Tuesday, September 22, 2015

Script for video The Magisterial Heresy - 3


 Part 1
In the last video 1 I showed through texts in Vatican Council 2 and the Catechism of the Catholic Church that there could be two interpretations, one rational and the other irrational.B could be an exception to A or it could not be an exception.It depends on the explicit-implicit , invisible-visible distinction.
The Magisterium and the secular media use the irrational reasoning.So B is an exception to A . For me, it is not.
 We can choose to interpret Vatican Council II according to Feeneyism or Cushingism.
The Vatican Curia, traditionalists and liberals use Cushingism. So B is an exception to A.
In this video I will show you the actual texts in which they make this mistake.

INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION, VATICAN

Christianity and the World Religions (1997)

'10. Exclusivist ecclesiocentrism—the fruit of a specific theological system or of a mistaken understanding of the phrase extra ecclesiam nulla salus—is no longer defended by Catholic theologians after the clear statements of Pius XII and Vatican Council II on the possibility of salvation for those who do not belong visibly to the Church (cf, e.g., LG 16; GS 22)...'-International Theological Commission, Christianity and the World Religions

Lionel: The International Theological Commission(ITC) is implying here that the the possibility of salvation for those who do not belong visibly to the Church are visible for us.The ITC is using the right hand column.


67. Vatican Council II makes its own the expression extra ecclesiam nulla salus. But in using it the council explicitly directs itself to Catholics and limits its validity to those who know the necessity of the Church for salvation. The council holds that the affirmation is based on the necessity of faith and of baptism affirmed by Christ (LG 14). In this way the council aligned itself in continuity with the teaching of Pius XII, but emphasized more clearly the original parenthentical character of this expression.- Christianity and the World Religions 1997,International Theological Commission
Lionel: The International Theological Commission,Vatican is implying here that only those who know the necessity of the Church for salvation are visible for us.For the ITC these cases are relevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.They are exceptions.Those who 'know' are known only to God.They implicit for us.Yet the ITC is using the irrational right hand column, mentioned in the last video


66. In his encyclical Mystici Corporis, Pius XII addresses the question, How are those who attain salvation outside visible communion with the Church related to her? He says that they are oriented to the mystical body of Christ by a yearning and desire of which they are not aware (DS 3821).-Christianity and the World Religions 2007
Lionel:
Yes they can be saved theoretically followed by the baptism of water and we do not know who are these cases specifically. So one cannot imply that those saved with the baptism of desire are exceptions to the dogma. They are not explicit. So why mention something which is irrelevant?

The opposition of the American Jesuit Leonard Feeney, who insisted on the exclusivist interpretation of the expression extra ecclesiam nulla solus, afforded the occasion for the letter of the Holy Office, dated 8 August ,1949, to the archbishop of Boston, which rejected Feeney s interpretation and clarified the teaching of Pius XII.
Lionel:
'who insisted on the exclusivist interpretation'.
There is no more an exclusivist interpretation for the ITC since there are 'explicit exceptions'?! 


With the doctrine about the Church as the universal sacrament of salvation or the sacrament of the kingdom of God, theology seeks to respond to the new way of posing the problem.


Lionel: That the Church is the universal sacrament of salvation or the sacrament of the kingdom of God is theoretical and a general statement.It  does not conflict with the traditional exclusivist interpretation of the dogma which says all need to formally enter the Church in the present times.There can be those saved  in invincible ignorance etc and it would be known only to God.
So what is hypothetical and theoretical for us cannot be a concrete exception to the dogma.It is not a concrete case in our reality

63. The primary question today is not whether men can attain salvation even if they do not belong to the visible Catholic Church; this possibility is considered theologically certain.


Lionel: Yes and it does not conflict with the literal interpretation of the dogma since we do not know who are these exceptional cases, they are known only to God.They are only possibilities and possibilities cannot be defacto exceptions to the dogma, for example, in 2015.


65. One speaks of the necessity of the Church for salvation in two senses: the necessity of belonging to the Church for those who believe in Jesus and the necessity for salvation of the ministry of the Church which, on mission from God, must be at the service of the coming of the kingdom of God.

Lionel: There is the necessity of belonging to the Church for all with no exception on earth. Since we do not know who is in invincible ignorance and will be saved. Only God can judge. We humans cannot distinguish between those who believe and will be saved and those who are in invincible ignorance and will be saved without the baptism of water.
According to the dogma Cantate Domino, Council of Florence, Protestants and Orthodox Christians need to convert to avoid the fires of Hell. According to Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14), all need faith and baptism for salvation.

66. In his encyclical Mystici Corporis, Pius XII addresses the question, How are those who attain salvation outside visible communion with the Church related to her? He says that they are oriented to the mystical body of Christ by a yearning and desire of which they are not aware (DS 3821).

Lionel: In Mystici Corporis, Pius XII does not state that these cases are explicit or that they are exceptions to the strict and traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. 
So there is an irrational premise and inference made here by Fr.Luiz Ladaria S.J the President of the ITC and Fr. Charles Morerod O.P the Secretary and other members of the ITC who formed part of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.They included Cardinal Gerhard Muller and Archbishop Augustine Di Noia.
They wrongly inferred that those saved with the baptism of desire are exceptions to the dogma. In other words they are known, to be exceptions.

The letter distinguishes between the necessity of belonging to the Church for salvation (necessitas praecepti) and the necessity of the indispensable means of salvation (intrinseca necessitas); in relationship to the latter, the Church is a general help for salvation (DS 3867—69).In the case of invincible ignorance the implicit desire of belonging to the Church suffices; this desire will always be present when a man aspires to conform his will to that of God (DS 3870). But faith, in the sense of Hebrews 11:6, and love are always necessary with intrinsic necessity (DS 3872).
Lionel: How can someone unknown be an exception to the dogma ? In ' the case of invincible ignorance the implicit desire of belonging to the Church suffices'. This is  hypothetical.It is a non existing case in our reality. Defacto, in reality every one with no exception needs to enter the Church for salvation and we do not know any such hypothetical case.This was an objective mistake made in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.

68. In contrast to Pius XII, the council refused to speak of a votum implicitum (implicit desire) and applied the concept of the votum only to the explicit desire of catechumens to belong to the Church (LG 14). With regard to non-Christians, it said that they are ordered in diverse ways to the people of God. In accord with the different ways with which the salvific will of God embraces non-Christians, the council distinguished four groups: first, Jews; second, Muslims; third, those who without fault are ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and do not know the Church but who search for God with a sincere heart and try to fulfill his will as known through conscience; fourth, those who without fault have not yet reached an express knowledge of God but who nonetheless try to lead a good life (LG 16).
Lionel: Is Lumen Gentium  16 (LG 16) which is cited here explicit or implicit? For the ITC it is explicit and so is an exception to the dogma. LG 16 refers to a hypothetical case known only to God. We do not know  'those who without fault are ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and do not know the Church but who search for God with a sincere heart and try to fulfill his will as known through conscience; fourth, those who without fault have not yet reached an express knowledge of God but who nonetheless try to lead a good life (LG 16).'-and who will go to Heaven.This is a common error.
LG 16 is being used in Pontifical Universities to change ecclesiology.The new ecclesiology being taught is based on this precise mistake. They mix up what is invisible as being visible.

69. The gifts which God offers all men for directing themselves to salvation are rooted, according to the council, in his universal salvific will (LG 2, 3, 26; AG 7). The fact that even non-Christians are ordered to the people of God is rooted in the fact that the universal call to salvation includes the vocation of all men to the catholic unity of the people of God (LG 13). The council holds that the close relationship of both vocations is rooted in the unique mediation of Christ, who in his body that is the Church makes himself present in our midst (LG 14).
Lionel: The ITC states 'The fact that even non-Christians are ordered to the people of God is rooted in the fact that the universal call to salvation includes the vocation of all men to the catholic unity of the people of God' (LG 13). Is it a fact? We do not know any such case.There is no known case of a non Catholic being saved without Catholic Faith and the baptism of water. There was no known case in 1949 when the Letter of the Holy Office  was issued. There was no known case before 1949. Humanly speaking we cannot know any such case.So how can a hypothetical possibility , which could be followed with the baptism of water, be considered ' a fact'. With or without the baptism of water there is no known case of salvation outside the Church.While the dogma says outside the Church there is no salvation.

41. The semina verbi, "seeds of the word", can be found outside the limits of the visible Church and specifically in the different religions; this motif is frequently combined with that of the light which enlightens all men and with that of the preparation for the Gospel (AG 11, 15; LG 16, 17; NA 2; Redemptoris missio, 56).
Lionel:
How can we humans know of someone saved  without Catholic Faith and the baptism of water and with the 'seeds of the Word'(AG 11) or that 'ray of the Truth'(NA 2) ? There is no known case past or present.So why is it assumed that AG 11 and NA 2 refer to known cases? Why are they linked to the dogma when these cases are invisible? This is an objective mistake of the ITC.

42. The theology of the seeds of the word stems from Saint Justin Martyr.
Lionel:
O.K there could be someone with the seeds of the Word somewhere 'out there'.Why suggest these cases are known and then why link them to the dogma? This is irrational reasoning.

 Faced with the polytheism of the Greek world, Justin sees in philosophy an ally of Christianity since it has followed reason; now this reason is found in its totality only in Jesus Christ, the Logos in person. Only Christians know the Logos in its entirety.3 But the whole human race has participated in this Logos. Hence from the beginning there have been those who have lived in accordance with the Logos, and in this sense there have been "Christians" even though the knowledge they have had of the seminal Logos has only been partial.4
Lionel:
Who are they personally ? Were there any such known cases in 1997? Are there any in 2015? This is all speculation.
The ITC will presume these cases are known and then posit this against the dogma.

 There is a great difference between the seed of something and the thing itself.
Lionel:
We don't know the difference between the seed of something which leads to salvation and 'the thing' itself. This would be known only to God. This is also something abstract and not concrete. It is not a 'thing'.
 But in any case the partial and seminal presence of the Logos is a gift and a divine grace. The Logos is the power of these "seeds of truth".- Christianity and the World Religions 1997
Lionel:
And since they are known only to the Logos and are unknown to us they are not relevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which says all need to be formal members of the Church in the present times, to go to Heaven and avoid Hell. The dogma does not mention any exceptions.

The study of the theme "Christianity and the World Religions" was adopted for study by a large majority of the members of the International Theological Commission. To prepare this study a subcommission was established composed of Bishop Norbert Strotmann Hoppe, M.S.C.; Rev. Barthelemy Adoukonou; Rev. Jean Corbon; Rev. Mario de Franca Miranda, S.J.; Rev. Ivan Golub; Rev. Tadahiko Iwashima, S.J.; Rev. Luis F. Ladaria, S.J. (president); Rev. Hermann J. Pottmeyer; and Rev. Andrzej Szostek, M.I.C. General discussion on this theme took place during several meetings of the subcommission and in the plenary sessions of the International Theological Commission held at Rome in 1993, 1994 and 1995. The present text was approved "in forma specifica" by vote of the commission on 30 September 1996 and was submitted to its president, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, who has given his approval for its publication.
____________________________


The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without being baptised (2007)

59. The Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston (1949) offers further specifications. “To gain eternal salvation, it is not always required that a person be incorporated in reality (reapse) as a member of the Church, but it is necessary that one belong to it at least in desire and longing (voto et desiderio). It is not always necessary that this desire be explicit as it is with catechumens.

When one is invincibly ignorant, God also accepts an implicit desire, so called because it is contained in the good disposition of soul by which a person wants his or her will to be conformed to God’s will”. - The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without the being baptized', International Theological Commission,2007
(Lionel: The International Theological Commission,Vatican is implying here that being saved in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water; having an implicit desire, refer to cases who  are visible to us.For the ITC these cases are relevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.They are exceptions.The ITC is using the irrational  right hand column.)

58. In the face of new problems and situations and of an exclusive interpretation of the adage: “salus extra ecclesiam non est”,[88] the magisterium, in recent times, has articulated a more nuanced understanding as to the manner in which a saving relationship with the Church can be realized. The Allocution of Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quadam (1854) clearly states the issues involved: “It must, of course, be held as a matter of faith that outside the apostolic Roman Church no one can be saved, that the Church is the only ark of salvation, and that whoever does not enter it, will perish in the flood. On the other hand, it must likewise be held as certain that those who live in ignorance of the true religion, if such ignorance be invincible, are not subject to any guilt in this matter before the eyes of the Lord”- The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without being baptized(2007. International Theological Commission) http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_index-doc-pubbl_en.html
(Lionel:The Allocution of Pope PIus IX clearly does not state in the passage cited above that those saved in invincible ignorance are explicitly known and so are exceptions to the dogma. The dogma says whoever does not enter into the Church will perish. The Church Councils and popes knew this. 
This unfortunately was the error of the Archbishop of Boston Richard Cushing and the Jesuits there.They first assumed that these cases were explicit and without the baptism of water and then they linked it to the dogma as an exception.)
59. The Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston (1949) offers further specifications. “To gain eternal salvation, it is not always required that a person be incorporated in reality (reapse) as a member of the Church, but it is necessary that one belong to it at least in desire and longing (voto et desiderio). It is not always necessary that this desire be explicit as it is with catechumens.
Lionel:
 Yes in principle a person can be saved with the baptism of desire followed by the baptism of water. In reality, explicitly we do not know any case of a person saved in Heaven with the baptism of desire,with or without the baptism of water. So it is not an issue with reference to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So why mention 'that one can belong' to the Church ' at least in desire and longing'? 

The ITC mentioned it since they were confused. They assumed these were explicit, known cases in the present times.

When one is invincibly ignorant, God also accepts an implicit desire, so called because it is contained in the good disposition of soul by which a person wants his or her will to be conformed to God’s will”.
Lionel:
Yes and the International Theological Commission (ITC) assumes that these cases are explicit and known in reality so they contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
_______________________________


PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR CHRISTIAN UNITY

In the course of the Council the “subsistit in” took the place of the previous “est”.[7] It contains in nuce the whole ecumenical problem.[8] The “est” claimed that the church of Christ Jesus “is” the Catholic Church. This strict identification of the church of Christ Jesus with the Catholic Church had been represented most recently in the encyclicals Mystici corporis (1943) and Humani generis (1950).[9] But even according to Mystici corporis there are people who, although they have not yet been baptised, are subsumed under the Catholic Church because that is their express desire (DS 3921). Therefore Pius XII had condemned an exclusive interpretation of the axiom “Extra ecclesiam nulla salus” already in 1949.[10]
The Council went a decisive step further with the aid of the “subsistit in”. It wished to do justice to the fact that there are found outside of the Catholic Church not only individual Christians but also “elements of the church”,[11] indeed churches and ecclesial communities which, although not in full communion, rightly belong to the one church and possess salvatory significance for their members (LG, 8, 15; UR, 3; UUS, 10-14). Thus the Council is aware that there are outside of the Catholic Church forms of sanctification which even extend as far as martyrdom (LG, 15; UR, 4; UUS, 12, 83). The question of the salvation of non-Catholics is now no longer answered personally as in Mystici corporis on the basis of the subjective desire of single individuals, but institutionally on the basis of objective ecclesiology.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/card-kasper-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_20041111_kasper-ecumenism_en.html

Lionel :
The Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity claims Pope Pius XII condemned an exclusive interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Since for the Pontifical Council those saved in invincible ignorance are assumed to be explicitly known.So these 'known' cases would contradict the exclusive interpretation of the dogma.This is irrational reasoning.
Secondly this is a factual error also because the text of Mystici Corporis and Humani generic do not make this claim.There is  no mention of explicit cases.
These Magisterial documents refer to  those who can be saved in invincible ignorance but nowhere  makes the claim that these cases contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Instead Pope Pius XII in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 mentions ‘the dogma’, ‘the infallible statement’. The text of the dogma indicates all non Catholics, specifically Orthodox Christians and Protestants, are oriented to the fires of Hell, unless they convert into the Catholic Church.(Cantate Domino,Council of Florence. This was the teaching of 'the dogma', the 'infallible teaching'.

The Council for Christian Unity, Vatican says: 

But even according to Mystici corporis there are people who, although they have not yet been baptised, are subsumed under the Catholic Church because that is their express desire (DS 3921).
Lionel:Yes they can receive salvation (LG 16) and these cases are known only to God. Since they are not explicitly known to us they do not contradict the dogma or Vatican Council II (LG 14,AG 7).They cannot be exceptions to the exclusivist interpretation of the dogma.
Therefore Pius XII had condemned an exclusive interpretation of the axiom “Extra ecclesiam nulla salus” already in 1949.
Lionel:
If the pope assumed that invisible cases are visible then he made an objective mistake.However  Mystici Corporis nor Human Generic makes this error.Instead the inference is wrongly made by the Council for Christian Unity and the International Theological Commission.It is a factual error on their part.It is a fact of life that there are no such cases. It is also a fact that the text of these two Magisterial documents do make the wrong inference.

_________________________________

VATICAN COUNCIL FOR THE CLERGY



2.2.3. La condanna dell'indifferentismo e del razionalismo

La sempre maggiore conoscenza della vastità del fenomeno religioso finì per porre il cristianesimo a fianco delle altre religioni.
Naturalmente il rischio del relativismo e dell'indifferentismo era a questo punto assai forte e contro di esso intervenne il magistero della chiesa cattolica. Da qui un certo ritorno alla posizione rigorista che si può cogliere con chiarezza prima nella condanna di Felicité de Lamennais ad opera di papa Gregorio XVI, poi dagli interventi papa Pio IX e infine nello schema preparatorio De ecclesia del Concilio Vaticano I.
Nell'enciclica Mystici corporis di papa Pio XII del 29 giugno 1943 viene messa a tema ancora una volta la questione dell'appartenenza alla chiesa che si realizza visibilmente solo grazie al battesimo, alla professione della vera fede e alla comunione ecclesiale. Centrale è qui l'affermazione che la chiesa corpo di Cristo si identifica con la chiesa cattolica romana. Quanti le sono ancora estranei, possono però essere ordinati ad essa, sia pure per un inconsapevole desiderio o voto e solo così poter sperare nella salvezza.
Infine un ulteriore pronunciamento magisteriale fu provocato dall'insegnamento di alcuni teologi americani che interpretavano l'assioma Extra ecclesiam nulla salus in senso rigorista, concedendo la salvezza solo ai battezzati cattolici e a quei catecumeni che avessero esplicitamente chiesto di entrare nella chiesa cattolica. Il vescovo di Boston, Mons. Cushing, chiese l'intervento del Sant' Ufficio, la cui risposta, pur riaffermando la dignità dogmatica dell'assioma, ne condannò l'interpretazione rigorista riprendendo le tesi dell'ignoranza invincibile e del voto implicito (Cfr. DS, 3866-3873. Tra questi il gesuita P. Leonard Feeney, non accettò le indicazioni del magistero e subì la scomunica il 4 febbraio 1953).
Lionel: 
The Vatican website for clergy (clerus.org) has made available a lengthy report in Italian by Father Alberto Sartori, President of the Commission for the Clergy in which he rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. He claims the Magisterium condemned Fr.Leonard Feeney for his 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma.(See above in Italian)
Fr.Sartori,the  Director of the Interdiocesan  Theological School of Formation,Italy  states that Pope Pius XII in Mystici Corporis implies or says that  there can be non Catholics saved who are not members of the Catholic Church visibly. They could be saved with a baptism of desire.
Don Sartori assumes that we know these cases explicitly otherwise how could they be exceptions. They would have to be visible tobe exceptions.
He believes these cases are explicit so they also contradict Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston. Mystici Corporis does not state that these are explicitly known cases.
However the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 does make this wrong inference.
 It has been known for centuries that these are implicit cases and so they do not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
________________________________

WIKIPEDIA ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM  NULLA SALUS

Catholic Church elucidations

In the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Church states that the phrase, "Outside the Church there is no salvation", means, if put in positive terms, that "all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body", and "is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church".
Lionel:
Wikipedia means the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions to the  dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They are exceptions to the statements of the popes on extra ecclesiam nulla salus whom Wikpedia quotes. So for Wikipedia , like the Catechism of the Catholic Church (846) ' all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body'.
At the same time, it adds: "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."
Lionel:
Those saved in invincible ignorance, are assumed to be persons saved without the baptism of water. They are allegedly explicit, for them to be exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church.
The Church has also declared that "she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter", and that "those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways."
Lionel:
Again it is being implied that there are cases of non Catholics who are baptised and who are saved and these cases are visible, objective and concrete. So they become relevant to the dogma and the statements of the popes on extra ecclesiam nulla  salus. They are objective exceptions for Wikipedia.
This is irrational and Magisterial, so no one corrects Wikipedia.
__________________________

WIKIPEDIA ON VATICAN COUNCIL II AND EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

Second Vatican Council

The Second Vatican Council declared that the Christian communities that are not in full communion, but only in "partial communion"[13] with the Catholic Church, "though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church".
Lionel: These cases mentioned in Unitatitus Redintigratio 3 are hypothetical and not personally known. They cannot be objective cases.So they are not relevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

 It explained that "some and even very many of the significant elements and endowments which together go to build up and give life to the Church itself, can exist outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church: the written word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, and visible elements too. All of these, which come from Christ and lead back to Christ, belong by right to the one Church of Christ."
Lionel:Yes there are good things in other religions.Here it is being implied that there are known cases of Protestants who are saved with the good things in their religion without being members of the Catholic Church. There is no such case.

The Council also said that even those who do not believe in Christ are related to the Church: "All men are called to be part of this catholic unity of the people of God which in promoting universal peace presages it. And there belong to or are related to it in various ways, the Catholic faithful, all who believe in Christ, and indeed the whole of mankind, for all men are called by the grace of God to salvation."
Lionel:
Yes all are called. Those who do not enter are oriented to Hell.

 However, it added immediately that those who, "knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved".
Lionel:
This is a reference to  hypothetical cases.Since we humans cannot tell who know or do not know and will be saved or not saved, without being formal members of the Church.
The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and  Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) state all need to enter the Church with 'faith and baptism'.

 In this way, the Catholic Church teaches that any person who knows that the Catholic Church is necessary for eternal salvation and knowingly rejects the Church with deliberate consent cannot be saved.
Lionel:
Yes the Catholic Church teaches this.
It also teaches that all need faith and baptism for salvation(AG 7, LG 14).

 On the other hand, "those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life."
Lionel: This is a reference to Lumen Gentium 16. For Wikipedia LG 16 refers to explicit cases without the baptism of water and Catholic Faith. So LG 16 is an exception to the dogma. There is no such case known in the present times or in the past.This is irrational reasoning.
 In its decree on missionary activity, the Council, quoting Lumen gentium, 14, said: "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. 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.'
Lionel:
In the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 it was wrongly assumed that being saved in invincible ignorance was explicit. So it became an exception to the Feeneyite version of the dogma. This error was placed in Vatican Council II.
Every one needs to enter the Church for salvation.Those who 'know' or 'do not know' will be decided by God.

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, yet a necessity lies upon the Church, and at the same time a sacred duty, to preach the Gospel."
Lionel: Why mention those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel ? We cannot meet them on the streets. We cannot say that a particular person will be saved in his inculpable ignorance and so does not have to convert into the Catholic Church.
______________________

WIKIPEDIA ON DOMINUS IESUS

Dominus Iesus

The 2000 declaration Dominus Iesus of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith states that "it must be firmly believed that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk 16:16; Jn 3:5), and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through baptism as through a door."
Lionel:
Dominus Iesus supports the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus here. It supports the Feeneyite version of the dogma.

 It then adds that "for those who are not formally and visibly members of the Church, salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church, but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation. This grace comes from Christ; it is the result of his sacrifice and is communicated by the Holy Spirit; it has a relationship with the Church, which, according to the plan of the Father, has her origin in the mission of the Son and the Holy Spirit."
Lionel: These are not defacto known cases in the present times.So it can be accepted as referring to abstract cases, it is accepted in theory. These  cases however cannot be linked to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Since they are not defacto known in 2015 .They are irrelevant to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Inculpable ignorance

In its statements of this doctrine, the Church expressly teaches that "it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, will not be held guilty of this in the eyes of God";
Lionel: Acceptable but this should not be linked to the dogma.It has no connection with all needing to be formal members of the Church in the present times; today, this month, this year.

 that "outside of the Church, nobody can hope for life or salvation unless he is excused through ignorance beyond his control";[6] and that "they who labor in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion and who, zealously keeping the natural law and its precepts engraved in the hearts of all by God, and being ready to obey God, live an honest and upright life, can, by the operating power of divine light and grace, attain eternal life."[8]
Lionel: Theoretical cases, they are irrelevant to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Inculpable ignorance is not a means of salvation.[21] But if by no fault of the individual ignorance cannot be overcome (if, that is, it is inculpable and invincible), it does not prevent the grace that comes from Christ, a grace that has a relationship with the Church, saving that person. Thus it is believed that God would make known to such a person before the moment of death, by either natural or supernatural means, the Catholic faith, since "without [such] faith it is impossible to please God", and this entails, for even the unbaptized, at the very least baptism of desire.
Lionel: This is fine as a theoretical discussion on this subject but it should not have been placed under the title extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Feeneyism.
-Lionel Andrades