1.Rejecting the baptism of desire etc as being invisible and known only to God.
2.Assuming that the baptism of desire and being saved in in invincible ignorance refers to known cases in the present times.
3.In principle assuming hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire etc are objectively visible in the present times and then interpreting Vatican Council II with this irrationality.
4.Being unaware of this error of assuming the baptism of desire refers to invisible instead of visible cases was made in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 by the magisterium. It was then repeated in Vatican Council II by the Council Fathers.
Once this error is corrected, and it is simple to correct it, then this Arian-like heresy in the Catholic Church, a type of schism for Archbishop Athanasius Schneider, ends.
The error has to be identified and then Church documents, especially Vatican Council II, be re-interpreted.Invisible cases of LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc must be identified as being invisible only in 2016.The baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 must not be considered explicit and objective cases in our time and space.-Lionel Andrades