SSPX and sedevacantist websites consider invisible for us BOD, BOB and I.I as being visible exceptions to Feeneyite EENS : theology at the Catholic Identity Confc.

How can Mystici Corporis and the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X have exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS when BOD, BOB and I.I are invisible cases ?  Why do traditionalist websites still suggest invisibile for us baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) are visible examples of salvation outside the Church and so are exceptions to EENS?

This  error is crawling all over the SSPX official website.

Fr. Feeney and Catholic doctrine

Conclusion

Let us finally quote the letter of the Holy Office condemning Fr. Feeney’s teaching:

That one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.1

Lionel: 

That one may obtain salvation of course it is always required that one be incorporated into the Church as a member!!!(Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441, outside the Church there is no salvation).For the SSPX like the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 unknown cases of BOD,BOB and I.I are known in 2017 and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. They can see people in Heaven saved without 'faith and baptism'.

_____________________________

The three errors of the Feeneyites

Error II:

The doctrine of baptism of desire is optional

Such is the case for the doctrine on baptism of desire, by the Feeneyites’ own admission. They write: "This teaching [on the "three baptisms"] indeed was and is the common teaching of theologians since the early part of this millennium."[7] However, this was not only the "common teaching of theologians," but also that of popes, Doctors of the Church, and saints! In addition, it is found even before this millennium in the very early years of the Church without a single dissenting voice.2
Lionel: 
Since 'the early part of this millennium' invisible for us BOD, BOB and I.I is being considered a visible example of salvation outside the Church and objective exceptions to the dogma EENS. The popes and Doctors of the Church 'before this millenium in the very early years of the Church' interpreted invisible for us BOD, BOB and I.I as simply being invisible. This is Feeneyism for me.They did not make an irrational inference. 

FOR ME BOD, BOB AND I.I REFER TO HYPOTHETICAL CASES

I affirm BOD, BOB and I.I and for me they refer to hypothetical cases known only to God. They would be followed by the baptism of water since this is the dogmatic teaching. Either way they are not invisible and unknown cases in 2017 and people who do not exist in our reality cannot be exceptions to the dogma EENS.
_________________________________________

WHERE ARE THE PEOPLE SAVED WITH BOD, BOB AND I.I IN 2017? The three baptisms

Fr. Joseph PfeifferOriginally featured in the March 1998 issue of The Angelus magazine.

The proponents of this doctrine are followers of the teaching of the famous American Jesuit, Fr. Leonard Feeney, who cites the dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus ( Outside the Church there is no salvation) against anyone who would claim the existence of three baptisms.3

Lionel:

How can there be the known existence of BOD, BOB and I.I ? If any one was saved as such he or she would only be known to God. So how can 'zero cases' of something be an exception to Feeneyite EENS? Where are the people saved with BOD, BOB and I.I in 2017? There are none. Yet for the SSPX like for the liberal theologians, BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions to the dogma EENS as Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer now with the SSPX Resistance suggest. When I mentioned this on the Resistance Forum they refused to discuss this issue.

__________________________________________

COUNCIL OF TRENT DOES NOT STATE THAT BOD REFERS TO A KNOWN PERSON

From the above teaching of Trent, which is a canonization of the teaching of St. Thomas on the necessity of baptism, it is de fide that baptism is necessary in a double way, by a necessity of precept, and more importantly, by a necessity of means. A thing is necessary for salvation by a necessity of precept, when it obliges because of the command of a superior.
Lionel: 
But the text of the Council of Trent does not state that BOD refers to a known case. This has to be wrongly inferred. The wrong inference is made by the SSPX.
For me BOD refers to an invisible case. This is common sense.
____________________________

SSPX WEBSITE SHOWS  BOD AS BEING RELEVANT TO EENS

According to Trent, baptism is so necessary that it must be had, in re aut in voto - in reality or desire, before one can be in the state of Justification, or Sanctifying Grace.
Lionel:
Yes hypothetically.In reality we do not know any such person.So Trent is not contradicting the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS.
So how can Mystici Corporis and the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X have exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS when BOD, BOB and I.I are invisible cases ? How can BOD be relevant to the dogma EENS if you do not mix up what is physically invisible as being visible? It cannot be relevant. Yet the SSPX website shows that it is relevant. 

SAME STORY ON SEDEVACANTIST WEBSITES

It is the same story on the sedevacantist websites.

If, by some mystery of Providence and Predestination, they [pagans and idolaters] are united to the soul of the Church, and by desire to its body, it is in spite of their paganism and idolatry.  It is due to an invincible ignorance of their error.”-Bishop Donald Sanborn 4

If there is a pagan or idolater united to the soul of the Church and by desire to its body and who is saved this is an unknown case for us.The sedevacantist bishop cannot say that he knows of any such person saved this year or last year.So this hypothetical case cannot be relevant or an exception to the dogma EENS.It does not contradict EENS as it was interpreted by the missionaries in the 16th century.A hypothetical case is not a practical exception to EENS.If there is no practical exception then there is no exceptions.

A possibility or a speculative case in the past cannot be a practical exception to EENS in the present times.

Bishop Sanborn is repeating the wrong inference, which he learnt during his religious formation under Archbishop Marcle Lefebvre.

So he will not affirm Feeneyite EENS.Also for him hypothetical cases of LG 16, UR 3, NA 2 etc are not hypothetical . Instead they are a visible exception for him to the dogma EENS, the Syllabus of Errors on ecumenism etc and the old ecclesiology. So he rejects Vatican Council II as being a rupture with Tradition when the fault lies with his irrational inference.

SEDEVACANTIST ST.GERTRUDE THE GREAT CHURCH REPEATS THIS ERROR IN THEIR CATECHISM CLASSES

So the nuns who teach Catechism at Bishop Sanborn's church,St. Gertrude the Great Church, would, like the parishes in Italy in general, teach this irrationality.They will not affirm Feeneyite EENS and instead interpret all magisterial documents with Cushingism( invisible people in the present times are visible exceptions to EENS, invisible people mentioned in Vatican Council II are visible exceptions to the past ecclesiology and the Syllabus of Errors).

ANTI FEENEYITE CATECHISM IN DEFENSE OF  KNOWN CASES SAVED WITH BOD AND BOB

Bishop Sanborn has written an 'Anti-Feeneyite' catechism which is a 'defense of the Church's teaching on baptism of desire and baptism of blood' which for him are explicit and objective cases, for them to be relevant to the Feeneytite interpretation of the dogma EENS which he does not affirm.5 

UNKNOWN CASES OF LG 16 IN 2017 ARE NOT EXCEPTIONS TO TRADITION

For me invisible for us BOD, BOB and I.I are not exceptions or relevant to Feeneyite EENS.

For me unknown cases in 2017 of LG 16 etc are not exceptions to the past ecclesiology of the Church on exclusive salvation and the need for all to formally convert into the Church to avoid the fires of Hell.

This will not be the theology at the Catholic Identity Conference to be held next month with Edward Pentin being one of the speakers.

For Pentin BOD, BOB and I.I are known exceptions to the dogma EENS and so Vatican Council II is a rupture with Tradition.He has no concept of Feeneyite Vatican Council II in which LG 16 etc are not exceptions to the 'rigorist' interpretation of the dogma EENS.

-Lionel Andrades

1
 http://archives.sspx.org/miscellaneous/feeneyism/fr_feeney_catholic_doctrine.htm
2.
http://archives.sspx.org/miscellaneous/feeneyism/three_errors_of_feeneyites.htm
3.
http://archives.sspx.org/miscellaneous/feeneyism/three_baptisms.htm
4
http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/bishop-donald-sanborn/#.WbeqkbKrTcs
5.
http://mostholytrinityseminary.org/Anti-Feeneyite%20Catechism%201%20&%202.pdf

_______________________________________

SEPTEMBER 11, 2017

How can Mystici Corporis and the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X have exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS when BOD, BOB and I.I are invisible cases ? : traditionalists still supporting liberal theologians.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/09/how-can-mystici-corporis-and-catechisms.html

EPTEMBER 11, 2017

When are the traditionalists going to change? When are they going to get rid of their smugness on doctrine and theology ?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/09/when-are-traditionalists-going-to.html

SEPTEMBER 11, 2017

Catholics not obliged to follow Chris Ferrara, Michael Matt ( Fr.Jonathan Loop, SSPX and Fr.Gregory Pendergraft FSSP )  : innovative and politically correct theology

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/09/catholics-not-obliged-to-follow-chris.html

SEPTEMBER 10, 2017

Catholic Identity Conference in October limited by a false theology and new salvation doctrines

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/09/catholic-identity-conference-in-october.html

http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/3402-catholics-rising-a-major-event-coming-soon

__________________________________