With the error of the pope out in the open , it is obsolete to talk in terms of there being exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Catholics now know that there are no known cases saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire or elements of sanctification and grace(LG 8)...
So to build up a theology assuming these cases are known to us in 2013 is false. Pope Francis does not know any Jew or Muslim in the present times who is saved or going to be saved contradicting the traditional teaching on other religions and Christian communities and churches.Since he cannot know if a person will commit a mortal sin before he dies and lose Sanctifying Grace nor can we judge souls.So he cannot claim that they have ecclesial faith needed for salvation. It's as simple as that! In his last encyclical he assumes that Christians have ecclesial faith!
Pope Francis like the Jesuits has been making the Cardinal Richard Cushing Error and has been assuming there is known salvation outside the visible limits of the Catholic Church.So he has been doing theology with Cushingism and has been producing non traditional new doctrines.
In the letter to the former editor of La Repubblica, he did not tell the Jews that the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church 846 say they all need to enter the Church 'as through a door', to avoid Hell and go to Heaven.
Why not? Since he assumes he can meet a non Catholic who he is sure will be saved in invincible ignorance or implicit desire,which is explicit for him.
Since there can be exceptions to everyone needing to be a visible member of the Church (with 'faith and baptism'-AG 7,Vatican Council II) all non Catholics no more have to convert into the Catholic Church.This has been the theology in the Catholic Church over the last 60-plus years.
It is now obsolete. Since we have discovered that there are no visible exceptions to the traditional and centuries-old interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation.Also without the 'visible dead theory' Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church supports Fr.Leonard Feeney. This has to be taken into account in inter religious dialogue and ecumenism.
On line so much of the theology on this subject is out dated because of Cushing irrationality which is being used. There is Robert Sungenis video on Outside the Church there is no salvation which assumes that the baptism of desire etc are known exceptions to all needing to convert into the Church. He assumes these cases are relevant to the dogma.EWTN has placed an article on line with the same mistake titled, Tragic Errors of Fr.Leonard Feeney.Catholics United for the Faith has a similar article by Phillip Gray.Fr. Anthony Cekada has reintroduced an article saying the supporters of Fr.Leonard Feeney, (at the St.Benedict Centers, USA) are in mortal sin since they reject the baptism of desire. He does not differentiate between implicit or explicit-for-us baptism of desire.The sedevacantists MHFM reject the baptism of desire since they assume it is explicit-for-us, and contradicts Tradition.The SSPX (USA) is selling a book written by Fr.Francois Laisney which considers implicit baptism of desire an exception to the traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney. The SSPX (Italy) have published a book by Fr.J.M Gleize which assumes there is an exceptional way of salvation.Michael Voris and Louie Verrecchio believe Vatican Council II is ambiguous and they are not aware that they are using Cushingism in the interpretation of the Council, just like Pope Francis.
The website of the International Theological Commission has this error prominently in two of its theological papers.One on other religions and the other on Limbo.They were approved by Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.j and Pope Benedict XVI.
Just about everyone in their theology have been 'condemning' Fr. Leonard Feeney as if there are known exceptions discovered in the 1940's to his literal interpretation.They have also been interpreting the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 using Cushingism.
This has all to be reversed. It has to be said that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 supported Fr.Leonard Feeney when it mentioned 'the dogma', the 'infallible statement'. Secondly, implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, mentioned in the Letter, are not exceptions to 'the dogma'. The Letter also says Fr.Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for disobedience and not for heresy. He recited the Athanasius Creed which repeats Outside the Church there is No Salvation and the excommunication was lifted.He died a son of the Church.
There has been so much false propaganda on this theological issue.Wikipedia states Lumen Gentium 16(invincible ignorance) is an exception to the traditional teaching on salvation.Catholic encyclopedia make the same mistake. No Cardinal corrects them.
The pope suggests in general atheists are saved and they do not have to convert into the Church. No cardinal issues a public clarification.
The pope indicates that he can meet a homosexual , whom he judges as not being on the way to Hell and so he cannot judge all or any of them. No one says that in general homosexuals are on the way to Hell according to the Catholic Church and so the pope could really judge the sin if he wanted to.
The pope says the Traditional Latin Mass has 'a political ideology'.Since, obviously its theology does not contain the dead man walking and visible to us premise.It does not use the visible-dead premise producing a liberal theology with a Leftist leaning. Cardinal Raymond Burke has not noticed this.
May be the cardinals too are doing theology assuming there are known, visible to us exceptions to the Church's traditional teaching on faith(salvation) and morals.