JOHN SALZA THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE IS NOT AN EXPLICIT EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

I am not referring to theology. It's not the issue of the baptism of desire compromising the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The baptism of desire is irrelvant to the dogma since we do not know any such case personally on earth.

I am not referring to theology I repeat. I am making an intellectual observation, a philosophical observation.

It is : we do not know who is saved in Heaven or on earth  with the baptism of desire, invincible ignorance, a good conscience, seeds of the Word etc.

Since we do not know any such eprson on earth the Church teachng stands, that is, every one with no exception needs Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.(Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II).Everyone with no exception  needs to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation; to avoid the fires of Hell.(Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441)

If the baptism of desire contradicts 'the dogma' ( The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 )then it would mean that the Letter of the Holy Office, the Magisterium made a mistake. (1) 
For apologist John Salza the baptism of desire is explicitly known ?
 -Lionel Andrades

http://www.scripturecatholic.com/feature-articles/Feature%20-%20Salza%20v%20Goddard%20on%20Baptism%20of%20Desire.pdf
____________________________________________

from The Bellarmine Report

James Phillips 2012-05-09 15:27

Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus (Outside the Church there is no salvation.) does not hold that only those with water baptism can be saved.

Cf: http://www.catholicintl.com/index.php/component/content/article/52-theology/577-baptism-of-desire-legit-or-not-legit
Also: http://www.scripturecatholic.com/feature-articles/Feature%20-%20Salza%20v%20Goddard%20on%20Baptism%20of%20Desire.pdf

http://www.catholicintl.com/index.php/latest-news/813

____________________________________________
1.
Friday, May 25, 2012
DID THE LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949, THE MAGISTERIUM, MAKE A MISTAKE? NO
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 was issued to the Archbishop of Boston during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII. It did not make a mistake when it said that every one needs to be incorporated into the church as a member does not exclude those who can be saved with implicit desire.

It means in principle, only as a concept, as a belief there can be non Catholics saved with implicit desire. The Letter if it is saying only in principle ‘it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member’, it has not made a mistake.However if someone misreads the Letter and assumes those saved with an implicit desire are known to us on earth; they are explicitly known, and so are exceptions, so every one does not need to be incorporated as a member into the Church - this is a mistake.We do not know anyone on earth saved with an implicit desire. Neither do we know anyone in Heaven saved with an implicit desire.
The Letter of the Holy Office supports Fr.Leonard Feeney since implicit desire can only be accepted as a possibility and is irrelevant to the literal interpretation of the dogma, as interpreted by Fr.Leonard Feeney and St.Benedict Center.
continued
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/05/did-letter-of-holy-office-1949.html

_________________________________________________

Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.- Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II.


Nostra Aetate does not contradict Ad Gentes 7
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/05/nostra-aetate-does-not-contradict-ad.html#links