Abp.Guido Pozzo cannot affirm the Syllabus of Errors nor the past exclusivist ecclesiology since Vatican Council II has a hermeneutic of rupture for him with invisible cases being visible : SSPX priests must correct his error

OCTOBER 12, 2017

Abp.Guido Pozzo cannot affirm the Syllabus of Errors nor the past exclusivist ecclesiology since Vatican Council II has a hermeneutic of rupture for him with invisible cases being visible : SSPX priests must correct his error

Recently there was a conference at the University of St. Thomas Aquinas(Angelicum) Rome where Archbishop Guido Pozzo, Secretary of Ecclesia Dei was present and no one asked him why had the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) have to sign a doctrinal preamble affirming Vatican Council II with an irrational premise instead of without the premise? He was not asked why was the SSPX General Chapter Statement 2012 not accepted by Ecclesia Dei when it affirms the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) without the premise( there are no known possibilities of salvation outside the Church)?
Why cannot the Vatican affirm Vatican Council II and EENS without the invisible- people- are- visible premise and the these- visible- people- are- examples- of- salvation- outside -the- Church conclusion.
No one asked him about this since they do not know what I am talking about or, for political or other reasons they kept quiet just as Archbishop Pozzo will not take the initiative and comment on this issue.
Bishop Bernard Fellay has signed the Filial Correction of Pope Francis on Amoris Laetitiasince he understands the new moral theology and new doctrines being put forth in that document.But he does not understand yet, it seems, that Vatican Council II and EENS can be interpreted with or without the irrational premise and non traditional conclusion.The result is different.
He has never affirmed EENS and Vatican Council II without the premise,which of course would be opposed by the political Left but this is the direction all religious communities(Carmelities,Dominicans etc) must move, if they want to be honest and faithful to the Truth.
Superiors of religious communities cannot fake it and say every one does not need to enter the Church for salvation since invisible cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are visible exceptions to all needing to be incorporated into the Church as members for salvation in 2017.
They cannot say that the cardinals at Vatican Council II(1960-65) did not make a mistake when they believed that invisible cases of the baptism of desire etc were visible and personally known.They did make a mistake! They were confused with the excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney which was still not lifted at that time.

Similarly Religious Superiors and bishops cannot pretend that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 did not make a mistake when it assumed hypothetical and theoretical cases of the baptism of desire etc were explicit and objective examples to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

So now when Archbishop Pozzo wants the SSPX to sign a doctrinal statement with these errors in theology ( invisible-visible exceptions to EENS) and doctrine ( no more exclusivist ecclesiology but a new ecclesiology with a new ecumenism etc) he should be asked to discuss this issue.

Ask him to affirm in public the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS, without the baptism of desire etc being a known possibility of salvation in the present times, without practical exceptions to EENS. He will refuse to do so. If he says he cannot since invisible cases of the baptism of desire etc are visible exceptions we know he is choosing to be irrational, non traditional, heretical and politically correct with the Left.Vatican Council II does not have the hermeneutic of continuity for him.

Ask him to affirm the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.If he says he will not, since there is known salvation outside the Church with visible cases of the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, then we know that Vatican Council II has the hermeneutic of rupture with the past for him, it contradicts EENS and the Syllabus of Errors.This is how he chooses to interpret Vatican Council.It does not have the hermeneutic of continuity for him.It is always with the irrational premise of invisible cases are visible examples of salvation outside the Church. Now he is unloading it on the SSPX.

Ask him to affirm the Syllabus of Errors and he will not do so.Since he has rejected the past exclusivist ecclesiology.He has changed the understanding of EENS. For him EENS has exceptions i.e known cases of the baptism of desire etc which are examples of salvation outside the Church.So there is a breach with the Syllabus. Vatican Council II does not have the hermeneutic of continuity for him.
This is all a doctrinal mess and they want the SSPX to rubber stamp it, as if it is normal.

CARDINAL RAYMOND BURKE, CMTV, MICM HAVE COMPROMISED It is normal and acceptable for Cardinal Raymond Burke, the USCCB and the bishops conferences including those in Polish and Hungary.The compromise has been made by Michael Voris at CMTV, the Catholic religious communities in general, the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary(MICM) at the St. Benedict Centers and lay Catholics at large.They are all comfortable with Vatican Council II interpreted with the false premise(hypothetical cases are physically visible in the present times) and non traditional conclusion( they are examples of salvation outside the Church and so are exceptions to EENS). They will not affirm EENS and Vatican Council II without the premise.

SSPX bishops and priests must understand the precise theological and doctrinal injustice done to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. He had to approve a Vatican Council II, de jure and de facto, based on the 1949 irrational premise which creates a non traditional conclusion. It was approved from Pope Pius XII to Pope John Paul II.It was heretical and they made it magisterial, official and obligatory for all Catholics. Archbishop Lefebvre did not comply so they excommunicated him.
The SSPX can now overturn all those errors from the past.They can return to the past exclusivist ecclesiology and simultaneously also affirm Vatican Council II, without the irrational premise.
The SSPX simply has to announce that they support Vatican Council II (premise-free) in harmony with EENS( premise-free).Everything else is explainable and falls in line.The loose ends are automatically tied up.

This month there will be the Catholic Identity and Voice of the Family Conference where they are not expected to discuss this issue. Since the organizers still don't understand that that the magisterium made an objective error, they violated the Principle of Non Contradiction, in the censure of Fr. Leonard Feeney and then Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and then many other unknown Catholics who refused to interpret magisterial documents with an irrational premise and conclusion,which the organizers still unknowingly utilize in the interpretation especially of Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition when it is not.-Lionel Andrades

May 12, 2017

SSPX Spokesman Confirms: "No Date for Reconciliation"
(Paris) Father Alain Lorans, spokesman for the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X. in France, according to AFP press agency, said: "Dialogue continues without timetable." There is no specific date. The FSSPX spokesman thus confirms what Guido Pozzo, the secretary of the Pontifical Commission, Ecclesia Dei, and the Vatican representativr for talks with the Society, said yesterday in an interview with Rome Reports.

Both sides thus indirectly denied speculation that the erection of the Society as a personal prelature could be announced by Pope Francis tomorrow, May 13, the 100th anniversary of the first apparition of the Virgin Mary in Fatima.
Archbishop Pozzo said yesterday that Monsignor Fellay would first have to sign the doctrinal preamble before the canonical recognition could be passed as a personal prelature.
In the end, seven of the Society's French district and three heads of aligned religious communities had very clearly spoken out against an agreement with Rome at the present time. AFP therefore headlined yesterday: "The Lefebvrian integralists between the road to Rome and an internal crisis."

eponymousflower.blogspot.ro/…/Archbishop Guid…


April 11, 2016

What Rome Expects of the Society of Pius X -- Interview of Archbishop Guido Pozzo

(Rome) What Rome expects from the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) said Curial Archbishop Guido Pozzo, Secretary of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei . The interview was held by Luca Marcolivio for the press Zenit .

About two weeks ago Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the SSPX was received by Pope Francis at the Vatican. The private audience caused quite a stir since it is known that Francis has no strong sympathies for tradition.

New "Doctrinal Preamble"?

Curial Archbishop Pozzo described the meeting as "useful" on the "path" of the SSPX, "towards a full reconciliation" that "will be made a canonical recognition of the institute." Currently it is "primarily" about creating a more trusting and respectful air, "to overcome hardening and distrust".

When asked which "basic requirements" Rome is urging of the SSPX for recognition, Pozzo said that the SSPX would submit a "doctrinal statement" which "at the appropriate moment," is one that will contain all the "essential and necessary points". Pozzo described such points as: "the approval of the creed, the sacramental bond and hierarchical communion with the Roman Pontiff, the head of the episcopal college united with him."

Specifically the Curial Archbishop explained, "that the SSPX is asked to recognize that only the Magisterium of the Church is entrusted with the preservation, defense and interpretation of the deposit of faith, and the Magisterium is not higher than the Word of God, but this serves only to hand down doctrine." The supreme Magisterium is the "authentic interpreter" even of the previous texts of the Magisterium "in the light of the everlasting tradition," including those of the Second Vatican Council. So there is no place for "opposing novelties", but only for a deeper understanding of the Depositum fidei, "always in the same doctrine, the same sense and in the same tradition."

Discussions have "led to a significant clarification" of Vatican II

As for the Second Vatican Council, the trodden path of the "recent years" have "led to a significant clarification," said Pozzo. "The 2nd Vatican Council can only be understood in the context of the entire tradition of the Church and her constant magisterium in an appropriate manner." In addition, a different weighting and thus binding of each document is observed. The person in charge ofEcclesia Dei emphasized that there even after "the canonical recognition" the conciliar documents can continue to be discussed. The aim of the "discussion, deepening" must be to "avoid any misunderstandings and contradictions" that "to our knowledge are currently spread throughout the Church".

Outstanding issues such as religious freedom, ecumenism are not "an obstacle to recognition"

The open questions about the relationship between church and state, freedom of religion, practice of ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue as well as "some aspects of liturgical reform and their actual use" would "be discussed and remain points to be clarified." but however, "they are not an obstacle for the canonical and legal recognition" of the SSPX.

eponymousflower.blogspot.ro/…/Archbishop Guid…

OCTOBER 11, 2017

Pope Benedict could have vetted and approved Amoris Laetitia

OCTOBER 10, 2017
CDF Doctrinal Commentary – Professio fidei supports heresy approved by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger

OCTOBER 10, 2017
Vatican doctrinal error could not have been made clearer : Lefebvre, Feeney censure based on the false premise


OCTOBER 9, 2017

Abp. Pozzo wanted Bishop Fellay to interpret the doctrinal preamble with an irrational premise : ignorance or scandal ?

OCTOBER 9, 2017

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