Comment on the blog post Scholasticism is reborn!
St.Bonaventure interpreted the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with Feeneyism ( there are no known exceptions to EENS), instead the faculty at the Scholasticum will interpret the dogma EENS with Cushingism( the baptism of desire and blood, exists without the baptism of water, and these cases are explicit, objectively known.This is why it is said they are exceptions to EENS).Correct? Would you agree with me?
I am not denying the baptism of desire I am just saying that for me it is invisible and not visible. For the faculty, since the baptism of desire is an exception to EENS ( Letter of the Holy Office 1949), it is objectively known to be an exception.
We have a case of subjectivism here?