St. Alphonsus did not unambiguously support the Thomistic thesis that explicit faith in the Trinity and the Incarnation is necessary for salvation.

Rewader God theory was a novelty invented by the Jesuits around the year 1600.  Until that time, no Catholic had ever taught or believed that salvation was possible without explicit knowledge of and faith in the Holy Trinity and the Incarnation.  That rendered it a dogma of the OUM.  Not to mention the formal/solemn expression of the same in the Athanasian creed.

Rewarder God theory is the watershed heresy that led ultimately to Vatican II.

Now, it's very interesting that you claim we must accept BoD because belief in it has become pervasive.  But then those Jesuits in 1600 were bound to accept the 1600-year Tradition that they were trying to overturn, no?  So these Jesuits were allowed to introduce novelties and overturn the universal consensus, but we Feeneyites must accept the modern universal consensus ... even though it's well established that the modern world has been thoroughly polluted with subjectivism since about the time of the Renaissance.  It's one hypocrisy, lie, and contradiction after another by the Cushingites.

John, are men saved only in the Catholic religion?

Trad123-
this answers you as well..

St. Alphonsus did not unambiguously support the Thomistic thesis that explicit faith in the Trinity and the Incarnation is necessary for salvation. In his “Theologia Moralis,” Alphonsus asks which articles of faith must be explicitly believed for salvation and he considers four:
1. God exists.
 2. God “is a rewarder to them that seek him” (Hebrews 11:6).
 3. The Holy Trinity.
 4. The Incarnation.
He says explicit belief in the first two is certainly necessary, while explicit belief in the last two is necessary according to the more common and more probable opinion, but he explains why the contrary opinion is “also quite probable.”

They are both probable, the first one being more likely, the second being "also quite probable".

2. Therefore, guided by the example of Our predecessors, We are grieved to hear reports from your dioceses which indicate that some of the people committed to your care freely encourage mixed marriages. Furthermore, they are promoting opinions contrary to the Catholic faith:


(. . .)


Finally some of these misguided people attempt to persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only in the Catholic religion, but that even heretics may attain eternal life.

10. In particular, ensure that the faithful are deeply and thoroughly convinced of the truth of the doctrine that the Catholic faith is necessary for attaining salvation.

In the second place, we ask whether you and the Armenians obedient to you believe that no man of the wayfarers outside the faith of this Church, and outside the obedience of the Pope of Rome, can finally be saved.

13. Now We consider another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained.

Surely, in so clear a matter, you will drive this deadly error far from the people committed to your care. With the admonition of the apostle that “there is one God, one faith, one baptism”[16] may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever.

They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that “those who are not with Christ are against Him,”[17] and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore “without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate.”

St. Alphonsus said that the opinion is "also quite probable"... not " tolerated" as you lyingly stated...

You dont think that St. Alphonsus and Pope St. Pius X believe in EENS?

You are preposterous...and dishonest...