Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => The Feeneyism Ghetto => Topic started by: stevusmagnus on October 01, 2009, 01:49:30 AM
-
http://www.catholic.com/newsletters/kke_040113.asp (http://www.catholic.com/newsletters/kke_040113.asp)
KARL KEATING'S E-LETTER
January 13, 2004
Index
Prior issue Next issue
Sign up
TOPIC:
FR. FEENEY AND THE JEWS
Dear Friend of Catholic Answers:
In the 1930s and early 1940s Fr. Leonard Feeney (1897-1978) was known to the public mainly as a writer of better-than-average poetry and of popular books such as "Fish on Friday." From the late 1940s until his death he was known instead for his rigorist interpretation of the maxim "extra ecclesiam nulla salus" ("no salvation outside the Church"). Adherents to his interpretation became known as "Feeneyites."
Ordered to stop teaching his interpretation, Feeney refused and was excommunicated, not technically for teaching heresy but for disobedience. He was reconciled to the Church before his death, and the excommunication was lifted. Some of his followers have tried to construe the reconciliation as a Vatican affirmation of Feeney's theology, but, since the excommunication did not extend beyond a matter of obedience, the lifting of it did not extend any further.
Feeney founded and headed the Saint Benedict Center, which was located across the street from Harvard University. He organized a religious association known as the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. After his death his followers split into no fewer than eight factions, the chief of which, still using the name Saint Benedict Center, is located in Richmond, New Hampshire, just north of the Massachusetts border.
The web site for that group includes an essay attacking Msgr. Ronald Knox (1888-1957). Knox, a convert from Anglicanism, was arguably the most brilliant British Catholic writer of the twentieth century. The essay attacking him can be read at:
www.catholicism.org/pages/knoxproblem.htm
I had seen the essay a long time ago, but it came to my attention again recently when Traditionalist writers Hugh Owen and Robert Bennett used it to argue, indirectly, for the young-earth theory.
They were writing against an article that had appeared in "The New Oxford Review." That article had used a translation by Knox of Pope Pius XII's 1950 encyclical "Humani Generis," and the Traditionalists didn't like the translation. This meant they didn't like Knox. To justify their dislike further, they cited the Saint Benedict Center essay attacking Knox.
The essay is titled "The Problem of Monsignor Ronald Knox: A Painful Post-Mortem" and was written the year after Knox's death. It carries no byline, just a note that it is reprinted from the July 1958 issue of "The Point," a publication that is not otherwise identified.
Wanting to learn more about "The Point," I did a Google search and found another Feeneyite web site. It features the full run of "The Point":
www.fatherfeeney.org/point/point.htm
It turns out that "The Point" was a publication of the Saint Benedict Center.
Before I discuss what is found in that publication, let me back up half a century. A friend of mine who lives in Boston was a teenager when Feeney and his companions used to go to Boston Common to speak, as they did most balmy weekends in the 1950s. Their public remarks were of the rabble-rousing variety, so much so that the police always were on hand to protect Feeney and his friends from the crowd.
The talks quickly achieved notoriety, not so much because they pushed the Feeneyite take on salvation but because of the unrelenting Jew-baiting that came from the platform. My friend remembers the Feeneyite speakers regularly using terms such as "kike" when referring to Jews.
Over the ensuing decades the followers of Leonard Feeney have insisted that neither he nor they were anti-Semitic, and they say the application of that term to their founder and to themselves has been unfair.
One must acknowledge that, more often than not, the term "αnтι-ѕємιтє" is bandied about carelessly and is applied to people who do not deserve the title. Columnists Patrick Buchanan and Joseph Sobran come to mind, two examples of prominent figures who unjustly have been accused of anti-Semitism.
But sometimes the term is used aptly. What about in Feeney's case? We can learn something from examining "The Point." This monthly was published from 1952 to 1959. It supplanted an earlier publication called "The Catholic Observer."
I have not seen printed copies of "The Point," but the brevity of its text leads me to conclude it was not printed in regular magazine format. Each issue was about 2,500 words long--the equivalent of five single-spaced typed pages. Some issues consisted of just one article. Some had a main article plus one or more very short additional items.
Here are the main titles from the issues for 1957:
January: "Jєωιѕн Invasion of Our Country--Our Culture Under Siege"
February: "When Everyone Was Catholic--The Courage of the Faith (Regarding the Jews) in the Thirteenth Century"
March: "Dublin's Briscoe (Jєωιѕн Lord Mayor) Comes to Boston"
April: "The Fight for the Holy City--Efforts of the Jews to Control Jerusalem"
May: "Our Lady of Fatima Warned Us (About Jєωιѕн Communists)"
June: "The Rejected People of Holy Scripture: Why the Jews Fear the Bible"
July: "The Judaising of Christians by Jews--Tactics of the Church's Leading Enemies"
August: "A Sure Defense Against the Jews--What Our Catholic Bishops Can Do for Us"
September: "An Unholy People in the Holy Land--The Actions of the Jews"
October: "The Jєωιѕн Lie About Brotherhood--the Catholic Answer--Israeli Brotherhood"
November: "Six Pointers on the Jews"
December: "The Price of Christmas in Mexico--Freemasons"
You will note that the title of each issue, except for December's, includes an explicit reference to Jews. The proportion is similar for the other years in which "The Point" was published.
Leonard Feeney may be remembered today for insisting that "there is no salvation outside the Church" (a true doctrine, by the way, if properly interpreted), but it seems that in the 1950s he and his Slaves were preoccupied with the Jews, to the point of obsession. They blamed Jews for all sorts of ills: religious, political, social, and cultural. (They do not seem to have blamed them for the Johnstown Flood.)
So far as I can tell, nowhere in "The Point" is there an explicit statement that its writers hate Jews or wish them ill or think them mentally or biologically "inferior." But does it take such attitudes to constitute anti-Semitism?
I don't think so. Webster's defines anti-Semitism as "hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious or racial group." Certainly "The Point" is packed with hostility--and unrelenting hostility at that. (I invite you to read the articles for yourself.)
As I said, the most prominent of the Feeneyite offshoots is the Saint Benedict Center. Its web site, www.catholicism.org, reprints from "The Point" several articles concerning Jews or Jєωιѕн influence. If you want to read the whole run of "The Point," you must go to the alternate web site, www.fatherfeeney.org, which is sponsored by some other organization (one that does not otherwise identify itself).
That other organization is bluntly anti-Semitic. Its web site carries an essay that claims, contrary to Catholic teaching, that "the Jews corporately murdered Christ," that "the Jews all bear the guilt of the murder of Christ," and that "the Jews are all cursed for their deicide." Not surprisingly, the site also features the text of the "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion," a docuмent well known to be a forgery but nevertheless used by the most extreme anti-Semitic groups worldwide.
So that is the other group. What about the Saint Benedict Center's current stance on Jews? Its web site doesn't really say. Most of what is found there has nothing to do with Jews, but what is said about Jews is never complimentary.
Have the folks at the Saint Benedict Center--including old-timers who used to join Feeney in Boston Common--renounced the anti-Semitism that used to come from the mouths of Feeneyite speakers? Have they renounced the anti-Semitism that was the chief note of "The Point" and therefore of the Saint Benedict Center in the 1950s? Have they renounced the anti-Semitism that appears at the web site of the other Feeneyite offshoot?
Not that I can determine. They have sidestepped such questions. They still run articles from "The Point," and that suggests they are not overly embarrassed about what appeared in that publication half a century ago.
Until next time,
Karl
-
I don't think so. Webster's defines anti-Semitism as "hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious or racial group." Certainly "The Point" is packed with hostility--and unrelenting hostility at that. (I invite you to read the articles for yourself.)
In the NO, recognizing the Jews as enemies of the Church is "antisemitism."
Can we doubt that many in the NO regard the Gospels themselves as being antisemitic?
-
Keating has been in pockets of Neocons/Jews for a loooong time,Sungenis and others did a good job revealing and writing on it.....
I am no fan of Feeney, but Karl's article is dishonest, trying to link the articels to some vast anti-Jew conspiracy......
I am sure the SPLC loves it.....
of note, the fact Feeney's people split several ways is no different than many cults and Prots.....
-
Clear example of attacking the messenger instead of the message. Every secular scholar whom I have read would agree that the Catholic Church, from the pre-Nicene era up until the rise of Catholic liberalism in the 18th-century, believed that actual membership in the Church was necessary for salvation. This doctrine has absolutely nothing to do with antisemitism. It is a historical question as much as it is a theological or doctrinal one.
-
Belloc,
Can you provide links of Sungenis exposing Keating? That would be interesting.
-
Belloc,
Can you provide links of Sungenis exposing Keating? That would be interesting.
Will try, but a lot of them Sugenis took down after debates over jews,etc......was part of his articles on Neocons,etc.....somewhere at home, I have them saved on computer.....
-
Subject: Karl Keating's E-Letter
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:53:49 -0800
KARL KEATING'S E-LETTER
January 27, 2004
GERRY MATATICS MIMICS HOWARD DEAN
The former governor of Vermont has been the object of jokes on late-night talk shows because of his now-famous scream, issued after he came in third in the Iowa caucuses.
Last week I was the object of screaming by Gerry Matatics. After thirteen years' absence, he came to San Diego to give a talk. The evening ended with him gesticulating and yelling at me at the top of his lungs. It was a weird and disturbing sight.
During the question period that followed his talk, someone asked whether an unbaptized person could go to heaven. Matatics--who a decade ago declared that he had undergone a "second conversion" and had moved from conservative Catholic to Traditionalist Catholic--gave an answer that closed heaven's gate to almost anyone who is not a formal member of the Catholic Church.
The followers of the late Fr. Leonard Feeney, who was best known for his rigorist interpretation of "no salvation outside the Church," exist on a narrow but real spectrum. Some, such as Matatics's friends at the New Hampshire-based Saint Benedict Center, are at one end and say a person must be a formal member of the Catholic Church to be saved. They take the most hardline position.
Other Feeneyites permit a little more leeway but still end up with a position that is more rigorous than that taught by the Catechism of the Catholic Church (846-848) or by Vatican II (Lumen Gentium 16) or by the most conservative pope of the nineteenth century, Pius IX. Feeneyites leave either no or little room for "invincible ignorance."
Matatics, who at his seminars used to distribute literature from the Saint Benedict Center, makes a tiny distinction between that group's position and his own and uses that distinction to claim that he is not really a Feeneyite. (If not, why distribute the most hardline Feeneyite literature?)
Unlike the Saint Benedict Center, he is open to the possibility that a catechumen who desires baptism but who dies before being baptized might be saved through what is commonly called "baptism of desire." But such a catechumen's salvation is not sure, says Matatics. It might be that he is not saved after all.
Anyone further removed from the Catholic Church would have even less hope--or no hope--of salvation. This would include not just the unbaptized but also Protestants. (Matatics has said in public that he expects his own parents to go to hell, because they remain Protestants.)
In Church history there cannot have been many cases of catechumens dying on the way to their baptisms. As a practical matter, therefore, Matatics's position reduces to the position of the Saint Benedict Center: Formal members of the Catholic Church are saved, and everyone else is lost.
The members of the Saint Benedict Center indisputably deserve the moniker "Feeneyite." In my opinion, Matatics does too. After all, there are Feeneyites who are more generous than he is in their interpretation of "no salvation outside the Church." He is midway along a narrow spectrum, but he is still on the spectrum.
Although for years Matatics has adopted a position almost indistinguishable from that of the Saint Benedict Center, the members of which do not object to being called "Feeneyites," he has insisted that the label should not be applied to him.
One can understand his reluctance: Being identified with a fringe movement is not a good way to ensure speaking engagements. But "pigs is pigs," and Matatics should cease objecting to a label that fits.
He has espoused the Feeneyite understanding of salvation but has been unwilling to go by the Feeneyite designation. He embraces the theory but not the name of the theory. He has not been candid with his audiences and so has done them a disservice.
THE SCREAM
Toward the end of the evening, Matatics referred to my January 13 E-Letter, which may be found at http://www.catholic.com/newsletters/kke_040113.asp
In that E-Letter I wrote about "The Point," a little journal printed by Feeney's original group in the 1950s. I listed the titles of the twelve issues published in 1957. All but one was about Jews and the problems they allegedly cause. I said that Feeney's group was "preoccupied with the Jews, to the point of obsession."
Not so, said Matatics. The Feeneyites were not obsessed with Jews. They simply were concerned about the salvation of Jews. I rolled my eyes.
In the U.S. of the 1950s, Jews were outnumbered by Protestants. They also were outnumbered by people of no religion. Jews then, as now, represented about two percent of the American population. Subtract Catholics from the mix, and Jews represented about three percent of the population.
So why were eleven out of twelve issues of "The Point" focused on perceived problems with Jews? Where were the articles about Protestants, members of Eastern religions, and unbelievers? They, too, by Feeneyite standards, are not on the road to salvation. Why so much supposed solicitude for Jews but not for Baptists or Hindus or agnostics?
I reminded Matatics's audience that Feeney's men used to go to Boston Common and give public lectures. When talking about Jews, they used slurs such as "kike."
A woman in the small audience asked what "kike" meant. I explained that, with respect to Jews, it was the analogue of the "n-word."
Someone using the latter word to refer to blacks is suspected of racism--and rightly so. Similarly, someone using "kike" to refer to Jews is suspected of anti-Semitism.
Matatics turned up the volume. His friends at the Saint Benedict Center were not αnтι-ѕємιтєs, he yelled.
I didn't say they were, I replied. I had been writing about the original Feeneyite group of the 1950s. In my E-Letter I noted that today's Saint Benedict Center reprints articles from "The Point." I asked whether today's group repudiates the anti-Semitism of the 1950s. My words were lost in the din caused by Matatics and his fans.
He was visibly agitated. His voice went from a yell to a scream and eventually broke. He was on a rant. I couldn't make out what he was saying, and I couldn't get a word in.
But I could get out. I was standing by the door, and I went through it, Matatics screaming after me. I was relieved that he didn't chase me as I made for the hotel's exit.
As I stood in the night chill, several people gathered around me, shaking their heads at what they had witnessed. One smiled consolingly and said the evening had reduced my time in purgatory.
Maybe, maybe not. But I know it reduced, almost to oblivion, the residual regard I had for Gerry Matatics, and it reaffirmed my belief that he would do the Church a favor by finding another line of work.
Until next time,
Karl
-
http://www.catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/keatings-gospel.htm
-
Matatics, who at his seminars used to distribute literature from the Saint Benedict Center, makes a tiny distinction between that group's position and his own and uses that distinction to claim that he is not really a Feeneyite. (If not, why distribute the most hardline Feeneyite literature?)
Unlike the Saint Benedict Center, he is open to the possibility that a catechumen who desires baptism but who dies before being baptized might be saved through what is commonly called "baptism of desire." But such a catechumen's salvation is not sure, says Matatics. It might be that he is not saved after all.
I like Matatics. Thanks for pointing him out to me.
-
What resident of whatever section of Traddieland cares what Keating says about anything?
-
Matatics, who at his seminars used to distribute literature from the Saint Benedict Center, makes a tiny distinction between that group's position and his own and uses that distinction to claim that he is not really a Feeneyite. (If not, why distribute the most hardline Feeneyite literature?)
Unlike the Saint Benedict Center, he is open to the possibility that a catechumen who desires baptism but who dies before being baptized might be saved through what is commonly called "baptism of desire." But such a catechumen's salvation is not sure, says Matatics. It might be that he is not saved after all.
I like Matatics. Thanks for pointing him out to me.
I used to like Matatics, he was one of the few apologists who would not try to weasel his way out of certain "hardline" or "over the top" church teachings that Protestants like to bring up. However he is now a sedevacantist home-aloner who even considers the SSPX, CMRI, SSPV to be "counterfeit traditional Catholics" (his own words). If any of his children keep the faith, it will be a miracle.
-
However he is now a sedevacantist home-aloner who even considers the SSPX, CMRI, SSPV to be "counterfeit traditional Catholics" (his own words). If any of his children keep the faith, it will be a miracle.
It's a miracle if ANYONE EVER keeps the faith.
But SSPX, CMRI and SSPV all have heresy. If that doesn't make them counterfeit, then I guess the Novus Ordo isn't counterfeit either.
And as for "home-aloners", I suppose you would just as soon see such people renounce their hatred of heresy, contradict the dogmatic teaching prohibiting communion with heretics and schismatics, and go join the closest "almost Catholic" parish or chapel?
-
I am no fan of Feeney, but Karl's article is dishonest, trying to link the articles to some vast anti-Jew conspiracy......
Uh OH! St. Paul was in on it!
For you, brethren, are become followers of the churches of God which are in Judea, in Christ Jesus: for you also have suffered the same things from your own coutrymen, even as they have from the Jews, Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and the prophets, and have persecuted us, and please not God, and are adversaries to all men; Prohibiting us to speak to the Gentiles, that they may be saved, to fill up their sins always: for the wrath of God is come upon them to the end.
And he even goes so far as to have the audacity to say that THEY are the ones with the cօռspιʀαcιҽs!
Serving the Lord with all humility, and with tears, and temptations which befell me by the cօռspιʀαcιҽs of the Jews;
JESUS CHRIST THE LORD WAS IN ON IT!!!
The Jews therefore said: Will he kill himself, because he said: Whither I go, you cannot come? And he said to them: You are from beneath, I am from above. You are of this world, I am not of this world. Therefore I said to you, that you shall die in your sins. For if you believe not that I am he, you shall die in your sin. They said therefore to him: Who art thou? Jesus said to them: The beginning, who also speak unto you.
That's anti-semitism! They only wanted to keep their religion exactly as it had always been, and Christ threatens them with DYING IN THEIR SIN!? The nerve...
Seriously, the anti-Jew conspiracy was brought upon them by themselves, freely and by choice:
Pilate saith to them: What shall I do then with Jesus that is called Christ? They say all: Let him be crucified. The governor said to them: Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying: Let him be crucified. And Pilate seeing that he prevailed nothing, but that rather a tumult was made; taking water washed his hands before the people, saying: I am innocent of the blood of this just man; look you to it. And the whole people answering, said: His blood be upon us and our children.
They, by generation and as a religion, are the original, outspoken and irrevocable enemies of Christ, but to use terms such as 'kike', in referring to individuals is just an unnecessary injustice. Not every person of Jєωιѕн blood rejects Christ, certainly there have been many converts, as reading the Council of Florence attests.
However, for those individuals who do, terms like "Christ denying Jews" or "apostate Jews" are not only not unjust, but they are wholly accurate.
-
Matatics, who at his seminars used to distribute literature from the Saint Benedict Center, makes a tiny distinction between that group's position and his own and uses that distinction to claim that he is not really a Feeneyite. (If not, why distribute the most hardline Feeneyite literature?)
Unlike the Saint Benedict Center, he is open to the possibility that a catechumen who desires baptism but who dies before being baptized might be saved through what is commonly called "baptism of desire." But such a catechumen's salvation is not sure, says Matatics. It might be that he is not saved after all.
I like Matatics. Thanks for pointing him out to me.
I used to like Matatics, he was one of the few apologists who would not try to weasel his way out of certain "hardline" or "over the top" church teachings that Protestants like to bring up. However he is now a sedevacantist home-aloner who even considers the SSPX, CMRI, SSPV to be "counterfeit traditional Catholics" (his own words). If any of his children keep the faith, it will be a miracle.
Well, I am not a sede, not yet at least.
-
I am no fan of Feeney, but Karl's article is dishonest, trying to link the articles to some vast anti-Jew conspiracy......
Uh OH! St. Paul was in on it!
For you, brethren, are become followers of the churches of God which are in Judea, in Christ Jesus: for you also have suffered the same things from your own coutrymen, even as they have from the Jews, Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and the prophets, and have persecuted us, and please not God, and are adversaries to all men; Prohibiting us to speak to the Gentiles, that they may be saved, to fill up their sins always: for the wrath of God is come upon them to the end.
And he even goes so far as to have the audacity to say that THEY are the ones with the cօռspιʀαcιҽs!
Serving the Lord with all humility, and with tears, and temptations which befell me by the cօռspιʀαcιҽs of the Jews;
JESUS CHRIST THE LORD WAS IN ON IT!!!
The Jews therefore said: Will he kill himself, because he said: Whither I go, you cannot come? And he said to them: You are from beneath, I am from above. You are of this world, I am not of this world. Therefore I said to you, that you shall die in your sins. For if you believe not that I am he, you shall die in your sin. They said therefore to him: Who art thou? Jesus said to them: The beginning, who also speak unto you.
That's anti-semitism! They only wanted to keep their religion exactly as it had always been, and Christ threatens them with DYING IN THEIR SIN!? The nerve...
Seriously, the anti-Jew conspiracy was brought upon them by themselves, freely and by choice:
Pilate saith to them: What shall I do then with Jesus that is called Christ? They say all: Let him be crucified. The governor said to them: Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying: Let him be crucified. And Pilate seeing that he prevailed nothing, but that rather a tumult was made; taking water washed his hands before the people, saying: I am innocent of the blood of this just man; look you to it. And the whole people answering, said: His blood be upon us and our children.
They, by generation and as a religion, are the original, outspoken and irrevocable enemies of Christ, but to use terms such as 'kike', in referring to individuals is just an unnecessary injustice. Not every person of Jєωιѕн blood rejects Christ, certainly there have been many converts, as reading the Council of Florence attests.
However, for those individuals who do, terms like "Christ denying Jews" or "apostate Jews" are not only not unjust, but they are wholly accurate.
:cheers: :jumping2: :rahrah: :dancing-banana: :light-saber:
-
CM,
Do you not find it the least bit alarming that you have condemned all Catholics except Feeneyite Sedes who believe as you do as heretics?
That God has given you and the .00001% of Catholics who think like you a chance at salvation, while basically condemning the rest of us to hopeless damnation?
Will Heaven consist of you, God and the Dimond brothers?
If so will this truly be Heaven? Haha. ;)
Are you putting us on or do you really believe this? If you do, what events in your life lead to these extreme beliefs?
-
-
Actually I shouldn't say the CMRI are pro-Iraq war. That was the impression I got, but I didn't verify it.
I do know one CMRI priest was in the military for six years and that Bishop Pivarunas is a staunch "Republican." I tried to tell myself that they were only "Republican" because they were anti-abortion, but the atmosphere at CMRI unfortunately was much like a Baptist chapel in Louisiana. A strong military, "red State," flag-waving ambiance. Because I at least thought the priests were Catholic, I ignored their political gaffes, though it was not the best fit for me, with my extremely intense distaste of the Jєωιѕн cesspool of lies and soul-death that is America.
There, that brings the thread back on track.
-
You can stick with Marie-Julie, I'll stick with the Church.
-
You can stick with Marie-Julie, I'll stick with the Church.
99% of whom are actively using artificial contraception and/or sterilization. Italy has one of the lowest birthrates in the entire World.
-
Actually I shouldn't say the CMRI are pro-Iraq war. That was the impression I got, but I didn't verify it.
I do know one CMRI priest was in the military for six years and that Bishop Pivarunas is a staunch "Republican." I tried to tell myself that they were only "Republican" because they were anti-abortion, but the atmosphere at CMRI unfortunately was much like a Baptist chapel in Louisiana. A strong military, "red State," flag-waving ambiance. Because I at least thought the priests were Catholic, I ignored their political gaffes, though it was not the best fit for me, with my extremely intense distaste of the Jєωιѕн cesspool of lies and soul-death that is America.
There, that brings the thread back on track.
thats a shame, they are as Americanized as most of AmChurch,
-
CM,
Do you not find it the least bit alarming that you have condemned all Catholics except Feeneyite Sedes who believe as you do as heretics?
That God has given you and the .00001% of Catholics who think like you a chance at salvation, while basically condemning the rest of us to hopeless damnation?
Will Heaven consist of you, God and the Dimond brothers?
If so will this truly be Heaven? Haha. ;)
Are you putting us on or do you really believe this? If you do, what events in your life lead to these extreme beliefs?
give him time, he will excommunicate them as well.....
-
Ifthough I am not a Feeneyite but an anti-una-cuм, anti-NFP sede home-aloner -- phew! -- let me quote from Marie-Julie Jahenny:.
taht is not a Catholic position at all, Catholics attend Mass and worship as a body...parachurching is Protestant.....someday we may be in the catacombs again, likley soon, but you will know it and the time....it is not yet, though you think so...it will be obvious, not some "sorta-kinda-he said" ambigous....
-
Matatics, who at his seminars used to distribute literature from the Saint Benedict Center, makes a tiny distinction between that group's position and his own and uses that distinction to claim that he is not really a Feeneyite. (If not, why distribute the most hardline Feeneyite literature?)
Unlike the Saint Benedict Center, he is open to the possibility that a catechumen who desires baptism but who dies before being baptized might be saved through what is commonly called "baptism of desire." But such a catechumen's salvation is not sure, says Matatics. It might be that he is not saved after all.
I like Matatics. Thanks for pointing him out to me.
I used to like Matatics, he was one of the few apologists who would not try to weasel his way out of certain "hardline" or "over the top" church teachings that Protestants like to bring up. However he is now a sedevacantist home-aloner who even considers the SSPX, CMRI, SSPV to be "counterfeit traditional Catholics" (his own words). If any of his children keep the faith, it will be a miracle.
so, he is back to virtual Protestantism eh.....again, proves my point over yrs that poor cathecism leads t opoor converts.....in lieu of the crop we got in the lat 40 yrs, none to great (AKin,Hahn,Ray..)
-
However he is now a sedevacantist home-aloner who even considers the SSPX, CMRI, SSPV to be "counterfeit traditional Catholics" (his own words). If any of his children keep the faith, it will be a miracle.
It's a miracle if ANYONE EVER keeps the faith.
But SSPX, CMRI and SSPV all have heresy. If that doesn't make them counterfeit, then I guess the Novus Ordo isn't counterfeit either.
And as for "home-aloners", I suppose you would just as soon see such people renounce their hatred of heresy, contradict the dogmatic teaching prohibiting communion with heretics and schismatics, and go join the closest "almost Catholic" parish or chapel?
Old story again---private judgment........not a new one for you CM......hey, BTW, see your acolyte is back!! Good for you, not as alone now......
-
Matatics, who at his seminars used to distribute literature from the Saint Benedict Center, makes a tiny distinction between that group's position and his own and uses that distinction to claim that he is not really a Feeneyite. (If not, why distribute the most hardline Feeneyite literature?)
Unlike the Saint Benedict Center, he is open to the possibility that a catechumen who desires baptism but who dies before being baptized might be saved through what is commonly called "baptism of desire." But such a catechumen's salvation is not sure, says Matatics. It might be that he is not saved after all.
I like Matatics. Thanks for pointing him out to me.
I used to like Matatics, he was one of the few apologists who would not try to weasel his way out of certain "hardline" or "over the top" church teachings that Protestants like to bring up. However he is now a sedevacantist home-aloner who even considers the SSPX, CMRI, SSPV to be "counterfeit traditional Catholics" (his own words). If any of his children keep the faith, it will be a miracle.
Well, I am not a sede, not yet at least.
Nor me, not ever...
-
I have a 79-year old friend who brought up his and my concerns with the CMRI and they shot him down cold, telling him he had "chinks in his armor" because he listened to me.
do tell :popcorn:
-
Excuse me, then what is the point of being sedevacantist?
None, there is no point.....
you see your "side" is as divide as any??
-
Matatics, who at his seminars used to distribute literature from the Saint Benedict Center, makes a tiny distinction between that group's position and his own and uses that distinction to claim that he is not really a Feeneyite. (If not, why distribute the most hardline Feeneyite literature?)
Unlike the Saint Benedict Center, he is open to the possibility that a catechumen who desires baptism but who dies before being baptized might be saved through what is commonly called "baptism of desire." But such a catechumen's salvation is not sure, says Matatics. It might be that he is not saved after all.
I like Matatics. Thanks for pointing him out to me.
I used to like Matatics, he was one of the few apologists who would not try to weasel his way out of certain "hardline" or "over the top" church teachings that Protestants like to bring up. However he is now a sedevacantist home-aloner who even considers the SSPX, CMRI, SSPV to be "counterfeit traditional Catholics" (his own words). If any of his children keep the faith, it will be a miracle.
so, he is back to virtual Protestantism eh.....again, proves my point over yrs that poor cathecism leads t opoor converts.....in lieu of the crop we got in the lat 40 yrs, none to great (AKin,Hahn,Ray..)
Belloc, good point. One thing that I've noticed about these "superstar" converts that EWTN likes to push is that many of them come from broad-church "Jesus and me is our only doctrine" evangelism. It might explain the crop we're getting, i.e. the Protestantism is great, but Catholicism is better Scott Hahn/Mark Shea types. Outside of Matatics, none of them ever said that they joined Christ's Church because of salvation. Overall, I have more respect for the converts of the past like Orestes Brownson and G. K. Chesterton.
-
Matatics, who at his seminars used to distribute literature from the Saint Benedict Center, makes a tiny distinction between that group's position and his own and uses that distinction to claim that he is not really a Feeneyite. (If not, why distribute the most hardline Feeneyite literature?)
Unlike the Saint Benedict Center, he is open to the possibility that a catechumen who desires baptism but who dies before being baptized might be saved through what is commonly called "baptism of desire." But such a catechumen's salvation is not sure, says Matatics. It might be that he is not saved after all.
I like Matatics. Thanks for pointing him out to me.
I used to like Matatics, he was one of the few apologists who would not try to weasel his way out of certain "hardline" or "over the top" church teachings that Protestants like to bring up. However he is now a sedevacantist home-aloner who even considers the SSPX, CMRI, SSPV to be "counterfeit traditional Catholics" (his own words). If any of his children keep the faith, it will be a miracle.
so, he is back to virtual Protestantism eh.....again, proves my point over yrs that poor cathecism leads t opoor converts.....in lieu of the crop we got in the lat 40 yrs, none to great (AKin,Hahn,Ray..)
Belloc, good point. One thing that I've noticed about these "superstar" converts that EWTN likes to push is that many of them come from broad-church "Jesus and me is our only doctrine" evangelism. It might explain the crop we're getting, i.e. the Protestantism is great, but Catholicism is better Scott Hahn/Mark Shea types. Outside of Matatics, none of them ever said that they joined Christ's Church because of salvation. Overall, I have more respect for the converts of the past like Orestes Brownson and G. K. Chesterton.
True, converts pre-V2 seem better.....though I do know a few that would fit right in here, but too many.... :shocked:
of note, have talk via email to Shea, he is condescending and often, nasty....
-
I am not familiar with Karl Keating's work at all -don't know if he is a blogger or whatever.
But I believe he has a point in the two emails posted. I always shy away from Jew-obsessed writers, activists or bloggers.
By God's grace I will be attracted to holy people who promote devotion and love for The Sacred Heart, The Immaculate Heart and my favorites, The Holy Angels. In my station of life, penance and sacrifice are in order.
:dancing:
-
I am not familiar with Karl Keating's work at all -don't know if he is a blogger or whatever.
But I believe he has a point in the two emails posted. I always shy away from Jew-obsessed writers, activists or bloggers.
By God's grace I will be attracted to holy people who promote devotion and love for The Sacred Heart, The Immaculate Heart and my favorites, The Holy Angels. In my station of life, penance and sacrifice are in order.
:dancing:
True, one can obssess too much over things.ALso, thogh, organized Judiasm ahs been a enemy of our Lord and his Church for 2000 yrs.no individuals perse, but Rabbi's,etc...read the Martyrdom of Polycarp,etc...they have always attacked the church..organized riots, persecutions,etc....strong evidence they backed the "reformation"...
Keating makes a lot of $$ with his site refuting Prots as it make a lot and is PC in Catholic world.....also, hires and supports many pushing for a Hebrew Rite and Hebrew Churches.....replete with Jєωιѕн rituals,etc......unlike ethnic Chuches of old....
One cannot love and serve Christ but put on blinders....we are called to be soldiers of Christ, in Church and out in the world......
know a fellow that does not want to ever talk about controversial things in the church and denies any cօռspιʀαcιҽs-in politics, Church,etc.....yet wants to love the Lord.....burying his head in the sand of "everything is great" mantra......
Not saying you are bad or doing this,Elizabeth,but one must know the enemy to defend Holy Church and Christ......
-
LOL, my poor old head is not quite buried in the sand...it is simply very clear that prayer, penance and sacrifice are what Elizabeth needs to try to save her soul.
-
know a fellow that does not want to ever talk about controversial things in the church and denies any cօռspιʀαcιҽs-in politics, Church,etc.....yet wants to love the Lord.....burying his head in the sand of "everything is great" mantra......
Exactly, Belloc. There is way too much of this going on. Almost all the clergy in America are BLIND. Pope Pius X condemned it.
"In our time more than ever" said Pius, "the chief strength of the wicked lies in the cowardice and weakness of good men ... All the strength of Satan's reign is due to the easy- going weakness of Catholics. Oh! If I might ask the Divine Redeemer, as the prophet Zachary did in spirit: What are those wounds in the midst of Thy hands? The answer would not be doubtful: With these was I wounded in the house of them that loved Me. I was wounded by My friends, who did nothing to defend Me, and who, on every occasion, made themselves the accomplices of My adversaries. And this reproach can be leveled at the weak and timid Catholics of all countries."
Easy-going weakness, thy name is CMRI. Just visit one of their chapels sometime. If you even bring up a conspiracy they will say you are "intense" or "nervous." It's some form of mind-control. The irony is that these are the same people who believe that the entire hierarchy of the Vatican has been replaced by plotting, scheming non-Catholics. But don't criticize America where the conspiracy is far more blatant! That's taboo!
Moreover, I am not "Jew-obsessed." I am stating a fact about ʝʊdɛօ-Masonic control of the world and especially America. The reason why the Catholics have been scattered to the four winds is because a bunch of greedy princes let the Jews out of Pandora's Box in order to gain power over other nations. Then the Jews, along with their Gentile slaves who are the Freemasons, took over everything through deceit and playing off the vices of their dupes. They own almost all the newspapers, the movie studios, the publishing industries, the magazines; they rule our government. This is not something hatched out of my imagination but it is ACTUAL REALITY.
Just praying does not make reality go away. That brings me to the second point of this post. I had quoted Marie-Julie Jahenny saying that the laity may be forgiven for following their pastors into untruth. But this may contradict St. Paul:
And then that wicked one shall be revealed whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth; and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, him,
Whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders, And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
As I have said elsewhere today, I don't think any of the VII Popes is the actual man of sin, but the principle still holds. You have to love truth. Rosaries will not help you if you have been seduced by lies. Mary does not exist in a vacuum; Mary loves her Son and is a fighter against heresies that OFFEND HER SON.
Oh, and Elizabeth, if you think I am Jew-obsessed, read some St. John Chrysostom sometime. And he had far less reason to be concerned with Jews than I do.
-
If you were a parent, your priorities and duties would change.
You'll just have to take my word for it. And we all have our special little purposes and spiritual works to do.
What I am beginning to suspect here,is a great horror of suffering for Our Lord. It's not always fight, fight, fight.
-
Belloc and others who may care, I did not leave CMRI because they were patriotic, or Republican, or perhaps pro-Iraq war. I stomached all of that the way I would stomach other political mistakes made by Catholics throughout the history of the Church. None of that has any bearing on their Catholicity.
I left because they were allowing people to go to una cuм Masses. To me, this is no different than a Catholic priest from,say, 1217, allowing someone to go to a Waldensian mass. It is not Catholic behavior to permit the laity to wander back and forth between un-Catholic sects and the Catholic Church.
The CMRI repeatedly points out the errors of SSPX and then tells people, "Go ahead and go there in an emergency." Sorry, this makes no sense. Either SSPX is good and Catholic IN ALL CASES or it is not. Would CMRI tell you to go to an Anglican church "in an emergency"? Come on!
My friend made the hilarious comment that this was like saying to an engaged couple, "If you can't find a priest around to marry you, just head over to Vegas." He also calls CMRI's policy "Being a little bit pregnant." This is how the devil works -- just slip in a little poison and then a little more until soon no one knows what the true doctrine is.
I believe that the only way to be Catholic in our time is to be sedevacantist. Someone may say, "It's only a difference of opinion about whether Ratzinger is Pope or not." That is where that person and I would have to part ways, hopefully for the moment. For me to accept that this man could be a Pope would be the most blasphemous insult to Jesus Christ. This is not just a man who made some mistakes in a letter, like Honorius, but a dogged, persistent enemy of Our Lord since the time he was a priest. An una cuм Mass with Ratzinger is a sacrilegious horror.
John Daly, before for some reason deciding to defend SSPX, brought up this pertinent example:
St Hypathius, a Bithynian monk of the fifth century, insisted on suppressing the name of Nestorius, the patriarch of Constantinople, from the sacred diptychs from the moment when Nestorius began to preach his heresy, which denied the unity of person in Our Lord. Hypathius's ordinary, the bishop Eulalius (who was a suffragan of Nestorius), refused Nestorius's heresy, but rebuked the monk for having withdrawn from communion with their patriarch before he had been condemned by a council. Hypathius replied: "I cannot insert his name in the Canon of the Mass, because a heresiarch is not worthy of the title of pastor in the Church; do what you like with me; I am ready to suffer all, and nothing will induce me to change my behaviour." (Petits Bollandistes, 17th June)
St. Hypathius acted like a Catholic. He didn't wring his hands and go along with evil because "people are confused and they are in invincible ignorance," or whatever their excuses are to partake in offenses to God. He refused to participate, and led by example. You see, it is those who give you the easy out, who say "It's okay to do whatever because you're confused," who are the authors of confusion. The Catholic Church is not a pick-and-choose buffet.
Notice who the saint is, too. It isn't the bishop who went along with the letter of the law, waiting indefinitely for the Church's judgment, but the lowly monk who KNEW right away that to insert Nestorius' name in the Canon was BLASPHEMY.
This disobedience to your superiors is not recommendable in all circuмstances; but only in special circuмstances, when those superiors are making you choose between them and Christ. And when you talk about special circuмstances, let me tell you, we are in one, boy. This is the GREATEST of all special circuмstances up to this point in time.
I feel as strongly about this as St. Hypatius did -- more strongly, because Ratzinger is far worse and more destructive than even Nestorius, and we do not have a functioning Church that can depose Ratzinger. Actually, we do, it's just that they refuse to do their duty.
The CMRI and SGG and SSPX ( more acronyms than Soviet Russia! ) can try to bully people with their seminary training all they want; but if they are wrong, they are still wrong. It is a historical fact that the clergy usually goes along with the prevailing government; in the time of Henry VIII, most of them were sucked into his Anglican Church; in the time of the French Revolution, most of them became "jureurs" and went along with the revolutionaries; and so on and so forth. As far as Vatican II, many stayed but many left as well. The point is, you cannot just go along with the clergy if they are heretics. The clergy are humans with human weaknesses; they are often afraid to rock the boat or have gotten too comfortable.
********
Like all of you, I am doing my best to try and save my soul. None of us here wakes up every morning and thinks, "I'm in the wrong and I want to burn in hell." Some people think that they must be in communion with their fellow Catholics even if those Catholics are riddled with heresies and are wrong. They don't want to miss their Sunday Mass even if it is sacrilegious.
I may have gone too far -- and I may pull back. If I can find a bishop who is not overbearing about NFP, I may accept his belief in it as a common error and attend his chapel. Or I may write to bishops and try to make them see the truth, and the one who does is the one who will get my support. Or I'll wait for the Minor Chastisement or Second Coming. I don't know. I'll tell you one thing, I haven't given up trying to find a Catholic bishop or priest. If one is reading this, please write me!
But I believe that we are where we are because of compromise and so I have set out on the course of being uncompromising where Catholic dogma is concerned. I fully believe St. Paul when he says, " But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema." That could be translated, "But though we, or a POPE, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema."
I do not go along with the rhythm method, or false interpretations of invincible ignorance, or the una cuм with one of the worst heresiarchs the Church has ever seen, and who has usurped the PAPAL THRONE. When the Church is restored, I am positive that all of these things will be looked back on as abominations, and I want to be ahead of my time -- because my time is grotesque. Do you realize this is inarguably the worst moment of time in Christian history up until now?
I do not believe Christ wants me to participate in communion with heretics. He has given me the actual grace to stay at home for now. However, many of the clergy, who are most likely only material heretics, could change from one day to the next. Until 2007, when Bishop Dolan began to raise a hue and cry about it, the una cuм wasn't even an issue for sedevacantists. Just as now, no one seems bothered by NFP, or has realized that Pius XII was almost surely an anti-Pope who taught and tried to enforce eugenics and social engineering. This could all change overnight.
I don't see the Church as dead but more like Sleeping Beauty, in a poisoned trance, awaiting Her prince. So those who say it is undergoing its mystical crucifixion and is now in the tomb seem to be right. It has a hierarchy -- so the gates of hell have not prevailed -- but they are in slumberland at the moment.
-
You can say the Missal at home, Elizabeth. That's what I would do if I had kids. It's what I have done and will do without kids! Apparently it's what Gerry Matatics does now as well.
But we can't do the wrong thing even if it's for the right reasons. We can't insult God just because we feel we have to discipline children by taking them to Mass. Of course, you don't feel you're insulting God, but when and if that realization strikes, you're going to have to act on it.
It is not comfortable to know you were in the wrong, to have thought you were Catholic when you weren't, and to have to change. But God takes your hand and leads you through it. This happened with me recently about NFP. I defended it on this website, defended Pius XII, defended the CMRI. Later, after breaking with CMRI, I was going to fly out to SGG, thinking that whatever Father Cekada's faults, at least he was Catholic and against the una cuм -- and then I read his defense of NFP and just got this sinking feeling. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark. I still haven't written about it in depth but NFP is a huge subject; much bigger than most people think.
All our lives have been upset. I wanted to be a writer-filmmaker before all this hit me. Then I wanted to be a priest and it seems that is impossible. Now, I have no resume and no plans and will be lucky to get a job at Starbucks. The truth leads us down some strange avenues, ones we never expected. But are you going to resist it when it comes?
"Let the dead bury the dead; you who are still living, come with me."
-
Raoul,
What is your end game here? To live out the rest of your days in seclusion, not going to the sacraments, working a minimum wage job to survive in anonymity? Typing endless pages of arguments that nobody agrees with? Is it you, your Missal and God the rest of the way with no real Church to speak of, except the non-existent ideal one in your mind? Is this what God wants from your life?
-
stevusmagnus: Go read the Life of the Early Fathers, and then a BIG RESOUNDING "YES" would not even make you flinch.
-
If you were a parent, your priorities and duties would change...You'll just have to take my word for it.
While I know this is an undeniable truth, it is also something that is the way it is for a good reason. There ARE differences in perspective/priorities/duties, the differences are normal and good, and we cannot force a square peg into a round hole - nor should we try.
-
I believe that the only way to be Catholic in our time is to be sedevacantist. Someone may say, "It's only a difference of opinion about whether Ratzinger is Pope or not." ... An una cuм Mass with Ratzinger is a sacrilegious horror.
Bp Sanborn is a cult leader who is bankrupt - and he has never PROVED these things.
Does anyone even say, "Oh, that Pope crap is just opinion, anyway." Uh, no - it is a caricature, thrown out there for effect.
John Daly, before for some reason deciding to defend SSPX, brought up this pertinent example:
"I cannot insert his name in the Canon of the Mass, because a heresiarch is not worthy of the title of pastor in the Church; do what you like with me; I am ready to suffer all, and nothing will induce me to change my behaviour.[/u]"
St. Hypathius acted like a Catholic.
He acted like a Catholic PRIEST - and HIS attitude toward his fellow Catholic PRIESTS and LAYMEN was VERY different from your own/Sanborn's.
Bp Sanborn, like Bp Dolan and Fr Cekada, is a Pharisee whose time of "success" is OVER. The seminary in FL will NEVER be completed, just like the "SHRINE"-to-be in OH. I am sorry to have to tell you this. I went to their seminary, did well, learned a lot, enjoyed it there immensely, yet the facts are the facts: they all LIE publicly and habitually to "grow their business", which is dying before their very eyes.
-
I almost went there.
-
Bp Sanborn, like Bp Dolan and Fr Cekada, is a Pharisee whose time of "success" is OVER.
Mike,
Do you know about the oath administered before the Blessed Sacrament exposed back in the 1990s at Mary Help of Christians Academy in Warren, MI? Bp Sanborn was made aware (if he did not already know) that such is a "no no", but he did it anyway.
How about the dramas (involving outright lies delivered from the pulpit) surrounding the removal of a wonderful priest from OLQM in Fraser to the dying seminary in FL?
Don't get me wrong: Fr C is in a class by himself where lying is concerned, but Bps. Dolan Sanborn have done it as well. ALL have been caught, yet ALL carry on as if it didn't happen.
-
...but Bps. Dolan Sanborn...
Please read "...Bps. Dolan AND Sanborn..."
-
So gladius, what type of chapel do you go to now? Independent or do you just stay home?
-
So gladius, what type of chapel do you go to now? Independent or do you just stay home?
Mostly independents, but, while I was in WA, my job precluded getting to Mass many Sundays. My employer asked me to do what I called the Vampire Shift (10:30am to 6:30pm) for a while, and that made my "schedule" a complete wreck. Fighting Mother Nature five days/nights a week is a BAD idea! :laugh1:
Honestly, I have no problem going to Mass at a place that has certain "lesser" issues, provided I have not been threatened with police action, as I was at sgg.org/cult, if I show my face. :laugh2:
-
Vampire Shift (10:30am to 6:30pm)
Sorry...1030pm to 0630am
-
Gladius,
Go to your local NO and "give witness" to them. ;)
-
You can say the Missal at home, Elizabeth. That's what I would do if I had kids. It's what I have done and will do without kids! Apparently it's what Gerry Matatics does now as well.
But we can't do the wrong thing even if it's for the right reasons. We can't insult God just because we feel we have to discipline children by taking them to Mass. Of course, you don't feel you're insulting God, but when and if that realization strikes, you're going to have to act on it.
It is not comfortable to know you were in the wrong, to have thought you were Catholic when you weren't, and to have to change. But God takes your hand and leads you through it. This happened with me recently about NFP. I defended it on this website, defended Pius XII, defended the CMRI. Later, after breaking with CMRI, I was going to fly out to SGG, thinking that whatever Father Cekada's faults, at least he was Catholic and against the una cuм -- and then I read his defense of NFP and just got this sinking feeling. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark. I still haven't written about it in depth but NFP is a huge subject; much bigger than most people think.
All our lives have been upset. I wanted to be a writer-filmmaker before all this hit me. Then I wanted to be a priest and it seems that is impossible. Now, I have no resume and no plans and will be lucky to get a job at Starbucks. The truth leads us down some strange avenues, ones we never expected. But are you going to resist it when it comes?
"Let the dead bury the dead; you who are still living, come with me."
With respect, it is very easy to say what you will do "with kids"
without having the resposibility of a mortgage, car payments, giving birth, having a relationship with a spouse, educating children.
However, I do know of a very high-functioning, large family who are home aloners and homeschoolers, and their kids are all really great. But some of us don't have the intellectual capacity and stamina.
We did home alone some years ago, and it just didn't work. We lack internal discipline or whatever, and not going to Mass is just horrible for my family.
It's a mess and we need to pray for each other.