Bishop Athanasius Schneider says that the baptism of water is necessary and it is important-but he does not make the Cushingite-Feeneyite distinction.

Bishop Athanasius says that the baptism of water is necessary and it is important-but he does not make the Cushingite-Feeneyite distinction. 1

Even cardinals Ratzinger and Schonborn in the Catechism of the Catholic Church say that the baptism of water is necessary for eternal salvation but they are Cushingites.So there are exceptions for them.

Bishop Robert Baron also says the same but there are exceptions for him. He is a Cushingite.He finally concludes with the exceptions, that most people come in the exceptions category and have a reasonable hope for salvation.

Bishop Schneider is also a Cushingite.So he does not tell Cushingite Taylor Marshall that all non Catholics on earth are on the way to Hell with no known exceptions. There is not a single known case of someone saved in Heaven without the baptism of water and instead with the baptism of desire.

As a Feeneyite I would say that all need the baptism of water and there are no known exceptions. LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 are not exceptions to all needing the baptism of water. 

He does not make the Feeneyite-Cushingite distinction or he would go a step further and say that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 are not exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.Vatican Council II is Feeneyite and not Cushingite.

But he does not mention EENS since his interpretation of EENS is Cushingite.For me EENS is Feneeyite.LG 8 etc are hypothetical and so are not exceptions.

Bishop Schneider says that we need to be missionaries to the non Catholics and non Christians but he does not state that they are all on the way to Hell without faith and baptism in the Catholic Church.He keeps things open and vague as do the liberals.

Since he is a Cushingite, in his comment on the Abu Declaration  was Christocentric and not also ecclesiocentric.

With Feeneyism he could be ecclesiocentric in his ecclesiology but with Cushingism, like the popes since Paul VI, he is restricted.

With Cushingism he has made Vatican Council II a rupture with Tradition( EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc).

FR.THOMAS WEINANDY OFM

Similarly when Fr. Fr. Thomas G. Weinandy, OFM., Cap mentions the four marks of the Church it is not enough.Even  liberals mention the same. He needs to also make the Feeneyite and Cushingite distinction then he becomes clear and specfic. 2

It is the modernists who brought the Cushingite error into the Church 81 years back with the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. They consolidated the error 55 years back at Vatican Council II. So we cannot ignore this.For them what is invisible is visible. So we have to deal with this new reality which is part of the New Theology.

Now even Cardinal Walter Kasper can mention the four marks of the Church and say that the baptism of water is important while rejecting the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Feeneyite).-Lionel Andrades

1

https://catholicism.org/bishop-athanasius-schneider-on-the-necessity-of-baptism-and-evangelism.html

 2

https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2018/02/23/the-four-marks-of-the-church-the-contemporary-crisis-in-ecclesiology/