There have been so many reports on this blog but Bishop Athanasius Schneider will still not affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) according to the 16th century missionaries.So he had no comment when Pope Benedict said the dogma had been developed by Vatican Council II.
Bishop Schneider agrees with Pope Benedict. For both of them hypothetical qualities mentioned in Vatican Council II are explicit, objective,seen in the flesh exceptions in 2016 to all needing to enter the Church with no exceptions.
In Bishop Athanasius Schnieder's mind the Baltimore Catechism and the Catechism of Pope Pius X was correct.Since it placed the baptism of desire in the section on Baptism, the baptism of water.In his mind the baptism of desire is known like the baptism of water.It is repeatable like the baptism of water and it's results are the same, it is accepted in faith; it is the same as the baptism of water in personal cases.
The baptism of desire is concrete for him, similar to the baptism of water.
So for him the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 was correct in criticizing Fr.Leonard Feeney for not accepting the baptism of desire etc.as a known exceptions to the dogma EENS.This was also the reasoning of the popes from Pope Pius XII to Pope Francis.
So Vatican Council II has developed too like the dogma EENS.The dogma EENS has exceptions,for Bishop Athanasius Schneider.Vatican Council II also mentions these exceptions ( LG 16).
But now after some 70-plus years it is being asked what if LG 16, LG 8, UR 3 et refer to hypothetical cases?
Then would the baptism of desire, a hypothetical case, be an exception to EENS?
What if if these cases were invisible for us? What if the baptism of desire was known only to God?
What if no one in Baltimore knew of a baptism of desire case? What if no one saw or knew of the results of a baptism of desire case?
Did Pius X know of someone saved with the baptism of desire? Was it concrete for him?
'Zero cases of something are not exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus'.These are the words of John Martignoni. Not mine.
So many people since then have said the same thing.Except Bishop Athanasius Schnieder.
What if there is no development of doctrine, no development of EENS in Vatican Council II?
What if Bishop Athanasius Schneider is wrong?
What if the new theology is based on a mistake in perception?
What if Pope Benedict was wrong?
There is no known development in EENS.
Vatican Council II has not developed EENS.
When will Bishop Athansius Schneider discuss this?