Sunday, June 24, 2012

RELIGIOUS SUPERIORS IN WORCESTER CANONICALLY HAVE NO RIGHT TO OFFICE: THEY VIOLATE THE NORMS OF THE EUCHARIST TOO JUST LIKE THE LCWR

In the Diocese of Worcester,USA there are Catholic religious communties approved by the bishop, whose Superiors violate Canon Law and have no right to hold their office. They also do not meet the known requirements for receiving the Eucharist at Mass.

Canon Law requires all Superiors to be Catholic and these Religious Superiors are Catholic when they can proclaim in public all the teachings of the Catholic Faith.Those who deny the Creed in public for instance, cannot remain remain as Superiors.

Most of the religious Superiors in Worcester, like the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR),USA, reject the dogmas on exclusive salvation and the infallibility of the pope ex cathedra.Their ecclesiology is not exclusive ecclesiocentrism.


They cannot affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus since they beleive there are known exceptions (baptism fo desire etc), to the literal interpretation.Since there are exceptions to the defined dogma on exclusive salvation, for them ,the pope and the Councils were wrong when they pronounced the dogma , ex cathedra.

In Worcester, if the Superiors are not proclaiming the traditional interpretation, because the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 suggested there are explicit exceptions, then the cardinal who issued the Letter, it should be noted, made a mistake.Personally we do not know any such exception.

Only in principle can we accept being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire. They are only possibilites. In reality we humans do not know any such case.

So if Fr.Leonard Feeney accepted or rejected the baptism of desire etc, it is irrelevant to his literal interpretation of the dogma. If it is said that the baptism of desire results in only justification or in only salvation, either way, it is irrelevant to the literal interpretation of the dogma.

Bishop Robert J.McManus, the Bishop of Worcester,does not know any such exception. Neither do the Religious Superiors know any person who is an exception to the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of the dogma.

In general there are only Catholics in Heaven where one can love God in ecstasy like the saints did on earth, where everything is positive and every one loves each other with a pure spiritual love. There are only Catholics in Heaven since Catholic Faith and the baptism of water are the ordinary means of salvation (AG 7). The Church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water (CCC1257) given to adults with Catholic Faith. God is not limited to the Sacraments, in certain circumstances.These possibilities are known only to God.In reality we do not know a single such 'possible' case. The means of salvation for these ‘exceptional’ cases are known only to God.For us on earth there are no ‘exceptions’.Before entering Heaven, as St.Thomas Aquinas taught, the 'exceptions'  could have received the baptism of water and have had a preacher teach them the Faith.

So all Religious Superiors can affirm in public the literal interpretatiion of the dogma along with being saved in implicit invincible ignorance and the baptism of desrie. This would be in harmony with Ad Gentes 7 ,Vatican Council II and it is not contradicted by implicit Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance/ a good conscience).

Canonists could ask Bishop Robert J.McManus to clarify this issuie i.e ask all Superiors of religious communities to affirm the dogmatic teaching of the Church.This same un-canonical situation exists in nearby Boston and Manchester where canonical petitions can be filed.

Perhaps the Superiors are unaware of this issue. However it would be an offence for discerning Catholics to see so many religious , who cannot affirm a dogma in public.They are informed and they knowingly receive the Eucharist. Men Superiors who are priests, and knowingly offer Mass while not proclaiming in public that exclusive salvation is there in only the Catholic Church with no known exceptions, would be insensitive to others. It could also be a  public grave sin.


This issue has significance since the LCWR have rejected the dogmas on extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the infallibility of the pope excathedra. I do not know if the LCWR has affiliates in Worcester.

The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary is a religious community in Worcester which does not violate Canon Law or the norms for receiving the Eucharist. This community of Fr.Leonard Feeney accepts the literal interpretation of the dogma.For them the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are not explicit exceptions to the dogma. They simply say that there are no exceptions.

Fr.Leonard Feeney held the traditional teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus as expressed by the Church Councils, the popes, the saints , Vatican Council I and II, all the Catechisms of the Catholic Church and other magisterial documents after Vatican Council II , like Dominus Iesus 20.

Canon Law on this issue also applies to the bishop and his Curia.-Lionel Andrades

Bishop of the Diocese of Worcester has not denied that religious communities could hold the literal interepretation of the dogma alongwith implicit desire:a precedent for the SSPX and their interpretation of Vatican Council II

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/bishop-of-diocese-of-worcester-has-not.html#links


CATHOLIC DIOCESES OF WORCESTER, LOS ANGELES: THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE IS NOT AN EXCEPTION TO THE DOGMA OUTSIDE THE CHURCH NO SALVATION
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/01/catholic-dioceses-of-worcesterlos.html#links


CANON LAW PROHIBITS LCWR SUPERIORS FROM HOLDING OFFICE
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/canon-law-prohibits-lcwr-superiors-from.html#links


CDF DOCTRINAL ASSESSMENT OF LCWR : HOW ARE THE SISTERS PERMITTED TO RECEIVE THE EUCHARIST ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/cdf-doctrinal-assessment-of-lcwr-how.html#links


Sr.Janet Mock doesn't realize that the LCWR sisters are confused on Vatican Council II and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/srjanet-mock-doesnt-realize-that-lcwr.html#links


If the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 said that the baptism of desire was an exception to the dogma they made a mistake: So why cannot the Leadership Conference of Women Religious hold the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus along with implicit baptism of desire ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/if-letter-of-holy-office-1949-said-that.html


Reality check: The LCWR, CDF and the Doctrinal Assessment by Bishop Leonard Blair: Do they have the right to receive the Eucharist ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/reality-check-lcwr-cdf-and-doctrinal.html


CARDINAL LEVADA SAYS LCWR SISTERS CAN AVAIL OF THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE- WHAT ABOUT THE EUCHARIST?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/cardinal-levada-says-lcwr-sisters-can.html#links


LCWR Sisters and the Secretary of the CDF need to affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma in accord with Vatican Council II (AG 7) along with implicit baptism of desire and invincible ignorance
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/lcwr-sisters-and-secretary-of-cdf-need.html#links

When the LCWR invites Curran, Hubbard and Schneiders they are saying the Catholic Church is not the one true Church (UR 3) and every one does not need faith and baptism for salvation (AG 7)
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/when-lcwr-invites-curran-hubbard-and.html


I affirm Vatican Council II and hold the SSPX traditional position on ecumenism and other religions
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/06/i-affirm-vatican-council-ii-and-hold.html