Saturday, March 25, 2017

So who was in heresy, Fr. Leonard Feeney or the Archbishop and Jesuits in Boston?

Monday, April 28, 2014

Baptism of Desire/Baptism of Blood-Against 


Baptism of Desire/Baptism of Blood IS
 "binding" on ALL Catholics! by Eric

 In this hour of the crisis for Holy Mother Church it is necessary
 cover those doctrines which a Catholic must believe in order
 "to be" or "remain a Catholic". Amidst such horrific teachings
 and misapplication of the Catholic Faith coming from the
 Feeneyites, many, who are sedevacanists, we must 
consider what the Church has taught infallibly which is not to
 be considered as mere theological opinion.  BOB/BOD is
 found in Tradition and taught explicitly at the dogmatic 
Council of Trent. It has been taught both thru the extraordinary
 and ordinary Magesterium. It can be found in the Catechism
 of Trent and St. Pius X. Those who reject BOD/BOB are
 objectively speaking "outside the Body of Christ"; they 
are heretics and protestants.
Lionel: I affirm the baptism of desire.
 I affirm implicit for us baptism of desire 
and I reject explicit for us baptism of
 desire. For me the baptism of desire
(BOD) is always hypothetical and a
theoretical issue. For  me it will
 include the baptism of water in
 the Catholic.Why cannot I hold this 
view theoretically? Any way, with 
or without the baptism of water
 you do not know of any case in 
This is how I interpret BOD.
I am affirming implicit BOD along
 with the strict interpretation of
 the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla
 salus(EENS). I am affirm invisible
 for baptism of desire alongwith
 the Feeneyite interpretation of
 the dogma EENS.
I affirm the dogma EENS like
 Peter and Michael Dimond but
 I do not reject hypothetical
 baptism of desire which is
 known only to God.They consider 
BOD as being explicit so they reject it.
Not me.
I do not affirm the baptism
 of desire like the SSPX does on 
its website.It is Cushingite 
and irrational.It infers that BOD refers to 
objective cases. Seen in the flesh people.
Otherwise how would it be relevant for
them, with reference to EENS?
The SSPX interprets EENS like the 
present magisterium and the Leftist media.
It is Cushingite and an innovation.

I have gathered here some of the texts in which Catholics 
have expressed their belief in baptism of desire and baptism 
of blood through the centuries. It is clear that Catholics have
 always believed in this infallible teaching of the Church:

Lionel: I assume none of them(BOD and BOB)
 refer to visible cases. They do not
 refer to people known. Since if any 
one is saved it would only be known
 to God.
So for me they are acceptable as being
 hypothetical cases.They  are not
 exceptions to EENS.
Fr.Anthony Cekada too has provided
 a long list of references to the baptism 
of desire for the sedevantists.For him BOD
 is an exception to EENS. So he infers 
that BOD is visible  and known in personal
 cases to be an exception to EENS.

(All quotes below are from the Douay Rheims Version)

Baptism of Blood (Scripture):
I have a baptism [His Crucifixion] wherewith I am to be
 baptized: and how am I straitened until it be accomplished?” 
(St. Luke 12)

“And Jesus said to them: You know not what you ask. Can you 
drink of the chalice that I drink of: or be baptized with the 
baptism wherewith I am baptized? 

But they said to him: We can. And Jesus saith to them: You
 shall indeed drink of the chalice that I drink of: and with the
 baptism wherewith I am baptized, you shall be baptized.” 
(St. Mark 10)

(The Church Fathers) 
Tertullian (died A.D. 220)

"We have indeed, likewise, a second font, (itself withal
 one with the former,) of blood, to wit; concerning 
which the Lord said, “I have to be baptized with a baptism,
 when he had been baptized already. For he had come “
by means of water and blood,” just as John had written; that
 He might be baptized by the water, glorified by the blood;
 to make us, in like manner, called by water, chosen by blood.
 These two baptisms He sent out from the wound in His pierced
 side [Jn. 19:34], in order that they who believed in His blood
 might be bathed with the water; they who had been bathed 
in the water might likewise drink the blood. This is the baptism
 that both stands in lieu of the fontal bathing when that 
has not been received, and restores it when lost.” (On Baptism, 16)

    St. Hippolytus. (A.D. 253) 
 “If a catechumen is arrested on account of the name of the
 Lord [i.e., because he is a Christian,] let him not be of double 
heart about his testimony; should violence come to him and he
 is killed, although his sins are not yet forgiven [i.e., he is not
 yet baptized,] he will be justified. For he has received baptism
 in his own blood.” (The Apostolic Tradition, 19)

 St. Cyprian (A.D. 258)

  Let men of this kind, who are aiders and favourers of 
heretics, know therefore, first, that those catechumens 
hold the sound faith and truth of the Church, and advance
 from the divine camp to do battle with the devil, with a full 
and sincere acknowledgement of God the Father, and of 
Christ, and of the Holy Ghost; then, that they certainly are 
not deprived of the sacrament of baptism who are baptized
 with the most glorious and greatest baptism of blood,
 concerning which the Lord also said, that He had “another
 baptism to be baptized with.

Lionel: These links are references to 
hypothetical cases.It is not said that 
BOD and BOB  are explicit and known.
Yet this is how they are wrongly
 interpreted by Eric.One can see these 
links with Feeneyism( BOD is invisible 
and so is not an exception to EENS) 
or Cushingism( BOD is physically 
visible and so is an exception
 to EENS, it also excludes the 
BOW in the Catholic Church)

Baptism of Desire: 

 Dogmatic Council of Trent: 
Sacraments received through desire 
 Trent: “And this translation [to the state of justification],
 since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be EFFECTED,
it may be received unto salvation “in desire” as well as “actually”.
Trent: “Whence it is to be taught, that the penitence of a
 Christian, after his fall, is very different from that at (his)
 baptism; and that therein are included not only a 
cessation from sins, and a detestation thereof, or, a 
contrite and humble heart, but also THE SACRAMENTAL
 [saltem in voto], and to be made in its season, and 
sacerdotal absolution and likewise satisfaction by fasts, 
alms, prayers, and the other pious exercises of a spiritual 
life; not indeed for the eternal punishment,-which is,
 together with the guilt, REMITTED, EITHER BY
SACRAMENT,-but for the temporal punishment, which
, as the sacred writings teach, is not always wholly 
remitted, as is done in baptism.” (Denz 807)

Trent: “The Synod teaches moreover, that, although it sometimes
 happen that this CONTRITION IS PERFECT through charity, 
and reconciles man with God BEFORE THIS SACRAMENT BE 
ACTUALLY RECEIVED, the said reconciliation, nevertheless, 
is not to be ascribed to that contrition, independently of THE
 DESIRE OF THE SACRAMENT which is included therein.” (Denz. 898) 

 St. Ambrose (Doctor, A.D. 397)
 But he even had this desire for a long time, that, when he 
should come into Italy, he would be initiated, and recently he
 signified a desire to be baptized by me, and for this reason
 above all others he thought that I ought to be summoned. 
Has he not, then, the grace which he desired; has he not
 the grace which he requested? And because he asked, 
he received, and therefore is it said: “By whatsoever
 death the just man shall be overtaken, his soul shall
 be at rest” (Wisd. 4:7)

 St. Thomas Aquinas:
And such a man CAN obtain salvation without being
ACTUALLY BAPTIZED, on account of his desire for
Baptism, which desire is the outcome of “faith that
 worketh by charity,” whereby God, Whose power is
not tied to visible sacraments, sanctifies man inwardly
. (Summa Theologica III, 68:2)

 Objection: the sacrament of Baptism is necessary for
 salvation. Now that is necessary “without which something 
cannot be” (Aristotle’s Metaphysics V). Therefore it seems
 that none can obtain salvation without Baptism.
COUNTS FOR THE DEED.” (Summa Theologica 3, 68, 2) 

  In another way one may eat Christ spiritually, as He is 
under the sacramental species, inasmuch as a man 
Lionel: None of them have said that BOD is an exception to EENS.
Neither is it an exception to EENS for me.

Church Texts Condemning Feeneyism

Richard J. Cushing, Archbishop of Boston
 – Decree Regarding Leonard Feeney,
 April 18, 1949

Rev. Leonard Feeney, S.J., because of grave 
offense against the laws of the Catholic Church 
has lost the right to perform any priestly function,
 including preaching and teaching of religion.

Any Catholics who frequent St. Benedict’s Center, 
or who in any way take part in or assist its 
activities forfeit the right to receive the Sacrament 
of Penance and Holy Eucharist.
Given at Boston on the 18th day of April, 1949.
Lionel: The Archbishop and
the Jesuits in Boston were
 interpreted BOD as being
 visible and known in 
personal cases.This was 
irrational.It contradicts the
 Principle of Non Contradiction.
How could they see people in 
Heaven saved without the 
baptism of water ? How could
 they see pèople in Heaven saved 
with the baptism of water? How 
could they say that 
someone on earth will be saved
without the baptism of water 
but with BOD, BOB or I.I ?
So when it is said that 
'the Church says' someone
(X,Y,Z) is in Heaven without the 
baptism of water in the Catholic 
Church, who is this person 'in 
the Church' who saw these 

Pius XII  Decree Excommunicating
Leonard Feeney, 13 February 1953

Prior to the excommunication, Feeney received 
the following summons to appear before the Holy
 Office from Cardinal Pizzardo on November 22, 1952.

The Holy Office has been obliged repeatedly to 
make your teaching and conduct in the Church
 the object of its special care and attention, and 
recently, after having again carefully examined a
nd calmly weighed all the evidence collected in 
your cause, it has found it necessary to bring 
this question to a conclusion.


Since the priest Leonard Feeney, a resident of Boston 
(Saint Benedict Center), who for a long time has been
 suspended a divinis for grave disobedience toward
 church authority, has not, despite repeated 
warnings and threats of incurring excommunication 
ipso facto, come to his senses, the Most Eminent 
and Reverend Fathers, charged with safeguarding
 matters of faith and morals, have, in a Plenary
 Session held on Wednesday 4 February 1953, 
declared him excommunicated with all the effects
 of the law.

On Thursday, 12 February 1953, our Most Holy Lord
 Pius XII, by Divine Providence Pope, approved 
and confirmed the decree of the Most Eminent
 Fathers, and ordered that it be made a matter
 of public law.

Given at Rome, at the headquarters of the Holy 
Office, 13 February 1953.

Marius Crovini, Notary

AAS (February 16, 1953) Vol. XXXXV, Page 100
Lionel: So he was excommunicated
 for saying there were no 
known cases of the baptism of
 desire in 1949 and the Archbishop 
and the cardinals at the Holy 
Office in Rome were saying 
there were?
So who is irrational and in heresy
-the Holy Office or Fr. Leonard Feeney?
According to Chris Ferrara there
 are no practical exceptions to the
 dogma EENS.
According to John Martignoni
 zero cases of something cannot
 be exceptions to the dogma EENS.
According to Fr. Stefano Visintini 
osb,Vice Rector of the Pontifical
 University of St.Anselm, Rome, 
BOD and I.I are not exceptions 
to EENS.
So who was in heresy, Fr. 
Leonard Feeney or the Archbishop
 and Jesuits in Boston?
-Lionel Andrades

No comments: