Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Feenyism  (Read 12198 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pax

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 408
  • Reputation: +42/-0
  • Gender: Male
Feenyism
« on: December 16, 2011, 05:24:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • As far as I know Father Feeney's teachings are not heretical. In fact they splendidly uphold such teachings as Cantante Domino and Unam Sanctum, and were upheld in the Encyclical Letter Mortalium Animos.

    It seems to me that Father Feeney was like a modern day Athanasius standing virtually alone against the heresy of Americanism condemned by Pope Leo XIII in Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae, which heresy, unfortunately, has now spread from sea to shining sea.
    Multiculturalism exchanges honest ignorance for the illusion of truth.

    Offline Canute

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 201
    • Reputation: +143/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Feenyism
    « Reply #1 on: December 16, 2011, 06:28:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What's wrong with Feeneyism? Too many people start threads about it just so they can argue over it.

     :sleep:


    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14824
    • Reputation: +6124/-914
    • Gender: Male
    Feenyism
    « Reply #2 on: December 16, 2011, 08:05:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: pax
    As far as I know Father Feeney's teachings are not heretical. In fact they splendidly uphold such teachings as Cantante Domino and Unam Sanctum, and were upheld in the Encyclical Letter Mortalium Animos.

    It seems to me that Father Feeney was like a modern day Athanasius standing virtually alone against the heresy of Americanism condemned by Pope Leo XIII in Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae, which heresy, unfortunately, has now spread from sea to shining sea.


    I don't disagree with you, yet where are the fruits of Fr. Feeney?

    I do not believe in BOD and think Fr. probably in heaven and could be a saint - who knows?........ but I have wondered about the fruits for some time now . . . . .I know SBC signed their "Doctrinal Preamble" and are now with the NO - - - - the fruit looks stinky.

    BTW, The Archbishop who was the instrumental cause of the whole "Boston Heresy Case" and everything else against Fr. Feeney  was Archbishop Richard James Cushing. According to wikepedia, At the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965) Cushing played a vital role in drafting Nostra Aetate, the docuмent that officially absolved the Jews of deicide charge.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Cushing
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline nadieimportante

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 771
    • Reputation: +496/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Feenyism
    « Reply #3 on: December 17, 2011, 12:32:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It would be more accurate to call us Chrysostom-ites

    St. John Chrysostom, The Consolation of Death: “And well should the pagan lament, who not knowing God, dying goes straight to punishment. Well should the Jew mourn, who not believing in Christ, has assigned his soul to perdition.”

    St. John Chrysostom, The Consolation of Death: “And plainly must we grieve for our own catechumens, should they, either through their own unbelief or through their own neglect, depart this life without the saving grace of baptism.”


    St. John Chrysostom, Hom. in Io. 25, 3:
    “For the Catechumen is a stranger to the Faithful… One has Christ for his King; the other sin and the devil; the food of one is Christ, of the other, that meat which decays and perishes… Since then we have nothing in common, in what, tell me, shall we hold communion?… Let us then give diligence that we may become citizens of the city above… for if it should come to pass (which God forbid!) that through the sudden arrival of death we depart hence uninitiated, though we have ten thousand virtues, our portion will be none other than hell, and the venomous worm, and fire unquenchable, and bonds indissoluble.”


    St. John Chrysostom, Homily III. On Phil. 1:1-20:
    “Weep for the unbelievers; weep for those who differ in nowise from them, those who depart hence without the illumination, without the seal! They indeed deserve our wailing, they deserve our groans; they are outside the Palace, with the culprits, with the condemned: for, ‘Verily I say unto you, Except a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of Heaven.”


    St. John Chrysostom, Homily XXV: “Hear, ye as many as are unilluminated, shudder, groan, fearful is the threat, fearful is the sentence. ‘It is not possible,’ He [Christ] saith, ‘for one not born of water and the Spirit to enter into the Kingdom of heaven’; because he wears the raiment of death, of cursing, of perdition, he hath not yet received his Lord’s token, he is a stranger and an alien, he hath not the royal watchword. ‘Except,’ He saith, ‘a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of heaven.”


    "Wrong is wrong even if everyone is doing it.
     Right is right even if no one is doing it." - Saint Augustine

    Offline curiouscatholic23

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 388
    • Reputation: +0/-1
    • Gender: Male
    Feenyism
    « Reply #4 on: December 17, 2011, 12:47:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Stubborn
    Quote from: pax
    As far as I know Father Feeney's teachings are not heretical. In fact they splendidly uphold such teachings as Cantante Domino and Unam Sanctum, and were upheld in the Encyclical Letter Mortalium Animos.

    It seems to me that Father Feeney was like a modern day Athanasius standing virtually alone against the heresy of Americanism condemned by Pope Leo XIII in Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae, which heresy, unfortunately, has now spread from sea to shining sea.


    I don't disagree with you, yet where are the fruits of Fr. Feeney?
    I do not believe in BOD and think Fr. probably in heaven and could be a saint - who knows?........ but I have wondered about the fruits for some time now . . . . .I know SBC signed their "Doctrinal Preamble" and are now with the NO - - - - the fruit looks stinky.

    BTW, The Archbishop who was the instrumental cause of the whole "Boston Heresy Case" and everything else against Fr. Feeney  was Archbishop Richard James Cushing. According to wikepedia, At the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965) Cushing played a vital role in drafting Nostra Aetate, the docuмent that officially absolved the Jews of deicide charge.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Cushing


    The fruits were that Fr. Feeney was gaining many converts in the Boston area. If you read the MHFM book Oustide The Church There is No Salvation it has a whole chapter on it. Cardinal Cushing, who often boasted that he had not made one single covert, also given a bnai birth (brittish masonic) award was furious with Fr. Feeney for upholding tradition. So Cardinal Cushing wrote to Rome and got a reply back, the only problem with this is that is was from the Holy Office, not Pius XII himself which shows its falliability.

    MHFM points out the fruits of Fr. Feeney's apostolate in Boston (orothodox teaching, gaining many converts), with the fruits of Vatican 2 in Boston (major settlements approaching billions of dollars).


    Offline s2srea

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5106
    • Reputation: +3896/-48
    • Gender: Male
    Feenyism
    « Reply #5 on: December 17, 2011, 01:21:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: nadieimportante
    It would be more accurate to call us Chrysostom-ites


    [size=9]Nah.[/size]

    Offline Raoul76

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4803
    • Reputation: +2007/-12
    • Gender: Male
    Feenyism
    « Reply #6 on: December 17, 2011, 02:26:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    It seems to me that Father Feeney was like a modern day Athanasius standing virtually alone against the heresy of Americanism condemned by Pope Leo XIII in Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae, which heresy, unfortunately, has now spread from sea to shining sea.


    Not everything is as it seems  :drillsergeant:

    Chrysostom-ites?  It would be more accurate to call you neo-Pharisees.  The Protestants and Jansenists also thought they were going "back to Augustine," just like you, restoring to the Church to the greater glory they imagined it once had under the Fathers... WRONG, the Church continues in the same glory and always will.

    To not even acknowledge, at the very least -- after twisting the words of Trent and Pius IX which, as they are written, show that what you're saying is indeed objectively heretical -- that the Church permitted the idea of salvation through implicit faith to be taught by many theologians for centuries, even most theologians, shows your pride right there.  Surely you must see that this concept is very likely part of the OAUM by now.  

    You simply don't want to see, because you are in love with this idea that you're saving the Church and are part of some elite.  Likening yourselves to saints and implying everyone else is an Americanist reveals the pride all too well.  The pride is also shown in the way you can't get off this topic; almost every single Feeneyite has this kind of OCD where this subject is all they can talk about.  In my case, I clearly am a convinced sede, but I can talk about other things.  

    That wasn't always the case, mind you, but now that I'm learning more humility, I'm able to admonish my brother once or twice and then move on...  But you just go around and around in circles.  It's obsessive and oppressive; and certainly not the spirit of God, not the way saints converted people. When did you ever see Jesus barraging people who didn't believe in Him?  

    It kind of reminds me of SJB; he almost never posts on anything anymore except Bishop Dolan.  People get so caught up in certain obsessions that it's like they drift away, lost at sea, their spirit begins to wilt, they lose focus on God and their spiritual progress, they go around in circles.  Whenever you see that happening, with yourself or anyone else, it's time to make some big changes.



    Readers: Please IGNORE all my postings here. I was a recent convert and fell into errors, even heresy for which hopefully my ignorance excuses. These include rejecting the "rhythm method," rejecting the idea of "implicit faith," and being brieflfy quasi-Jansenist. I also posted occasions of sins and links to occasions of sin, not understanding the concept much at the time, so do not follow my links.

    Offline Raoul76

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4803
    • Reputation: +2007/-12
    • Gender: Male
    Feenyism
    « Reply #7 on: December 17, 2011, 02:32:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • curiouscatholic23 said:  
    Quote
    MHFM points out the fruits of Fr. Feeney's apostolate in Boston (orothodox teaching, gaining many converts), with the fruits of Vatican 2 in Boston (major settlements approaching billions of dollars).


    Converts to his heresy / error?  

    So now you're saying that we can judge by the amount of people who are converted to something?  We're playing the numbers game?  Well, there are many more people in VII than there are sedes, so I guess Father Ratzinger is more holy than the sede bishops...

    Luther made lots of "converts" too, you know.  The Jansenists also inspired a certain "fervor."  And many people even love Vatican II...  

    Vatican II being laxist doesn't make the Pharisee ideas of the Dimonds any better.  It is an error on the other side, that's all.  Just like the Donatists, or the Jansenists, it's a "far right" error rather than a "far left" error.  The Donatists were reacting against bishops who had acted in a cowardly way and were considered to be sellouts.  They thought these bishops were weak and tepid, so they became overly stringent and harsh in reaction to them, which eventually led to schism.  In short, two wrongs don't make a right.
    Readers: Please IGNORE all my postings here. I was a recent convert and fell into errors, even heresy for which hopefully my ignorance excuses. These include rejecting the "rhythm method," rejecting the idea of "implicit faith," and being brieflfy quasi-Jansenist. I also posted occasions of sins and links to occasions of sin, not understanding the concept much at the time, so do not follow my links.


    Offline curiouscatholic23

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 388
    • Reputation: +0/-1
    • Gender: Male
    Feenyism
    « Reply #8 on: December 17, 2011, 03:01:37 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Raoul76
    Quote
    It seems to me that Father Feeney was like a modern day Athanasius standing virtually alone against the heresy of Americanism condemned by Pope Leo XIII in Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae, which heresy, unfortunately, has now spread from sea to shining sea.


    Not everything is as it seems  :drillsergeant:

    Chrysostom-ites?  It would be more accurate to call you neo-Pharisees.  The Protestants and Jansenists also thought they were going "back to Augustine," just like you, restoring to the Church to the greater glory they imagined it once had under the Fathers... WRONG, the Church continues in the same glory and always will.

    To not even acknowledge, at the very least -- after twisting the words of Trent and Pius IX which, as they are written, show that what you're saying is indeed objectively heretical -- that the Church permitted the idea of salvation through implicit faith to be taught by many theologians for centuries, even most theologians, shows your pride right there.  Surely you must see that this concept is very likely part of the OAUM by now.  

    You simply don't want to see, because you are in love with this idea that you're saving the Church and are part of some elite.  Likening yourselves to saints and implying everyone else is an Americanist reveals the pride all too well.  The pride is also shown in the way you can't get off this topic; almost every single Feeneyite has this kind of OCD where this subject is all they can talk about.  In my case, I clearly am a convinced sede, but I can talk about other things.  

    That wasn't always the case, mind you, but now that I'm learning more humility, I'm able to admonish my brother once or twice and then move on...  But you just go around and around in circles.  It's obsessive and oppressive; and certainly not the spirit of God, not the way saints converted people. When did you ever see Jesus barraging people who didn't believe in Him?  

    It kind of reminds me of SJB; he almost never posts on anything anymore except Bishop Dolan.  People get so caught up in certain obsessions that it's like they drift away, lost at sea, their spirit begins to wilt, they lose focus on God and their spiritual progress, they go around in circles.  Whenever you see that happening, with yourself or anyone else, it's time to make some big changes.





    Have you ever asked yourself why 99% of the bishops at Vatican 2 signed the docuмents?

    Maybe its because this idea that salvation can be found in other religions (like judaism, hinduism, buddhism, etc.) was running wild.

    Bod was originally an error that morphed into invincible ignorance that allowed Vatican 2's hersey of religious liberty.

    Its all interconnected once you see the truth.

    And FYI, this idea that God could never allow an error/hersey to be taught by the majority of the church is simply not true. God allowed 99% of the Church to hold errors/hersey about arianism yet there was still a remnant that kept the faith.

    And you still never answered my question:
    Can an unbaptized satanist ever be saved through invincible ignorance? Why or why not?

    Offline nadieimportante

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 771
    • Reputation: +496/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Feenyism
    « Reply #9 on: December 17, 2011, 03:03:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  •  

    Quote
    Chrysostom-ites?  It would be more accurate to call you neo-Pharisees.  The Protestants and Jansenists also thought they were going "back to Augustine," just like you, restoring to the Church to the greater glory they imagined it once had under the Fathers... WRONG, the Church continues in the same glory and always will.


    All the Fathers taught unanimously as St. John Chrysostoms quotes that I posted. all the dogmatic decrees of the Church on EENS (and what constitutes a member of the church) all teach the same as St. John Chrysostom. Therefore, I don't have a clue what "church" you  are talking about.


    Quote
    To not even acknowledge, at the very least -- after twisting the words of Trent and Pius IX which, as they are written, show that what you're saying is indeed objectively heretical --


    Why don't you quote those "words" that are being "twisted" from "as they are written". You are full of it. The Church teaches dogmatically that absolutely no one is saved outside of the Church even if they shed their blood for Christ. Yet you twist that to believe that anyone can be saved, now that's twisting.


    Quote
    that the Church permitted the idea of salvation through implicit faith to be taught by many theologians for centuries, even most theologians, shows your pride right there.


    Implicit faith? Why don't you show us who taught implicit faith? and when? St. Thomas never heard of it. and St. Alphonsus Ligouri  was opposed to it. Are they heretics too?

    As for the rest of what you wrote after "You simply don't want to see...", it's just your opinions again. not worth responding to.

    Where is ONE authoritative quote posted by you anywhere on the subject? Not a one.
    "Wrong is wrong even if everyone is doing it.
     Right is right even if no one is doing it." - Saint Augustine

    Offline s2srea

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5106
    • Reputation: +3896/-48
    • Gender: Male
    Feenyism
    « Reply #10 on: December 17, 2011, 03:08:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: nadieimportante
    Why don't you quote those "words" that are being twisted from "as they are written". You are full of it. The church teaches dogmatically that absolutely no one is saved outside of the Church even if they shed their blood for Christ.


    Where is the word 'absolutely' to be found in "EENS- Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus"? I keep seeing this lately.

    You're making up your own dogma, to "EEANS- Extra Ecclesiam Absolutely Nulla Salus"


    Offline nadieimportante

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 771
    • Reputation: +496/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Feenyism
    « Reply #11 on: December 17, 2011, 03:59:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • St. Augustine: “If you wish to be a Catholic, do not venture to believe, to say, or to teach that ‘they whom the Lord has predestinated for baptism can be snatched away from his predestination, or die before that has been accomplished in them which the Almighty has predestined.’ There is in such a dogma more power than I can tell assigned to chances in opposition to the power of God, by the occurrence of which casualties that which He has predestinated is not permitted to come to pass. It is hardly necessary to spend time or earnest words in cautioning the man who takes up with this error against the absolute vortex of confusion into which it will absorb him, when I shall sufficiently meet the case if I briefly warn the prudent man who is ready to receive correction against the threatening mischief.” (On the Soul and Its Origin 3, 13)


    Descending into the Vortex of Confusion

    SSPX Fr. Rulleau's Baptism of Desire, A Patristic Commentary
    Page 43

    "The existence of baptism of desire is, then, a truth which, although it has not been defined as a dogma by the Church, is at least proximate to the faith. Historically, the Fathers of the Church only the case of a catechumen who died before he could receive the sacrament without being guilty of any negligence or contempt of the sacrament. Following the same reasoning, however, should we not include in this category of saved by baptism of desire converts not yet catechumens who might desire baptism? If so, what kind of desire is necessary? Would a simple attraction towards the Catholic religion suffice? Again, following the same reasoning, should we not include someone who had never heard of the Faith for want of preachers to make it known? It becomes clear that by following this line of reasoning you would end by extending baptism of desire to every decent man seeking God. Consistent with the same reasoning, should we not go so far as to call "anonymous Christians" everyman whose vague belief in the beyond would take the place of "baptism"? When the Church was only confronted by a waning paganism, these questions did not come up. Since the beginning of the Modern Age, however, as the Church has found herself confronted by entire nations which do not know Christ, and, in the former Christendom, by Christians benighted by ignorance and unbelief, these questions have become unavoidable" END

    Back to Reality:

    Excerpts of the Nine Dogmatic Decrees that all agree with St. Augustine


    Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra:
    “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire ..and that nobody can be saved, … even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ[/b], unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

    Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, Constitution 1, 1215, ex cathedra: “There is indeed one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which nobody at all is saved, …

    Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302, ex cathedra:
    “… this Church outside of which there is no salvation nor remission of sin… Furthermore, … every human creature that they by absolute necessity for salvation are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff.”

    Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, Decree # 30, 1311-1312, ex cathedra:
    “… one universal Church, outside of which there is no salvation, for all of whom there is one Lord, one faith, and one baptism…”

    Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra:
    “Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.”
     
    Pope Leo X, Fifth Lateran Council, Session 11, Dec. 19, 1516, ex cathedra:
    “For, regulars and seculars, prelates and subjects, exempt and non-exempt, belong to the one universal Church, outside of which no one at all is saved, and they all have one Lord and one faith.”

    Pope Pius IV, Council of Trent, Iniunctum nobis, Nov. 13, 1565, ex cathedra: “This true Catholic faith, outside of which no one can be saved… I now profess and truly hold…”

    Pope Benedict XIV, Nuper ad nos, March 16, 1743, Profession of Faith: “This faith of the Catholic Church, without which no one can be saved, and which of my own accord I now profess and truly hold…”

    Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, Session 2, Profession of Faith, 1870, ex cathedra: “This true Catholic faith, outside of which none can be saved, which I now freely profess and truly hold…”

    What those dogmatic Decrees Mean

    From: Who Shall Ascend, by Fr. Waltham

    Being ex cathedra definitions, they must be taken literally, unequivocally, and absolutely. Hence, to attempt to modify or qualify them in any way is to deny them.

    3. The doctrine says clearly that only Catholics go to Heaven; all others are lost, that is, they do not go to Heaven, but to Hell. All who are inclined to dispute this dogma should have the good sense to realize that if this is not what the words of the definitions mean, the Church would never have promulgated such a position. To give any other meaning to these words is to portray the Church as foolish and ridiculous.
    4. The pronouncements indicate that, by divine decree, those only will be saved who are members of the Church when they die. This membership must be formal, real, explicit, and, in those of the (mental) age of reason, deliberate. There is no such thing as "potential" membership in the Church, or "implicit" membership, or "quasi-membership," or "invisible membership," or anything of the kind. Neither can those who are catechumens, that is, those who are preparing to enter the Church, be considered members.

    12. Let the reader accept the reasonable fact that the Pontiffs who pronounced these decrees were perfectly literate and fully cognizant of what they were saying. If there were any need to soften or qualify their meanings, they were quite capable of doing so.[/size] They were not regarded as heretics or fanatics at the time of their pronouncements, and have never been labelled such by the Church to this very day. It is an easy thing for the people of this "enlightened" age to fall into the modern delusion that the men of former times, especially those of the Middle Ages, were not as bright as we are, so that they sometimes said they knew not what.
    13. The dates of these definitions are extremely important. They mark the time when the Church terminated speculation and discussion among theologians on the subject of the conditions of salvation. All writings on this subject, therefore, which predate these definitions have value only in so far as they corroborate these definitions.


    15. Almost everybody who writes or comments on this subject explains the doctrine by explaining it away. He begins by affirming the truth of the axiom, Extra Ecclesiam, etc., and ends by denying it while continuing to insist vigorously that he is not doing so. He seems to think it a clever thing to state the formula, then to weasel out of it. What he ought to do is one of two things: either admit that he does not believe this dogma (and also in the same breath, that he does not believe in the Dogma of the Church's lnfallibility); or he should allow for the possibility that there is something about the Catholic Doctrine of Salvation of which he is unaware, or which he refuses to accept, or has been misled into denying.
    "Wrong is wrong even if everyone is doing it.
     Right is right even if no one is doing it." - Saint Augustine

    Offline Augstine Baker

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 985
    • Reputation: +274/-1
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Feenyism
    « Reply #12 on: December 17, 2011, 05:52:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: s2srea
    Quote from: nadieimportante
    Why don't you quote those "words" that are being twisted from "as they are written". You are full of it. The church teaches dogmatically that absolutely no one is saved outside of the Church even if they shed their blood for Christ.


    Where is the word 'absolutely' to be found in "EENS- Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus"? I keep seeing this lately.

    You're making up your own dogma, to "EEANS- Extra Ecclesiam Absolutely Nulla Salus"


    I keep seeing you post things, but never actually say anything.

    Just hit the ignore button and go away.

    Offline ServusSpiritusSancti

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8212
    • Reputation: +7174/-12
    • Gender: Male
    Feenyism
    « Reply #13 on: December 17, 2011, 08:42:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • A bit surprising that pax is so anti-sede yet he sides with a priest who was a sede...
    Please ignore ALL of my posts. I was naive during my time posting on this forum and didn’t know any better. I retract and deeply regret any and all uncharitable or erroneous statements I ever made here.

    Offline s2srea

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5106
    • Reputation: +3896/-48
    • Gender: Male
    Feenyism
    « Reply #14 on: December 17, 2011, 09:43:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Augstine Baker
    Quote from: s2srea
    Quote from: nadieimportante
    Why don't you quote those "words" that are being twisted from "as they are written". You are full of it. The church teaches dogmatically that absolutely no one is saved outside of the Church even if they shed their blood for Christ.


    Where is the word 'absolutely' to be found in "EENS- Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus"? I keep seeing this lately.

    You're making up your own dogma, to "EEANS- Extra Ecclesiam Absolutely Nulla Salus"


    I keep seeing you post things, but never actually say anything.

    Just hit the ignore button and go away.


    I think I made a pretty good point there. I guess it just really bothers you guys huh..

     :rolleyes: