Dear Joe:

If they lack my "gentleness" then they must be REALLY harsh!

Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary was co-founded by excommunicated Father Leonard Feeney, who in the 1940's insisted that all people who are not "card carrying" Catholics go to hell. This is contrary to interpretation of the doctrine of "No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church" (extra Ecclesiam nulla salus). The Holy See, not some wacko priest or laymen are the official interpreters of dogma and doctrine. This dogma can be found in the Catechism (CCC 830-848; especially 846-848).

The teaching found there quotes Vatican II on the topic, but the teaching long preceded Vatican II as evidence by the August 8, 1949 official declaration from the Holy See that was sent to Fr. Feeney, which he refused to accept. After repeated attempts to reconcile Fr. Feeney the Holy See excommunicated him on February 13, 1953 for persistent disobedience to legitimate Church authority. It was after his excommunication that founded the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Fr. Feeney was reconciled to the Church in 1972 and died in 1978. It is reported, however, that he never retracted his interpretation of extra Ecclesiam nulla salus.

Msgr. Camille Perl, secretary of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei,  N. 343/98 dated 27 October 1998 wrote: “The question of the doctrine held by the late Father Leonard Feeney is a complex one. He died in full communion with the Church and many of his former disciples are also now in full communion while some are not.”

After Fr. Feeney's death there were conflicts among the Order, which split into several groups. The most prominent of these groups both call themselves the "Saint Benedict Center."

The Saint Benedict Center in Still River, Massachusetts follows the Benedictine Rule and has been reconciled with the Church. The Diocese of Worcester lists the Center on its website. This branch celebrates the Tridentine Form of the Roman Missal with full ecclesiastical approval.

The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary that runs the website catholicism.org is the branch located in New Hampshire. While there are definitive sources to prove the Massachusetts Saint Benedict Center did reconcile with the Church, I cannot find any evidence of reconciliation of the New Hampshire center.  While the New Hampshire Saint Benedict Center is not officially recognized by their bishop, that is not required. Canon Law allows the faithful to form groups without any official recognition, so that does not tell us anything.

When reviewing a situation like this we need to heed the teaching of the Church in our judgments:

2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor's thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:

Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another's statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.

Since Church teaching requires us to decide positively about any group or person unless there is actual evidence to suggest otherwise, I cannot make any conclusions as to the New Hampshire center's relationship with the Church. We must presume they are in communion with the Church as they claim.

However, their radical traditionalist views on the dogma of extra Ecclesiam nulla salus are suspect, in my opinion. I certainly would not donate to them, or if I were a parish pastor would not allow distribution of their literature and appeals.

We must remember that Vatican II, as an ecumenical council, was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Anyone disparaging Vatican II disparages the Holy Spirit. The "liberalizations" that occurred in the 1960's and 1970's and beyond, often touted in the name of the "spirit of Vatican II", were not a result of Vatican II, but of liberal bishops and priesst violating the "spirit" and letter of Vatican II. They did this, frankly, because Vatican II did not liberalize the Church the way they wanted.

The abuses in liturgy and the like existed for decades, or even centuries before Vatican II. Vatican II just happened to suffer the coincidence of being in the same decade as the liberalization of our society. As a result, the dissenters who stayed mostly behind rectory doors, came out of the closet and out of the rectory to be more open and divisive in the public arena. The Faithful have suffered from their sin ever since.

On the other side, the "traditionalist" took umbrage at the liberalization they saw in the Church and mistook that trend as the fault of Vatican II (a very non-thinking approach and analysis). Vatican II had nothing to do with the liberalization, as mentioned above.

The Traditionalists also took umbrage at what they saw as invalid changes to the liturgy. While the Roman Missal of 1970 may not have been constructed with eloquence, it was not, and is not heretical. The Traditionalists like to call heresy things that do not even qualify as heresy. There is also a major tendency for them to be rather obsessive-compulsive and scrupulous.

For example, one traditionalist told me that the current Mass is invalid because the words of consecration uses the word "cup" instead of "chalice". Earth to traditionalist -- a chalice is a cup! The word chalice may be more beautiful, I agree, but saying "cup" instead, when the Church has approved that language, hardly invalidates the Mass.

Bottomline: I do not recommend, and I stay away from, any group that uses mis-interpretations of Vatican II ("spirit of Vatican II) as an excuse liberalize the Faith with heterodoxies, heresies, and other matters that violate a genuine Catholic principles and worldview.

I also do not recommend, and I stay away from, any group that uses mis-interpretations of Vatican II to allege that there is something wrong with Vatican II. We must remember that Vatican II is also Tradition.

Those who actually assert that Vatican II is evil or invalid I truly think have mental problems or are inspired by the Enemy, or both.

The FIRST TRADITION is that of obedience in fact and in spirit. Anyone claiming to be a traditionalist must adopt an obedient and respective attitude and behavior toward the Pope and Magisterium, and toward all official teachings of the Catholic Church, as defined by the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and the hundreds of official documents that support those teachings in the Catechism.

All Level I (dogma) and Level 2 (definitive) teachings of the Church must be believed and obeyed. To fail in this is to be a heretic (in the case of Level 1 teaching) or be no longer in communion and thus barred from the Sacraments (in the case of Level 2 teaching). While we may disagree on other levels of teaching to one degree or another that disagreement must not be in a "spirit of dissent" but must always be respectful and always based upon facts and thoughtful reason, not mere opinions. And until the Church changes any of those lower levels of teaching, we are to obey them.

An anolgy to this is a stop sign on the corner that one thinks should be changed to a yield sign. That is fine; one may have that opinion. One may even lobby the city council to change it, but until that stop sign is actually changed to a yield sign we are to STOP and will pay the consequences if we don't.

A spirit of dissent, from the "liberals" or the "traditionalists" is out-of-line and not in keeping with Catholic teachings and worldview.

St. Teresa of Avila once said, "The more we see failure in obedience, the stronger should be our suspicion of temptation."

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary