Bishop Tissier de Mallerais the fourth heresy is the explicit known to us baptism of desire: this is the SSPX error in interpreting the Council and other magisterial documents

Bishop Tissier de Mallerais of the Society of St. Pius X in his Trinity Sunday sermon in England (1) has named three heresies and criticized Vatican Council II. The three heresies he has named are not mentioned in Vatican Council II. The sedevacantists Most Holy Family Monastery have rightly called the SSPX heretics, but for the wrong reason.The Most Holy Family Monastery’s Peter and Michael Dimond have said that there can be no exception to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.They are correct. This would be heresy.They say that the SSPX are heretics because they assume that there is the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance .They assume that those who are saved in these exceptions are exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma. So this is heresy.

The SSPX does not deny that they believe that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma. They admit they are exceptions. They refer to the case of Fr.Leonard Feeney and the decision of the Holy Office in the Letter of 1949.

So the Dimond brothers call the SSPX heretics and the SSPX does not deny that there are exceptions to exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.

Neither has Bishop Tissier de Mallerais denied this heresy in the Vatican-SSPX talks when the Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said there is no more exclusive ecclesiocentric Catholic Church. (International Theological Commission papers Christian and the World Religions and The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without being baptized ).

So Bishop Tissier de Mallerais’s ecclesiology is that there are explicit exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma defined three times and explained many times in the ordinary magisterium.

This is heresy. It is with this heretical view the SSPX reviews Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance, good conscience), the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257 (God is not limited to the Sacraments).

It’s heresy possibly due to ignorance.It is assuming that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are known to us.So they are explicit exceptions to the dogma. This is also the error of Peter and Michael Dimond. They reject the baptism of desire etc since they assume, like the SSPX, that these cases are known to us for them to be exceptions to the dogma.

If the Letter of the Holy Office assumed that the baptism of desire was explicit and so an exception to the literal interpretation of Fr. Leonard Feeney they made a mistake.

The SSPX  in England and the USA have been informed many times about this heresy. They do not respond.

Once this heresy is admitted traditionalists will be able to interpret Vatican Council II in accord with the literal interpretation of the dogma. The Council will not be in conflict with the SSPX position on religious liberty, ecumenism and other religions.-Lionel Andrades

1.
http://www.sspx.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=420:bishop-tissier-de-mallerais-sermon-362012&catid=100:interviews&Itemid=69
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/