Fidelity Always
PAPAL ENCYCLICALS
By Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton
Exact from the American Ecclesiastical Review, Vol. CXXI, August, 1949, pp. 136-150
“Despite the divergent views about the existence of the infallible pontifical teaching in the encyclical letters, there is one point on which all theologians are manifestly in agreement. They are all convinced that all Catholics are bound in conscience to give a definite internal religious assent to those doctrines which the Holy Father teaches when he speaks to the universal Church of God on earth without employing his God-given charism of infallibility. Thus, prescinding from the question as to whether any individual encyclical or group of encyclicals may be said to contain specifically infallible teaching, all theologians are in agreement that this religious assent must be accorded the teachings which the Sovereign Pontiff includes in these documents. This assent is due, as Lercher has noted, until the Church might choose to modify the teaching previously presented or until proportionately serious reasons for abandoning the non-infallible teaching contained in a pontifical document might appear. It goes without saying that any reason which would justify the relinquishing of a position taken in a pontifical statement would have to be very serious indeed.”
By Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton
Exact from the American Ecclesiastical Review, Vol. CXXI, August, 1949, pp. 136-150
“Despite the divergent views about the existence of the infallible pontifical teaching in the encyclical letters, there is one point on which all theologians are manifestly in agreement. They are all convinced that all Catholics are bound in conscience to give a definite internal religious assent to those doctrines which the Holy Father teaches when he speaks to the universal Church of God on earth without employing his God-given charism of infallibility. Thus, prescinding from the question as to whether any individual encyclical or group of encyclicals may be said to contain specifically infallible teaching, all theologians are in agreement that this religious assent must be accorded the teachings which the Sovereign Pontiff includes in these documents. This assent is due, as Lercher has noted, until the Church might choose to modify the teaching previously presented or until proportionately serious reasons for abandoning the non-infallible teaching contained in a pontifical document might appear. It goes without saying that any reason which would justify the relinquishing of a position taken in a pontifical statement would have to be very serious indeed.”
Lionel:
Pope Pius XII has called 'the dogma' extra ecclesiam nulla salus an 'infallible teaching' (Letter of the Holy Office 1949). The dogma has always to be taught as the Church teaches it, the Letter says.The saints have always taught the dogma as having no exceptions.There are no exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to St.Thomas Aquinas, St.Augustine, St.Anthony Marie Claret, St.Maximillian Kolbe.
Pope Pius XII has called 'the dogma' extra ecclesiam nulla salus an 'infallible teaching' (Letter of the Holy Office 1949). The dogma has always to be taught as the Church teaches it, the Letter says.The saints have always taught the dogma as having no exceptions.There are no exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to St.Thomas Aquinas, St.Augustine, St.Anthony Marie Claret, St.Maximillian Kolbe.
The baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are not VISIBLE and so they cannot be exceptions.We cannot name any 'explicit exception' in 2014.
However the Letter of the Holy Office also mentions the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as an exception for many. Since the distinction between invisible and visible for us distinction was not made. The Letter has left this point confused.
So in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 , the magisterium in the past has said that there are no exceptions and now it is saying there are exceptions.
However the Letter of the Holy Office also mentions the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as an exception for many. Since the distinction between invisible and visible for us distinction was not made. The Letter has left this point confused.
So in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 , the magisterium in the past has said that there are no exceptions and now it is saying there are exceptions.
At one of the two times, the magisterium has to be wrong.-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment