De Mattei - Tu es Petrus: True devotion to the Chair of Saint Peter
The Nota explicativa praevia, [preliminary explanatory note] desired by Paul VI to save the orthodoxy of the document, was a compromise between the principle of the primacy of Peter and that of the collegiality of the bishops. That which took place with Lumen Gentium also occured with the conciliar constitution Gaudium et Spes, which placed on the same level the two ends of matrimony: procreative and unitive. Equality in nature does not exist. One of the two principles is destined to assert itself over the other. And, as is the case in matrimony, the unitive principle prevailed over the procreative, so in the case of the constitution of the Church, the principle of collegiality is imposing itself on that of the Primacy of the Roman Pontiff.
Lionel: Roberto dei Mattei still cannot state that Lumen Gentium does not contradict the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).Neither will he affirm the dogma EENS according to the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century.
He still finds it difficult to say that Vatican Council II is not a rupture with the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS. The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made an objective mistake.
There is only one Catholic Church, in which today cohabitate in a confused and fragmentary way, different and counterpoised theologies and philosophies.
Lionel: For him unknown cases of the baptism of desire are known. Invisible people saved in invincible ignorance are visible. This is his philosophy.
For him since there are known people saved outside the Church, not every one needs to enter the Church. This is the New Theology which he accepts with the liberals.
In the case of a heretical Pope
Lionel: For Roberto dei Mattei to assume the baptism of desire etc are exceptions to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus, is to support heresy. This heresy comes from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which is Magisterial.
the heresy becoming manifest or notorious, and publicly spread.
Lionel: Today in general the traditionalists reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century.
They also interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise. They assume for example, Lumen Gentium 8 refers to known people saved outside the Church with 'elements of sanctification and truth'. This is an objective error. It is a philosophical error. Then the traditionalists accept the New Theology which states outside the Church there is salvation.
This is manifest heresy and it is a rejection of the past ecclesiology of the Church by using a false premise.
To speak means, above all, to witness publicly one’s own fidelity to the Gospel and to the immutable Catholic truths, denouncing the errors which counteract it.
Lionel: Roberto dei Mattei could begin by affirming the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus without the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance explicit exceptions.He could then ask Fr. Jean Marie Gleize, whom he has quoted in his article, and the SSPX bishops and also the popes to do the same.
He could announce that for him Vatican Council II is not a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.It is not a rupture with the Syllabus of Error. It is not a rupture with the past ecclesiology with an ecumenism of return.
He could announce that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre did not know about this alternative interpretation of Vatican Council II which was not a rupture with Tradition.