Catholics can start saying that Fr. Leonard Feeney's interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is the official teaching of the Catholic Church when the false premise is not used.

Catholics can start saying that Fr. Leonard Feeney's interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is the official teaching of the Catholic Church when the false premise is not used. The Letter of the Holy Office 1949's interpretation of EENS is not the official teaching of the Church since an objective error was made.

 A false premise was used which created a rupture with Tradition.

The Holy Spirit cannot be irrational and make a major mistake and neither would the Holy Spirit reject Tradition in this case. 

So the Placuet Deo Press Conference conclusion and the interpretation of EENS by the CDF cannot be magisterial but instead is heresy and a schism with the past popes on EENS. The CDF has also interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally.

See the timing at 28:53 on this video. Cardinal Ladaria in answer to a question cites LG 8 as an exception to EENS.This is an objective error and it comes from the mistake the Church made in the Fr. Leonard Feeney case.How can unknown cases of being saved with 'elements of sanctification and truth'in other religions(LG 8) be practical exceptions to the dogma EENS or the ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Catholic Church? This is an objective mistake. It is a fact of life that we cannot see people saved in Heaven without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7) which is needed for salvation.

So if the  Prefect of the CDF represents ' the Church' then ' the Church' has made an objective mistake.

The 'Church of present day ecclesiastics at the Vatican ' assume people who are in Heaven and visible only to God are also objectively visible on earth and they are practical exceptions to EENS since they are people saved without the baptism of water and Catholic faith.This is an objective error of the Church of ecclesiastics, the Church of people.

How can we see people saved in Heaven on earth or in Heaven?

They are misinterpreting, with a false premise, magisterial documents like Vatican Council II, which is also 'the Church'. The ecclesiastics are rejecting Vatican Council II and the Catechisms, when these Church documents, are interpreted without the false premise and so the conclusion is different. So 'the Church of ecclesiastics today' is rejecting 'the Church' of Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents and also ' the Church' of the past popes  and Church Councils.

The Church only names the saints but does not say that they are there in Heaven without the baptism of water. Since there is no way anyone on earth could know this.

The ordinary means of salvation is faith and baptism(AG 7) and there is no one on earth whom the Church recognizes as being able to see exceptions, or an extraordinary way of salvation.There is no known extraordinary means of salvation in particular cases for us human beings.

So for Catholics the dogma EENS as interpreted by the missionaries in the 16th century is contradicted by Vatican Council II.This is also the official teaching of the Catholic Church according to magisterial documents which are in harmony with Tradition.

On this subject however the present two popes and the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith are not magisterial and instead violate the Principle of Non Contradiction.They have been promoting bad philosophy and theology.

However there original mistake is not theology but an error in observation. 

They have made an objective and factual mistake in assuming unknown people, physically invisible people are known in real life and they are objective exceptions to the traditional teaching on all needing to be members of the Church for salvation. So we have official heresy, irrationality and a bad new theology which cannot be part of the Deposit of the Faith.

Anyway there is no criticism or correction from the CDF or the Vatican Press Office to these reports .So they know that I am correct.

They cannot say that there are known people in 2018 who have been saved outside the Church and it is personally known to them at the CDF.

Neither can they say that in general or particular there are known people in the present times saved with the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance.

Neither do they want to affirm Feeneyite EENS and displease the Left.

So they agree with me in silence when I say that invisible for us BOD, BOB and I.I are not visible examples of salvation outside the Church. 

They also agree with me when I say that invisible for me LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2 etc are not visible exceptions to traditional EENS or to Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.

-Lionel Andrades