Lionel, where does the Church teach that those "invisible" cases of people of people having been infused with the supernatural virtues cannot be saved unless they become formal members of the Church.
Please answer this question directly. If you cannot do so, then your distinction is contrived.Lionel:
I know you are sincere but you still have not understood what I am saying.I am not useing the familiar apologetics of the SBC-SSPX on this subject.I am asking you to step aside from theology for a second, since the theology mentioned in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, is meaningless and does not apply.
In a way they kind of duped all of us, including me.
There is no physical case of the baptism of desire.
There is no known case of the baptism of desire.
We cannot meet ot see any one saved with the baptism of desire.
Yet they have created a theology over this non existent case.
There are all sorts of theological speculation of a case which does not exist.
There is no connection between the theology of the Letter(1949) and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
All that theology is fine in itself it is rational and acceptable but the moment it is placed in relation to EENS it is meaningless.It has nothing to do with EENS.
For example 'God can infuse the virtue of faith in someone's soul...without that person being on the formal membership roster of a parish'.Yes. Wonderful. Acceptable. But your not saying this has any connection with EENS?
It has not connection.
Since a theoretical case cannot be an objective exception to all needing to be fomal members of the Church for salvation.
To be an exception some one has to exist.
The magisterium did not notice this . They overlooked this error in 1949. Then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger carried over this error onto many Church documents e.g Redemptoris Missio.