We now know that invincible ignorance is not an exception to EENS and so LG 14 does not contradict Feeneyite EENS if Cushingism is avoided.

Comments from FR. FEENEY’S STRANGE DOCTRINE

• • −

  

  
  
  
  

  Jim Russell  masamo • 17 hours ago

  
  

  Of course LG is an infallible document. Critics of Vatican II cannot sidestep the fact that the Holy Spirit *infallibly* protects such ecumenical councils from positively teaching error even *if* a council is described as "pastoral" and does not declare new dogmas.

  The Church cannot err in its *universal* teaching on faith and morals--period. That's de fide dogma.

Lionel : We can assume that the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) are  hypothetical cases only and I call this Feeneyism.It is also being assumed that BOD, BOB and I.I are non hypothetical and objective non Catholics saved outside the Catholic Church.I call this Cushingism.

We can interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism or Feeneyism and the conclusion would be different. Since our premise and inference is different.

The Council Fathers at Vatican Council II used Cushingism because of the error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.Also the excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney was not lifted by Cardinal Richard Cushing, during Vatican Council II.

So their theology was irrational. It was heretical.

This cannot be infallible.

This was a rejection  of the dogma EENS and a change in our understanding of the Nicene and Apostles Creed. It was a rejection of the Athanasius Creed. This is a change in a faith-teaching.

No Council can change the de fide teachings on Catholic faith and salvation by using a false premise and inference. They did this at Vatican Council II and it is expressed in LG 14.

We now know that invincible ignorance is not an exception to EENS and so LG 14 does not contradict Feeneyite EENS if Cushingism is avoided.

-Lionel Andrades

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/fr.-feeneys-strange-doctrine