Fr.John Zuhlsdorf interprets Vatican Council II with Marchetti's theory so the Council for him is ambigous and a break with extra ecclesiam nulla salus

Fr.John Zuhlsdorf:

We know from the Gospels that Our Lord established the Church as His vehicle for the salvation of humanity.

Lionel:

True but Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston said the same thing.Surely  Fr.Zuhsdorf does not mean it like the good priest from Boston.

Fr.Zuhlsdorf uses the Marchetti Theory.He assumes those saved in invincible ignorance ( possibilities known to God) are objective cases in the present times.So he does not say, like Cardinal Francesco Marchetti, that all need to be formal members of the Church for salvation.He avoids Feeneyism and does not disclose that he too notes some confusion.

 

He ordered us to preach the Gospel to all nations, and taught that baptism is essential for salvation.

St. Cyprian of Carthage (+258) wrote, “Salus extra ecclesiam non est” (ep. 72, Ad Iubaianum de hereticis baptizandis). Even earlier, Origen, wrote, “Let no man deceive himself. Outside this house, that is, outside the Church no one is saved.” (Homily on the Birth of Jesus). Clearly from both the Fathers and from the Magisterium of the Church we have a consistent teaching that the Church is THE vehicle of the salvation.

Lionel:

And none of them mentioned that being saved in invincible ignorance referred to known cases in the present times. They did not say that every one did not need to be formal members of the Church (with faith and baptism) since there were known exceptions.Fr.Zuhsldorf has always been a liberal on this issue.

 

The Church still maintains that and teaches, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church states, “all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is His Body.” (CCC 846)

Lionel:

The Catechism has accepted the Marchetti error (CCC 846,1257).Marchetti's inference is also there in Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus etc.

 

This is a positive formulation of the doctrine, in contrast to the flip side, “there is no salvation outside the Church”.

Lionel:

The flip side was a dogma defined three times. If he supports that dogma they'll come for his blog.

 

The Church has always taught that we do not know the inscrutable ways of God.

Can those who appear to be visibly outside of the Church attain heaven?

Yes.

Lionel:

A similar statement was made by Fr.Jonathan Morris and so Michael Voris asked Fr.Jonathan : who did he think in the present times would be saved without entering the Church. Who would go to Heaven without being a member of the Catholic Church ?. 

 

Not through their own merit. None of us attains heaven through our own merit. We have the example of Christ Himself, who stated that, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven (John 3:5).

Lionel:

He was also referring to the baptism of water in a particular community, in a particular Church. It was the Catholic Church.

That’s pretty straightforward. But then, on the Cross, He informed the Good Thief that He would be in paradise (Luke 23:43).

Lionel:

Yes as a possibility a person could be saved without the baptism of water being visibly given to him but in a way known only to God.For us this is speculation. It is also possible that this person would receive the baptism of water too. This was the dogmatic teaching.Fr.Z is  trying to accomodate the objective error of Marchetti. This is the error accepted by the magisterium and incorporated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church and taught at Pontifical Universities.

We cannot say that there is any one in 2015 whom we know who will be saved like the Good Thief.There is no 'good thief' for us in the present time.

Fr.Zuhlsdorf like Marchetti infers that hypothetical cases accepted in principle, in faith, are defacto exceptions in the present times to the 'rigorist interpretation' of the thrice defined dogma on salvation.He is still trying to stay clear of Feeneyism even though Feeneyism is the official teaching of the Church in Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents when the Marchetti inference is not used.Tough job!

How do we square those things? There’s no indication that the Good Thief was “born of water and the Spirit”, yet we know he attained heaven.

If baptism is the entrance into the Church, and outside the Church there is no salvation, how can we say that the Good Thief is in heaven?

We also have the consistent teaching of the Church on the concept of invincible ignorance. There are those who, through no fault of their own, have not heard the Gospel message. Are they all guaranteed to be damned? No.

Lionel:

What is the connection between those who are saved in invincible ignorance and extra ecclesiam nulla salus? There is none. Thanks to the Letter of the Holy Office's 1949 it was made a new issue in the Church.

St.Augustine no where says that these cases are known to us in the present times to be relevant to the dogma. Fr.Zuhlsdorf will now go ahead and make the irrational inference.

St. Augustine commented in a homily once on the sheep who are outside of the flock and the wolves who are within (tr. eu. Io. 45.12). Bl. Pius IX wrote

“It must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood; but on the other hand, it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, will not be held guilty of this in the eyes of God.

Lionel:

True and he does not state that we know these cases personally. So how can they be defacto exceptions to the Feeneyite version of the dogma?

Now in truth, who would arrogate so much to himself as to mark the limits of such an ignorance, because of the nature and variety of peoples, regions, innate dispositions, and of so many other things? For in truth, when released from these corporeal chains, ‘we shall see God as He is’ (1 John 3:2), we shall understand perfectly by how close and beautiful a bond divine mercy and justice are united; but as long as we are on earth, weighed down by this moral mass which blunts the soul, let us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, there is ‘one God, one faith, one baptism’ (Ephesians 4:5); it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry. But just as the way of charity demands, let us pour forth continual prayers that all nations everywhere may be converted to Christ; and let us be devoted to the common salvation of men in proportion to our strength, ‘for the hand of the Lord is not shortened’ (Isaiah 9:1) and the gifts of heavenly grace will not be wanting to those who sincerely wish and ask to be refreshed by this light.” (Allocution “Singulari quadam” 9 December 1854).

Is it possible to be saved outside of the Catholic Church? No. It is not.

Lionel:

Here Fr.Z is on the mark. Defacto, objectively, explicitly, in known cases, in 2015 it is not possible to be saved outside the Church. He is correct here.

 

Salvation comes through the Church.

Lionel:

Yes and everyone needs to be a formal member of the Church for salvation.(John 3:5.MK.16:16, Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7, Lumen Gentium 14, Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441 etc).
 

Is it possible that those who seem to be outside of the Catholic Church end up in heaven?

God’s mercy and judgment are such that His understanding of salvation in and through the Church is on a different plane than ours is in this life.

It is possible for those who, due to invincible ignorance, appear to remain outside the Church are, somehow, saved in and through the Church. This possibility should, in no way, shape, or form, allow us to relax our efforts to work and pray for the spread of the Gospel and for seeking to get as many of our brothers and sisters as we possibly can into the Ark of Salvation, the Holy Catholic Church.

Bottom line: God is not limited by our understanding. God can save whom it pleaseth Him to save. Can He save people who are not visibly and formally within the embrace of Holy Catholic Church, and not even baptized? Yes. He can. We don’t know how He might do that, but He can, whether we understand it or not. In any event, any person who is saved, is saved through the merits of the Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross, and that salvation and those merits are mediated – somehow – through the only Church that He found, the Catholic Church.

Lionel:

God can also save a formicator and a sodomite if he wishes too and we do not know how he will do it however the Bible, Tradition and the Magisterium tells us that they need to repent and change their ways to be saved. There is a condition. Similarly the Bible , Tradition and pre -1949 Magisterium tell us that all need to formally enter the Church to avoid Hell and there are no defacto, known exceptions.There is a condition.

 

Also, I want to remind everyone what the Second Vatican Council said in Lumen gentium 14:

“They could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it, or to remain in it.”

Lionel:

Mistake! The Second Vatican Council II has not said here that we personally know who these cases are or that they are exceptions to the dogma.To reach this wrong conclusion an inference has to be made. Cardinal Marchetti and Fr.Z make this inference.  

It is irrational and non-Catholic.It pleases the political Left.

Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7) says all need faith and baptism for salvation. Christians in the many denominations do not have Catholic Faith which include the Sacraments through  which God saves. They also do not have the faith and moral teachings of the Church necessary to avoid mortal sin and to save their soul.

According to Vatican Council II (AG 7) non Catholics, Christians, are on the way to Hell unless they convert into the Church. This is also the teaching of Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence (extra ecclesiam nulla salus)  which Vatican Council II does not contradict when the theory of Cardinal Marchetti is avoided in the interpretation.Fr.John Zuhlsdorf interprets Vatican Council II with Marchetti's theory and so the Council for him is ambigous and a break with the past.

-Lionel Andrades
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2015/02/ask-father-salvation-outside-the-church/#comments


February 3, 2015
Rorate Caeili and Fr.Zuhlsdorf's interpretations are politically correct
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/02/rorate-caeili-and-frzuhlsdorfs.html