Monday, July 18, 2011

SEMINARIAN OF THE FRANCISCAN FRIARS OF THE IMMACULATE EXPRESSES FORMATION

I was talking to a seminarian yesterday (July 17) evening, he was selling religious books at the Church Santa Maria di Nazareth, Boccea, Rome. There were so many inconsistent views he held and I could imagine the real confusion in his mind when the subject was really clear.

1. He believed the Church was the ordinary means of salvation but if he met a non-Catholic he would not ask him to enter the Church. Since the Hindu or Buddhist cold be in invincible ignorance or have the baptism of desire.

He says the Church is the ordinary way but considers the baptism of desire etc as exceptions, to the general norm i.e. the baptism of water. Yet he also considers the general norm those potentially saved with the baptism of desire and other forms of implicit salvation.

2. He believed that all needed to enter the Church explicitly but some who were saved implicitly did not have to explicitly, formally enter the Church with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water. So how could he reconcile this with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus? He could not. The dogma says everyone needs to be an explicit member of the Church.

The Church Councils, popes and saints taught differently on extra ecclesiam nulla salus he said. The Church today understands it differently. So the Church does not change its teaching on abortion etc but on this dogma it is possible and acceptable.

4. Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy he said and if I did not believe him he added I could ask his priest-formators. The Letter of the Holy Office condemned Fr. Leonard Feeney for heresy he said.

This too was inconsistent. He was only repeating what his superiors told him.

Fr. Leonard Feeney had the same message as Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441 so was the dogma in heresy? Was he excommunicated for affirming the dogma? St. Francis of Assisi, St. Maximillian Kolbe and numerous saints taught the same extra ecclesiam nulla salus as Fr. Leonard Feeney.

WITH A DEFACTO KNOWABLE BAPTISM OF DESIRE MASS IS OFFERED

1. He could not see that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance were accepted in principle and not rejected. However when they were considered de facto and known in particular cases was when the trouble starts. If they are just accepted as a possibility, known to God then we can maintain this belief and also the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Otherwise it is saying that the baptism of desire is defacto and explicitly known to us and the dogma says everyone needs to be a de facto and explicit member of the Catholic Church so this is a contradiction. It is contrary to rationality and the Principle of Non Contradiction.

However when we see that the Baptism of desire can only be dejure and accepted in principle and so does not contradict the dogma. It also does not violate the Principle on Non Contradiction. This was the understanding of the Baptism of desire over centuries that it did not conflict with the dogma. This is not a new theory or theology I expressing here.

The seminarian considered the baptism of desire, as very real and known in particular cases, so it contradicted the dogma as it was known in the past. For him it contradicted Fr. Leonard Feeney.

2. Those who know about Jesus and the Church and yet do not enter but those in invincible ignorance can be saved. True in principle. Finally it will be Jesus only who will be the Judge in particular cases. In Boston, USA I cannot say that, “This person is saved in invincible ignorance and so he does not have to convert into the Church”. De facto, in reality on earth, there are no known exceptions.

De facto, since I do not know of any exception, everyone needs to be an explicit member of the Church in Boston, since the dogma says so. In Boston and the rest of the world.

3. The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 published in the Denzinger does not state in the text that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy. Even Karl Keating and Fr. Francis Sullivan S.J (Boston College) admit this.

The Letter also refers to ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible teaching’. The dogma Cantate Domino is in accord with Fr. Leonard Feeney. So on the dogma, the Letter of the Holy Office supported Fr. Leonard Feeney.

4. In the Boston Heresy Case (a phrase created by the secular media) were the Archbishop and Jesuits in Boston in heresy? They gave us a new doctrine, the known in the present times case of a non Catholic saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance.

The Archbishop stopped Fr.Leonard Feeney from offering Mass and hearing Confession and the Jesuits expelled him from the community and Boston College. Why? For holding the centuries-old traditional teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus? The Archbishop nor Jesuits issued a clarification when the media reported that the Catholic Church has changed its teaching on outside the church there is no salvation. This heresy is an American gift to the Church.

This is a lie which in ignorance probably, is being passed on to young seminarians by their prudent priest formators.
-Lionel Andrades

Photo (top) The Church of Santa Maria di Nazareth (below) Fr.Settimo Manelli FFI, Parish Priest at the Church and formator at the seminary.The seminarian suggests that the ex cathedra dogma is denied with a defacto knowable baptism of desire and Mass is offered in this condition.