Author Topic: Fr. Leonard Feeney - Who is he what did he teach? (Read 28304 times)

Dawn · « **Reply #240 on:** October 18, 2010, 08:16:12 PM »

I do not know Roscoe. I do not think so. Take care.

Cheryl · « **Reply #241 on:** October 19, 2010, 05:59:57 AM »

Quote from: MyrnaM

:scratchchin:

No need to scratch Myrna, Roscoe and Dawn have a special bond that no one else but the two of them understand. Sometimes I think The Holy Ghost has given Dawn the gift of tongues when it comes to Roscoe-speak. She does seem to be the only one who understand where he's coming from. Hey Dawn, :wave: nice to see you!

Dawn · « **Reply #242 on:** October 19, 2010, 10:50:15 AM »

Thank you Cheryl. I do like Roscoe. There are just a few on this board I would not have anything to do with. It is a gift from God that I am able to get along with most everyone I meet. I love people and want to do the best that I can for them. And, of course we know that is telling them the Truths of the Catholic Faith.
I will run from persons saying they are Catholic and spouting things out of their mouth about salvation and the Mercy of God. I know this is not a popular position with some here, but I for one have grown to really have deep love for saints Like Jerome, or Vincent Ferrer or St. Francis and dear St. Dominic who were so adamant about the fewness of those saved and the importance for us to tell the complete Truth no matter how difficult for some to hear.

Alexandria · « **Reply #243 on:** October 19, 2010, 11:26:53 AM »

I'll add my vote for Roscoe too.

So, Roscoe, here's a "thumbs-up" from Alexandria. Unfortunately, it won't get you anywhere..... :wink: :cool:

roscoe · « **Reply #244 on:** October 19, 2010, 01:34:32 PM »

Despite the Jansenist heretics that inhabit this Forum, there are a few who do not qualify as what Fr Feeney would describe as pius frauds. Viva Il Papa

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #245 on:** October 19, 2010, 03:05:51 PM »

Quote from: roscoe

Despite the Jansenist heretics that inhabit this Forum, there are a few who do not qualify as what Fr Feeney would describe as pius frauds. Viva Il Papa

Just to point out, 90% of people who post here are NOT heretics. I wouldn't say there are only a few here who are not.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #246 on:** October 19, 2010, 03:07:03 PM »

I'll give a vote to Dawn. She's a nice person, great to have her back.

:cheers:

Cheryl · « **Reply #247 on:** October 19, 2010, 03:16:22 PM »

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

I'll give a vote to Dawn. She's a nice person, great to have her back.

:cheers:

For the second time today, I'll second the motion. :cheers:

Cheryl · « **Reply #248 on:** October 19, 2010, 03:21:14 PM »

Quote from: Dawn

T. There are I know this is not a popular position with some here, but I for one have grown to really have deep love for saints Like Jerome, or Vincent Ferrer or St. Francis and dear St. Dominic who were so adamant about the fewness of those saved and the importance for us to tell the complete Truth no matter how difficult for some to hear.

Have you ever had the chance to see the movie, Monsieur Vincent? Great movie, wonderful performance by the actor who played St. Vincent Ferrer. It came out in 1947.

roscoe · « **Reply #249 on:** October 19, 2010, 06:41:53 PM »

I have a couple of disagreements with Dawn but they are amicable. She is a little to hard on Pius XII(XIII) and considers herself a 'sede'. It does not however get to the point where she denies Papal Primacy like some of the radical, dogmatic 'sedes' and those who think the anti-pope Benedict is somehow pope of the Catholic Church.

innocenza · « **Reply #250 on:** November 12, 2010, 12:07:00 PM »

Opinions, please, on the following citation, via a friend, on what Bp. McKenna wrote to the Dimond Brothers:

"Fr. Fahey in these words is in fact recognizing Baptism of Desire. I repeat them, emphasizing what you ignorantly overlook, with (in parentheses) his implications: 'The Jews, as a nation, are objectively aiming at giving society a direction which is in complete opposition to the order God wants. It is possible that (subjectively) a member of the Jєωιѕн Nation, who (objectively) rejects Our Lord, may (subjectively) have the supernatural life which God wishes to see in every soul (Sanctifying Grace), and so be good with the goodness God wants, but objectively, the direction he is seeking to give to the world is opposed to God and to that life, and therefore is not (objectively) good. If a Jew who rejects Our Lord is (subjectively) good in the way God demands (and therefore, by Baptism of Desire, in the State of Grace), it is in spite of the movement in which (objectively) he and his nation are engaged.' I could not agree more with what Fr. Fahey says . . ."

Elizabeth · « **Reply #251 on:** November 13, 2010, 08:48:44 PM »

Quote from: innocenza

Opinions, please, on the following citation, via a friend, on what Bp. McKenna wrote to the Dimond Brothers:

"Fr. Fahey in these words is in fact recognizing Baptism of Desire. I repeat them, emphasizing what you ignorantly overlook, with (in parentheses) his implications: 'The Jews, as a nation, are objectively aiming at giving society a direction which is in complete opposition to the order God wants. It is possible that (subjectively) a member of the Jєωιѕн Nation, who (objectively) rejects Our Lord, may (subjectively) have the supernatural life which God wishes to see in every soul (Sanctifying Grace), and so be good with the goodness God wants, but objectively, the direction he is seeking to give to the world is opposed to God and to that life, and therefore is not (objectively) good. If a Jew who rejects Our Lord is (subjectively) good in the way God demands (and therefore, by Baptism of Desire, in the State of Grace), it is in spite of the movement in which (objectively) he and his nation are engaged.' I could not agree more with what Fr. Fahey says . . ."

:idea: Impossible to comprehend?

Tradycja · « **Reply #252 on:** November 13, 2010, 08:52:13 PM »

Quote from: Elizabeth

Quote from: innocenza
Opinions, please, on the following citation, via a friend, on what Bp. McKenna wrote to the Dimond Brothers:

"Fr. Fahey in these words is in fact recognizing Baptism of Desire. I repeat them, emphasizing what you ignorantly overlook, with (in parentheses) his implications: 'The Jews, as a nation, are objectively aiming at giving society a direction which is in complete opposition to the order God wants. It is possible that (subjectively) a member of the Jєωιѕн Nation, who (objectively) rejects Our Lord, may (subjectively) have the supernatural life which God wishes to see in every soul (Sanctifying Grace), and so be good with the goodness God wants, but objectively, the direction he is seeking to give to the world is opposed to God and to that life, and therefore is not (objectively) good. If a Jew who rejects Our Lord is (subjectively) good in the way God demands (and therefore, by Baptism of Desire, in the State of Grace), it is in spite of the movement in which (objectively) he and his nation are engaged.' I could not agree more with what Fr. Fahey says . . ."

:idea: Impossible to comprehend?

So someone can have baptism of desire who does not have the desire to be baptized???

innocenza · « **Reply #253 on:** November 14, 2010, 05:33:21 AM »

Twists the mind into a pretzel.

Cristian · « **Reply #254 on:** November 14, 2010, 07:26:59 AM »

Quote from: innocenza

Opinions, please, on the following citation, via a friend, on what Bp. McKenna wrote to the Dimond Brothers:

"Fr. Fahey in these words is in fact recognizing Baptism of Desire. I repeat them, emphasizing what you ignorantly overlook, with (in parentheses) his implications: 'The Jews, as a nation, are objectively aiming at giving society a direction which is in complete opposition to the order God wants. It is possible that (subjectively) a member of the Jєωιѕн Nation, who (objectively) rejects Our Lord, may (subjectively) have the supernatural life which God wishes to see in every soul (Sanctifying Grace), and so be good with the goodness God wants, but objectively, the direction he is seeking to give to the world is opposed to God and to that life, and therefore is not (objectively) good. If a Jew who rejects Our Lord is (subjectively) good in the way God demands (and therefore, by Baptism of Desire, in the State of Grace), it is in spite of the movement in which (objectively) he and his nation are engaged.' I could not agree more with what Fr. Fahey says . . ."

To me, imo, the words are at least confuse.