Saturday, January 10, 2015

Fr.Cekada-no evidence

Musings of a Pertinacious Papist
Comments on Fr.Anthony Cekada changing his position.

 Fr. Cekada Celebrating Mass

Dear Lionel.
...Fr Cekada really nailed it on the matter of doctrinal interpretation re Feenye's heresy and Bishop Sanborn (just one of many), rightly, observed the absurdity of Feeney's refusal to accept a free flight to Rome to try and defend his claims....

Baptism of Desire and Theological Principles (2000)
by Rev. Anthony Cekada
What principles must Catholics follow to arrive at the truth?...

Lionel:
I had been in contact with Fr.Cekada a few years back via the Internet. He thought those who support Feeneyism were in mortal sin. He has pulled down that report.
_____________________

Baptism of Desire and
Theological Principles (2000)
by Rev. Anthony Cekada

What principles must Catholics follow to arrive at the truth?
OVER THE YEARS I have occasionally encountered traditionalists, both lay and clerical, who followed the teachings of the late Rev. Leonard Feeney and the St. Benedict Center concerning the axiom “Outside the Church there is no salvation.” Those who fully embrace the Feeneyite position reject the common Catholic teaching about baptism of desire and baptism of blood.


Lionel:
The St.Benedict Centers accept the baptism of desire followed with the baptism of water.

________________________

Catholics, however, are not free to reject this teaching, be-cause it comes from the Church’s universal ordinary magisterium. Pius IX stated that Catholics are required to believe those teachings that theologians hold “belong to the faith,”...
Lionel:
Yes they are expected to accept the baptism of desire as a possibility, known only to God.
They are not expected to accept the baptism of desire as refering to known cases in the present times.This would also be irrational.

_______________________

In 1998, I photocopied material on baptism of desire and baptism of blood from the works of twenty-five pre-Vatican II theologians (including two Doctors of the Church), and assembled it into a dossier. All, of course, teach the same doctrine.
Lionel:
Fr.Cekada assumed that the baptism of desire referred to visible and known cases in the present times. This is how he interpreted the statements of those theologians.
I think he now realizes that it was an error.

____________________

Behind the Feeneyite rejection of this doctrine lies a rejection of the principles that Pius IX laid down, principles that form the basis for the whole science of theology.
Lionel:
To create theology based on us being able to see the dead now in Heaven is irrational.It is also non traditional.

__________________________

He who rejects these criteria rejects the foundations of Catholic theology and constructs a peculiar theology of his own...
Lionel:
It is a 'peculiar' theology which says every one needs the baptism of water in the present times but some do not. This is a contradiction.It is a new theology.

It is a peculiar theology which infers that we can see the dead on earth saved with the baptism of desire.
It is a peculiar theology which comes to the conclusion that the dead whom we see on earth are visible, objective exceptions to the dogma according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.

_________________


Dear Lionel. It was M.Js intention to bury your support for Feeney's heresy under an avalanche of sources...
Lionel:
There is not a single quote from Tradition before 1949 which says that the baptism of desire is known and visible to us and so is an exception to the centuries old interpretation of the dogma.
Not a single quote! Not a single source.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 was a break with Tradition.

_____________________

But MJ doubts you will be able to convince others that Feeney was right and the Catholic church wrong.

Lionel:
I have quoted above an American Archbishop, a Benedictine Dean of Theology and an American apologist.They agree with me.
There are no known exceptions to the dogma. This is something fundamental. Even Catholics with no knowledge of theology agree.

______________________

Fr Cekada really nailed it on the matter of doctrinal interpretation re Feenye's heresy and Bishop Sanborn (just one of many), rightly,...
Lionel:
Bishop Sanborn, the CMRI priests and Fr.Cekada assumed that the baptism of desire was an exception to the dogma. This is irrational.This is also the mistake of the sedevantists MHFM.

____________________

If he really had "recovered" a key Dogma that had been lost to the entire world and that Dogma had to do with Salvation, then why did he refuse to tell the Church of his discovery?
Lionel:
He affirmed the dogma until death.He refused to recant.


In a prepared statement for the press the former Jesuit (Fr.Leonard Feeney) added: "The conscience difficulty is that the diocese of Boston, under the auspices of Archbishop Cushing, and Boston College, under the auspices of Father John J. McEloney, S.J., both notably ignorant in the field of Catholic theology ... are teaching that there is salvation outside the Catholic Church." - Father Feeney Is Dismissed From Jesuit Order by Rome
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1949/10/29/father-feeney-is-dismissed-from-jesuit/
_______________________

In any event, it is quite clear that your ideological defense of fenney's heresy also includes rejection of a simple doctrinal principle...

Lionel:
I accept the baptism of desire. I have not rejected it. For me it is compatible with the dogma.

_____________________

Of course, MJ, could release another avalanche of evidence (he used to war against the feeneyites on Free Republic for years) but evidence can not extinguish ideology -only grace can do that
.Lionel:
There is no evidence.None of his quotes say that the baptism of desire is objective and known in personal cases. So how can he infer that there are exceptions to the dogma.Ghosts are exceptions for him? This is evidence?

-Lionel Andrades

Continued
http://pblosser.blogspot.it/2014/12/extra-ecclesiam-nulla-salus-what-does.html

http://www.traditionalmass.org/priests/cekada.php

No comments: