When the defacto-dejure analysis is not used there could be confusion and the creation of a false theology.
Whether we are aware of it or not, we could be using either the defacto-dejure analysis or the irrational defacto-defacto model.
St. Pius XII uses the standard defacto-dejure analysis in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. The secular media interprets the Letter with the defacto-defacto model. It seems irrational. It does not make sense.
For example:
De facto-dejure model
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 refers to the dogma and so says that everyone de facto needs to enter the Church for salvation and there are no defacto exceptions.
It also says de jure, in principle and known only to God, a non Catholic can be saved with the baptism of desire ‘in certain circumstances’ (Letter of the Holy Office 1949).
Defacto-defacto model
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 according to the secular media says every one de facto needs to enter the Church for salvation and there are de facto exceptions.
For the media and the liberals there are those who can be saved defacto with the baptism of desire which is defacto known to us.
If the defacto-dejure analysis is not used some Magisterial texts would appear odd e.g. CCC 1257.
Would the Catechism of the Catholic Church be saying that the church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water.Defacto every one needs the baptism of water given to adults with Catholic Faith. However God is not limited to the Sacraments. So there are some defacto, known cases on earth who can be saved in invincible ignorance or with the baptism of desire?! In actuality every one needs the baptism of water but also in actuality some people on earth do not need it and they are known to us.
Irrational!
The defacto-dejure analysis was was used in Vatican Council II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church etc.It does not contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction.
-Lionel Andrades
Posts
10 comments:
"It is well to remember that the teaching of the Cantate Domino is not that men must actually become members of the Church in order to attain to eternal salvation. The document insists that pagans, Jews, heretics, and schismatics will not be saved unless, before the end of their lives they are joined (aggregati) to the one true Church. It is Catholic doctrine now, and it was Catholic doctrine when the Cantate Domino was written, that a man who is in the Church in the sense that he sincerely, even though implicitly, desires to live within it, is in a position to be saved if he should die before he is able to attain membership in the Church."
(The Catholic Church and Salvation, pg. 41, Monsignor Joseph Clifford Fenton, 1958, published by Seminary Press in 2006)
It is clear if you use the defacto-dejure analysis:
Bro.Anthony :The document insists that pagans, Jews, heretics, and schismatics will not be saved unless, before the end of their lives they are joined (aggregati) to the one true Church.
Lionel: Before the end of their life they must be members of the Church. They can only be members of the Church by asking for the baptism of water and knowing Catholic Faith. This is the only de facto option available.
They cannot ask for the baptism of desire or choose to have one. Since this is accepted only in principle, dejure.
Bro.Anthony :a man who is in the Church in the sense that he sincerely, even though implicitly, desires to live within it, is in a position to be saved if he should die before he is able to attain membership in the Church.
Lionel: Yes he is and Cantate Domino does not mention these cases.
Neither did Mons. Fenton know of any such case.
Bro.Anthony: It is Catholic doctrine now, and it was Catholic doctrine when the Cantate Domino was written, that a man who is in the Church in the sense that he sincerely, even though implicitly, desires to live within it, is in a position to be saved if he should die before he is able to attain membership in the Church."
Lionel: Mons. Fenton would like to believe that Cantate Domino refers to implicit baptism of desire since he implies that the baptism of desire is known and visible to us. So his must be an exception for him.
He also assumed that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 referred to explicit baptism of desire as did the Archbishop of Boston.
He never pointed out that the Letter of the Holy Office supported Fr. Leonard Feeney on doctrine. He could not, since he assumed that those who are saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are known to us.
So he is trying to accommodate this point in Cantate Domino even though the dogma says every one needs to convert into the Church.
In general Mons. Fenton affirms the dogma and says every one needs to enter the Church but he then implies there are visible exceptions with the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance.
The baptism of desire etc was known at the time of Cantate Domino and it was not assumed to be an exception to the dogma.
"So he is trying to accommodate this point in Cantate Domino even though the dogma says every one needs to convert into the Church."
Lionel, you have said this several times but you have yet to show me that the dogma teaches that one must be a member of the Church to be saved. Please show me where in Cantate Domino this is taught. Quote me the exact verse(s). Monsignor Fenton obviously read the original Latin text of the teachings of the popes regarding the dogma and he (Fenton) clearly states that the dogma embodies both those who are baptized and those who are not, whereas you state that the dogma does not address the non-baptized. Please prove it to me through quotes of the popes' writings.
… Please show me where in Cantate Domino this is taught.
Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino (1441): "The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church…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" (Matthew 25:41), unless before death they are joined with Her…only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation…No one…can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church."-, Wikipedia, extra ecclesiam nulla salus
No where in the quote can it be justified that one must become a member of the Church to be saved. What I get from it is that one must be "within" the Church, "united" to her, etc. Being an actual member or having the desire to be a member, whether explicitly or implicitly, places one "within" the Church or "united" to her.
No where in the quote can it be justified that one must become a member of the Church to be saved?
Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino (1441):.. they will go into the "eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matthew 25:41), unless before death they are joined with Her…only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation…No one…can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church."-, Wikipedia, extra ecclesiam nulla salus
How can you have a desire to be implicitly in the Church and then assume you are already saved?
You can receive the baptism of water and Catholic Faith and then believe that you are saved.
You can choose to receive the baptism of water and Catholic Faith . You cannot choose to receive the baptism of desire.
The baptism of desire is an exceptional case it refers to those who die before they receive the baptism of water. Catholic Faith and the baptism of water is the ordinary means of salvation.
Someone implicitly chooses to be a member and then profits ‘by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation’? It does not make sense.
Someone who has not received the baptism of water and Catholic Faith but believes that he has an implicit desire is ‘in the unity of the Catholic Church’? The Church instead teaches that someone who knows about the Church and does not enter cannot be saved.(Ad Gentes 7 etc).
"You can receive the baptism of water and Catholic Faith and then believe that you are saved."
Lionel, it should be obvious that someone who believes they have Baptism of Desire and goes no further to get water baptized is not in invincible ignorance. It would only show that they don't want to do God's Will.
Both of us agree that Baptism of Desire is not an exception to the dogma. The difference is that you believe that the dogma does not teach about these cases, whereas I believe that the dogma includes these cases.
Theologians have taught that the dogma speaks about the Church being necessary for salvation as a precept and as a means. A necessity of means refers to the Church being necessary for salvation regardless of the subjective state of the individual (knowledge of the Church as the true Church, invincible ignorance, etc.). Therefore, your interpretation of the dogma (that it does not include those saved by Baptism of Desire) would be incomplete because it would not indicate that the Church is necessary as a means and not just a precept.
"You can receive the baptism of water and Catholic Faith and then believe that you are saved."
Lionel, it should be obvious that someone who believes they have Baptism of Desire and goes no further to get water baptized is not in invincible ignorance.
Please cite the text from where you have this quotation. Then it should be clear to both of us.
Bro.Anthony : .. Theologians have taught that the dogma speaks about the Church being necessary for salvation as a precept and as a means...
Lionel: It is important to accept that the dejure defacto analysis is there already in the magisterial texts.
‘Theologians have taught that the dogma speaks about the Church being necessary for salvation as a precept and as a means.’
Lionel : It is God who will decide the difference between necessit of means or precept.
The dogma does not mention it. The dogma says every one needs to enter the Church.
Please not that Msgr.Fenton does not seem aware of the defacto-dejure analysis in magisterial documents.
He also assumes that the baptism of desire etc is known to us. This is the implication if you consider those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire as exceptions to the dogma.
Bro.Anthony :Therefore, your interpretation of the dogma (that it does not include those saved by Baptism of Desire) would be incomplete because it would not indicate that the Church is necessary as a means and not just a precept.
Lionel :It is not my interpretation of the dogma neither am I presenting a new theology. I am calling attention to the dejure –defacto distinctinion already there in magisterial documents by the person who wrote them.
See the difference! http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2011/08/see-difference.html#links
See the difference!
VATICAN COUNCIL II
Lumen Gentium 14 says everyone needs to enter the Church, ‘the necessity of faith and baptism’. This is the same teaching as Cantate Domino. The dogma says every one with no exception needs to formally enter the Church to avoid Hell.
This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. 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 and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church.-Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II.
Lumen Gentium 15 and 16 refer to those saved implicitly and who are not formal members of the Church. They can be saved of course but who they are will always not be known to us. Specific cases are known only to God. So since they are not explicitly known to us they do not contradict Lumen Gentium 14 which indicates every one needs to be a formal member( ‘faith and baptism’) for salvation.
If you considered implicit salvation as explicitly known to us then Lumen Gentium 15-16 would contradict Lumen Gentium 14. Then Lumen Gentium would be confusing as some call it, a mystery.
Lumen Gentium 15. The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter….
Lumen Gentium 16: Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God…
CONTINUED
CONTINUED
QUANTO CONFICIAMUR
8. Also well known is the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church –Quanto Conficamur, Pope Pius IX 1863
7. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments...-Qunato Conficamur
If those saved with invincible ignorance are explicitly known to us then N. 8 will contradict N.7. If invincible ignorance is implicit, there is no contradiction between 8 and 7.
LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949
Here the Letter is affirming 'the dogma', the 'infallible statement'. The dogma is Cantate Domino, Council of Florence which holds the ‘strict interpretation’ of outside the church there is no salvation. Every one needs to formally, explicitly be a member of the Catholic Church with no exception says the dogma. It was defined ex cathedra and so it is 'infallilble'.
The Letter affirms implicit salvation ( invincible ignorance, baptism of desire etc ). If implicit baptism of desire is considered explicit and known to us, then the Letter would contradict itself.Since it indicates every one in Boston needs to explicitly be a member of the Catholic Church ; all non Catholics there need to convert to avoid Hell (Cantate Domino). Then it would also indicate that there could be non Catholics in Boston known to us, who are saved in invincible ignorance or with the baptism of desire and so they do not have to convert into the Catholic Church.This would mean the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are exceptions to the dogma.
Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.
However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949 during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII to the Archbishop of Boston (emphasis added)
The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.
However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949 (emphasis added )
Reason tells us that we do not know any case of person saved in this category so how can they be exceptions to the dogma. Also how could all the popes contradict themself in so many magisterial texts ?
Over the centuries the Catholic Church assumed implicit salvation was implicit and not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Post a Comment