Traditionalist forums are still not discussing the baptism of desire philosophically: the issue is at the heart of the SSPX reconciliation

Without a rational approach to extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the ‘exceptions’ there is no hermeneutic of continuity in Vatican Council II.

Traditionalist forums discuss extra ecclesiam nulla salus theologically only. So theologically some will assume that implicit desire is an exception to the dogma. Others will say it is not.

If they use a philosophical, intellectual approach and then look at the ‘exceptions’ per se, there are no exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation being there in only the Catholic Church.

In 2012 there is no known case of the baptism of desire/implicit desire. We do not know any case over the last 100 years or more. Neither do we know any such case saved in invincible ignorance.

So in reality there are no exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

No magisterial document also says there are exceptions to the dogma or that implicit desire etc is explicit.

This is not theology. This is an empirical, objective observation. We do not know the dead- saved.

The implications of this is that Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

If the Council is traditional and in accord with the dogma on salvation then there is the hermeneutic of continuity.

It means the traditionalist’s interpretation of the Council has the hermeneutic of continuity. Th interpretation of the Vatican Curia is without the hermenutic of continuity. The Vatican Curia assumes that there are exceptions to the dogma and so the Council is a break with continuity,with Tradition.

Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in two theological papers of the International Theological Commission attributes this break to the Fr. Leonard Feeney case.

He assumes, like Cardinal Richard Cushing, that the baptism of desire etc are explicit exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma. This was the Cushing error.

Since then the traditionalists have also accepted this error and have argued over it. Philosophically we can see the Curia‘s position as heresy.It's a break with Tradition. There is no hermeneutic of continuity.-Lionel Andrades

Jeff Mirus could be asked if he knows anyone saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire in 2012. If he does not, then how can the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance be an exception to Fr. Leonard Feeney?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/09/jeff-mirus-could-be-asked-if-he-knows.html#links