Friday, March 14, 2014

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.
 
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

 
Photo : A representative image of the consequences of Vatican II in the web encyclopedia Wikipedia



No comments: