The Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith implies that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 corrected Fr.Leonard Feeney for doctrine and being in heresy.The text of the Letter does not state this.

So the SSPX is not obliged to accept that Fr.Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for denying being saved with implicit desire or invincible ignorance.

The controversial text in the Letter could apply to disobedience and discipline and not doctrine and heresy.Liberals and dissenters have 'pulled a fast one on us'.

 

Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J, Secretary, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, assumes that Fr.Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for denying there was salvation outside the Church.So this is the basis of Cardinal Ladaria's 'theology of religions' and 'ecclesiology of communion'.(International Theological Commission papers).

Cardinal Luiz Ladraia S.J, former Professor at the Gregorian University similar to the Jesuits at the other Jesuit Universities takes it for granted that the Letter of the Holy Office condemned Fr. Leonard Feeney, a former Jesuit.The Letter does not mention that he was excommunication for heresy.

If the cardinal who issued the Letter of the Holy Office assumes that implicit desire was an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus, it was a factual error. There are no such known cases on earth. So it would then be an oversight of the magisterium.

When Cardinal Luiz Ladaria assumes that the Letter of the Holy Office and Vatican Council II (LG 16) contradicts extra ecclesiam nulla salus he cannot cite any text to support his view.He can cite the supportt of the secular media and liberals who also imply ,just like him.

There is no magisterial text which states implicit desire and invincible ignorance are known and are explcit or, that they contradict the dogma on salvation-Lionel Andrades