The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) under the sub heading outside the church there is no salvation mentions invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire as exceptions. They are not defacto exceptions.
Vatican Council II also mentions invincible ignorance (LG 16) but nowhere implies that it is an exception to the dogma or the ordinary means of salvation.
The Catechism instead implies that those who are saved in invincible ignorance are visible and known to us, so the baptism of water is needed by only those who know about Jesus and the Church.
The text of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus states that everyone needs to enter the Church. The text of the dogma defined three times is not included in the Catechism.This is all misleading.
To imply that the baptism of desire is a defacto exception to the dogma is heresy. It is indifferentism when one says non Catholics can be defacto saved in their religion and we know who these cases are. This teaching is not part of the Deposit of the Faith. It is irrational and a repititon of the Richard Cushing Error.
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in preparing the Catechism did not violate the Principle of Non Contradiction. Since defactro every one needs to enter the Church for salvation (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence) and dejure, in principle, in theory and known only to God a person can be saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.
Placing invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire under the subheading Outside the Church NO Salvation however implies that they are relevant to the dogma or defacto exceptions.
For the Catechism to say that the baptism of water is needed for only those who know about Jesus and the Church could imply that those saved in invincible ignorance are defacto known to us in the present time. It implies that we know these particular cases and so we cannot say that everyone on earth with no exception needs Catholic Faith and the baptism of desire for salvation: to avoid the fires of Hell.
Also to suggest that only those who ‘know’ need the baptism of water for salvation would imply that Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated not for disobedience but for heresy. It would also imply that the excommunication was wrongly lifted by the Catholic Church without the priest having to recant or make changes in his writing. It also implies that the popes, saints and Fr. Leonard Feeney were wrong in saying everyone needs to be an explicit member of the Church for salvation. It would also be a contradiction of three Councils which defined the dogma in an extra ordinary mode. The ‘dogma’ is referred to in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 as the ‘infallible statement’.
For a priest to knowingly say that there are defacto exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is a first class heresy and a mortal sin. He is refuting the Nicene Creed in which we pray, “I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins” and “I believe in the Holy Spirit the Holy Catholic Church”. It was the Holy Spirit which guided the Magisterium of the Church to teach over the centuries that outside the church there is no salvation.
A priest, who knowingly continues in this error, even after being informed, is in manifest public heresy and is not to offer Mass without receiving absolution in the Confessional and making public amends; removing the sacrilege. Similarly it would be a sacrilege for a lay person knowingly in this error to receive the Eucharist.-Lionel Andrades
ERRORS IN THE CATECHISM ?
Practically everyone needs the baptism of water for salvation while in theory a person can be saved with the baptism of desire - Rector, Church Santa Maria Annunziata, Rome
In the Catechism of the Catholic Church why did Cardial Joseph Ratzinger not mention that the baptism of desire is not a defacto exception to the dogma outside the church no salvation nor to Vatican Council II ?
ETERNAL WORD TELEVISION NETWORK (EWTN) SAYS 'SUBMISSION TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE SOVEREIGN PONTIFF IS NECESSARY FOR SALVATION'
CHURCH TEXT IS CRITICAL OF THE ARCHBISHOP OF BOSTON : REFERS TO IMPLICIT AND NOT EXPLICIT (TO US) BAPTISM OF DESIRE
VICARIATE OFFICES FOR YOUTH AND THE SICK ARE TEACHING ERRORS
YOUTUBE VIDEO QUESTIONS TO ASK THE CATHOLIC CHAPLAIN OR PROFESSOR
PROFESSION OF FAITH: I BELIEVE IN THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH
DID THE LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949 CONTRADICT THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS? NO
ROME VICARIATE HIT BY THE RICHARD CUSHING ERROR : Centro Della pastorale sanitaria says the baptism of water is not defacto needed for the salvation of all on earth
BOSTON ARCHDIOCESE WEBSITE SAYS NOSTRA AETATE DISMISSES CHURCH INTEREST IN BAPTIZING JEWS AND AFFIRMS GOD’S COVENANT WITH THEM : NOWHERE DOES VATICAN COUNCIL II MAKE THIS CLAIM
CATHOLIC ANSWERS SUCCUMBS TO THE RICHARD CUSHING ERROR
MSGR.JOSEPH FENTON AND FR. WILLIAM MOST DID NOT NOTICE THE RICHARD CUSHING ERROR
USCCB REPORT MAKES ALLOWANCE FOR THE RICHARD CUSHING ERROR
FR.LEONARD FEENEY AND HIS COMMUNITIES HAVE ACCEPTED THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE PER SE
ARCHBISHOP OF BOSTON CARDINAL RICHARD CUSHINGS LEGACY: FOLLOWERS INCLUDE USCCB, EWTN, CATHOLIC ANSWERS, SSPX, SEDEVACANTISTS MHFM
CARDINAL RATZINGER DID NOT VIOLATE THE PRINCIPLE OF NON CONTRADICTION AS CATHOLICS UNITED FOR THE FAITH IMPLY
FR.TULLIO ROTONDO AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE ON EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS
LEGIONARY OF CHRIST PRIEST FR.RAFAEL PASCUAL AFFIRMS CANTATE DOMINO, COUNCIL OF FLORENCE
CATHOLIC LAY PROFESSOR AT UNIVERSITA EUROPA DI ROMA AFFIRMS DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS