We still have one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church on the subject of EENS. Politically the dogma could not be suppressed. May be at some time in the future in Portugal, once again there will be a Catholic State and the dogma of the faith will not more be lost as Our Lady indicated at Fatima.

 Outside the Church there is no salvation was not just a saying of St. Cyprian it was a dogma of the Catholic Church defined by three Church Councils in the Extraordinary Magisterium over  three different times in history. It is expressed in Vatican Council II (AG 7).

A lobby wanted to do away with this 'infallible teaching' and so in 1949 the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston was issued. It projected unknown cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as being known non Catholics saved outside the Church. This was after World War II and the popes caved in.

Knowing that the popes Pius XII and John XXIII did not defend Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center and the 'infallible teaching', an ecumenical Council was called, which was to eliminate the dogma extra ecclesiamn nulla salus (EENS), forever.They would do this with the New Theology of the LOHO, which said outside the Church there is salvation.

Pope Paul VI accepted a Church which would be Christocentric and not ecclesiocentric. He chose to interpret the Council with the error of the 1949-LOHO.

After a half century the mistake in the LOHO is discovered and it is being asked if the Council could have been interpreted with a Rational Premise and so the Church would have returned to the old theology.

The answer is YES.

Recently Bishop Athanasius Schneider  said, among other priests  and an archbishop, that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire. There are no explicit cases of St. Thomas Aquinas' implicit baptism of desire confirmed Dr. Taylor Marshall.

They are saying that in principle LG 14, LG 8, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 223 etc are not literal people whom we known in 1965-2021. These are always hypothetical and theoretical cases.

So they are looking at Vatican Council II without the New Theology which depends upon the False Premise ( invisible people are visible in the present times), False Inference ( they are objective exceptions for extra ecclesiam nulla salus, Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX etc) and Non Traditional Conclusion ( Vatican Council II with the False Premise contradicts Tradition ( EENS etc).

Now we know that Vatican Council II interpreted with the Rational Premise is supported by Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and the baptism of water for salvation. All) and LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, GS 22 etc are not objective exceptions. They are not exceptions.So we have a Vatican Council II which supports the past ecclesiocentrism. The Council is dogmatic, in harmony with EENS.It is not only pastoral.

Based on a dogmatic Council we can practically affirm the exclusivist ecclesiology, Traditional Mission, the old exclusivist ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue and we can proclaim the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics with the non separation of Church and State.

So the Catholic Church theologically has returned to the 1930's the time of the editor, St. Maximillian Kolbe whose writings were exclusivist.

The Church is Feeneyite ( invisible cases are invisible only) and not Cushingite ( invisible cases are visible) but the present two popes are Cushingite and so is Cardinal Ladaria and Archbishop Arthur Roche.So we are still stuck with their irrational interpretation of the Vatican Council II of 1965.

But the attempt by a group of people to do away with the dogma EENS has failed.The truth has asserted itself. It has come back on its own.We still have one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church on the subject of EENS. Politically the dogma could not be suppressed. May be at some time in the future in Portugal, once again there will be a Catholic State and 'the dogma of the faith' will no more be lost as Our Lady indicated at Fatima. -Lionel Andrades