Monday, May 6, 2013

Robert Sungenis crisis






The American apologist Robert Sungenis probably realizes that he has to review his understanding of Catholic teaching.Especially on the issue of Vatican Council II, salvation and other religions there are new facts he has to deal with.

In the past, the traditionalist Sungenis, always assumed Vatican Council II was a break with the past, especially the traditional teaching on other religions, Christian communities and churches.

While there was a whole body of Catholic traditional literature which affirmed his faith, and told him that non Catholic religions, including Christian communities and churches, were  not paths to salvation, Vatican Council II for Sungenis was ambiguous.

For him there were sections of the Council which were heretical and could not be the teaching of the Holy Spirit ,which guides the Church not to make error.

He thought there were two interpretations of Vatican Council II, one true and the other false or confusing.

It is with the false and confusing interpretation that there should be a new crisis, a personal review of what he formerly took for granted.

Now he is being asked to accept that Vatican Council II is in agreement with St.Robert Bellarmine, for whom he has a special affection.This is the great Jesuit saint who taught the literal interpretation of the dogma extra eccclesiam nulla salus, now affirmed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church 846,845.

Can Robert Sungenis accept that Vatican Council II is as' rigorist' as the interpretation of St.Robert Bellarmine and the other Jesuit, Fr.Leonard Feeney?Could Vatican Council II be in agreement with Pope Francis when he said outside the Church one cannot find Jesus?

St.Robert Bellarmine accepted being saved in invincible ignorance and  implicit desire but did not claim that these cases were visible to us. He knew that these persons saved were invisible for us humans and so not an exception to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.This is Change Number 1 which Robert Sungenis has to make.Presently he assumes like Cardinal Richard Cushing,former  Archbishop of Boston, and the Jesuits at that time, that these cases are visible to us and so are exceptions to Tradition.

Once he makes this correction he will see through other inconsistencies in his interpretation of the Council.

For example:

1. When Lumen Gentium 14 and Ad Gentes 7 says those who know about Jesus and the Church and who still do not enter,are on the way to Hell, it does not contradict Ad Gentes 7 which also states 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation.There is no contradiction since we do not know any such case, of 'those who know, yet...' .So it cannot be an exception to all needing faith and baptism for salvation in 2013.If these cases were visible they would be exceptions.

2.Similarly we do not know any person personally, who is saved with 'elements of sanctification'(LG 8), 'imperfect communion with the Church'(UR), being a 'good and holy' non Catholic (NA), 'seeds of the word' etc.So these cases cannot be exceptions to all needing faith and baptism for salvation(AG 7).Neither are they exceptions to the thrice defined dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.They are irrelevant to Fr.Leonard Feeney's literal interpretation of the dogma.
So there are no exceptions or contradictions in Vatican Council II to AG 7,which has been placed in the Catechism under the title Outside the Church No Salvation.
Robert Sungenis has to clarify these points.Otherwise he could be implying that we can personally see the deceased saved, who are on earth, and are exceptions to AG 7.In other words Vatican Council II contradicts itself or has made a mistake.

This is an objective ,factual error.The dead are not visible to us.

It is with this error that he is interpreting Vatican Council II, like just about every one else( including other apologists) as being anti-Bellarmine.-L.A
(written at the tomb of St.Robert Bellarmine, Rome).

This issue is also available on the extra ecclesiam nulla salus forum   
 http://eens.forumotion.com/t37-robert-sungenis#357  if anyone would like to discus it.)