continued, de Chardin wrote, "There is a communion with God, and a communion with the earth, and a communion with God through the earth."  And yet the liberals Jesuits did almost nothing. And this was a man whose mother smacked him accross the face as a little boy because she found him worshipping rocks.

And as far as Fr. Feeney's disobedience, what about Abp. Lefebrvre and the '88 consecrations?  The good Abp. clearly saw that Rome was bad-willed, and that Rome clearly wanted to "pick the bishops."  Abp. Lefebvre saw through this and went ahead with the consecrations, and it was a good thing.

Stupid anonymous,  ^ that was Me

When a Pope is again ruling and reaffirms the teaching on Baptism of Desire to the Church, as he must and will, then I wonder how many of those on here will obey him and believe the Catholic teaching on this. 

Will you all form a heretical sect and reject his teaching or will you submit and stay in the Church? 

🤣 🤣 🤣

You know what an hypothetical future Roman Pontiff must do? That is choice!

🤪

When a Pope is again ruling and reaffirms the teaching on Baptism of Desire to the Church, as he must and will, then I wonder how many of those on here will obey him and believe the Catholic teaching on this. 

Will you all form a heretical sect and reject his teaching or will you submit and stay in the Church? 

The Church has already infallibly taught that only those baptised and profess the true faith are members of the Body of Christ (the Church), and that there is no salvation outside the Church, and that Water baptism is the only sacrament of baptism, and that water baptism is necessary. A true Pope will not be able to infallibly teach false doctrines such as BoD, BoB and salvation outside the Church in ignorance. On the contrary a false-'true' Pope will easily deceive the majority of 'trad' Catholics and lead them straight into hell.

.

We already know how a real pope handled Feeney.

By not signing the pseudo holy office letter?

Mind you. this same Pope led way for evolution and contraception, yet at the same time defined that only those baptised and profess the true faith are members of the Church... but you BoDers are so inconsistent with your faith you do not care for what the Church actually teaches, instead you choose to believe fallible men.

Pope Benedict XIV, Apostolica (# 6), June 26, 1749: “The Church’s judgment is preferable to that of a Doctor renowned for his holiness and teaching.”

Most 'trads' gravitate to false errors like BoD due to a lacking in faith.

St. Augustine, Against Julian, Book 5, Chap. 4: “Of the number of the elect and predestined, even those who have led the very worst kind of life are led to repentance through the goodness of God… Not one of them perishes, regardless of his age at death; never be it said that a man predestined to life would be permitted to end his life without the sacrament of the Mediator [Baptism]. Because of these men, our Lord says: ‘This is the will of him who sent me, the Father, that I should lose nothing of what he has given me.’”

A conversation with a Feeneyite

Feeneyite:
"You need to deny Baptism of Desire and Baptism of Blood"

Catholic responds:
"But the Council of Trent teaches this, how can I deny something taught by a Council?"

Feeneyite:
"No, the Council doesn't mean what it says, when it says 'Baptism or the Desire,'  You need to trust my interpretation of the Council."  Desire doesn't mean desire.  I know what it really means."

Catholic responds:
"But why is it that every theologian who has commented on Trent all read it one way, that Trent teaches Baptism of Desire, when it taught with the words, "Baptism or the Desire...," yet you read it your own way and have not a single approved Catholic source since the Council of Trent that reads it the way you do?"

Feeneyite:
"Yes, but I understand Trent better than all the theologians and Catechisms since Trent.  My reading comprehension and understanding of theology is also greater than the Holy Office.  My superior reading comprehension makes it clear that when Trent taught " Baptism of the Desire for it," it really didn't mean that at all.  I also have a cool theory that "desire" really means a vow, not a desire, even though no other approved and trained translator has ever translated it this way. 

You should trust both my superior reading comprehension and my translating abilities and ignore all theologians, seminary manuals, catechisms and the Holy Office and put your trust in me!"

Catholic responds:
"Are you aware that you are talking just like every heretic in Church history?"

Feeneyite:
"No, this time is different, because i know this truth, and as I said, I know that when Trent said "desire" it didn't really mean "desire."  It is for me to explain what Trent really meant, don't trust St. Alphonsus, the Holy Office, and so many other theologians on this, I know better. "

Catholic responds:
"If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.  I won't follow you.  You look like, talk like and act like every heretic in Church history.  I have spotted you.  I believe what the Catholic Church has taught in the Council of Trent, in its approved catechisms, in seminary manuals approved for the training of priests all across the world, in the writings of the approved theologians, and what the Holy Office taught.  I running away from you."

What sort of dishonest childish response is this?

.

We already know how a real pope handled Feeney.

Yes, we also know how that "real" pope handled Cushing, a flaming Modernist and manifest heretic (ipso facto deposed according to your principles).

Aforementioned "real" pope ...

1) opened the door to evolution
2) opened the door to NFP as Catholic Birth Control
3) appointed, during his lengthy reign, nearly every Modernist bishop would would later bring us the glories of Vatican II (he could have transformed the Church by filling all the posts with Traditionalist-thinking clerics)
4) failed to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and therefore to prevent Vatican II
5) set up Bugnini and allowed him to begin his liturgical experimentations (even Roncalli kicked Bugnini out)
6) permitted other liturgical experimentation (e.g., Mass of the Future)
7) permitted some of the first Ecuмenical gatherings

Of the 260 or so popes in history, there's a good chance 100-150 of them are in hell right now.

in every sense of the word, Pius XII's papacy led inexorably to Vatican II.

That's to say nothing of the fact that we don't even know if the Pope actually dealt directly with the Feeney issue, or whether it was just some Modernists in the curia.  We know that the so-called Suprema Haec never appeared in Acta Apostolicae Sedis, perhaps because they didn't want Pius XII to see it (since he had to approve everything in it).

By not signing the pseudo holy office letter?

Not only not signing it, but very likely never having seen it.  It's highly suspicious that it would not appear in Acta Apostolicae Sedis.  Problem there is that for it to appear in AAS, it would have to be reviewed and approved by Pius XII.

Rahner had to cite The Pilot as his source for that nonsensical Modernist letter in Enchiridion Symbolorum ... a first.  

Clueless Trads are oblivious to how Vatican II founded its heretical ecclesiology on "the letter" and cited it in the footnotes.