Archbishop Guido Pozzo must be told that at excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre ,Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger interpreted Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition, a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and the baptism of desire.He did this when he had a choice.
Then in March 2016 he again interpreted Vatican Council II as a rupture with the dogma EENS.He said EENS was no more like it was for the missionaries of the 16th century.There was a development of the dogma for him, with Vatican Council II.
So for Pope Benedict the CDF and Ecclesia Dei, Vatican Council II is a rupture with the Church teachings over the centuries.So why should the SSPX or any Catholic religious community accept this 'fake news' version of Vatican Council II?
The SSPX should be apologised to for the CDF's excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre.Since if Cardinal Ratzinger at that time interpreted Vatican Council II with Feeneyism, the Council would affirm the exclusivist ecclesiology of the past and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope IX.Vatican Council II would not be a rupture with Tradition for Archbishop Lefebvre.
Pope Benedict should also apologise for not affirming Vatican Council II with Feeneyism in March 2016. Then there would not have been 'a development of the dogma' with Vatican Council II.
The SSPX must now be allowed to sign a doctrinal preamble affirming Vatican Council II in accord with the exclusivist ecclesiology of the past.Since invisible cases of the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are no more considered explicit exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS.This is common sense. It is also traditional theology.The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made an objective mistake in the Fr. Leonard Feenet case and a correction must be made by the CDF on behalf of the 1949 CDF.
Also the many priests of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, who offer the Traditional Latin Mass, should be allowed to sign a doctrinal preamble affirming Vatican Council II in harmony with the dogma EENS, as it was known to the magisterium and missionaries in the 16th century.
Archbishop Guido Pozzo himself needs to endorse Vatican Council II in harmony with the dogma EENS as it was known to the 16th century missionaries and clarify that Pope Benedict made a heretical mistake in March 2016 in the interview to Avvenire.This is also the heretical interpretation of bishops conferences throughout the world whose approval of the SSPX is being sought.
Guido Pozzo and Pope Francis need to apologise to the SSPX, since at first they told the SSPX that they can be given a personal prelature without accepting Vatican Council II being a condition. They then spring a surprise on them and change their plans.-Lionel Andrades