Don Pietro Leone is still giving us the political version of Vatican Council II, the schismatic one, approved by the Left : he will not answer if LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to invisible or visible cases in 2021

 Don Pietro Leone and the web blog Rorate Caeili (F.G) are still giving us the political version of Vatican Council II, the schismatic one, approved by the Left. We all agree it is a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).But  for Don Leone  LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to physically visible non Catholics saved  outside the Church. So they become  visible exceptions for EENS.But for me LG 8 etc are always invisible cases. They are not objective people in 1965-2021.So they cannot be exceptions for EENS.On the other hand Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation) supports Feeneyite EENS.The baptism of desire (LG 14) and being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) are not objective exceptions for AG 7.They are always invisible.So Vatican Council II does not contradict EENS for me as it does for him.

When I read the text of Vatican Council II there is no theological opening for the New Ecumenism. Since with EENS not contradicted we are back to the old exclusivist ecumenism and the past ecclesiocentric inter-religious dialogue, which is an opportunity for Catholic mission.Since all non Catholics are oriented to Hell with no known exceptions, unless they enter the Catholic Church with faith and the baptism of water (AG 7 /LG 14, CCC 846 etc).

For Don Leone and Rorate Caeili  LG 8 etc refer to visible cases and so there are exceptions for EENS and so, in a big give away, it is possible for the liberals to promote the New Ecumenism, New Ecclesiology etc. Don Leone and Rorate Caeili have only one way of reading the Council-text. It is the same as the liberals.

Leone and F.G at Rorate Caeili use the Fake Premise (invisible cases are physically visible, LG 8 etc refer to known people in particular cases saved outside the Church in the present times). I use the Rational Premise (invisible cases are invisible, LG 8 etc refer to speculative and theoretical cases only. Always).So their conclusion is non traditional (outside the Church there is salvation, known exceptions to EENS) and my interpretation is traditional (outside the Church there is no salvation).They produce the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition, like the liberals, and I, one of continuity.

 They both accept the second part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which used the Fake Premise to interpret BOD and I.I. I am not obliged to do the same. They interpret Vatican Council II with the common Fake Premise, like the liberals. I am not obliged to do the same.

They know that they have a problem since when I keep asking Don Leone and Rorate Caeili (F.G) if LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc refer to invisible or visible cases in 2021, they do not answer.

In his latest post  Don Leone refers to extra ecclesiam nulla salus being negated by Vatican Council II. Of course it will be negated since the Council Fathers accepted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and used the Fake Premise to create a New Theology, which negates traditional EENS.But they have a choice. We can interpret LG 8 etc with the Rational Premise and there will be no rupture with EENS. But they do not do this and produce more reports with the same error.

Don Pietro Leone refers to EENS but does not qualify which one is he referring to: that of the Lefebvrists or the Feeneyites, with the Fake Premise or without it, in harmony with Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) or in a break with traditional Feeneyite EENS.-Lionel Andrades