Vatican upholds prohibitions placed on Feeneyite group by diocese in New Hampshire
.- The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has declined to consider an appeal by the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary located in New Hampshire against prohibitions placed on them by the Diocese of Manchester.1
The group, located in Richmond, N.H., about 60 miles southwest of Manchester, has roots in an order originally founded by Fr. Leonard Feeney.
The Diocese of Manchester had placed the group under precepts of prohibition, effective Jan. 7, 2019, because of obstinacy in their theological position regarding the principle that there is no salvation outside the Church. They were prohibited from referring to themselves as an association of the faithful in the Church and having sacraments celebrated at their property, among other things.
Lionel: The diocese and the CDF want the St. Benedict Center to interpret the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II with a false premise to create a false rupture with Tradition.This is upheld by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, for political-Left reasons. This is unethical. The use of the false premise is deception.It should be avoided by all.
_______________
The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart appealed the prohibitions to the CDF, but “Rome chose not to consider the appeal,” Fr. Georges de Laire, judicial vicar of the Diocese of Manchester, said, according to the New Hampshire Union Leader.
“The decision from CDF says that it was rejected because it fell outside the statute of limitations,” Fr. de Laire said.
He told the Union Leader that the diocese is “now engaged in an effort to dialogue” with the group and to encourage them to observe the prohibitions, and that the diocese has a “complicated relationship” with the Slaves.
Lionel: There is no dialogue. The theology of the Catholic Church cannot be changed with a false premise. This is understood by both groups. The St. Benedict Center is saying outside the Church there is no known salvation and the diocese is saying there is. The diocese confuses invisible cases as objective examples of salvation and objective exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.So there is a New Thelogy created with the false premise.This is the convoluted reasoning they are forcing on the NH community.
________________
Bishop Peter Libasci of Manchester “remains hopeful that a solution can be identified,” Fr. de Laire said. “The bishop is committed to the Slaves and their supporters, as they are members of the Church and he owes them ministry.”
That membership in the Church is necessary for all men for salvation is a truth of revelation; however, actual membership can, in special circumstances, be replaced by a desire, even implicit, for this membership.
Lionel: 'actual membership can, in special circumstances, be replaced by a desire, even implicit, for this membership', yes, hypothetically only and this is accepted by Brother Andre Marie in his Doctrinal Statement on the website of Catholicism.org
Practically all need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation.This was the dogmatic teaching based on John 3:5 and Mark 16:16.
This is the de fide teaching and there are no practical exceptions. This is something obvious. We cannot meet or see someone saved outside the Catholic Church,withoiut faith and the baptism of water(AG 7).
__________________
The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in Richmond are not affiliated in any way with the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary located in Still River, Mass. That community, also rooted in an order first founded by Fr. Feeney, was refounded in 1976, and was regularized by the Bishop of Worcester in 2002.
Lionel: They affirm the 'strict' interpretation of the dogma EENS like the NH community but the Brother Thomas Augustine MICM, the Prior,interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise as do the liberals in the diocese. So LG 8, LG 16 etc emerge as exceptions to traditional Feeneyite EENS,even though they say there are no exceptions.
________________
In October 2016 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith wrote to Brother Andre Marie, leader of the group based in Richmond, that the position he retains - that articles from the Catechism of the Catholic Church and Dominus Iesus on the principle ‘outside the Church there is no salvation’ have been given different readings that are contrary to one another, and it is permissible to hold the position that these articles contradict previous Church teaching - is unacceptable.
Lionel: This ironically was the theological position of Brother Andre Marie who was affirming traditional Church teaching on EENS in harmony with the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Dominus Iesus and Vatican Council II. He made the implicit-explicit, invisible-visible clarification which the diocese dare not make, for political reasons.
____________________
On that basis, and that the Slaves had persisted in their obstinacy and that scandal had continued, the Manchester diocese placed the prohibitions on the group which were to take effect in January 2019. The decree of prohibitions bears the signatures of Fr. de Laire and of Diane Quinlan, the diocesan chancellor.
Lionel: The decree was politically motivated.Since the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary were affirming the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS and the diocese was rejecting it.
In other words St. Thomas Aquinas who held the strict interpretation of EENS and did not project invisible cases of being saved invincible ignorance as an exception to EENS, was no more a Catholic for the CDF and the Diocese of Manchester. It would be the same for the three Church Councils which defined EENS, in the Extraordinary Way.
_________________
The decree stated that only the Anointing of the Sick for a person in danger of physical death by an approved priest would be allowed at the group’s property, and that no priest would validly hear Confession and impart Absolution at the property except for a penitent in imminent danger of physical death.
It added that documents signed by the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart in April and July 2009, after which the then-bishop had provided for a priest to say Mass at their property, were null and void.
Lionel: The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary had signed the Athanasius Creed affirming their Catholic Faith. This was unacceptable for the Diocese and the CDF. They consider the Athanasius Creed, which says all need to be Catholic for salvation, as being obsolete. Since unknown cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2,GS 22 etc mentioned in Vatican Council are known and objective exceptions to that Creed.
This is the false reasoning that the 'alleged magisterium',on this issue, want the St.Benedict Center to follow and avoid a practical excommunication which is political hate directed at Catholics by the Left.-Lionel Andrades
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/vatican-upholds-prohibitions-placed-on-feeneyite-group-by-diocese-in-new-hampshire-89335
1
Response to Press Inquiries
In response to a misleading article that appeared in the New Hampshire Union Leader on 2 February 2021 (“Vatican rejects Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary appeal”), the Members of Saint Benedict Center clarify that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (“CDF”) neither adjudicated nor rejected the substantive merits of the administrative recourse that the Members filed in the spring of 2019.
In its decision, the CDF wrote very clearly that “recent jurisprudence” concerning a disputed point of procedural law changed for the Congregation, and that because of that, our recourse as filed at that time could not be accepted. The CDF issued no judgment against our Doctrinal Beliefs, no judgment as to whether any statute of limitations for the prosecution of a violation had passed (there is no such thing as a statute of limitations in canon law), and no judgment on the merits of the injurious decree issued by Father Georges de Laire on 7 January 2019 imposing multiple precepts and prohibitions upon the Members of the Saint Benedict Center and its “associates.” No judicial appeal was ever filed by the Members of the Center, because there was no trial held. Consequently, there were no judges of the CDF who rejected an appeal, contrary to what Father de Laire misstates as fact.
Last August, I renewed contact with Father de Laire. On 7 January of this year, my canonical procurator and I met with him at the Chancery to discuss how the Diocese and the Center can move forward. At that meeting, Father de Laire requested that I submit to him in writing some of the many questions that we presented on the occasion regarding his decree, questions that remain to this date unanswered by him.
Fulfilling the request made of me, I submitted to Father de Laire a letter dated 23 January, wherein I asked fifteen questions regarding just the preamble of the 2019 decree. This limitation was at his request, for he wanted the discussion to proceed in a “manageable” way. It was my impression that there would ensue good-faith correspondence on the pressing issues addressed by Father de Laire’s 2019 decree. Yet, without answering my letter, Father de Laire has once again chosen to go to the secular press to mischaracterize what has actually transpired.
The Members of Saint Benedict Center will not attempt to press their doctrinal and canonical case against him in the court of public opinion. Rather, with the guidance of expert canonical and civil legal counsel, they remain fixed on the course charted over two years ago: to pursue justice for the community of Saint Benedict Center by utilizing all means at their disposal in ecclesiastical and civil law. This includes patient, charitable, and truthful dialogue on our part.
None of those avenues have been exhausted.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment