Replies

In 1972 all the apparent censures were lifted from Father Feeney, without his having to retract any of his teachings. Had he been, as some say, “condemned for his doctrine” he would have been required to repudiate his error. The reason for this is clearly stated by Pope Innocent I who taught that “Communion once broken off cannot be renewed until the persons concerned give proof that the reasons for which communion was broken off are no longer operative.”

So, "some say" he was "condemned for his doctrine." But the Feeneyites continually make hay out of this, only on the other side--claiming that because he never had to retract anything, he MUST NOT have been a heretic.

I never said he was excommunicated for heresy--I said he actually was a heretic. I have said nothing inconsistent. He was excommunicated for disobedience. The excommunication was eventually lifted. All of which says nothing about whether he was or was not a heretic. The reason I know Feeneyism is a heresy has absolutely nothing to do with the excommunication, the lifting of the excommunication, or the absence of any retraction. You keep bringing up those totally irrelevant matters.

I know Feeneyism is a heresy because I can read the statements from the Magisterium which have contradicted Feeneyism point-blank.

Fundamentally, the reason the Church never pulled out the Big Guns against Feeneyism is that, as a heresy, it is small potatoes. It is popular only among neurotics, as an expression of their deeply-concealed desire that a large portion of the human race should go to hell. I have never met a Feeneyite who wasn't a deeply enraged neurotic.