As expected there is no clarification or denial from Archbishop Guido Pozzo or the Vatican to these blog posts.Vatican Council II is not the issue.They are faking it.It never was the issue.The CDF/Ecclesia Dei wanted the SSPX to compromise with error. They wanted the SSPX to interpret Vatican Council II with an irrational inference.Then they wanted the SSPX to accept the non traditional conclusion.This would be a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).This would be a rupture with Tradition.This hermeneutic of discontinuity is approved by Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis.
Summorum Pontificum was probably a bait for the SSPX to approve Vatican Council II interpreted with a new theology, based on irrational Cushingism.
Archbishop Pozzo , Archbishop Di Noia and Cardinal Muller at the CDF/Ecclesia Dei will not accept Vatican Council II interpreted with traditional Feeneyism i.e there are no visible exceptions to the dogma EENS. I cannot meet someone on the streets saved outside the Church. I cannot see any one in Heaven this month who is there without Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.
Yet the Left, and the CDF, would want the SSPX to interpret LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, etc as referring to visible exceptions to EENS.They want the SSPX to accept the new theology and claim they can meet someone on the streets saved outside the Church and of course, there are visible cases of persons in Heaven saved without the baptism of water.
It is time for the SSPX to clearly ask Archbishop Pozzo to affirm Vatican Council II in harmony with the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS.
They should also ask the CDF for an apology.Archbishop Lefebvre was correct in rejecting Vatican Council II interpreted with Cushingism.
They could also ask the CDF to explain how can the baptism of desire etc, with or without the baptism of water, be an exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS, according to the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 ?
This was the irrational thinking of the 1949 magisterium in Rome. The 1949 Letter to the Archbishop of Boston with this factual error was placed in the Denzinger by Fr.Karl Rahner S.J. It was also referenced in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992) by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.
Ask him about the interpretation of Vatican Council II with Feeneyism ( there no known exceptions to EENs, past or present, since we physically cannot see people who have died and who are in Heaven in this state). According to the CDF can this interpretation be accepted by all Catholics ?
This is how I interpret Vatican Council II. According to Catholic priests in Rome there are no known exceptions to the dogma EENS. They agree with me.
Abp.Guido Pozzo does not deny it : Ecclesia Dei/CDF use an irrationality and heresy to interpret Vatican Council II