Repost : Clarification/disclaimer would be helpful on the SBC website
MAY 23, 2013
Clarification/disclaimer would be helpful on the SBC website
Fr.Brian Harrison is reviewing an article he wrote on the Internet and possibly Bro. Andre Marie,MICM, Prior of the St.Benedict Center Richmond,N.H will cite this theological paper on the SBC or post is as he has done before.It will contain the familiar error of assuming the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are visible-to-us exceptions of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.We can see the dead saved!!!
In the past too he has made this error and it was not corrected by Bro.Andre Marie.
Similarly Jeff Mirus of Catholic Culture had written a few articles to which Bro. Andre Marie responded. Again he did not correct Jeff Mirus. We do not know of any case in the present times saved in invincible ignorance(LG 16).
People in general , assume there are known exceptions to the dogma. So when they see the dogma-text on the SBC website it is assumed at first that this community of Fr.Leonard Feeney is a sedevacantist one or traditionalists who reject Vatican Council II.
There is no clarification or disclaimer on the SBC website saying , 'Being saved with implicit desire (with or without ) the baptism of water is always invisible for us human beings.
So being saved in invincible ignorance(LG 16, Vatican Council II), elements of sanctification (LG 8) and being 'good and holy' non Catholics (NA) are not in themself, known or unknown, exceptions to the dogma defined three times.' When Fr.Brian Harrison says that invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are included in the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, then whatever this means for him, he would have to clarify that these cases are not exceptions to the dogma on salvation.
When Robert Sungenis says every one needs to enter the Church in the present times with no exception and also says except for those with the baptism of desire etc, whatever this means for him, he would have to clarify that these cases arenot known exceptions to the dogma.
When Bro.Andre Marie says that a person can be saved with implicit desire but only followed by the baptism of water, he would have to clarify, that these cases are known only to God and so are not exceptions to the dogma or the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney. When just about all of them say that the Letter of the Holy office 1949 states there are exceptions to the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney on the dogma, it would have to be clarified that there is no text in the Letter which says these cases are explicit for us and so are exceptions to the dogma.The Letter only mentions implicit desire and being saved in inculpable ignorance.It does not state that they are exceptions. You can assume that they are exceptions or assume they are not.There are two options. One rational and the other irrational.
If Bro. Andre Marie would say clearly that being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are invisible for us, this would be stating a fact of life. We cannot see the dead. So even if Fr.Leonard Feeney has not clearly mentioned this truth, we accept it as a universal fact : the dead cannot be seen with the naked eye.
What does not exist cannot be an exception.What we cannot see or know cannot be an exception. If someone is dead he cannot be an exception to all needing to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation(Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441) or all needing faith and baptism for salvation( Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II).