Saturday, December 17, 2011

ARCHBISHOP OF BOSTON CARDINAL RICHARD CUSHINGS LEGACY: FOLLOWERS INCLUDE USCCB, EWTN, CATHOLIC ANSWERS, SSPX, SEDEVACANTISTS MHFM

He assumed the baptism of desire was visible and so contradicted the dogma outside the church there is no salvation. He assumed that those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance were known to us and so it contradicts Fr. Leonard Feeney’s traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Since the time of the Archbishop Cardinal Richard Cushing  it is assumed there are two interpretations of the dogma. 1)the rigorist interpretation of Fr. Leonard Feeney, the popes and saints and 2) the non rigorist interpretation. The non rigorist interpretation says everyone needs to enter the Church for salvation except for those in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire. It is assumed here that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are exceptions to the dogma. So this is a ‘new ‘interpretation.

We now know that there is only one interpretation of the dogma, the centuries old interpretation since the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are not known to us.

It is assumed that Vatican Council II, Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance, good conscience) is an exception to the dogma. This would be assuming that those saved in invincible ignorance are defacto known to us in particular cases. We know that they are not visible and explicitly known to us but known only to God. So they are not exceptions to the dogma.

 De facto everyone needs to enter the Church for salvation. De jure in principle  those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are known only to God. The baptism of water is explicit. The baptism of desire is implicit.

The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 was addressed directly to the Archbishop of Boston. It was critical of the Archbshop. It mentioned ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible statement’. The dogma does not mention any exceptions. The dogma also indicates, like Fr. Leonard Feeney, that everyone needs to explicitly enter the Church for salvation.

Today the USCCB (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops), Eternal Word Television Network, Catholic Answers, Society of St. Pius X, Pontifical seminaries and universities, sedevacantists, priests, nuns and lay Catholics are all unknowingly following the legacy of the Archbishop of Boston and the Jesuits of Boston College.

They assume the baptism of desire etc is visible and so is an exception to the dogma.
-Lionel Andrades



DISSENTING WEBSITE CATHOLICA ADMITS FR. LEONARD FEENEY NOT EXCOMMUNICATED FOR HERESY

The Australian dissenting website Catholica concedes that the priest Fr. Leonard Feeney was not excommunicated for heresy.

Catholica which usually urges Catholics to throw away Church  teachings and accept whatever  they like has an article by Fr. Dan Donowan http://www.catholica.com.au/gc2/dd/035_dd_300611.php

It says:
By February 4 1953 a plenary session of the Holy Office declared Feeney excommunicated ipso facto and the decree of excommunication was dated February 13 1953. His excommunication was not for upholding Catholic teaching but for his grave and scandalous disobedience to legitimate Church authority...

Feeney was never charged with heresy nor was he required to recant any aspect of his teaching when Cardinal Humberto Medeiros of Boston (1970-1983), petitioned Paul VI for Feeney's reconciliation. On August 23 1972, auxiliary Bishop Lawrence Riley of Boston went to St Benedict Center at Still River where Feeney recited the Athanasian Creed which begins thus; "Whoever wishes to be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt shall perish everlastingly..." The Abbey continues to celebrate the Latin liturgy and members still profess that "extra ecclesia nulla salus".
The report by Fr.Donowan does not say that the Letter of the Holy Office mentioned 'the dogma'. The dogma was a criticism of the Archbishop of Boston who suggested that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance were exceptions to the dogma outside the church no salvation and to the traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney. The dogma does not mention these exceptions.


Also the Catholica report cites the case of the sister of Archbishop Richard Cushing who married a Jew who influenced the non traditional decision of the Archbishop. It does not mention that the Jewish Left media in Boston projected  the Catholic Church as having changed its teaching on the dogma. This had Catholics assuming that the Church excommunicated Fr.Leonard Feeney for heresy. The role of the media is not mentioned in the article by Fr.Donawan.


Neither is it said that the Church has not retracted the dogma or that Vatican Council II (LG 14, Ag 7) has the same message as the defined dogma outside the church no salvation.

Instead Catholics wrongly assume that LG 16 on invincible ignorance, is an exception to the dogma. They believe irrationally  that those saved in invincible ignorance etc are known defacto. This is the legacy of the Archbishop of Boston and the Jews at Boston College. We now know there can be no visible baptism of desire and so it cannot be a contradiction of the dogma.


No where in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 is it said that the baptism of desire etc are exceptions to the dogma.-Lionel Andrades

ECUMENISM WITHOUT THE NEED FOR JESUS IN THE EUCHARIST

The bishops in England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland do not deny that there is no visible baptism of desire. So the baptism of desire they know cannot be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. However neither do they affirm in public that there can only be , the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The issue is linked to the Eucharist. Is Jesus in the Eucharist  necessary for the salvation of all people ? In Ecumenism in England the focus is on Jesus without the Church.  Even though Vatican Council II and the dogma tell us that  all non Catholics need to enter the Church; they need to believe in Jesus in the Eucharist for salvation.

The website of the Conference of Catholic Bishops of England and Wales indicates falsely that the Church teaches that Protestants and others in England who do not believe in the Eucharist are also on the way to Heaven.

Jesus in the Eucharist is at the centre of the world’s salvation, all need Catholic Faith and the Baptism of water (AG 7, LG 14) to be saved from the fires, screams and suffering of Hell.

In general, defacto everyone needs the Eucharist to be saved. There could be people saved who did not have the means to receive the Eucharist. They could have received the other Sacraments and have died without mortal sin on their soul. They could be in Heaven worshiping and adoring Jesus in the Trinity just as we do now on earth.

The Church teaches that every non Catholic throughout the world needs to accept Jesus in the Eucharist to go to Heaven. (‘the dogma’. Letter of the Holy Office 1949). There are no defacto known exceptions.

The Church accepts dejure, in principle that there could be  non Catholics saved with implicit baptism of desire but knows that there are no known defacto cases.(Letter of the Holy Office 1949).So everyone on earth needs the Sacraments, they need to believe in the Eucharist for salvation.

In principle, dejure, as a possibility there could be non Catholics who do not know about Jesus and the Eucharist these persons could be saved. However they are known and judged only by God and so we cannot consider them as exceptions to Vatican Council II and the dogmatic teaching which says all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation. Jesus and the Church, the Sacraments including the Eucharist, is the ordinary means of salvation. It is the ordinary means of salvation for pagans, for those living in the forests and remote areas of the world. In general they all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water to remove the stain of Original Sin and to use the Sacraments to live the Gospel and have their sins forgiven through the Sacrament of Confession.

This is the general, norm the ordinary way that God the Father chose  to save all people through His Son who founded only one Church, the Catholic Church.

The Archbishop of Westminster England Vince Nicols  is not denying that there is no visible baptism of desire and so those saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Neither is he saying that this is the teaching of the Catholic Magisterium. http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/12/will-archbishop-vince-nicols-reply.html


Since those saved in invincible ignorance are unknown to us there cannot be two interpretations of the dogma, ‘rigorist interpretation’ and non-rigorist interpretation. The Conference of Catholic Bishops of England and Wales (CBCEW) is back to the centuries old interpretation of the dogma; the only interpretation. The secular media refer to the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma assuming there is a second interpretation. They assume that the baptism of desire and those saved in invincible ignorance are defacto known to us and so it contradict the original interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This was the error of the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing.

The issue is not just the dogma but also the Eucharist.

-Lionel Andrades