Author Topic: roscoe: Please clarify (Read 3552 times)

gladius_veritatis · « **on:** March 13, 2008, 10:36:22 PM »

"I do not disagree w/ Dimonds on everything--I agree w/ the Feeneyite position on Pius XII. Does anyone know where they stand on Pius XI?"

roscoe,

These are your words from another thread. Please clarify your meaning, particularly with respect to the bold text. Thank you.

roscoe · « **Reply #1 on:** March 13, 2008, 11:15:14 PM »

OK--I do not want to get into a discussion on 'Feeneyism' but one thing that shaped my thinking in this respect was reading CG Clarke's Loyola's And Cabots book. Without getting into a disputation on validity of types of Baptism or indeed even bringing it up, the book basically says that what Fr. Feeney needed was basically what it says in the last 2 sentences of Unam Sanctum--which was even then nothing new. That we must remain loyal to the Roman Pontiff in order to insure salvation; this is the same thing as saying there is no salvation outside the Catholic Religeon(Church).

Apparently a declaration of this Dogmatic Article Of Faith could not be procured from Pius XII.

My understanding is that there is a book called Aftermath of Boston Heresy Case by Potter, but I have not been able to obtain it. Even the St Benedict Center does not offer the book for sale.

roscoe · « **Reply #2 on:** March 13, 2008, 11:34:13 PM »

In other words, Fr. Feeney was declaring the Papal Infallibility that Pius IX insisted on( a kind of Final Tridentine Decree) in the face of so much opposition. If you can't get a declaration of Papal Infallibility from a Pope, there is a real problem.

roscoe · « **Reply #3 on:** March 13, 2008, 11:48:40 PM »

Has anyone read the article Illuminati and The Catholic Church by Terminiello? It is difficult to read but probably still avail from omnicbc. This is where I first heard the fantastic charges that Pius XII, Pius XI, Card Belmonte, Della Chiesa and Card
Rampolla were all Illuminati inductees(Judaics) of various descriptions.

After reading the article 5 times, it is my opinion that while I don't agree w/ all of the authors conclusions, he is never the less sincere--this is of great value in a historian. Kertzer is another sincere historian that I hardly agree w/ a good # of his conclusions.

roscoe · « **Reply #4 on:** March 14, 2008, 12:45:22 PM »

I hope this is all clear enough as I am going to crawl back in my hole now. Ciao