Of course, ambiguity is all over the documents of the Council. That's why one can make the argument that in some particular interpretation of the text it does not necessarily contradict Catholic teaching. It was thanks to this ambiguity that the modernists got the documents accepted by the Council in the fist place.
But I think if we look at the fruits of the Council it is impossible to think that the official interpretation of the texts is in accordance with the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church.
However, traditional Catholic teaching in fact teaches that a man can be part of the Church and thus be saved even when he is not externally recognized as one of Her members.
Baptism of desire is a traditional teaching that states one can be part of the Church with explicit OR IMPLICIT desire of baptism.
Catechism of Pope St. Pius X states that "The absence of Baptism can be supplied by martyrdom, which is called Baptism of Blood, or by an act of perfect love of God, or of contrition, along with the desire, at least implicit of Baptism, and this is called Baptism of Desire".
But that has nothing to do with modernist errors about other religions as instruments of salvation, and their followers being in some sort of communion (although "imperfect") with the Catholic Church.
Marcadores