Art Sippo the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 referred to the dogma which indicates all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell.

The Catholic Legate, Canada has an apologetical piece which suggests there is text in Vatican Council II which opposes the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

(To access it on the Catholic Legate website click on Apologetics, then Ultra Traditionalism, then Articles, and finally Salvation Outside the Church?)

There are three points I want to underscore.

1. The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 supported Fr. Leonard Feeney on doctrine, contrary to the propaganda on the Internet and the leftist media.

2. Lumen Gentium 16 does not say that we know case of invincible ignorance or those whom Jesus will judge as having a good conscience. So Vatican Council II dos not contradict the dogma Cantate Domino, Council of Florence, extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

3.  The dogma indicates that all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid Hell. The Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing never affirmed the dogma in public. The secular newspapers in Boston reported that the Church has changed its centuries-old teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The Archbishop never issued a contradiction.
The Letter of the Holy office 1949 mentions the 'dogma', the 'infallible' teaching. The dogma indicates every Jew in Boston needs to enter the Church for salvation. The Archbishop did not make the Letter public for three years and allowed the confusion to spread.It was only after the Vatican insisted that he  made the Letter public.

1.

Here is the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston :

Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.

However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church…-Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston

Here is the ‘dogma’ the ‘infallible’ teaching referred to in the Letter.

1. “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215). Ex Cathedra

2. “We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 302.). Ex Cathedra

3.“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.) Ex Cathedra – from the website Catholicism.org and “No Salvation outside the Church”: Link List, the Three Dogmatic Statements Regarding EENS ) http://nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/

The dogma above indicates that all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation.

This is exactly what Fr. Leonard Feeney had been saying.

So the Letter supported Fr.Leonard Feeney on doctrine (dogma).

2.

Lumen Gentium 16, Vatican Council II, does not claim that we know personally, people saved in invincible ignorance. So it is wrongly assumed that LG 16 contradicts the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. LG 16 refers to implicit salvation and not to explicit cases known to us. We can affirm LG 16 and also Cantate Domino, Council of Florence. Rationality tells us that we do not know a single case in the present times of a person saved in invincible ignorance.So how can it contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus?

Apply the Three Common Sense Points.

1. There is no way that we can know of a particular person saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire because of its very nature. It is known only to God.

2. There is no text in Vatican Council II or the Catechism which claims we know of any such case.

3. So Vatican Council II and the Catechism do not contradict the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus .-The Three Common Sense Points

The baptism of desire is a gift of God. We cannot claim that someone has received the Baptism of Desire this month. We cannot claim to know the Mind of God. We cannot claim that someone or many people have been saved in invincible ignorance this month.

There is a common error. They postulate that since it is possible to be saved in invincible ignorance we know of such cases in real life. Then they suggest this contradicts the dogma which says everyone needs to enter the Church for salvation and there are no exceptions.

The Baptism of Desire or being saved in Invincible Ignorance for us: is only a belief. It’s theoretical. It is accepted in principle. De jure. While the Baptism of water is something real, tangible, observable and repeatable. It’s de facto.

The question is: is there one person this month saved with the baptism of desire or being in invincible ignorance?

If I ask Art Sippo if there was a case of the baptism of desire this month, or last year, he is not going to say yes.

We believe that someone who has not had the Gospel preached to him can be saved. God would provide the necessary helps needed (St. Thomas Aquinas).However because we believe this it does not mean someone is saved in this condition, this month, or over the last year.

3.

1.The Archbishop closed down St.Benedict Center and the issue was doctrinal, specifically the ex cathedra dogma.







Richard J. Cushing, Archbishop of Boston – Decree Regarding Leonard Feeney, April 18, 1949

Rev. Leonard Feeney, S.J., because of grave offense against the laws of the Catholic Church has lost the right to perform any priestly function, including preaching and teaching of religion...

Any Catholic who frequent St. Benedict’s Center, or who in any way take part in or assist its activities forfeit the right to receive the Sacrament of Penance and Holy Eucharist.

2. He never in public afirmed the dogma and uses his office to suppress Fr.Leonard Feeney and the others who were faithful to Catholic teaching.

3.He allowed Fr.Feeney to be criticized for affirming the dogma correctly.


4.He never discouraged the Jesuits in his archdiocese when they removed Fr.Feeney from their community . The  issue was the interpretation of the dogma.


5.He never corrected the errors in the Boston newspapers regarding the dogma and this would spread throughout the world.


6.He delayed making public the Letter from the Holy Office 1949 for three years.


7.Even after it was issued there was no apology from him.


8.Even years after the excommunication was issued, years after the Letter was issued,  there was no move to remove the excommunication on Fr.Leonard Feeney.

'Something is rotten in the state of Denmark'.

The ex cathedra dogma shows us that that Fr. Leonard Feeney was not in heresy and instead it was the Archbishop Cushing who was in heresy, he gave Catholics a new doctrine. He was tacitly saying implicit baptism of desire was explicit like the baptism of water. This is heretical since he contradicted an infallible teaching extra ecclesiam nulla salus which says everyone needs to be an explicit(visible) member of the Catholic Church to avoid Hell. He would never affirm the dogma in public and penalised those who did. 

(See:  http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/07/robert-kennedy-asked-richard-cushing-to.html )