Joseph Shaw says that this 'issue is complex'. 1 It is so because he uses a false premise. He assumes that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are explicit for us and so are an exception to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.
It is with this false premise
(1.Invisible cases are visible.
2.So all do not need to convert into the Catholic Church.)
that he begins to interpret Vatican Council II.
This is Cushingism. Cardinal Richard Cushing , the Archbishop of Boston inferred that there were known exceptions to the traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus.He was supported by the Jesuits in Boston.
They then were active at Vatican Council II.
Joseph Shaw assumes that those saved with ' a ray of the Truth'(Nostra Aetate 2, Vatican Council II ) refers to visible cases on earth. So NA 2 contradicts extra ecclesiam nulla salus. There are exceptions.It is the same with UR 3, LG8 , AG 11 what is acceptable as being invisible and hypothetically possible is considered to be visible in our reality.
Many people who assume that Fr.Leonard Feeney was wrong to reject the baptism of desire (explicit/visible for them) reason rationally, but with a wrong premise.
Change the premise and Fr.Leonard Feeney is in perfect agreement with Vatican Council II including NA 2.
If the cardinal who issued the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 relative to Fr.Leonard Feeney during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII assumed that the baptism of desire (implicit desire) was an exception to the traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney, then that cardinal made an objective mistake.His premise was wrong.
It is the same false premise which Gavin D'Costa uses on the video seen on the websites of the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales and the University of Bristol,England.
It is with the false premise that there are exceptions to Tradition.Without the false premise there are no exceptions to the Catechism of Pope Pius X and the Syllabus of Errors on other religions, Protestant communities and salvation.
It is when the false premise is used that this issue becomes complicated and complex. It becomes a theological minefield.With a rational premise the issue is simplified.
I am going to start deleting your comments. They are irrelevant to the posts they are attached to - they are essentially spam. They are also incomprehensible, and for that reason boring. They are, finally, rude. You have no idea what the various people who have not responded to your spamming think about these complex issues.-Joseph Shaw