The Scholasticum will be a liberal Catholic college and so it will be approved by the Vatican.For the faculty the baptism of desire(BOD) is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).They follow the Letter of the Holy Office 1949-.In other words BOD refers to an objective case.Since it is an objective case it is an exception to EENS.
If the maintained that BOD is invisible and implicit for us and so is not an exception to EENS and so the Holy Office 1949 made a mistake,the Scholasticum will not be approved by the Vatican.
The Jewish Left (ADL, SPLC) will accuse them of teaching 'hate'.If the Scholasticism taught that the Holy Office 1949 made a mistake so there cannot be an explicit exception to EENS in Vatican Council II, they will be rational and traditional.They will not have to reject Vatican Council II as did the Fischer More College.
They can still be traditional, accept Vatican Council II but reject the second part of the Letter (1949).The first part of the Letter(1949) would support them.
Then the Scholasticum can present itself as a traditional Catholic College , which does not reject Vatican Council II or the dogma EENS according to the centuries old interpretation.
Since they affirm EENS and also implicit for us baptism of desire there is no change in the traditional ecclesiology.They cannot be accused of rejecting Vatican Council II or the baptism of desire. They will not be forced to choose between the baptism of desire and EENS.They will then be coherent on religious liberty, ecumenism, salvation outside the Church for non Christians,a traditional ecclesiology along with all liturgical rites, Church mission and evangelisation based on the interpretation of the dogma EENS according to the 16th century missionaries.
They will not contradict St.Thomas Aquinas on exclusivist salvation in the Catholic Church and also the possibility of the man in the forest ( unknown to us) being saved because God will send a preacher to him.
The college can then tell the contemporary magisterium that they are irrational in assuming there is an explicit for us baptism of desire.How can there be a known exception to EENS ?.They can tell the contemporary magisterium that they are irrational to assume there are explicit exceptions to EENS. Hypothetical cases cannot be objective exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Catholic Church, with 'faith and baptism'(AG 7, LG 14) to avoid Hell.
Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 in Vatican Council II support the dogma EENS according to the 16th century missionaries and there are no known exceptions for any of us in 2016.
All the saints assumed that the baptism of desire ( the desire for the baptism of water by a theoretical case of a catechuman who dies before receiving it) was implicit .This is rational.If the Scholasticum teaches the same thing they may lose their premises in the Convent of St. Francis at Bagnoregio, VT, Italy.This is a problem also before the SSPX and the sedevacantists who own seminaries.They have their premises only because they have compromised on Church-doctrine like the magisterium.
The Scholasticum plans on doing the same thing.
St.Bonaventure interpreted the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with Feeneyism instead the faculty at the Scholasticum will interpret EENS with Cushingism ? https://fromrome.wordpress.com/2016/05/29/scholasticism-is-reborn/#comments