So much Internet confusion on 'Catholic Salvation' : websites only discuss the Protestant-Catholic aspect and avoid non Christian religions

There is so much confusion on Catholic Salvation.All the links and tags on 'salvation' only refer to the Protestant-Catholic aspect.What is the official teaching of the traditionalists and sedevacantists on salvation?Their websites do not say it clearly.

Why do their website not say all non Catholics need to convert into the Catholic Church according to the Bible( John 3:5, Mark 16:16,Matt.7:13-14 etc),Tradition ( The Church Councils and the popes) and the text of Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church intepreted with Feeneyism.

This is the rational and non ambigous teaching of the Catholic Church before and after Vatican Council II.Why don't they say that this is the message of Vatican Council II(Feeneyite)  in Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14 ?

So all non Catholics need to be formal members of the Catholic Church to avoid the fires of Hell.For me it is clear.

The websites of the traditionalists and sedevacantists could clarify that their understanding of the Catholic Faith, is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, since Jesus is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.He is the only way, truth and life.

So someone could ask the SSPX or the Most Holy Trinity sedevacantist seminary,Florida,of Bishop Donald Sanborn to be clear and say that Vatican Council II says all need faith and baptism for salvation, since the Bible says the same ( John 3:5, Mark 16:16, Matt.7:13-14 etc) and the past magisterium says the same. 

 

However the position of  the present magisterium is confusing and politically accomodating with the Left but the position of the traditionalists and sedevacantists is also confusing.Instead of an EENS ( Feeneyite) , they choose an EENS ( Cushingite), as does the Vatican Curia.

 

Instead of a Vatican Council (Feeneyite) ,like the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, they can only interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism.This is the error on all the websites.I have not seen an exception.

They will vaguely say all need Jesus for salvation( but with the new theology which they accept) and they mean there is known salvation in another religion.So every one does not need to enter the Church for salvation.
They will vaguely say that the Church is necessary for salvation and also say that the baptism of desire is an exception.In some cases the Church is not necessary. Hypothetical cases ( baptism of desire,invincible ingnorance(LG 16), elements of sanctification and truth(LG 8) etc) are known exceptions for all of them.

Even the St.Benedict Centers, the communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney, will interpret EENS as Feeneyite (no known exceptions) but will not interpret Vatican Council II as Feeneyite.Lumen Gentium 16 is an exception to EENS for the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.Their position on Vatican Council II is the same as the SSPX and the sedevacantists.

Instead they should all tell the Vatican that they affirm Vatican Council II and EENS.They accept the Catechism of the Catholic Church.They interpret all these magisterial documents with rational and non ambigous Feeneyism. They should ask the CDF and Ecclesia Dei, Vatican to also do the same.

Just as parts of Amoris Laetitia is controversial for  Archbishop Guido Pozzo, the secertary of the Ecclesia Dei and consultator to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, he should be asked to announce that EENS(Cushingite)  and Vatican Council II (Cushingite) is also controversial.How can theology assume there are objective cases of the baptism of desire?

The position of the SSPX on salvation is  confusing.Doctrinally they have made an error, as did the magisterium, on 'Feeneyism'.Since there can be no known cases past or present of any one saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.There can be no known exceptions to Feeneyism.

So the SSPX websites do not doctrinally teach the Catholic teaching on salvation.Before the Council of Trent it was assumed that there was no salvation outside the Church.The SSPX website assumes there is.

Before the Council of Trent it was assumed that the desire for the baptism of water by a theoretical case of a catechumen who dies before receiving it, is  hypothetical.It cannot be personally known.The SSPX website indicates that it is an exception to EENS, so it cannot be a hypothetical case.It has to be a known case for it to be an exception.

 

In the past it was taught every one needs to be a card carrying member of the Catholic Church now the SSPX websites indicate there are exceptions.( Baptism of desire etc).
 

Before the Council of Trent Feeneyism( there are no known exceptions) was the only theology now according to the SSPX website the dominant theology is Cushingite.

Before the Council of Trent there was no concept of the Anonymous Christian.Now the SSPX has accepted the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and so with being saved in  invincible ignorance etc, allegedly without the baptism of water,there is salvation outside the Church.There can be salvtion in another religion.This  is the Anonymous Christian theology of Karl Rahner and Joseph Ratzinger.This is the new theology of the SSPX. This is standard Cushingite theology which was not there before the Council of Trent.
 

This is all the confusion which is there when you google the words 'Salvation', 'Catholic salvation'.

-Lionel Andrades