Don Leone rejects the conclusion of his interpretation of Vatican Council II with a false premise, while Bishop Barron accepts it. Both agree that the Council is a rupture with Tradition. Both do not mention the false premise. I do not use the false premise. So for me the Council is not a rupture with Tradition

 Don Pietro Leone is a Cushingite and I am a Feeneyite. A Cushingite interprets Vatican Council II with a false premise and a Feeneyite avoids it. In general the traditionalists and liberals are Cushingite. They use the same false premise to interpret the Creeds and Catechisms.

Even the traditionalists at the St. Benedict Center, Still River, MA, USA,  where Brother Thomas Augustine MICM is the Prior, are Cushingites on Vatican Council II. Their bishop in the diocese of  Worcester is also a Cushingite. Bishop Robert McManus uses the same false premise as the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary,at the St. Benedict Center, Still River, to interpret Vatican Council II and the Creeds and Catechisms.

It is like Done Pietro Leone who writes for Rorate Caeili and Bishop Robert Barron.Both are Cushingites.They follow the tradition of Pope Paul VI and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

They use the same false premise to create a rupture with Feneeyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX...

Don Leone rejects the conclusion of his interpretation of Vatican Council II with a false premise, while Bishop Barron accepts it. Both agree that the Council is a rupture with Tradition. Both do not mention the false premise. I do not use the false premise. So for me the Council is not a rupture with Tradition. - Lionel Andrades