Home › Forums › All Things Catholic › Website Says Feeneyism Is Heresy Instead Of Cushingism › Reply To: Website Says Feeneyism Is Heresy Instead Of Cushingism
Before the topic completely drifts, I ask you, yes or no, do dogs and cats go to heaven. Give me a Dogmatic reply.
I would, if there was one (dogma).
Much like the SSPX, the position of many Feeneites is a rather slippery slope.
I think much of what people know about Fr.Leonard Feeney comes from the secular media owned by the Jewish Left. They assume this to be the teachings of the Catholic Church.
For instance we know the texts of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and we can read the texts on the popes statements on this issue. According to one ‘media approved view ‘ the popes and the Councils were excommunciated for holding the same teaching as Fr.Leonard Feeney on extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?
Then the media including the Catholic apologist Fr.William Most says those who are saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are exceptions to the dogma? This would mean that we know visible cases on earth of persons saved with the baptism of desire who are exceptions to the dogma ? Does the Church teach this ?No.
However this is the general misinformation floating around.
Now the Church has long before Fr. Feeney and his decision that he knew who was going to be excluded from heaven, does fly in the face of any number of Magesterial teachings, and approved Catholic practices.
Fr.Leonard Feeney ‘knew who was going to be excluded from heaven’ based on the dogma and magisterial teachings.
What would you say is the extreme position of extra ecclesiam nulla salus permitted of Catholics ?
Your question about the strict and narrow interpretation of EENS, is a bit dishonest. While it is permitted to hold the position, one cannot until the Church has officially pronounced on the issue proclaim it dogmatic, to the exclusion of the rest of the Catholic teaching on what other provisions the Church allows to be believed.
I affirmed the dogma in an earlier post. I have not come to this issue from any of Fr.Leonard Feeney’s communities though I sympathise with them. I donot know if you would consider my view extreme. I agree with Fr.Leonard Feeney in saying every one needs to enter the Church with no salvation and there is no baptism of desire etc that we know of and which can be an exception to the dogma.
The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has not been retracted by the Catholic Church. There is no document which makes this claim. So it is still dogmatic.
May be you mean the Church has not issued a dogmatic statement on the baptism of desire etc.i.e if it is a defacto exception to the dogma.
You see I don’t hold to the Feeneyite postion, I admit that it is possible because the Church has not (regardless of what the Feeneyites claim) made a final dogmatic pronouncement. In addition either explicit or implicit holding that the Feeneyite position is the de-facto dogmatic position, is by at least implication, and from some Feeneyites explicit that Pope St. Pius X, Venerable Pope Pius IX and others are herectical for explaining and expounding on the teachings of the Church related to this issue, but including the possiblity of non-catholics coming to salvation. By doing so you are ignoring entire statements of the Church which allow us to accept as pious opinion that God has provided for the salvation of the Pagan and the non-catholic under the provisions discussed earlier.
We agree that a non Catholic can be saved.
I interpret the magisterial documents as saying that de facto in reality every one needs to enter the Church as St.Thomas Aquinas taught.
While de jure in principle ‘in certain circumstances’ there could be a pagan given the grace needed for salvation and he could be provided with the means of salvation. St.Thomas Aquinas gave us the example of the man in the forest.
The difficulty arises if you assume that these pagans who are saved are known to us in particular cases.
You also wish us to let you eat your cake and have it too. Discounting Fr. Most, and the majority of theologians, as well as Popes as not speaking for the Magesterium or with the Authority of the Magisterium, but demanding that we accept the Slaves, Fr. Feeney, Mrs. (sometimes Sr.) Catherine Goddard Clarke, or your website as the voice of the Magisterium because you say all others are heretics is quite a big role for you to take on.
I am only saying that those saved in invincible ignorance are not an exception to the dogma . Fr.William Most assumes they were.
Also the ordinary means of salvation in the Catholic Church is Catholic Faith and the baptism of water (AG 7,LG 14) it is not invincible ignorance. Fr.Most says that the Native Americans were saved before the missionaries arrived there.
These are two errors in that post you have quoted.
Secondly I may not be using the apologetics of any of Fr.Leonard Feeney’s communities.
As to Mr. Voris, and others who have public postings on the internet, there is a bit of a fine line here. First Mr. Voris who does present himself as have a Bachelors in Sacred Theology, which seems valid, and does many times present very good and newsworthy issues, is like those you dismiss as not being the voice of the Magisterium, is himself not either. I like much of what he presents, but I don’t give him nor am I required to give him the same obedience that I give to the legitimate authority of the Ordinary of a Diocese. If the bishop is a heretic, there are established protocols for investigating such claims, under Canon Law, which he skips over. How this is connected with Abp. Gomez escapes me though.
Is Archbishop Gomez willing to say that Judaism is not a path to salvation and that Jews need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell (for salvation) ?
Will he affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as does Micahel Voris ?
I can almost see why under the former Ordinary, Roger Cardinal Mahony the Slaves would not seek canonical status in LA, however under Abp Gomez, I see no reason for the Slaves to not present themselves for regularization.
Yes I think they can present themselves for regularisation.I hope they will.