FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Another EENS, please be patient...
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Quote: 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.

Yeah, I read it.  I agree, he was excommunicated for grave disobedience, though evidently the excommunication was deficient according to the other poster.  Either way, who cares.  It has no bearing on EENS.  The other thing you quoted was a fallible protocal letter which was not published in the AAS.  It is worthless, though I did quote from it saying that the Church infallibly declared only Catholics are saved.  I can use infallible sources that say the same thing if you are interested.
(06-26-2011, 12:48 AM)James02 Wrote: [ -> ]
Quote: 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.

Yeah, I read it.  I agree, he was excommunicated for grave disobedience, though evidently the excommunication was deficient according to the other poster.  Either way, who cares.  It has no bearing on EENS.  The other thing you quoted was a fallible protocal letter which was not published in the AAS.  It is worthless, though I did quote from it saying that the Church infallibly declared only Catholics are saved.  I can use infallible sources that say the same thing if you are interested.

I see, Gaddafi.  You pick and choose, hey?  Feeney disobeyed because he knew he was a heretic and did not want to be proven so by the Teaching Hierarchical Authority of the Catholic Church.
Yep, I pick and choose.  A Papal Encyclical published in the AAS, I hold infallible.  A protocal letter from some low level functionary I hold not infallible.  You are correct, I do make that distinction.
(06-26-2011, 12:55 AM)James02 Wrote: [ -> ]Yep, I pick and choose.  A Papal Encyclical published in the AAS, I hold infallible.  A protocal letter from some low level functionary I hold not infallible.  You are correct, I do make that distinction.

Wow!  You must be very high in the Hierarchy to disdain an official decree by the Holy Office under Pius XII.
(06-26-2011, 12:48 AM)James02 Wrote: [ -> ]
Quote: 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.

Yeah, I read it.  I agree, he was excommunicated for grave disobedience, though evidently the excommunication was deficient according to the other poster.  Either way, who cares.  It has no bearing on EENS.  The other thing you quoted was a fallible protocal letter which was not published in the AAS.  It is worthless, though I did quote from it saying that the Church infallibly declared only Catholics are saved.  I can use infallible sources that say the same thing if you are interested.

NOPE. Fr. Feeney was not excommunicated (so-called) for heresy. Please get that right.

Until you know the facts, this subject is over. This thread is not about Fr. Feeney, God love him, it is about EENS.

The FACT is that Trent never taught BOD, but taught the NECESSITY of desire for the sacrament, inasmuch as the Council taught that Desire for baptism is a disposition, and a disposition does not justify. Only baptism justifies. This is borne out in the Catechism of the Council of Trent, where it is taught that the necessary disposition for baptism is its desire.

AND, I am seeking for BOD in actual documents of the ordinary magisterium, that are not compromised by invalidating factors.

How about some SUBSTANCE, BOD supporters, where is THAT?

(06-26-2011, 12:58 AM)wulfrano Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-26-2011, 12:55 AM)James02 Wrote: [ -> ]Yep, I pick and choose.  A Papal Encyclical published in the AAS, I hold infallible.  A protocal letter from some low level functionary I hold not infallible.  You are correct, I do make that distinction.

Wow!  You must be very high in the Hierarchy to disdain an official decree by the Holy Office under Pius XII.

PLease, there are invalidating factors. You refuse to acknowledge or discuss them, so the subject of Father Feeney is over.

Anathema sit. :fish:
(06-26-2011, 12:58 AM)wulfrano Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-26-2011, 12:55 AM)James02 Wrote: [ -> ]Yep, I pick and choose.  A Papal Encyclical published in the AAS, I hold infallible.  A protocal letter from some low level functionary I hold not infallible.  You are correct, I do make that distinction.

Wow!  You must be very high in the Hierarchy to disdain an official decree by the Holy Office under Pius XII.

AAS is pretty important eh
(06-26-2011, 12:59 AM)Gregory I Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-26-2011, 12:48 AM)James02 Wrote: [ -> ]
Quote: 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.

Yeah, I read it.  I agree, he was excommunicated for grave disobedience, though evidently the excommunication was deficient according to the other poster.  Either way, who cares.  It has no bearing on EENS.  The other thing you quoted was a fallible protocal letter which was not published in the AAS.  It is worthless, though I did quote from it saying that the Church infallibly declared only Catholics are saved.  I can use infallible sources that say the same thing if you are interested.

NOPE. Fr. Feeney was not excommunicated (so-called) for heresy. Please get that right.

Until you know the facts, this subject is over. This thread is not about Fr. Feeney, God love him, it is about EENS.

The FACT is that Trent never taught BOD, but taught the NECESSITY of desire for the sacrament, inasmuch as the Council taught that Desire for baptism is a disposition, and a disposition does not justify. Only baptism justifies. This is borne out in the Catechism of the Council of Trent, where it is taught that the necessary disposition for baptism is its desire.

AND, I am seeking for BOD in actual documents of the ordinary magisterium, that are not compromised by invalidating factors.

How about some SUBSTANCE, BOD supporters, where is THAT?

Why was Feeney called to Rome? Because he disobeyed the order to stop circulating a false interpretation of the dogma "Extra Ecclesia".

No one is saying that Baptism of Desire is a sacrament.  Be content with that.
Read "Loyolas and the Cabots" if you really want to know what went on. :fish:
(06-26-2011, 05:01 PM)Gregory I Wrote: [ -> ]Read "Loyolas and the Cabots" if you really want to know what went on. :fish:

Please give me a summary.