Abp.Pozzo wanted the SSPX to sign the doctrinal preamble with an irrational premise : it's unethicall

The Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) must note that Archbishop Guido Pozzo, Secretary of Ecclesia Dei, Vatican wanted them to sign the doctrinal preamble while accepting LG 16, UR 3,NA 2 etc in Vatican Council II as referring to known people in 2017 saved outside the Church.He wanted them to contradict the Syllabus of Errors by assuming invisible for us baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance referred to visible exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and were examples of salvation outside the Church.
This is the interpretation of Vatican Council II and EENS accepted by Cardinal Raymond Burke, Massimo Faggioli,Fr.James Martin s.j...

The two popes use a false premise (invisible people are visible), false inference( these invisible but visible people are saved outside the Church) and non traditional conclusion (outside the Church there is known salvation with these invisible-visible cases, so there is a new understanding of the Nicene Creed, EENS,Vatican Council II and the Catechisms).
So Archbishop Pozzo must be asked to acknowledge that there are no practical exceptions to EENS in 2017.Also the references to BOB, BOB and I.I in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and LG 16, LG 8,UR 3, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II are to theoretical cases, possibilities known only to God and not to personally known people.
The Council of Trent, Catechism of Pius X and Baltimore, Mystici Corporis, the popes in the ordinary and extra ordinary magisterium and Vatican Council II do not state that we have to interpret BOD, BOB and I.I etc as referring to known people saved outside the Church.Yet this was wrongly inferred by the liberal theologians and is accepted by cardinals and bishops today at the CDF/Ecclesia Dei, Vatican.
The SSPX can ask Abp-Pozzo to, like me, interpret Vatican Council II as being in harmony with EENS.This would be the EENS as it was interpreted by the missionaries and magisterium of the 16th century and not EENS as having visible for us BOD, BOB and I.l as its exceptions.
So he must affirm a Vatican Council II( premise-free) and EENS(premise-free).
He cannot expect the SSPX to sign a doctrinal preamble with an irrational interpretation of magisterial documents when a rational alternative is available.Also to know that LG 16 etc refers to unknown people in the present times, and then to continue with the confusion, is unethical, deceptive and not Catholic.-Lionel Andrades

October 8, 2017

Archbishop Guido Pozzo rejects the Syllabus of Errors with Vatican Council II and EENS interpreted with the false premise : SSPX must note the doctrinal error
Lionel L. Andrades
Title should read:
Abp.Pozzo wanted the SSPX to sign the doctrinal preamble with an irrational premise : it's unethical