In this year of the 100 anniversary of the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima, 'the dogma of the faith has been lost' even with the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and other traditionalists denying it

In this year of the 100 anniversary of the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima, 'the dogma of the faith has been lost' even with the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and other traditionalists denying it, to protect their religious communities from hostile forces.

It was always known that the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX) did not accept the dogma  extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) since for them invisible cases of the baptism of desire were visible exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. This was the interpretation of the liberal theologians which Archbishop Lefebvre had accepted.

But now even the St.Benedict Centers, when they say every one needs to enter the Church with no exceptions, mean, there are exceptions mentioned for them in Vatican Council II.

LG 16,LG 8, UR 3, GS 22 etc are exceptions to traditional EENS for them and so they reject Vatican Council II. This Vatican Council II which they reject I call Cushingite Vatican Council II.

But when they reject Vatican Council II(Cushingite) they are implying that LG 16 etc must refer to known people saved outside the Church and so LG 16 becomes an exception to Feeneyite EENS.

They are not interpreting Vatican Council II with LG 16 not being an exception to EENS since, it is obvious,  LG 16 refers to hypothetical cases, unknown people.Invisible people in our reality cannot be exceptions to Feeneyite EENS. This interpretation of Vatican Council II in which LG 16 refers to hypothetical and invisible people I call Vatican Council II, Feeneyite.If the traditionalists affirmed Vatican Council II Feeneyite then the Council would not be a rupture with the dogma EENS and the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.

The SBC could then affirm EENS Feeneyite as they do now and also Vatican Council II Feeneyite and there would be no contradiction. The dogma of the faith would not be lost.

But they are not doing this since they do not want to oppose the political Left and their liberal bishops.

They are accepting Vatican Council II Cushingite which is a rupture with EENS Feeneyite and so 'the dogma of the faith has been lost'.The communities are recognized and encouraged by their leftist bishops who reject EENS(Feeneyite) and probably do not know about Vatican Council II(Feeneyite).

So in this 100th year anniversary, the dogma of the faith which Our Lady mentioned and which is EENS for me (and also for John Salza)Vatican Council II Cushingite is being accepted by the St. Benedict Centers and Vatican Council II Feeneyite not affirmed.

Even the followers of Fr. Leonard Feeney are compromising with the bad times.

The St.Benedict Center, Still River,Massachusetts, was granted canonical status since they did not oppose the interpretation of Vatican Council II EENS of the bishop of Worcester and they did not affirm Vatican Council II(Feeneyite).

The St. Benedict Center, Richmond, New Hampshire has been recognized as a society, and possibly in future will be  given canonical status, since they do not oppose the Vatican Council II(Cushingite) of the bishop of Manchester.They also do not affirm Vatican Council II Feeneyite.Neither do they ask the bishop to do the same.

So the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary have a difficult choice since they want to maintain their present status in the Church and they are opposed by enemies of the Church.

The St.Benedict Centers past and present, have made many sacrifices for Jesus and His Church they have held firm to the truth with reference to the dogma EENS.They were always correct on EENS but were misled by the traditionalists, on the subject of Vatican Council II. They rejected the error of Archbishop Lefebvre on EENS but accepted his error on Vatican Council II.

If Archbishop Lefebvre interpreted Vatican Council II with Feeneyism as a theology then the Council would not be an issue for him.

So now when the SBC affirm Vatican Council II (Cushingite) and do not ask their bishops to affirm Vatican Council II(Feeneyite), and neither do it themself, they are saying that LG 16, LG 8 etc are exceptions to Tradition.This is the only interpretation of the Council which they know.It is a rupture with Feeneyite EENS. They have to accept it for canonical recognition and so the Council is a rupture with EENS only because of their interpretation.
And the dogma of the faith has been lost. There is a new version of EENS and Vatican Council II. It is Cushingite and it is magisterial.

-Lionel Andrades