When I tell people that Vatican Council II says outside the Church there is no salvation, it supports the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), the Feeneyite version, they would say the Council also mentions those saved in invincible ignorance(LG 16) and the baptism of desire ( LG 14) etc.So every one does not need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation.The Council is not Feeneyite.
I would respond that this would be true only if Lumen Gentium 16 and Lumen Gentium 14 refer to known people saved outside the Church. They then would be exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
It would be true if LG 16, LG 14 etc refer to visible, non Catholics saved outside the Church. In 2018 we know that there are no such people.
It would be true if these were references to objectively known cases of people instead of being hypothetical and theoretical cases.
So why does Vatican Council II mention them if they are only hypothetical cases?
We can accept LG 16, LG 14 as speculation with good will, hypothetical cases. References to what is abstract.Theoretical possibilties.Things hoped for.
So every one wrongly interprets Vatican Council II ?
Yes. Since there was a mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 (LOHO).It wrongly assumes invisible cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are visible exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).So LOHO, with this error which I call Cushingism, contradicts Feeneyite EENS.This error was repeated in Vatican Council II.So only with the error that people wrongly interpret Vatican Council II.
So we must affirm Vatican Council II as supporting Feeneyite EENS ?
Yes.Since Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation and calls for Mission.While hypothetical cases ( LG 8, LG 14,LG 16,UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc) do not refer to known people saved outside the Catholic Church.
They are invisible and unknown Catholics, who do not exist.They cannot be objective exceptions to EENS.I am referring to EENS as it was interpreted by the missionaries in the 16th century.
So EENS today is the same as it was in the 16th century and Vatican Council II is in harmony with it.
We now have EENS ( Feeneyite) and Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite- without the invisible non Catholics are visible premise).EENS ( Feeneyite ) and Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) are in harmony with the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance( Feenyite-they refer to personally unknown people in the present times).They are in haromy with the Catechisms( interpreted with Feeneyism and not Cushingism) and the Nicene Creed ( Feeneyite- I believe in only one known baptism for the forgiveness of sins, and not three or more known baptisms, which exclude the baptism of water) etc.
So the present ecclesiology of the Church for me, is still Feeneyite, like it was in the past.-Lionel Andrades