Monday, April 30, 2012

So is this not an 'irregular' situation for the bishop, priests, religious and catechists in the diocese of Worcester ?

The Bishop of Worcester would not allow the Eucharist to be given to a divorcee. Nor would he accept a priest who is married.There are rules and he knows them.Yet he allows priests in his diocese to offer Holy Mass who believe there are explicit exceptions to a defined dogma and to Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7), even though the  bishop and priests cannot cite any known exceptions in daily life.Probably the bishop is not aware of this situation and he himself could be making this error.
We can accept exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as possibilities, defacto there are no known exceptions, so in reality there are no exceptions to the dogma or Ad Gentes 7 which says ALL need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.
Priests of the diocese offer Mass for the religious community Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary who hold the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and agree with Vatican Council II (AG 7).They know LG 16 (invincible ignorance) is not an explicit exception to the dogma which says all need to convert into the Church for salvation.So they do not believe in a visible-to-us-baptism of desire or being saved in invincible ignorance and being now in Heaven and known to us.
According to Canon Lawyer Peter Vere the community of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary are in full communion with the diocese. They were told to understand the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and make a simple Profession of Faith.They were allowed to hold the strict interpretation of the dogma.(1)
The issue is : can a priest who denies the strict interpretation of the dogma and also AG 7 with alleged exceptions of the baptism of desire and baptism of blood, cases which cannot be known to us and are known only to God, offer Mass? Is the priest not saying 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin' and really means three? Is he not also saying that there are visible to him cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of blood and so they are exceptions to the dogma?
Assuming that he believes that  Fr.Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for claiming that the baptism of desire etc are not exceptions to the dogma, would this not be an error of the Holy Office of that time. We know the baptism of desire is not an exception to the dogma since we do not know these cases. So if the Letter of the Holy Office assumes that the baptism of desire etc are defacto exceptions to the dogma then they made a mistake. It would be an objective factual mistake.
So is this not an 'irregular' situation for the bishop, priests, religious and catechists in the diocese of Worcester ?
-Lionel Andrades
  1.
___________________________________________

STRANGE HAPPENINGS IN WORCESTER?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/strange-happenings-in-worcester.html#links
An 'irregular situation' in Manchester,Worcester and Boston?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/04/catholic-diocesan-priests-in-worcester.html