Converts to the Catholic Church do not want to affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) nor the simple interpretation of Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II,which say all need faith and baptism for salvation : Fr.Brian Harrison and Edward Pentin

Converts to the Catholic Church do not want to affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) nor the simple interpretation of Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II,which say all need faith and baptism for salvation.Fr.Brian Harrison and Edward Pentin would like to believe that invisible cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism  of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) are visible exceptions to EENS and AG 7.
_______________________

Therefore, all must be converted to Him...and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door...

By means of this activity, the Mystical Body of Christ unceasingly gathers and directs its forces toward its own growth (cf. Eph. 4:11-16). The members of the Church are impelled to carry on such missionary activity by reason of the love with which they love God and by which they desire to share with all men the spiritual goods of both its life and the life to come.

Finally, by means of this missionary activity, God is fully glorified, provided that men fully and consciously accept His work of salvation, which He has accomplished in Christ.-Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II

_____________________________

Even former apologists Patrick Madrid and Robert Sungenis were not willing to make the theological change and say outside the Church there is no salvation and there are no known exceptions for them.

They would say that it is important to be a Catholic and it is necessary to enter the Church for salvation but would not admit that there are no practical exceptions to EENS and Ad Gentes  7 in the present times.

In other words there were exceptions for them as if they could know and judge exceptions.

This is the error Archbishop Augustine Di Noia made when he was asked about EENS by Edward Pentin for the National Catholic Register.Di Noia at Ecclesia Dei said that he would judge Anglicans who would be going to  Heaven for him.This is even though they were outside the Catholic Church.Di Noia would know how Jesus would judge and what would be the state of their soul before death.Edward Pentin accepted this answer.

Edward Pentin also, like Di Noia, interprets BOD,BOB and I.I and LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc 1 as referring to known people who will be going to Heaven outside the Catholic Church.

So with this irrationality Pentin derails traditional and rational Catholic theology. He re-interprets the Creed, Catechisms and Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition(EENS, Syllabus of Errors).He would make a false Profession of Faith since he has changed the understanding of the Nicene Creed.

So for Pentin and Fr. Harrison, St. Thomas Aquinas would contradict himself. Aquinas supports the strict interpretation of EENS, according to the dogma. But when Aquinas refers to hypothetical cases of BOD, BOB and I.I, it is interpreted as physically visible non Catholics saved outside the Church.In this way they become exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.

Fr. Leonard Feeney said that there are no cases of the baptism of desire etc. He meant it literally.

Even St. Thomas Aquinas and St.Augustine do not state that BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions to EENS since they refer to known people saved outside the Church.

Fr.Brian Harrison and Edward Pentin, converts to the Catholic Faith have been informed over the last few years. They still are not announcing that they affirm EENS like the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century.

This is being Catholic for them.

They are also projecting Vatican Council II as a rupture with EENS, when it is not.

For me St.Thomas Aquinas does not contradict EENS and neither does Vatican Council II.

Vatican Council II is not ' a development', a rupture with EENS according to the missionaries in the 16th century and yet when Pope Benedict said this ( March 2016, Avvenire) there was no correction from Fr. Brian Harrison or Edward Pentin.

The Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO) has made an objective mistake. It used a false premise(invisible people are visible) and inference( outside the Church there is known salvation) and this has been accepted by the Catholic converts.LOHO has been references in Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church and placed in the Denzinger, with the mistake which cannot be magisterial. It cannot be the work of the Holy Spirit.

-Lionel Andrades

1

 BOD(baptism of desire), BOB(baptism of blood) and I.I(invincible ignorance) and Lumen Gentium 8 (Lumen Gentium 8- elements of sanctification and truth in other religions), Lumen Gentium 14 ( case of the unknown catechumen and unknown non Catholics  saved in invincible ignorance), Lumen Gentium 16( invincible ignorance / a good conscience), Unitatitis Redintigratio 3( imperfect communion with the Church), Nostra Aetate 2( a ray of that Truth which saves all/ good and holy non Catholics in other religions) , Gaudium et Specs  22( people of goodwill).