Redemptors Missio is based on a flawed philosophy which created a non traditional and heretical conclusion.It discards the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and 'the ecclesiocentrism" of the past'(RM 17).It cannot be the work of the Holy Spirit but the personal opinion of Cardinal Ratzinger and Pope John Paul II ?
It rejects the ecclesiocentrism of the past by assuming hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire are objective in real life.This is assumed to be an exception to all needing to be incorporated into the Church as members.This is flawed reasoning.
So with the false premise of there being visible and not invisble cases of persons saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance( without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church) Cardinal Ratzinger eliminates the exclusivist ecclesiology of the past.
For salvation he projects Christ without the necessity of membership in the Church, for salvation.Since in principle, Cardinal Ratzinger like cardinals present at Vatican Council II, assumed hypothetical cases are not hypothetical in the present times; Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance) etc refer not to hypothetical but objective cases.
Redemptoris Missio does not say all non Catholics are on the way to Hell unless they formally convert into the Catholic Church ( Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441,Extra ecclesiam nulla salus).This cannot be stated by him.Since he assumes there are known cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire.All without baptism of water and Catholic faith.So like Lumen Gentium 14, on those 'who know' and do not enter the Church and who will be condemned,Cardinal Ratzinger reasons the same way.Those who are in invincible ignorance can be saved so only those who 'know' and who are not invincible ignorance, need to enter the Church,was the sad reasoning.
This is flawed logic. It is as if we humans could know such cases, and so it is mentioned .This was the error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which was then repeated in Vatican Council II (LG 14 etc).
Even though there was a choice before him, Cardinal Ratzinger interpreted all hypothetical cases as being non hypothetical.If he had interpreted LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 3 etc as being only hypothetical then Vatican Council II itself would not contradict 'the ecclesiocentrism of the past'(RM 17).
It would support the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.Redemptoris Missio would then have to be written differently.
Since Cardinal Ratzinger chose the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II, when he had an option, this is reflected in Redemptoris Missio,Dominus Iesus, two papers of the International Theological Commission, the Balamand Declaration, Ecclesia di Eucarestia,the Notification of the CDF on Fr.Jacques Dupuis s.j etc.
This cannot be the authentic and perennial magisterium of the Church inspired by the Holy Spirit.Since an objective and factual mistake has been made.
It is a fact of life that all baptism of desire cases are invisible for us.The famous case of the catechumen,is an unknown person, personally and specifically.
Redemptoris Missio was probably written under some pressure when he was new as the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF).Since as Pope Benedict XVI, under pressure, he said in public, that Jews do not need to convert in the present times.Again he contradicted the dogma EENS and Vatican Council II( AG 7), which says all need faith and baptism for salvation.
Since he mixed up what is hypothetical as being objective the Catechism of the Catholic Church n.1257 says all need the baptism of water for salvation but God is not limited to the Sacraments.All need to enter but some do not!.Defacto all need the baptism of water for salvation but dejure,in principle,in faith,as a possibility God is not limited to the Sacraments.However Catholics assume God is not limited to the Sacraments refers to known cases and so CCC 1257 contradicts itself.
But why was it mentioned in the first place? Why? Since there was confusion between what is objective and subjective, visible and invisible, practically known and a hypothetical possibility.
All this is now part of the new,ambigous theology, which accomodates physically visible baptism of desire. So the Catechism of the Catholic Church n.846 says all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church.It does not directly say all need to be incorporated into the Church.Since, the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 states :'Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member...'1
Like the Letter of the Holy Office relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney, Redemptoris Missio is based on a false premise ( physically visible and known cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance) and a false conclusion ( there are personally known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known for example in the 16th century).So Redemptoris Missio, based on an irrational choice in the interpretation of Vatican Council II, has the hermeneutic of rupture with extra ecclesiam nulla salus , as it was known to the 16th century missionaries.It is also a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors and the Catechism of St. Pius X, supporting the Feeneyite interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus i.e being saved in invincible ignorance etc refer to invisible and personally unknown cases in the present times.So they do not contradict Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441 on outside the Church there is no salvation.
The style of writing of Redemptoris Missio is also diffused unlike the clear and direct style of papal documents over the centuries.
There is a major philosophical error in Redemptoris Missio.There is an irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.In this sense,Redemptoris Missio cannot be considered a magisterial document, issued by Cardinal Ratzinger.The sane errors are there in Dominus Iesus.
The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.-Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston.
December 22, 2016
Card.Ratzinger's error in the ITC papers is also there in Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/12/cardratzingers-error-in-itc-papers-is.html