CathInfo.com

When we speak of the "Letter of the Holy Office" (link) that was published in numerous Catholic journals in 1953 (which contained approval for the doctrine on baptism of desire), it should be understood that the letter had these two components:

1.   Original Letter of Holy Office 1949: A private letter from the Sacred Congregation to Archbishop Cushing confirming the church's teaching on baptism of desire, and condemning Father Feeney and the St. Benedict Centers’ interpretation of it. The letter was signed by two cardinals and confirms, “…the august Pontiff in an audience on the following Thursday, July 28, 1949, deigned to give his approval…”
2.   Prefixed Letter of Abp Cushing 1952: The second part is a public letter from Archbishop Cushing confirming the Sacred Congregation's order that he publish the letter from 1949. His prefixed letter confirms, “The Supreme Pontiff, His Holiness, Pope Pius XII, has given full approval to this decision…”


Many excuses have been given by the Feeneyites to ignore this letter. Here are examples with rebuttals:

1.   The letter was faked or altered:

Archbishop Cushing placed his own name on the letter before publishing it. He knew well that word would immediately get back to Pope Pius XII, so it would be career ѕυιcιdє for him to have faked or altered it. One of the living Cardinals (Ottaviani) would have also been questioned. If Pope Pius XII didn't really approve, he would have publicly condemned the publishing of the letter and Archbishop Cushing (and possibly Cardinal Ottaviani) would have been severely reprimanded. It would have been enormous news talked about to this day.

2.   The letter only contained signatures of two Cardinals and Abp Cushing. Pope Pius XII didn't approve of it:

Once the letter was published globally in Catholic journals in 1953 , Pope Pius XII certainly heard about it very quickly, and given that he reigned for 5 more years, he certainly knew about it. If Pope Pius XII didn't really approve, he would have publicly condemned the publishing of the letter and Archbishop Cushing (and possibly Cardinal Ottaviani) would have been severely reprimanded. It also would have been enormous news.

3.   The letter contained heresy:

Once the letter was published globally in Catholic journals in 1953, there would have been a massive outcry from clergy all over the world pointing out the heresy. There is no record of any such protest. Pope Pius XII also reigned for another 5 years after the letter was published, and never said a word. If he knew of the letter and remained silent, he would have been guilty of heresy for allowing a heresy to be published in his name.

4.   The letter had no AAS number, so it can be ignored:

The 1917 Code of Canon Law clearly states under Canon 9, "Laws laid down by the Apostolic See are promulgated by publication in the official commentary Acta Apostolicae Sedis [Acts of the Apostolic See], unless in particular cases another mode of promulgation has been prescribed."

Notice that if another mode of promulgation is prescribed, this quote from Canon Law does not refer to such a thing as bad or evil, or that the law should be ignored.


Conclusion: There is absolutely no reason to disregard the letter from the Holy Office. If you think otherwise, let's see your reasons and your proof.

The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, 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.

Fr. Feeney is exonerated by "The Letter" itself.

"The Letter" is in and of itself a double talking heretical docuмent that did nothing - except perhaps double talk itself into state of self contradiction for taking a member of the Church, Fr. Feeney, and making him a member of the Church by desire.

Certainly no one can have any doubt that that Fr. Feeney truly and explicitly longed and desired to be actually united to the Church, therefore, per the conditions dictated within  "The Letter" (bolded), Fr. Feeney indeed remained a member of the Church, at least by (explicit) desire - according to "The Letter" that is.


"The Letter" is so dumb.

 

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: The Letter

The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, 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.

Fr. Feeney is exonerated by "The Letter" itself.

"The Letter" is in and of itself a double talking heretical docuмent that did nothing - except perhaps double talk itself into state of self contradiction for taking a member of the Church, Fr. Feeney, and making him a member of the Church by desire.

Certainly no one can have any doubt that that Fr. Feeney truly and explicitly longed and desired to be actually united to the Church, therefore, per the conditions dictated within  "The Letter" (bolded), Fr. Feeney indeed remained a member of the Church, at least by (explicit) desire - according to "The Letter" that is.


"The Letter" is so dumb.

 

Stubborn,

Your objection that the letter was heretical is answered in #3 in the original post.

Anyone else?

Right. Please re-read your #3 as it is an extremely naive excuse of an item. Keep in mind while you are re-reading your own invention and *always remember* that; what we do not know is not a proof of anything.  

"The Letter", well, much of it anyway, is most certainly heretical.

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.

So what exactly is that sense in which the Church understands Her own dogma?

Hence, too,that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church, and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.

FYI, the sense in which the Church, per V1, understands the meaning of "No salvation outside the Church", is just exactly as She declared it, which is exactly as Fr. Feeney taught it - which you call heresy. :-/

Hard to believe you cannot understand this since only basic, elementary comprehension skills are needed to understand all of this.