Author Topic: Fr. Stepanich on Outside of the Church There is No Salvation (Read 22459 times)

Dawn · « **Reply #5 on:** July 17, 2009, 01:39:50 PM »

What those who call themselves Feeneyites believe today, I have no idea. However, as Roscoe has stated elsewhere, as I have informed him, Fr. Feeney was "excommunicated" for disobedience, he did not come when called by Pius XII.He was not giving a false teaching on Outside of the Church there is No Salvation, but that he said it at all here in American was the problem. Remeber, the diocese of Boston was and most likely still is under the spell of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs/false ecuмenists. They did not want him mucking up the relationship that they had developed with Jews, Masons, Protestants and of course on the hush hush ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs. He upset the balance and was turned on. They they I speak of included his former pupil Bishop Wilson.Wilson was a queer and a pedophile.
The "excommunication" was lifted by Paul 6.

CM · « **Reply #6 on:** July 17, 2009, 03:01:59 PM »

This Stepanich is a heretic. His understanding of 'invincible ignorance' is entirely heterodox, and takes the teachings of Pope Pius IX out of context. And Pius XII was neither saintly nor a pope, but a heretic.

Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quadem, December 9, 1854: "For it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood; but, on the other hand, it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, are not stained by any guilt in this matter in the eyes of God."

Ignorance itself will not excuse a person from the guilt of infidelity to the true religion, such as subjecting oneself to a heretical antipope, but invincible ignorance alone. Notice also that the following teaching of Pius IX does not state that such persons will be exonerated from the guilt of original sin or other sins against morality. Pope Pius IX never taught that a person in the state of invincible ignorance of the true Faith could be saved, but that their just punishment would not include punishment for the sin of infidelity.

Elizabeth · « **Reply #7 on:** July 17, 2009, 03:32:49 PM »

CM who the hell are you, some mighty theologian?

Dawn, the mess in Boston would have been all the more reason to seize the opportunity to meet with the Pope, IMO.

I personally know an adult child of the Feeney commune. Lets just say that conditions were deplorable for the children, and the mess in Boston was right there in the Feeney Slaves community/commune.

Vladimir · « **Reply #8 on:** July 17, 2009, 04:03:33 PM »

Quote from: Elizabeth

For years I have been seeing the Feenyites pretend that they don't know if Feeney was excommunicated.

They continue in their obstinate rebellion to ignore that Feeney was summoned to Rome to speak with Pope Pius XII about his [false] teaching. Feeney refused to respect and obey the Holy Father, and he was excommunicated for this.

So now these heretics are busy trying to make Pope Pius XII an anti-pope. What else can they do? Except damn evey innocent little baby to Hell and every sweet and pure soul who co-operated with God's Grace to Hell.

Also, they make a mockery of all of the zillions of prayers we say for the dying, etc. They deny God's love for souls.

The

Do you really think that I am like that?

CMMM · « **Reply #9 on:** July 17, 2009, 06:13:41 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

This Stepanich is a heretic. His understanding of 'invincible ignorance' is entirely heterodox, and takes the teachings of Pope Pius IX out of context. And Pius XII was neither saintly nor a pope, but a heretic.

Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quadem, December 9, 1854: "For it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood; but, on the other hand, it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, are not stained by any guilt in this matter in the eyes of God."

Ignorance itself will not excuse a person from the guilt of infidelity to the true religion, such as subjecting oneself to a heretical antipope, but invincible ignorance alone. Notice also that the following teaching of Pius IX does not state that such persons will be exonerated from the guilt of original sin or other sins against morality. Pope Pius IX never taught that a person in the state of invincible ignorance of the true Faith could be saved, but that their just punishment would not include punishment for the sin of infidelity.

Let us take this one step further.

Pius IX does not teach that salvation can be attained by invincible ignorance alone. In fact, no pope ever has. In contrast however, no pope has ever explicitly stated that those, though invincibly ignorant of the Truth that is Catholicism, are condemned to hell. If invincible ignorance will not be punished for, then what lay in the way of salvation?

Original Sin. It's remedy? Baptism, most certainly.

Let us investigate Justin Martyr...

St. Justin Martyr, 1.46 (c. 150 AD): "We have been taught that Christ is the first-begotten of God, and we have declared him to be the Logos of which all mankind partakes [John 1:9]. Those, therefore, who lived according to reason [Greek, logos] were really Christians, even though they were thought to be atheists, such as, among the Greeks, Socrates, Heraclitus, and others like them. . . . Those who lived before Christ but did not live according to reason [logos] were wicked men, and enemies of Christ, and murderers of those who did live according to reason [logos], whereas those who lived then or who live now according to reason [logos]are Christians. Such as these can be confident and unafraid"

And likewise, Clement of Alexandria...

Clement of Alexandria (Stromata 7.17, 1.5)"From what has been said, I think it is clear that there is one true Church, which is really ancient, into which those who are just according to design are enrolled."

How can reason alone justify a man? There would have to be two factors accounted for...

First would be obviously an invincible ignorance of Catholicism, such as the Greeks would have enjoyed. This ignorance would also apply today to those without the reason to understand Catholicism, such as the handicapped, the young, the uneducated, and those without access to the resources to learn.

Secondly, we can safely assume both Justin and Clement believed in Baptism of Desire, as we understand no one can be justified without baptism. Hence, if the Greeks could be justified, it must be admitted they had somehow received a valid baptism.

So, as CM says, Ignorance itself will not excuse, however, invincible ignorance coupled with a valid baptism of desire, would be sufficient in terms of what is 'required' for salvation.

St. Alphonsus Liguori 1691-1787 Moral Theology - (Bk. 6):

"But baptism of desire is perfect conversion to God by contrition or love of God above all things accompanied by an explicit or implicit desire for true Baptism of water, the place of which it takes as to the remission of guilt, but not as to the impression of the [baptismal] character or as to the removal of all debt of punishment. It is called 'of wind' ['flaminis'] because it takes place by the impulse of the Holy Ghost Who is called a wind ['flamen']

This in no way means 'Everyone saved', as ultimately there must still be a response to the Lord's grace, but the possibility exists and we should ultimately pray that God's will be done with such individuals, and be our lord's hands and feet in bringing to them the truth of Catholicism.