DDF HIDES INFORMATION FROM TRADITIONALISTS - FEENEY, LEFEBVRE, SSPX BISHOPS, FR. GLEIZE, FR. LAISNEY, FR. BERG AND PAGLIARANI
DDF HIDES INFORMATION FROM TRADITIONALISTS - FEENEY, LEFEBVRE, SSPX BISHOPS, FR. GLEIZE, FR. LAISNEY, FR. BERG AND PAGLIARANI
The CDF/DDF/Holy Office did not tell Fr. Leonard Feeney he was correct. There was no visible baptism of desire. An invisible baptism of desire case could not be a visible exception for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) of the Council of Florence 1442,
They did not tell Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre to use the Rational Premise (invisible cases are invisible in 2026, LG 16 is a hypothetical and invisible case). There were no visible cases of LG 8,14,16,UR 3, NA 2,GS 22 etc in 1965.So Vatican Council II with Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation from Hell) was aligned with the dogma EENS and LG 8, 14, 16 etc were not explicit exceptions for EENS or AG 7.
Now they are not telling Fr. Davide Pagliarani, that Vatican Council II can only be interpreted with the Rational Premise. The Council is then traditional.
With the Rational Premise (LG 16 is invisible in 2026), the Council is ecclesiocentric (AG 7) and no more liberal.