Vatican Council II can be interpreted in harmony with Tradition when the Lefebvrists and liberals do not use the false premise. However even if the Council were to be annulled, as it is suggested, there still is the issue of affirming exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. This is not being done by Archbishop Carlo Vigano and Peter Kwasniewski.

 

First, it seems to me that I can agree with practically all of what Kwasniewski has written: his analysis of the facts is extremely clear and polished and reflects my thoughts exactly. What I am particularly pleased about is that “ever since Archbishop Viganò’s June 9 letter and his subsequent writing on the subject, people have been discussing what it might mean to ‘annul’ the Second Vatican Council”.-Archbishop Carlo Vigano 1

Lionel : Vatican Council II can be interpreted in harmony with Tradition when the Lefebvrists and liberals do not use the false premise.

However even if the Council were to be annulled, as it is suggested, there still is the issue of affirming exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. This is not being done by Archbishop Carlo Vigano and Peter Kwasniewski.

Like Archbishop Marcdel Lefebvre they use the false premise to interpret Vatican Council II.They also use the false premise to interpret the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance. So they create a new false interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus whcih is a rupture with Tradition.It is EENS Cushingite and not EENS, Feeneyite.

So they are still not affirming Tradition, irrespective of how they interpret Vatican Council II. With the false premise they contradict the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX.

With the false premise they support the New Theology, New Rcumenism and New Ecclesiology.This is all heresy. It is schism with the past popes and the Church Fathers.-Lionel Andrades

1

https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/vigano-how-is-it-that-the-bible-and-all-church-documents-can-be-questioned-except-vatican-ii