There have been many comments on ASK FATHER: Salvation “outside” the Church by Fr.John Zuhlsdorf (Feb.5,2015) and links have been provided by commentators to support Fr.Z.
The links show that Marchetti's inference, his personal theory with no precedent magisterial support, has been the basis for the rejection of the dogma as it was interpreted over the centuries, the 'strict interpretation'.
Here is the second link.It is an article by Fr.Peter Stravinskas Can Outsiders be Insiders?
Can Outsiders Be Insiders?
And so it is with the theological slogan, extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Latin for "outside the Church, no salvation"). This is a doctrine of the Catholic Church, one that's found in every age of Catholic history, and it's held to by the Church's best and most influential minds. Understood properly, its dogmatic truth is beyond question. The problem arises, however, when this slogan is given a life of its own. And so it was in the 1940s with Fr. Leonard Feeney.
For those who don't know, Fr. Feeney was a brilliant and popular chaplain at Harvard University. Unfortunately, he began to preach and teach an extreme form of extra ecclesiam (Lionel : Extreme form ? How can a dogma have two forms, or meanings, how can it develop as it has for Fr.Stavinskas.It has developed since he is influenced by the Cardinal Marchetti Theory. Marchetti assumed there was known salvation outside the Church. So there were known exceptions to the dogma as interpreted by Fr.Leonard Feeney. In other words those who are dead are exceptions!!) which the then Archbishop of Boston, Richard Cushing, found problematic. When asked either to modify his position or to be silent, Fr. Feeney responded by accusing the Archbishop himself of heresy, leading to an investigation of Feeney's work by the Holy See, with the attendant decision by the Jesuit Order to silence him. When he refused to accept this decision, he was dismissed from the Society of Jesus and eventually excommunicated, taking with him many men and women whom he formed into a community of religious and laity — all committed to his rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam. (Lionel: The statements of the Church Councils, popes and saints have now become 'the rigorist interpretation' )
Though later reconciled to the Church himself, Fr. Feeney has many followers today who continue to stand by his original position. Their rhetoric is often angry, decrying what is, in their view, the corruption of authentic Catholicism.(Lionel: Authentic Catholicism must now say that the deceased for us, saved with the baptism of desire and who are in Heaven, are exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This became 'authentic Catholicsm' since 1949) For them, there is no salvation for anyone outside the visible bounds of the Catholic Church; to deny this is to deny a consistent teaching of the Church. Their claim is a troubling one: If indeed, the Church at one time taught as infallible dogma a notion it now rejects, then the Catholic assertion of ecclesial infallibility is a myth, disproved by history.(Lionel: Marchetti rejected the infallible dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with his theory of being able to see the dead who are saved with the baptism of desire etc.) This is the question I will address. Did the Church reverse a doctrine it once proclaimed as truth? I should note at the outset, my indebtedness to Jesuit Father Francis A. Sullivan, for his magisterial study on this topic in Salvation Outside the Church? Tracing the History of the Catholic Response (Paulist Press, 1992). (Lionel: Fr.Francis Sullivan S.J rejects the dogma and is not aware of the irrationality of Cardinal Marchetti's theory.He is Emeritus Professor of Theology at Boston College which expelled four professors of theology who supported Fr.Leonard Feeney. They had to accept Marchetti inference as being 'authentic Catholicsm' ).
I enthusiastically recommend this work of Father Sullivan's to any who desires a more in-depth analysis than what I can provide in this brief overview... (Lionel: I would avoid it)
The patristic position on extra ecclesiam continued into the middle ages, with St. Thomas Aquinas. For the Angelic Doctor, only the Church provided both faith and the sacraments, and hence, salvation. Like the early Fathers, Aquinas held that non-Christians were so because of obstinacy to the Gospel message. This was the case even for those in non-Christian areas, for God, in His power, could provide such individuals with some type of extraordinary revelation, thus giving them the opportunity to respond. If they refused, they rejected the direct appeal of God.
While Aquinas stressed the necessity of Church membership for entrance into eternal life, he also envisioned some people, unable to be baptized into the Faith, who nonetheless had a desire either to be baptized or at least to be saved and were essentially willing to do whatever God wanted them to do for salvation. The reason he gives for what we have come to term "baptism of desire" is quite instructive. He says that such a one "can obtain salvation without being actually baptized, on account of the person's desire for baptism, which desire is the outcome of faith that works through charity, whereby God, Whose power is not tied to visible sacraments, sanctifies a person inwardly" (Summa Theologiae III, q.68, a.2).(Lionel: St.Thomas Aquinas did not say that these cases were known or that they could be exceptions to the traditional dogmatic teaching which he supported. Here Fr.Stravinskas begins to adapt to Marchetti's inference) This insight must be deeply appreciated: God is not bound to the sacraments.(Lionel: Since for Fr.Stravinskas there is known salvation outside the Church!) What does Aquinas mean? That the Lord Who established the Church and instituted the sacraments as the ordinary means of salvation remains sovereign in His judgments and actions. He Who made sacraments is likewise free to bestow His grace in other ways.
Two extremely important Church documents were released during this time period. Pope Boniface VIII in 1302, facing fierce political opposition, found it necessary to state, in the strongest terms, the supremacy of the papacy over temporal rulers. It is in this light that we must interpret his famous Unam Sanctam. Therein, we read, "We declare, state and define that for every human creature it is a matter of necessity for salvation to be subject to the Roman Pontiff." It needs to be noted that this line from Boniface's bull is but a direct quotation from Aquinas' Contra Errores Graecorum (Latin for "Against the Errors of the Greeks"), wherein he is simply equating subjection to the pope with membership in the Church of Christ.
In like manner, the proceedings of the Council of Florence (1431), convoked to heal the rift between the Churches of the East and West, contained the following article: "[The holy Roman Church] . . . firmly believes, professes and preaches that no one outside the Catholic Church, neither pagans, nor Jews, nor heretics, nor schismatics, can become partakers of eternal life . . . And no one can be saved, no matter how much he has given in alms, even if he sheds his blood for the name of Christ, unless he remains in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." A careful reading of the text reveals that the Council Fathers had in mind not an outright condemnation of those invincibly ignorant of the gospel, but of those who were obdurate in their rejection of it. Surely, it would never have dawned upon a medieval Christian that the way Jews and Moslems were approached with the Gospel (all too often, under political and physical duress) did little to convince them of the truths of Christianity. At any rate, the conventional wisdom of the era presumed that the Christian message was indeed sufficiently known and that refusal to accept it constituted the sin of unbelief, deemed worthy of eternal damnation.(Lionel: This is an inference.The pope does not say this.) Theology never develops in a vacuum, and that is clearly the case with the doctrine of extra ecclesiam nulla salus... (Lionel: Since there was known salvation outside the Church, theology 'developed' for Fr.Stravinskas as it did for Cardinal Marchetti, Cardinal Richard Cushing, Boston College...)
With great insight and sensitivity, he went on to make a specific example of the followers of Islam: "I grant that the Moslems have heard the name of Christians. But they have been so educated that they think that our Faith is false and mistaken, while the faith in which they have been educated is the true faith . . . They do not know anything about divine revelation; they have not seen signs or miracles that would prove their religion false, nor have they heard of them in such a way that they would be truly obliged to believe those who told them of such things." All this led him to this conclusion: "Therefore, erroneous faith does not condemn, provided the error has a reasonable excuse and that they are invincibly ignorant of the true Faith" (Ibid)... (Lionel: We can see the 'new theology' being applied here.It is a theology based on there being known salvation outside the Church. This known salvation, was used by Cardinal Marchetti to reject the traditional interpretation of the dogma.We have theology whose foundation is an objective error; it is based on the dead being known and visible to us.)
The condemnation of these Jansenist teachings by the Holy See is an indication of a willingness to accord some measure of saving grace to those invincibly ignorant of the Christian message. Taking our time machine up to the 19th century, we find no less a stalwart defender of Catholic orthodoxy than Pope Pius IX making this most nuanced statement in Singulari Quadam: ". . . it is also a perfectly well known Catholic dogma that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church, and that those who are contumacious against the authority and the definitions of that same Church, and who are pertinaciously divided from the unity of that Church and from Peter's successor, the Roman Pontiff, to whom the custody of the vineyard has been committed by the Savior, cannot obtain eternal salvation."
The operative words, to be sure, are "contumacious" and "pertinaciously." No surprise, then, that in the very same document, we find a clear expression of the possibility of salvation for those outside the Church through no fault of their own.(Lionel: He is adapting the orthodox teaching to the 'new theology' founded on an irrationality. ) And so, we read: "It is known to Us and to you that those who labor in invincible ignorance concerning our most holy religion and who, assiduously observing the natural law and its precepts which God has inscribed in the hearts of all, and being ready to obey God, live an honest and upright life can, through the working of the divine light and grace, attain eternal life." Pius IX obviously took seriously the theological discussions of the previous centuries and encapsulated them in his letter. (Lionel: He is only referring to those in invincible ignorance. He is referring to a possibility. He is not saying that these cases refer to known persons or that they are an exception to the dogma. Fr.Stravinskas infers all this as did Cardinal Francesco Marchetti )
The ball was now back in the court of the theologians to explain how that might happen. The Jesuit Cardinal Johann Franzelin, a contemporary of the pope, took up the challenge and saw the process working in this way: "Since justification occurs only through supernatural faith and, as St. Paul teaches, 'faith comes through what is heard' [Romans 10:17], the saving message must be proclaimed — the task of the Church. Furthermore, faith orients a person to the Church and even if that person will not be joined to the Church on earth, he is oriented toward the eschatological Church, to which the earthly Church is intimately and indissolubly bound. Beyond that, those not in communion with the Catholic Church, by virtue of their desire for salvation, have at least an implicit desire for such membership. In short, anyone who is destined for salvation, achieves that goal through the Church and by a relationship with her" (Theses de Ecclesia Christi, Thesis 24...) (Lionel: The new theology is based on an irrational inference and has now been established.The dogma is really discarded)
In 1943, Pope Pius XII's Mystici Corporis was released. Eighty years after Pius IX's encyclical, Pius XII made this important contribution to the issue: "We urge each and every one of [those outside Catholic unity] to be prompt to follow the interior movements of grace, and to seek earnestly to rescue themselves from a state in which they cannot be sure of their own salvation. For even though, by a certain unconscious desire and wish, they may be related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer, they remain deprived of so many and so powerful gifts and helps from heaven, which can be enjoyed only within the Catholic Church."
Note the critical lines, "they cannot be sure of their own salvation," and, "they remain deprived of so many and so powerful gifts." What was he saying? Well, at a minimum, he was acknowledging that although they cannot be certain of their eternal salvation, neither they nor we are certain of their eternal damnation.(Lionel: Where does Pope Pius XII say that these cases were known to them to be exceptions to the dogma? He does not make this claim in this text. This was the inference of Cardinal Marchetti. There is no pope or magisterial document before 1949 to support Cardinal Marchetti.) And further, that while they are deprived of "many" gifts leading to salvation, they are not deprived of all such gifts. (Lionel: We have hypothethical cases here. This is speculation.These are not defacto, known exceptions to the dogma).
Six years later, this encyclical formed the basis for the response of the Holy Office to the teaching of Father Feeney.(Lionel: He is referring to the encylical interpreted with the irrational inference.In this way it was used to reject the traditional interpretation of the dogma.
This encyclical can also be interpreted without the inference.) And so, the following paragraph gives an official interpretation to the teaching of Pius XII( he refers to the Marchetti Letter) : "With these prudent words [of Pius XII], the Pope censures those who exclude from eternal salvation all men who adhere to the Church only with an implicit desire; (Lionel: Who are unknown to us and so are irrelevant to the dogma) and he also censures those who falsely maintain that men can be saved equally well in all religions" (Letter of the Holy Office to Archbishop Cushing, 1949). Judged unacceptable were both a facile condemnation of those outside the Church through no fault of their own (Lionel: And who were unknown to Marchetti and so irrelevant to the dogma ) and a facile religious indifferentism.
We now come to the Second Vatican Council, where nearly 1900 years of theological development (Lionel: The excommunicated of Fr.Leonard Feeney was still not lifted at the time of Vatican Council II. Also no pope mentioned the irrationality of Marchetti's inference.So the error was crystallized) was crystallized. Referring to non-Catholic Christians, the Decree on Ecumenism stated, "The brethren divided from us also carry out many of the sacred actions of the Christian religion. Undoubtedly, in ways that vary according to the condition of each church or community, these actions can truly engender a life of grace, and can be rightly described as capable of providing access to the community of salvation (Lionel: It refers to a possibility. This is important to note.This is not a defacto known case. So we do not have a contradicition to the traditional interpretation of the dogma) . . . It follows that these separated churches and communities, though we believe they suffer from defects already mentioned, have by no means been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation.(Lionel: Yes as a possibility. This possibility in these hypothetical cases could also include entry into the Catholic Church,with its faith and moral teachings and the Sacraments.However the bottom line is: it is not a known exception to the dogma) For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church." (Lionel: We cannot name any who will be saved as such in 2015. So it is still a reference to a hypothetical case and in no way contradicts the traditional interpretation of the dogma according to Fr.Leonard Feeney).
Let us highlight a few points here. First, don't miss the word "fullness," which makes the critical distinction between the possession by the Catholic Church of all that is needed for salvation, while still allowing for aspects of that fullness to be present elsewhere...(Lionel: He recognises it is a possibility. It should not be considered a defacto, known case. Defacto ( in reality) we defacto do not know of any Protestant who has been saved or will be saved outside the visible limits of the Catholic Church.There is no such case in 2015)
Quite logically, then, that very same Council gives in Lumen Gentium this sober assessment: "Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, [this sacred synod] teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. For Christ, made 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 also the necessity of the Church, for through Baptism as through a door men enter the Church." (Lionel: Here the rigorist interpretation of the dogma is supported by Vatican Council II.) In shorthand form, we see the ongoing doctrinal commitment to the necessity of the Church in salvation. And then, the follow-up: (Lionel: Note in the following line we do not have an exception to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma. Since a hypothetical case cannot be a defacto, objective exception.Marchetti was not aware of this.) "Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by God through Jesus Christ, would refuse to enter her or to remain in her, could not be saved." (Lionel: Those who know or do not know will be known and judged only by God.So we do not have an exception to the dogma. For Fr.Stravinskas these cases are known in the present times. So they are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus) So, we are face to face with the traditional doctrine, made with the accompanying qualifying remarks about a conscious refusal to join or remain within the one Church of Christ.
Having surveyed the history of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, we stand in a position to see how this doctrine has developed over the centuries.(Lionel: It 'develops' since is it assumed that references to salvation mentioned in Vatican Council II are visible and known to us in real life. This is the irrational premise used.It produces an irrational and non traditional conclusion) And indeed, a close look at history shows that the doctrine has developed, (Lionel It has not developed for me since I do not use the irrational inference in the interpretation of the dogma. The dead are not visible to me) and not reversed...
Valid doctrinal development involves the gradual growth in understanding of a core, unchanging truth.(Lionel: This development is based on the original Marchetti error, of there being known salvation outside the Church. People in Heaven are visible on earth to be objective exceptions to all needing the baptism of water. This is the fantasy theology accepted here.) At the heart of extra ecclesiam nulla salus is the fundamental dogma that the Church is absolutely necessary for salvation.
(Lionel: The de fide teaching is that all need to formally enter the Church, all need to be visible members of the Church) Through Christ's body, God's grace is channeled into the world. In the words of Lumen Gentium, the Church is the "universal sacrament of salvation." All salvation comes through Christ's Church; apart from that grace, there is no hope for eternal life. This point has been understood in different ways throughout the history of Christianity, and yet the doctrine has remained intact.(Lionel: The dogma has been rejected by Fr.Stravinskas since he used the Marchetti inference) Those who claim the Church has changed its stand on extra ecclesiam fail to recognize this core truth in the midst of its various interpretations.(Lionel: We now have heresy being supported by the magisterium.There is also an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II) In doing so, they ignore the development that occurs in the doctrinal life of the historic Church. (Lionel: We recognise that the 'development' is based on the objective error of Cardinal Francesco Marchetti which was supported by the Archdiocese of Boston).
- FR. PETER STRAVINSKAS
What does the Catholic Church mean by its doctrine "Outside the Church There Is No Salvation"? Does this mean that non-Catholics can't be saved? What's the official Catholic teaching, past and present, about the Church's mission to evangelize non-Catholics and bring them into eternal life in Christ? A noted theologian answers these and other crucial questions.
 |
For those who don't know, Fr. Feeney was a brilliant and popular chaplain at Harvard University. Unfortunately, he began to preach and teach an extreme form of extra ecclesiam (Lionel : Extreme form ? How can a dogma have two forms, or meanings, how can it develop as it has for Fr.Stavinskas.It has developed since he is influenced by the Cardinal Marchetti Theory. Marchetti assumed there was known salvation outside the Church. So there were known exceptions to the dogma as interpreted by Fr.Leonard Feeney. In other words those who are dead are exceptions!!) which the then Archbishop of Boston, Richard Cushing, found problematic. When asked either to modify his position or to be silent, Fr. Feeney responded by accusing the Archbishop himself of heresy, leading to an investigation of Feeney's work by the Holy See, with the attendant decision by the Jesuit Order to silence him. When he refused to accept this decision, he was dismissed from the Society of Jesus and eventually excommunicated, taking with him many men and women whom he formed into a community of religious and laity — all committed to his rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam. (Lionel: The statements of the Church Councils, popes and saints have now become 'the rigorist interpretation' )
Though later reconciled to the Church himself, Fr. Feeney has many followers today who continue to stand by his original position. Their rhetoric is often angry, decrying what is, in their view, the corruption of authentic Catholicism.(Lionel: Authentic Catholicism must now say that the deceased for us, saved with the baptism of desire and who are in Heaven, are exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This became 'authentic Catholicsm' since 1949) For them, there is no salvation for anyone outside the visible bounds of the Catholic Church; to deny this is to deny a consistent teaching of the Church. Their claim is a troubling one: If indeed, the Church at one time taught as infallible dogma a notion it now rejects, then the Catholic assertion of ecclesial infallibility is a myth, disproved by history.(Lionel: Marchetti rejected the infallible dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with his theory of being able to see the dead who are saved with the baptism of desire etc.) This is the question I will address. Did the Church reverse a doctrine it once proclaimed as truth? I should note at the outset, my indebtedness to Jesuit Father Francis A. Sullivan, for his magisterial study on this topic in Salvation Outside the Church? Tracing the History of the Catholic Response (Paulist Press, 1992). (Lionel: Fr.Francis Sullivan S.J rejects the dogma and is not aware of the irrationality of Cardinal Marchetti's theory.He is Emeritus Professor of Theology at Boston College which expelled four professors of theology who supported Fr.Leonard Feeney. They had to accept Marchetti inference as being 'authentic Catholicsm' ).
I enthusiastically recommend this work of Father Sullivan's to any who desires a more in-depth analysis than what I can provide in this brief overview... (Lionel: I would avoid it)
The patristic position on extra ecclesiam continued into the middle ages, with St. Thomas Aquinas. For the Angelic Doctor, only the Church provided both faith and the sacraments, and hence, salvation. Like the early Fathers, Aquinas held that non-Christians were so because of obstinacy to the Gospel message. This was the case even for those in non-Christian areas, for God, in His power, could provide such individuals with some type of extraordinary revelation, thus giving them the opportunity to respond. If they refused, they rejected the direct appeal of God.
While Aquinas stressed the necessity of Church membership for entrance into eternal life, he also envisioned some people, unable to be baptized into the Faith, who nonetheless had a desire either to be baptized or at least to be saved and were essentially willing to do whatever God wanted them to do for salvation. The reason he gives for what we have come to term "baptism of desire" is quite instructive. He says that such a one "can obtain salvation without being actually baptized, on account of the person's desire for baptism, which desire is the outcome of faith that works through charity, whereby God, Whose power is not tied to visible sacraments, sanctifies a person inwardly" (Summa Theologiae III, q.68, a.2).(Lionel: St.Thomas Aquinas did not say that these cases were known or that they could be exceptions to the traditional dogmatic teaching which he supported. Here Fr.Stravinskas begins to adapt to Marchetti's inference) This insight must be deeply appreciated: God is not bound to the sacraments.(Lionel: Since for Fr.Stravinskas there is known salvation outside the Church!) What does Aquinas mean? That the Lord Who established the Church and instituted the sacraments as the ordinary means of salvation remains sovereign in His judgments and actions. He Who made sacraments is likewise free to bestow His grace in other ways.
Two extremely important Church documents were released during this time period. Pope Boniface VIII in 1302, facing fierce political opposition, found it necessary to state, in the strongest terms, the supremacy of the papacy over temporal rulers. It is in this light that we must interpret his famous Unam Sanctam. Therein, we read, "We declare, state and define that for every human creature it is a matter of necessity for salvation to be subject to the Roman Pontiff." It needs to be noted that this line from Boniface's bull is but a direct quotation from Aquinas' Contra Errores Graecorum (Latin for "Against the Errors of the Greeks"), wherein he is simply equating subjection to the pope with membership in the Church of Christ.
In like manner, the proceedings of the Council of Florence (1431), convoked to heal the rift between the Churches of the East and West, contained the following article: "[The holy Roman Church] . . . firmly believes, professes and preaches that no one outside the Catholic Church, neither pagans, nor Jews, nor heretics, nor schismatics, can become partakers of eternal life . . . And no one can be saved, no matter how much he has given in alms, even if he sheds his blood for the name of Christ, unless he remains in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." A careful reading of the text reveals that the Council Fathers had in mind not an outright condemnation of those invincibly ignorant of the gospel, but of those who were obdurate in their rejection of it. Surely, it would never have dawned upon a medieval Christian that the way Jews and Moslems were approached with the Gospel (all too often, under political and physical duress) did little to convince them of the truths of Christianity. At any rate, the conventional wisdom of the era presumed that the Christian message was indeed sufficiently known and that refusal to accept it constituted the sin of unbelief, deemed worthy of eternal damnation.(Lionel: This is an inference.The pope does not say this.) Theology never develops in a vacuum, and that is clearly the case with the doctrine of extra ecclesiam nulla salus... (Lionel: Since there was known salvation outside the Church, theology 'developed' for Fr.Stravinskas as it did for Cardinal Marchetti, Cardinal Richard Cushing, Boston College...)
With great insight and sensitivity, he went on to make a specific example of the followers of Islam: "I grant that the Moslems have heard the name of Christians. But they have been so educated that they think that our Faith is false and mistaken, while the faith in which they have been educated is the true faith . . . They do not know anything about divine revelation; they have not seen signs or miracles that would prove their religion false, nor have they heard of them in such a way that they would be truly obliged to believe those who told them of such things." All this led him to this conclusion: "Therefore, erroneous faith does not condemn, provided the error has a reasonable excuse and that they are invincibly ignorant of the true Faith" (Ibid)... (Lionel: We can see the 'new theology' being applied here.It is a theology based on there being known salvation outside the Church. This known salvation, was used by Cardinal Marchetti to reject the traditional interpretation of the dogma.We have theology whose foundation is an objective error; it is based on the dead being known and visible to us.)
The condemnation of these Jansenist teachings by the Holy See is an indication of a willingness to accord some measure of saving grace to those invincibly ignorant of the Christian message. Taking our time machine up to the 19th century, we find no less a stalwart defender of Catholic orthodoxy than Pope Pius IX making this most nuanced statement in Singulari Quadam: ". . . it is also a perfectly well known Catholic dogma that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church, and that those who are contumacious against the authority and the definitions of that same Church, and who are pertinaciously divided from the unity of that Church and from Peter's successor, the Roman Pontiff, to whom the custody of the vineyard has been committed by the Savior, cannot obtain eternal salvation."
The operative words, to be sure, are "contumacious" and "pertinaciously." No surprise, then, that in the very same document, we find a clear expression of the possibility of salvation for those outside the Church through no fault of their own.(Lionel: He is adapting the orthodox teaching to the 'new theology' founded on an irrationality. ) And so, we read: "It is known to Us and to you that those who labor in invincible ignorance concerning our most holy religion and who, assiduously observing the natural law and its precepts which God has inscribed in the hearts of all, and being ready to obey God, live an honest and upright life can, through the working of the divine light and grace, attain eternal life." Pius IX obviously took seriously the theological discussions of the previous centuries and encapsulated them in his letter. (Lionel: He is only referring to those in invincible ignorance. He is referring to a possibility. He is not saying that these cases refer to known persons or that they are an exception to the dogma. Fr.Stravinskas infers all this as did Cardinal Francesco Marchetti )
The ball was now back in the court of the theologians to explain how that might happen. The Jesuit Cardinal Johann Franzelin, a contemporary of the pope, took up the challenge and saw the process working in this way: "Since justification occurs only through supernatural faith and, as St. Paul teaches, 'faith comes through what is heard' [Romans 10:17], the saving message must be proclaimed — the task of the Church. Furthermore, faith orients a person to the Church and even if that person will not be joined to the Church on earth, he is oriented toward the eschatological Church, to which the earthly Church is intimately and indissolubly bound. Beyond that, those not in communion with the Catholic Church, by virtue of their desire for salvation, have at least an implicit desire for such membership. In short, anyone who is destined for salvation, achieves that goal through the Church and by a relationship with her" (Theses de Ecclesia Christi, Thesis 24...) (Lionel: The new theology is based on an irrational inference and has now been established.The dogma is really discarded)
In 1943, Pope Pius XII's Mystici Corporis was released. Eighty years after Pius IX's encyclical, Pius XII made this important contribution to the issue: "We urge each and every one of [those outside Catholic unity] to be prompt to follow the interior movements of grace, and to seek earnestly to rescue themselves from a state in which they cannot be sure of their own salvation. For even though, by a certain unconscious desire and wish, they may be related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer, they remain deprived of so many and so powerful gifts and helps from heaven, which can be enjoyed only within the Catholic Church."
Note the critical lines, "they cannot be sure of their own salvation," and, "they remain deprived of so many and so powerful gifts." What was he saying? Well, at a minimum, he was acknowledging that although they cannot be certain of their eternal salvation, neither they nor we are certain of their eternal damnation.(Lionel: Where does Pope Pius XII say that these cases were known to them to be exceptions to the dogma? He does not make this claim in this text. This was the inference of Cardinal Marchetti. There is no pope or magisterial document before 1949 to support Cardinal Marchetti.) And further, that while they are deprived of "many" gifts leading to salvation, they are not deprived of all such gifts. (Lionel: We have hypothethical cases here. This is speculation.These are not defacto, known exceptions to the dogma).
Six years later, this encyclical formed the basis for the response of the Holy Office to the teaching of Father Feeney.(Lionel: He is referring to the encylical interpreted with the irrational inference.In this way it was used to reject the traditional interpretation of the dogma.
This encyclical can also be interpreted without the inference.) And so, the following paragraph gives an official interpretation to the teaching of Pius XII( he refers to the Marchetti Letter) : "With these prudent words [of Pius XII], the Pope censures those who exclude from eternal salvation all men who adhere to the Church only with an implicit desire; (Lionel: Who are unknown to us and so are irrelevant to the dogma) and he also censures those who falsely maintain that men can be saved equally well in all religions" (Letter of the Holy Office to Archbishop Cushing, 1949). Judged unacceptable were both a facile condemnation of those outside the Church through no fault of their own (Lionel: And who were unknown to Marchetti and so irrelevant to the dogma ) and a facile religious indifferentism.
We now come to the Second Vatican Council, where nearly 1900 years of theological development (Lionel: The excommunicated of Fr.Leonard Feeney was still not lifted at the time of Vatican Council II. Also no pope mentioned the irrationality of Marchetti's inference.So the error was crystallized) was crystallized. Referring to non-Catholic Christians, the Decree on Ecumenism stated, "The brethren divided from us also carry out many of the sacred actions of the Christian religion. Undoubtedly, in ways that vary according to the condition of each church or community, these actions can truly engender a life of grace, and can be rightly described as capable of providing access to the community of salvation (Lionel: It refers to a possibility. This is important to note.This is not a defacto known case. So we do not have a contradicition to the traditional interpretation of the dogma) . . . It follows that these separated churches and communities, though we believe they suffer from defects already mentioned, have by no means been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation.(Lionel: Yes as a possibility. This possibility in these hypothetical cases could also include entry into the Catholic Church,with its faith and moral teachings and the Sacraments.However the bottom line is: it is not a known exception to the dogma) For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church." (Lionel: We cannot name any who will be saved as such in 2015. So it is still a reference to a hypothetical case and in no way contradicts the traditional interpretation of the dogma according to Fr.Leonard Feeney).
Let us highlight a few points here. First, don't miss the word "fullness," which makes the critical distinction between the possession by the Catholic Church of all that is needed for salvation, while still allowing for aspects of that fullness to be present elsewhere...(Lionel: He recognises it is a possibility. It should not be considered a defacto, known case. Defacto ( in reality) we defacto do not know of any Protestant who has been saved or will be saved outside the visible limits of the Catholic Church.There is no such case in 2015)
Quite logically, then, that very same Council gives in Lumen Gentium this sober assessment: "Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, [this sacred synod] teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. For Christ, made 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 also the necessity of the Church, for through Baptism as through a door men enter the Church." (Lionel: Here the rigorist interpretation of the dogma is supported by Vatican Council II.) In shorthand form, we see the ongoing doctrinal commitment to the necessity of the Church in salvation. And then, the follow-up: (Lionel: Note in the following line we do not have an exception to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma. Since a hypothetical case cannot be a defacto, objective exception.Marchetti was not aware of this.) "Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by God through Jesus Christ, would refuse to enter her or to remain in her, could not be saved." (Lionel: Those who know or do not know will be known and judged only by God.So we do not have an exception to the dogma. For Fr.Stravinskas these cases are known in the present times. So they are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus) So, we are face to face with the traditional doctrine, made with the accompanying qualifying remarks about a conscious refusal to join or remain within the one Church of Christ.
Having surveyed the history of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, we stand in a position to see how this doctrine has developed over the centuries.(Lionel: It 'develops' since is it assumed that references to salvation mentioned in Vatican Council II are visible and known to us in real life. This is the irrational premise used.It produces an irrational and non traditional conclusion) And indeed, a close look at history shows that the doctrine has developed, (Lionel It has not developed for me since I do not use the irrational inference in the interpretation of the dogma. The dead are not visible to me) and not reversed...
Valid doctrinal development involves the gradual growth in understanding of a core, unchanging truth.(Lionel: This development is based on the original Marchetti error, of there being known salvation outside the Church. People in Heaven are visible on earth to be objective exceptions to all needing the baptism of water. This is the fantasy theology accepted here.) At the heart of extra ecclesiam nulla salus is the fundamental dogma that the Church is absolutely necessary for salvation.
(Lionel: The de fide teaching is that all need to formally enter the Church, all need to be visible members of the Church) Through Christ's body, God's grace is channeled into the world. In the words of Lumen Gentium, the Church is the "universal sacrament of salvation." All salvation comes through Christ's Church; apart from that grace, there is no hope for eternal life. This point has been understood in different ways throughout the history of Christianity, and yet the doctrine has remained intact.(Lionel: The dogma has been rejected by Fr.Stravinskas since he used the Marchetti inference) Those who claim the Church has changed its stand on extra ecclesiam fail to recognize this core truth in the midst of its various interpretations.(Lionel: We now have heresy being supported by the magisterium.There is also an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II) In doing so, they ignore the development that occurs in the doctrinal life of the historic Church. (Lionel: We recognise that the 'development' is based on the objective error of Cardinal Francesco Marchetti which was supported by the Archdiocese of Boston).
-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment