Sola Scriptura is NOT My Position

New blog on the kid: Refutation of Dr. Steven Nemes · I Heard the Cardinal Zen had Taken on Michael Lofton · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Michael Lofton on Marcel Lefebvre, Me on Both and on Pope Michael · Sola Scriptura is NOT My Position · Michael Lofton Responded to Cardinal Zen · Great Bishop of Geneva! Blunder, Gendron!

What's Wrong With Scripture Alone?
I Miss Christendom | 5 July 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnUkjgh-GBY

Was shared on my blog, with my comments. Reactions on your part will be taken as rebloggable.

3:20 Actually, "blessed among women" nails sinlessness, so Immaculate Conception.

There is no other candidate than Satan for being Her Sisera or Holophernes, and the repetition by Elizabeth with the addition that echoes Genesis 3:15 clinches that.

And there is no other way for a mortal person to inflict a mortal headwound on Satan than by not sinning.

17:52 According to Tradition, "imperium romanum" which I take to mean the dignity of Roman Emperor.

Just after Nicolas II and Charles I left power, Lenin, a close precursor of Antichrist, got power.

19:47 To me too.

You have done an excellent job of refuting sola scriptura.

Would you agree, if sth in Biblical history is apparently a plain reading and has also been taught by tradition (YEC, Geocentrism) just because there is a recent so to speak licence to interpret it otherwise, from the magisterium, does not make this licence trump the previous weight for the traditional doctrine, especially if further investigation shows the modern doctrine will logically involve things in conflict with traditional doctrine and not covered by the licence or appearance of such.

E g the decision of 1820 does not explicitly allow for saying "the furthest stars are 13.8 billion light years away" and the decision of 1909 does not explicitly allow for extending Genesis 5 and 11 so that Adam lived 50 000 or 100 000 or 500 000 or 1 750 000 years ago, hence, should these positions come to be implied by Heliocentrism or Old Earth, the licences from 1820 and 1909 are no good argument against a full return to traditional doctrine?