Fr.Peter C.Phan's censored book is being published in English by Orbis (Maryknoll),N.Y USA with no reference to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishop (USCCB) Doctrinal Committee Notification which censured it.
The priest has not apologised or recanted his position and is a guest speaker at many U.C Catholics universities, while the USCCB has removed the text of the Notification from the Internet.
His book has a surprising whole chapter on the Holocaust, which could be an indication of who is supporting him.Possibly the Chair he heads is also financed by them, as those in Pontifical Universities in Rome.
Like other priests at the Jesuit Georgetown University, he rejects the dogma extra eclesiam nulla salus,Vatican Council II (AG 7, CCC 845,846) and he still has faculties to offer Holy Mass. He uses Cushingism in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents.
Unfortunatly the USCCB Notification has also made the same factual error of Archbishop Richard Cushing , when it assumed we could know or see non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance or with the baptism of desire. So these so called visible cases, were considered exceptions to all needing to enter the Church in the present times for salvation. This is fantasy and irrationality. We cannot see the dead.
Without this error the USCCB would be saying all Muslims and Jews, among others, need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation (AG 7,LG 14) and there are no known exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14) etc. They would also be saying all, with no known exceptions, need to visibly enter the Church ' as through a door' (AG 7, CCC 846 Outside the Church no Salvation).
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 is being interpreted with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism. It is assumed that being saved with implicit desire etc is a known exception to 'the dogma' and the ' infallible statement'.
When the Letter of the Holy Office is interpreted according to Feeneyism there are known exceptions in the present times, we cannot see the dead.The Letter supports Fr.Feeney and the traditional interpretation.
The Letter says Fr.Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for disobedience. The dissenters assume it is for heresy.
When the Letter of the Holy Office is interpreted according to Feeneyism there are known exceptions in the present times, we cannot see the dead.The Letter supports Fr.Feeney and the traditional interpretation.
The Letter says Fr.Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for disobedience. The dissenters assume it is for heresy.
If he was excommunicated for heresy, then it would mean Pope Pius XII made a factual error .He assumed there are known cases. These would be persons saved in invincible ignorance etc.
However if the Letter of the Holy Office is interpereted with Feeneyism then Pope Pius XII has not made a factual error. The Letter would support Fr.Leonard Feeney when it mentions ' the dogma' and ' the infallible teaching'. The text of the dogma does not mention any exceptions.
The Letter faults Fr.Leonard Feeney for beiong disobedient to the Archbishop .He also did not come to Rome when called and did not defend himself,similar to Fr. Peter C.Phan.Fr.Leonard Feeney continued to teach the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Fr.Peter C.Phan has continued to teach heresy.-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment