Fr.Gleize is a professor of ecclesiology at the SSPX seminary in Econe, Switzerland.He uses the phrase 'via eccezionale'(exceptional way) and refers to those who are saved outside the visible structures of the Catholic Church. He even quotes Pope Pius XII's Mystici Corporis.
'19.Risposta alla terza obiezione: in Mystici corporis Pio XII dice che in via eccezionale ci si può salvare al di fuori dei limiti visibili della Chiessa Cattolica...'-Don J.M Gleize FSSPX (p.152. Editrice Ichthys.VIII Il 'Subsistit in'-Status Quaestionis),Vaticano II-Un Dibattito Aperto Questioni disputate sul XXI Concilio Ecumenico
How can there be an exceptional way of salvation outside the Church? The SSPX District Superior has affirmed the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, and has said that outside the Church there is no salvation.Instead he criticises Vatican Council II (UR 3 etc) for suggesting that there is salvation outside the Church.
Here Fr.Gleize also says that there is salvation outside the Church and quotes Pope Pius XII.
1. There are no known cases of any body saved outside the Church, that is, someone saved without faith and baptism in the Church.
2.There is no known case of someone saved in another religion who is now in Heaven with Catholic faith and the baptism of water.
So Pope Pius XII was referring to a hypothetical case, a possibility known only to God.If he was referring to a known case then it would be a factual error. Since there could not have been any known case during his lifetime.
So we have the dogmatic ordinary means of salvation, which is faith and baptism in the Church.All need to be formal members of the Church for salvation.How can there be an extraordinary means of salvation? This is modernism.
The Council of Trent refers to 'the desire thereof 'of a catechumen but does not say that this is a personally known case, it excludes the baptism of water and it is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. All this has to be wrongly inferred and it was.
Similarly the popes and saints, in response to a campaign to eliminate the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, have referred to that hypothetical catechumen who dies before he recieves the baptism of water which he sought and who is allegedly saved. They do not state that this hypothetical case was personally known or is an exception to the traditional teaching on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.Yet this is wrongly inferred by liberal theologians and also those in the SSPX.
The error of the new theology is that it assumes hypothetical cases are explicit in our times(2013- 2016).Then it infers that these known cases are examples of extraordinary means of salvation,exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So they become examples of people saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
For Fr. Jean Marie Glieze the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance happen 1) without the baptism of water and 2) they are objectively known in personal cases. So they are exceptions to the interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus acording to Fr. Leonard Feeney or the 16th century missionaries.
This was the mistake made by Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops.