From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

Even when specifically approved by the pope, decrees of the Holy Office are not infallible. They call for a true assent, internal and sincere, but they do not impose an absolute assent, like the dogmatic definitions given by the pope as infallible teacher of the Faith.

I maintain that the Holy Office letter demands a true internal and sincere assent by good Catholics.  

There are priests and bishops who believe as LoLies does, so why can't we just get the same jive with better spin from them if we wish?

Yes, certainly it requires our assent. It is included in Denzinger.

Yes, certainly it requires our assent. It is included in Denzinger.

Denzinger is crap, edited by Karl Rahner, not an official Vatican Magisterial organ.  AAS, now, that's something different.  Rahner put SH in Denzinger precisely because it backs his modernist "Anonymous Christian" theology.

I'm sure that LoT's mind is spinning when I say that there are some docuмents to which I assent but with which I disagree.  That's because he doesn't know the meaning of the term religious assent.  LoT thinks that everything in the authentic Magisterium is infallible.

The docuмent doesn’t get its authority from being published in Denzinger. It gets it from having been issued by the Holy Office, whose head is the Pope.

Idiot.  You JUST said that we have to give it our assent because it's in Denzinger.

Again the burden of proof is being unreasonably shifted. The letter came from the Holy Office to the Abp. of Boston. It was made public in 1953 and appeared in several periodicals. It was included in Denzinger. The docuмent says His Holiness approved the doctrine set forth therein. The Pope is the head of the Holy Office. We have met our burden of proof. If anyone believes that Pius XII did NOT approve this, the burden of proof is now on him to prove it. Not on us.

No, you haven't met anything.  It must appear in AAS to be surely authentic from the Vatican.  It's precisely to prevent potential fraud that this stipulation was put into Canon Law.  There's no proof that the letter published by Cushing, the sworn enemy of Father Feeney and of EENS, a manifest heretic by YOUR definition, LoT, hasn't been edited or altered somehow.  It was allegedly written in 1949 and only made public 4 years later, conveniently AFTER the man who had allegedly written had passed away.  There's sufficient evidence to create positive doubt about its authenticity.  Its appearance in AAS would have completely dispelled all doubt, but, quite strangely for a docuмent intended to teach the Church, it doesn't appear there.

It’s an official letter from the secretary of the Holy Office, in that very capacity. The Pope doesn’t need to sign it. There are a lot of things the Pope doesn’t sign. For example, the Syllabys of Modernist Errors (Lamentabili Sane) was not signed by Pope Pius X either.