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: It is the magisterium since the time of Pope Pius XII which insists invisible people are visible exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The conclusion and inference is irrational.It is also a break with the magisterium in the 16th century. This was confirmed by Pope Benedict XVI in March 2016. This would be heresy for the magisterium in the 16 the century. Pope Benedict does not deny it.Also the heresy comes from assuming that invisible people are objective exceptions to the 16th century understanding of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This is a de fide teaching which is being changed or denied. It is first class heresy. It is a mortal sin.
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. 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: Yes and the present magisterium contradicts the past magisterium because of an alleged 'development' with Vatican Council II according to Pope Benedict.So at one time the magisterium is wrong, before or after Pope Pius XII.
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: Pius IX does not state here that'those who are in invincible ignorance of the true religion and are not guilty for this in the eyes of the Lord,'are visible in the flesh cases.Obviously they cannot be known to us and would be known only to God. But EWTN assumes that this is a reference to a known case.Since only a known case could be an exception to the dogma EENS. An invisible person cannot be an exception to the teaching on all needing to be members of the Church for salvation.For example if there was a case of someone saved outside the Church in 2017 then this would be an exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma no salvation outside the Church. But where are these cases? There are none.So this is a false inference by EWTN.
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: Again this is a reference to a hypothetical case.The text does not state that this is a reference to a known person, someone personally known.It is inferred wrongly by EWTN that this is an exception to the dogma.The pope is referring with good will to a hypothetical case.This is something obvious. Yet the liberal theologians misinterpret someone who is theoretically in Heaven to be practically on earth and known.Upon this irrationality is based the new theology approved by Rahner and Ratzinger.Fantasy theology !________________________________________
These statements are consistent with the understanding of the Church contained in the documents of Vatican II, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church,
Lionel: No they are not!. They are only consistent ( in error)
if the same Cushingite theology is used to interpret all these documents including the understanding of EENS.
I interpret all these magisterial documents consistently by omitting the false premise. I do not confuse invisible people as being objectively seen or known.I do not assume that there is known salvation outside the Church since invisible baptism of desire is a visible exception to the old ecclesiology.For me Vatican Council II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church and EENS is Feeneyite.So it is consistent.It is also rational and traditional.
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: Yes the rigorist position of EENS was condemned by a Magisterium which assumed invisible people are objective exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS.This is also the reasoning of EWTN and the two living popes.They all violate the Principle of Non Contradiction and are a rupture with the magisterium of the 16th century according to Pope Benedict XVI( Avvenire, March 2016).
So this is all contradictory. It is not rational, traditional or Catholic. It is a deception which has been brought into the Church.It has unfortunately had the support of Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX priests and bishops who have had their formation under him. He had wrongly interpreted Vatican Council II assuming hypothetical cases( LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, GS 22, NA 2 etc) are objectively known cases. He picked up the error of the 1949 Letter during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII.
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:The magisterium was in heresy and was forcing this heresy upon Fr. Leonard Feeney.It was Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits at Vatican Council II who were in heresy.It was blatant public heresy and the popes did nothing.
These liberals placed this irrational philosophy and theology in Vatican Council II. There are so many superfluous passages in Vatican Council II which mention being saved in invincible ignorance and the case of the catechumen who desires the baptism of water before he died.These are hypothetical cases.The case of the catechumen is an imaginary case.So they were always irrelevant to the dogma EENS.
Answered by Colin B. Donovan, STL