16 March 2015

God Bless Mark Shea

He stoops down to link to my blog, and lumps me in with about 357 other blogs, writers, news services, publications and politicians on his (I guess) enemies list.  There doesn't seem to be any common thread among us, though, except that we aren't Mark Shea. Is it a compliment or not?  I can't make it out. Maybe it is intended as a humor piece.  Who can say in this crazy, workaday world?

Well, let me be the first to try to make the peace.  Mark, you are my brother in Christ.  I wish you nothing but the best.  You are always a fascinating read.  God bless you!  

11 comments:

Athelstane said...

Even by Mark's standards, that was a breathtaking rant.

You're a good man, Timman.

Christophe said...

I didn't want to open all those links - which one refers to you?

Christophe said...

I didn't want to open all those links - which one refers to you?

Fr. Andrew said...

Christopher- I just moused over them until I found his "reshuffling of Vatican Bureaucracy."

Timman- God bless you for not being perfect.

Catholic Mission said...

Mark Shea ,EWTN,NCR are formally rejecting a defined dogma, the Nicene Creed and a rational Vatican Council II with their irrationality
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/01/mark-shea-ewtnncr-are-formally.html


Mark Shea blocks comment,discussion on National Catholic Register error
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/01/mark-shea-blocks-commentdiscussion-on.html


EWTN's website like the NCR editorial policy assumes the dead in Heaven are living and visible exceptions to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/01/ewtns-website-like-ncr-editorial-policy.html

Lynne said...

I never read his blog.

Karen said...

I quit reading Mark Shea long ago as I realized his rantings were so aggressively hate-filled. I don't know what ails the man, truly, but I do believe he needs a lot of prayers. His raw anger with the world is in neon lights. I wouldn't doubt if he would turn in a heartbeat on everyone and everything he now defends if his mind perceives the least bit of criticism aimed at himself. From the little psychology I had in nursing school, people like that are extremely insecure and they build themselves up by tearing everyone else down. Maybe he's even demonically-affected, and I don't say that as an insult; just another reason for his need for prayers.

You are in some good company, Timman. Attacks like only mean you are doing something right. God bless you too!

thetimman said...

Feeneyism, if that term means the position of Fr. Feeney at some points of his life, that extra ecclesiam nulla salus precludes any possibility of baptism of desire, however defined, is condemned by the Church, and was prior to Vatican II. It is my understanding, though I am no student of the issue in depth, that Fr. Feeney himself disclaimed this position in the end, or at least at some time.

As an aside, Fr. Feeney is a great writer, and I have enjoyed some of his short stories very much. There is one in particular where he, in the story he tells, muses favorably that some non-Catholic to whom he was speaking might benefit from ignorance in the judgement.

Catholic Mission, I would rather not discuss the issue on this post as not being relevant, but thanks for your comment.

thetimman said...

Feeneyism, if that term means the position of Fr. Feeney at some points of his life, that extra ecclesiam nulla salus precludes any possibility of baptism of desire, however defined, is condemned by the Church, and was prior to Vatican II. It is my understanding, though I am no student of the issue in depth, that Fr. Feeney himself disclaimed this position in the end, or at least at some time.

As an aside, Fr. Feeney is a great writer, and I have enjoyed some of his short stories very much. There is one in particular where he, in the story he tells, muses favorably that some non-Catholic to whom he was speaking might benefit from ignorance in the judgement.

Catholic Mission, I would rather not discuss the issue on this post as not being relevant, but thanks for your comment.

Catholic Mission said...

Mark Shea assumes that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions to the dogma as interpreted by the Church Councils, saints, Vatican Council II (AG 7) and Fr.Leonard Feeney.

My view ( and not some concept of Feeneyism ) is :being saved in invincible ignorane and the baptism of desire is NOT related to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, it is not an exception to the traditional strict interpretation of the dogma. It is not even relevant.
The Good Thief on the Cross, who died allegedly without the baptism of water, cannot be an exception to the strict interpretation of the dogma. Since he existed centuries back. Exceptions must exist in the present times. Something or someone can only be an exception today.
Every exception to all needing the baptism of water for salvation has to happen today.Otherwise it will not be an exception.

Something that happened in the past cannot be an exception to the dogma on March 18,2015.

Something that will happen in the future cannot be an exception to the dogma on outside the church there is no salvation.

Something that happens in Heaven and is known only to God, cannot be an exception on earth to the dogma today;someone in Heaven cannot be an exception oN earth, to all needing to convert formally into the Church on March 18, 2015.

So if someone dies in invincible ignorance ( with or without the baptism of water) it would be known only to God. So how could it be an exception or relevant to the strict interpretation of outside the Church there is no salvation ?

The message of the dogma is related to today.All need 'faith and baptism' for salvation today.All need to convert today into the Church to avoid the fires of Hell.

Even if someone were to die without faith and baptism ( which is not de fide) we would not know of this case.Humanly we cannot know. These persons would be dead and in Heaven.For Marck Shea being saved in invincible ignorance or with the baptism of desire are exceptions to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church.

If a pope, cardinal or magisterial document infers that there are exceptions today it is false.It has to be rejected.This is common sense.The dead -past, present or future- cannot be exceptions to all needing to convert into the Church today.

Cardinals Marchetti and Cushing in 1949 did not know of any exceptions.

At Vatican Council II ( 1960-1965) no one there knew of anyone saved without faith and baptism.

When Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus were issued neither did Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger know of any exceptions to the dogma.

There is no known case of salvation outside the Church i.e without Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.

So how can the Catechism of Pope John Paul II, Dominus Iesus, Redemptoris Missio and other magisterial documents, over seen by Cardinal Ratzinger, imply that there is salvation outside the Church? Yet they do.

The magisterium has made a factual error and Mark Shea repeats it. He assumes there are explicit exceptions to the dogma. So he cannot say that Vatican Council II affirms the strict interpretation of the dogma with Ad Gentes 7 and there cannot possibly be exceptions in Vatican Council II, to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus

For March Shea,as it was for cardinals Marchetti and Cushing in 1949, persons in Heaven are living exceptions on earth to all needing to be formal members of the Church (with faith and baptism).
CONTINUED

Catholic Mission said...

CONTINUED
It is a fact of life that we cannot see these people on earth.This is his objective error.

Mark Shea also contradicts Church documents before 1949 which do not mention the baptism of desire and being being saved in invincible ignorance, as referring to cases known to us in the present times i.e defacto or explicitly visible. Neither does Mystici Corporis or the Council of Trent allege that these cases are known and visble to us and so are exceptions to traditonal extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So if we do not know of any such case how can they be exceptions to the dogma for Mark Shea ? This was the objective mistake of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
Mark Shea then uses this same irrationality (false premise-the dead-saved are visible) with a false conclusion (they are exceptions to all needing to convert) to allege that Lumen Gentium 16 ( saved in invincible ignorance ) is an explicit exception to Ad Gentes 7 ( all need faith and baptism for salvation).It is also an exception for him to Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441 on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

He is also rejecting the Nicene Creed by inferring 'I do not believe in one (known) baptism, the baptism of water but three or more known baptisms ( blood, desire, seeds of the Word, invincible ignorance, good conscience etc).All without the baptism of water'. This is irrational and heretical. The baptism of desire and blood are known only to God. We do not know any one who will be saved with the 'seeds of the Word'(AG 11) etc.
He rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, changes the Nicene Creed and presents us with an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.
Mark Shea cannot say that any particular person in 2015 has been saved as such or will be saved as such in future without Catholic Faith.

Since these cases are unknown possibilities, even if there are many of them(100's) they are irrelevant to the dogma.The dogma tells us all need to be formal members of the Church in 2015 for salvation.'Zero cases of something are not exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus' says the apologist John Martignoni.
The Church also teaches that all need to be formal members of the Catholic Church for salvation.The Council of Florence indicates Protestants and Orthodox Christians are on the way to the fires of Hell unless they convert into the Church. Ad Gentes 7 has the same message.Mark Shea does not want to discuss this.

I am not using the apologetics of the St.Benedict Centers, the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, the communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney.
-Lionel Andrades