No it doesn't, Centro. It is saying that the so-called "Feeneyism" - the true application of the Church's EENS dogma - was driving that missionary work, though the Arch. may not have known it. We all are quite aware that he never (publically at least) took Fr. Feeney's "cause" if it can be put that way - and that the SSPX pulls its holy garments away from the great unwashed of the "Feeneyites." What is hard to understand is that despite what Our Lord said in the Gospel about the necessity of Water and the Holy Ghost, the dogmatic pronouncement of Trent on the necessity of water (check early, untouched Trent catechisms on that), the many people raised from the dead to be baptized, and incidents of miraculous water being provided for baptism - despite all this, people still go with the liberal interpretation of EENS and water, and/or the Modernists' attack on their necessity. St. Thomas lived before the 2nd and 3rd definitions of EENS were pronounced. He would not continue to hold his old BOB/BOD position(s) after that happened, being a good, careful Catholic.