We have only two regrets.
The first is they praised Dietrich von Hildebrand, and rightly so, because he got so much right. But we wished they would have pointed out his major error on marriage. Von Hildebrand taught, with his wife, that the primary end of marriage is unitive, or at least equal to procreation and rearing of children. This was condemned by Pius XI.
"Alice Von Hildebrand says that her husband believed that the Church’s position on the procreation and education of children as the primary end of marriage diminished the value of the interpersonal and unitive aspects of marriage, and that it was timely and necessary to introduce a corrective to remedy the situation" (The Phenomenology of von Hildebrand and His Novel Teaching on Marriage)
Pope Pius XI clearly cites the 1917 Code of Canon Law formulation based on the writings of Saint Thomas and Saint Augustine - “The primary end of marriage is the procreation and the education of children.”(Casti Connubii--On Christian MarriagePope Pius XI - 1930. #17)
The second point that was disappointing is no reference is ever made to the dogma No Salvation Outside the Church or to Fr. Feeney or even the other defenders of The Dogma of the Faith, such as Orestes Brownson, and Bishop Hay.
It seems Marshall is willing to defend Bishop Marcel Lefebvre, but sees a third rail with Fr. Feeney. Lefebvre for all his good, has a very weak understanding of the Dogma EENS.
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, p. 216:
“Evidently, certain distinctions must be made. Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.), but not by this religion. There may be souls who, not knowing Our Lord, have by the grace of the good Lord, good interior dispositions, who submit to God...But some of these persons make an act of love which implicitly is equivalent to baptism of desire. It is uniquely by this means that they are able to be saved.” [Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, Angelus Press, 1997, p. 216] (Implicit Baptism of Desire is covered on this site here.)
So while this is a very fruitful discussion, and in essence they proclaimed the necessity of Sacramental Baptism; they fell short of proclaim the Dogma EENS in its fullness. And even if they have issues with certain points of Fr. Feeney, the problems of Lefebvre and von Hildebrand don't seem to stop them from praising the courage of those men.
Never the less, we see the Holy Spirit is moving, and opening up the truth. This video is really worth listening to, one of the best analysis of the theological problems that lead us to our present crisis.
