Cantarella understands that the baptism of desire is not a defacto exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Since, she says we cannot see the dead.This was the Cushingite mistake.
She also understands that traditionalists, sedevacantists and liberals are making the same error. They assume that the baptism of desire refers to objective cases.Hypothetical cases are visible in the flesh. The dead are visible on earth for them.
She now has to extend this insight to Vatican Council II.
Like being saved with the baptism of desire is invisible for us, so also being saved with ' a ray of the Truth'(NA 2) is invisible for us.Just as the baptism of desire is not an explicit exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus so NA 2 is not an exception to all needing the baptism of water for salvation in 2014.
She then has to apply this reasoning to LG 16,LG 8,UR 3 etc. She will find that there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Also she may have already noticed that Ad Gentes 7 supports the dogma on exclusive salvation when it says all need faith and baptism for salvation.Vatican Council II is Feeneyite!
She could begin new threads on Internet forums,on the subject of Vatican Council II or the Catechism of the Catholic Church,while using this reasoning!
Baptism of Desire cannot be a visible exception to EENS, since we cannot see the dead - Cantarella, CathInfo traditional forum
BODers of today carry the same Cushingite error of thinking the baptism of desire as a visible exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus-Catarella,CathInfo forum
The Holy Office 1949 made a mistake. Cardinal Marchetti-Selvaggiani assumed there are known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus-Cantarella, CathInfo forum
Sedevacantists "traditionalists in name only" share the same very mistake with the liberals Novus Ordo Catholics-Cantarella
Cushingism is the name of the error that is professed. The error of believing there are known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus- Cantarella, CathInfo forum