Another SSPX priest in Rome says implicit salvation is not visible to us and is known only to God.

He could not cite any text in Vatican Council II which contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

A priest of the SSPX  yesterday said that implicit salvation is not visible to us . He agreed it was not an exception to the dogma on salvtion.

In principle it was possible for a non Catholic to be saved in another religion and this person would be saved by Jesus and the Church. However these cases he said were not known to us and so were not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They were irrelevant to the dogma.

I asked him if he could cite any case of implicit salvation in Vatican Council II which was explicit and so an exception to the traditional teaching on other religions? He did not know of any case.

The point I was trying to make was that Vatican Council II itself does not contradict the traditonal teaching on other religions. Since we cannot see persons saved in invincible ignorance a good conscience etc.

When Archbishop Lefebvre mentioned a Hindu could be saved in his religion, he was referring to something exceptional, and which we accept in principle as a possibility. De facto we cannot know any such case. So it was irrelevant to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which says all need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation. This is the same message as Ad Gentes 7 Vatican Council II .

Vatican Council II would only contradict the SSPX position on other religions if it was assumed that implicit salvation is explicit .Otherwise there is nothing in the Council which is non traditional, regarding other religions.

On Thursday I spoke to another SSPX priest who agreed that implicit salvation is not visible to us.-Lionel Andrades
First Saturday

http://www.sanpiox.it/public/index.php?