It criticizes Fr.Leonard Feeney. It says the Archbishop of Boston suspended the Jesuit priest because 'he took literally the Catholic doctrine that “outide the church there is no salvation” i.e insisting that everyone who is not a good Cathlolic will go to hell. '
Yet this was the text of the Catholic ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which TIME would dare not publish. It indicates all Jews and other non Catholics are on the path to Hell unless they convert into the Catholic Church, the only Church of the Jewish Messiah with whom God made an everlasting Covenant for all time.
Time has always maintained a pro Jewish Left policy. It has continued what Catholics could consider hate i.e the distorted and false reporting of Catholic teaching.
Religion: I Preach Hatred
Monday, Oct. 13, 1952
Three years ago, Boston's Archbishop Richard J. Gushing suspended Father Leonard Feeney from all his functions as a Roman Catholic priest (TIME, May 2, 1949). His offense: taking literally the Catholic doctrine that "outside the church there is no salvation," i.e., insisting that everyone who is not a good Catholic will go to hell.*
Father Feeney, a Jesuit teacher who was once associate editor of the magazine America, did not recant. Though he was also dismissed from the Jesuit order, he stayed at St. Benedict Center in Cambridge, a house of studies originally founded for the use of Catholic Harvard-men. A core of disciples gathered around him, most of them college students attracted by his magnetic personality and fanatic theology. Now under a hundred, they call themselves the "Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary."
A Shocked "Ooh." The "slaves" look with scorn on other U.S. Catholics, whom they regard as heretics for associating with Protestants and Jews. Most of them lave left their families for a semi-monastic life of prayer and preaching in Cambridge. In isolation, their cult has grown narrower in its fanaticism—and angrier at the world of unbelievers outside. Early in September, Archbishop Gushing published a Vatican decree approving his condemnation of Feeney, and church authorities are now considering a formal ban of excommunication.
The threat of further church action has made the slaves angrier still. Last week, as is their custom, they marched out to hold their weekly meeting on Boson Common. There were 50 of them, almost all under 35, the men dressed in black suits and black ties, the women in black dresses and short-visored black caps. As a small crowd of spectators watched, they set up a portable platform with a painting of the Madonna and a crowned figure of the Infant Jesus.
After a few hymns, the speakers began. Shouted Dr. Fakhri Maluf, onetime Boston College philosophy teacher: "It is heresy to believe that there can be salvation for the Christ-hating and Mary-hating people . . . Archbishop Gushing stuck his head out in heresy against us . . . Our Lady, Scourge of Heretics, punish him!" Some orthodox Catholic spectators let out a shocked "ooh," but the slaves clapped and applauded.
Some Holy Water. Then Father Feeney, a flashing-eyed man of 55, took over the platform. "Archbishop Gushing is a heretic," he began. A heckler interrupted. Shouted Feeney: "I came here to preach the love of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and I found nothing but filthy adulterous faces, who attacked her." He pointed to a newspaperman making notes in the crowd. One of the girl slaves turned, scowling, and sprinkled some holy water in the reporter's direction. "I preach hatred of those who hate Jesus," Father Feeney continued. "Am I a hate-priest when I want a man to be a child of Mary? . . . Mother of God, I ask you to include those who hate me among your enemies."
His speech over, Father Feeney and his young followers concluded the meeting with some prayers and a Latin blessing. Then the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary lined up and marched off the Common. As they passed the reporter, the scowling girl held up a bottle and shook some more holy water at him.
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,817066-2,00.html#ixzz0vu7Wy1IU
Here is the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.*Accepted church doctrine explains, in the words of Pope Pius IX, that no one should "arrogate to himself" the right to "put limits to the divine mercy, which is infinite."
The ex cathedra teaching says everyone needs to be a visible member of the Catholic Church.1. “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215). Ex cathedra.
2.“We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.).Ex cathedra.
3.“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.) Ex cathedra – from the website Catholicism.org and “No Salvation outside the Church”: Link List, the Three Dogmatic Statements Regarding EENS http://nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/
...it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 302.). Ex CathedraThe dogma above carries the same message as Dominus Iesus 20.
...none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation…
...No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” - (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.) Ex Cathedra
20. From what has been stated above, some points follow that are necessary for theological reflection as it explores the relationship of the Church and the other religions to salvation.
Above all else, it must be firmly believed that “the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk 16:16; Jn 3:5), and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through baptism as through a door”.77 This doctrine must not be set against the universal salvific will of God (cf. 1 Tim 2:4); “it is necessary to keep these two truths together, namely, the real possibility of salvation in Christ for all mankind and the necessity of the Church for this salvation”.78
The Church is the “universal sacrament of salvation”,79 since, united always in a mysterious way to the Saviour Jesus Christ, her Head, and subordinated to him, she has, in God's plan, an indispensable relationship with the salvation of every human being.80 For those who are not formally and visibly members of the Church, “salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church, but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation. This grace comes from Christ; it is the result of his sacrifice and is communicated by the Holy Spirit”;81 it has a relationship with the Church, which “according to the plan of the Father, has her origin in the mission of the Son and the Holy Spirit”.82
Dominus Iesus indicates that Feeneyism is the ordinary path of salvation (Redemptoris Missio 55).There is no theology which can say that non Catholic religions are paths to salvation (CDF,Notification,Dupuis 2001).
The Letter supported Fr.Leonard Feeney yet the secular media reports it was against him.
The first part of the Letter refers to doctrine and the second to discipline. Yet the two are mixed by the media and Catholics.
The first half the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney affirms the ‘dogma’ the ‘infallible’ teaching .The text of the dogma supports Fr. Feeney. It indicates everyone needs to be a visible member of the Church and there are no exceptions. (See the text of the dogma at the end of this report) It also does not refer to ‘explicit’ Baptism of desire as an exception.
So how can Fr. Leonard Feeney be in heresy?
The second half of the Letter accuses Fr. Feeney of being disobedient. Time has shown that it was the Archbishop of Boston Richard Cushing who gave us a new doctrine. It said: everybody needs to enter the church except for those with the Baptism of Desire, in invincible ignorance etc. This is heresy. He and the Jesuits were saying that everyone does not have to be a visible member of the Catholic Church and there was such a thing as an explicit baptism of desire etc.
He never issued a clarification when the Boston newspapers reported that the Church had changed its centuries-old teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Even after he received the Haec Suprema he did not lift the excommunication on Fr. Feeney. He also had an important role in Vatican Council II and Lumen Gentium 16 reflects his and the Jesuits influence.
St. Maximillian Kolbe says that if your Superior teaches heresy you are not obliged to obey. Fr. Leonard Feeney and St. Benedict centre rightly disobeyed.
In 1949 the Vatican (Holy Office) and Catholics knew that a cardinal was faithful to the teachings of the Catholic Church. In 2010 we know it is not necessarily true.
However the Lumen Gentium 16 text is neutral and it can be interpreted in harmony with the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Secondly the cardinal’s explicit Baptism of Desire is explicit for God only. We do not know if there ever was an explicit Baptism of desire in our lifetime.
Finally, assuming Fr. Feeney was in heresy, as the secular media allege, how can the ordinary Magisterium of a pope, or, a cardinal’s (Ottaviani) statement supersede and contradict an ex cathedra dogma, in this case, thrice defined ?
So the Catholic Church’s teaching remains unchanged: Everyone needs Catholic Faith with the Baptism of water to go to Heaven and avoid Hell and if there is someone in genuine invincible ignorance etc it will be known only to God.
So the Letter’s portion on discipline/disobedience must not be confused with the earlier section on doctrine/dogma.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 supports Fr.Leonard Feeney and the media reports that the Letter from the Vatican condemned Fr.Feeney for heresy. There is no clarification from the present Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Sean O'Malley.
Like Time in the Wikipedia entry on ‘Fr.Leonard Feeney’ there is heavy propaganda by a lobby as if to hide the truth from Catholics about extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Boston Heresy Case.
1) Wikipedia, the internet encylopedia cannot produce a Catholic Church text which says Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy. All the documentation refers to ‘disobedience’.
2) Wikipedia agrees Fr. Leonard Feeney held the ‘strict’ actual interpretation of the dogma. So how could he be excommunicated for heresy?
3) Wikipedia never mentions that the Letter of the Holy Office, Vatican 1949 affirms the dogma, specifically by name.
4) Wikipedia makes no mention of Vatican Council II affirming the dogma outside the Church no salvation (LG 14, AG 7)
5) If as Wikipedia says he was excommunicated for heresy then it means Pope Pius XI was fallible. Since he was contradicting many other popes. It means popes are not infallible when speaking ex cathedra and that dogmas can change or be reinterpreted.
In 1949 Pope Pius XII approved the Letter of the Holy Office, Vatican to the Archbishop of Boston with reference to Fr.Leonard Feeney. The Letter endorsed ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible teaching’ and so supported the priest in the Boston Case.
Yet we will get another story from Times, Wikipedia, New York Times, Reuters and there are no clarifications issued by Catholics. They choose to be catechized by the secular media instead of the Church.
__________________________________________________________________________________
The first part of the Letter refers to doctrine and the second to discipline. Yet the two are mixed by the media and Catholics.
The first half the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney affirms the ‘dogma’ the ‘infallible’ teaching .The text of the dogma supports Fr. Feeney. It indicates everyone needs to be a visible member of the Church and there are no exceptions. (See the text of the dogma at the end of this report) It also does not refer to ‘explicit’ Baptism of desire as an exception.
So how can Fr. Leonard Feeney be in heresy?
The second half of the Letter accuses Fr. Feeney of being disobedient. Time has shown that it was the Archbishop of Boston Richard Cushing who gave us a new doctrine. It said: everybody needs to enter the church except for those with the Baptism of Desire, in invincible ignorance etc. This is heresy. He and the Jesuits were saying that everyone does not have to be a visible member of the Catholic Church and there was such a thing as an explicit baptism of desire etc.
He never issued a clarification when the Boston newspapers reported that the Church had changed its centuries-old teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Even after he received the Haec Suprema he did not lift the excommunication on Fr. Feeney. He also had an important role in Vatican Council II and Lumen Gentium 16 reflects his and the Jesuits influence.
St. Maximillian Kolbe says that if your Superior teaches heresy you are not obliged to obey. Fr. Leonard Feeney and St. Benedict centre rightly disobeyed.
In 1949 the Vatican (Holy Office) and Catholics knew that a cardinal was faithful to the teachings of the Catholic Church. In 2010 we know it is not necessarily true.
However the Lumen Gentium 16 text is neutral and it can be interpreted in harmony with the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Secondly the cardinal’s explicit Baptism of Desire is explicit for God only. We do not know if there ever was an explicit Baptism of desire in our lifetime.
Finally, assuming Fr. Feeney was in heresy, as the secular media allege, how can the ordinary Magisterium of a pope, or, a cardinal’s (Ottaviani) statement supersede and contradict an ex cathedra dogma, in this case, thrice defined ?
So the Catholic Church’s teaching remains unchanged: Everyone needs Catholic Faith with the Baptism of water to go to Heaven and avoid Hell and if there is someone in genuine invincible ignorance etc it will be known only to God.
So the Letter’s portion on discipline/disobedience must not be confused with the earlier section on doctrine/dogma.
Like Time in the Wikipedia entry on ‘Fr.Leonard Feeney’ there is heavy propaganda by a lobby as if to hide the truth from Catholics about extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Boston Heresy Case.
1) Wikipedia, the internet encylopedia cannot produce a Catholic Church text which says Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy. All the documentation refers to ‘disobedience’.
2) Wikipedia agrees Fr. Leonard Feeney held the ‘strict’ actual interpretation of the dogma. So how could he be excommunicated for heresy?
3) Wikipedia never mentions that the Letter of the Holy Office, Vatican 1949 affirms the dogma, specifically by name.
4) Wikipedia makes no mention of Vatican Council II affirming the dogma outside the Church no salvation (LG 14, AG 7)
5) If as Wikipedia says he was excommunicated for heresy then it means Pope Pius XI was fallible. Since he was contradicting many other popes. It means popes are not infallible when speaking ex cathedra and that dogmas can change or be reinterpreted.
In 1949 Pope Pius XII approved the Letter of the Holy Office, Vatican to the Archbishop of Boston with reference to Fr.Leonard Feeney. The Letter endorsed ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible teaching’ and so supported the priest in the Boston Case.
Yet we will get another story from Times, Wikipedia, New York Times, Reuters and there are no clarifications issued by Catholics. They choose to be catechized by the secular media instead of the Church.
__________________________________________________________________________________
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment