The Archbishop of Boston Richard Cushing was in heresy and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 was addressed to him.

The Archbishop of Boston was in heresy for assuming that the dead are visible and so are exceptions to the dogma on salvation.While the Catholic world still assumes that Fr.Leonard Feeney was wrong since the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are explicit and so exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

How can what we cannot know personally, which we cannot see, be an exception to every one needing to enter the Catholic Church for salvation?

The Society of St.Pius X praises Archbishop Richard Cushing and condemns Fr.Leonard Feeney.Then they extend this error to Vatican Council II and assume that Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance) contradicts Tradition.

Implicit-to-us salvation in Vatican Council II the SSPX assumes is a break with the Syllabus of Errors and extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So they hold that Vatican Council II contradicts the traditional teaching on other religions.

The contradiction is not in Vatican Council II but with their implying the dead saved in invincible ignorance can be seen.So for them the Letter of the Holy Office excommunicated Fr.Leonard Feeney for heresy, even though the Letter mentions it was for disobedience.

The Letter was addressed to the Archbishop. The Archbishop and the Jesuits were in heresy for suggesting that there were defacto exceptions to the centuries old interpretation of the dogma on salvation.

If the cardinal who issued the Letter also assumed that the baptism of desire etc was an explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus then he too would have made an objective, factual error. We cannot see the dead.

The baptism of desire and invincible ignorance has nothing to do with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This was the 'drama' of the Archbishop and the Jesuits at Boston.

When this error is acknowledged by the SSPX Vatican Council II would emerge traditional.Since Ad Gentes 7 (all need faith and baptism for salvation) agrees with the SSPX position on other religions and ecumenism.There are no known exceptions to Ad Gentes 7 as it is generally wrongly believed today.

Today Wikipedia assumes Fr.Leonard Feeney was in heresy and not Cardinal Richard Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston.So Wikipedia indicates that Lumen Gentium 16 contradicts extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Fr.Leonard Feeney.Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre said that there could be a Hindu in Tibet saved in his religion.It is assumed that this case is an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This Hindu would have to be known personally to be an exception.

Canonist Peter Vere writes that the St.Benedict Centers had a controversial view on the baptism of desire etc.He means the baptism of desire is explicit and known to us in personal cases and so it is an exception to the dogma and the St.Benedict Centers reject it.

He does not realize that the baptism of desire can be accepted only in principle. The communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney accept the baptism of desire in principle, with a condition.They reject any explicit-to-us baptism of desire which could be an exception to the dogma.

Here is the initial part of the Letter of the Holy Office which supports Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine.

Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.

Lionel:
The text of the 'infallible statement',defined three times does not mention the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance. So it supports Fr.Leonard Feeney here.

Letter of the Holy Office
However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church.

Lionel:
The text of the 'dogma' supports Fr.Leonard Feeney's position.

Letter of the Holy Office.

Now, among the commandments of Christ, that one holds not the least place by which we are commanded to be incorporated by baptism into the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, and to remain united to Christ and to His Vicar, through whom He Himself in a visible manner governs the Church on earth.

Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.

Lionel:

Those who know and do not enter cannot be saved. These cases would be judged by God. We cannot judge them. Since these cases are unknown to us they are irrelevant to Fr.Leonard Feeney's position.

In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the sacrament of regeneration and in reference to the sacrament of penance (, nn. 797, 807).

Lionel:

An in principle statement. Fine.

Letter of the Holy Office

The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, 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.

Lionel:

In principle we accept 'that 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. In reality we do not know any such case so it is not an exception to Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Still there is nothing which contradicts the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonrd Feeney and the popes and saints.

Letter of the Holy Office

However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.

Lionel:

 Implicit desire is not visible for us. We cannot meet anyone saved with implicit desire . So it is irrelevnt to Fr.Leonrd Feeney.

-Lionel Andrades