Traditionalists only say they are traditionalists while they accept the new ecclesiology which is not traditional

The Traditionalists only say they are traditionalists while they have accepted the new ecclesiology  which is a break with Tradition.

Traditionalists and sedevacantists are using the basis for the new ecclesiology.It is: being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I) and the baptism of desire (BOD) are explicit and so are exceptions to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).So they infer that these cases  ( I.I and BOD)  are known in the present times to be exceptions to all needing the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. This is the premise and inference used by the SSPX, FSSP,CMRI,MHFM etc.It is here where they make a mistake and accept the new ecclesiology.

The SSPX only says it affirms Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441 on extra ecclesiam nulla salus. In reality the SSPX, like Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre ,accepts Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani's premise and inference  in 1949.It was an irrational break with EENS and the old ecclesiology.

The FSSP only says they accept EENS while they consider I.I and BOD to be exceptions to St.Maximilian Kolbe and Don Bosco's concept of EENS.

The sedevantists CMRI only say they affirm EENS. For them too the   BOD and being saved in I.I are explicit.They refer to personally known cases in the present times.People you could see on the streets. This is the Marchetti-Cushing premise and inference used against Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center.The CMRI uses it to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with Tradition and then blames Vatican Council II.

The Vatican Curia (CDF) only says it affirms EENS; words, while they also say in interviews given by Cardinal Muller and Archbisop Di Noia to the National Catholic Register, that BOD and I.I are exceptions. This is how they interpret Vatican Council II. It's with the 1949 premise and inference. The CDF has inherited its present day fantasy theology from Marchetti in 1949.The dead-saved are visible is their conclusion.This is a break with the interpretation of EENS according to St. Anthony Marie Claret, St.Francis Xavier, St. Catherine of Siena and other saints.All these sainsts  should all be declared heretics by the CDF.Since they differ with the contemporary magisteriums version of EENS.

The traditionalists MICM ( Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Fr.Leonard Feeney's communities in the USA) say and do affirm EENS.They have been sincere.They also accept BOD and I.I followed by the baptism of water.However they interpret Lumen Gentium 16  ( invincible ignorance) etc as being exceptions to EENS.So there are exceptions to EENS for them too.This comes across in their interpretation of Vatican Council II.

The sedevacantists MHFM also say and do affirm EENS but reject BOD and I.I as not being compatible with the dogma.For them too, LG 16 is an exception to EENS. So they infer that these cases are explicit for us in the present times.Vatican Council II becomes a break with Tradition.-Lionel Andrades