Pope continues with heretical statements : reinterprets the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with an irrationality

Pope Francis has subtly criticised the Great Commission of Jesus.He has done it befor too. He now mentioned it with reference to ISIS.

Recently he again discouraged an ecumenism in which Orthodox Christians would have to convert into the Catholic Church.

For me this is a direct attack and negation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was know in the 16th century.The pope does not say follow your conscience and affirm the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as did the 16th century missionaries.

However he does suggest that a person in manifest mortal sin could follow his conscience and receive the Eucharist etc.

His statement is continued-heresy. It is a contradiction of the dogma extra ecclesiam nullas salus, as I interpret it as a Catholic.

Pope Francis and Pope Benedict do not affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus like the Jesuit Fr. Leonard Feeney.I do.

MY THESIS

If the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance which is mentioned in some catechisms, in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and in Vatican Council II refers to invisible cases(since they are physically invisible) then it is not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So Vatican Council II would then not be a rupture with this dogma. Neither would it contradict the Syllabus of Errors of Pius IX or Tradition in general.

However if the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance refers to visible cases,if it is interpreted as such, then it is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla slus and the Syllabus of Errors. Vatican Council II (LG 16, LG 14 etc) is a rupture with Tradition.

The two popes are interpreting Vatican Council II with LG 16 etc being visible instead of invisible. This is a factual and objective mistake.

It is no suprise that Pope Francis rejects an ecunmenism of return and the need for non Christians to formally convert into the Church for salvation ( to avoid Hell).Similarly it was no surprise for me when Pope Benedict in the interview with Avvenire said extra ecclesiam nulla salus is no more like it was for the 16th century missionaries.

The discussion of the Fr. Leonard Feeney case may seem academic or a thing of the past however it has a direct relationship today, with how we interpret Vatican Council II.The SSPX's canonical status and the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate regularising their canonical status depends on this interpretation of Vatican Council II.

-Lionel Andrades