Archbishop Lefebvre was correct on Vatican Council II being a rupture with Tradition. He correctly detected a New Theology. He could see the effect, the results. But he did not know it was the false premise in the New Theology which was doing the damage. He did not know this since, he was interpreting extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) with the same false premise

 Archbishop Lefebvre was correct on Vatican Council II being a rupture with Tradition. He correctly detected a New Theology. He could see the effect, the results. But he did not know it was the false premise in the New Theology which was doing the damage. He did not know this since, he was interpreting extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) with the same false premise.

The baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance were exceptions to EENS for him. This was false reasoning.

Yet this seems the principal reasoning at Vatican Council II.

Fifty -five years later and it is still not known to Catholic leaders. -Lionel Andrades