Author Topic: ON THE FEENEYITE HERESY (Read 68063 times)

Ladislaus · « **Reply #900 on:** October 06, 2014, 10:15:46 AM »

Quote from: Don Paolo

Although Ladislaus loves to say I know nothing about theology, and that I don't know what I'm talking about; it is rather evident and plainly manifest that clueless Ladislaus does not know what he's talking about in the matter of the doctrine of St. Thomas on the need for explicit belief in the revealed mysteries:

Summa Theologiae II - IIae Q. 2, a. 7, ad 3: "If, however, some were saved without receiving any revelation, they were not saved without faith in a Mediator, for, though they did not believe in Him explicitly, they did, nevertheless, have implicit faith through believing in Divine providence, since they believed that God would deliver mankind in whatever way was pleasing to Him, and according to the revelation of the Spirit to those who knew the truth, as stated in Job 35:11: "Who teacheth us more than the beasts of the earth."

He's talking about the old dispensation here, the implicit faith in Christ of the Old Testament.

That's why St. Thomas uses the expression "when once grace had been revealed".

Nishant · « **Reply #901 on:** October 06, 2014, 10:17:27 AM »

Persionally, I would be very happy if every Catholic believed this, if the Conciliar Popes in particular believed and taught that only Catholics are saved, that would be the beginning of the end of the crisis in the Church, it would put an absolute end to false ecuмenism and all interfaith abominations. So, this is a very important teaching, little known and little believed today.

BOD is not the issue. It is a settled matter that souls are saved by Baptism of Desire and Blood. The Feeneyites are wrong. The more important teaching, which the Conciliar Popes do not believe, but neither do many others, is that you must be Catholic and know the essential mysteries of the Catholic Faith to be saved.

Not even the CCC, although it does not of course clearly teach it, fails at least to give a lip service to 2000 years of Tradition, so plainly evident in the texts of the New Testament, that explicit faith in Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation.

Quote

161 Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation. "Since "without faith it is impossible to please [God]" and to attain to the fellowship of his sons, therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will anyone obtain eternal life 'But he who endures to the end.'"

"Now, this is the Catholic Faith, that we worship God in Trinity, and Trinity in unity. Which Faith except a man hold firmly and faithfully, without doubt he will perish forever ... Whoever will be saved must think thus on the Trinity... Furthermore, it is necessary for eternal salvation that he believe faithfully in the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ." - Athanasian Creed, cited by Pope Gregory XVI in Mirari Vos.

Quote from: Gregory XVI

“With the admonition of the apostle, that ‘there is one God, one faith, one baptism’ (Eph. 4:5), may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that ‘those who are not with Christ are against Him,’ (Lk. 11:23) and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him.

Quote from: Pope Pius XI, Nostis et Nobiscuм

In particular, ensure that the faithful are deeply and thoroughly convinced of the truth of the doctrine that the Catholic faith is necessary for attaining salvation.[4]

4. This doctrine, received from Christ and emphasized by the Fathers and Councils, is also contained in the formulae of rhe profession of faith used by Latin, Greek, and Oriental Catholics.

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9nostis.htm

Ladislaus · « **Reply #902 on:** October 06, 2014, 12:45:14 PM »

Quote from: Nishant

Persionally, I would be very happy if every Catholic believed this, if the Conciliar Popes in particular believed and taught that only Catholics are saved, that would be the beginning of the end of the crisis in the Church, it would put an absolute end to false ecuмenism and all interfaith abominations. So, this is a very important teaching, little known and little believed today.

BOD is not the issue.

I couldn't agree with you more. Were you to ask Father Feeney himself, he would say the same thing. Most modern "Feeneyites" (of the SBC variety vs. the Dimond variety) would absolutely agree. Most of us don't really care about BoD proper. We just happen to see how BoD was used to undermine EENS, Nishant. What happens, however, is that people like Don Paolo, Ambrose, and LoT keep quoting St. Thomas and St. Alphonsus and St. Robert Bellarmine to "PROVE", as it were, their hypothesis that non-Catholics can be saved; they quote their BoD statements and then hide behind these to pretend that it's justification from authority for their Pelagianism.

Ambrose · « **Reply #903 on:** October 06, 2014, 01:20:45 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Quote from: Nishant
Persionally, I would be very happy if every Catholic believed this, if the Conciliar Popes in particular believed and taught that only Catholics are saved, that would be the beginning of the end of the crisis in the Church, it would put an absolute end to false ecuмenism and all interfaith abominations. So, this is a very important teaching, little known and little believed today.

BOD is not the issue.

I couldn't agree with you more. Were you to ask Father Feeney himself, he would say the same thing. Most modern "Feeneyites" (of the SBC variety vs. the Dimond variety) would absolutely agree. Most of us don't really care about BoD proper. We just happen to see how BoD was used to undermine EENS, Nishant. What happens, however, is that people like Don Paolo, Ambrose, and LoT keep quoting St. Thomas and St. Alphonsus and St. Robert Bellarmine to "PROVE", as it were, their hypothesis that non-Catholics can be saved; they quote their BoD statements and then hide behind these to pretend that it's justification from authority for their Pelagianism.

Untrue, yet again. You have been corrected on this point many times, but act as though you haven't.

Let me state it for you again:
There is no salvation outside the Church. Non-Catholics cannot be saved. This does not contradict the 1949 Holy Office Letter approved by Pope Pius XII.

Don Paolo · « **Reply #904 on:** October 06, 2014, 01:54:28 PM »

LADISLAUS IS NOT CORRECT: In De Veritate Q. 14, a. 11, St. Thomas does say that explicit belief in something is necessary for those who were brought up in the forest or among wild beasts; but he does not unconditionally specify in this context anything more than St. Paul states to the Hebrews in 11:6, ("For he that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and is a rewarder to them that seek him"), when he says on faith in the Summa Theologiae, (as quoted earlier): "Therefore, everyone in every age is bound explicitly to believe that God exists and exercises providence over human affairs."

If something more is required, then God will provide:

"1. Granted that everyone is bound to believe something explicitly, no untenable conclusion follows even if someone is brought up in the forest or among wild beasts. For it pertains to divine providence to furnish everyone with what is necessary for salvation, provided that on his part there is no hindrance. Thus, if someone so brought up followed the direction of natural reason in seeking good and avoiding evil, we must most certainly hold that God would either reveal to him through internal inspiration what had to be believed, or would send some preacher of the faith to him as he sent Peter to Cornelius (Acts 10:20)."

The Church has not defined on this point. I have already quoted the popes who teach that those in invincible ignorance are bound to believe explicitly in God and that He rewards them that seek him. Since this point has not yet been defined, it is just one more patent manifestation of Feeneyite sectarian pretence that they insist that their opinion, although condidered the safer and more common opinion at the time of St. Alphonsus, is to be considered a dogma. But now that in the 19th and 20th Centuries, the pre-Vatican II popes have taught what St. Alphonsus judged to be the less probable opinion on this question, it can only be considered as an expression of contempt for the supreme magisterium of the Church, that they adamantly insist that the opinion contrary to theirs is a heresy.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #905 on:** October 06, 2014, 02:38:59 PM »

Quote from: Ambrose

Untrue, yet again. You have been corrected on this point many times, but act as though you haven't.

Liar. You simply redefine all the terms. What I wrote stands.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #906 on:** October 06, 2014, 02:40:04 PM »

Quote from: Don Paolo

LADISLAUS IS NOT CORRECT.

Nishant is correct about my being correct. You have absolutely no earthly idea what you're talking about.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #907 on:** October 06, 2014, 02:42:10 PM »

What a complete dunce!

Quote from: Don Paolo

Quote from: St. Thomas
Thus, if someone so brought up followed the direction of natural reason in seeking good and avoiding evil, we must most certainly hold that God would either reveal to him through internal inspiration WHAT HAD TO BE BELIEVED, or would send some preacher of the faith to him as he sent Peter to Cornelius (Acts 10:20).

Don Paolo · « **Reply #908 on:** October 06, 2014, 02:55:31 PM »

Blessed Pius IX in Quanto Conficiamur Maerore:

"There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. By sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments.”
I have quoted earlier the same doctrine in the magisterial docunents of St. Pius X, and Pius XII.

The key words are, "By sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts . . . they ... are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace". Therefore it is abundantly clear from the literal text of Pius IX, that those who are truly invincibly ignorant are not bound to profess explicitly that which they cannot know. For them, implicit faith in the revealed mysteries suffices for salvation.
While this teaching is not defined, it us not proposed as a mere opinion or speculation, but is set forth in a doctrinal encyclical; so it is absolutely preposterous that most Feeneyites resort to the pretense that the stricter opinion, according to which explicit faith in the principal mysteries is absolutely necessary for salvation without exception, is de fide; since that proposition also has not been defined. According to Ladislaus, anyone who holds to this teaching of Pius IX is a Pelagian heretic. That would make Bl. Pius IX a heretic!

Don Paolo · « **Reply #909 on:** October 06, 2014, 03:03:51 PM »

The same doctrine as that if Quanto Conficiamur Amore is more simply expressed in the magisterium of St. Pius X:

"A person outside the Church by his own fault, and who dies without perfect contrition, will not be saved. But he who finds himself outside without fault of his own, and who lives a good life, can be saved by the love called charity, which unites unto God, and in a spiritual way also to the Church, that is, to the soul of the Church." (Pope St. Pius X, Catechism of Christian Doctrine)

According to Ladislaus, not only Bl. Pius IX was a Pelagian heretic, but so also was St. Pius X.

Don Paolo · « **Reply #910 on:** October 06, 2014, 04:26:42 PM »

Clueless Ladislaus quotes a passage of St. Thomas THAT DOES NOT SPECIFY THAT WHICH THE MATUTO IN THE FOREST MUST EXPLICITLY PROFESS in support of his rigorist Feeneyite position that all without exception must explicitly profess the revealed mysteries of faith:

"Thus, if someone so brought up followed the direction of natural reason in seeking good and avoiding evil, we must most certainly hold that God would either reveal to him through internal inspiration WHAT HAD TO BE BELIEVED, or would send some preacher of the faith to him as he sent Peter to Cornelius (Acts 10:20)."

St. Thomas, in Q. 14 a. 11 De Veritate specifies "THAT WHICH MUST BE BELIEVED", i.e., what it is that such a matuto or caipira in the rain forest, who has no access to any means of instruction in the doctrine of the faith must believe explicitly in order to be saved:

"That all the faithful in every age must believe something explicitly is evident from the fact that there is a parallel between the reception of faith with reference to our ultimate perfection and a pupil’s reception of those things which his master first teaches him, and through which he is guided to prior principles. However, he could not be so guided unless he actually considered something. Hence, the pupil must receive something for actual consideration; likewise, the faithful must explicitly believe something. And these are the two things which the Apostle tells us must be believed explicitly: “For he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and is the rewarder to them that love Him” (Hebrews 11:6). Therefore, everyone in every age is bound explicitly to believe that God exists and exercises providence over human affairs."

The key words: "And these are the two things which the Apostle tells us must be believed explicitly: 'For he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and is the rewarder to them that love Him' (Hebrews 11:6). Therefore, everyone in every age is bound explicitly to believe that God exists and exercises providence over human affairs."

Thus it is absolutely clear what must be explicitly professed by the invincibly ignorant matuto in the forest.

Cantarella · « **Reply #911 on:** October 06, 2014, 05:03:00 PM »

Quote from: St. Thomas

After the Incarnation, all men, if they wish to be saved, are “bound to explicit faith in the mysteries of Christ, chiefly as regards those which are observed throughout the Church and publicly proclaimed, such as the articles that refer to the Incarnation.” 4 And, after the Incarnation, all men, in order to be saved, “are bound to explicit faith in the mystery of the Trinity.”

The "matuto in the forest" (or any "invincible ignorant) is not damned on account of heresy or infidelity, but only original and actual sins. Baptism is the only remedy for original sin. It is important to make a clear distinction between the Hell torments for actual sins, and the mere absence of God which is the result of Original Sin. People that have a difficulty understanding God's justice is usually because they do not know about the extent of Original sin and the different levels of Hell. The invincible ignorant is not saved on account of original sin, at the very least.

The Angelic Doctor himself explained that those who die invincibly ignorant, who have heard nothing about the Faith through no fault of their own are still damned for their sins, including original sin, which cannot be taken away without Baptism and the Faith.

Quote

“Unbelief has a double sense. First, it can be taken purely negatively; thus a man is called an unbeliever solely because he does not possess faith. Secondly, by way of opposition to faith; thus when a man refuses to hear of the faith or even contemns it, according to Isaiah, “Who has believed our report?” This is where the full nature of unbelief, properly speaking is found, and where the sin lies.

“If, however, unbelief be taken just negatively, as in those who have heard nothing about the faith, it bears the character, not of fault, but of penalty, because their ignorance of divine things is the result of the sin of our first parents. Those who are unbelievers in this sense are condemned on account of other sins, which cannot be forgiven without faith; they are not condemned for the sin of unbelief.”

The Catholic Faith is the foundation of all Justification. The Matuto in the forest has not the Catholic Faith.

Don Paolo · « **Reply #912 on:** October 06, 2014, 05:04:13 PM »

In Summa Theol. II - IIae Q. 1 a. 5, St. Thomas teaches that which by necessity of precept must be explicitly professed: "I answer that, The precepts of the Law, which man is bound to fulfill, concern acts of virtue which are the means of attaining salvation. Now an act of virtue, as stated above (I-II, 60, 5) depends on the relation of the habit to its object." He then specifies precisely what men are bound to believe by divine precept: "Therefore, as regards the primary points or articles of faith, man is bound to believe them, just as he is bound to have faith; but as to other points of faith,man is not bound to believe them explicitly, but only implicitly, or to be ready to believe them, in so far as he is prepared to believe whatever is contained in theDivine Scriptures. Then alone is he bound to believesuch things explicitly, when it is clear to him that they are contained in the doctrine of faith."

On the other hand, St. Thomas explains in De Veritate that which is of absolute necessity of means for salvation: "the two things which the Apostle tells us must be believed explicitly: 'For he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and is the rewarder to them that love Him' (Hebrews 11:6). Therefore, everyone in every age is bound explicitly to believe that God exists and exercises providence over human affairs."

In the typically simplistic manner of the fundamentalist, Ladislaus fails to make the elementary distinction between necessity of precept and necessity of means. (Yet the stupid ass has the sacrilegious insolence to say that I am the dunce! What a clueless Feeneyite troll!)

Cantarella · « **Reply #913 on:** October 06, 2014, 05:05:13 PM »

A person that has reached the age of reason, is obliged to profess an explicit belief in the Holy Trinity, The Incarnation, and the Catholic Faith before they die. This truth is necessary to believe for Salvation as a necessity of means.

Quote

Pope Eugene IV Exultate Deo ex cathedra:
"Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all else to hold the Catholic Faith: unless each one preserve this whole and entire, he will without a doubt perish in eternity...then he defines the Holy Trinity, the Incarnation, and the necessity to believe in these truths...This is the Catholic Faith; unless each one believes this faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved."

There is the necessity to explicitly believe and profess the Catholic Faith. Popes such as Pius X, Clement XI, Pius IX all have reaffirm and re-stated this dogma. Modern BODers have fallen pray of liberal ideas and false notions concerning ecuмenism and universal salvation. Watered down, lukewarm Catholics are the real enemies of the Faith and a real thread for the purity of it.

Don Paolo · « **Reply #914 on:** October 06, 2014, 05:05:56 PM »

And Cantarella has just made the same elementary blunder as Ladislaus.