Catholic priests, who offer the Traditional Latin Mass and the Novus Ordo Mass have to say that B is an exception to A in the following two examples.
Here is the orthodox passage in Ad Gentes 7 which in accord with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
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.-AG 7
The following passage in Ad Gentes 7 is based on Marchetti assuming being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire were explicit for him in 1949 and so were exceptions to the traditional Feeneyite version of the dogma on salvation.
Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it."(17) Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him (Heb. 11:6)-AG 7
The following passage from Lumen Gentium 14 is orthodox and in agreement with the rigorist interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. -LG 14
The following passages from Lumen Gentium 14 also comes from the objective mistake Cardinal Francesco Marchetti Selvaggiani made in the Letter of the Holy Office. Why did they have to mention those saved with the baptism of desire (explicit intention) or infer there are those saved in invincible ignorance ? Why would they be relevant to the orthodox passage above.How would they be relevant to the centuries-old dogma if they were not explicit and personally known? Why did they have to mention it in Vatican Council II?
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.-LG 14
Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.-LG 14
B was placed in Vatican Council II since they assumed Marchetti was correct when he said there was salvation outside the Church. This was accepted by Pope Pius XII and Pope John XXIII.
Now we know that these cases cannot be exceptions since they are not explicit in our reality.So these are really superflous passages, dead wood statements.
The contemporary magisterium interprets B as being an exception to A and the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.So ecclesiology has changed. The 'Feeneyite' version of the dogma is no more accepted.
So what if a priest says B is not an exception to A ? He would be rational but he would not be politically correct. He would be affirming the Feeneyite version of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This would be considered 'crypto Lefebvre' by the Vatican.The priest offering the Traditional Latin Mass would then be affirming traditional ecclesiology with the Traditional Mass.It would be the old ecclesiology with the old rite.-Lionel Andrades
So can the Traditional Latin Mass be offered by priests who consider B not an exception to A?