Saturday, June 28, 2014

Supporters of Fr.Leonard Feeney unfortunately still use the irrational inference .It can be seen in their interpretation of Vatican Council II

Fine. So why was Fr.Leonard Feeney wrong if the Letter of the Holy Office  was not claiming there were exceptions? The Letter was saying there were exceptions, implicit desire etc ?
Father Feeney was wrong on two counts:
1) He attacked the catechetical materials (namely, the Baltimore Catechism) as being heretical and those promulgating it as being heretics.
So he was not wrong for saying that the baptism of desire is not a visible exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus ? He was wrong for other things, misunderstandings?

2) He claimed that the "dead were visible," that is, a non-Catholic who died as such was, with an absolute certitude, destined for the "eternal fire."
This is the teaching of the dogma and the Bible. A non Catholic who died as such was on the way to Hell This was wrong for you, since there are known exceptions?

If he would have phrased #2 as being "to a moral certitude," I think that he would have been fine, but his absolutist declarations moved him into the realm of theological error. We cannot say, with an absolute certitude, that any human being has been damned to eternal and everlasting Hell. Father Feeney claimed that such cases were, in fact, "visible" to us.
With absolute certitude we can say that every human being we meet who is not a Catholic is damned to eternal everlasting Hell unless he or she converts into the Catholic Church, since the Bible, Tradition and the Magisterium teach this. You are saying that this is wrong and you know of some explicit exception in 2014 ? Someone whom you can meet who does not need ' faith and baptism' for salvation?
Why did the Letter not support Fr.Leonard Feeney on this point ? It was because they assumed that there were known exceptions !

In any case, the 1949 Holy Office Letter is not an absolute document.
It has a non traditional inference. It uses an irrationality to create a false theology.
In fact, "Feeneyite" groups have been fully reconciled to the Church and were only asked to "understand" the Letter without accepting it as being some "de fide" Magisterial document, which, of course, it is not and never has been. It simply does not carry the same weight as a Papal encyclical.
Supporters and communities which support Fr.Leonard Feeney unfortunately still use the irrational inference .This can be seen clearly in their interpretation of Vatican Council II. -Lionel Andrades

No comments: