Is the Feenyite interp. of EENS pronounced as heretical?

  • Thread starter Thread starter codefro
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

codefro

Guest
Basically just that. I know there was Vatican involvement when Fr. Feeny was preaching his interpretation of EENS, but did the Magisterium explicitly condemn the belief that only explicitly Catholic members of the faithful will go to Heaven, and all those outside the Catholic Church shall parish, to be heretical? Please cite sources, and please don’t cite Catholicism.org. That website does not make anything very clear, and I am looking for clear sources.
 
codefro said:
Basically just that. I know there was Vatican involvement when Fr. Feeny was preaching his interpretation of EENS, but did the Magisterium explicitly condemn the belief that only explicitly Catholic members of the faithful will go to Heaven, and all those outside the Catholic Church shall parish, to be heretical? Please cite sources, and please don’t cite Catholicism.org. That website does not make anything very clear, and I am looking for clear sources.
Click to expand...
I haven’t read what he wrote and you have not quoted it.

If he simply said there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church that is indeed the Church teaching. Of course the Church explains what that means.

However, I’m guessing he must have said more than that.
 
One of the documents at this link is a letter from the Holy Office concerning Fr. Feeney. While it doesn’t use the word “heretical,” it says that he and his followers are in “grave peril,” that they “cannot be excused even by reason of good faith,” and that they “cannot be excused of culpable ignorance.”

And of course, there’s the fact that he was excommunicated.

romancatholicism.org/feeney-condemnations.html
 
Feeney himself eventually reconciled with the Catholic Church and his excommunication was lifted in 1972. His followers, i.e the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, split between two branches the St Benedict Center in Stillwater Mass, and the St Benedict Center Richmond, NH, the first of which is recognized by the Church (although the latter one did get episcopal approval for the appointment of a chaplain to their center in October 2010).).

The Richmond branch has been declared as a Hate Group by the Southern Poverty Law Centre because they allegedly promote antisemitism. I would be wary of them then.
 
Pope St. Leo the Great, Letter 16, Oct. 21, 447, #6: “Wherefore, as it is quite clear that these two seasons [Easter and Pentecost] of which we have been speaking are the rightful ones for baptizing the chosen in Church, we admonish you, beloved, not to add other days to this observance. Because, although there are other festivals also to which much reverence is due in God’s honour, yet we must rationally guard this principal and greatest sacrament as a deep mystery and not part of the ordinary routine: not, however, prohibiting the license to succor those who are in danger by administering baptism to them at any time. For while we put off the vows of those who are not pressed by ill health and live in peaceful security to those two closely connected and cognate festivals, we do not at any time refuse this which is **the only safeguard of true salvation **to anyone in peril of death, in the crisis of a siege, in the distress of persecution, in the terror of shipwreck.”
 
Apostolicam Sedem of either Pope Innocent II (A.D. 1143) or Pope Innocent III (A.D. 1216)

“To your enquiry we respond thus: We assert without hesitation (on the authority of the holy Fathers Augustine and Ambrose) that the priest whom you indicated (in your letter) had died without the water of baptism, because he persevered in the faith of holy mother the Church and in the confession of the name of Christ, was freed from original sin and attained the joy of the heavenly fatherland. Read (brother) in the eighth book of Augustine’s “City of God” where among other things it is written, “Baptism is ministered invisibly to one whom not contempt of religion but death excludes.” Read again the book of blessed Ambrose concerning the death of Valentinian where he says the same thing. Therefore, to questions concerning the dead, you should hold the opinions of the learned Fathers, and in your church you should join in prayers and you should have sacrifices offered to God for the priest mentioned.”

Pope St. Innocent III - A certain Jew, when at the point of death, since he lived only among Jews, immersed himself in water, while saying I baptize myself in the name of the Father, and the Son, and in the Holy Spirit… We respond that since there should be a distinction between the one baptizing and the one baptized, as clearly gathered from the words of the Lord when said “Go baptize all nations in the name of the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit.” The Jew must be baptized again by another. If however such a one had died immediately he would have rushed to his heavenly home without delay because of the faith of the sacrament although not because of the sacrament of faith. **Denzinger **section 413

These are long after the teaching of Pope Leo, so maybe they changed it. Anyway, from what I have seen all the examples given to contradict Fr. Feeney from the Magisterium are explainable. Baptism of Desire was not defined by Trent. It just said that baptism could be invalid because of lack of desire for it.
 
I meant to say the examples given by apologists to prove Baptism of desire from Popes can all be explained as far as I have seen except the ones I gave in my last post. The Catechism of the Catholic Church does not give an interpretation to Trent, but since it is a Catechism, I suppose it reinforces the teachings of Innocent III
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top