For a Cushingite Don Pietro Leone Lumen Gentium 8 etc would be known non Catholics saved outside the Church in 2014-2021.So he would conclude that it is the fault of Vatican Council II

 

From the webblog Rorate Caeii

Don Pietro Leone: The Council and the Eclipse of God – PART V

 

                                                          THE CHURCH

     

                            I   THE CHURCH CONSIDERED IN HERSELF

After a brief introduction to expound Catholic teaching concerning the Church in Herself, we shall see how the Council opposes this teaching.

 

 

Introduction

 

In this introduction we shall briefly expound the Church’s:

 

a)     Nature;

b)    End, and Means for Attaining the End;

c)     Constitution;

d)    Properties;

e)     Necessity.

https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2021/03/don-pietro-leone-council-and-eclipse-of_11.html#more

Lionel: Don Pietro Leone is a Cushingite Lefebvrist. He interprets Vatican Council II like the liberals. He uses the false premise.

He says outside the Church there is no salvation but means that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are exceptions. So really outside the Church there is salvation.

In this article he has not mentioned the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) defined by three Church Councils.

He cannot do so. He is a Cushingite and so invisble cases are objective exceptions to EENS. So Vatican Council II would contradict EENS for him. 

This is typical of the followers of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre who attend/offer the Latin Mass with the new ecclesiology,and reject the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.

Without the false premise LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc are not practical exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.

For a Cushingite like Don Piert Leone LG 8 etc would be interpreted as being known non Catholics, objectively visible people saved outside the Church. So they would contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Don Leone would conclude that it is the fault of Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades

________________________

FRIDAY, MARCH 14, 2014

How to Regard Vatican II
a special essay by Don Pietro Leone

Many of our readers are aware of the work of Don Pietro Leone (for instance, The Roman Rite: Old and New, on the Traditional Mass and the many problems of the new liturgy). Don Pietro Leone is the pen name of a priest who celebrates the traditional Mass in full and peaceful communion with his Ordinary somewhere in that great cradle of civilization known as Italy.

In this special essay, reflecting the personal position of the author and translated by our contributor Francesca Romana, the reverend Father tries to explain what is the best way to regard the Second Vatican Council, 50 years later and with the full knowledge of all its fruits and consequences, willed or unintentional...

The obscure texts are ambiguous between a non-Catholic sense which is primary, and a Catholic sense which is secondary. In the primary sense they represent a rupture with Tradition and the Faith, whereas in the secondary sense they represent a line of continuity with Tradition and the Faith.

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/

 

Rorate Caeili has presented an analysis of Vatican Council II by Don Pietro Leone who did not know that Lumen Gentium 16 etc is invisible for us. It does not refer to those saved in invincible ignorance as being visible in the flesh. It does not state that they can be seen with the naked eye.So LG 16 is not an exception to Tradition. It is with this simple error that Don Leone  has analysed Vatican Council II.

 

The dead for us, saved in invincible ignorance  Don Leone assumes is a known exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the rest of Tradition. So these cases of persons dead and  and visible to Don Leone are known exceptions to all needing to enter the Church for salvation. This becomes a  break with the Syllabus of Errors etc.

 

This is the typical SSPX error. They were led into this error when they assumed that the baptism of desire is a known exception to the  traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, according to the saints and popes.

 

Since Don Leone assumes LG 16 is explicit for us and not implicit for us the texts of Vatican Council II emerge 'obscure' (surely AG 7 will contradict LG 16). They are 'ambigous'.Since AG 7 affirms the dogma on exclusive salvation while LG 16 (explicit for Don Leone) contradicts the dogma.
 

LG 16 (explicit for us) 'represent a rupture with Tradition and the Faith' while LG 16 (invisible for us and not an exception to the dogma on salvation) 'represent a line of continuity with Tradition and the Faith.'

-Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/search?q=Don+Pietro+Leone