It was not known to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Fr. Leonard Feeney : Vatican Council II is in harmony with 16th century EENS. There is no ' development of doctrine'.

It was not known to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Fr.Leonard Feeney it seems. They did not know that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II referred always to only hypothetical cases . They were not practical exceptions to the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).Vatican Council II really does not contradict the traditional teaching on exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church. Vatican Council II is ecclesiocentric and not only Christocentric.

This was no known to Archbishop Pierre Martin Thục (1897 – 1984) the Vietnamese sedevacantist bishop. So it was not known to Michael and Peter Dimond, Benedictines at the Most Holy Family Monastery, USA.

Also it was not known to Brother. Thomas Augustine MICM, Superior of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Still River, MA, USA. He did not know that Vatican Council II does not contradict Feeneyite EENS. In the past Brother Andre Marie MICM, Prior at the St. Benedict Center, N.H, also interpreted Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition.

The present bishops and priests of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX)do not interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with EENS. So invincible ignorance mentioned in the Catechism of Pope Pius X would contradict Cantate Domino, Council of Florence on outside the Church there is no salvation. For the Lefebvrists,  it would also contradict the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX. Tradition would contradict tradition also for the Lefebvrist, sedevacantist bishops, Donald Sanborn and Mark Pivarunas.The false premise creates the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.

The popes also use the same false premise.Pope Francis recently announced that Vatican Council II had to accepted and interpreted  according to 'the Church'. He was referring to the political left-approved version of Alberto Melloni of the Bologna School. Melloni uses the common false premise like the Lefebvrsist, Thucs and Feeneyites. The fake premise is that what is invisible is considered visible. So LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc refer to physically visible bodies in Newton's time and space, in 1965-2021. So they are wrongly considered known examples of salvation outside the Church. Then they emerge as practical exceptions to EENS.

The popes from Paul VI to Francis have used a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II, when they had a rational alternative, which they avoided. They made a mistake and Archbishop Lefebvre and Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston did not correct the error. -Lionel Andrades