catholicité. Quelles sont donc ces nouveautés doctrinales "de l'Eglise" devenues si "fondamentales" issues d'un concile qui n'a rien voulu définir...
Dommage que Sa Sainteté Notre Trés Saint Père s'efforce soigneusement de ne pas lister quels seraient ces étranges "éléments fondamentaux" qui seraient notamment "plusieurs points" de ce concile purement pastoral qui seraient soudainement devenus des critères discriminants de catholicité. Quelles sont donc ces nouveautés doctrinales "de l'Eglise" devenues si "fondamentales" issues d'un concile qui n'a rien voulu définir ?
Quels "points" seraient devenus des critères discriminants de catholicité ?
Aucun texte du concile du Vatican n°2 ne relève du magistere de l'Eglise …
Que Jésus-Christ fasse connaître sa Sainte Volonté, pour qu'il n'y ait pas d'actes irréparables et que le Royaume de la Divine Volonté "sur la terre comme au ciel" maintienne sa course au dedans des créatures humaine dans l'Eglise! PICCARRETA
Quels "points" seraient devenus des critères discriminants de catholicité ?
Aucun texte du concile du Vatican n°2 ne relève du magistere de l'Eglise …
Pope Leo and the SSPX interpret Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally. This is unacceptable. Morally, we can only interpret the Council rationally and the conclusion is traditional. VC 2 is dogmatic and ecclesiocentric.
Je pense qu'on va passer un sale quart d'heure, on va être effaré par ce qu'on va entendre de toutes parts venant des "autorités" de l'Eglise, ils ont l'air de vouloir mettre l'accélérateur en écrasant tout le monde ! mais nous serons dans la Paix du Christ et nous prierons pour la conversion de tous, à commencer par la nôtre
18.06.2026
Archbishop Lefebvre did not know before he was excommunicated by Cardinal Ratzinger, that LG 8, 14, 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, refer to invisible cases and so were not explicit exceptions for Tradition ( EENS, Syllabus etc).Vatican Council II was tradition. Let this sink in.
Lefebvre did not know that Ad Gentes 7 (all need faith and baptism for salvation) was aligned with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) of the Council of Florence 1442.It did not mention any exception. While unknown cases of LG 8, 14, 16 etc, were not objective exceptions for AG 7 or EENS. The Council does not contradict an ecumenism of return of the Syllabus of Pius IX and the teaching on outside the Church there is no salvation, in the Catechism of Pope Pius X.
Even Bishops Alfonso de Galaretta and Bishop Bernard Fellay when they were excommunicated the first time, along with Lefebvre, did not seem to know about this. They are not talking about this point as they prepare to be excommunicated a second time.
They do not mention Ratzinger’s secret, as Pope Leo prepares to excommunicate them as did Pope John Paul II, using the LG 16 visible interpretation of Vatican Council II.
When AG 7 is aligned with EENS, then Vatican Council II supports the exclusivist and ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Roman Missal at the Latin Mass. Ecclesiology returns to the past with no change.
Now Pope Leo interprets Vatican Council II with alleged visible exceptions for EENS and so a break with Tradition as he prepares to excommunicate the SSPX. Even Fr.Davide Pagliarani, the Superior General of the SSPX, interprets LG 8, 1 4, 16 etc as being visible. He maintains Ratzinger’s secret. So he supports the new and liberal doctrines which come with the New Theology. The New Theology originates with the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston (LOHO). In LOHO Pope Pius XII and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) confused what is implicit as being explicit and then concluded that outside the Catholic Church there was known salvation and so it was not necessary for all to be members of the Church for salvation.
Now hundreds of priests and religious sisters of the SSPX will be excommunicated since the Fr. Pagliarani and bishops Galaretta and Fellay maintain Raztinger's secret and new doctrines. Even Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, influenced by Archbishop Lefebvre who interpreted Church documents with the new theology of the 1949 LOHO, does not announce the obvious. He did not state in public that LG 8, 14, 16 refer to hypothetical cases only and so are not practical exceptions for EENS in 2026, which he affirms. But he is a traditionalist who does not affirm Feeneyite EENS and neither the Athanasius Creed in the visible. Like Pope Leo, for him too, LG 16 is visible.
What is the point in Fr. Davide Pagliarani saying outside the Church there is no salvation in his Declaration of Faith. He considers LG 8, 14, 16 etc as being visible exceptions for the dogma EENS in 2026? He contradicts his Declaration of Faith with Vatican Council II irrational (LG 16 visible).
Why does Fr. Pagliarani not consider Pope Leo, Cardinals Fernandez and Cupich to be in schism when they do not affirm EENS and accept the Nicene Creed in its original understanding? Now he projects LG 8, 14, 16 etc as being exceptions for the Athanasius Creed, the dogma EENS and the original interpretation of the Creeds with the baptism of desire etc being invisible.
Fr.Pagliarani must now talk in terms of Vatican Council II. He must tell Pope Leo to interpret LG 8, 14, 16 etc rationally and so then he will have to affirm the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms in harmony with Tradition. This will be acceptable for the SSPX.
The Creeds, Councils and Catechisms interpreted rationally and so traditionally do not support the LGBT ideology and innovation in faith and morals, mission, liturgy and ecclesiology.
Tell Pope Leo to make the first move for reconciliation: be honest on LG 16. It is invisible and not visible in 2026.
In Heaven there are only Catholics (AG 7, CCC 845-846, Dominus Iesus 20 etc, CDF, Notification of Fr. Jacques Dupuis sj, 2021, Catechism of Pope Pius X, 24 Q, 27 Q, Council of Florence 1442 etc).
Fr.Pagliarani could, for example, inform Catholics in the north of Italy that Vatican Council II says outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation. So there must not be a separation of Church and State. The Government must be Catholic to save souls from Hell. Christ must be the King in Parliament and in politics.
Remember the English and Irish martyrs? Their Faith was clear. They did not confuse what is implicit as being explicit as does Cardinal Vincent Nichols, Una Voce, and the Latin Mass Societies in Britain. Dr. Joseph Shaw cannot say that he follows Pope Leo on LG 14 and 16- visible and also Tradition, when the baptism of desire and beings saved in invincible ignorance, over the centuries referred to invisible cases only.
Vatican Council II interpreted rationally is apostolic and magisterial and it supports only Tradition. There is no other choice. Inform the pope.
Why should we project a traditional Council, as being liberal just because Pope Paul VI made this error?
OTHER RELIGIONS
Yes, there are good and holy things in other religions but the religions are not paths to salvation and their members are oriented to the Catholic Church (Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II).
Fr. Davide Pagliarani, Bishops Fellay and Galaretta and also Archbishop Vigano must start talking in turns of Vatican Council II and not only Tradition. The Council supports them.
Traditionalists could file petitions against the Archbishop of Milan who is in schism on Vatican Council II. He does not affirm AG 7 in harmony with EENS and the Athanasius Creed and the Nicene Creed with LG 8, 14, 16 etc, not been exceptions. Instead for him LG 8, 14, 16 etc are exceptions for EENS, the Athanasius Creed, and the Nicene Creed etc. Here again, the issue is Vatican Council II and not only Tradition.
VIGANO SCHISM TRIAL
Traditionalists could file joint petitions, since now they have unity in doctrine on Vatican Council II etc, against the schism charge made by Cardinal Fernandez and Archbishop Joseph Kennedy against Archbishop Vigano. Pope Francis and the tribunal interpreted Vatican Council irrationally and not rationally. The issue again is Vatican Council II and not only Tradition.
Why should Cupich be a cardinal and be allowed to offer Holy Mass when he does not affirm Vatican Council II? Morally, the Council can only be interpreted rationally (LG 16 invisible) by him. There is only one ethical choice.
ARLINGTON DISCALCED SISTERS
A joint traditionalist petition must be filed against the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, against the excommunication of the Arlington Discalced Carmelite Sisters in Texas, USA. Bishop Michael Olsen in Texas must interpret Vatican Council II rationally in harmony with the faith and spirituality of the Carmelite Tradition.
The bottom line still is that Ratzinger did not tell Lefebvre, before the excommunication, that LG 8, 14, 16 etc referred to invisible cases only. Pope Leo also does not tell Fr. Davide Pagliarani before the next excommunication that Vatican Council II with LG 8, 14, 16 etc invisible, supports the traditionalists and not the liberal cardinals. It is the cardinals who are in public schism with LG 16 and cannot affirm the Nicene Creed etc, in the original. – Lionel Andrades
Pope Leo XIV on the upcoming SSPX Episcopal Consecrations: “I am considering making another appeal saying don't do this, let's try to live the communion of the Church. But it's their choice. One must realize what it means for them and for the Church. Certainly, the division among Christians is a painful point. However, they refuse to accept some fundamental elements of the Church, starting with several points from the Second Vatican Council. If they make that decision, I'm sorry but we have to move on.”
Apostate Robert Prevost is in schism with the Most Holy Trinity, defies divine natural law, and disobeys the Gospel of Christ.
But the SSPX is also in schism with Vatican Counci lI irrational and not rational. So they are unable to correct the pope, specifically and precisely. Since they too are political on VC 2 they do not discuss doctrine in public.
What are you talking about? It is well known that Vatican II contains heresies and apostasy. The heresy of religious indifferentism violates the First Commandment; therefore, it is heresy and apostasy.
In impromptu declarations to the press, yesterday (June 16, 2026):
“I am considering making another appeal and saying ‘don't do this, let's try to live the communion of the Church.’ But it is their choice.
We must realize what it means for them and for the Church. Certainly, the division among Christians is a painful point.
However, they refuse to accept some fundamental elements of the Church, starting with several points of the Second Vatican Council. If they make that choice, I am sorry. But we must move forward”
Ah now! Wasn't he riding around Rome with Mustang Sally not two months ago claiming communion with the Anglican heretics?
Leo XIV cautioned that the planned ordination of Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) bishops could push the group toward schism, urging them again to stop and remain in communion with the Church.
@P. O'B There are different distinctions with Unity. The Pope is talking about social unity or unity with people of good will. In addressing other Christian churches or religions, he's not referring to Unity within the Catholic Faith.
You might be right, but distinctions from Leo would help. And in the modern Church, which often insinuates universal salvation, why worry about a little schism?
It's just beating empty straw.
Pope Leo and the SSPX and the Anglicans are not in communion with Jesus Christ and His Mystical Body the Catholic Church. They are apostolic and magisterial only when they interpret the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms only rationally.This is only one option and none of them have taken it, yet.
Leone XIV sta forse ammettendo qui che il Concilio Vaticano II ha cambiato la Chiesa?
Punto chiave: Papa Leone XIV rifiuta di ricevere la FSSPX e prende in considerazione solo un «ulteriore appello» in vista delle imminenti ordinazioni episcopali
The SSPX too is interpreting Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally, just like Pope Leo. They have to choose to interpret the Council rationally and then it will be apostolic and magisterial and in harmony with tradition. It will be dogmatic on extra ecclesiam nulla salus etc.
Lionel Leslie Andrades Your remarks clearly show that you completely leave out
of account the practical consequences—and thus the true spirit—
of Vatican II. I agree with the FSSPX (of which I am not a member)
that the documents of Vatican II require correction; indeed, my
dear fellow, you yourself seem to acknowledge this when you
suggest that Vatican II must be interpreted in the light of Tradition.
The fact is that only what is ambiguous or open to multiple
meanings requires interpretation. Freemasons holding high
and even the highest ecclesiastical offices interpret it through a
hermeneutic of rupture rather than continuity; recognizing
this is truly not difficult, yet it is necessary
Svatý Otče Lve XIV.: MÍSTO VAŠICH NEGACÍ DĚLEJTE NĚCO POZITIVNÍHO, TOTIŽ TŘETÍ VATIKÁNSKÝ SNĚM, KTERÝ BY VYJASNIL NEJEDNOZNAČNOSTI DRUHÉHO VATIKÁNSKÉHO SNĚMU!
He needs to first interpret Vatican Council II rationally and so honesstly and then the concljusion will be traditional. Rome returns to the Catholic faith. The Council will be dogmatic doctrinally.
Domanda:
Sentite, dal primo luglio i lefebvriani non erano già in una forma di espresso, si va verso lo scisma.
Ecco, cosa prova di fronte a questa prospettiva?
Un dolore per la Chiesa?
Papa Leone XIV:
Certamente. Noi abbiamo invitato, sto considerando ancora fare un altro appello, a dire: non fate questo, cerchiamo di vivere da comunione nella Chiesa. Ma è la loro scelta. Bisogna rendersi conto di ciò che significa per loro e per la Chiesa. Certamente la divisione fra i cristiani è sempre un punto doloroso.
Però loro rifiutano di accettare certi elementi fondamentali della Chiesa, cominciando con diversi punti del Concilio Vaticano II.
Se fanno quella scelta, mi dispiace, però noi dobbiamo andare avanti.
Leo XIV on the SSPX consecrations — “I am considering making another appeal and saying ‘don't do this, let's try to live the communion of the Church.’ But it is their choice. We must realize what it means for them and for the Church. Certainly, the division among Christians is a painful point. However, they refuse to accept some fundamental elements of the Church, starting with several points of the Second Vatican Council. If they make that choice, I am sorry. But we must move forward”
Der Okkupator Prevost ist ein Heuchler letzter Kategorie! Er weigert sich seit Monaten mit der intakt katholischen FSSPX zu sprechen. Und hier spielt er schon wieder den falschen "Pazifisten", um seine Bosheit zu rechtfertigen. Prevost will die FSSPX von dem Weinstock der intakten Lehre Christi trennen. Er selber ist eine getrennte, synodale, synkretistische, gottverräterische, Novus Ordo Rebe.
Vatican Council II can be a point of unity among the traditionalists when they interpret it rationally and so traditioinally. They will be apostolic and magisterial.
Leo XIV zur FSSPX: "Wir haben sie eingeladen, und ich erwäge noch, einen weiteren Appell an sie zu richten und zu sagen: Tut das nicht. Versuchen wir, in der Gemeinschaft der Kirche zu leben. Aber es ist ihre Entscheidung. Man muss sich bewusst machen, was das für sie und für die Kirche bedeutet. Die Spaltung unter Christen ist immer etwas Schmerzhaftes.
Sie weigern sich jedoch, bestimmte grundlegende Elemente der Kirche anzunehmen, angefangen bei verschiedenen Punkten des Zweiten Vatikanischen Konzils.
Wenn sie diese Entscheidung treffen, tut mir das leid. Aber wir müssen weitergehen."
Nachdem der Vatikan 60 Jahre lang theologische Diskussionen mit den unterschiedlichsten Gruppen geführt hat – von Orthodoxen über Lutheraner bis hin zu Juden und Buddhisten –, um über unsere Gemeinsamkeiten und Meinungsverschiedenheiten zu sprechen, dürfte es für ihn kein großes Problem sein, die Piusbruderschaft als weiteren Gesprächspartner hinzuzunehmen.
@De Profundis Im Februar dieses Jahres bot der Vatikan der Piusbruderschaft buchstäblich Gespräche an, um Lehrfragen im Zusammenhang mit dem Zweiten Vatikanischen Konzil zu klären, die Mindestbedingungen für die volle kirchliche Gemeinschaft festzulegen und einen kanonischen Status für die Piusbruderschaft zu definieren. Diese lehnte das Angebot ab. Die Piusbruderschaft wollte keinen Dialog führen.
@Diana Pfeffer Ja richtig, doch wussten Sie auch welche Bedingungen gestellt wurden an die FSSPX?! Denn aufgrund diesen haben die Oberen der FSSPX zu Recht abgelehnt. Zudem Prevost nicht Petrus ist....Und die Exkommunikation kirchenrechtlich absurd sowie ungültig ist. Der Vatikan selbst müsste mal heftigst ausgeräuchter werden, denn der Rauch Satans ist heftig am wirken, seit Bergo ganz besonders
When the Vatican a few years back accepted the SSPX it was based upon the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II. The SSPX did not interpret Vatican Council II rationally and in harmony with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus of the Council of Florence 1442 which did not mention any exceptions.
Pius IX. hätte die Piusbruderschaft sofort exkommunziert und ein Interdikt über deren Anhänger verhängt.
@Kordula Bayer
Da liegen Sie falsch.
Was Sie mit „Papstvorbehalt“ meinen, ist mir nicht klar. Das sollten Sie noch erklären. Danke.
Entscheidend für meinen Kommentar ist der Umstand, dass Pius IX. den Universalprimat durch das Erste Vatikanum dogmatisiert und durchgesetzt hat. Wenn Sie Biographien über Pius IX. lesen, dürfte auch Ihnen klar werden, dass er als Papst keinen Widerspruch duldete, allein schon aufgrund seiner Persönlichkeitsstruktur.
Leo XIV. an die FSSPX: „Tun Sie das nicht“: Am Dienstagabend wurde Papst Leo XIV. in Castel Gandolfo zur Priesterbruderschaft St. Pius X. (FSSPX) befragt. Er antwortete: „Wir haben sie eingeladen, und ich erwäge noch immer, einen weiteren Appell zu richten, in dem ich sage: ‚Tun Sie das nicht. Versuchen wir, in Gemeinschaft innerhalb der Kirche zu leben.‘ Aber es ist ihre Entscheidung. Man muss sich bewusst machen, was das für sie und für die Kirche bedeutet. Gewiss ist eine Spaltung unter Christen immer etwas Schmerzhaftes. Allerdings weigern sie sich, bestimmte grundlegende Elemente der Kirche anzuerkennen, angefangen bei mehreren Punkten des Zweiten Vatikanischen Konzils. Wenn sie diese Entscheidung treffen, tut es mir leid, aber wir müssen weitermachen.“
Papst Leo XIV. : ... aber wir müssen weitermachen ( Konzil ) ! Weiter in die Richtung des Abstiegs, Gottlosigkeit und leere Kirchen ... ! Dafür wollen wir die Brüder der Fremdreligionen umarmen und auf Augenhöhe betrachten ! Ja, den Islam, Koran und andere Dämonen ehren, aber die FSSPX weiter ausschließen, ächten und verurteilen ! Der Hl. Papst Johannes Paul II. hat zwar unchristlich gehandelt und die Piusbrüder exkommuniziert, aber die Konzils-Kirche bleibt dabei und sollte es unter dem Antichristen eine Welt-Religion geben, bleibt die FSSPX weiter ausgeschlossen, denn sie hangen dem Gottessohn Jesus Christus an ... !
Le concile... Celui de Vatican II n'était-il pas "pastoral" ? On y causait donc (très, très solennellement... trop sans doute) de procédés d'enseignement : pas de quoi fouetter un chat
Par contre, la douleur a d'ores et déjà été brutalement ré-installée. Tout particulièrement par Narcisse Imbroglio. Plus son continuateur qui, ici, nous joue une comédie inutile et hypocrite.
"Nous les avons invités" c'est le nous du Pape avec Fernandez ? Il y a une co- direction maintenant à Rome ?
They were invited to accept Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally with the hermeneutic of discontinuity with Tradition and not rationally with the continuity with the past. The SSPX has been invited to choose the schism of the popes, cardinals and bishops. It is official.
Natürlich und völlig verständlich, das diese Bischofsweihen für den Bischof von Rom ein gewaltiges Übel darstellen, erstens weil diese vollauf im Sinne Gottes unseres Herrn und seiner Einen, Heiligen, Katholischen und Apostolischen Kirche sind, zweitens weil für die höchstlöbliche FSSPX das oberste Gesetz dieser Kirche "Für das Heil der Seelen zu sorgen" völlig konträr zum Gesetz Rom`s der Nach VK II Ära "Für das UNHEIL der Seelen zu sorgen" steht und drittens die AFTERKIRCHE nur mehr den Götzen Mammon dient.
Matthäus 6. 24
Niemand kann zwei Herren dienen: entweder er wird den einen hassen und den andern lieben, oder er wird dem einen anhangen und den andern verachten. Ihr könnt nicht Gott dienen und dem Mammon.
Gottes und Mariens Segen auf allen Wegen