There is a comment on an earlier post (1) on the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary following true doctrine. Yes they are when they interpret the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus without any exception of the baptism of desire etc.
However even though they reject the baptism of desire etc theologically, unless it is followed with the baptism of water, their concept of the baptism of desire is according to Cushingism. They assume that these cases are explicit for us.Oh no!!?
Similarly they assume that all salvation mentioned in Vatican Council II (LG 16 etc ) are also explicit and so contradict the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.
The following is a comment from the other blog post.
One can interpret Vatican Council II with Cushingism or Feeneyism. Which of the two do you think the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary are using ?
Cushingism emerges with the interpretation of the baptism of desire etc.
Do the communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney interpret the baptism of desire as being explicit for us or implicit for us ?
Similarly do they believe that being saved in invincible ignorance followed by the baptism of water is explicit for us or implicit for us?
Do they assume that LG 16 (invincible ignorance ) is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?
-Lionel Andrades
(1)
You are either a Feeneyite or a Cushingite.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/08/you-are-either-feeneyite-or-cushingite.html#links
-Lionel Andrades
(1)
You are either a Feeneyite or a Cushingite.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/08/you-are-either-feeneyite-or-cushingite.html#links
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment