ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE AND FR. LEONARD FEENEY WERE CORRECT. THE CDF ( HOLY OFFICE) WERE POLITICAL. POPE LEO XIV MUST CORRECT THE OBJECTIVE MISTAKE.
By Lionel Andrades
Date: May 11, 2025
The Political Persecution of Orthodoxy
The political left attempted to force Fr. Leonard Feeney in Boston to accept an irrational interpretation of the baptism of desire. He refused. Similarly, they tried to compel Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre to accept an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II. He, too, refused. Both received politically motivated excommunications for their orthodoxy.
Pope Leo XIV’s Unknowing Error
Pope Leo XIV unknowingly accepts an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II texts, such as Lumen Gentium (LG) 8, 14, 16, Unitatis Redintegratio (UR) 3, Nostra Aetate (NA) 2, and Gaudium et Spes (GS) 22. This leads to a liberal, non-traditional conclusion. He could correct this error overnight by adopting a rational interpretation of the Council.
Impact on the College of Cardinals and Papal Elections
The political misinterpretation of Creeds, Councils, and Catechisms created an impediment for the College of Cardinals, affecting their election of the pope. This error produced a liberal “new Church” by reinterpreting Church teachings irrationally.
Restoring Tradition with a Rational Vatican Council II
A rational interpretation of Vatican Council II aligns with Tradition, allowing Pope Leo XIV and the College of Cardinals to correct their error and end the scandal. With this correction, their legitimacy is reaffirmed. Pope Leo’s recent visit to the Shrine of Our Lady of Good Counsel, outside Rome, underscores his role as pope.
The Athanasius Creed and Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus (EENS)
Pope Leo XIII upheld the Athanasius Creed and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS). Today, rejecting these by claiming Vatican Council II (irrational) provides exceptions is no longer tenable. A rational Vatican Council II supports the Creed and EENS without exceptions, requiring all Catholics, including Cardinals Grech, Semeraro, O’Malley, Maradiaga, Muller, Burke, and Sarah, to affirm these teachings publicly.
Current Misinterpretations and Their Consequences
The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) and sedevacantists, like many in the Church, interpret Vatican Council II irrationally, creating a rupture with EENS and the Athanasius Creed. For the 16th-century Magisterium, this would constitute heresy and schism. Pope Leo XIV, until he corrects this error, is not apostolic or magisterial on this issue. Pope Francis similarly enforced an irrational interpretation, demanding the Church accept a political reading of the Council.
Rejection of Traditional Orthodoxy
Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez viewed traditional orthodoxy as obsolete, declaring the Arlington Discalced nuns in Texas laicized for their traditionalism. He labeled their Carmelite theology as incompatible with an irrational Vatican Council II. Similarly, he declared Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano schismatic for refusing to accept this interpretation and Pope Francis’ alignment with it. The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in New Hampshire faced harsh prohibitions for rejecting an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II and the Catechism, which undermines EENS.
The “Upside-Down” Church
The liberal Church, justified by an irrational Vatican Council II, has been handed to Pope Leo XIV. Issues like homosexual unions and divorce are not the root problem but symptoms of this misinterpretation, which Cardinals Muller, Burke, and Sarah also accept. They failed to challenge the irrational basis of Pope Francis’ Synods and Amoris Laetitia.
A Call for Clear Proclamation of EENS
Can Cardinal Peter Erdo in Hungary tell Viktor Orban that salvation is only through the Catholic Church, as taught by a rational Vatican Council II? Can Cardinal Wilfred Napier in South Africa proclaim that one is either Catholic or damned, per Conciliar teaching? A rational Vatican Council II restores the pre-1949 ecclesiology of the Church.
Correcting Historical Errors
Pope Leo XIV must apologize for the excommunications of Archbishop Lefebvre and Fr. Leonard Feeney, which stemmed from the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II and the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office (LOHO). The LOHO mistakenly treated invisible cases of the baptism of desire as visible exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. Pope John XXIII failed to correct this before Vatican Council II, perpetuating the error.
Dialogue with Traditionalists
Pope Leo XIV should engage the SSPX and sedevacantists using a rational Vatican Council II to bring them into a traditional mainline Catholic Church. A traditional Church is only possible when Church documents are interpreted rationally.
Conclusion
Archbishop Lefebvre and Fr. Leonard Feeney were correct in their fidelity to Tradition. The CDF (Holy Office) acted politically in their excommunications. Pope Leo XIV has the opportunity to restore orthodoxy by correcting the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II, realigning the Church with its apostolic and magisterial roots.
— Lionel Andrades