Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => The Feeneyism Ghetto => Topic started by: trad123 on August 10, 2019, 01:24:15 AM
-
https://www.cathinfo.com/baptism-of-desire-and-feeneyism/why-do-all-major-trad-organisations-teach-those-in-false-religions-can-be-saved/msg661645/#msg661645
Are you sure you've not mis-assessed the position of those you mention in your OP? The claim that ABL and the CMRI are each committed to Vatican II soteriology is one that crops up again and again, but I've never seen sufficient evidence that this is the case for either.
Unitatis Redintegratio, Decree on Ecuмenism
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/docuмents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html
3.
(. . .)
Moreover, some and even very many of the significant elements and endowments which together go to build up and give life to the Church itself, can exist outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church: the written word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, and visible elements too. All of these, which come from Christ and lead back to Christ, belong by right to the one Church of Christ.
Dominus Iesus
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/docuмents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html
12.
(. . .)
Furthermore, the salvific action of Jesus Christ, with and through his Spirit, extends beyond the visible boundaries of the Church to all humanity. Speaking of the paschal mystery, in which Christ even now associates the believer to himself in a living manner in the Spirit and gives him the hope of resurrection, the Council states: “All this holds true not only for Christians but also for all men of good will in whose hearts grace is active invisibly. For since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery”.37
(37) Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, 22.
CCC, 847:
https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/catechism/index.cfm?recnum=3077
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.
Lumen Gentium, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/docuмents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html
15. The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter.
( . . .)
They also share with us in prayer and other spiritual benefits. Likewise we can say that in some real way they are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too He gives His gifts and graces whereby He is operative among them with His sanctifying power.
16.
(. . .)
Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.(19*) Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life.
CCC 1281
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a1.htm\
Those who die for the faith, those who are catechumens, and all those who, without knowing of the Church but acting under the inspiration of grace, seek God sincerely and strive to fulfill his will, can be saved even if they have not been baptized (cf. LG 16).
An Interview with Karl Rahner on the State of Catholic Theology Today
http://www.innerexplorations.com/chtheomortext/kr.htm
Toe: Tell us something about your ideas on what you call anonymous Christianity.
Rahner: "Anonymous Christianity means that a person lives in the grace of God and attains salvation outside of explicitly constituted Christianity… Let us say, a Buddhist monk… who, because he follows his conscience, attains salvation and lives in the grace of God; of him I must say that he is an anonymous Christian; if not, I would have to presuppose that there is a genuine path to salvation that really attains that goal, but that simply has nothing to do with Jesus Christ. But I cannot do that. And so, if I hold if everyone depends upon Jesus Christ for salvation, and if at the same time I hold that many live in the world who have not expressly recognized Jesus Christ, then there remains in my opinion nothing else but to take up this postulate of an anonymous Christianity."11
http://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/08Aug/aug4str.htm (http://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/08Aug/aug4str.htm)
Against the Heresies, by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre: Page 216:
Evidently, certain distinctions must be made. Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.), but not by this religion. There may be souls who, not knowing Our Lord, have by the grace of the good Lord, good interior dispositions, who submit to God...But some of these persons make an act of love which implicitly is equivalent to baptism of desire. It is uniquely by this means that they are able to be saved.
Against the Heresies, by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre: Page 217:
"One cannot say, then, that no one is saved in these religions…"
Against the Heresies, by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre: Pages 217-218:
"This is then what Pius IX said and what he condemned. It is necessary to understand the formulation that was so often employed by the Fathers of the Church: 'Outside the Church there is no salvation.' When we say that, it is incorrectly believed that we think that all the Protestants, all the Moslems, all the Buddhists, all those who do not publicly belong to the Catholic Church go to hell. Now, I repeat, it is possible for someone to be saved in these religions, but they are saved by the Church, and so the formulation is true: Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. This must be preached."
Bishop Lefebvre, Sermon at first Mass of a newly ordained priest (Geneva: 1976):
"We are Catholics; we affirm our faith in the divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ; we affirm our faith in the divinity of the Holy Catholic Church; we think that Jesus Christ is the sole way, the sole truth, the sole life, and that one cannot be saved outside Our Lord Jesus Christ and consequently outside His Mystical Spouse, the Holy Catholic Church. No doubt, the graces of God are distributed outside the Catholic Church, but those who are saved, even outside the Catholic Church, are saved by the Catholic Church, by Our Lord Jesus Christ, even if they do not know it, even if they are unaware of it..."
Fr. Schmidberger (SSPX), Time Bombs of the Second Vatican Council, 2005, p. 10:
"Ladies and gentlemen, it is clear that the followers of other religions can be saved under certain conditions, that is to say, if they are in invincible error."
Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of SSPX, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006:
Consider a Hindu in Tibet who has no knowledge of the Catholic Church. He lives according to his conscience and to the laws which God has put into his heart. He can be in the state of grace, and if he dies in this state of grace, he will go to Heaven."
The SSPV, The Roman Catholic, Fenton Article, Fall 2003, p. 6:
"So, is it true and an article of faith that 'outside the Church there is no salvation'? Yes, it is. Does this mean that a person, no matter how praiseworthy a life he may have led, will be eternally lost who, through no grave fault of his own, is not an actual member of the Church at the moment of death? No, it does not."
The SSPV, The Roman Catholic, Fenton Article, Fall 2003, p. 7:
"With the strict, literal interpretation of this doctrine, however, I must take issue, for if I read and understand the strict interpreters correctly, nowhere is allowance made for invincible ignorance, conscience, or good faith on the part of those who are not actual or formal members of the Church at the moment of death. It is inconceivable to me that, of all the billions of non-Catholics who have died in the past nineteen and one-half centuries, none of them were in good faith in this matter and, if they were, I simply refuse to believe that hell is their eternal destiny."
Bishop Donald Sanborn, Sacerdotium V, p. 24:
"Vatican II's idea of the Church is heretical, since it identifies organized religions of pagans and idolaters with the Mystical Body of Christ. The truth is that in no way are pagans and idolaters, as pagans and idolaters, united to the Mystical Body of Christ. If, by some mystery of Providence and Predestination, they [pagans and idolaters] are united to the soul of the Church, and by desire to its body, it is in spite of their paganism and idolatry. It is due to an invincible ignorance of their error."
Fr. Kevin Vaillancourt, I Baptize With Water, p. 18, quoting from Fr. Tanquery with approval:
"Necessity of means, however, is not an absolute necessity, but a hypothetical one. In certain particular circuмstances, for example, in the case of the invincible ignorance or of incapability, actual membership in the Church can be supplied by the desire for this membership. It is not necessary that this be explicitly present; it can be included in a willingness and readiness to fulfill the will of God. In this way those who are outside the Catholic Church can achieve salvation." (Catholic Research Institute)
Fr. Kevin Vaillancourt, I Baptize With Water, p. 17:
"Are there any more 'good faith' pagans in existence? Is it possible for the Communists of China or the faithful adherents of Buddhism and Mohammedism of the Near and Far East to either have never heard the Gospel, or else had the Gospel presented to them in an erroneous light?... Can the Chinese Communist, or the Indian Buddhist or the Pakistani Muslim be included in such a consideration [of invincible ignorance]? Only God knows, and it is not up to me to decide for Him. I write here merely to uphold the dogmatic principle of the possibility of such cases today, without admitting that all, or even a significant number of those who are in such circuмstances will achieve salvation through justification."
-
Pius IX
Allocution to the cardinals on the Consistory of the 17th of December, 1847:
The life of Pope Pius IX and the great events in the history of the Church during his pontificate by John Gilmary Shea, published 1877, pgs. 97 - 103
https://archive.org/details/TheLifeOfPopePiusIX1877 (https://archive.org/details/TheLifeOfPopePiusIX1877)
It is assuredly not unknown to you, venerable brethren, that in our times many of the enemies of the Catholic faith especially direct their efforts toward placing every monstrous opinion on the same level with the doctrine of Christ, or of confounding it therewith, and so they try more and more to propagate that impious system of the indifference of religions.
But quite recently, we shudder to say it, men have appeared who have thrown such reproaches upon our name and apostolic dignity, that they do not hesitate to slander us, as if we shared in their folly and favored the aforesaid most wicked system. (. . .) as to suppose that not only the sons of the Church, but that the rest also, however alienated from Catholic unity they may remain, are alike in the way of salvation, and may arrive at everlasting life." We are at a loss from horror to find words to express our detestation of this new and atrocious injustice that is done us.
Against the Heresies, by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre: Pages 217-218:
"This is then what Pius IX said and what he condemned. It is necessary to understand the formulation that was so often employed by the Fathers of the Church: 'Outside the Church there is no salvation.' When we say that, it is incorrectly believed that we think that all the Protestants, all the Moslems, all the Buddhists, all those who do not publicly belong to the Catholic Church go to hell. Now, I repeat, it is possible for someone to be saved in these religions, but they are saved by the Church, and so the formulation is true: Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. This must be preached."
-
Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, 1832
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/greg16/g16mirar.htm (http://www.papalencyclicals.net/greg16/g16mirar.htm)
13. Now We consider another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained. Surely, in so clear a matter, you will drive this deadly error far from the people committed to your care. With the admonition of the apostle that “there is one God, one faith, one baptism”[16] may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that “those who are not with Christ are against Him,”[17] and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore “without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate.”[18] Let them hear Jerome who, while the Church was torn into three parts by schism, tells us that whenever someone tried to persuade him to join his group he always exclaimed: “He who is for the See of Peter is for me.”[19] A schismatic flatters himself falsely if he asserts that he, too, has been washed in the waters of regeneration. Indeed Augustine would reply to such a man: “The branch has the same form when it has been cut off from the vine; but of what profit for it is the form, if it does not live from the root?”
-
Pius IX
On Promotion of False Doctrines, 1863
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9quanto.htm (http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9quanto.htm)
7. Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments.
19.
(. . .)
Let us pray that the errant be flooded with the light of his divine grace, may turn back from the path of error into the way of truth and justice and, experiencing the worthy fruit of repentance, may possess perpetual love and fear of his holy name.
Leo XIII
On Mission Societies, 1880
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/leo13/l13mis.htm (http://www.papalencyclicals.net/leo13/l13mis.htm)
6.
(. . .)
Do men like these pour forth their prayers to God that in His mercy he may bring to the Divine light of the Gospel by His victorious grace the people sitting in the darkness?
-
http://drbo.org/cgi-bin/s?q=2+Corinthians+4%3A3-4+&b=drb
2 Corinthians 4:3-4
And if our gospel be also hid, it is hid to them that are lost, In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto them.
-
But quite recently, we shudder to say it, men have appeared who have thrown such reproaches upon our name and apostolic dignity, that they do not hesitate to slander us, as if we shared in their folly and favored the aforesaid most wicked system. (. . .) as to suppose that not only the sons of the Church, but that the rest also, however alienated from Catholic unity they may remain, are alike in the way of salvation, and may arrive at everlasting life." We are at a loss from horror to find words to express our detestation of this new and atrocious injustice that is done us.
http://www.traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php?id=68
The New Ecclesiology: An Overview Most Rev. Donald J. Sanborn
(. . .)
II. The Traditional Ecclesiology
Those who are validly baptized in non-Catholic sects are presumed by Church law to participate in and assent to the sins of heresy and/or schism of their respective sects. Privately, however, they may be not guilty of these sins, owing to invincible ignorance of the true Faith, in which case they may belong to the Catholic Church by desire, provided they fulfill other conditions.
-
But quite recently, we shudder to say it, men have appeared who have thrown such reproaches upon our name and apostolic dignity, that they do not hesitate to slander us, as if we shared in their folly and favored the aforesaid most wicked system. (. . .) as to suppose that not only the sons of the Church, but that the rest also, however alienated from Catholic unity they may remain, are alike in the way of salvation, and may arrive at everlasting life." We are at a loss from horror to find words to express our detestation of this new and atrocious injustice that is done us.
The New Ecclesiology: Docuмentation, by Most Rev. Donald J. Sanborn
www.traditionalmass.org/images/articles/ecclesiology.pdf
Commentary, Page 7:
Therefore those who adhere to the Vatican II ecclesiology are straying from divine truth.
Commentary, Page 18:
Heretical and schismatics sects are not a means of salvation, and those who adhere to them have no hope of heaven, unless they are excused from fault because of invincible ignorance.
-
Rev. Curzio Nitoglia
An analysis of three principal errors of Vatican II: Personalism, a false notion of the Church, and collegiality
http://www.traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php?id=32&catname=10
Therefore if some member of a non-catholic sect sanctifies himself, he owes that to the grace of God which blows where it will and touches him despite the false principles of a sect in which he finds himself through invincible ignorance.
-
http://www.thetradforum.com//index.php?topic=406.msg5590#msg5590
I never understood the questioning of implicit desire when there are a number of pre-Vatican II Catholic catechisms that specifically teach it.
Agreed, but to the Feenyite, this is simply pre-Vatican II modernism.
As if Vatican II happened in a vacuum. It had it's roots.
That goes for implicit desire, denial of the Athanasius creed, an aberration of the visible unity of the Church wherein non-members are supposedly united to the Church, yet publicly profess an alien faith.
-
From the Baltimore Catechism;
Q. 510. Is it ever possible for one to be saved who does not know the Catholic Church to be the true Church?
A. It is possible for one to be saved who does not know the Catholic Church to be the true Church, provided that person:
1.(1) Has been validly baptized;
2.(2) Firmly believes the religion he professes and practices to be the true religion, and
3.(3) Dies without the guilt of mortal sin on his soul.
Q. 511. Why do we say it is only possible for a person to be saved who does not know the CatholicChurch to be the true Church?
A. We say it is only possible for a person to be saved who does not know the Catholic Church to be the true Church, because the necessary conditions are not often found, especially that of dying in a state of grace without making use of the Sacrament of Penance.
Q. 512. How are such persons said to belong to the Church?
A. Such persons are said to belong to the "soul of the church"; that is, they are really members of the Church without knowing it. Those who share in its Sacraments and worship are said to belong to the body or visible part of the Church.
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resources/catechism/baltimore-catechism/lesson-11-on-the-church (https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resources/catechism/baltimore-catechism/lesson-11-on-the-church)
-
From the Baltimore Catechism;
Q. 510. Is it ever possible for one to be saved who does not know the Catholic Church to be the true Church?
A. It is possible for one to be saved who does not know the Catholic Church to be the true Church, provided that person:
1.(1) Has been validly baptized;
2.(2) Firmly believes the religion he professes and practices to be the true religion, and
3.(3) Dies without the guilt of mortal sin on his soul.
Q. 511. Why do we say it is only possible for a person to be saved who does not know the CatholicChurch to be the true Church?
A. We say it is only possible for a person to be saved who does not know the Catholic Church to be the true Church, because the necessary conditions are not often found, especially that of dying in a state of grace without making use of the Sacrament of Penance.
Q. 512. How are such persons said to belong to the Church?
A. Such persons are said to belong to the "soul of the church"; that is, they are really members of the Church without knowing it. Those who share in its Sacraments and worship are said to belong to the body or visible part of the Church.
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resources/catechism/baltimore-catechism/lesson-11-on-the-church (https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resources/catechism/baltimore-catechism/lesson-11-on-the-church)
If people who believe in so-called "baptism of desire", restricted their belief to the above quotes from an older Baltimore Catechism, all these threads on EENS would not exist on CI.
Unfortunately 99% of believers in so-called baptism of desire, believe that any non-baptized person can be saved, that Mohamedans, Hindus, Buddhists, Jєωs, non-Catholics in every false religion, can be saved by their belief in a God that rewards. This thread is not about those non-Catholics who are validly baptized, what this thread is about, that even traditionalist groups teach in their seminaries and to the faithful that non-Catholics in every false religion can be saved without being validly baptized, without desiring to be baptized, without desiring to be Catholics, without belief in Jesus Christ or the Holy Trinity, indeed, even despising all that is Catholic.
-
Very good Trad123, it is all there in one place for all to see for themselves. As I said before:
The SSPX teaches it because they are flawed, it is their Achilles heal and a sign for those seeking truth to NOT follow them blindly or with absolute trust. It is the sign that they will eventually rationalize ANYTHING, including joining Rome (like the SSPX is attempting), or declaring themselves pope. This is why I do not follow them with certainty of faith, I just take what good they (trad groups) have to offer . You have the Vatican II sect and you have the trad groups that teach the same thing regarding EENS, that Muslims, Hindus, Jєωs, Buddhists, indeed people in any "religion" can be saved by their belief in a God that rewards.
-
What about cases of invincible ignorance?
-
What about cases of invincible ignorance?
Invincible ignorance until death means that God chose to not introduce the candidate to the gospel, to not lead the candidate to the Church and the sacraments. It means that God chose to not reward the candidate with salvation.
-
When someone brings up Pius IX and makes the bold claim he inferred the salvation of non-Catholics, at that point, that person has committed slander against Pius IX.
-
Bishop Sanborn, are you listening?
You share the ecclesiology of the Novus Ordo, whether you realize it or not.
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/is-there-really-no-salvation-outside-the-catholic-church
A Catholic Contradiction?
Perhaps the one paragraph in the CCC used more than any other to “prove” Catholics contradict themselves with regard to this the doctrine “extra ecclesiam nulla salus” is paragraph 841, which is given to us under the heading: “The Church’s Relationship with the Muslims”:
The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.
“See? Here the Church says Muslims can be saved. What up with that?”
Well, this has to be understood in the context of what the Catechism says else where, and as I quoted it above: Those Muslims (and as we will see in more detail, anyone of any religion, or even the non-religious could be included here) who are not responsible for their ignorance of the Catholic Faith can indeed be saved.
Now, contrary to what you may have read elsewhere, CCC 841 is not saying “anyone who is a good Joe will go to heaven.” A Jєωιѕн person will not make it to heaven by being a good Jєω, or a Muslim by being a good Muslim, a Protestant by being a good Protestant, etc. In John 14:6, Jesus said, “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life, no man can come to the Father except by me.” He seems to be quite plain in this text that he is essential to the equation. And not only is Christ essential to the equation, but also Christ speaking through his Church. “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me” (Luke 10:16). The Church is “the fullness of him who fills all in all” (Eph. 1:23). The Church is Christ in the world. It is almighty God who willed “that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known” (Ephesians 3:10). To reject the Church is to reject Christ because it was Christ who gave authority to the Church and declared:
If he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile or a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matt. 18:17-18).
In a nutshell, you cannot separate rejecting the Church with rejecting Christ according to Scripture and the teaching of the Catholic Church. In other words, one cannot just create his own religion and follow the “Jesus” of his own creation and choosing without there being eternal consequences.
Breaking it Down
As an apologist, I find the real issue here to be a conceptual disconnect between the dogma—extra ecclesiam nulla salus—and the idea that some people who are not formally Catholic can be saved. And this is understandable. One way I have found some success in helping folks to bridge this divide is to note what I mentioned in brief before, i.e., the Church teaches the possibility of salvation for people who do not have what we call a formal relationship with the Church, i.e., they are not on the registry at a local Catholic parish, yet they do indeed have a salvific relationship with the Church.
-
If people who believe in so-called "baptism of desire", restricted their belief to the above quotes from an older Baltimore Catechism, all these threads on EENS would not exist on CI.
Unfortunately 99% of believers in so-called baptism of desire, believe that any non-baptized person can be saved, that Mohamedans, Hindus, Buddhists, Jєωs, non-Catholics in every false religion, can be saved by their belief in a God that rewards. This thread is not about those non-Catholics who are validly baptized, what this thread is about, that even traditionalist groups teach in their seminaries and to the faithful that non-Catholics in every false religion can be saved without being validly baptized, without desiring to be baptized, without desiring to be Catholics, without belief in Jesus Christ or the Holy Trinity, indeed, even despising all that is Catholic.
It would be debated just because of Protestants, Eastern Orthodox, and the like.
-
It is almost calumny to say that the modern trad groups especially the sedevacantist ones share the same ecclesiology as Vatican 2. The Vatican 2 ecclesiology is much more catholic and orthodox then Sanborn and Fellay etc!
I think much more people in the indult crowd actually believe in EENS than dogmatic sedevacantists.
You will find many people who own Bread of Life or something else in the indult or serious Novus ordo households than in so called trad groups. Just look at what happened with Michael Voris ---almost everyone on his channel supported his videos supporting the SBC.
The modern trad group leaders are complete heretics on EENS, there is no other way to put it.
-
It is almost calumny to say that the modern trad groups especially the sedevacantist ones share the same ecclesiology as Vatican 2. The Vatican 2 ecclesiology is much more catholic and orthodox then Sanborn and Fellay etc!
It seems rather consistent:
https://www.cathinfo.com/baptism-of-desire-and-feeneyism/will-the-real-catechism-of-pius-x-please-stand-up/msg663009/#msg663009
On page 74 of +ABL's book "Open Letter to Confused Catholics"., it reads:
"The doctrine of the Church also recognizes implicit baptism of desire. This consists in doing the will of God. God knows all men and He knows amongst Protestants, Muslim, Buddhists and in the whole of humanity there are men of good will. They receive the grace of baptism without knowing it, but in an effective way. In this they become part of the Church".
Dominus Iesus
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/docuмents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html (http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/docuмents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html)
12.
(. . .)
Furthermore, the salvific action of Jesus Christ, with and through his Spirit, extends beyond the visible boundaries of the Church to all humanity. Speaking of the paschal mystery, in which Christ even now associates the believer to himself in a living manner in the Spirit and gives him the hope of resurrection, the Council states: “All this holds true not only for Christians but also for all men of good will in whose hearts grace is active invisibly. For since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery”.37
(37) Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, 22.
-
This thread is not about those non-Catholics who are validly baptized
I think it is.
Both the Novus Ordo and the traditional Catholic groups have an ecclesiology that ranks a number of men (even if the latter thinks that number is rather small) from all religions as being united to the Church.
Does anyone else recall listening to a sermon at: traditionalcatholicsermons.org/wordpress/
and having an example used of a illiterate Eastern "Orthodox" peasant in good faith / invincible ignorance?
-
It is almost calumny to say that the modern trad groups especially the sedevacantist ones share the same ecclesiology as Vatican 2. The Vatican 2 ecclesiology is much more catholic and orthodox then Sanborn and Fellay etc!
I think much more people in the indult crowd actually believe in EENS than dogmatic sedevacantists.
You will find many people who own Bread of Life or something else in the indult or serious Novus ordo households than in so called trad groups. Just look at what happened with Michael Voris ---almost everyone on his channel supported his videos supporting the SBC.
The modern trad group leaders are complete heretics on EENS, there is no other way to put it.
Very good observation, I never thought of it that way, but you are right. All of the books and articles I see against the traditional belief of the absolute necessity of the sacrament of baptism for salvation, and EENS as it is written, are all SSPX and Sede's. Why is that? Why are they so hostile against people who will not accept their belief that "Muslim, Buddhists and in the whole of humanity there are men of good will. They receive the grace of baptism without knowing it" (and are thus saved).
I am told that some sede groups (Brooksville, FL ?) openly post in their chapels that no "Feeneyite heretics" will be given communion! That is really insane, to call oneself a traditionalist and at the same time banning people who refuse to believe the novelty of anybody can be saved without baptism. It is one thing to believe that novelty and keep it to yourself, it is another thing to openly teach it (a mortal sin?), and it is off the charts to actually throw people out who do not believe your novelty. They are insane!
-
I think it is.
Both the Novus Ordo and the traditional Catholic groups have an ecclesiology that ranks a number of men (even if the latter thinks that number is rather small) from all religions as being united to the Church.
Does anyone else recall listening to a sermon at: traditionalcatholicsermons.org/wordpress/
and having an example used of a illiterate Eastern "Orthodox" peasant in good faith / invincible ignorance?
You are right, except they always hide behind baptism of desire of the catechumen or a baptized Protestant that does a perfect act of contrition, and defend those positions ad-nauseum, while what they really believe is that Muslim, Buddhists and in the whole of humanity there are men of good will. They receive the grace of baptism without knowing it (and are saved)
That is why I said this is not about a baptized Protestant.
-
I think it is.
Both the Novus Ordo and the traditional Catholic groups have an ecclesiology that ranks a number of men (even if the latter thinks that number is rather small) from all religions as being united to the Church.
Does anyone else recall listening to a sermon at: traditionalcatholicsermons.org/wordpress/
and having an example used of a illiterate Eastern "Orthodox" peasant in good faith / invincible ignorance?
I’d need to listen to that, but I wouldn’t bring up said ignorant peasant in an invincible ignorance context.
Rather I’d say he’s Catholic, barring a culpable decision of schism. Which, as an illiterate peasant, he probably hasn’t made
-
It is almost calumny to say that the modern trad groups especially the sedevacantist ones share the same ecclesiology as Vatican 2. The Vatican 2 ecclesiology is much more catholic and orthodox then Sanborn and Fellay etc!
I think much more people in the indult crowd actually believe in EENS than dogmatic sedevacantists.
You will find many people who own Bread of Life or something else in the indult or serious Novus ordo households than in so called trad groups. Just look at what happened with Michael Voris ---almost everyone on his channel supported his videos supporting the SBC.
The modern trad group leaders are complete heretics on EENS, there is no other way to put it.
I’d support them, and this despite the fact I’d be thrown into the heretic crowd by you I think. For one thing, I’m not a perfectionist, and for another, I think EENS is both seriously neglected and important
-
Pope Gregory XVI - 1832
Summo Iugiter Studio, On Mixed Marriages
https://www.papalencyclicals.net/Greg16/g16summo.htm
2. Therefore, guided by the example of Our predecessors, We are grieved to hear reports from your dioceses which indicate that some of the people committed to your care freely encourage mixed marriages. Furthermore, they are promoting opinions contrary to the Catholic faith: namely, they dare to affirm that a Catholic may freely and legally contract marriage with a heterodox party, not only without asking for a dispensation (which must be obtained from the Apostolic See in each individual case), but also without agreeing to the necessary obligations, especially the duty to educate all the offspring in the Catholic religion. Indeed it has even come to the point that these same persons insist that mixed marriages ought to be approved when the heretical partner is a divorced person whose former spouse is still alive. To this end they issue serious threats of punishments in order to induce priests to announce mixed marriages in the churches and, afterwards, to defend the act by which these marriages were contracted or, at least, to grant the contracting parties what they call dimissory letters.
Finally some of these misguided people attempt to persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only in the Catholic religion, but that even heretics may attain eternal life.
-
Mother Angelica
There was a heresy at one time that you had to be Catholic, otherwise you didn't go to Heaven. That's not what the Church teaches. All people are saved by the merits of Jesus, the grace in the Church, but they don't have to be Catholic. We hope they're all Catholic, but many people are of different religions, no religion, they don't know. Nobody has told them about Jesus, so they're going to be judged only by what they know, what they've been told, and the graces they have, you see. You know what our dear Lord said: there are other people that we must save, and will enter the Kingdom.
At the video go to timestamp 48:20
Mother Angelica Live
ROAD TO EMMAUS
5/16/2000
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dWVboaTYRo
-
Compare what Mother Angelica stated:
There was a heresy at one time that you had to be Catholic, otherwise you didn't go to Heaven. That's not what the Church teaches. All people are saved by the merits of Jesus, the grace in the Church, but they don't have to be Catholic. We hope they're all Catholic, but many people are of different religions, no religion, they don't know. Nobody has told them about Jesus, so they're going to be judged only by what they know, what they've been told, and the graces they have, you see. You know what our dear Lord said: there are other people that we must save, and will enter the Kingdom.
https://www.cathinfo.com/baptism-of-desire-and-feeneyism/will-the-real-catechism-of-pius-x-please-stand-up/msg663033/#msg663033
St. Augustine and other great theologians applied St. John 10:16 to this very issue, emphasizing that Our Lord must bring the non-Catholics into the Church because they cannot be saved as they are.
And other sheep I have, that are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd.
Notice how Our Lord speaks, indicating that it is He Himself who must bring these non-Catholics into the Church. The reason why the Church doesn't allow anyone to baptize himself with water is to teach us that we cannot merit the grace of joining the Church. We are to recognize that we are dependent on God to provide a minister for us. Even in cases of emergency, a person is not allowed to baptize himself; the Church would rather have a Jєω or a Muslim be the one who baptizes, provided he have the right intention, than permit a man to baptize himself.
It is a DOGMA of the faith that no man can merit the initial grace of justification. The apostles of "implicit baptism of desire" do not understand any of this. They write as if it is a matter of sheer effort for a non-Catholic to join the Church. It is very difficult, they say, because observing the natural law is hard for fallen man, but some can do it, and if they do observe it, then they will somehow baptize themselves implicitly, and become invisible members of the Church. The very reason God does not allow any man to baptize himself with water is to prevent this Pelagian nonsense.
-
Mother Angelica
There was a heresy at one time that you had to be Catholic, otherwise you didn't go to Heaven
:facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:
This is where we've gotten, to denounce dogma as heresy and promote heresy as dogma. You have to give Satan some credit for pulling this one off.
-
Mother Angelica
At the video go to timestamp 48:20
Mother Angelica Live
ROAD TO EMMAUS
5/16/2000
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dWVboaTYRo
(https://i.ibb.co/Th5mysd/Angelica.png)
This is a screenshot from the video. For those who'd like to check the digit ratio.
-
Bishop Sanborn
Ecclesiology Debate: Bp. Donald Sanborn vs. Dr. Robert Fastiggi (2004)
In Vatican II we see this repeated, over and over again, that if you are in full communion it means that you are completely reconciled to the Roman Catholic Church, but at the same time, if you are in partial communion it means you have some things in common, somethings not in common.
Timestamp 4:54
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NigK6MhXs6Q
Frankenchurch Rises Again: Ratzinger on the Church
Rev. Anthony Cekada
http://www.fathercekada.com/2007/07/16/frankenchurch-rises-again-ratzinger-on-the-church/
According to Vatican II, John Paul II’s Code of Canon Law and Ratzinger’s Catechism of the Catholic Church, all those who have been baptized — Catholics, heretics, schismatics — are incorporated into the “People of God.” This endows them with “degrees of incorporation” into, degrees of “communion” with, or “elements” of, the Church of Christ, which work out as follows:
(1) Catholics: Full incorporation or communion, or all elements of the Church of Christ.
(2) Schismatics and heretics: Partial incorporation or communion, or some elements of the Church of Christ.
Having all elements of the Church is best, but having just some of them is pretty good too.
If you are in the second category and “partially incorporated,” you have “invisible bonds of communion” that somehow attach you to the Church of Christ.
That is why I call it “Frankenchurch.” The Church is not an integral entity, but a monster stitched together with visible and invisible bonds, full and partial, from disparate parts — Catholics, heretics and schismatics.
www.stdominicchapel.com/public_html/content/docuмents/ecclesiology.pdf
Commentary:
Page 5
Those who hold even one doctrine at variance with the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church are to be considered alien to the Church. Therefore they are not in “partial communion.”
The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc. would say a Protestant in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire. He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Protestant publicly espouses his Protestant religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?
The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc. would say an Eastern "Orthodox" in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire. He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Eastern "Orthodox" publicly espouses his Eastern "Orthodox" religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?
The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc. would say a Muslim in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire. He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Muslim publicly espouses his Islamic religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?
The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc. would say a Jєω in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire. He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Jєω publicly espouses his тαℓмυdic religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?
The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc. would say a Buddhist in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire. He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Buddhist publicly espouses his Buddhist religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?
The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc. would say a Hindu in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire. He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Hindu publicly espouses his Brahman religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?
-
Fourth Lateran Council: 1215
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecuм12-2.htm (http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecuм12-2.htm)
Constitutions
1. Confession of Faith
(. . .)
There is indeed one universal church of the faithful, outside of which nobody at all is saved. . .
Mystici Corporis
The Mystical Body of Christ, the Church
Pope Pius XII - 1943
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12mysti.htm (http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12mysti.htm)
10.
(. . .)
Indeed no true and perfect human society can be conceived which is not governed by some supreme authority. Christ therefore must have given to His Church a supreme authority to which all Christians must render obedience. For this reason, as the unity of the faith is of necessity required for the unity of the church, inasmuch as it is the body of the faithful, so also for this same unity, inasmuch as the Church is a divinely constituted society, unity of government, which effects and involves unity of communion, is necessary jure divino. “The unity of the Church is manifested in the mutual connection or communication of its members, and likewise in the relation of all the members of the Church to one head” (St. Thomas, 2a 2ae, 9, xxxix., a. I). From this it is easy to see that men can fall away from the unity of the Church by schism, as well as by heresy. “We think that this difference exists between heresy and schism” (writes St. Jerome): “heresy has no perfect dogmatic teaching, whereas schism, through some Episcopal dissent, also separates from the Church” (S. Hieronymus, Comment. in Epist. ad Titum, cap. iii., v. 1011). In which judgment St. John Chrysostom concurs: “I say and protest (he writes) that it is as wrong to divide the Church as to fall into heresy” (Hom. xi., in Epist. ad Ephes., n. 5). Wherefore as no heresy can ever be justifiable, so in like manner there can be no justification for schism. “There is nothing more grievous than the sacrilege of schism….there can be no just necessity for destroying the unity of the Church” (S. Augustinus, Contra Epistolam Parmeniani, lib. ii., cap. ii., n. 25).
(. . .)
59. What We have said concerning the “mystical Head” would indeed be incomplete if We were not at least briefly to touch on this saying of the same Apostle: “Christ is the Head of the Church: he is the Savior of his Body.” For in these words we have the final reason why the Body of the Church is given the name of Christ, namely, that Christ is the Divine Savior of this Body. The Samaritans were right in proclaiming Him “Savior of the world”; for indeed He most certainly is to be called the “Savior of all men,” even though we must add with Paul: “especially of the faithful, since, before all others, He has purchased with His Blood His members who constitute the Church.
St. Cyril
Catechetical Lecture 5
Of Faith
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/310105.htm (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/310105.htm)
1. How great a dignity the Lord bestows on you in transferring you from the order of Catechumens to that of the Faithful, the Apostle Paul shows, when he affirms, God is faithful, by Whom you were called into the fellowship of His Son Jesus Christ. 1 Corinthians 1:9 For since God is called Faithful, thou also in receiving this title receive a great dignity. For as God is called Good, and Just, and Almighty, and Maker of the Universe, so is He also called Faithful. Consider therefore to what a dignity you are rising, seeing you are to become partaker of a title of God.
St. John Chrysostom
Homily 25 on the Gospel of John
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/240125.htm (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/240125.htm)
3.
(. . .)
What advantages it to be bound by the ties of earthly family, if we are not joined by those of the spiritual? What profits nearness of kin on earth, if we are to be strangers in heaven? For the Catechumen is a stranger to the Faithful. He has not the same Head, he has not the same Father, he has not the same City, nor Food, nor Raiment, nor Table, nor House, but all are different; all are on earth to the former, to the latter all are in heaven. One has Christ for his King; the other, sin and the devil; the food of one is Christ, of the other, that meat which decays and perishes; one has worms' work for his raiment, the other the Lord of angels; heaven is the city of one, earth of the other. Since then we have nothing in common, in what, tell me, shall we hold communion? Did we remove the same pangs, did we come forth from the same womb? This has nothing to do with that most perfect relationship. Let us then give diligence that we may become citizens of the city which is above. How long do we tarry over the border, when we ought to reclaim our ancient country? We risk no common danger; for if it should come to pass, (which God forbid!) that through the sudden arrival of death we depart hence uninitiated, though we have ten thousand virtues, our portion will be no other than hell, and the venomous worm, and fire unquenchable, and bonds indissoluble.
St. Leo the Great
Sermon 26
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/360326.htm (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/360326.htm)
II. Christians are essentially participators in the nativity of Christ
Although, therefore, that infancy, which the majesty of God's Son did not disdain, reached mature manhood by the growth of years and, when the triumph of His passion and resurrection was completed, all the actions of humility which were undertaken for us ceased, yet today's festival renews for us the holy childhood of Jesus born of the Virgin Mary: and in adoring the birth of our Saviour, we find we are celebrating the commencement of our own life. For the birth of Christ is the source of life for Christian folk, and the birthday of the Head is the birthday of the body. Although every individual that is called has his own order, and all the sons of the Church are separated from one another by intervals of time, yet as the entire body of the faithful being born in the font of baptism is crucified with Christ in His passion, raised again in His resurrection, and placed at the Father's right hand in His ascension, so with Him are they born in this nativity. For any believer in whatever part of the world that is re-born in Christ, quits the old paths of his original nature and passes into a new man by being re-born; and no longer is he reckoned of his earthly father's stock but among the seed of the Saviour, Who became the Son of man in order that we might have the power to be the sons of God.
St. Hilary of Poitiers
On the Trinity (Book VIII)
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/index.html (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/index.html)
7. For as to those whose soul and heart were one, I ask whether they were one through faith in God? Yes, assuredly, through faith, for through this the soul and heart of all were one. Again I ask, is the faith one or is there a second faith? One undoubtedly, and that on the authority of the Apostle himself, who proclaims one faith even as one Lord, and one baptism, and one hope, and one God. Ephesians 4:4-5 If then it is through faith, that is, through the nature of one faith, that all are one, how is it that you do not understand a natural unity in the case of those who through the nature of one faith are one? For all were born again to innocence, to immortality, to the knowledge of God, to the faith of hope. And if these things cannot differ within themselves because there is both one hope and one God, as also there is one Lord and one baptism of regeneration; if these things are one rather by agreement than by nature, ascribe a unity of will to those also who have been born again into them. If, however, they have been begotten again into the nature of one life and eternity, then, inasmuch as their soul and heart are one, the unity of will fails to account for their case who are one by regeneration into the same nature.
8. These are not our own conjectures which we offer, nor do we falsely put together any of these things in order to deceive the ears of our hearers by perverting the meaning of words; but holding fast the form of sound teaching we know and preach the things which are true. For the Apostle shows that this unity of the faithful arises from the nature of the sacraments when he writes to the Galatians, For as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ. There is neither Jєω nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Galatians 3:27-28 That these are one amid so great diversities of race, condition, sex — is it from an agreement of will or from the unity of the sacrament, since these have one baptism and have all put on one Christ? What, therefore, will a concord of minds avail here when they are one in that they have put on one Christ through the nature of one baptism?
St. Thomas Aquinas
Summa Thelogica
First Part
Question 21.
Article 1.
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/5021.htm#article1 (http://www.newadvent.org/summa/5021.htm#article1)'
I answer that, When a man enters the Church by Baptism, he is admitted to two things, viz. the body of the faithful and the participation of the sacraments: and this latter presupposes the former, since the faithful are united together in the participation of the sacraments.
St. Ambrose
On Baptism: A Catechetical Instruction
http://www.lectionarycentral.com/trinity12/Ambrose.html (http://www.lectionarycentral.com/trinity12/Ambrose.html)
1.
(. . .)
I shall now begin to instruct you on the sacrament you have received; of whose nature it was not fitting to speak to you before this: for in the Christian what comes first is faith. And at Rome for this reason those who have been baptized are called the faithful (fideles).
-
https://www.cathinfo.com/baptism-of-desire-and-feeneyism/vatican-ii-ecclesiology-and-cmri-sspx-sspv-etc/msg663088/#msg663088
Bishop Sanborn, what say you?
The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc. would say a Protestant in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire. He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Protestant publicly espouses his Protestant religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?
The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc. would say an Eastern "Orthodox" in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire. He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Eastern "Orthodox" publicly espouses his Eastern "Orthodox" religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?
The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc. would say a Muslim in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire. He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Muslim publicly espouses his Islamic religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?
The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc. would say a Jєω in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire. He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Jєω publicly espouses his тαℓмυdic religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?
The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc. would say a Buddhist in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire. He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Buddhist publicly espouses his Buddhist religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?
The CMRI, SSPX, SSPV, etc. would say a Hindu in invincible ignorance, if he be in good faith, would be united to the Church by desire. He is said to have supernatural faith, hope, and charity, he is united to the Catholic Church, but this Hindu publicly espouses his Brahman religion. Is it not fair to say that he has some things in common, somethings not in common with Catholics?
-
St. Thomas Aquinas
Quaestiones disputatae de veritate
Question Fourteen: Faith
ARTICLE XI: In the eleventh article we ask: Is it necessary to believe explicitly?
https://dhspriory.org/thomas/english/QDdeVer14.htm#11
Answers to Difficulties
1. Granted that everyone is bound to believe something explicitly, no untenable conclusion follows even if someone is brought up in the forest or among wild beasts. For it pertains to divine providence to furnish everyone with what is necessary for salvation, provided that on his part there is no hindrance. Thus, if someone so brought up followed the direction of natural reason in seeking good and avoiding evil, we must most certainly hold that God would either reveal to him through internal inspiration what had to be believed, or would send some preacher of the faith to him as he sent Peter to Cornelius (Acts 10:20).
Pope Pius XI - 1928
Mortalium Animos
On Religious Unity
https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius11/p11morta.htm
13.
(. . .)
We desire that Our children should also know, not only those who belong to the Catholic community, but also those who are separated from Us: if these latter humbly beg light from heaven, there is no doubt but that they will recognize the one true Church of Jesus Christ and will, at last, enter it, being united with us in perfect charity.
-
St. Thomas Aquinas
Quaestiones disputatae de veritate
Question Fourteen: Faith
ARTICLE XI: In the eleventh article we ask: Is it necessary to believe explicitly?
https://dhspriory.org/thomas/english/QDdeVer14.htm#11
Pope Pius XI - 1928
Mortalium Animos
On Religious Unity
https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius11/p11morta.htm
The quote from St Aquinas should be the end of every debate about invincible ignorance. The Latin church since 1900 or so has been essentially thomist in its philosophy and yet we see a complete disregard for his teachings of the salvation of 'wild beasts'. The sspx and sedevacantist seminaries primary source of its teachings is St Aquinas and they have seemed to skip over this page. Theological discussion of Baptism of Desire for catechumens is fine,but the fact that the so called "remnant" believes utter disgusting crap-like that a Jєω who rejects Christ as he dies (cmri,sanborn) is mind boggling!
The "remnant" is not the traditional Catholic movement, it is the actual Catholics within it, who are scarce. Just as the fewness of the saved was taught at times when the church was at its height! Very few people were saved that actually had the true faith thrown in their face.
Just look what the people in traditional catholic churches do. Gross immodesty, television and video games, immoral professions, a complete lack of history and knowledge of church teachings.
Just as 80% of traditional Catholics heretically believe that non Catholics can be saved, 80% are immodest from top down. I am not sure what percentage people are watching modern television and video games, but from things I have seen and heard first hand, it is quite a lot. And many traditional Catholics I know are involved with immoral professions.
But But Piux IX taught it infallibly! -- wrong and wrong.
The thing about these so called traditionalists is that they can't be wrong or else everything the traditional Catholics have built over the last 50 years has been in vain, but it has been.
Is the church being restored? No not at all, more heretical teachings come every day from the hierarchy. Is the traditional catholic movement growing? Well the indult is, and the sspx grows a bit every year but the old independent priests are almost all gone, and the sedevacantist groups are stagnant. Only a few new sedes are ordained throughout the entire world in a given year, some years none. The liberal sspx ordains around 20-30 a year. The indult maybe 50+, the resistance 0-2 a year.
Why is that? Because the vast majority and every leader of every group does not believe in the necessity of the catholic church for salvation. How did the apostles and the early saints convert entire cities or countries? Because they believed it was convert or everlasting hell fire.
-
https://www.cathinfo.com/baptism-of-desire-and-feeneyism/'believers'-in-baptism-of-desire-and-being-'gαy'/msg663282/#msg663282
Since no one could deny the dogma ... since it has been defined explicitly several times in no uncertain terms ... that there can be no salvation outside the Church, the only way to claim that pagans could be saved was to find a way to include them in the Church and therefore effectively redefine the Church. As an end-around to EENS, then, since you can't say there's salvation outside the Church, they went and redefined the criteria by which people could be inside the Church ... completely overturning Tridentine ecclesiology which dogmatically taught that the Church is a visible society with external visible criteria for membership.
See what that does to Catholic ecclesiology? It turns it into the subsistence ecclesiology of Vatican II, that not only do you have a visible core of Catholics who are in the Church, but you also have these satellite members who although materially and visibly separated from this subsistent core, are nevertheless within the Church. So the fullness of belonging to the Church now admits of degrees. We have the notion of "separated brethren" who are formally united to us while materially divided.
ALL OF VATICAN II flows directly from this new ecclesiology developed in order to undermine EENS. EENS is absolutely, without a doubt, the core theological issue of this day ... even though some ... like Matthew here on CI ... claim that it doesn't matter. Nonsense. Nothing matters more. Without this new ecclesiology built on EENS-denial, there is no Vatican II crisis. Period. Yet so few Traditional Catholics understand this. They continue to condemn Vatican II ecclesiology on one side of their mouth, but then promote it on the other without even knowing it.
-
Council of Chalcedon – 451 A.D.
The letter of Pope Leo to Flavian, bishop of Constantinople, about Eutyches
https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecuм04.htm
(. . .)
He had no idea how he ought to think about the incarnation of the Word of God; and he had no desire to acquire the light of understanding by working through the length and breadth of the holy scriptures. So at least he should have listened carefully and accepted the common and undivided creed by which the whole body of the faithful confess that they believe in
God the Father almighty and in
Jesus Christ his only Son, our Lord,
who was born of the holy Spirit and the virgin Mary.
-
https://www.cathinfo.com/baptism-of-desire-and-feeneyism/lot's-quote-spamming/msg559068/#msg559068
On the Progression of BoD/BoB
Those early Church Fathers who believed in BoB/BoD ONLY EVER APPLIED the notion to formal CATECHUMENS. They never entertained the possibility that it could apply to non-Christians (Catechumens were considered Christians but not part of "the faithful"). For the first SIXTEEN HUNDRED YEARS of Church History no Catholic EVER disputed the doctrine that explicit faith in Jesus Christ and the Holy Trinity are necessary for salvation. Even the Athanasian Creed teaches this.
But sometime about the year 1600 a handful of Jesuits started dabbling with the notion that people could have supernatural faith by explicitly believing only in the existence of God as a rewarder/punisher ... a novelty.
With this new heretical tool in hand, heretical because it violates a dogmatic teaching of the Ordinary Universal Magisterium undisputed for 1600 years, the Jesuits combined this with the notion of an "implicit" Baptism of desire contained in the generic feeling of wanting to do whatever God wants of them. So in this way, the Jesuits and their followers were able to extend salvation to all manner of non-Catholic and even infidel ... so long as they had some belief in God. See how far we had come from the one or two Church Fathers who believed that formal Catechumens who had officially joined the Church as "Christians" through a formal public ceremony and who publicly professed belief in the true faith and who basically not only desired Baptism but even had it scheduled "on their calendar" ... to now any well-meaning infidel who doesn't even believe in Christ, never heard of Baptism, but just sincerely wants to do the will of some generic deity.
This upended and destroyed Tridentine Catholic ecclesiology which emphasized that the Church is a visible society to which only those belong who publicly profess the Catholic faith.
Now the Church could include all these people only invisibly united to it ... heretics, infidels, etc.
But since there's no salvation outside the Church (as defined several times by the Church), you have to say that heretics, infidels, etc. who are saved must have been inside the Church during their lives.
THIS IS PRECISELY THE "SUBSISTENCE" ECCLESIOLOGY AND SUBJECTIVIST SOTERIOLOGY TAUGHT BY VATICAN II and is the fundamental error on which ALL the Vatican II errors rest. Yet these blithering idiot sedevacantists who accuse V2 and the V2 Popes of "heresy" for adopting this ecclesiology are among the most vocal proponents of the EXACT SAME ECCLESIOLOGY. In so doing, they condemn themselves and they undermine any valid reason for resisting Vatican II. Consequently, if I believed in this ecclesiology/soteriology as promoted by the Cushingite BoDers, I would have to accept Vatican II and recant my schism from the Catholic Church.
-
Thanks for these great quotes, trad123.
One of the dogmatic EENS definitions explicitly says that there is "no salvation outside the Church of the faithful."
Now, even Msgr. Fenton admits that the faithful is a specific theological term which has always excluded catechumens.
How does he get around this? He claims that a catechumen could be IN the Church of the faithful without actually being one OF the faithful. That's an incredible stretch. Msgr. Fenton admits much of the Church Tradition about this subject, and invents what I call the "undigested hamburger" ecclesiology. According to him, one can be IN the body without being PART of the body. That's his end-around to get those outside the Church saved. So ... just like some undigested food in the stomach that has yet to be assimilated into the body, and yet happens to be inside of it.