Traditionalists and sedevacantists cannot get over it, Vatican Council II is not a rupture with Tradition .But affirming EENS in public is going to be quite a thing for them

Three years have passed and Fr.Anthony Cekada cannot get over it.Vatican Council II was not a rupture with Tradition.Sedevacantism based on Vatican Council II is now obsolete.The truth is out.

It's the same with the Una Voce traditionalists.They cannot get around this.

Those who have had their religious formation under Archbishop Lefebvre cannot believe it.The Archbishop had it wrong all along.He interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally and did not know about the rational  choice.

It is now time for all the traditionalists to support Vatican Council II and Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus, or extra ecclesiam nulla salus, was it was known to the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century.

Otherwise the doctrinal confusion remains in the Church and this is useful for the Masons and the political Left. The traditionalists like the liberals, would continue to remain in schism with the past popes since they would be rejecting Feeneyite EENS.They would do this by interpreting the baptism of desire as referring to known people saved outside the Church, when there are no such known people. This is the wide spread heresy in the Church.With visible for us baptism of desire, they have changed the meaning of the Nicene Creed.They have changed the interpretation of EENS,Vatican Council II and the Catechisms, past and present.They have ignored a rational interpretation of these Church documents/teachings.

This error is so thick in the Church that this month when Cardinal Luiz Ladaria at the Press Conference on Placuit Deo said that Lumen Gentium 8 was an exception to the Church's old teaching on having the superiority and exclusiveness of salvation no one objected.

Even the sedevacantists Peter and Michael Dimond at the Most Holy Family Monastery did not object in their E-Exchanges.Since it is based on physically- visible- for- them Lumen Gentium 8, cases of 'elements of sanctification and truth' that Peter and Michael Dimond interpret Vatican Council II.So for them there are known elements of sanctification and truth in other religions, in 2018.So  Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma EENS, as Cardinal Ladaria suggested. Peter and Michael Dimond  rejected Vatican Council II when the error lies with their false premise.

Similarly at the sedevacantist St.Gertrude the Great Church of Bishop Dolan and Fr.Anthony Cekada, there were no objections. Since like Cardinal Ladaria they also interpret Lumen Gentium 8 as referring to known people saved outside the Church.So for them there were known people saved outside the Church where the Catholic Church allegedly subsists.For the liberals and the sedevacantists there is known salvation outside the Church.This is not how I interpret Lumen Gentium 8.

So when I say that Lumen Gentium 8 refers not to known people in 2018 or the past, but to hypothetical cases, they do not understand me. In their mind it is fixed that these are known people saved outside the Church.

How could someone see a non Catholic saved in Heaven without the baptism of desire in the Church. So who could have seen or known an exception to Feeneyite EENS?

Now after they have been informed there is no comment from them.Since it is difficult for all of them to state in public that they affirm Vatican Council II and also Feeneyite EENS.-Lionel Andrades