CathInfo.com

For another Scriptural proof contra the Pelagian-BOD heresy, we have St. Paul justifying why God permits that many will not receive the Gospel and be damned for their sins:
"And if our gospel be also hid, it is hid to them that are lost, In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto them." 2 Cor. 4:3-4

The Fr. Fahey comment is particularly disturbing since he got so much else right, and is a bit of a champion among Trads. There, in a nutshell, is a vivid prequel to Vatican II, and in Fr. Fahey of all people. Maddening.

I only found out about it in the past couple months. It was disturbing, to put it mildly. Especially since I love his books.

Even Abp. Lefebvre has promoted the same error, which is where I think all of the SSPX and sedevacantist priests/bishops have gotten the error too since the prominent ones went through the Econe seminary. Against the Heresies, pp. 216, 217, 218:

Page 216: “Evidently, certain distinctions must be made. Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.), but not by this religion. There may be souls who, not knowing Our Lord, have by the grace of the good Lord, good interior dispositions, who submit to God...But some of these persons make an act of love which implicitly is equivalent to baptism of desire.  It is uniquely by this means that they are able to be saved.”

Page 217: “One cannot say, then, that no one is saved in these religions…”

Pages 217-218: “This is then what Pius IX said and what he condemned. It is necessary to understand the formulation that was so often employed by the Fathers of the Church:  ‘Outside the Church there is no salvation.’  When we say that, it is incorrectly believed that we think that all the Protestants, all the Moslems, all the Buddhists, all those who do not publicly belong to the Catholic Church go to hell.  Now, I repeat, it is possible for someone to be saved in these religions, but they are saved by the Church, and so the formulation is true: Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.  This must be preached.”

This heresy against EENS is THE major cause of all that we've seen leading up to and after Vatican II. It is the most insidious of the rotten fruits of the Modernism heresy.

Even Abp. Lefebvre has promoted the same error, which is where I think all of the SSPX and sedevacantist priests/bishops have gotten the error too since the prominent ones went through the Econe seminary. Against the Heresies, pp. 216, 217, 218:

This heresy against EENS is THE major cause of all that we've seen leading up to and after Vatican II. It is the most insidious of the rotten fruits of the Modernism heresy.

Indeed, there's no dogma that no one is saved except BY the Church; it reads that no one is saved OUTSIDE the Church, and the Archbishop doesn't even try to explain how these various infidels are IN the Church.  This demonstrates (along side the Fr. Fahey example) how DEEP the rot had gotten with regard to Catholic soteriology and ecclesiology.  Archbishop Lefebvre probably adopted this opinion because it was taught to him PRE-Vatican II by a professor he respected as otherwise orthodox and Traditional.  Archbishop Lefebvre's view of EENS here is identical to Karl Rahner's "Anonymous Christian" theory.

And I am astonished to see how few Trad bishops and priests understand THE theological roots of the V2 crisis, that it all leads back to EENS-denial (and the resultant ecclesiology).  So while condemning the errors of V2 (which are merely symptoms of the disease) they at the same time condemn those who are fighting against the ROOT error behind it all.  V2 is but a symptom (and expression) of this core theological battle, and they're decidedly on the WRONG side of the issue and are in fact fighting FOR the enemy in the final anlysis.