Wednesday, November 30, 2011

LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949 WAS CRITICAL OF ARCHBISHOP RICHARD CUSHING

A religious believes that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy and cites these passages from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, the emphasis are his.

Bro.Ignatius Mary:
Letter of the Holy Office: This Supreme Sacred Congregation has followed very attentively the rise and the course of the grave controversy stirred up by certain associates of “St. Benedict Center” and “Boston College” in regard to the interpretation of that axiom: “Outside the Church there is no salvation.”

After having examined all the documents that are necessary or useful in this matter, among them information from your Chancery, as well as appeals and reports in which the associates of “St. Benedict Center” explain their opinions and complaints, and also many other documents pertinent to the controversy, officially collected, the same Sacred Congregation is convinced that the unfortunate controversy arose from the fact that the axiom, “outside the Church there is no salvation,” was not correctly understood and weighed,

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.

Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.(Letter of the Holy Office 1949)

Lionel: Those 'who know' and do not enter the Church are oriented to Hell it is indicated in the Letter and also repeated in Vatican Council II . The issue is not 'those who know' or those who are in saved in invincible ignorance. Either way it is only known to God and only God can judge. The issue is that the dogma says every one with no exception on earth needs to convert into the Church for salvation. All non Catholics and non Christians are specified in the dogma. It’s not just those 'who know' or those who are in invincible ignorance. This would be judged only by Jesus.

The dogma,Fr. Leonard Feeney,many popes and saints say that all people with no exception on earth need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation and not just 'those who know'.Though they would agree that only 'those who know' are culpable. This teaching is repeated in Vatican Council II (LG 14, AG 7) which says all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation. It is repeated in  Dominus Iesus 20 which says though salvation is offered to all people to receive this salvation all need to enter the Church. This is Pope Pius XII ‘s message also here in the Letter, when he refers to ‘the dogma’. Fr.Leonard Feeney was in agreement with 'the dogma' which indicates every one needs to be a visible, explicit member of the Church for salvation. The dogma did not mention any exceptions. Neither did Fr.Leonard Feeney.

It was the Archbishop of Boston who considered those in invincible ignorance etc as exceptions to the dogma. When the Letter mentions only 'those who know' it is acknowledging the dejure,in principle cases of those who can be saved in invincible ignorance.Since they are in invincible ignorance 'they do not know' they can be saved.Those 'who know' and do not enter cannot be saved.

The Letter does not imply that those who do not know about Jesus and the Church are exceptions to the dogma. This was the false assumption of the Archbishop of Boston Richard Cushing.

The Letter does not support the Archbishop here.

Neither is it a criticism of Fr.Leonard Feeney since he was not saying that 'only those who know' can be saved. He was affirming the dogma which says all people need to convert into the Church and not just 'those who know'.(Cantate Domino, Council of Florence etc)

Letter of the Holy Office :In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man’s final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the sacrament of regeneration and in reference to the sacrament of penance (, nn. 797, 807).

However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.

Lionel : Those who are saved with the baptism of desire are not exceptions to the dogma. There is no visible baptism of desire.The baptism of desire would have to be visible and explicit to be an exception to the dogmatic teaching. So this passage cannot be held against Fr.Leonard Feeney. It was the Archbishop of Boston who suggested that there was salvation outside the church and cited those with the baptism of desire. It was Cardinal Richard Cushing who assumed that the baptism of desire was an exception to the dogma. Fr.Feeney said the contrary. So this passage is a correction of the Archbishop of Boston and the Jesuits at Boston  College.

Letter of the Holy Office 1949 :These things are clearly taught in that dogmatic letter which was issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943, (AAS, Vol. 35, an. 1943, p. 193 ff.). For in this letter the Sovereign Pontiff clearly distinguishes between those who are actually incorporated into the Church as members, and those who are united to the Church only by desire.

Lionel: We can distinguish between those who 'are actually incorporated into the Church as members' and 'those who are united to the Church only by desire'.Those who are united to the Church by desire are known only in principle. This is a concept. It is accepted hypothetically, dejure. De facto we do not know any such case.So they do not contradict the dogma, they are not exceptions.

Implicitly or explicitly we do not know any case of those who are 'united to the Church only by desire'. This is a non issue raised by the Archbishop and the Jesuits in Boston.This passage is related to them and not to Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Note, the Letter here does not say that 'those who are united to the Church only by desire' are exceptions to the dogma. It was the Archbishop who implied this.

Letter of the Holy Office  1949: Toward the end of this same encyclical letter, when most affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions those who “are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire,” and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but on the other hand states that they are in a condition “in which they cannot be sure of their salvation” since “they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church”

Lionel: We do not know a single case in the present time of those who ‘are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire’. So it does not contradict the dogmatic teaching according to the popes, saints, Fr. Leonard Feeney and the St. Benedict Center. It was the Archbishop and the Jesuits who suggested there were defacto exceptions to the dogma and Fr.Leonard Feeney. This passage is a reference to them and not to  Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Letter of the Holy Office 1949: From what has been said it is evident that those things which are proposed in the periodical , fascicle 3, as the genuine teaching of the Catholic Church are far from being such and are very harmful both to those within the Church and those without.

The writings From the Housetops fascicle 3 refer to an article by Raymond Karam and not Fr.Leonard Feeney. Karam defended the salvation dogma.
-Lionel Andrades