The Catholic politicians in Italy can affirm all the teachings of the Catholic Church without an irrational premise and inference : their conclusion would be different from the Left.

The Catholic politicians in Italy can affirm all the teachings of the Catholic Church. They can affirm the Creed like me and also Vatican Council II. They can interpret all the Catechisms in harmony with the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS),outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation.

But like me and unlike the two popes and all the cardinal and bishops, they will not use an irrational premise ( invisible people are visible) and inference( invisible non Catholics saved outside the Church are visible examples of salvation outside the Church and exceptions to EENS).

So there is no non traditional conclusion  which says outside the Church there is known salvation and so Vatican Council II contradicts the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS.

So like me, their interpretation of Vatican Council II and the Catechisms will differ from the Left. It would be completely different.

They would be in harmony with the founders of religious communities  like St.Francis of Assisi. Now the Left creates a rupture with St. Francis' understanding of exclusive salvation and doctrines related to it.

These Catholic politicians, who would be affirming Tradition with exclusive salvation along with Vatican Council II,  would be opposed within the Church by many cardinals and bishops. Even the secular leftist  authorities , who support abortion and homosexuality, could oppose them.

But the ordinary Catholic would know that these politicians are rational, traditional and honest, while the Catholic Left is deceptive.

Catholics who attend Mass in italian or Latin would then have a clear Catholic Identity. There would also be the need for traditional Mission with Vatican Council II saying all non Catholics need faith and baptism for salvation. They need to enter the Catholic Church with Catholic faith and the baptism of water to avoid Hell.

However these Catholic politicians must be aware that Archbishop Lefebvre and Pope Pius XII also interpreted the dogma EENS like the Left does today. They make the same mistake as the liberals whom they otherwise criticize. So the theology and doctrines on salvation of the Lefbvrists must be avoided.

I do not interpret Vatican Council II and EENS like them.Neither do I interpret the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance like them.So our conclusions are different. Mine is traditional and thiers is a rupture with Tradition.-Lionel Andrades

NOVEMBER 3, 2018

Salvini - 2

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/11/salvini-2.html

Salvini - 2

I affirm all the teachings of the Catholic Church but interpret Salvation Theology traditionally i.e I am not using an irrational premise and inference , like the popes and cardinals, to create a break with traditional exclusive salvation. 

The political parties in Italy, like Lega, Forza Nuova and Militia Christi, can ask their members to do the same.

So they would be reading Vatican Council II differenly and the Left would object.

Liberal Catholic bishops and priests would protest.Presently the liberals have a monopoly over the false interpretation of Vatican Council II and the Lega,Forza Nuova and Militia Christi would be showing Catholics the truth.

Today in Italy a Catholic seminarian is not free to interpret Vatican Council II rationally. He cannot assume hypothetical cases (LG 8, LG 16 etc) are just hypothetical.Politically the Left forces him to infer that LG 8, LG 16 etc refer to objective people,seen in the flesh and that too saved outside the Church.Though the liberals and the Left know that there are no such non Catholics in real life.

But the seminarian is forced to repeat this irrationality if he wants to be a priest.

He is forced, like the rest of the Catholic Church, to break away from the teachings of St. Francis of Assisi, St,Teresa of Avila, St. Dominic and the founders of religious communities, who upheld exclusive salvation. They did not use a false premise to change the traditional teaching.

So it is time for the pro-Catholic political parties in Italy to challenge the irrationality and political correctness of the Left  which has enter the Catholic Church here.The political parties could ask their Catholic party members  to interpret Vatican Council II rationally. Then they could appeal to all Catholics to also interpret Vatican Council II and all magisterial documents, rationally.

Cardinal Lorenzo Baldiserri and the Sant' Egidio community founder Andrea Riccardi  will oppose the Lega.Also seminarians who want a comfortable and non controversial religion would do the same.

But those who understand how Vatican Council II can be re-interpreted in harmony with St. Francis Xaview and St. Robert Bellarmine on exclusive salvation, will have a vibrant faith.There would no more be falsehoods and compromise for them. They would have their traditional Catholic Identity- and not the one now approved for the Church by the Left.

Salvini, Fontana and other members of the Lega must give up  compromised Leftist concepts on Vatican Council II. Mission, ecumenism, inter-religious dialogue, Separation of Church and State, Non separation of secularism and state, inter-faith marriages, non Catholics receiving the Eucharist etc.

Also Lefebvrists  must be shown how their traditionalist model of the faith is Leftist.Since Pope Pius XII and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre  chose to interpret extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) according to Cardinal Cushingism i.e there are exceptions to EENS which are not hypothetical but instead are visible.

Probably for political reasons(about that time the state of Israel emerged) Pope Pius and Archbishop Lefebvre did not support Feeneyism i.e literally, invisible people do not exist, hypothetical cases of being saved in invincible ignorance do not exist in our reality.-Lionel Andrades

NOVEMBER 2, 2018

Salvini

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/11/salvini.html

Cardinal Cushing had allies with other heretical clergyman in Boston : they wanted to crush Fr. Feeney's preaching of the dogma

Cushing had allies with other heretical clergymen in Boston, the area where the controversy erupted. Father John Ryan, S.J., head of the Adult Education Institute of Boston College, stated in the fall of 1947: “I do not agree with Father Feeney’s doctrine on salvation outside the Church.” Father Stephen A. Mulcahy, S.J., Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences of Boston College, termed it: “Father Feeney’s doctrine that there is no salvation outside the Church.” And Father J.J. McEleney, S.J., Provincial of the New England Province of the Society of Jesus, told Father Feeney in a personal meeting, that he was being ordered to transfer to Holy Cross College because of “Your doctrine.” Father Feeney quickly responded, “My doctrine on what?” To which Fr. McEleney replied, “I’m sorry, we can’t go into that.”

Right from the start, these fallen clergymen fused the issue with Father Feeney rather than the real source from which it came. This enabled them to focus on Father Feeney, and ignore Jesus Christ, whose doctrine this was.

Pope Pius IX, Nostis et Nobiscum (# 10), Dec. 8, 1849: “In particular, ensure that the faithful are deeply and thoroughly convinced of the truth of the doctrine that the Catholic faith is necessary for attaining salvation. (This doctrine, received from Christ and emphasized by the Fathers and Councils, is also contained in the formulae of the profession of faith used by Latin, Greek and Oriental Catholics).”

These heretics failed to realize that to belittle a defined dogma to something of Father Feeney’s invention is blasphemous and severely dishonest. But God is not mocked. We see the same thing today, especially rampant among so-called traditionalists. But I will return to this point.

On December 2, 1948, the President of Boston College, Father William L. Keleher, S.J., held an interview with Dr. Maluf, who was an ally of Father Feeney in the stand for the dogma. Fr. Keleher stated:

“Father Feeney came to me at the beginning of this situation and I would have liked to do something except that I could not agree with his doctrine on salvation… He (Fr. Feeney) kept repeating such phrases as ‘There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.’”

When Maluf (a member of the Boston College faculty) responded that this “phrase” is a defined dogma, Fr. Keleher said:

“the theologians at St. John’s Seminary and Weston College disagree with Father Feeney’s doctrine on the salvation of non-Catholics.”

So there you have the case of Father Feeney in a nutshell. Father Feeney held, as it had been defined, that there is no salvation for those who die as non-Catholics. Those against him, including Fr. Keleher (President of Boston College), the “Archbishop” of Boston, the priests at Boston College, and the “theologians” at St. John’s Seminary, held a different doctrine “on the salvation of non-Catholics.”This was the battle. This was the dividing-line. One was either on one side or the other. One believed that there is no salvation for those who die as non-Catholics or one believed that there is salvation for those who die as non-Catholics. Let me quickly remind the reader on which side he will find the Catholic Church.

Pope Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio (# 2), May 27, 1832: “Finally some of these misguided people attempt to persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only in the Catholic religion,but that even heretics may attain eternal life.”

A “Jesuit” priest of the new Vatican II religion skillfully describes what the scene was like when “the Boston Heresy Case” (i.e., whether only those who die as Catholics can be saved) erupted into public view during Holy Week 1949.

Mark S. Massa, “S.J.”, Catholics and American Culture, p. 31: “The Boston Heresy Case erupted into public view during Holy Week 1949. The firings of Feeney’s disciples from Boston College made front-page news all over the Northeast: the New York Times began a series on Feeney and his group, and Newsweek, Life, and Time magazines all featured stories on the Boston ‘troubles.’ On perhaps the most solemn holy day of the Catholic calendar, Good Friday, Feeneyites [sic] stood outside Boston parishes carrying placards warning of the impending subversion of true doctrine by Church leaders themselves and selling the latest issue of From the Housetops. As one student of the event has observed, the question of salvation replaced the Red Sox as the topic of conversation in Boston bars, and anyone spied in a Roman collar became a potential ‘lead’ in the story. The only analogue [comparable thing] church historians could think of was Constantinople in the fourth century, where rioting crowds had battled in the streets over the definition of the divinity of Jesus, and Greek theological phrases became the mottos of chariot teams.”

On April 13, 1949, Fr. Keleher (the President of Boston College) fired Dr. Maluf, James R. Walsh and Charles Ewaskio from the faculty at Boston College for accusing the school of heresy against the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation. In his April 14 statement to the press explaining the reason behind their dismissal, Fr. Keleher stated:

“They continued to speak in class and out of class on matters contrary to the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church, ideas leading to bigotry and intolerance. Their doctrine is erroneous and as such could not be tolerated at Boston College. They were informed that they must cease such teaching or leave the faculty.”

One cannot help but notice Fr. Keleher’s double-tongue: these men were dismissed for ideas leading to intolerance, which could not be tolerated. If intolerance is the false doctrine here, as Fr. Keleher indicates, then he is condemned by his own mouth. Furthermore, one cannot pass over Fr. Keleher’s brazen assertion that “Their doctrine [i.e., the solemnly defined dogma that those who die as non-Catholics cannot be saved] is erroneous.” By this statement Keleher is asserting that the Church’s doctrine (on no salvation outside the Church) is erroneous and in no way his own. This was the type of heretical, anti-Catholic character in league with “Archbishop” Richard Cushing in the quest to crush Fr. Feeney’s preaching of the dogma.

This was the beginning of the end, so to speak, as will be seen when we look at what has resulted in Boston as a result of their selling out of the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation.

CONTINUED

http://www.traditionalcatholic.info/fr-leonard-feeney-and-feeneyism/


Vatican hides the Leonard Feeney secret from secular newspapers : CDF made an objective error  

https://gloria.tv/article/4RQFy1MC8WJzD7FbBsjWX26J7

Father Feeney believed and preached the dogma – as it had been defined – publicly in Boston. He believed and preached that unless a man embraces the Catholic Faith he will perish forever in Hell

The Case of Father Feeney

Heretics and modernists resist the truth, just as they resist Him who is the Truth (Jn. 14:6). And because they resist the truth they resist facts, because facts report truth without any error. One of the facts that the modernists and heretics resist most of all is the fact that the Catholic Church has infallibly taught that Outside the Catholic Church There is No Salvation and that John 3:5 is to be taken as it is written and that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation (Trent, Sess. 7, Can. 5 on the Sacrament).

So what do these people do with these facts staring them in the face? They resort to attacking the reporter of these facts (argumentum ad hominem), which enables them to ignore the facts themselves. The episode of Father Leonard Feeney, S.J. is a case in point.

The dogma Outside the Catholic Church There is No Salvation really has nothing to do with Father Leonard Feeney. (In fact, I had never heard of Fr. Feeney when I came to the same conclusion – based upon Catholic dogma – that the Sacrament of Baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation and that all those who die as non-Catholics are lost.) It has to do with the teaching of the Chair of St. Peter, as has been shown, which is the authentic and infallible teaching of Christ. To reject this Catholic dogma is to reject Christ Himself.

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 5), June 29, 1896: “But he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith,since he thereby refuses to honor God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith.”

Father Feeney became famous for his public stand for the dogma Outside the Catholic Church There is No Salvation in the 1940’s and 1950’s. Most people fail to realize that, at that time, the world’s bishops were by no means staunch traditionalists. Most of the world’s bishops had already embraced the heresy of indifferentism, which explains why almost all of them signed the heretical Vatican II documents just a short time later. They had embraced the heretical idea that “invincible ignorance” saves those who die as non-Catholics. This is why one can easily detect heresy against the dogma in most theology manuals and texts beginning as early as the late 19^th century. In fact, during his time, Father Feeney wrote to all of the bishops of the world about the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation and received only three positive responses. In other words, only three of the world’s bishops at that time manifested a positive belief in the dogma Outside the Catholic Church There is No salvation as it had been defined. It is no wonder that Vatican II went through with virtually no resistance from the Episcopate.

Father Feeney believed and preached the dogma – as it had been defined – publicly in Boston. He believed and preached that unless a man embraces the Catholic Faith – whether he be a Jew, Muslim, Protestant or agnostic – he will perish forever in Hell. Many converted, and many were angry. He had not a few enemies, especially among the increasingly modernist, politically correct and compromised clergy.

One of his main enemies was the “Archbishop” of Boston, Richard Cushing, a B’nai Brith (Jewish Freemasons) man of the year, and someone who called the dogma Outside the Catholic Church There is No Salvation “nonsense.” In April of 1949, Cushing silenced Fr. Feeney and interdicted St. Benedict Center (the apostolate affiliated with Fr. Feeney). The reason given by Cushing was “disobedience,” but the real reason was Father Feeney’s public stand for the dogma Outside the Catholic Church There is No Salvation. It was not due to Father Feeney’s stand against the theory of baptism of desire either, since this wasn’t first published until 1952. Cushing’s dissatisfaction with Fr. Feeney was strictly based on Father Feeney’s stand for the defined dogma that only Catholics – and those who become Catholics – can be saved.

CONTINUED

http://www.traditionalcatholic.info/fr-leonard-feeney-and-feeneyism/

SSPX, SSPV, CMRI and all other independent, validly ordained traditional “Catholic” priests obstinately denying a Catholic dogma and they should repent

The “priests”, ecclesiastics and adherents of the Vatican II sect, as well as the priests and followers of the SSPX, SSPV, CMRI and all other independent, validly ordained traditional “Catholic” priests in this great apostasy (and those who knowing this information persist in denying this infallible dogma), as well as those who obstinately support or agree with the heretical groups, societies or sects, or the heresy advanced by these heretics, should rightly fear, as Pope Gregory XVI says, because they will without a doubt inherit a place in Hell for obstinately denying a Catholic dogma if they do not repent and convert.

Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (# 13), Aug. 15, 1832: “They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that ‘those who are not with Christ are against Him,’ (Lk. 11:23) and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore, ‘without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate (Athanasian Creed).”

The facts presented in this article need to be made known so that the good name of Father Leonard Feeney, M.I.C.M., can be restored among Catholics and the immutable dogma of no salvation outside the Catholic Church be once again proclaimed from the housetops that the Vatican II sect can be opposed and condemned by everyone as the heretical and apostate end times church that it really is.

CONTINUED

http://www.traditionalcatholic.info/fr-leonard-feeney-and-feeneyism/

Father Leonard Feeney was unjustly treated and persecuted by heretical, negligent and ignorant churchmen in positions of authority

Rather, Father Leonard Feeney was unjustly treated and persecuted by heretical, negligent and ignorant churchmen in positions of authority who abused the authority and of the offices they held (or never held, since heretics have no authority, jurisdiction or membership in the Church) and brought up uncanonical charges of disobedience to this priest of Christ’s Church. We conclude, then, with the following summary of those binding and infallible definitions of the Church Magisterium concerning salvation that Father Feeney simply affirmed, taught, and staunchly defended as they were solemnly declared:

• Outside the Catholic Church there is positively no salvation (Lateran IV: Denz. 430; [802]; Pope Boniface VIII: Denz. 468-69; [870, 875]; Council of Florence: Denz. 714; [1351]; Pius IX:1716-17; [2916-17])
• The Sacrament of Baptism makes one a member of the Church(Florence: Denz. 696; [1314]; Council of Trent: Denz. 895; [1671]);
• Anyone not Baptized (sacramentally) is not a member of the Catholic Church (Trent: Denz. 895; [1671]), that is, he is not “truly incorporated into the Church” (Pope Leo IV- Council of Valence III: Denz. 324);
• The Sacrament of Baptism is in water ONLY, the two (water and Baptism) are inseparable, and neither is separable from its link with the other (Pope St. Leo I: Tome-Council of Chalcedon I), and must be confessed as such (Council of Vienne: Denz. 482; [903]; Trent: Denz. 858; [1615]);
• The Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation (Pope Benedict XIV: Denz. 1470) for adults and for children alike (Vienne: Ddnz. 482; [903]), and is optional for NO ONE (Trent: Denz. 861; [1618]).

CONTINUED

http://www.traditionalcatholic.info/fr-leonard-feeney-and-feeneyism/

Father Leonard Feeney was not “excommunicated” for teaching that outside the Catholic Church and without submission to the Roman Pontiff no one can be saved. He couldn’t be, because the Church herself has dogmatically defined this.

In 1972 Father Feeney was supposedly “reconciled” to what he thought was the Catholic Church (in reality it was the Vatican II sect). If Father Feeney truly needed to be reconciled, he would have had to recant any possible erroneous or heretical positions. Yet, he was never asked to do that. Anyone who is truly excommunicated for heresy must withdraw what they once held and proclaim belief in orthodoxy. But Father Feeney was never asked to take back or repent from his teaching on “Outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation.” Why not? Because those of the Archdiocesan establishment who arranged for the reconciliation knew the facts of the case and that Father Feeney was not “excommunicated” for heresy, but for disciplinary reasons.

But for the pre- and post- Vatican II heretics who condemned and still condemns the staunch priest Father Leonard Feeney, and despised and still despise the dogma Outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation, and sowed and still sows the seeds for the Great Apostasy that is now upon us – for them it is no problem believing that there is salvation outside the Catholic Church, while simultaneously pretending to believe that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. It is no problem for these people because they are of evil (Mt. 5:37).

Pope Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio, May 27, 1832, on no salvation outside the Church: “Finally some of these misguided people attempt to persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only in the Catholic religion, but that even heretics may attain eternal life… You know how zealously Our predecessors taught that article of faith which these dare to deny, namely the necessity of the Catholic faith and of unity for salvation… Omitting other appropriate passages which are almost numberless in the writings of the Fathers, We shall praise St. Gregory the Great who expressly testifies that THIS IS INDEED THE TEACHING OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. He says: ‘The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved.’ Official acts of the Church proclaim the same dogma. Thus, in the decree on faith which Innocent III published with the synod of Lateran IV, these things are written: ‘There is one universal Church of all the faithful outside of which no one is saved.’ Finally the same dogma is also expressly mentioned in the profession of faith proposed by the Apostolic See, not only that which all Latin churches use, but also that which the Greek Orthodox Church uses and that which other Eastern Catholics use. We did not mention these selected testimonies because We thought you were ignorant of that article of faith and in need of Our instruction. Far be it from Us to have such an absurd and insulting suspicion about you. But We are so concerned about this serious and well known dogma, which has been attacked with such remarkable audacity, that We could not restrain Our pen from reinforcing this truth with many testimonies.”

For example, Pope Leo XIII teaches the following:

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 13), June 29, 1896: “You are not to be looked upon as holding the true Catholic faith if you do not teach that the faith of Rome is to be held.”

But Francis, who claims to be the pope of the Catholic Church, does not teach that the faith of Rome (the Catholic faith) is to be held (as we will see). He teaches the opposite. For instance, in a recent meeting with a Protestant named Brian Stiller (The Global Ambassador of the World Evangelical Alliance), Antipope Francis stated this:

“I’m not interested in converting Evangelicals to Catholicism. I want people to find Jesus in their own community. There are so many doctrines we will never agree on. Let’s not spend our time on those. Rather, let’s be about showing the love of Jesus.” (Dispatches from Brian, 2014/07/09, “Lunch with the pope”)

Antipope Francis has taught this heresy numerous times before, as proven in the article below. He has explicitly rejected converting atheists, Jews, schismatics and others many times, as the article Antipope Francis’ Heresies, The Apocalypse & The End of the World show. But this is another very bold expression of his complete rejection of Catholic teaching. He therefore teaches that non-Catholics do not need to hold the faith of Rome. According to Catholic teaching, he is not to be considered a Catholic. It’s that simple.

Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi (# 23), June 29, 1943: “For not every offense, although it may be a grave evil, is such as by its very own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church [ab Ecclesiae Corpore],as does schism or heresy or apostasy.”

In fact, as part of the “reconciliation” ceremony, Father Feeney was asked to profess one of the three Creeds of the Church. So, without any objection, he devoutly recited the Athanasian Creed. This ancient and venerable creed begins and ends with these solemn words:

“Whoever wishes to be saved needs above all else to hold the Catholic Faith; unless each one preserves this whole and entire, he will without a doubt perish in eternity. … This is the Catholic Faith; unless everyone believes this faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.”

Therefore, Father Leonard Feeney was not “excommunicated” for teaching that outside the Catholic Church and without submission to the Roman Pontiff no one can be saved. He couldn’t be, because the Church herself has dogmatically defined this.

CONTINUED
http://www.traditionalcatholic.info/fr-leonard-feeney-and-feeneyism/

Heretics like this, who do not believe one bit in the necessity of Jesus Christ or the Catholic faith, are major proponents of “baptism of desire” and the “excommunication” of Fr. Feeney. That’s quite revealing about the forces behind those two ideas

Feeneyism and Feeneyites

Feeneyism is the doctrinal position held by Feeneyites (and true Catholics) associated with Leonard Feeney (1897–1978), a Jesuit priest and founder of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, who advocated a strict (and correct) Catholic interpretation of the doctrine extra Ecclesiam nulla salus ("outside the Church there is no salvation").

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, The Athanasian Creed, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439: “But it is necessary for eternal salvation that he faithfully believe also in the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ... the Son of God is God and man... This is the Catholic faith; unless each one believes this faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.”

Fr. Leonard Feeney was officially “excommunicated” in 1953 by “The Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office” under Pope Pius XII for refusing to submit to ecclesiastical authority, but his supporters claim that the excommunication was invalid because the correct procedure was not followed and the reason for excommunicating him was not in accordance to divine Catholic faith or justice. He was reconciled to the Vatican II Church before his death, but was allegedly not required to retract his position on the doctrine in question, which is inscribed on his tombstone.

Pope Pius XII who allowed the persecution and subsequent excommunication of Father Leonard Feeney was by no means a staunch traditionalist. His reforms, omissions and failures paved the way for Vatican II. Just a few things that Pius XII did are:

- He promoted Annibale Bugnini, the author of the New Mass, and began the liturgical reform with his allowance of reforms in the Holy Week Rites.

- He promoted men like Giovanni Montini (later Paul VI) and Angelo Roncalli (later John XXIII), without which promotions these men could never have had the influence or caused the immeasurable destruction that they did.

- He taught that birth control could be used by couples by means of the rhythm method (or Natural Family Planning), which is a frustration and a subordination of the primary purpose of the marriage act – procreation.

- He allowed the persecution and subsequent excommunication of Father Leonard Feeney, whether through willful complicity, ignorance or neglect, for doing what every Catholic priest should do: preach the Gospel, defend the faith and adhere to defined dogma.

The Catholicism Answer Book [Vatican II publication], Page 93: “A famous declared excommunication took place in 1953 when the Vatican punished a Boston priest, Father Leonard Feeney, for his refusal to recant a distorted teaching on the principle of extra ecclesia nulla salus (outside the church there is no salvation). He erroneously and publicly maintained that only Catholic Christians could go to heaven and Protestants would go to hell unless they converted to Catholicism.”

This really shows the ignorance of these men. When Father Feeney was “excommunicated,” absolutely nothing was stated that the “excommunication” was for a belief he held. But that doesn’t matter to apostates like these men, because they are evil. It’s also interesting to note that heretics like this, who do not believe one bit in the necessity of Jesus Christ or the Catholic faith, are major proponents of “baptism of desire” and the “excommunication” of Fr. Feeney. That’s quite revealing about the forces behind those two ideas.

CONTINUED

http://www.traditionalcatholic.info/fr-leonard-feeney-and-feeneyism/