As expected there is no denial from Cardinal Luiz Ladaria s.j and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF). The International Theological Commission (ITC) made an objective error in two theological papers 1) Christianity and the World Religions and 2) The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without being baptised.The mistake was approved by Pope Benedict, Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, Archbishop Guido Pozzo and others.1
1) They do not deny that they assume possibilities of salvation, which can be known only to God, were mistaken to be known non Catholics saved outside the Catholic Church in the present time e.g 1949, 1965, 2017-2018 etc.
There are no such non Catholics.This is a factual mistake.2
2) They do not deny that they wrongly assumed invisible cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) were visible exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).This is also an objective error.There are no such objective cases in 2018.
3) They do not deny that they wrongly assumed LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc were objective examples of non Catholics saved outside the Church.This was false.We cannot see or meet someone saved outside the Church.
4) So when they considered LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as being objective exceptions to EENS it was an objective mistake.This is something obvious.
So the CDF cannot issue a clarification saying Lionel Andrades was wrong since there are known cases in 2018 of non Catholics saved with BOD, BOB and I.I and without the baptism of water. Neither can the CDF say that there are known cases of non Catholics saved in 2018 without the baptism of water and instead with the references mentioned in LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc.
The CDF knows that there are no such known people and so there is an error in the theological papers of the ITC.
The same error was made during Vatican Council II (1960-1965).Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation and yet also mentions being saved in invincible ignorance.It was a mistake to mention invincible ignorance in Ad Gentes 7.Since there are no practical exceptions to all needing faith and baptism for salvation.
This was an error. The same error was made in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
Similarly Lumen Gentium 14 says all need faith and baptism but mentions the case of the catechuman this was an error.There is no known case of a catechuman saved outside the Church.This too was an oversight of the Council Fathers.An unknown catechumen could not be an exception or relevant to all needing faith and baptism for salvation.
When the popes and saints referred to this catechumen or someone saved in invincible ignorance it was always to a hypothetical case. So they affirmed BOD, BOB and I.I and also the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. There was no 'development' for them.So Mystici Corporis, Quanta Cura and the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X do not contradict Feeneyite EENS.
The Council Fathers made the same objective errors in 1965 as did Cardinal Ratzinger and Fr.Luiz Ladaria s.j in the ITC theological papers.-Lionel Andrades