The SSPX Declaration would take on a new meaning if the three bishops would clarify the terms implicit-explicit, dejure-defacto, invisible-visible

 

The SSPX Declaration would take on a new meaning if the three bishops would clarify the following.

 

1.

Do they accept in principle a baptism of desire ? The possibility of a person being saved with the baptism of desire is accepted in principle.

 

2.

Do they accept in fact, defacto a baptism of desire ? Do they know defacto cases, in reality saved with the baptism of desire?

 

 

1.

 Do they accept in principle that a person can be saved in invincible ignorance ? The possibility of a person being saved in invincible ignorance is accepted in principle.

 

2.

Do they accept in fact, defacto  that a person can be saved in invincible ignorance  ? They  know defacto cases, in reality saved  in invincible ignorance?

 

 

So  when the SSPX Declaration states that Vatican Council II contradicts the traditional teaching on other religions, do they refer to 1 or 2.

 

1. 

Vatican Council II in theory, in principle mentions invincible ignorance (LG 16), a good conscience (LG 16), elements of sanctification and grace (LG 8), imperfect communion with the Church(UR 3), good and hold things in other religions leading to salvation (NA 3), seeds of the Word (AG 11) ? They accept the possibility of a person being saved as such.

 

Or

 

2.

Vatican Council II defacto, in fact, explicitly, in practise refers to cases saved in  invincible ignorance (LG 16), a good conscience(LG 16), elements of sanctification and grace (LG 8), imperfect communion with the  Church (UR 3), good and hold things in other religions leading to salvation (NA 3), seeds of the Word (AG 11) ? They accept that these are defacto,  known cases. They are known by name.

 

If they are referring to N.1 then Vatican Council II does not contradict the traditional teaching on other religions, since there are  no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The references are to in principle cases. They are implicit and known only to God. They are invisible for us.

 If they are referring to N.2 then the SSPX  bishops are irrational. Defacto, in real life we do not know any of these cases. Neither does Vatican Council II make this irrational claim of being able to see the dead now saved in Heaven.The Council does not claim that the dead are physically visible to us for them to be exceptions to the traditional teaching on other religions.-Lionel Andrades