Monday, May 31, 2010

VATICAN CONSULTANT ON ISLAM CANNOT SAY ISLAM NOT A PATH TO SALVATION AND MUSLIMS NEED TO CONVERT TO AVOID HELL

Christian Troll represented the Catholic Church at the last inter faith meeting in Rome with Muslims. The Jesuit who specialises in Islam and is a professor at the Gregorian University, Rome is unable to affirm the Catholic Faith in a book he has written and in interviews with Islamic media available on the Internet.

His book Muslims ask, Christians answer is available on the website of the English diocese of Westminister. The book is being sold at Westminster by a former Catholic priest who went deep into Eastern spirituality and then married. He now has a family.

None of the questions address the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.He writes:-

891. When is the magisterium infallible?
The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful - who confirms his brethren in the faith he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals. The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter's successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium, above all in an Ecumenical Council. When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine for belief as being divinely revealed, and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions must be adhered to with the obedience of faith. This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself (Catechism of the Catholic Church).-Question 100, Muslims ask,Christians answer.

The infallible teaching of three popes and Councils is that all Muslims need to convert to avoid Hell.

Prof. Troll’s bio data says that was a professor of Islamic Studies in New Delhi from 1976 to 1988, then senior lecturer at the Centre for the Study of Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations, University of Birmingham up to 1993, and after that a professor of Islamic Institutions at the Pontifical Oriental Institute in Rome until 1999. He was appointed an honorary professor by the Sankt Georgen Graduate School of Philosophy and Theology in 2001.Until 2005, Troll was a twelve-year member of the Catholic Church's subcommission for religious relations with Muslims, which is part of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue (PCID).

 His book Muslims ask,Christian answer howevr contains heresy since he interprets Vatican Council II (LG 16) as contradicting the infallible teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The previous Vatican Consultant on Islam was Fr. Daniel Madigan S.J who was also a professor at the Gergorian University and President of a controversial institute there. He also did not consider Islam as not being a path to salvation (Notification,CDF,Fr.Jacques Dupuis S.J,Dominus Iesus 20 etc).He abruptly left the Gregorian University and teaches at a Jesuit University in Washington.

Christian Troll does not interpret Lumen Gentium 16 as referring to de jure salvation. Instead he considers it de facto and explicit.

________________________________________________________________________________

the following is from the book Muslims ask, Christians answer available on the Internet


Question 50: Why should I become a Christian? What good would it do me and how can Christianity guarantee me an afterlife? The Muslims don’t think highly of Christians, much like the Christians feel about the Jews: how can I find the right religion? One religion makes the other sound like a fairy tale, how can you prove the truth? What is the proof? A Creator does indeed exist, but which of the religions is right? (TR)

Answer: First, the text of the book and the answer to the previous questions should have shown that the Christian faith claims to be the true faith on the one hand, but it does not follow that it is therefore justified to take the stance that other faiths, such as the Jewish or Muslim faiths are completely false or worthless. The Questioner ought to carefully read chapter 11 and chapter 4, as well as the answer to question 42 with this statement in mind.

So, why should someone become a Christian? Because, as every convinced Christian will tell you, being a Christian means meeting Jesus Christ, the way, the truth, and the life (see John 14:6) and because the Christian faith therefore satisfies what the truly seeking person is looking for in life. What does it bring a person to become a Christian? It “brings” Jesus Christ, the “Son of God” into his life, allows him to follow Him and to the people of the church who believe in Him, it brings him such lasting joy and fulfillment here on Earth such that only the true God can grant.

Christians, along with the Christian church believe that God, our merciful creator and Lord revealed Himself through his “Son” Jesus and therewith also revealed the Truth. It is therefore absolutely crucial to get to know Jesus, the Person and what He claims, and to honestly make yourself available to confront Him face-to-face. To the things already mentioned in chapter 2, we would like to add an extract from the book written by the theologian Otto Herrmann Pesch “Kleines Glaubensbuch” (Topos Taschenbuch 29):
(Note there is no mention of the necessity of the Church and Muslims going to Hell if they do not enter)Question 167: Will all those who are not Christians go to hell? (TR)

Answer: This question has already been discussed earlier in answer to question 17 (Questions and Answers 1). To complete the answer I add No 16 of the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, “Lumen Gentium”:
(Note he is suggesting that LG 16 says there are Muslims whom we know who will not go to Hell. He is suggesting that de facto there could be Msulims whom we know who will be saved instead of suggesting that in principle only and under 'certain circumstances'(Letter of the Holy Office 1949) and so unknown to us some can be saved.
However we cannot say that de facto 10 Muslims in Rome have the Baptism of desire or that de jure we know 10 Muslims in Rome are in genuine invincible ignorance).
Question 183: What are Christian paradise and hell like? (TR)

Answer: In answer to this question we need to expand a little and consider the words of a leading modern day catholic theologian says about the dead, eternal life and therefore also about heaven (paradise) and hell.

Many of our contemporaries, even baptized Christians, struggle with the last sentence of the creed, as, indeed, did the people of Athens at the time of St Paul (Acts 17:32).

Presumably this is rooted in the apparently mythological images which the New Testament has taken over from the early Jewish apocalyptic tradition, and which were then passed on throughout the centuries through the preaching of the Church and through Christian art: that on the last day of our times, with the visible second coming of our Lord to earth, the graves will be opened and the bodies of all the dead will come to life again, so that all the people can then gather before Christ, the judge, for the last judgment.

Today many believers and the majority of theologians are convinced that we can imagine the resurrection of the dead in ways other than these strongly bodily images, without having to abandon the binding content of our faith. And so today much more emphasis is placed on the unity of body and soul, also with respect to the completion of life with God. This means: we believe that after death all human beings comes face to face with the love of God in the form of the risen Christ, with “body and soul”, with their whole humanity and their whole colourful life story, with everything they have experienced and suffered, done and not done. As with the Eucharist, where we receive the “body of Christ” (i.e. the risen Christ!), the term body refers not to the biological organism of our body (with skin, flesh and bones), but to that which St Paul calls the “spiritual body” of the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:44), that is to say the whole body which has been penetrated and transformed by the Holy Spirit, the giver of life. In it remains “stored” all that of our earthly life, of our transient physicality and its experiences of happiness, love and joy which is important for the salvation of human beings in God. This resurrection of the body is not in contrast to the “immortality of the soul”, because the biblical meaning of the word soul emphasizes human beings’ openness to God and that they can enter into a personal relationship of love and friendship with God beyond their physical connection with earth and creation. From God’s point, this love and friendship never ends and is therefore “immortal”. The resurrection of the dead therefore describes the salvation of the one and whole human being.

For human beings death represents the definitive end of life on earth lived across the various phases in time and space. The “everlasting life” after death therefore does not simply run eternally and parallel to our time, only on a higher, invisible “heavenly” plane. Rather, in death our life lived on earth reaches its final form with God. But this must not be misunderstood as if God then codified the “result” of our live forever. Rather, finality means: we bring the “fruits” of our life to God. He accepts it, preserves, cleanses and perfects it in the never ending conversation of love between Father and Son in the Holy Spirit. In the light of this love the fruit of our lives can reach its fullness and reach that form which God has planned for each one of us at the very beginning of our lives. Once all human beings have suffered their death and have handed over the fruits of their lives to God, then Christ will have “come again” to every one of them. Then the last day of history has been reached. Like all of creation, this last day is not a certain calendar date in our timeline, and can therefore not be calculated in advance.

In this final and open coming face to face with the love of God we will understand the truth of our lives, clearly and without being able to suppress it. The huge discrepancy between our lives and the love of God for us will become apparent. His love will take the form of a “judging love” (= judgment) which hopes to move us to the recognition of truth, acceptance of our sin and to repentance. If we then accept God’s unerring, true and endlessly merciful gaze on our lives, his love can purify the innermost part of us. Then we can truly accept God’s forgiveness and allow it to transform us, thus becoming truly fit for heaven. Tradition calls this purgatory (purification), and it represents the “gates” of “heaven”.

Heaven is defined as the blissful existence of mankind in the unity of the triune God, but also with the body of Christ, which will gather up all faithful, hopeful and loving people of the earth; and finally also with the whole creation, which is loved by God in all eternity, which together with us is still suffering “birth pangs”, but which shall be released from its “bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God” (Romans 8:21f).

And “hell”? Unlike Heaven God does not assign people to hell (as punishment). Of himself God only communicates himself, but only as love that desires nothing but salvation for everyone. However, human beings have been given the absolute freedom to say “no” to God’s mercy, however improbable such a choice may seem. For example, when they are so in love with their own achievements that they will not accept God’s salvation as pure grace but rather request it as their due. Such a “negative finality” can only be comprehended as a frozen fossilisation, a negation of life and all relationships, as an egocentricity that sees itself as the only absolute. We may and must hope that there is no-one for whom this will be the final word about themselves and their lives. But we cannot exclude the possibility with absolute certainty. Because the ultimate relation of God’s endless mercy and mankind’s endless freedom remain a secret to us. As long as we are still on our way, they are part of the mystery of faith and hope”. (Medard Kehl SJ in: W. Fürst & J. Werbick (Hg.), Katholische Glaubensfibel. Freiburg: Herder, 2004, p. 87 ff.)
“16. Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God (32). In the first place we must recall the people to whom the testament and the promises were given and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh (cf. Romans 9:4-5), On account of their fathers this people remains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts He makes nor of the calls He issues (cf. Romans 11:28-29). But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things (cf. Acts 17:25-28) and as Saviour wills that all men be saved (cf. 1 Timothy 2:4). Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience (33). Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel (34) She knows that it is given by Him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life. But often men, deceived by the Evil One, have become vain in their reasonings and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, serving the creature rather than the Creator (cf. Romans 1:21-25) Or some there are who, living and dying in this world without God, are exposed to final despair. Wherefore to promote the glory of God and procure the salvation of all of these, and mindful of the command of the Lord, "Preach the Gospel to every creature" (Mark 16:15) the Church fosters the missions with care and attention."
(Note again he cites LG 16 suggesting that the baptism of desire and genuine invincible ignorance is not implcit, subjective and conceptual only. He suggests it is explcit and objective and known also to us. Yet we know that these exceptions to the baptism of desire are known only to God. The ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus states every Muslim needs to de facto enter the Catholic Church to avoid Hell.)

(Note he is changing the Catholic concept of Hell even though there is no new Christian Revelation on this subject.The Bible tells us Hell has fire and is a place of physical sufferinge.g Lazarus in the Gospel of Luke.
This is a point we have in common with Islam which has not changed its understanding of Hell).
Question 190: What happens to people who have not heard of Jesus? Will they all go to hell because they are not baptised? (TR)

Answer: “The church teaches that baptism is only essential for the salvation of those who have been told of baptism and who have had the opportunity to decide to be baptised. Because God wills the salvation of all people (cf. 1 Tim 2:4-6), a person who lives according to his conscience and who does God’s will as he recognises it, and who would therefore surely had desired baptism if he had known about its importance, can receive salvation on the basis of this baptism by desire.” Deutscher Erwachsenen-Katechismus, Vol. 1, p. 332

( Note“The church teaches that baptism is only essential for the salvation of those who have been told of baptism"says Troll.
Those Muslims who know about the Church and yet do not enter through the baptism of water are going to Hell definitely  according to the Vatican Council II and the Catechism.Also Muslims in general are on the way to Hell and if there is anyone among them with the Baptism of desire, a good conscience or invincible ignorance they will be known only to God.
Vatican Council II, Ad Gentes 7 and the Catechism of the Catholic Church 836 says 'all' people need to enter the Catholic Church.)
d. The good news of salvation applies fundamentally to all people


God wants all people to be saved and to attain knowledge of truth (1 Tim 2:4). He does not want the sinner to die but for the sinner to convert and remain alive (see Ez 33:11; 2 Pet 3:9). This universality of God’s will for salvation was emphasised once again at the Second Vatican Council:


“Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Nor does Divine Providence deny the help necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel. She knows that it is given by Him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life” (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church: Lumen Gentium = The Light of Nations, 16),Muslims Ask,Christian answer.
(Note Dominus Iesus reminds us that Jesus died for all people but for all people to receive salvation they have to respond, only those who respond by entering the Catholic Church can receive salvation (avoid Hell).)

”All men are called to be part of this Catholic unity of the people of God….And to this belongs or are in various ways related to it, the Catholic faithful, all who believe in Christ, and indeed the whole of mankind, for all men are called by the grace of God to salvation.“ (LG 13).
(Note all men and women are called however as Lumen Gentium 14 says those will be saved who enter the Catholic Church with Catholic Faith and the Baptism of water.This is also the message of Ad  Gentes 7.
Christian Troll gives us Lumen Gentium 16 without Lumen Gentium 14 and Ad Gentes 7's relevant quotation)

”They are fully incorporated in the society of the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ accept her entire system and all the means of salvation given to her, and are united with her as part of her visible bodily structure and through her with Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. The ties which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a "bodily" manner and not "in his heart." (LG 14).
(Note Lumen Gentium 14 also states:
Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved...)





”The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the appellation of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter. (LG 15). "He who believes in Christ and has received Baptism in the correct manner, is in a certain, albeit incomplete communion with the Catholic Church“ (UR 3). Communion with the orthodox churches is so deep that only very little is missing to achieve the fullness required to permit the joint celebration of the Eucharist.“ (Pope Paul VI, Sermon of December 14th, 1975) (see also KK 836-838).-Question 44, Ad d
(Note they are our brothers and sisters with a valid baptism however they do not have Catholic Faith (A D Gentes 7,Vatican Council II) so they are on the way to Hell according the ex cathedra teaching outside the church there is no salvation(extra ecclesiam nulla salus).

Sunday, May 30, 2010

ALL MUSLIMS AND JEWS ARE GOING TO HELL EXCEPT THOSE IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE, THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE ACCORDING TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

ALL MUSLIMS AND JEWS ARE GOING TO HELL EXCEPT THOSE IN INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE, THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE ACCORDING TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH


According to the official teaching of the Catholic Church all non-Catholics are oriented to Hell unless they convert into the Catholic Church. Those non Catholics who have the baptism of desire, a good conscience or are in genuine invincible ignorance and could be saved would be known to God only.


The ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation) teaches that everyone, with no exception, needs to defacto enter the Church to avoid Hell. This is also the teaching of Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II and #836 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.'All' need to be Catholics to go to Heaven and avoid Hell.


Vatican Council II also indicates that millions of Muslims, Jews and members of other religions, in modern cities of the world, who know about the Church and yet do not enter, are oriented to Hell. (Ad Gentes7). This includes members of Christian religions and communities.
Here is the ex cathedra dogma.
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).

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.).
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.) – from the website Catholicism.org and “No Salvation outside the Church”: Link List, the Three Dogmatic Statements Regarding EENS http://nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/
The Rosiminian priest who every Sunday at 8 a.m celebrates the Novus Ordo Mass in Italian  confirmed that Vatican Council II Lumen Gentium 16 does not contradict the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.


Fr.George who is the chief celebrant at Holy Mass at the Church of San Ambrogio and Carlo Via del Corso, Rome was commenting on an apologetic book on display at the Church entrance.The book published by the Vatican Library and written by a Bishop of Frascati,Italy seemed ambigous about Lumen Gentium 16,Vatican Council II.

Fr.George said that Lumen Gentium 16 does not refer to defacto salvation. So it did not contradict the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The dogma indicates that de facto everyone with no exception needs to be a visible member of the Catholic Church for salvation.He agreed that Lumen Gentium 16 referred to de jure salvation and was an acceptable concept.

It in no way contradicted the infallible teaching that the Church was necessary for the salvation of all people and all needed to be a visible member of the Catholic Church ,Jesus' Mystical Body.
 
Fr. Masimilliano de Gaspari F. I says there is no de facto baptism of desire. Baptism of desire always has to be de jure. Fr. Masimilliano de Gaspari F.I who gets his religious name from St. Maximillian Kolbe, who also has similar views on this subject.

Fr. Masimilliano, an Italian priest of the religious community Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, observed that there is no case of baptism of desire that one can judge, nor can one say that any one in particular has genuine invincible ignorance.”It is always a probability”, he observed. It is a probability, a possibility.

It may be mentioned that we cannot say that there are de facto 10 cases of baptism of desire in Rome. Neither can we say de jure that there are 10 cases of baptism of desire in Rome. Since we can only talk in terms of a concept.

Implicit faith (baptism of desire, invincible ignorance) is always only a concept. We accept it in principle (de jure).

De facto the Church tells us (in the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus,Vatican Council II, Ad Gentes 7, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church 836 ) that everyone without exception needs to enter the Catholic Church to avoid Hell. Since with Original Sin human beings have lost the supernatural state which Adam and Eve enjoyed in Paradise who could have lived on without dieing if they were not disobedient. This state of grace is restored through the baptism of water and Catholic Faith.It has been created and won for us by Jesus Christ through His Death and Resurrection.
Those who know about this truth and yet do not enter the Catholic Church are definitely on the way to Hell at the time of death.Other non Catholics are also on the way to Hell however there is a possibility that some of them could have implicit faith and so God will arrange for them to be baptized or send someone to teach them what they should do before they die. In many cases people have returned from death to be baptized by saints and then they return to the next life. This is the mercy of God.

Father Masimilliano de Gaspari F.I said everyone with no exception needs to de facto enter the Catholic Church for salvation. I was speaking with him (April 25, 2010) the morning before he celebrated Holy Mass in Latin at the Church of the Annunziata, Lungotevere, Rome.He was not present today.

"Would you agree that everyone with no exception de facto needs to enter the Catholic Church for salvation while there is a possibility in principle, de jure, that in certain circumstances those with implicit faith (baptism of desire, invincible ignorance etc) can be saved and it would be known only to God?"

"Yes. I agree ", he said in Italian. He also speaks English.

The ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus says everyone with no exception needs to be a visible member of the Catholic Church to be saved (from Hell).

The three popes and Councils which gave Catholics this infallible teaching were aware of invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire (implicit faith).It was NOT mentioned for the FIRST TIME in Vatican Council II.Fr. Masimiliano dei Gaspari agreed.

The popes interpreted implicit faith NOT as de facto salvation. Fr. Masimilliano de Gaspari agreed.

We cannot judge de facto who has a genuine baptism of desire. He agreed.

So if we interpret implicit faith in Vatican Council II (LG 16) as referring to de facto salvation it would be a heresy. It would contradict the ex cathedra teaching outside the Church there is no salvation. It would also contradict Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7) and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (836) which state 'all' need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation.

There has been much confusion caused on this subject by theologians like Fr. Hans Kung who have interpreted Lumen Gentium 16 (invincible ignorance etc) as referring to de facto salvation. It would wrongly mean that Vatican Council II is opposed to the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which for centuries said everyone with no exception needs to be a visible member of the Catholic Church to avoid Hell. It would also mean that the three popes and Councils which gave us this infallible teaching were wrong and that the dogma was only pre-Vatican Council II-thus indicating that those popes were not infallible ex cathedra. It also wrongly suggested that there was no reference to implicit faith (baptism of desire etc) in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 (years before Vatican Council II) to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney. The Letter during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII referred to ‘the dogma’ and the ‘infallible' teaching.

The secular media has also been falsely claiming that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy instead of discipline. Communities founded by Fr. leonard Feeney state that the excommunication against Fr. Feeney was not mentioned in the Acta Apostolica Sedis and the entry in the Denzinger-Enchridion was made by Karl Rahner and Jacques Dupuis S.J, the latter who himself was checked by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, with a Notification issued by Cardinal Ratzinger.The Denzinger entry was made from the Ecclesiastical Review!

Also the Letter of the Holy Office was based on information given by Cardinal Richard Cushing , the Archbishop of Boston who never affirmed the dogma in public.Neither did he issue a clarification when the secular newspapers in Boston and Massachusetts reported that the Catholic Church has changed its teaching on outside the Church no salvation.

Fr.Masimilliano de Gaspari is clarifying that Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are not opposed to the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation and that ex cathedra the popes remain infallible.He is also saying that implciit faith was not mentioned for the first time in Vatican Council II as Fr.Hans Kung and the secular newspapers have been repeating over the years.

Everyone needs to be baptized within the Catholic Church for salvation is the message of the former Archbishop of Boston.His Eminence Cardinal Bernard Francis Law, Archpriest of the Papal Basilica of St. Mary Majors, Rome prayed that the Jews, whom he mentioned specifically among all people, be baptized and so join the Chosen People (“popolo eletto”); the Elect, the Catholic Church.The cardinal was leading the Easter Vigil prayers on Saturday night at the Basilica of St. Mary Majors.
Cardinal Law specifically mentioned after two Old Testament Readings, the necessity of the Jews being baptized for salvation.

Later in his homily in Italian he emphasized the necessity of the Catholic Church for the salvation of all people; all people who enter the Catholic Church.

The cardinal’s message was that Catholics are the ‘chosen people’ of God. He said one cannot separate Jesus from the Catholic Church. Jesus in the Catholic Church is the only way to God the Father. Salvation is available for all baptized persons who enter the Catholic Church. To be saved all people need to worship Jesus in the Catholic Church. He cited various popes.

It may be mentioned that it is an ex cathedra teaching of three popes and Councils that all people with no exception need to join ‘the chosen people’, the Catholic Church for salvation.

_______________________________________________________________________________
Photos of Yahya Pallavicini, Anna Foa and Riccardo Segni

ANOTHER MISSION SUNDAY : TRINITY SUNDAY

Today at Holy Mass in the Tridentine Rite, Byzantine Rite and Novus Ordo Italian Mass the Gospel Reading said: Go out and teach the whole world what I (Jesus) have taught you and baptize them (into the only and one Church which he founded9 and he will be with this Church (and Catholics) for all time.


Today morning my fourth Mass on this Trinity Sunday was in Latin.

The Gospel Reading for me was on Catholic Mission. Last Sunday too was a feast day of Mission, Pentecost, and next Sunday is Corpus Domini, the fest of the Eucharist the Heart of Mission and evangelization. There are Catholics who carry Adoration Lists with them inviting their friends and these whom they meet for Eucharist Adoration. This is Eucharistic Evangelization.

In the homily yesterday evening the African priest recalled the natural cooking fires, over three pieces of wood, which become one flame. He observed how water could be seen in some places as liquid, vapor and ice but still the same water.

Today morning a priest recalled the experience of St.Augustine at the seaside and the vision of a child. There was the example of St. Patrick in Ireland, pointing to the three leaves (petals) of the Shamrock flower on one stem. St. Teresa of Avila’s first experience and vision of the Trinity in the Essence of God, was mentioned and of course, the other Carmelite was remembered, St. Elizabeth of the Trinity.

In the Eucharist, at Holy Mass we have the Mystery of the Trinity, the Creator, with us every day.

One of the homilies expressed well the importance of Baptism to enter into the New Alliance, the New Covenant which God made through His Son Jesus Christ. Jews need to be baptized to enter the New Covenant said the priest.


I recently read that the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) Mass is valid but their priests and bishops are in an irregular situation-but, so are cardinals Bertone, Bagnasco, Kaspar, Martini, Tettamanzi(Milan), they are automatically excommunicated. Since they say that Jews do not have to convert in the present times, this is contrary to today’s Gospel. It is contrary to the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Saturday, May 29, 2010

Lionel's E-News for the week May 29-June 4,2010 : SOCIETY OF ST.PIUS X (SSPX) SUCCUMBS TO THE FR.KUNG DECEPTION: NEGOTIATIONS WITH CDF MUST CLARIFY LG 16 / SOCIETA DELLA SAN PIO X (SSPX) SOCCOMBE ALL'INGANNO DI DON KUNG: LE TRATTATIVE CON CDF DEVONO CHIARIRE IL LG 16

Lionel's E-News for the week May 29-June 4,2010


Friday May 28, 2010

SSPX SUCCUMBS TO THE FR.KUNG DECEPTION: NEGOTIATIONS WITH CDF MUST CLARIFY LG 16

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/05/sspx-succumbs-to-frkung-deception.html

Friday, May 28, 2010

SSPX SOCCOMBE ALL'INGANNO DI DON KUNG: LE TRATTATIVE CON CDF DEVONO CHIARIRE IL LG 16

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2010/05/sspx-soccombe-allinganno-di-don-kung-le.html


ONLY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH-CATHOLIC MISSION OFFICE TO THE JEWS AND GENTILES IN ROME

‘…but he that believeth not shall be condemned.’-Mark 16:16

Lionel Andrades, Catholic layman
E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com
Blog: http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/
YouTube: http://it.youtube.com/LionelAndrades

Friday, May 28, 2010

SSPX SOCCOMBE ALL'INGANNO DI DON KUNG: LE TRATTATIVE CON CDF DEVONO CHIARIRE IL LG 16

I colloqui con CDF, Vaticano deve chiarire se il Lumen Gentium 16 riferisce alla salvezza de jure o de facto, alla salvezza esplicita o appena a un concetto.

La Società della San Pio X (SSPX) è presente nelle porte chiuse trattative con la Congregazione per la Dottrina della Fede, Vaticano per accertare della dottrina Cattolica. Tuttavia lo SSPX potuto essere nell'eresia secondo il sito web e nei sacerdoti di SSPX. Se lo SSPX non interpreta il Lumen Gentium 16 come riferendosi a de jure, salvezza implicita, quindi è l'inganno di Don Hans Kung. Se interpretano il Lumen Gentium 16 come riferirsi come de facto, come una persona conosce personale allora è eresia. Se non vedono il battesimo di desiderio come implicito allora contraddirebbe l’ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Il dogma si riferisce all'entrata esplicita nella Chiesa Cattolica, con il Battesimo dell'Acqua e della Fede Cattolica, che è esplicita e obiettivamente verificabile.

Lo SSPX sta dicendo correttamente che tutto deve entrare nella Chiesa Cattolica per salvezza ma anche utilizzare il mantra ‘ tranne quelli nell'ignoranza invincibile e nel battesimo di desiderio'. Ciò è confusione.

Sarebbe razionale dire che ognuno (tutti non Cattolici) senza eccezione bisogna entrare nella Chiesa Cattolica per salvezza (per evitare inferno) e chi è nell'ignoranza invincibile o avere il battesimo di desiderio loro conosciuto soltanto al Dio e al Lui soltanto li giudicherà.

Qui è l'ex dogma del cathedra.

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).

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.).

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.) – from the website Catholicism.org and “No Salvation outside the Church”: Link List, the Three Dogmatic Statements Regarding EENS: http://nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/)
Non c’è documento della Chiesa Cattolica che dice che Don Leonard Feeney di Boston era scomunicato per l'eresia. Anche i suoi critici come Don Most ammette che era scomunicato per disobbedienza, lui non andato a Roma difendersi. Ha fatto le accuse contro Santo Ufficio ed era disubbidiente all'Arcivescovo di Boston.

Se lo SSPX o il CDF non affermi il dogma, uno potrebbe fare le stesse accuse dell'eresia contro di loro.

Don Leonard Feeney è stata rimossa dall’Congregazione di Gesuita perché ha affermato il dogma di cui sopra. Anche oggi le Gesuite all’Boston College, in cui ha insegnato a ed è stato rimosso come professore, negano il dogma. Arcivescovo Richard Cushing, l'arcivescovo di Boston morire senza mai affermare il dogma in pubblico. Lui ha mettere Don Feeney e il centro St. Benedict Centre sulla sospensione.

Un sacerdote per i nostri tempi, un uomo per tutte le stagioni, Don Feeney non ha usato `di mantra ‘tranne quelli nell'ignoranza invincibile e con il battesimo di desiderio'. Poiché, è evidente non c’è battesimo esplicito (de facto) di desiderio che possiamo sapere. L'ignoranza invincibile genuina è implicita e non possiamo discernerli. Nessun di noi sanno chi il Dio giudicherà come avendo una buona coscienza il Giorno di Giudizio.

Lo SSPX deve chiarire la posizione in pubblico. Il Superiore Generale della Gesuita e presente Arcivescovo di Boston di Boston bisogna pubblico scusarsi.

Nel SEEING THROUGH THE KUNG DECEPTION ON THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS (blog: eucharistandmission Maggio 26,2010), ho scritto:


Alcuni giorni fa su una Cattolica Forum sull’Internet, Jim ha avuto una comprensione. Ha cominciato a osservare diversamente il mantra “tranne quelli nell'ignoranza invincibile e nel battesimo di desiderio’.

Il battesimo di desiderio è sempre implicito. È ipotetico, soggettivo e de jure ha osservato.

Così come può il Battesimo di Desiderio e l'ignoranza invincibile contraddice l’ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, cioè ,ognuno deve essere un membro esplicito della Chiesa Cattolica per salvezza?

Se e non contraddicesse il dogma (anche se ha fatto) significherebbe che ogni ebreo, musulmani o buddista è sul senso a inferno.

L'insegnamento infallibile dice che tutto ha bisogno esplicitamente del battesimo dell'acqua per evitare l'inferno. Dice che tutto ha bisogno della Fede Cattolica, che è obiettiva, esso deve essere imparato e la sua conoscenza può essere provata esplicitamente. Così il mantra è un inganno quando suggerisce che il battesimo dell'acqua e l'ignoranza invincibile siano espliciti e possano essere giudicati in persone specifiche.

Questo errore sta essendo pappagallo ripetuto appena da circa ogni Cattolico.

Gli Stati Uniti Conferenza Cattolica Vescovi (USCCB), Comitato di Dottrina, nella Chiarificazione sul Don Peter Phan ripete alcune volte che la chiesa è necessaria per salvezza tranne quelle nell'ignoranza invincibile... Società della San Pio X (SSPX) dice che ognuno deve entrare nella chiesa per salvezza ‘ tranne quelle nell'ignoranza invincibile e con il battesimo di desiderio’. Apologista Cattolica Art Sippo dice tutti non bisogna trasporto carta della Chiesa Cattolica per salvezza (evitare l’inferno).

Qui fa parte della discussione sul Forum.

Che cosa significate dall’implicito battesimo di desiderio? Quando il battesimo di desiderio non e implicito?


Supponete che il Catechismo e il Concilio Vaticano II stanno riferendosi al battesimo di desiderio e dell'ignoranza invincibile esplicitamente?

Se è speculativo allora non c’è contraddizione con il dogma. Ognuno deve essere il trasporto della carta della Chiesa Cattolica per salvezza. Ciò battesimo di desiderio è ovviamente puramente speculativa, concettuale, de jure…

Il mantra era stato diffuso nelle scritture di Don Hans Kung, che ancora è permesso offrire la Santa Messa. Don Kung ha veduto il mantra come riferendosi alla salvezza esplicita e de facto. Non era per lui una possibilità, qualche cosa d’ipotetico, de jure (soltanto in principio). Dopo questi premessa difettosi Kung ha razionalizzato che i papi sono non di più infallibili. Ha creduto che il Concilio Vaticano II aveva generato una rivoluzione, nonostante che il mantra (Lumen Gentium 16) non fosse accennato per la prima volta nel Concilio Vaticano II, come lui potrebbe suggerire.
Infatti, quelli che senza colpa ignorano il Vangelo di Cristo e la sua Chiesa ma che tuttavia cercano sinceramente Dio e coll'aiuto della grazia si sforzano di compiere con le opere la volontà di lui, conosciuta attraverso il dettame della coscienza, possono conseguire la salvezza eterna...- Lumen Gentium 16
L'inganno di Don Hans Kung è stato diffuso mediante i mezzi secolari ed Ebrei-Sinistra. Poiché Kung ha interpretato il mantra riferendosi alla salvezza esplicita ha creduto che il dogma è stato contraddetto.

I papi e i Concili , al contrario, hanno interpretato il mantra come riferimento a salvezza de jure. Inoltre è stata accettata in principio, come concetto dal San Tomaso Aquino.Soltanto un concetto.

Jim, potrebbe ora dire che gli USCCB, gli SSPX, il Patrick Madrid e Don Hans Kung è nell'eresia. (Perché bisogna accenni il mantra se sapere che è de jure e non contraddice l'insegnamento infallibile? )

SSPX SUCCUMBS TO THE FR.KUNG DECEPTION: NEGOTIATIONS WITH CDF MUST CLARIFY LG 16

Talks with CDF,Vatican must clarify if Lumen Gentium 16 refers to de jure or de facto salvation, explicit salvation or just a concept.

The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) is presently in closed-door negotiations with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican to ascertain Catholic doctrine. Yet the SSPX itself could be in heresy according to its website and reports by SSPX priests. If the SSPX does not interpret Lumen Gentium 16 as referring to de jure, implicit salvation, then it is the Kung Deception. If they interpret Lumen Gentium 16 as referring to something defacto-personally-knowable then it is heresy. If they do not see the Baptism of Desire as implicit then they would contradict the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The dogma refers to explicit entry into the Catholic Church, through the baptism of water and Catholic Faith, which is explicit and objectively verifiable.
The SSPX has been saying correctly that everyone needs to enter the Catholic Church for salvation but have also been using the mantra ‘except for those in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire’.

This is confusion to put it politely.

It would be rational to say everybody(all non Catholics) with no exception need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation (to avoid Hell) and those who are in invincible ignorance or have the baptism of desire known only to God and He only will judge them.

Here is the ex cathedra dogma.

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).

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.).

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.) – from the website Catholicism.org and “No Salvation outside the Church”: Link List, the Three Dogmatic Statements Regarding EENS:  http://nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/ )
There is no Church document which says Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy. Even his critics like Fr. William Most admit he was excommunicated for disobedience, he did not go to Rome to defend himself. He made accusations against the Holy Office and was disobedient to the Archbishop of Boston.

If the SSPX or the CDF did not affirm the dogma, one could make the same accusations of heresy against them.

Fr. Feeney was removed from the Jesuit Order because he affirmed the above dogma. Till today the Jesuits at Boston College, where he taught and was removed as a professor, deny the dogma. Archbishop Richard Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston who placed Fr. Feeney and the Benedict Center under interdict, died without ever affirming the dogma in public.

A priest for our times, a man for all seasons, Fr. Leonard Feeney did not use the mantra ‘except for those in invincible ignorance and with the baptism of desire’. Since, it is obvious there is no explicit (de facto) Baptism of Desire that we can know of. Genuine invincible ignorance is implicit and we cannot discern it. None of us know whom God will judge as having a good conscience on the Day of Judgement.

The SSPX needs to clarify its position in public. The Jesuit Superior General and the present Archbishop of Boston need to make a public apology.

In SEEING THROUGH THE KUNG DECEPTION ON THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS (May 26,2010 Blog : eucharistandmission ) I wrote:

A few days back on a Catholic Forum on the Internet, Jim had an insight. He began to look differently at the familiar mantra “except those in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire”.

The Baptism of Desire is always implicit. It is hypothetical, subjective and de jure he observed.

So how can the Baptism of desire and invincible ignorance contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus i.e. everybody needs to be an explicit member of the Catholic Church to be saved?

And if it did not contradict the dogma (even if it did) it would mean every Jew, Muslim or Buddhist is on the way to Hell.

The infallible teaching says everyone explicitly needs the baptism of water to avoid Hell. It says everyone needs Catholic Faith, which is objective, it has to be learnt and one’s knowledge can be tested explicitly.

So the mantra is a deception when it suggests the baptism of water and invincible ignorance are explicit and can be judged in specific persons.

This error is being repeated parrot-like by just about every Catholic. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) Doctrine Committee in the Clarification on Fr. Peter Phan repeats a few times that the Church is necessary for salvation ‘except for those in invincible ignorance…’ The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) says everybody needs to enter the Church for salvation except for those in invincible ignorance and with the baptism of desire.Apologist Art Sippo also says everybody has not to be a card carrying member of the Catholic Church to be saved from Hell.

Here is part of the Forum discussion:-


What do you mean by implicit Baptism of Desire? When is the Baptism of Desire not implicit?
Do you assume that the Catechism and Vatican Council II is referring to explicit baptism of desire and invincible ignorance?


This (Baptism of Desire) is obviously purely speculative, conceptual, de jure...

The mantra had been popularized in the writings of Fr.Hans Kung, who is still allowed to offer Holy Mass. Fr.Kung saw the mantra as referring to explicit and de facto salvation-instead of a possibility ,something hypoterical, de jure (in principle only).

After this faulty premise Kung rationalized that the popes are no more infallible.He believed that Vatican Council II had created a ‘revolution’ even thought the mantra (Lumen Gentium 16) was not mentioned for the first time in the Council, as he could suggest.The Hans Kung Deception was popularized by the secular Jewish-Left media.
Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience...-Lumen Gentium 16

Since King interpreted the mantra as referring to explicit salvation he believed the dogma was contradicted.

The popes and Councils, on the contrary, interpreted the mantra as a reference to de jure salvation.It was also accepted in principle, as a concept by St.Thomas Aquinas. Only a concept.

Jim, could now say that the USCCB, SSPX,Patrick Madrid and Fr.Hans Kung are in heresy. Why mention the mantra if you know it is de jure and does not contradict the infallible teaching?

______________________________________________________________________________

Here are some important E-Addresses of the SSPX
info@sspx.org,fsspx@fsspx.org,direction@seminaire-econe.ch,poste@seminaire-econe.ch,info@seminaire-econe.ch,admin@seminaire-econe.ch,info1@priesterseminar-herz-jesu.de,website@holycrossseminary.com,
cajmdaniels@gmail.com So if it is speculative then there is no contradiction with the dogma. Everybody has to be a card carrying member of the Catholic Church for salvation.

Thursday, May 27, 2010

ART SIPPO SUCCUMBS TO THE KUNG DECEPTION

It was Fr.Hans Kung who interpreted Lumen Gentium 16 as referring not to de jure but de facto salvation.It is this interpretation that apologist Art Sippo has accepted. Vatican  Council itself did not say those with invincible  ignorance or the baptism of desire are people that we explicitly know and whom we can explicitly judge. It was Hans Kung and his supporters who taught this heresy and personal interpretation of Vatican Council II.

On the blog of Patrick Madrid , Art Sippo answers questions on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Patti
USA
7253 PostsPosted - 02/07/2010 : 2:24:56 PM

It is the position of the Catholic Church since Vatican II that it is not STRICTLY necessary to be a card carrying member of the Catholic Church in order to be saved. But it IS the ORDINARY means by which a human being is saved and frankly the only way that carries any assurance of salvation.
Actually, that was in place pre-Vatican II also, from the time of the ECF, St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, the Council of Florence, Pope Pius IX and Pope Pius XII. It was in fact under Pope Pius XII's holding of the papal office that Fr. Leonard Feeney's error was condemned.

Yours in Christ,
Patti
Laudare, benedicere, praedicare.
She says after 1962-65 the infallibile dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus was changed.But where is the text in Vatican Council II responsible for this change?THERE IS NO SUCH TEXT AVAILABLE IN VATICAN COUNCIL II.

No where does the Council say that those with invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are explicitly and de facto saved rather than being saved in principle, de jure as a concept.

The Church has always taught for centuries that everyone must be a card carrying member of the Catholic Church to go to Heaven.
Here is the ex cathedra dogma.

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).

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.).

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.) – from the website Catholicism.org and “No Salvation outside the Church”: Link List, the Three Dogmatic Statements Regarding EENS http://nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/ )
Yet Art Sippo writes the following.
artsippo
USA
5205 PostsPosted - 02/07/2010 : 3:15:36 PM

Absolutely, Patti! I wanted to make it clear that VCII was the watershed of the many centuries of Catholic reflection on the mystery of the Church.

I would like to say a few words about Fr. Feeney. He ran a Catholic chaplaincy in the Cambridge area around Boston near Harvard...
In my last post (SEEING THROUGH THE KUNG DECEPTION ON THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS May 26,2010 Blog : eucharistandmission ) I wrote:

A few days back on a Catholic Forum on the Internet, Jim had an insight. He began to look differently at the familiar mantra “except those in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire”.

The Baptism of Desire is always implicit. It is hypothetical, subjective and de jure he observed.

So how can the Baptism of desire and invincible ignorance contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus i.e. everybody needs to be an explicit member of the Catholic Church to be saved?

And if it did not contradict the dogma (even if it did) it would mean every Jew, Muslim or Buddhist is on the way to Hell.

The infallible teaching says everyone explicitly needs the baptism of water to avoid Hell. It says everyone needs Catholic Faith, which is objective, it has to be learnt and one’s knowledge can be tested explicitly.

So the mantra is a deception when it suggests the baptism of water and invincible ignorance are explicit and can be judged in specific persons.

This error is being repeated parrot-like by just about every Catholic. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) Doctrine Committee in the Clarification on Fr. Peter Phan repeats a few times that the Church is necessary for salvation ‘except for those in invincible ignorance…’ The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) says everybody needs to enter the Church for salvation except for those in invincible ignorance and with the baptism of desire.
 Art Sippo also says  everybody has not to be a card carrying member of the Catholic Church to be saved from Hell.

Here is part of the Forum discussion:-

     
What do you mean by implicit Baptism of Desire? When is the Baptism of Desire not implicit?


Do you assume that the Catechism and Vatican Council II is referring to explicit baptism of desire and invincible ignorance?

This (Baptism of Desire) is obviously purely speculative, conceptual, de jure...

So if it is speculative then there is no contradiction with the dogma. Everybody has to be a card carrying member of the Catholic Church for salvation.
The mantra had been popularized in the writings of Fr.Hans Kung, who is still allowed to offer Holy Mass. Fr.Kung saw the mantra as referring to explicit and de facto salvation-instead of a possibility ,something hypoterical, de jure (in principle only).

After this faulty premise Kung rationalized that the popes are no more infallible.He believed that Vatican Council II had created a ‘revolution’ even thought the mantra (Lumen Gentium 16) was not mentioned for the first time in the Council, as he could suggest.The Hans Kung Deception was popularized by the secular Jewish-Left media.

Since King interpreted the mantra as referring to explicit salvation he believed the dogma was contradicted.

The popes and Councils, on the contrary, interpreted the mantra as a reference to de jure salvation.It was also accepted in principle, as a concept by St.Thomas Aquinas.Only a concept.

Jim, could now say that the USCCB, SSPX,Patrick Madrid and Fr.Hans Kung are in heresy (Why mention the mantra if you know it is de jure and does not contradict the infallible teaching?). Jim also knows there is no church document which says Fr.Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy.
Jim could also say that Art Sippo is in heresy.

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

SEEING THROUGH THE KUNG DECEPTION ON THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

A few days back on a Catholic Forum on the Internet, Jim had an insight. He began to look differently at the familiar mantra “except those in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire”.

The Baptism of Desire is always implicit. It is hypothetical, subjective and de jure he observed.

So how can the Baptism of desire and invincible ignorance contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus i.e. everybody needs to be an explicit member of the Catholic Church to be saved?

And if it did not contradict the dogma (even if it did) it would mean every Jew, Muslim or Buddhist is on the way to Hell.

The infallible teaching says everyone explicitly needs the baptism of water to avoid Hell. It says everyone needs Catholic Faith, which is objective, it has to be learnt and one’s knowledge can be tested explicitly.

So the mantra is a deception when it suggests the baptism of water and invincible ignorance are explicit and can be judged in specific persons.

This error is being repeated parrot-like by just about every Catholic. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) Doctrine Committee in the Clarification on Fr. Peter Phan repeats a few times that the Church is necessary for salvation ‘except for those in invincible ignorance…’ The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) says everybody needs to enter the Church for salvation except for those in invincible ignorance and with the baptism of desire.

Here is part of the Forum discussion:-

What do you mean by implicit Baptism of Desire? When is the Baptism of Desire not implicit?
Do you assume that the Catechism and Vatican Council II is referring to explicit baptism of desire and invincible ignorance?
Jim says:
This (Baptism of Desire) is obviously purely speculative, conceptual, de jure...
So when I meet a Jew or Muslim in Boston I can tell him that the Catholic Church teaches that he needs Catholic Faith and the Baptism of water to go to Heaven says Scott Hahn correctly .(As Jim says the Baptism of Desire is hypothetical. So we wouldn’t know any particular case in Boston). So everyone with no exception needs to enter the Church to avoid Hell and if anyone has the baptism of desire or is in invincible ignorance it would be known only to God.

The mantra had been popularized in the writings of Fr.Hans Kung, who is still allowed to offer Holy Mass. Fr.Kung saw the mantra as referring to explicit and de facto salvation-instead of a possibility ,something hypoterical, de jure (in principle only).

After this faulty premise Kung rationalized that the popes are no more infallible.He believed that Vatican Council II had created a ‘revolution’ even thought the mantra (Lumen Gentium 16) was not mentioned for the first time in the Council, as he could suggest.The Hans Kung Deception was popularized by the secular Jewish-Left media.


Since King  interpreted the mantra as referring to explicit salvation he believed the dogma was contradicted.

The popes and Councils, on the contrary, interpreted  the mantra as a reference to de jure salvation.It was also accepted in principle, as a concept by St.Thomas Aquinas.Only a concept.

Jim, could now say that the USCCB, SSPX,Patrick Madrid and Fr.Hans Kung are in heresy (why mention the mantra if you know it is de jure and does not contradict the infallible teaching?).Jim also knows there is no church document which says Fr.Leonard Feeney was  excommunicated for heresy.

Alongwith Jim, there is a whole group of young people,Catholics with a good religious formation.They have been fortunate. They should be ready to explain things at another level; the level of Vatican Council II.
They now see through the Kung Deception on Lumen Gentium 16 and extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Monday, May 24, 2010

CARDINAL IVAN DIAS AND THE PROPAGANDA FIDE NUN: THE ISSUE IS DOCTRINE

Cardinal Ivan Dias ,Prefect, Congregation for the Evangelisation of People called attention recently to Doctrine among priests and missionaries. The fomer Archbishop of Bombay said ‘Doctrine means being faithful to the Word of God, the Magisterium of the Church, observing the words of the Holy Father.’


The cardinal has his office at the Propaganda Fide, Piazza Spagna, Rome. An Italian nun also works in the same building. The good sister has a problem with doctrine and it shows.On a Youtube video she has denied an ex cathedra dogma of the Catholic Church.



Rome (Agenzia Fides) - "The world needs priests and missionaries in 3D, people who maintain Doctrine, Discipline, Devotion." This was the appeal made by His Eminence Cardinal Ivan Dias, Prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, to all priests and missionaries in the world, upon the conclusion of the Year for Priests proclaimed by Benedict XVI.

Cardinal Dias was speaking yesterday afternoon at the General Assembly of the Pontifical Mission Societies being held in Rome (see Fides 17/05/2010), and focused on identity and qualities that every priest and missionary must cultivate in his life and ministry, saying: "Every priest, on his path of growth and in his ministry, should safeguard these three dimensions: Doctrine, Discipline, Devotion. Safeguarding Doctrine means being faithful to the Word of God, the Magisterium of the Church, observing the words of the Holy Father. The second, Discipline, is very important nowadays and should be taken more deeply into account. This implies the discipline of mind and body, a sign and fruit of a human and spiritual maturity. This includes formation in chastity and proper relations with the opposite sex; management of discord and conflict in relationships and in the community; management of free time and use of new technologies. As for Devotion, I would emphasize that the priest, in each of his small daily actions, should bear in mind that he is a man of God. He should give primacy to the spirit, keeping in mind that he is in the world, but not of the world."

"In general - the Cardinal said, addressing all priests and missionaries – be people who 'breathe the sacred,' especially in the celebration of Holy Mass and administering the Sacraments, helping others to encounter the living and active person of Jesus Christ."

Cardinal Dias recalled that every priest, like every Christian, "has the missionary spirit in his DNA," otherwise he would be "a deformed Christian or at least not yet well-formed..."

As a model of a person and priest who lived these three dimensions to the full and had a missionary spirit, the Prefect of “Propaganda Fide” presented Cardinal John Henry Newman, who is scheduled to be beatified September 19 by Pope Benedict XVI on his upcoming trip to England. (PA) (Agenzia Fides 18/05/2010)

Saturday, May 22, 2010

CHIARIFICAZIONE DI USCCB E ERESIA?

Il Conferenza degli Stati Uniti dei Cattolici Vescovi (USCCB) in 2007 ha pubblicato una chiarificazione su un libro di Don Peter C.Phan. L’USCCB ha dichiarato che chi è nell'ignoranza invincibile non devono entrare nella Chiesa Cattolica per salvezza. Di USCCB non dicono che ogni non cattolico senza eccezione deve entrare de facto nella Chiesa Cattolica per andare a cielo. Quindi c’era ambiguità nella loro chiarificazione. Per l’USCCB è il Lumen Gentium 16 e un riferimento a salvezza de jure o de facto? Se fosse un riferimento a salvezza de facto contraddirebbe di ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Qui e l’ex cathedra dogma.
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).
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.).
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.) – from the website Catholicism.org and “No Salvation outside the Church”: Link List, the Three Dogmatic Statements Regarding EENS: http://nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/ )
Per rifiutare un ex cathedra dogma è un peccato mortale. Don Peter Phan insegnare alle università cattoliche Washington e negli USA. Inoltre offrire la Santa Messa. Arcivescovo Donald Wuerl, e arcivescovo di Washington.
Peter Phan - Writings on the Internet

• Proclamation of the Reign of God as Mission in the Church delivered at the 2001 Conference and Annual Meeting of the United States Catholic Mission Association in Memphis, Tennessee, October 26-28, 2001.


• Christianity and Other Religions: From Confrontation to Encounter [Rich Text Format]. Sedos.org:


"In the last four decades, many if not most missiologists have rejected the long-held view that the purpose of mission is “soul-saving” and “church- planting”. “Soul-saving” tends to individualize salvation, belittling the other aspects of the Church’s mission such as inculturation, interreligious dialogue, and liberation. “Church-planting” tends to ecclesiasticize salvation, identifying the Church with the Kingdom of God and fomenting rivalries among Christian denominations.


Instead of this church-centred approach to mission, a kingdom-of-God-centred view has been proposed in which the Church is made subservient to, though not separate from, the reign of God.5 It is the reign of God that determines the Church and its mission, and not the other way round. In terms of priority and intrinsic importance, the reign of God stands at the top, followed by mission, proclamation, and church. This is the order in which these four realities of the Christian faith should be understood and related to each other.6 In this perspective, conversion in the sense of renouncing one religious tradition and joining the Christian Church still is a desirable outcome of mission, but it is not its main goal, let alone its sole purpose.


[and]


Conversion then can mean, in its Latin etymology, “turning with” rather than simply toward something else. Christians and non-Christians can turn together, with one another, toward not a particular religious organization or church but toward the Kingdom of God, and they can and must help each other in doing so. Just as in ecumenism, the model of “returning” of the so-called “separated brethren” to the Catholic Church is no longer adopted as the goal of Church unity, so in mission in the future, especially in Asia where religious pluralism is the fact of life, conversion is not sought as the joining of the Christian Church by, e.g., ex-Buddhists or ex-Hindus or ex-Muslims (though that may happen from time to time, just as the other way round is also possible) but as the “turning” of all humans, together and with reciprocal assistance and encouragement, toward Christ, that is, to the way of life and the values that he embodied in his own person, and the “taking up of his mission” in the service of the Kingdom of God.
__________________________________________________________________________________

USCCB Doctrine Committee Faults Book by Father Peter Phan

WASHINGTON (December 10, 2007)—The U.S. Bishops' Doctrine Committee issued clarifications concerning several aspects of Father Peter C. Phan's book, Being Religious Interreligiously: Asian Perspectives on Interfaith Dialogue.

Father Phan's book uses "certain terms in an equivocal manner" that "opens the text up to significant ambiguity," the Committee said. It added that "a fair reading of the book could leave readers in considerable confusion as to the proper understanding of the uniqueness of Christ."

The Committee, which represents the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) on doctrinal matters, outlined its concerns in a statement, "Clarifications Required by the Book Being Religious Interreligiously: Asian Perspectives on Interfaith Dialogue." The Committee made the statement public December 10. It is available at www.usccb.org/dpp/StatementonBeingReligiousInterreligiously.pdf.
The Committee stressed the importance of understanding religious pluralism, but said the way the book addresses some theological issues "raises serious concerns." The Committee said the statement outlines some "problematic aspects of the book" and offers "a positive restatement of Catholic teaching on the relevant points."
Several aspects of the book concern the Committee, but it limited comments to three areas:
1. Jesus Christ as the unique and universal Savior of all humankind
2. The salvific significance of non-Christian religions
3. The Church as the unique and universal instrument of salvation.
The Doctrine Committee took action after the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith asked it to evaluate the book by Father Phan, a priest of the Diocese of Dallas, Texas, who holds the Ellacuria Chair of Catholic Social Thought in Georgetown's Department of Theology. Over a period of two years, the Committee asked Father Phan to clarify points of concern.

On the first point, the Committee objected to Father Phan's qualifying the uniqueness of Christ and saying that terms referring to Christ as "unique" "absolute" and "universal" "should be jettisoned and replaced by other, theologically more adequate equivalents."

"It has always been the faith of the Church that Jesus is the eternal Son of God incarnate as man. The union of humanity and divinity that takes place in Jesus Christ is by its very nature unique and unrepeatable," the Committee said.

"Because humanity and divinity are united in the person of the Son of God, He brings together humanity and divinity in a way that can have no parallel in any other figure in history," it said.

On the second point, the salvific significance of non-Christian religions, the Committee states that Father Phan's book questions the Church's mission to spread the Gospel to all. He states that "non-Christian religions possess an autonomous function in the history of salvation, different from that of Christianity," and that "they cannot be reduced to Christianity in terms of preparation and fulfillment."

The Committee said that "[s]ince the book as a whole is based on the idea that religious pluralism is indeed a positively-willed part of the divine plan, the reader is led to conclude that there is some kind of moral obligation for the Church to refrain from calling people to conversion to Christ and to membership in his Church. According to the book religious pluralism 'may not and must not be abolished' by conversion to Christianity."

The Committee notes that "[t]his call for an end to Christian mission is in conflict with the Church's commission, given to her by Christ Himself: 'Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations �."'

"Moreover," the Committee said, "if one accepts that Jesus Christ is in fact the one affirmed by Christian faith as the eternal Son of God made man, through whom the universe was created and by whose death and resurrection the human race has the possibility of attaining eternal life, then it is incoherent to argue that it would somehow be better if certain people were not told this truth."

"The Church's evangelizing mission is not an imposition of power but an expression of love," the Committee said also.

Regarding the Church as the unique and universal instrument of salvation, the Committee criticizes the book for saying that the Church's claim for uniqueness and universality "should be abandoned altogether" given the Church's human failings and historical entanglement with sin and injustice.

The Committee acknowledged that members of the Church have failed, but said that "the holiness of the Church is not simply defined by the holiness (or sinfulness) of her members but by the holiness of her head, the Lord Jesus Christ."

The Committee said that "because the Church is the universal sacrament of salvation, whatever grace is offered to individuals in whatever various circumstances, including non-Christians, must be seen in relationship to the Church, for she is always united to Jesus Christ, the source of all grace and holiness."

The Committee said that because all grace flows through Jesus, one cannot consider the Church as just one way of salvation "alongside those constituted by the other religions, seen as complementary to the Church or substantially equivalent to her."

__________________________________________________________________________________

Lionel's E-News for the week May 21-27,2010 : USCCB CLARIFICATION IN HERESY? /VATICAN APPROVED BOOK INDICATES ALL MUSLIMS IN ROME ON THE WAY TO HELL

FRIDAY, MAY 21, 2010

USCCB CLARIFICATION IN HERESY?

WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 2010

VATICAN APPROVED BOOK INDICATES ALL MUSLIMS IN ROME ON THE WAY TO HELL

ONLY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH-CATHOLIC MISSION OFFICE TO THE JEWS AND GENTILES IN ROME
‘…but he that believeth not shall be condemned.’-Mark 16:16

Lionel Andrades, Catholic layman
E-mail: lionelandrades10@gmail.com
Blog: http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/
YouTube: http://it.youtube.com/LionelAndrades

Friday, May 21, 2010

USCCB CLARIFICATION IN HERESY?

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in 2007 issued a clarification on a book by Father Peter C.Phan. The USCCB  stated that those who are in invincible ignorance etc do not have to enter the Catholic Church for salvation.


Neither did the USCCB statement say that every non Catholic without exception needs to de facto enter the Catholic Church to go to Heaven.

Hence there was ambiguity in their clarification.

For the USCCB is Lumen Gentium 16 a reference to de jure or de facto salvation?


If it was a reference to de facto salvation it would contradict the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Here is the ex cathedra dogma.

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).

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.).

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.) – from the website Catholicism.org and “No Salvation outside the Church”: Link List, the Three Dogmatic Statements Regarding EENS: http://nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/ )
To reject an ex cathedra dogma is a mortal sin.


Father Peter Phan continues to teach at Catholic Universities in Washington and the USA. He is also still permitted to offer Mass by Archbishop Donald Wuerl, Archbishop of Washington.

Peter Phan - Writings on the Internet

• Proclamation of the Reign of God as Mission in the Church delivered at the 2001 Conference and Annual Meeting of the United States Catholic Mission Association in Memphis, Tennessee, October 26-28, 2001.

• Christianity and Other Religions: From Confrontation to Encounter [Rich Text Format]. Sedos.org:

"In the last four decades, many if not most missiologists have rejected the long-held view that the purpose of mission is “soul-saving” and “church- planting”. “Soul-saving” tends to individualize salvation, belittling the other aspects of the Church’s mission such as inculturation, interreligious dialogue, and liberation. “Church-planting” tends to ecclesiasticize salvation, identifying the Church with the Kingdom of God and fomenting rivalries among Christian denominations.

Instead of this church-centred approach to mission, a kingdom-of-God-centred view has been proposed in which the Church is made subservient to, though not separate from, the reign of God.5 It is the reign of God that determines the Church and its mission, and not the other way round. In terms of priority and intrinsic importance, the reign of God stands at the top, followed by mission, proclamation, and church. This is the order in which these four realities of the Christian faith should be understood and related to each other.6 In this perspective, conversion in the sense of renouncing one religious tradition and joining the Christian Church still is a desirable outcome of mission, but it is not its main goal, let alone its sole purpose.

[and]

Conversion then can mean, in its Latin etymology, “turning with” rather than simply toward something else. Christians and non-Christians can turn together, with one another, toward not a particular religious organization or church but toward the Kingdom of God, and they can and must help each other in doing so. Just as in ecumenism, the model of “returning” of the so-called “separated brethren” to the Catholic Church is no longer adopted as the goal of Church unity, so in mission in the future, especially in Asia where religious pluralism is the fact of life, conversion is not sought as the joining of the Christian Church by, e.g., ex-Buddhists or ex-Hindus or ex-Muslims (though that may happen from time to time, just as the other way round is also possible) but as the “turning” of all humans, together and with reciprocal assistance and encouragement, toward Christ, that is, to the way of life and the values that he embodied in his own person, and the “taking up of his mission” in the service of the Kingdom of God.

__________________________________________________________________________________


USCCB Doctrine Committee Faults Book by Father Peter Phan

WASHINGTON (December 10, 2007)—The U.S. Bishops' Doctrine Committee issued clarifications concerning several aspects of Father Peter C. Phan's book, Being Religious Interreligiously: Asian Perspectives on Interfaith Dialogue.

Father Phan's book uses "certain terms in an equivocal manner" that "opens the text up to significant ambiguity," the Committee said. It added that "a fair reading of the book could leave readers in considerable confusion as to the proper understanding of the uniqueness of Christ."

The Committee, which represents the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) on doctrinal matters, outlined its concerns in a statement, "Clarifications Required by the Book Being Religious Interreligiously: Asian Perspectives on Interfaith Dialogue." The Committee made the statement public December 10. It is available at www.usccb.org/dpp/StatementonBeingReligiousInterreligiously.pdf.

The Committee stressed the importance of understanding religious pluralism, but said the way the book addresses some theological issues "raises serious concerns." The Committee said the statement outlines some "problematic aspects of the book" and offers "a positive restatement of Catholic teaching on the relevant points."

Several aspects of the book concern the Committee, but it limited comments to three areas:

1. Jesus Christ as the unique and universal Savior of all humankind

2. The salvific significance of non-Christian religions

3. The Church as the unique and universal instrument of salvation.

The Doctrine Committee took action after the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith asked it to evaluate the book by Father Phan, a priest of the Diocese of Dallas, Texas, who holds the Ellacuria Chair of Catholic Social Thought in Georgetown's Department of Theology. Over a period of two years, the Committee asked Father Phan to clarify points of concern.

On the first point, the Committee objected to Father Phan's qualifying the uniqueness of Christ and saying that terms referring to Christ as "unique" "absolute" and "universal" "should be jettisoned and replaced by other, theologically more adequate equivalents."

"It has always been the faith of the Church that Jesus is the eternal Son of God incarnate as man. The union of humanity and divinity that takes place in Jesus Christ is by its very nature unique and unrepeatable," the Committee said.

"Because humanity and divinity are united in the person of the Son of God, He brings together humanity and divinity in a way that can have no parallel in any other figure in history," it said.

On the second point, the salvific significance of non-Christian religions, the Committee states that Father Phan's book questions the Church's mission to spread the Gospel to all. He states that "non-Christian religions possess an autonomous function in the history of salvation, different from that of Christianity," and that "they cannot be reduced to Christianity in terms of preparation and fulfillment."

The Committee said that "[s]ince the book as a whole is based on the idea that religious pluralism is indeed a positively-willed part of the divine plan, the reader is led to conclude that there is some kind of moral obligation for the Church to refrain from calling people to conversion to Christ and to membership in his Church. According to the book religious pluralism 'may not and must not be abolished' by conversion to Christianity."

The Committee notes that "[t]his call for an end to Christian mission is in conflict with the Church's commission, given to her by Christ Himself: 'Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations �."'

"Moreover," the Committee said, "if one accepts that Jesus Christ is in fact the one affirmed by Christian faith as the eternal Son of God made man, through whom the universe was created and by whose death and resurrection the human race has the possibility of attaining eternal life, then it is incoherent to argue that it would somehow be better if certain people were not told this truth."

"The Church's evangelizing mission is not an imposition of power but an expression of love," the Committee said also.

Regarding the Church as the unique and universal instrument of salvation, the Committee criticizes the book for saying that the Church's claim for uniqueness and universality "should be abandoned altogether" given the Church's human failings and historical entanglement with sin and injustice.

The Committee acknowledged that members of the Church have failed, but said that "the holiness of the Church is not simply defined by the holiness (or sinfulness) of her members but by the holiness of her head, the Lord Jesus Christ."

The Committee said that "because the Church is the universal sacrament of salvation, whatever grace is offered to individuals in whatever various circumstances, including non-Christians, must be seen in relationship to the Church, for she is always united to Jesus Christ, the source of all grace and holiness."

The Committee said that because all grace flows through Jesus, one cannot consider the Church as just one way of salvation "alongside those constituted by the other religions, seen as complementary to the Church or substantially equivalent to her."
__________________________________________________________________________________