PRIEST PRESENTS OPTIMISTIC VIEW OF SUPERNATURAL REALITY AND CANNOT PROVIDE ANY TEXT FROM VATICAN COUNCIL II

A French priest who is studying Fundamental Theology at the Gregorian University, Rome presented God as Mercy and Love and with most people, if not all going to Heaven. I was talking with him on March 18, 2011.This is a big change in Catholic understanding of objective reality at the supernatural level. Until the 1930’s it was considered that most people were going to Hell. Now in the Church there is a big shift from most people going to Hell to most people going to Heaven in the present times.

What’s new, what was responsible for the change from 1930 and 2011?

It couldn’t be Vatican Council II or the young French priest would point it out to me.

If there is nothing in Vatican Council II to attribute for this major shift, then from where did this change come?

I think a factor for this change is the secular media and the liberal interpretation of Vatican Council II, by priests and religious congregations. They have wrongly considered implicit salvation as knowable to us in the present times and so have reject the dogma extra eccleisam nulla salus.

As expected the French priest would say that there can be people saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire, with a good conscience and other forms of implicit salvation.

And I had to repeat to him that we do not know any such case in the present time.

So all these cases of implicit salvation are not in conflict with the dogma extra eccleisam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II. If we knew of such cases in present times then they would conflict with the dogmatic teaching.

 

So it is common for the secular media to repeat that Vatican Council II has changed it all, ‘Vatican Council II has brought in a revolution’.

This French priest believed in this propaganda as he thought hard for some text in Vatican Council II to justify his optimistic vision of objective reality at the supernatural level, i.e. Heaven and Hell.

 

If objective reality can change after Vatican Council II then there must be some text which says so.

So he thought hard.

Lumen Gentium says that all those who are saved are saved by Jesus and the Church he said.

True I responded but this does not conflict with the dogma which says everyone needs to be a formal member o the Church with no exceptions for salvation.

 

There could be someone who is not a formal member of the Church but whose heart is in the Church he observed.

Correct! And he could be saved it would be known only to God. This too does not conflict with the dogma.

 

So what is the basis of his optimistic view of objective reality at the supernatural level?

For centuries the Church has taught that the millions of non Catholic need to convert to avoid Hell.

Why does the Church not teach it now?

He thought that we need to keep a middle ground between optimism and pessimism,

How can he keep a middle ground when you read the dogma which says clearly that millions of non Catholics are on the way to Hell?

The secular culture discourages belief in Hell and presents a glamorous-everyone- smiling image through the media.

I think more Catholics will see through the glamour when they realize that.

1. There is no text in Vatican Council which can account for this positive view of objective reality. Hell is still Hell and there people going there according to present day Catholic visionaries alive, who have seen Hell and returned to tell us about it.

2. The Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston (1949) referred to the ‘dogma’ (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence) which indicates all Jews in Boston need to convert to avoid Hell. The dogma supported Fr. Leonard Feeney. The Letter, published in the Denzinger, was not against Fr. Leonard Feeney as is being reported in the secular media for over 50 years.

 

3. There is no text in Vatican Council II which says we can know specific cases of non Catholics saved with the baptism of desire or with invincible ignorance in the present times.

De facto (in reality) we cannot know any such case (baptism of desire etc).

So if Fr. Leonard Feeney or anyone else says there is no de facto baptism of desire that we can know of, it makes sense. In principle we can accept that it is possible for someone to be saved with the baptism of desire. De facto we do not know any case.

So there is no text in Vatican Council II or the Catechism of the Catholic Church which contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or Ad Gentes 7.

The optimistic view of supernatural reality has no basis in the text of Vatican Council II.