Author Topic: Abp MARCEL LEFEBVRE AND SSPX PRIESTS IN HERESY (Read 7893 times)

LionelAndrades · « **Reply #5 on:** June 27, 2010, 07:56:49 AM »

Ladislaus,

Quote

Stuff like this drives me nuts. We know that absolutely everyone -- without exceptions -- must become Catholic in order to be saved. People can be saved in other religions.

Everyone needs to explicitly be a member of the Catholic Church to be saved and there are no exceptions. Every non Catholic needs to convert and there are no exceptions.

If someone is saved in another religion then it is known only to God. We do not even know if anyone is saved in another religion.

Quote

Either they're Catholic or they're not Catholic. Either there are exceptions or there aren't.

Everyone who is in Heaven is a Catholic.

Quote

You're trying to have your cake and eat it too. You want to accept the Church's definitions on EENS which use language like "absolutely no one at all" and yet accept implicit BoD (which you call explicit) as well.

BOD(Baptism of desire) can never ever be explicit. We can only administer the Baptism of water. We cannot give anyone the Baptism of Desire.

Quote

At least be logically consistent and say that people who are saved are Catholic implicitly. No Protestant has ever been saved. Only Catholics are saved.

Only Catholics are saved.

In Christ
Lionel[/size]

LionelAndrades · « **Reply #6 on:** June 27, 2010, 08:09:51 AM »

Spiritus Sanctos,

Please be specific.
The following is from the SSPX website.

Quote

FR. FEENEY AND CATHOLIC DOCTRINE
A reissue of the article appearing in Verbum, No. 24 (1986), prefaced by the previous Editorial, clarifying the teaching of the Church regarding Baptism.

Many of our friends have heard of Fr. Leonard Feeney, and some of them have a great esteem for this priest who fought against the liberal ecuмenism by recalling again and again that outside the Church there is no salvation. But, to make his point, Fr. Feeney went so far as to exclude Baptism of desire (and martyrdom) from the means of salvation.

This is SSPX heresy. The website is saying that the Baptism of Desire is explicit.
We believe in principle that there is implicit baptism of desire. So how can implicit baptism of desire contradict the infallible teaching that everyone needs to be a visible member(explicit) of the Church?

Quote

His teaching was then condemned by the Holy Office in 1949, and he himself was excommunicated in 1953.

There is no Church Docuмent which says that he was condemned for heresy. This is the propaganda of the Jєωιѕн Left media, Wikipedia etc.
He was excommunicated for disobedience.He did not go to Rome to defend himself. He was also disobedient to the Archbishop of Boston Richard Cushing who never affirmed the dogma or corrected the newspaper errors.

Quote

It should be sufficient to recall that this happened under the pontificate of the saintly Pope Pius XII,

True.

Quote

and that the letter of the Holy Office was signed by Cardinal Ottaviani, who was not a liberal either. However, certain good Catholics still try to exculpate Fr. Feeney by saying that the Holy See was misinformed, etc.

In this thread on this Forum the actual dogma is available.Read it for yourself and decide.

Quote

Well, we have just to open his book The Bread of Life (first published in l952), to see that his doctrine contradicts the Church’s teaching. Let St. Thomas Aquinas, the greatest theologian the Church has ever known, be the witness for the prosecution. His Summa Theologica [ST] is the reference book that all seminarians (Fr. Feeney not excepted) had to study according to the directives of St. Pius X and the 1917 Code of Canon Law....

Fr.Leonard Feeney was also familiar with St.Thomas Aquinas and was not a critic.

In Christ
Lionel

[/size]

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #7 on:** June 27, 2010, 04:59:54 PM »

I fail to see where the SSPX is in heresy.

Cecelia · « **Reply #8 on:** June 27, 2010, 05:25:11 PM »

Wow Lionel,

Thanks for your very precise dealing with the controversy over BOD/BOB.

I agree with what you have written and it makes sense. :applause:

I do not see what your objectors are on about. I dont think they read the dogma properly or understand what the Church teaches regarding infallibility.

All doctrines fit together like a hand-in-glove. BOD (explicit) stands alone. I think they do not understand the doctrine of Predestination properly. Perhaps if they studied this, they would understand EENS better.

If EENS had not been misrepresented then the Great Apostasy we are living through, heralded by Vatican II, would not have taken place. This may well be the reason it had not been clarified by the Magisterium prior to this.

SSPX need to serioulsy look at what they are saying.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #9 on:** June 27, 2010, 07:33:21 PM »

Cecilia said:

Quote

Thanks for your very precise dealing with the controversy over BOD/BOB.

I agree with what you have written and it makes sense. :applause:

:shocked:

Apparently I need a new set of antennae!