Every one is playing it safe and the Faith remains changed with a new theology and new doctrines

It has  been a long time since Pope Benedict XVI has not given us one of his public statements on how society has gone far from God -and in which he will not speak about the necessity of Jesus or the Church for salvation.He would not say that believing in Jesus is necessary for salvation and also being a member of the Church.Probably he doesn't believe in it himself.

Then soon there will be another of the usual comments from Bishop Athanasius Schneider without him saying that membership in the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation and so most people,who are now not Catholics, are oriented to Hell.He interprets Vatican Council II with Cushingism.So we cannot expect much from him, He remains politically correct with the Left.Speaking this truth would probably 'not be charity'( to himself).He does not get into trouble with any one.This is his personal example for the rest of the Catholics, who any way, like him and Bishop Fellay are not proclaiming the Catholic Faith in public.

Then Bishop Bernard Fellay is expected to soon come out with another calculated and well though public statement.He will not state that Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) is in harmony with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) as it was known to Fr. Leonard Feeney and the missionaries in the 16th century.He cannot offend the Jewish Left. The liberal rabbis and their supporters will call up their pro Satan laws.

Catholic Religious of course can proclaim the faith today.But then they would have to be willing to live like St. Vincent de Paul or St.Benedict Joseph Labra.

A few days back on the feast or Our Lady Queen of the Universe during Mass in Italian at the church San Andrea della Fratte the young Minim priest said salvation is open to all without affirming that all need to enter the Church for salvation(Dominus Iesus 20, Vatican Council II (AG 7), Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441).He does not want to live like St.Joseph Benedict Labra nor like the original Minim priests who were mendicants like the Franciscans.

Then the day before yesterday at the Altar of the Miracle at St. Andrea della Fratte an elderly priest said that we must not follow the letter of the Law but see the situation.. He means there is no mortal sin.He  does not preach it.He gives the Eucharist to any one who comes forward.Since since it is politically acceptable and his life and career depend upon this action.He probably doesn't believe in anything.Like Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandes and Pope Francis there is no law but situations, to violate the law with slogans like 'conscience', 'fundamental option' etc.

They too are not proclaiming the Faith like bishops Fellay and Schneider.

There is a report by Phil Lawler on Catholic Culture  in which he says he does not want to discuss the cause of the problem at Vatican Council.All his life he has been writing prudent pieces and staying above water?

By now he should know that Vatican Council II can be interpreted in harmony with the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.

Writing about this could cost him his job with Jeff Mirus at Catholic Culture.Mirus is a liberal on Vatican Council II and EENS.Inter change the word 'liberal' with 'heretic' and 'sinner'.

Phil Lawler affirms the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS and was once to speak at the St.Benedict Center, the community of Fr. Leonard Feeney in the USA.He was warned about being Anti Semitic. So he turned down the speaking engagement even after it was publicized.

Since then he avoids being labelled by the Left and he does not affirm Vatican Council II with Feeneyism.

Similarly Bishops Fellay and Schneider will not affirm the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX on an ecumenism of return, exclusivist salvation in the Church based on Vatican Council II(Feeneyite).Instead they will project Vatican Council II interpreted with the irrational Cushingite premise and its non traditional conclusion.
Obviously there has to be rupture with the Syllabus of Errors and the dogma EENS.
Since there is no known salvation outside the Church in reality, while like the liberals they are saying that there is known salvation.
There are no known cases of invisible for us baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I), but like the liberals , they claim that there are visible cases of BOD, BOB and I.I.

They will not support Catholic political parties which affirm the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation.Neither will they interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with Feeneyism,which leads to the old ecclesiology upon which the Social Reign of Christ the King was proclaimed ; the outside the Church there was no known salvation- ecclesiology.Then they will complain about Vatican Council II (Cushingite) negating this proclamation on the need for Christ and his Church to be at the centre of all political legislation. Obviously if you use a false premise there will be a false conclusion.But there are no risks if you do so.

Every one is playing it safe and the Faith remains changed with a new theology and new doctrines.-Lionel Andrades