Author Topic: Feeneyites and Sedes Give Trads a Bad Name (Read 15872 times)

Jehanne · « **Reply #10 on:** September 30, 2009, 05:17:25 AM »

Quote from: SJB

You and I do not have the same rule of Faith. You have chosen a different rule. Until this is addressed, any discussion is pointless.

Not sure where you are getting that one, but fine. To the extent that Feeneyism denies BoD and BoB, yes, I agree that it is in error. However, to the extent that it repudiates the modernistic heresy (apparently, embraced by the SSPX, SSPV, and others) that faith can be "implicit", then, yes, I think that it is right on the mark. As I said before, I think that it is better to be too conservative as opposed to the alternative. In that respect, I do not see how anyone can condemn the ideas of Father Feeney as being heretical, except on the grounds of their being theological novelties, but then again, so is the idea of implicit faith.

CM · « **Reply #11 on:** September 30, 2009, 06:04:04 AM »

Implicit faith is not only a novelty it is heresy.

After describing the Most Holy Trinity, Pope Eugene IV at the Council of Florence infallibly says this: "Whoever, therefore, wishes to be saved, let him think thus of the Trinity."

He is specifically stating that a person must know and believe correctly concerning the Trinity, and that anyone who does not is incapable of attaining salvation (as is more clearly seen in the rest of his decree; ie "This is the Catholic Faith. Unless a person believes it faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.").

Arguing that "Feeneyism" is heresy has been tried, and it fails every time; it's an empty pursuit. Believing that one can be saved without the sacrament of baptism, on the other hand, is definitely heretical.

The only way anybody will come to this truth is by adopting the correct rule of Faith.

In fact, I am certain that it is a mass exodus from this rule that has precipitated the crisis facing the Church today.

Jehanne · « **Reply #12 on:** September 30, 2009, 06:39:06 AM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

Implicit faith is not only a novelty it is heresy.

After describing the Most Holy Trinity, Pope Eugene IV at the Council of Florence infallibly says this: "Whoever, therefore, wishes to be saved, let him think thus of the Trinity."

He is specifically stating that a person must know and believe correctly concerning the Trinity, and that anyone who does not is incapable of attaining salvation (as is more clearly seen in the rest of his decree; ie "This is the Catholic Faith. Unless a person believes it faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.").

Arguing that "Feeneyism" is heresy has been tried, and it fails every time; it's an empty pursuit. Believing that one can be saved without the sacrament of baptism, on the other hand, is definitely heretical.

The only way anybody will come to this truth is by adopting the correct rule of Faith.

In fact, I am certain that it is a mass exodus from this rule that has precipitated the crisis facing the Church today.

If I had to choose between the modernistic heresy of implicit faith and Feeneyism, I would choose the latter. Fortunately, however, I do not have to choose. It has been defined, de fide, by the Church, how to attain everlasting salvation and eternal life:

"Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly...This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02033b.htm

SJB · « **Reply #13 on:** September 30, 2009, 12:23:45 PM »

Quote from: Jehanne

Quote from: SJB
You and I do not have the same rule of Faith. You have chosen a different rule. Until this is addressed, any discussion is pointless.

Not sure where you are getting that one, but fine. To the extent that Feeneyism denies BoD and BoB, yes, I agree that it is in error.

That's a serious thing. It is a mortal sin to knowingly deny a theologically certain doctrine. That's what the Church teaches quite clearly.

Quote

However, to the extent that it repudiates the modernistic heresy (apparently, embraced by the SSPX, SSPV, and others) that faith can be "implicit", then, yes, I think that it is right on the mark.

So an erroneous doctrine is right when it seems to oppose another more serious error? Is that what you are saying?

Quote

As I said before, I think that it is better to be too conservative as opposed to the alternative.

That's a false choice.

Quote

In that respect, I do not see how anyone can condemn the ideas of Father Feeney as being heretical, except on the grounds of their being theological novelties, but then again, so is the idea of implicit faith.

Fr. Feeney was opposing the outright DENIAL of the dogma of EENS. This is what was occurring in Boston at the time. The Holy Office letter was not condemning Fr. Feeney...it was explaining the correct understanding of the dogma...which was at odds with both Fr. Feeney AND those who were denying the dogma or obscuring it's meaning.

Jehanne · « **Reply #14 on:** September 30, 2009, 12:37:17 PM »

Quote from: SJB

Fr. Feeney was opposing the outright DENIAL of the dogma of EENS. This is what was occurring in Boston at the time. The Holy Office letter was not condemning Fr. Feeney...it was explaining the correct understanding of the dogma...which was at odds with both Fr. Feeney AND those who were denying the dogma or obscuring it's meaning.

Sure, it was advancing the heresy of implicit faith, which Pius XII (a progressive pope, according to most observers) also advanced, which paved the way for Vatican II. Father Feeney was never condemned. We all know this. As a matter of fact, even JPII did not condemn Feeneyism, but I do not have the docuмent where he (JP II) cites the three de fide pronouncements (Lateran, Unam Sanctam, Florence) but he does list the Denzinger references to them. I believe in both BoD and BoB, but I do not go beyond the limits that the Church has infallibly set, in spite of what the post-conciliar popes, SSPX, etc. are saying.