I would like to place the following report ‘NO TRIDENTINE RITE MASS WITHOUT EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS’ on a PDF. File. If someone can place this report on a PDF. File and make it available on the internet please go ahead. You have my permission.You are also free to publish or print it. No Copyright permission is needed.
Lionel Andrades
----------------------------------------------------------------------
NO TRIDENTINE RITE MASS WITHOUT EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
Father Leonard Feeney was not excommunicated for heresy: No Tridentine Rite Mass without Outside the Church there is No Salvation (Extra ecclesiam nulla salus)
If there is an objection that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for affirming extra ecclesiam nulla salus, this is a falsehood. The 'dogma' referred to in the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston 1949 indicates that all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell.
Here is the text of the dogma.
“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
There is no Church document which says that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy. There is no also no Church document which says that the Church has retracted extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The Church still upholds the dogma.
The diocese of Manchester, USA recently appointed a chaplain for the St. Benedict Centre, Richmond, New Hampshire and approved their chapel. The diocese of Worcester has granted canonical status to the St. Benedict’s Abbey monks and the Sisters of St. Benedict Centre and the community in Still River, Massachusetts, St. Ann’s House. The Abbey was recognized as early as 1988 with the approval of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. All these communities inspired by Fr. Leonard Feeney uphold the ex cathedra dogma outside the church there is no salvation which is in accord with Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church 845, 846, Dominus Iesus 20 and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 issued during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII. They hold what the secular media calls 'the rigorist interpretation' of the dogma.
Their recognition by the diocese was also formally approved by Ecclesia Dei, Vatican since they use the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, permitted by the moto proprio Summorum Pontificium. The Tridentine Rite Mass, the Mass of the popes and saints.
Pius XII was saying in the Letter of the Holy Office all Jews in Boston need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water to avoid Hell. (1) The Letter (Haec Suprema) issued by Cardinal Ottaviani supported Fr. Feeney on doctrine and criticized him for being disobedient to the Archbishop of Boston, whom it was believed then, was faithful to the Church on doctrine. The first part of the Letter referred to doctrine/dogma and the second part to discipline/disobedience.
There is no Magisterial document which states that Fr. Feeney was excommunicated for heresy. The Letter of the Holy Office included in the Denzinger–Enchiridion refers to only ‘disobedience’. The Letter really supported Fr. Leonard Feeney with ‘the dogma’ it needs to be repeated. So it is factually incorrect to say the priest was excommunicated for heresy
There is no explicit or implicit Baptism of Desire that we know of and it is only explicit for God. The ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus clearly says everyone must be a VISIBLE; FORMAL member of the Catholic Church to go to Heaven and avoid Hell and there are no exceptions. The Jewish Left media created the phrase Boston Heresy Case and refer to a rigorist and non rigorist interpretation, as if there can be two interpretations of an infallible teaching. The rigorist interpretation is in accord with the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7) and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (845,846)
When Fr. Leonard Feeney and his communities say there is no baptism of desire they mean that there is no baptism of desire defacto or de jure (in principle) that we can know of. None of us knows any case of a person saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance.
The communities of Fr. Leonard Feeney in the USA accept the baptism of desire as a concept; as a possibility, in ‘certain circumstances’ (Letter of the Holy Office 1949). They have also provided a definition of the baptism of desire with its conditions on their website (Catholicism.org).
So it is false for a priest offering the Tridentine Rite Mass to reject the dogma Cantate Domino as it was known for centuries, claiming, that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for affirming this very dogma.
There can be no Tridentine Rite Mass without extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
PRIESTS OFFERING EXTRAORDINARY FORM OF MASS IN ROME DO NOT MEET CONDITIONS OF UNIVERSAE ECCLESIAE: INSTRUCTIONS OF ECCLESIA DEI
20. With respect to the question of the necessary requirements for a priest to be held idoneus (“qualified”) to celebrate in the forma extraordinaria, the following is hereby stated:a.) Every Catholic priest who is not impeded by Canon Law7 is to be considered idoneus (“qualified”) for the celebration of the Holy Mass in the forma extraordinaria.- Universae Ecclesiae, Motu 30 April, 2011
I attended the Tridentine Rite Mass held at the Church of the Annunziata, near the Vatican. The Mass was offered by a priest of the community Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate.I wonder if he meets the conditions of Universae Ecclesiae to offer Mass especially with reference to N.20.
We know that a priest in public mortal sin is not to offer Mass according to Canon Law. We also know that it is a grave sin to reject in public an ex cathedra dogma. Here is the dogma that the Franciscan community is unable to affirm in public.
The OMI priest Fr. Tissa Balasuriya was excommunicated by Pope John Paul II for rejected the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady.
“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
If the priest who offered Mass last Sunday cannot affirm the above dogma in public it is a violation of Canon Law. He also does not meet the conditions of Universae Ecclesiae N.20 to celebrate Holy Mass.
Cantate Dominio is in accord with Vatican Council II, Ad Gentes 7.
Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.-AG 7
The same message is repeated in Dominus Iesus (2000)
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”.-Dominus Iesus 20
If there is an objection with reference to Lumen Gentium 16 it is a straw man. LG 16 does not say that we know any case of invincible ignorance in the present times.
Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II.
If there is an objection that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for affirming extra ecclesiam nulla salus, this is a falsehood. The dogma referred to in the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston 1949 indicates that all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell.
APOLOGETICS
Here is the dogma again.
2. LUMEN GENTIUM 16 OBJECTION
So the Letter of the Holy Office supported Fr. Leonard Feeney on doctrine. The dogma (above) indicates all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. This was exactly what Fr. Leonard Feeney taught.
So Lumen Gentium 16 does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II. There is no text in Vatican Council II which contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. If there is an objection with reference to Lumen Gentium 16 it is a straw man. LG 16 does not say that we know any case of invincible ignorance in the present times.Note: All need the baptism of water for salvation and Catholics only give baptism to adults with Catholic Faith. So Ad Gentes 7 is saying that all people need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.
If there is an objection with reference to Lumen Gentium 16 it is a straw man. LG 16 does not say that we know any case of invincible ignorance in the present times.
So when a priest offers the Latin Tridentine Rite Mass then he needs to affirm the dogma when asked. Otherwise he is in grave public sin, when it is known to many, as in the case of the priests in Rome who offer the extraordinary form of the Mass and deny the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and this is known to many.Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.
However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church…-Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston (Emphasis added)
WHY DO PRIESTS OFFERING THE TRIDENTINE RITE MASS HAVE TO ACCEPT THE NOVUS ORDO MASS ECCLESIOLOGY?
No where in Vatican Council II is it said that we know of specific cases of the baptism of desire or invincible ignorance. So it’s false to assume that Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which Venerable Pope Pius XII, called ‘infallible’.
The priests who have been given permission to offer the Latin Rite Mass according to the moto proprio Summorum Pontificum are not affirming the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Those who offered this ancient rite, the great Sacrificial Mass, in the past took the teaching extra ecclesiam nulla salus for granted. One cannot think of the Roman Catholic priest in the, past offering the Tridentine Rite Mass without reference to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Priests need to appeal to Ecclesia Dei and the Congregation for the Doctrine for the Faith. Appeal for the right to affirm and preach extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
1) There is no text in Vatican Council II which states that we know of specific cases if implicit salvation in the present times. The secular media and many Catholics claim we do know of such cases in the present times and so it contradicts the dogma.
2) The Church has not retracted extra ecclesiam nulla salus through any Magisterial document. So it still is a Magisterial teaching.
3) The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston supported Fr. Leonard Feeney on doctrine.
It’s priests who offer the Novos Ordo Mass who will say 'everyone needs to enter the Church except for those in invincible ignorance or who have the baptism of desire’ Father! We don’t know of any such case. Neither do you know of any specific case of someone in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire.
So then they conclude that ‘the Church teaches’ that a non Catholic could be saved. Since, he could be in that exceptional category. So everyone does not need to enter the Church as states the dogma and Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7). Then they go one step further and assume may be even no one needs to enter the Church.
Cardinal Walter Kaspar came to this conclusion about Vatican Council II and the Jews. He wrote in a front page article in the L'Osservatore Romano, which was approved by the Pope and Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, that Jews do not have to convert in the present times. He offers the Novos Ordo Mass.
So why do priests offering the Tridentine Rite Mass have to accept all this irrationality which contradicts the Bible and the Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7) ?
APOLOGETICS
1. POST VATICAN COUNCIL II MAGISTERIUM TEXTS SUPPORT THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
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”.-Dominus Iesus 20
So does Vatican Council II
Here is the dogma.
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.
So the Letter of the Holy Office supported Fr. Leonard Feeney on doctrine. The dogma (above) indicates all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. This was exactly what Fr. Leonard Feeney taught.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
Here is the dogma again.
2. LUMEN GENTIUM 16 OBJECTION
So the Letter of the Holy Office supported Fr. Leonard Feeney on doctrine. The dogma (above) indicates all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. This was exactly what Fr. Leonard Feeney taught.
So Lumen Gentium 16 does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II. There is no text in Vatican Council II which contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. If there is an objection with reference to Lumen Gentium 16 it is a straw man. LG 16 does not say that we know any case of invincible ignorance in the present times.Note: All need the baptism of water for salvation and Catholics only give baptism to adults with Catholic Faith. So Ad Gentes 7 is saying that all people need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.
If there is an objection with reference to Lumen Gentium 16 it is a straw man. LG 16 does not say that we know any case of invincible ignorance in the present times.
Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.-Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II.
So Lumen Gentium 16 does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II.
Apply the Three Common Sense Points.
1. There is no way that we can know of a particular person saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire because of its very nature. It is known only to God.
2. There is no text in Vatican Council II or the Catechism which claims we know of any such case. (Lumen Gentium 16 mentions the possibility of such people being saved, which we accept conceptually. De facto we do not know if there is even one single case in the present times, or the last 100 years)
3. So Vatican Council II and the Catechism do not contradict the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.-The Three Common Sense Points
3. FR. LEONARD FEENEY SUPPORTED BY HOLY OFFICE (1949)
If there is an objection that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for affirming extra ecclesiam nulla salus, this is a falsehood. The 'dogma' referred to in the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston 1949 indicates that all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell.
Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.
However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church…-Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston (Emphasis added).
So the Letter of the Holy Office referring to the ‘dogma’ supported Fr. Leonard Feeney on doctrine. The dogma (Cantate Domino) indicates all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell. This was exactly what Fr. Leonard Feeney taught.
“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.)
So how can Novos Ordo priests claim Vatican Council II contradicts the ex cathedra dogma when they cannot provide any specific text?
There is no Magisterial text to support the ecclesiology being used by Novos Ordo priests. Instead the Magisterium texts support the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
NEW MOTO PROPRIO : NOVUS ORDO MASS ECCLESIOLOGY STILL COMPULSORY
a new moto proprio was to be announced which would not restrict ‘the liturgical renewal desired by the Second Vatican Council’. It needs to be mentioned that the moto proprio Summorum Pontificum specified rules for offering Mass according to the Missal promulgated by John XXIII in 1962 ( the Tridentine Mass), and for administering most of the sacraments in the form they had before the Second Vatican Council. It allowed bishops to establish places where Mass could be said using the 1962 Missal. It granted greater freedom to use the Tridentine liturgy in its 1962 form, stating that all priests may freely offer the Sacrificial Mass with the 1962 Missal privately, without having to ask for permission from anyone. It also permitted parish priests and rectors to willingly accept requests from groups who adhere to this liturgical tradition-SSPX
Pope Benedict explained that he was providing the rituals that nourished the faithful for centuries. He hoped it would be an interior reconciliation in the heart of the Church, with Traditionalist Catholics such as the members of the Society of St. Pius X.
However Pope Benedict XVI still expects all Catholics to attend the Tridentine Rite Mass using the Novos Ordo Mass ecclesiology which has no basis in Vatican Council II and is opposed to the Magisterial documents of Pope John Paul II. So the new moto proprio will continue the error, even demanding priests to deny an ex cathedra dogma which was accepted by all priests in the past using the Tridentine Rite.
However Pope Benedict XVI still expects all Catholics to attend the Tridentine Rite Mass using the Novos Ordo Mass ecclesiology which has no basis in Vatican Council II and is opposed to the Magisterial documents of Pope John Paul II. So the new moto proprio will continue the error, even demanding priests to deny an ex cathedra dogma which was accepted by all priests in the past using the Tridentine Rite.
For instance there is no textual basis in Vatican Council II which would deny or change the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Yet priests are not allowed to affirm it citing Vatican Council II.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston clearly refers to ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible’ teaching. The dogma indicates all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation. This was exactly the teaching of Fr. Leonard Feeney. So the Letter of the Holy Office supported Fr. Leonard Feeney on doctrine. He was not excommunicated for heresy but for disobedience.
Yet priests offering the Great Sacrifice in the Tridentine Rite are told not to affirm the dogma in its rigorist interpretation since Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for doing so.
So the priests are allowed to offer Holy Mass according to Summorum Pontificum and now the new moto proprio if they are in mortal sin i.e. if they deny an ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which is supported by Vatican Council II ( Ad Gentes 7) and Dominus Iesus 20.
The priests offering the Novus Ordo Mass in the vernacular languages any way do not accept extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
They claim that it is contradicted by Lumen Gentium 16 which says that a person in invincible ignorance can be saved even if he is not a formal member of the Church and so this contradicts the dogma.
The priests offering the Tridentine Rite Mass would agree that a person can be saved in invincible ignorance and it would be known only to God. Even the communities of Fr. Leonard Feeney agree in principle (de jure) that there can be the possibility that a person in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire can be saved. This is not an issue or problem for them.
However no where in Vatican Council II is it said that we know of specific cases in the present times of people saved in invincible ignorance. This is the false assumption made by Novos Ordo priests who any way are ‘celebrating’ a sacrilegious Mass i.e. to be in public manifest mortal sin and offering Mass without Confession or removing the scandal.
So the new moto proprio will continue to allow priests to offer Holy Mass if they remain in public mortal sin. This is a liturgical issue.
Lionel Andrades
Catholic layman
E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com
You Tube: http://it.youtube.com/LionelAndrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment