Thursday, February 12, 2015

The lawful authorities were saying that there were exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma

I have received an e-mail today.The discussion continues.1
 
Hi...,
You will have to show me or point out to me where in the 1949 letter of the Holy office or where in official church teaching at any point in Church teaching that it says that souls that are known to be saved are exceptions or are known to us while they are alive. (Lionel :O.K) I can not find that anywhere in the letter of 1949.(Lionel: It's there) In fact if anything the 1949 letter points out specifically how these situations leave that person with uncertainty as to their salvation.(Lionel : Yes) The word "exceptions " is never used by the Church in defining a soul that is saved.(Lionel : Yes but it is inferred) You either will be Catholic on earth or Catholic in Heaven. I feel to even use the word "exception" by anyone is dangerous to the faith.(Lionel : It is implied) Please note the following from Pope Pius XII in explaining these conditions subjectively which are not known to us individually but are clearly recognized as favorable for God's discernment and judgement.

From the letter of the Holy Office 1949:"Toward the end of this same encyclical letter, when most affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions those who "are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire,"( Lionel: Yes this is a possibility. But why mention it here unless the cardinal thinks it is relevant. How can those who are saved with an implicit desire, be relevant to the strict interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center? Yet it is relevant for him. Cardinal Marchetti thinks it is an exception to all needing the baptism of water , with no exceptions.So this case of someone having an implicit desire, is not a hypothetical case but one actually known ,for him. So it becomes an explicit exception to the dogma) and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but on the other hand states that they are in a condition "in which they cannot be sure of their salvation" since "they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church" (AAS, 1. c., p. 243). With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire, (Lionel: We do not know of any defacto case of someone saved with an implicit desire and without the baptism of water. So it is not an exception to the dogma. Why mention it here? ) and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally well in every religion (cf. Pope Pius IX, Allocution, , in , n. 1641 ff.; also Pope Pius IX in the encyclical letter, , in , n.
1677).

But it must not be thought that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated by perfect charity. (Lionel : Agreed but it would have to be known, visible in 1949, for it to be an exception to the dogma according to the St.Benedict Center. This it is not! So it cannot be an exception as it is being implied here.) Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person has supernatural faith: "For he who comes to God must believe that God exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him" (Heb. 11:6). The Council of Trent declares (Session VI, chap. 8): "Faith is the beginning of man's salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and attain to the fellowship of His children" (Denzinger, n. 801)."

Where in the above quote does it say that these conditions would be known to us or are exceptions from the Church teaching all including these situations that they must be Catholic and have Baptism by water.(Lionel: Fr.Leonard Feeney is being criticized for not accepting the baptism of desire as an exception to the dogma. It is implied that the baptism of desire is an exception. In other words these are visible and known cases, for Fr.Feeney to consider. ) How could we even project that they possess the holiness as described by the Pope for us to possibly ever proclaim that we KNOW them or that they were already saved while on earth; let alone use the word exception to describe their eternal status. Give me an example of what you describe as a defined heretical church taught exception.
LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE
Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.-Letter of the Holy Office
(Lionel: We do not know any one in 2015 who is saved or will be saved with implicit desire or in invincible ignorance.So who knows or does not know, is known only to God.The Letter implies that we know who these cases are and so not every one needs to enter the Church as Fr.Leonard Feeney taught.Only those who 'know' need to enter the Church, as compared to the dogmatic teaching which says all need to formally enter the Church.)
In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
(Lionel: Why mention that a person can be saved in desire and longing with reference to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Where are these cases ? What are their names? The cardinal assumes there are known cases and so it is relevant to the dogma. He assumes there are exceptions to the dogma. )
This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the sacrament of regeneration and in reference to the sacrament of penance (, nn. 797, 807).-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
(Lionel. No where does the Council of Trent say that there are exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus or that we know in real life who these people are for them to be exceptions.In Cardinal Marchetti's mind they are visible  and known. So for him they are exceptions.)
Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
(Lionel: The dogma says all need to be incorporated into the Church actually as a member and he denies it. For him there are known cases of persons who do not need to be incorporated as members of the Church.)
However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
(Lionel :'This desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance..' in other words this case is known, explicit, objective for Cardinal Marchetti. So it is an exception to the rigorist interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.)
These things are clearly taught in that dogmatic letter which was issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943, (AAS, Vol. 35, an. 1943, p. 193 ff.). For in this letter the Sovereign Pontiff clearly distinguishes between those who are actually incorporated into the Church as members, and those who are united to the Church only by desire.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Lionel: 'those who are actually incorporated into the Church as members, and 'those who are united to the Church only by desire' . 'Those who are united to the Church only by desire' will be saved, while being outside the visible limits of the Church.Since these cases are visible and known for Cardinal Marchetti they are exceptions to all needing to be incorporated into the Church as members for salvation. This is inferred and so Fr.Leonard Feeney is pulled up.He had to say that they were known exceptions to the dogma and there was salvation outside the Catholic Church.He has to say that not all people need to defacto be members of the Church for salvation.He did not and so criticized here.
From what has been said it is evident that those things which are proposed in the periodical , fascicle 3, as the genuine teaching of the Catholic Church are far from being such and are very harmful both to those within the Church and those without.-Letter of the Holy Office.
Lionel : From the Housetops was saying there are no known exceptions to the dogma.
Hence, one cannot understand how the St. Benedict Center can consistently claim to be a Catholic school and wish to be accounted such, and yet not conform to the prescriptions of canons 1381 and 1382 of the Code of Canon Law, and continue to exist as a source of discord and rebellion against ecclesiastical authority and as a source of the disturbance of many consciences.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Lionel: They were saying that there are no known exceptions.
Furthermore, it is beyond understanding how a member of a religious Institute, namely Father Feeney, presents himself as a "Defender of the Faith," and at the same time does not hesitate to attack the catechetical instruction proposed by lawful authorities, and has not even feared to incur grave sanctions threatened by the sacred canons because of his serious violations of his duties as a religious, a priest, and an ordinary member of the Church.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Lionel: The lawful authorities were saying that there were exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma. Implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, referred to known cases saved without the baptism of water. So there was known salvation outside the Church for the lawful authorities.
Finally, it is in no wise to be tolerated that certain Catholics shall claim for themselves the right to publish a periodical, for the purpose of spreading theological doctrines, without the permission of competent Church authority, called the "" which is prescribed by the sacred canons.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Lionel: The competent authorities were saying that all persons do not need to enter the Church but only those who 'knew', those who were not in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire and who were saved. So all need to enter the Church except for this category- of exceptions.
Therefore, let them who in grave peril are ranged against the Church seriously bear in mind that after "Rome has spoken" they cannot be excused even by reasons of good faith. Certainly, their bond and duty of obedience toward the Church is much graver than that of those who as yet are related to the Church "only by an unconscious desire." Let them realize that they are children of the Church, lovingly nourished by her with the milk of doctrine and the sacraments, and hence, having heard the clear voice of their Mother, they cannot be excused from culpable ignorance, and therefore to them apply without any restriction that principle: submission to the Catholic Church and to the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Lionel: They were being criticized for saying there are no exceptions.
___________________
This is exactly what I discussed with father. If those in these conditions find themselves saved it is NEVER to be because the Church ever taught them that this was an option to choose from as this would be disobedient to the command of Jesus. (This is not the issue. The issue is that the baptism of desire etc are not exceptions to the dogma.This was what Cardinal Marchetti missed out on) This would simply be a very hopeful condition of Holiness that the Church has defined for all to believe in the proper context. (There is a factual mistake here. Those saved with the baptism of desire for example would be in Heaven. They would not be on earth. So they could not be an exception to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney. This was an oversight) They are completely irrelevant to teaching the faith with absolute crystal clear assuredness but must recognized and accepted as Church teaching.-Lionel Andrades
 
1.
Posted by at
Labels: , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)