They have not mentioned it since they do not believe in it or do not understand it, yet.
Diane Montagna at LifeSitesNews does not cite Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.She does not quote the blue passage and mention that the red passage refers to invisible and hypothetical cases and so does not contradict the blue passage.
Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door. Therefore those men cannot be saved, who though aware that God, through Jesus Christ founded the Church as something necessary, still do not wish to enter into it, or to persevere in it." Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him...-Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II.
Instead she cites the red passage as if it refers to known people saved outside the Catholic Church and so contradicts the strict interpretation of outside the Church there is no salvation in Ad Gentes 7 ( blue passage).
Here it is :
Vatican II allows for the possibility of extraordinary revelations to non-Christians. According to its decree on the missionary activity of the Church, “God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him” (Ad Gentes, 7). -Diane Montagna, LifeSiteNews
For her a possibility is a personally known person saved outside the Church and so it contradicts Ad Gentes 7 when it says all need faith and baptism for salvation.
For me all need faith and baptism for salvation is the norm. Ad Gentes 7 is also mentioned in the Catechism of the Catholic Church 846.
For Diane Montagna CCC 846 would be contradicted by CCC 847-848. Again possibilities are not just possibilities for her.They are actual people in 2019 saved outside the Church otherwise how could they be exceptions ? How could they be exceptions to the traditional teaching on outside the Church there is no salvation.
This is the difference between Feeneyism and Cushingism in the interpretation of magisterial documents and especially Vatican Council II.
With Feeneyism hypothetical cases are just hypothetical.
With Cushingism hypothetical cases are assumed to be non hypothetical and objective exceptions to the orthodox passages in Vatican Council II etc.
So the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 can be read with the Feeneyite or Cushingite model.1 Diane Montagna is a Cushingite.With Cushingism she reads Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition ( EENS, ecumenism of return, Syllabus of Errors etc).
Similarly for her the red would contradict the blue in the interpretation of Lumen Gentium 14, Unitatis Redintigratio 3 and Dominus Iesus 16 2
So she does not interpret Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church with the red not being an exception to blue with reference to Islam and other religions.
If she did so then Vatican Council II (AG 7) would be saying all Muslims need faith and baptism for salvation and there are no known exceptions of the baptism of desire(LG 14) or invincible ignorance(LG 16) etc in 2019.There are no practical exceptions to exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
Instead she has irrationally interpreted Vatican Council II.
This could be a reason why she has not commented on the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Diocese of Manchester,USA placing prohibitions on the Brother Andre Marie MICM and the St.Benedict Center, in New Hampshire.3 The CDF wanted the SBC to say that Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church contradict the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. So it could no more be said that there are only Catholics in Heaven.
So for six months there are prohibitions placed on the traditionalist community and they are legally considered not-Catholic for Pope Francis.
-Lionel Andrades
1
FEBRUARY 3, 2019
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 can be read with the Feeneyite-Cushingite model. It can be read with the red passages not being exceptions to the blue passages ( Feeneyism) or with the red passages being exceptions to the blue passages (Cushingism). The blue passages are orthodox and support the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known to the Magisterium in the 16th century
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/02/the-letter-of-holy-office-1949-can-be.html
2
JANUARY 28, 2019
In Magisterial documents the red is not an exception to the blue, the red does not contradict the blue : with the blue there is a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition (16th- century extra ecclesium nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors, ecumenism of return, past exclusivist ecclesiology etc)
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/01/in-magisterial-documents-red-is-not.html
3.
https://www.catholicnh.org/assets/Documents/About/FAQ/Decree-Precepts-StBenedictCtr.pdf
Posts
