Pending questions.
Does the community of Fr.Leonard Feeney interpret the baptism of desire as being explicit for us or implicit for us ?
Does the community of Fr.Leonard Feeney interpret the baptism of desire as being explicit for us or implicit for us ?
Similarly do they believe that being saved in invincible ignorance followed by the baptism of water is explicit for us or implicit for us?
Do they assume that LG 16 (invincible ignorance ) is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?
Do they assume that LG 16 (invincible ignorance ) is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?
So is Vatican Council II in perfect agreement with Tradition and the dogma on salvation when it says all need faith and baptism for salvation(AG 7) and we know there are no known exceptions mentioned in the Council ?
Is the Council in perfect agreement with Fr.Leonard Feeney on the issue of extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?
This is the position of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in Worcester and Manchester,USA ?
Do you think that the supporters of Fr.Leonard Feeney are interpreting the baptism of desire as being explicit for us or as being implicit for us ?
This is the fundamental issue.
Once this error is corrected the Council supports Fr.Leonard Feeney
-Lionel Andrades
(from comments on the blog post You are either a Feeneyite or a Cushingite.
Fr.Leonard Feeney's communities using Cushingism?
You are either a Feeneyite or a Cushingite
.http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/08/you-are-either-feeneyite-or-cushingite.html#links
.http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/08/you-are-either-feeneyite-or-cushingite.html#links
One has to be aware of the error of Cushingism when reading Vatican Council II