The central point of what I want to say

The central point of what I want to say is : in March 2106 , we cannot physically, see, meet or know someone in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.

Similarly in March 2016  we cannot physically watch, touch or recognize someone on earth, who will be saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.

Likewise we cannot know anyone this year  saved in invincible ignorance (I.I)  and the baptism of desire (BOD).We cannot know of someone saved in I.I or BOD with or without , the baptism of water.Neither was this possible last year or the year before last or in 1949 Boston or in 1892 Baltimore.

So no one could have seen a case of salvation outside the Church.

It means Lumen Gentium 16 ( being saved in invincible ignorance) refers to a hypothetical case of salvation. It cannot be physically seen or known.So it cannot be an example of salvation outside the Church.It cannot be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).

So when Pope Benedict XVI says there is ' a development of doctrine', he means LG 16 refers to a known case of salvation outside the Church.

Chris Ferrara also means LG 16 refers to a known case of salvation outside the Church.LG 16 contradicts EENS and the Syllabus of Errors for him. So he rejects Vatican Council II.

In his reasoning he seems rational, since he presumes there are known cases of salvation this year, or last year, or in 1949 or 1892.

For him someone like St.Emerentiana or St.Victor is in Heaven without the baptism of water.So when Pope Benedict and the liberals ( Masons) say there is 'a development of doctrine' Chris Ferrara does not have a clue to the specific error.Since he uses the same irrational reasoning.His premise is- people in Heaven are visible and known.They include people saved with the baptism of desire.His inference is : so there is salvation outside the Church.

-Lionel Andrades