Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre made a mistake because Lumen Gentium does not contradict the past ecclesiology, Unitatis Redintigatio does not contradict an ecumenism of return and Ad Gentes does not contradict traditional mission and exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.This is the mistake made by traditionalists and sedevacantists who follow Lefebvre and the bishops of the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX).

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre made a mistake because Lumen Gentium  does not contradict the past ecclesiology, Unitatis Redintigatio does not contradict an ecumenism of return and Ad Gentes does not contradict traditional mission and exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.This is the mistake made by traditionalists and sedevacantists who follow Lefebvre and the bishops of the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX).

Archbishop Lefebvre did not correct Pope Paul VI when interpreted Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition.

Lefebvre thought the rupture with Tradition had come with the New  Mass in the vernacular, when it really was a false premise used to interpret the Council to create a non traditional conclusion.Obviously, when he interpreted all hypothetical cases as being objective and known people, the conclusion would be non traditional and heretical.
 
 

I mentioned in blog post yesterday LG 8, LG 14 and LG 16 being hypothetical cases do not contradict the old ecclesiology. There is no known salvation outside the Church. So there is no theological and philosophical foundation for the New Theology.

There is nothing in Lumen Gentium to contradict the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church. So there is no philosophical and theological foundation in Vatican Council II for the New Ecclesiology.

Unitatis Redintigratio does not name any particular person saved outside the Church as a Protestant or other Christian in his religion.It does not state that we can know of a Christian saved outside the Church without Catholic faith. So the Decree on Ecumenism(UR) does not anywhere contradict the past ecumenism of return.

Similarly Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation and we know there can be no practical exceptions known to us humans in 2019. So Vatican Council II is not a rupture with Mission and Salvation as it was known to the Magisterium and missionaries in the 16th century.

I love Vatican Council II and I affirm Tradition( Athanasius Creed, Syllabus of Errors, EENS etc).

-Lionel Andrades 

July 29, 2019

 

 

Dietrich and Alice von Hildebrand, Paolo Pascualucci, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Roberto dei Mattei, Fr. Nicholas Gruner, Christopher Ferrara, Mons. Ignacio Barreiro and others were all interpreting Vatican Council II with Cushingism.So this line of traditionalist writers had it wrong on the Council.Their premise was wrong and so their conclusion was wrong

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/07/dietrich-and-alice-von-hildebrand-paolo.html

    

FROM THE RIGHT HAND BAR.CLICK TO ACCESS

• Red is an exception to the blue-Bologna School/ Fr.John Zuhlsdorf(1)
• Red is not an exception to the blue - Proclamation (2)
• Red is not an exception to the blue - profances Holy Mass (1)
• Red is not an exception to the blue :CCC 846-848 (4)
• Red not an exception to blue mapping(1)

 

  

  

  

   

  

   

 

  

 

 

   

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

 

   

  

  

  

  

 

 

  

  

  

 

  

Lionel Andrades in five steps (3)
Lionel Andrades' Catholic beliefs (8)
Lionel Andrades' description of Feeneyism and Cushingism (6)
Lionel Andrades' intepretation of Vatican Council II and Extra ecclesiam nulla salus (14)
Lionel Andrades' interpretation of Vatican Council II and EENS (9)
Lionel Andrades' interpretation of Vatican Council II and EENS : Questions and Answers (9)