All the popes and saints over the centuries, before Pius XII,held the strict interpretation of EENS without assuming BOD,BOB and I.I were exceptions.

 

No, Feeney was wrong because he explicitly denied even the hypothetical possibility of someone being saved by BOD. (Lionel: This is an opinion. But assuming he denied even the hypothetical possibility of someone being saved by BOD,what has this to do with the dogma EENS ? He affirmed the strict interpretation of EENS and said there were no literal cases of BOD. You are saying the same ). 

You, also affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS with hypothetical cases of BOD, BOB and I.I.So what's new ? You are saying the same thing.All the popes and saints over the centuries,before Pius XII, said and did the same. They held the strict interpretation of EENS without assuming BOD,BOB and I.I were exceptions.)

Absolute and relative necessity are not "hypothetical" but describe realities, whether known by man or God alone. Quit hiding behind Catholic terminology.( If they are realities they will be known only to God.Only God can decide who is saved)

I reject the Modernist interpretation of BOD but not the doctrine. (Even the 'Feeneyites' reject the modernist interpretation of BOD and not the doctrine.Since the doctrine of BOD does not contradict Feeneyite EENS. The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made an objective mistake. The same mistake was repeated at Vatican Council II. So now there can be two interpretations of the Council.One is rational and the other is irrational.)-Lionel Andrades