CathInfo.com

I already said it but I will repeat in case you didn't see it.

"Trent council says :"C. iv. Quibus verbis justificationis impii descriptio insinuatur, ut si translatio… Quae quidem translatio post Evangelium promulgatum, sine lavacro regenerationis aut ejus voto, fieri non potest, sicut scriptum est : Nisi quis renatus fuerit exaqua et Spiritu Sancto, non potest introire in regnum Dei."

It's irrelevant to the conversation, but i'll answer.  Yes, some of these have personally happened to me.  Some have happened to close family/friends.  Numerous, numerous stories out there.

Back to the point, though, no...this is not some personal vendetta against "3 baptism catholics".  I'm not related to Fr Feeney.  My views aren't based on emotion, or some type of personal crusade against BOD.

There is a personal crusade involved though, but it's based on doctrine.  The same doctrine that Fr Feeney was supporting, which is EENS.  There is also a personal crusade against V2 and it's teaching of universal salvation, of which BOD plays a part.

Fr Feeney's crusade was merely him projecting the slipperly-slope of where BOD (the corrupted, vague, ambigous notions of it) would lead (i.e. V2) and were leading to (in the 1940s).  In those days, the idea that protestants were going to hell was "frowned upon" in both society, in the media and also by the pre-V2 heretics and lukewarm clerics which (eventually) brought us V2.  These pre-modernists were pushing V2-style ecuмenism long, long, LONG BEFORE pope JP2 had his inter-faith abomination at Assisi in 1986.

Some of you just haven't connected the dots yet.  Just like covid was prepared for by the previous 40 years (i.e. the AIDS epidemic in the 80s, the bird flu, the swine flu, SARS, etc), so the V2 ecuмenism was prepared for LONG BEFORE 1969.  And that's what Fr Feeney was fighting.  There was ecuмenical heresy going on in the 1940s and 50s.  And a corruption of BOD led to V2's universal salvation.  THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT.

If someone wants to believe in St Thomas' BOD, which requires EXPLICIT belief in the Incarnation/Trinity BY A CATECHUMEN, then go ahead.  I see no problem.

But that's NOT what Fr Feeney was arguing against.  He was arguing against pre-V2/heretical ecuмenism wherein "pious jews", "sincere muslims and hindus" could be saved, not knowing of the church, not knowing about baptism, but only "seeking God" in their hearts.  THAT'S NOT CATHOLIC, THAT'S HERESY.  THAT'S NOT WHAT ST AUGUSTINE, ST THOMAS, ST BELLARMINE, AND ST ALPHONSUS were talking about.

That's what this debate is about, really.  The corruption of BOD, which started in the 1700s, by the pre-modernists and gained steam in the 1900s, which was a precursor to V2.