what am i supposed to tell people if they ask about No salvation outside the Church?

[LittleSoldier]

After 30+ years of seeking and soul searching, if I thought that the true Church was not the Catholic Church; and there were other “churches” that could lead me to Heaven…well…I would still be a Protestant enjoying the pitch-in dinners and clapping along with “When the Saints go Marching In” (not to mention attending service when I felt like it or had nothing better to do).This new Catholic believes the only salvation is in THE Church or an unknown Grace of God not revealed to us mortals.

You are very blessed. I did a lot of soul searching, too, and came back to the church I was baptised into as an infant. I’m very glad I did. When my Mom was about eighteen she started studying, trying to find the True Church. She hadn’t been raised in any faith. She was just kind of a Protestant but not belonging to any denomination. She felt that something was missing in her life.

When she was nineteen she was declared dead because of a severe insulin reaction, but then they found out she hadn’t quite died and she was baptised as a Catholic. She recovered and never looked back. Her faith stayed with her. She left us a few years ago, in her eighties.

Her faith has always been an inspiration to me.

We are very blessed because we know the True Church. If we turned our backs on it we would be in big trouble. And I’m sure people do turn their backs. But so many people haven’t discovered the Truth and I know they are still good people. What Fr. Feeney taught was a heresy and was condemned. One does not have to be a Catholic to go to heaven. But if one knows the Catholic Church is the True Church and denies her - watch out!!

 

[LittleSoldier]

I wish I had been following this thread from its inception. It has gotten late and I haven’t the time to read all the posts.

The sad thing is that earlier tonight my 84 year old mother (now in a nursing home) called me a bigot for defending the Church not serving her (an Anglican) communion.

She has a very strong faith in Jesus. She was raised a Mennonite and became an Anglican after marriage. She was in tears thinking that I believed that my late father and late brother were destined for hell and that she was too. (Her mind is still sound but her emotional state is touch and go, ever since loosing her first born child a short time ago.)

I told her that that is not the belief of the Catholic Church.

It’s been a tough night.

I’m so sorry! You’re not confused. It isn’t the belief of the Catholic Church. There was a heretical priest (Fr. Feeney) that taught it, but his teaching was condemned.

I’m sorry you’re hurting. She’s OK. She’s going to be just fine.

God bless. :hug1:

 

[LittleSoldier]

It all depends on who is asking. Are they anti-Catholic? Are they thinking of becoming Catholic? Are they traditional Catholics? Are they informed about who Fr. Feeney was? What do they know about the Council of Trent, Lumen Gentium, or the papal bulls that are often used to defend the rigorous interpretation of the formula? I don’t think there is even any embarrassment with confessing your inability to answer. I might try, but I wouldn’t expect everybody who is Catholic to be knowledgable about such a subject. I wouldn’t even expect every priest to be knowledgable about it.

I have never had anyone ask me anything like that. I suppose that says something about the impression I make on people in person. Heh. Depending on the inquirer I would probably try to talk a little about good Fr. Feeney. I say good because he was a wonderfully evangelistic priest and a credit to his faith who died reconciled to the Church. I would say, based on a conversation I once had with an apologist from Catholic Answers, that his position was heterodox, not heretical. I think the rigorous view of the matter is only wrong. It isn’t definitively wrong. The problem it seems to me is that some “Feeneyites” seem determined to posit that their position is definitively right. That, as I understand it, is the unacceptable part of the belief.

In short, the Council of Trent speaks favorably about baptism of desire, and I am happy to pray for the dead who never joined the Catholic Church.

Rory

Would you please explain the difference between heterodoxy and heresy in reference to Fr. Feeney? I’m confused because I was taught that Feeneyism is a heresy. I’m happy to find out he was reconciled with the Church before his death.

Thanks!

 

[Bonarges]

I’m so sorry! You’re not confused. It isn’t the belief of the Catholic Church. There was a heretical priest (Fr. Feeney) that taught it, but his teaching was condemned.

I’m sorry you’re hurting. She’s OK. She’s going to be just fine.

God bless. :hug1:

Catholic Dogma states there is no salvation outside the Church (extra ecclesiam nulla salus). All Catholics are bound to accept it as a revealed truth by God to His Church. We submit to the principle. We do not apply it to individuals.

Fr. Feeney was NEVER accused of heresy by the Church. He was NEVER excommunicated for heresy. Your statements are slanderous, and worthy of confession. Learn the facts before blabbing about a deceased priest who died in full communion with Mother Church.

Our Lord established a Church for a reason. It is the Ark of Salvation as mentioned in Scripture. It is the same Church to which the Elect were added. This is easy stuff if you are willing to read the early Church history.

If Jesus founded a Church (and He did), then it must have existed in the 1ST century. This very same Church must also exist today since Our Lord stated that He would be with His Church until “the end of the age”, and, “the gates of Hell would not prevail against it”. If a man could be saved in any church other than this one, why did Our Lord bother to establish a Church at all? Was this first church, Baptist? Episcopalian? Lutheran? Methodist? I need go no further. There is no salvation outside the Roman Catholic Church for the same reason there was no salvation outside Noah’s Ark. There is still only ONE ark. Look to history. It’s all there.

 

[LittleSoldier]

Catholic Dogma states there is no salvation outside the Church (extra ecclesiam nulla salus). All Catholics are bound to accept it as a revealed truth by God to His Church. We submit to the principle. We do not apply it to individuals.

Fr. Feeney was NEVER accused of heresy by the Church. He was NEVER excommunicated for heresy. Your statements are slanderous, and worthy of confession. Learn the facts before blabbing about a deceased priest who died in full communion with Mother Church.

Our Lord established a Church for a reason. It is the Ark of Salvation as mentioned in Scripture. It is the same Church to which the Elect were added. This is easy stuff if you are willing to read the early Church history.

If Jesus founded a Church (and He did), then it must have existed in the 1ST century. This very same Church must also exist today since Our Lord stated that He would be with His Church until “the end of the age”, and, “the gates of Hell would not prevail against it”. If a man could be saved in any church other than this one, why did Our Lord bother to establish a Church at all? Was this first church, Baptist? Episcopalian? Lutheran? Methodist? I need go no further. There is no salvation outside the Roman Catholic Church for the same reason there was no salvation outside Noah’s Ark. There is still only ONE ark. Look to history. It’s all there.

Now that sort of language is really inappropriate. You didn’t need to accuse me of slander and blabbing. Very uncharitable. Very crude. Not nice at all. Is this the way you always speak to those with whom you disagree? I’m disappointed, especially because I was trying to comfort someone who was hurting and you leapt in and attacked me. I would have been very happy to discuss this with you in a charitable manner, but you never gave me the chance. You just attacked.

That is not nice. Really.

You see, I already did my research. I already knew about Feeneyism.

Please read the following:

Many of our friends have heard of Fr. Leonard Feeney, and some of them have a great esteem for this priest who fought against the liberal ecumenism by recalling again and again that outside the Church there is no salvation. But, to make his point, Fr. Feeney went so far as to exclude Baptism of desire (and martyrdom) from the means of salvation.** His teaching was then condemned by the Holy Office in 1949, and he himself was excommunicated in 1953.** It should be sufficient to recall that this happened under the pontificate of the saintly Pope Pius XII, and that the letter of the Holy Office was signed by Cardinal Ottaviani, who was not a liberal either. However, certain good Catholics still try to exculpate Fr. Feeney by saying that the Holy See was misinformed, etc. Well, we have just to open his book The Bread of Life (first published in l952), to see that his doctrine contradicts the Church’s teaching. Let St. Thomas Aquinas, the greatest theologian the Church has ever known, be the witness for the prosecution. His Summa Theologica [ST] is the reference book that all seminarians (Fr. Feeney not excepted) had to study according to the directives of St. Pius X and the 1917 Code of Canon Law.

Let us finally quote the letter of the Holy Office condemning Fr. Feeney’s teaching:

That one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing. However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance, God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wants his will to be conformed to the Will of God. These things are clearly taught in the dogmatic letter which was issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943 (Mystici Corporis)… he mentions those who are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer “by a certain unconscious yearning and desire,” and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation; but on the other hand, he states that they are in a condition “in which they cannot be sure of their salvation” since “they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church!” With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire, and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally as well in every religion. (Letter to the Archbishop of Boston, August 8, 1949).

[NOTE: All underlining, italics, and bolding have been added]

catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php?topic=3026190.0

Here are a couple more links, just in case you’re interested:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feeneyism
catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0512fea3.asp (this one is from CAF)

 

[diggerdomer]

wow… something good cme from Vatican II…?

Certainly!

The Liturgical reforms (just as Trent directed liturgical reforms)

Canon Law.

The Catechism.

I hope that’s sufficient as an example!

 

[RosaryCrusader]

I’m so sorry! You’re not confused. It isn’t the belief of the Catholic Church. There was a heretical priest (Fr. Feeney) that taught it, but his teaching was condemned.

I’m sorry you’re hurting. She’s OK. She’s going to be just fine.

God bless. :hug1:

I don’t know what to say…You’re denying a Church Dogma, judging someone’s soul, and making false statements against Fr. Feeney all in the same post…

1. " It isn’t the belief of the Catholic Church" Please read the prior posts and your CCC which acknowledges the necessity of the Church - even if it is watered down.

2. “There was a heretical priest (Fr. Feeney) that taught it, but his teaching was condemned.” Actually, nothing was condemned - he was excommunicated for failing to go to Rome and this gave people the impression that his teachings were condemned but nothing could be further from the truth - and in fact his orders are in full communion and are allowed to propagate all of the teachings and works of Fr. Feeney with the blessing of Rome and the local Bishop - see here for documentation: nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/

3. "I’m sorry you’re hurting. She’s OK. She’s going to be just fine." This is an act of false charity as Christ desires no one to die outside of the Church but desires that all should come to the knowledge of the truth. You’re judging the state of someone’s soul - this judgment is reserved solely to Christ and not you. Instead of spreading false charity based solely on human emotion and totally devoid of any supernatural charity - you should be encouraging prayer and sacrifice for the intention of the soon to be departed’s conversion and positive judgment as well as encouraging any attempts to get the loved one convert if one thinks it will do some good. This may be God’s final attempt at bringing someone into the fold.

 

[AnneElliot]

God is not in control of our lives, although He knows what will happen to us. He gives us all free will, as a gift, and allows us to use that free will. Will a 12 year old child be brought to the fullness of Truth before she is suddenly killed in a car accident? Maybe, maybe not. She may not be blessed to be a Catholic as we are. She may not have had the chance to learn much about Jesus and the Church He founded.

“God is not in control of our lives”? I did not mean the statement to imply that God did not give man free will, but God is most certainly in control of our lives-- of our living and dying-- all the experiences we have in this life are a result of God’s Providence. And no one, not even a little girl who dies in a car accident, is outside the scope of His Providence.

God certainly has the power to show the fullness of Truth in His own Being at our death.

I did not deny this, and would agree… which is why I said that God is in control of our lives.

One does not have to be a member of the Catholic Church in order to go to heaven. But as the Church is Christ, one cannot be saved except through the Church.

You are flat out wrong in suggesting that one does not have to be a member of the Catholic Church in order to go to Heaven.There is only one Body. Christ does not have many bodies. There is one Sacred Body by which we are saved-- the Body of Christ. And in order to be saved we must be a member of that Body, as the Church teaches, and has always taught.

Fourth Lateran Council “There is indeed one universal church of the faithful, outside of which nobody at all is saved”
ewtn.com/library/councils/lateran4.htm

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos #10 “For since the mystical body of Christ, in the same manner as His physical body, is one, compacted and fitly joined together, it were foolish and out of place to say that the mystical body is made up of members which are disunited and scattered abroad: whosoever therefore is not united with the body is no member of it, neither is he in communion with Christ its head.”
vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19280106_mortalium-animos_en.html

Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis #22 “Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed… It follows that those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit.”
vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_29061943_mystici-corporis-christi_en.html

 

[ncjohn]

2. “There was a heretical priest (Fr. Feeney) that taught it, but his teaching was condemned.” Actually, nothing was condemned - he was excommunicated for failing to go to Rome and this gave people the impression that his teachings were condemned but nothing could be further from the truth…

Hard to tell whether this is a wilfull misrepresentation or just a repeating of the myth that some websites keep propagating.

From one of the many sources that cites the condemnation:
Nothing could be further from the truth. On August 8, 1949, the Holy Office sent a letter to Archbishop Richard James Cushing of Boston condemning Father Feeney’s error. In this letter, the Holy Office explained that, “…among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church. However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church.”

As to whether the excommunication was lifted, yes it was. Was it done so lawfully? All but those few who support the Feeney position deny that it was since it did not comply with the canonical need to repent of dogmatic error. Can his “spiritual descendents” be in actual full communion with the Church? Again, aside from those who cling to the errors of Fr. Feeney, none support the idea that one can be in opposition to the stated meaning of the dogma by the only valid authority, the Church, and still be in communion.

lasalettejourney.blogspot.com/2008/10/did-father-feeney-and-his-followers.html

I’m not a canon lawyer and will not attempt to make the judgment myself but those representing the Church disagree with the concept that one can hold the Feeney position and be in full communion and advise great caution in promoting a disobedience to Mother Church that could put one’s salvation in jeopardy. Or, as Jesus put it, “It were better for him, that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should scandalize one of these little ones.”

 

[Redbaron998]

Here is how i word it, some may say its a lil waterd down but its a good way to put it to a protestant.

When the “There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church” was first being used there was only the Catholic Church, or it was the only one of any size. It was not untill later that was any church other than the Catholic Church.

This doesnt change the fact that even today there is only ONE church, the church is the mystical body of Christ, in a sense all Christians are a member of the church. Baptism is the first initiation right into the church, and the church recognizes the validty of the majority of Baptisms of most Christian denominations. If you have been validly baptised you are a member of the Church of Christ.

This however does not mean your in full communion with the Church. Protestants have found the truth but not the fullness of truth that is the Catholic Faith. The Catholic Church is the single Church Christ founded, he founded only one. It is One Holy Catholic and Apostolic. (Then you show them this in scripture)

Now if they at the end of this arent moved to convert (which is likely as we are usually just hoping to plant a seed and you showing the marks of the church in scripture will itch thier curiosity) the convesation will probably move to, “so if we are not Catholic we are damned?” This is an very imature way to approach the faith, as even a non-Christian if invincble ignorant may be saved, all acording to Gods will. But keep this in mind: If you are Christian, you are a part of the Church, though it may be a schismed sect of it and far from full communion with Rome, you are in a certain way a part of the Catholic Church.

Hopefully this will help give them the incentive and knowledge to realize why they need to become Catholic, a large part of any conversation is going to be using scripture to prove why the Catholic Church IS the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic church, if you dont show them sufficently you are wasting your time and thiers. In this case the burden of proof is one us and we have to demonstrate why we are what we say we are.

Hope that helps.

 

[LittleSoldier]

I don’t know what to say…You’re denying a Church Dogma, judging someone’s soul, and making false statements against Fr. Feeney all in the same post…

1. " It isn’t the belief of the Catholic Church" Please read the prior posts and your CCC which acknowledges the necessity of the Church - even if it is watered down.

2. “There was a heretical priest (Fr. Feeney) that taught it, but his teaching was condemned.” Actually, nothing was condemned - he was excommunicated for failing to go to Rome and this gave people the impression that his teachings were condemned but nothing could be further from the truth - and in fact his orders are in full communion and are allowed to propagate all of the teachings and works of Fr. Feeney with the blessing of Rome and the local Bishop - see here for documentation: nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/

3. "I’m sorry you’re hurting. She’s OK. She’s going to be just fine." This is an act of false charity as Christ desires no one to die outside of the Church but desires that all should come to the knowledge of the truth. You’re judging the state of someone’s soul - this judgment is reserved solely to Christ and not you. Instead of spreading false charity based solely on human emotion and totally devoid of any supernatural charity - you should be encouraging prayer and sacrifice for the intention of the soon to be departed’s conversion and positive judgment as well as encouraging any attempts to get the loved one convert if one thinks it will do some good. This may be God’s final attempt at bringing someone into the fold.

The Catholic Church is Christ. As Christ, we are saved through the Catholic Church. Nobody is saved without the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is absolutely necessary.

Fr. Feeney’s words were condemned. I never stated that he was excommunicated. Of course he was. Here is the letter condemning his teachings:

 

[LittleSoldier]

I don’t know what to say…You’re denying a Church Dogma, judging someone’s soul, and making false statements against Fr. Feeney all in the same post…

1. " It isn’t the belief of the Catholic Church" Please read the prior posts and your CCC which acknowledges the necessity of the Church - even if it is watered down.

The Catholic Church is absolutely necessary for salvation. I never said she wasn’t. The Catholic Church is Christ and as Christ, she is the only way anyone can be accepted into heaven.

Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ on behalf of his body, which is the church…

[Collosians 1:24, NAB]

2. “There was a heretical priest (Fr. Feeney) that taught it, but his teaching was condemned.” Actually, nothing was condemned - he was excommunicated for failing to go to Rome and this gave people the impression that his teachings were condemned but nothing could be further from the truth - and in fact his orders are in full communion and are allowed to propagate all of the teachings and works of Fr. Feeney with the blessing of Rome and the local Bishop - see here for documentation: nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/

His teachings were condemned. I never stated he was excommunicated! But we both know he was and you are correct in that he was excommunicated for not going to Rome as ordered. Of course this had something to do with his teaching of heresy.

I would be a little leery of using blogs as Church documentation. Anyone can write anything he/she wants to write on a blog. It seems strange that a blog would have Fr. Feeney as its subject. Why all the “supporters”? If this is accepted by the Holy See, why all the fuss?

Many of our friends have heard of Fr. Leonard Feeney, and some of them have a great esteem for this priest who fought against the liberal ecumenism by recalling again and again that outside the Church there is no salvation.** But, to make his point, Fr. Feeney went so far as to exclude Baptism of desire (and martyrdom) from the means of salvation. His teaching was then condemned by the Holy Office in 1949, and he himself was excommunicated in 1953.** It should be sufficient to recall that this happened under the pontificate of the saintly Pope Pius XII, and that the letter of the Holy Office was signed by Cardinal Ottaviani, who was not a liberal either. However, certain good Catholics still try to exculpate Fr. Feeney by saying that the Holy See was misinformed, etc. Well, we have just to open his book The Bread of Life (first published in l952), to see that his doctrine contradicts the Church’s teaching. Let St. Thomas Aquinas, the greatest theologian the Church has ever known, be the witness for the prosecution. His Summa Theologica [ST] is the reference book that all seminarians (Fr. Feeney not excepted) had to study according to the directives of St. Pius X and the 1917 Code of Canon Law.

Here is the wording of the letter condemning Fr. Feeney’s teachings:

…one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing. However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance, God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wants his will to be conformed to the Will of God. These things are clearly taught in the dogmatic letter which was issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943 (Mystici Corporis)… he mentions those who are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer “by a certain unconscious yearning and desire,” and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation; but on the other hand, he states that they are in a condition “in which they cannot be sure of their salvation” since “they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church!” With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire, and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally as well in every religion. (Letter to the Archbishop of Boston, August 8, 1949).

catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php?topic=3026190.0

[NOTE: All bolding, underlining, and italics are added.]

-----continued in next post-----

 

[LittleSoldier]

-----continuation of last post-----

This is from another link - here on CAF:

Why does the Catholic Church teach that there is “no salvation outside the Church”? Doesn’t this contradict Scripture? God “desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim. 2:4). “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me” (John 14:6). Peter proclaimed to the Sanhedrin, “There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).

Since God intends (plans, wills) that every human being should go to heaven, doesn’t the Church’s teaching greatly restrict the scope of God’s redemption? Does the Church mean—as Protestants and (I suspect) many Catholics believe—that only members of the Catholic Church can be saved?

That is what a priest in Boston, Fr. Leonard Feeney, S.J., began teaching in the 1940s.** His bishop and the Vatican tried to convince him that his interpretation of the Church’s teaching was wrong. He so persisted in his error that he was finally excommunicated,** but by God’s mercy, he was reconciled to the Church before he died in 1978.

In correcting Fr. Feeney in 1949, the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office (now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) issued a document entitled Suprema Haec Sacra, which stated that " extra ecclesiam, nulla salus" (outside the Church, no salvation) is “an infallible statement.” But, it added, “this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church itself understands it.”

Note that word dogma. This teaching has been proclaimed by, among others, Pope Pelagius in 585, the Fourth Lateran Council in 1214, Pope Innocent III in 1214, Pope Boniface VIII in 1302, Pope Pius XII, Pope Paul VI, the Second Vatican Council, Pope John Paul II, and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Dominus Iesus.
Our point is this: When the Church infallibly teaches extra ecclesiam, nulla salus, it does not say that non-Catholics cannot be saved. In fact, it affirms the contrary. The purpose of the teaching is to tell us how Jesus Christ makes salvation available to all human beings.

catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0512fea3.asp

[NOTE: All bolding, underlining, and italics are added.]

3. "I’m sorry you’re hurting. She’s OK. She’s going to be just fine." This is an act of false charity as Christ desires no one to die outside of the Church but desires that all should come to the knowledge of the truth. You’re judging the state of someone’s soul - this judgment is reserved solely to Christ and not you. Instead of spreading false charity based solely on human emotion and totally devoid of any supernatural charity - you should be encouraging prayer and sacrifice for the intention of the soon to be departed’s conversion and positive judgment as well as encouraging any attempts to get the loved one convert if one thinks it will do some good. This may be God’s final attempt at bringing someone into the fold.

You’re judging the state of someone’s soul. This judgment is reserved solely to Christ and not you. My statement was “She’s going to be just fine.” I did not state that she would go to heaven; I did not state that she would go to hell; I did not state that she would go to purgatory. All I said was “she’s going to be just fine.” You are making assumption about my statement. I do hope that people pray for her and I am sure they are (I am). But if someone really loves Jesus I am sure she can rely on His love. We don’t know what happens to aborted babies but we hope in God’s love. Everything God does is from love and what happens to those murdered children is done in love.

As stated above, she does not have to be a member of the Catholic Church in order to be saved. ** This belief is heresy.**

 

[LittleSoldier]

Hard to tell whether this is a wilfull misrepresentation or just a repeating of the myth that some websites keep propagating.

From one of the many sources that cites the condemnation:
Nothing could be further from the truth. On August 8, 1949, the Holy Office sent a letter to Archbishop Richard James Cushing of Boston condemning Father Feeney’s error. In this letter, the Holy Office explained that, “…among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church. However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church.”

As to whether the excommunication was lifted, yes it was. Was it done so lawfully? All but those few who support the Feeney position deny that it was since it did not comply with the canonical need to repent of dogmatic error. Can his “spiritual descendents” be in actual full communion with the Church? Again, aside from those who cling to the errors of Fr. Feeney, none support the idea that one can be in opposition to the stated meaning of the dogma by the only valid authority, the Church, and still be in communion.

lasalettejourney.blogspot.com/2008/10/did-father-feeney-and-his-followers.html

I’m not a canon lawyer and will not attempt to make the judgment myself but those representing the Church disagree with the concept that one can hold the Feeney position and be in full communion and advise great caution in promoting a disobedience to Mother Church that could put one’s salvation in jeopardy. Or, as Jesus put it, “It were better for him, that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should scandalize one of these little ones.”

Thank you, John. It’s disturbing to see this heresy is still alive and well after all these years. I wonder if this is willful misrepresentation, also.

Why anyone would believe that anything a website with the word “Catholic” in its title presents Church teaching is amazing. “Catholics for Choice” is a well-known heretical organization, but it has that word in it, so abortion must be OK.

 

[LittleSoldier]

I posted my comments last night in response to a post which attacked me. That post and my response were both removed from the thread.

This is now the second time I’ve posted this. I’m not going to post it again. I’m sick and this is difficult for me to do.

If anyone has any questions, please research Fr. Feeney, and Feeneyism. There is a lot there online to read. But please be careful because much of it buys into the heresy.

It’s not true that those who are not Catholic are damned to hell and why anyone would believe that a loving God would allow such a travesty is beyond me. God loves us. Do you realize how many people would be damned to hell each and every day simply because they are not Catholic? No wonder people get upset at the Church; no wonder Protestants don’t want to convert. I don’t blame them. If I thought the Feeney heresy were true Church teaching I wouldn’t want to have anything to do with the Catholic Church either.

May God bring us all peace, faith, and wisdom. God bless!

 

[LittleSoldier]

“God is not in control of our lives”? I did not mean the statement to imply that God did not give man free will, but God is most certainly in control of our lives-- of our living and dying-- all the experiences we have in this life are a result of God’s Providence. And no one, not even a little girl who dies in a car accident, is outside the scope of His Providence.

Correct, even if she isn’t a Catholic.

I did not deny this, and would agree… which is why I said that God is in control of our lives.

Then perhaps we are talking past each other.

You are flat out wrong in suggesting that one does not have to be a member of the Catholic Church in order to go to Heaven.There is only one Body. Christ does not have many bodies. There is one Sacred Body by which we are saved-- the Body of Christ. And in order to be saved we must be a member of that Body, as the Church teaches, and has always taught.

Then I guess CAF is wrong as well. Perhaps you should let them know.

Fourth Lateran Council “There is indeed one universal church of the faithful, outside of which nobody at all is saved”
ewtn.com/library/councils/lateran4.htm

I agree.

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos #10 “For since the mystical body of Christ, in the same manner as His physical body, is one, compacted and fitly joined together, it were foolish and out of place to say that the mystical body is made up of members which are disunited and scattered abroad: whosoever therefore is not united with the body is no member of it, neither is he in communion with Christ its head.”
vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19280106_mortalium-animos_en.html

I agree.

Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis #22 “Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed… It follows that those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit.”
vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_29061943_mystici-corporis-christi_en.html

I agree.

The problem is that not one of your quotes state that non-Catholics can’t receive salvation. And they can, through the Catholic Church. One does not have to be a member of the Catholic Church in order to receive salvation through her.

This is how powerful the Church is. Even people who are not members are saved because the Church is Christ. Didn’t Christ make His sacrifice for everyone? That is my impression. Or did He only die for Catholics? I don’t think so.

 

[AnneElliot]

LittleSoldier:

The problem is that not one of your quotes state that non-Catholics can’t receive salvation. And they can, through the Catholic Church. One does not have to be a member of the Catholic Church in order to receive salvation through her.

This is how powerful the Church is. Even people who are not members are saved because the Church is Christ. Didn’t Christ make His sacrifice for everyone? That is my impression. Or did He only die for Catholics? I don’t think so.

Can you answer the following questions for me so I can better understand you:

Why be Catholic if it doesn’t matter (i.e., you said, “one does not have to be a member of the Catholic Church in order to receive salvation through her”)?

Do you think everyone will ultimately be saved?

Lastly, where does the Church teach this:

LittleSoldier:

Even people who are not members are saved because the Church is Christ

Doesn’t that very idea violate what you “agreed” to in your earlier post?

Fourth Lateran Council “There is indeed one universal church of the faithful, outside of which nobody at all is saved”
ewtn.com/library/councils/lateran4.htm

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos #10 “For since the mystical body of Christ, in the same manner as His physical body, is one, compacted and fitly joined together, it were foolish and out of place to say that the mystical body is made up of members which are disunited and scattered abroad: whosoever therefore is not united with the body is no member of it, neither is he in communion with Christ its head.”
vatican.va/holy_father/pi…animos_en.html

Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis #22 “Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed… It follows that those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit.”
vatican.va/holy_father/pi…hristi_en.html

 

[HelenRose]

All i hear is conflicting information… even from the popes…

so if you could shed some light on this…

My answer is: It is a sin to presume God’s mercy and I have no intention of presuming God’s judgement either.

God alone knows the heart and I will leave it up to Him to make the judgement call.
It is my duty and responsiblity to show forth God’s love and salvation.

If we think of the Church as eternal and all encompassing, well of course, there can be no salvation outside the Church. But if we recognize that the Church is eternal and all encompassing, we know that Christ can bring a soul into His Church when ever and for what ever reason He wants to. For His Church is salvation.

Our job is to pray for Mercy for ourselves and for others.

I think the mistake that is made in this debate is the concept that the Church is only the visable - physical Church here on Earth. The Church extends throughout all of eternity and is as infinite as God’s love.

 

[distracted]

I apologize if I have mis-stated what the Church teaches. I have re-read my post and I realize that I cannot correctly remember the passages from different documents. I disagree with some of what has been said here, but I do not have the inclination or the interest or the time to go and re-read all the documents I studied years ago. I knew I should not have gone any further than my original response.

Sorry for the confusion.
Peace,
Tom

i don’t really know what you’re talking about… others probly don’t either…

care to elaborate??

 

[distracted]

heard this a 1000 times:

A loving God would not throw people into eternal fire. He loves them

no God wont… but unrepented sin WILL…

& most people don’t seem to be doing much repenting these days… in my opinion, based on experience…

Jesus and the saints say that not many make it to Heaven… words to taht effect…

They go to Hell cuz they do not love God and his law/truth… enough to apply it to their lives…

It is humans who put themselves far from God…

it is NOT God’s will that any should perish…

if they DO it is NOT God’s fault… not ONE little bit…

“god’s spirit will not always strive with man’s.” (somwhere in the bible)