Can the SSPX and the Franciscans of the Immaculate interpret Lumen Gentium 16 as invisible and hypothetical and not objective, seen in the flesh I keep asking ? :Pope Benedict's theology a rip off

Have you wondered why did Pope Benedict  have to surprisingly come out with this statement on extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) in the interview with Avvenire.His rejection of the dogma because he can allegedly see or know exceptions in Heaven to all needing to convert into the Church,  is clear.He implies that there are physically visible cases of non Catholics who are in Heaven without the baptism of water. So there is salvation outside the Church, which he has personally seen in Heaven or some else he believes has seen.Since there is visible and known salvation outside the Church,for him the dogma has developed. This means he is not going to say all Jews, Muslims and Christians in 2016 need to formally convert into the Church to avoid Hell.He will lament over the loss of the dogma and the faith. But he will accept that the ordinary magisterium of Vatican Council II was sufficient to set aside a thrice defined dogma and that too with an irrationality, i.e being able to see people in Heaven who are there without 'faith and baptism'.

He gave the impression as if he was very sorry that the dogma has been rejected but  did not say that he had rejected the dogma with this fantasy theology of knowing people who will be saved or have been saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.

So the bottom line is that he is not going to proclaim the dogma and neither will be allow you to do so.

His statement comes after the Vatican Press Office was forced to announce a Document on relations with the Jews which they said was not magisterial.It said Jews did not need to convert. It was said directly based on the military and political strength of Israel. Pope Benedict said the same thing in the interview with Avvenire but did so theologically.

What is interesting about Pope Benedict's placating interview was not that he said that there was a development of doctrine, this was being said by the liberals and the Masons for a long time.It was interesting to note that there was a complete  black out on the issue of extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II being interpreted with the Feeneyite theology.

He did not touch this subject.Even though there are a few thousands posts on this issue on the Internet he avoided it.Can the SSPX and the Franciscans of the Immaculate interpret Vatican Council II and the dogma EENS with the Feeneyite theology it was being asked of the CDF/Ecclesia Dei. Then comes this interview.But there is no mention of the alternative the SSPX and all Catholic religious communities and organizations have.They can interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with the strict interpretation on exclusive salvation in only the Catholic Church.

He did not answer the questions I put to Archbishop Guido Pozzo after his recent statement on the SSPX. Nor did he answer the questions I put to Bishop Athanasius Schneider after his recent interview with Rorate Caeili.They both did not want to say anything on this issue.There was no denial or clarification. May be they asked Pope Benedict for help.And no help is forthcoming.

Can the SSPX and the Franciscans of the Immaculate interpret Vatican Council II with Lumen Gentium 16 referring to invisible and hypothetical cases and not objective cases seen in the flesh I keep asking ? Neither the CDF, the traditionalists or the sedevacantists are willing to answer this question. The pope too has avoided it.

We humans cannot see or know someone saved in invincible ignorance and who did not know about Jesus and the Church (LG 14).  So LG 14 is not a new doctrine. It does not contradict traditional EENS.It does not contradict the teaching on all unbaptised persons, needing to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. There was no comment from Pope Benedict on Lumen Gentium 14.

For Pope Benedict and Cardinal Muller LG 14 could contradict the traditional teaching on all the un-baptised needing the baptism of water for salvation. Since for them LG 14 would refer to explicit cases, seen in the flesh. So they are  exceptions to the dogma they become examples of salvation outside the Church.But are they really explicit? 

There are quote a large number of reports on the Internet only on this point.

Pope Benedict has avoided this issue.

Instead he promoted his new theology which is based on an irrationality ( that of being able to see people in Heaven). He supports a theology of religious pluralism since he has not affirmed traditional EENS in the interview and believes there is salvation outside the Church. This is the basis for his 'development of the dogma'.With the new theology, he says all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church (CCC 846).


This is his support for Rahner's Anonymous Christian theory.It is based on known salvation outside the Church.Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus have been water down with the Cushing theology. They are not Feeneyite.There are Feeneyite statements in them but then he has accomodated also  the Cushingite error.

In spite of these contradictions the interview has been welcomed by many traditionalists.It was their way of saying, "See, Pope Benedict  also agrees with us on Vatican Council II".The traditionalists don't know that the theology he presented was a rip off.Vatican Council II is traditional and Feeneyite without the seeing people in Heaven theory.

He did not touch the real issue which would expose lies, corruption and politics in the name of theology over the last 70 years or more.

-Lionel Andrades