Outside The Church There Is No Salvation
The doctrine that "Outside the Church there is no salvation" is one that is constantly misinterpreted by those who won't submit to the Magisterium of the Church.
Lionel: The contemporary magisterium of the Church will not submit to the pre-Council of Trent magisterium.
Instead the two popes and the Vatican Curia interpret the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus using philosophical subjectivism ( visible cases of the baptism of desire).They confuse what is invisible as being visible, subjective as being objective.In this way,with this irrationality, the dogma is discarded and it is replaced with a ' doctrine' (EWTN) or an 'aphorism'(CCC 846).
Faith does not depend upon our ability to reason to the truth but on our humility before the Truth presented to us by those to whom Christ entrusted that task.
Lionel: However the liberal theologians with the support of ecclesiastics have broken away with the traditional, centuries old interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. They did this with the use of an irrational premise and conclusion.This is a rebellion
against 'those to whom Christ entrusted that task' over the centuries.
This is why the First Vatican Council taught that it is the task of the Magisterium ALONE to determine and expound the meaning of the Tradition - including "outside the Church no salvation."
Lionel: However there is a problem. For the magisterium after the Council of Trent , the baptism of desire is not a hypothetical case, as if it was over the centuries. Instead it is considered an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.In other words it is explicit for it to be an exception.It is not a hypothetical case. This was the magisterial understanding of the second part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.It was referenced in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.It has also been approved by Pope Benedict in two theological papers of the International Theological Commission,Vatican.
Concerning this doctrine the Pope of Vatican I, Pius IX, spoke on two different occasions. In an allocution (address to an audience) on December 9th, 1854 he said:
We must hold as of the faith, that out of the Apostolic Roman Church there is no salvation; that she is the only ark of safety, and whosoever is not in her perishes in the deluge; we must also, on the other hand, recognize with certainty that those who are invincible in ignorance of the true religion are not guilty for this in the eyes of the Lord. And who would presume to mark out the limits of this ignorance according to the character and diversity of peoples, countries, minds and the rest?
Lionel: The passage in blue is the Feeneyite, traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The part in purple refers to a hypothetical case for us human beings.So it is not an exception to the dogma as it was wrongly suggested in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.However if the passage in purple is considered to be an exception to the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Church then it would be an error.we must also, on the other hand, recognize with certainty that those who are invincible in ignorance of the true religion are not guilty for this in the eyes of the Lord. And who would presume to mark out the limits of this ignorance according to the character and diversity of peoples, countries, minds and the rest?
This would then be the Cushingite theology, the new theology.It would be a perspective based on an irrational premise ( known cases of persons saved in invincible ignorance and without the baptism of water) and a non traditional conclusion( these known cases of being saved in invincible ignorance are examples of salvation outside the Church and exceptions to the dogma on salvation).
Again, in his encyclical Quanto conficiamur moerore of 10 August, 1863 addressed to the Italian bishops, he said:
It is known to us and to you that those who are in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion, but who observe carefully the natural law, and the precepts graven by God upon the hearts of all men, and who being disposed to obey God lead an honest and upright life, may, aided by the light of divine grace, attain to eternal life; for God who sees clearly, searches and knows the heart, the disposition, the thoughts and intentions of each, in His supreme mercy and goodness by no means permits that anyone suffer eternal punishment, who has not of his own free will fallen into sin.
Lionel: Yes and this refers to a hypothetical case. It is a theoretical possibility. It is said with goodwill and it is speculation.However if it is considered an exception to the dogma on salvation then it is irrational, non traditional, an innovation and heresy. It would be a new theology, Cushingite theology.__________________________
These statements are consistent with the understanding of the Church contained in the documents of Vatican II,
Lionel: They are consistent with Vatican Council II ( Cushingite). They would not be consistent with Vatican Council II (Feeneyite). For example Lumen Gentium 16 on invincible ignorance would refer to explicit cases in Vatican Council II ( Cushingite). They would be implicit in Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite). It is the same Vatican Council II but with two different conclusions.Vatican Council II (Cushingite) is a break with Tradition. Vatican Council II(Feeneyite) supports Tradition and there would be no change in ecclesiology before and after Vatican Council II.
and the Catechism of the Catholic Church,
Lionel:Similarly there can be an interpretation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church with the theology of Cushingism or Feeneyism.(See this blog's tags on Catechism of the Catholic Church, Feeneyism, Right Hand Side Column, Left Hand Side Column,Cushingism etc)
as well as explaining why the rigorist position of Fr. Feeney (that all must be actual members of the Catholic Church to be saved) has been condemned by the Magisterium.
Lionel: The magisterium is using irrational Cushingism as a theology.It is interpreting magisterial documents with the irrational premise and conclusion. Even magisterial document ,like Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus, were written with ambiguous passages based on Cushingism.How can the Holy Spirit guide the Church to teach that there are hypothetical cases which are not hypothetical in the present times? How can the Holy Spirit make an objective error?.How can the Holy Spirit teach that there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, when we cannot know of any exception as human beings?This is all human error contradicting the magisterium of the past.How can the Holy Spirit contradict the magisterium of the past and that too with an irrationality?
It is ironic that precisely those who know their obligation to remain united to the Magisterium, and thus on whom this doctrine is morally binding, keep themselves from union with the Roman See on this point.
Lionel: This could also be said about the present two popes and the Vatican Curia.They need to be in union with the Roman See over the centuries, on this issue.
Answered by Colin B. Donovan, STL