Could someone pls direct us to where his Excellency has given  his opinion re: Fr Feeney?

In an interview on an irish podcast he said muslims and hindus can reach heaven.

This was a few years ago.  

I am pretty sure that Archbishop Lefebvre said much the same thing somewhere.  He said that they cannot be saved by/in there own religion but only through the Catholic church.
If I find the quote I will post it. 

There is no reason for the SSPX to write all those books about BOD if it was to answer the "Feenyites".


Here's all that needed to be said:

"You strict interpreters of the Council of Trent Canons on the Sacrament of Baptism, Canons 2 and 5, are only putting up this long debate over a catechumen who dies by accident before being baptized? This is a waste of ink!"

----------------------------------------------------------

The SSPX writes all of those books for a reason. I think that two of the reasons are:

1) they don't want to be further "stigmatized' by Rome as "Feeneyites", so they use the Feeneyites as whipping boys to show Rome that the SSPX is  liberal, just like the conciliar church with regard to EENS.

2) All the priests of the SSPX have been taught in their seminaries that non-Catholics can be saved, even if they are not baptized nor have a desire to be baptized (implicit faith, the complete opposite of baptism of desire). Here are the Abp. himself and Bishop Fellay, saying it:

From the book  Against the Heresies, by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre:

1. Page 216: “Evidently, certain distinctions must be made.  Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.), but not by this religion.  There may be souls who, not knowing Our Lord, have by the grace of the good Lord, good interior dispositions, who submit to God...But some of these persons make an act of love which implicitly is equivalent to baptism of desire.  It is uniquely by this means that they are able to be saved.”

2.Page 217: “One cannot say, then, that no one is saved in these religions…”

Pages 217-218: “This is then what Pius IX said and what he condemned.  It is necessary to understand the formulation that was so often employed by the Fathers of the Church:  ‘Outside the Church there is no salvation.’  When we say that, it is incorrectly believed that we think that all the Protestants, all the Moslems, all the Buddhists, all those who do not publicly belong to the Catholic Church go to hell.  Now, I repeat, it is possible for someone to be saved in these religions, but they are saved by the Church, and so the formulation is true: Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.  This must be preached.”
__________________________________________

Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “We know that there are two other baptisms, that of desire and that of blood. These produce an invisible but real link with Christ but do not produce all of the effects which are received in the baptism of water… And the Church has always taught that you have people who will be in heaven, who are in the state of grace, who have been saved without knowing the Catholic Church. We know this. And yet, how is it possible if you cannot be saved outside the Church? It is absolutely true that they will be saved through the Catholic Church because they will be united to Christ, to the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Catholic Church. It will, however, remain invisible, because this visible link is impossible for them. Consider a Hindu in Tibet who has no knowledge of the Catholic Church. He lives according to his conscience and to the laws which God has put into his heart. He can be in the state of grace, and if he dies in this state of grace, he will go to heaven.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5.)
---------------------------------------------------------
So much for desire to be baptized, or desire to be a Catholic, or a catechumen, or a martyr

This is the Achilles heal of all the traditional priests ordained by the SSPX. If they can be led to accept even in implicit faith, then the accepting of the teaching that Vatican II contains no errors when interpreted according to tradition, is an easy step.

In an interview on an irish podcast he said muslims and hindus can reach heaven.

This was a few years ago.  

Source for this allegation?

Lad
You say

“ There was a priest at Winona (SSPX) who taught that explicit faith in Jesus Christ and the Holy Trinity are necessary for salvation. ”

My understanding is that this is what is taught at STAS today. I have no formal association with STAS but know all of the professors and many seminarians

I seriously doubt that, since +Lefebvre himself did not hold this view.

They use Prummer’s Moral Theology at STAS( he affirms BOD but says that the necessity of explicit Faith in the Trinity and Incarnation is probable, and should certainly be what is taught in practice)

If they now use Prummer, that is something new (Thanks for the heads-up!).

Formerly, the entire SSPX used Merkelbach.

Strangely, they never used St. Alphonsus.

I once asked Fr. Beck why, and he said he did not know.

It's the equivalent of not using St. Thomas Aquinas in Philosophy.

I am certain they use Prummer. St. Alphonsus’ entire Moral Theology has not been translated into English( it’s being translated as we speak right now) Anyway, heres what Prummer says
“ Art. 1. Necessity of Faith as a means of Salvation
Principle. The habit of faith is a necessary means of salvation for all men ; so is the act of faith for all adults.
The reason for the first part of the principle is that faith has been established by God as the substance, viz., the primary foundation, of things to be hoped for, i.e., eternal happiness. The Vatican Council made the following declaration : “ Since without faith it is impossible to please God and to attain to fellowship of His sons, consequently no one can attain to justification without it ; neither can anyone attain to everlasting life without persevering in faith.” The second part of the principle rests on Christ’s words : “ He who does not believe will be condemned ” (Mark xvi, 15). Furthermore, how could an adult merit eternal life unless he first believed in its existence and in the means necessary to attain to it ?
In an adult neither the desire for faith nor faith in the wide sense of the word are sufficient, as some theologians have thought ; there is required explicit faith and faith in the strict sense of the word.
193. Truths to be believed.
1. With at least implicit faith one must believe everything revealed to man by God and which the Church proposes for belief.
2. With explicit faith one must believe that God exists and that He rewards the good and punishes the wicked. For St. Paul says : “Nobody reaches God’s presence until he has learned to believe that God exists, and that He rewards those who try to find Him ” (Heb. xi, 6). Theologians are not agreed whether there are other truths which should be accepted with explicit faith as necessary means of salvation. There is a probable opinion which must be followed in practice that explicit faith in Christ as redeemer and in the Blessed Trinity is necessary for salvation. Therefore one cannot baptize or absolve anyone who does not give explicit belief to those four truths (Cf. S. Offic., die 25 Jan. 1703). It is sufficient for the uneducated to accept with divine faith these mysteries, even though their grasp of them may be imperfect.”

In the seminary curriculum, moral theology doesn’t begin until after Latin 1-3 has been completed, and the seminarian has “tested out” of Latin (ie., year 4-5 in the seminary).

Just curious why, therefore, you would note that Alphonsus hasn’t been completely translated into English as a reason for the SSPX not to use him.

Ps: He has been translated into French (unsure of German, but probably), yet Econe preferred Merkelbach.