Baptism of Desire (for catechumens) was a theological speculation emerged to teaching in modern times. The discussion is not about Baptism of Desire but about the Salvation of non-Catholics.  This idea that the "Soul of the Church" can be composed of non Catholics not only undermines the dogma of "No salvation Outside the Church" but the Incarnation itself. The whole point of the Incarnation is that the Word assumed human flesh in order to redeem us from our sins as Man, by dying on the Cross, and in order to institute a visible society with a visible head and visible sacraments, in which society every man must be visibly incorporated if he wishes to be saved.

If the Soul of the Church are the non Catholics and can be saved as CMRI claims, then it follows that:

- One can be saved outside the Church.

- One can be saved without having the Catholic Faith.

- Baptism is not necessary for salvation.

- To confess the supremacy and infallibility of the Roman Church and of the - Roman Pontiff is not necessary for salvation.

- One can be saved without submitting personally to the authority of the Roman Pontiff.

- Ignorance of Christ and His Church excuses one from all fault and confers justification and salvation.

- One can be saved who dies ignorant of Christ and His Church.

- One can be saved who dies hating Christ and His Church.

- God, of His Supreme Goodness and Mercy, would not permit anyone to be punished eternally unless he had incurred the guilt of voluntary sin.

- A man is sure of his salvation once he is justified.

- One can be saved by merely an implicit desire for Baptism.

- There are two Churches, the one visible, the other invisible.

- There are two kinds of membership in the Church.

- Membership in the Church can be invisible or even unconscious.

- To know and love the Blessed Virgin is not necessary for salvation.

But such are the results of Modern Liberalism.

Quote from: Ladislaus

Quote from: Clemens Maria

But theologians have always made a distinction between the visible members of the Church and those non-members of the Church who are nevertheless united to Her by desire and longing.

Uhm, no, they haven't "ALWAYS" made this distinction.  In fact it was entirely uneard-of until well after the 13th century or so.  And even the ones who did were not promoting Pelagianism like the vast majority of you are.

St Ambrose (d. 397).  So the St. Ambrose was Pelagian?  And the Church has been wrong for 1600+ years?

Of course st. Ambrose was not a pelagian. Here is his actual teaching on Baptism from his book, De Mysteriis,

“One is the Baptism which the Church administers: the Baptism of water and the Holy Ghost, with which catechumens need to be baptized . . . Nor does the mystery of regeneration exist at all without water, for ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom.’ Now, even the catechumen believes in the cross of the Lord Jesus, with which he also signs himself; but, unless he be baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, he cannot receive remission of his sins nor the gift of spiritual grace.” (4,4: 4,20 Patrologia Latina, 16, 394)

You're not positing "material errors" at all; yes, there's such a thing as material error, but you don't know what it is and you aren't talking about these.

Quote from: Cantarella

Quote from: Nado

Every CMRI priest professes that everyone who is now in heaven or purgatory got there with the divine virtue of faith and the divine virtue of charity (sanctifying grace).

Yes, but they happen to believe that these virtues could be actually found in non-Catholics and the invincible ignorant, forgetting that it is dogma that the Catholic Faith is the foundation of all justification. The Church teaches that outside the Church no sinner can attain sanctifying grace, which is true, since outside the Catholic Church there is no remission of sins (Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, 1302, ex cathedra).

Quote

Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302, ex cathedra: “With Faith urging us we are forced to believe and to hold the one, holy, Catholic Church and that, apostolic, and we firmly believe and simply confess this Church outside of which there is no salvation NOR REMISSION OF SIN…”

Of course you are right. But you cannot seem to make the distinction of what happens when a person first converts.

You do know that when a person converts, it is first in the heart and will, and some time can go buy before they approach a Catholic about joining the Church?

That is a catechumen. That is not the discussion here.

The CMRI error that must be resisted is the novel concept of an exceptional way of salvation: through "invincible ignorance" while the person is in a "false religion". This objective error was spread in the Catholic Church and carried over Vatican II. It is the main basis for liberalism and dissent in the Church.

Ask any CMRI if it would be possible for a Jew, a Muslim, or hindu, to be saved without converting and totally ignorant of the Catholic Faith. All say yes, without exception.

I posted the entire article here: http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=34921

Please identify exactly what parts of the article you find objectionable.  Objecting to the "Soul of the Church" terminology isn't going to gain you any converts since that exact terminology is also used in the Baltimore Catechism and in The Pius X Catechism which are approved catechisms of the Catholic Church.  Objecting to that terminology will just make you look like a dissenter.

Cantarella, I think it would be best if you stick to a criticism of this article because this article can be assumed to be an exposition of the topic in question which is agreeable to the CMRI.  But if you insist on attacking CMRI clergy, in justice you should be specific about what you heard said, where and when it was said and by whom.  Otherwise, your criticism amounts to nothing more than a gossip-based calumny.  If you do post specifics, I will attempt to bring it to the attention of the CMRI clergy and we will see if they agree with your accusations or not.

Many thanks for the text. It was hard to copy from Myrna's docuмent image.

Here are the objections with the corresponding annotations (and comments) from the Infallible Magisterium:

1) First, let's start for the title:

THE SALVATION OF THOSE OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

This is equivalent to say:

"The Original Sin of Our Lady"

It is a clear denial right there of the thrice infallibly defined dogma of "THERE IS NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CHURCH"

"There is only one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one at all can be saved." (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215)

"We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff." (Pope Boniface VIII, in the bull, Unam Sanctam, 1302)

"The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes, and teaches, that none of those who are not within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but Jews, heretics and schismatics, can ever be partakers of eternal life, but are to go into the eternal fire 'prepared for the devil, and his angels' (Mt. 25:41)., unless before the close of their lives they shall have entered into that Church; also that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is such that the Church's sacraments avail only those abiding in that Church, and that fasts, almsdeeds, and other works of piety which play their part in the Christian combat are in her alone productive of eternal rewards; moreover, that no one, no matter what alms he may have given, not even if he were to shed his blood for Christ's sake, can be saved unless he abide in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." (Mansi, Concilia, xxxi, 1739; Pope Eugene IV, in the bull, Cantate Domino, 1441).


2)  

In the face of this, must one believe that everyone,
 without exception, who does not OFFICIALLY belong to the Church
 by means of the reception of Baptism and the public profession
 of the Catholic faith, is damned?  Not at all.  

Council of Trent, Canons of Baptism (Canon 2)

If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.


3)

 THE EXTRAORDINARY MANNER ...for salvation

     If the Church teaches that the sacraments instituted by
 the Son of God made man oblige the Father to give His graces to
 whomsoever validly receives them, she has never taught that His
 generosity is restricted to this methodology.  

Council of Trent, Canons of Baptism, Canon 5:

If anyone says that Baptism of optional, that is not necessary for salvation, let it be anathema.

Session 7, Canon 4 of the Sacraments in General from the Decree Concerning the Sacraments:

If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation but are superfluous, and that without them or without the desire of them men obtain from God through faith alone the grace of justification, though all are not necessary for each one, let him be anathema.


4)

It is then clear that God, who has promised to give His graces through these ordinary means of the sacraments, can also give them in an extraordinary manner.  Holy Scripture provides us with numerous examples of this.  Thus, Saint Dismas, the good thief, received the grace  of regeneration without any sacrament, and this with such efficacy that Our Lord said to him, "This very day you will be with me in Paradise" (Luke XXIII:43).

The Good Thief died before the foundation of the Catholic Church at Pentecost, and therefore before the sacrament of Baptism became obligatory. They died under the Old Law. After Christ came, he established the New Law for the salvation of humankind which was fulfilled after He died for our sins. In the Old Testament two things were required for "salvation": the strict fulfillment of the commandments and the sincere belief on the Messiah to come.  The Good Thief showed perfect contrition and child-like faith in the Savior before he died, therefore he was saved.


5)

These examples show with a certitude which cannot be
 denied that it is possible to belong to the Soul of the Church
 without belonging to her Body, and that God can bestow His
 graces in an extraordinary manner which is independent of the
 sacraments.

Again,
 Session 7, Canon 4 of the Sacraments in General from the Decree Concerning the Sacraments:

If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation but are superfluous, and that without them or without the desire of them men obtain from God through faith alone the grace of justification, though all are not necessary for each one, let him be anathema.

Session 7, Canons 2 & 5 of the Canons on Baptism from the Decree Concerning the Sacraments:

Can. 5. If anyone says that baptism is optional , that is, not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema.

Can. 2. If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ: “Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost,” let him be anathema.


6)

With regard to these latter and all those who deny the
 mysteries of God, it is necessary to make the following point.
 If it is possible that non-Catholics can belong to the Soul of
 the Church while in good faith knowing nothing of the divine
 Mysteries, this is absolutely impossible for those who
 blaspheme against them.

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra said:

“Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.”

Pius XI said:
For since the mystical body of Christ, in the same manner as His physical body, is one, compacted and fitly joined together, it were foolish and out of place to say that the mystical body is made up of members which are disunited and scattered abroad:whosoever therefore is not united with the body is no member of it, neither is he in communion with Christ its head.


7)

INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE

This is the error in which those who without any fault on
 their part find themselves.  It presumes good faith.  It can be
 met with among those to whom the true religion has never been
 presented, and among those to whom it has been presented and to
 whom, despite this, it does not appear to be the truth.  Such
 is to be found in parts of the world which are completely
 adherent to the schismatic churches or some other cult, such as
 Islam, Judaism, Protestantism, etc.  This ignorance excuses
 those involved of all culpability.

The Invincibly Ignorant is damned at least for the guilt of Original Sin. They are justly deprived of the only means of salvation, which is membership in the Holy Catholic Church (visibly, explicitly,....). They have neither innocence nor excuse in this matter. Their ignorance of the Divine Faith is a punishment for the original sin. It is the will of God, and it suffices for damnation.

The Roman Catholic Church infallibly defined at the ecuмenical councils of Lyons and Florence, that the guilt of original sin suffices for damnation in hell.


8.

If God helps non-Catholics to save their souls outside of
 the norms established by His Son, it is because He would "have
 all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth"
 (I Tim. II:4).  This desire induces the Father to continuously
 draw souls (John VI:44) that His Son chooses (John XV:16).  In
 order to enlighten them, He normally uses the ministers of His
 Church.  But this habitual disposition in no way hinders Him
 from drawing some souls directly and without any minister
 whatsoever, and regardless of the situation in which they find
 themselves.  God, who wishes the salvation of every soul,
 provides every soul with the necessary graces.

A human being that is properly and sincerely disposed will receive the necessary Sacrament of Baptism, just the way Our Lord instituted it, before he dies. God can make it possible for a person that truly seeks and asks salvation. God will ensure that his elect gets baptized.

Council Of Trent, on Justification (Chapter 11)

God does not command impossibilities, but by commanding admonishes you both to do what you can do, pray for what you cannot do, and He assists you that you may be able. For God does not forsake those who have once been justified by His grace, unless He be first forsaken by them.

And

If anyone shall say that the commandments of God are, even for a man who is justified, impossible to observe; let him be anathema (Canon18)

God can see into the souls of people, and if He finds unworthy dispositions, then He could very well keep that person from receiving Baptism. "For the lord searches all hearts, and understands all the thoughts of minds. If you seek Him, you shall find Him, but if you forsake Him, He will cast you off forever" (Chronicles 28:9).


9.

It is also to HIS Church that Jesus confided the seven
 sacraments; non-Catholics are deprived of this, and this
 deprivation can only make their perseverance in the path of
 salvation more precarious.

Makes salvation impossible, given that no one can enter Heaven with Original Sin which is remitted only though the Sacrament of Baptism.

Council of Lyons:
 "The souls of those who die in mortal sin or with original sin only, however, immediately descend to Hell, yet to be punished with different punishments"

 Council of Florence:
 " It is likewise defined that the souls of those who depart in actual mortal sin or in original sin only, descend immediately into Hell but to undergo punishments of different kinds".

 Pope Innocent III:
 " The punishment of original sin is the loss of the vision of God; the punishment for actual sin is the torments of everlasting Hell".

Now the Feeneyites have turned this into a Feeneyism thread!

Time to threaten them with your power to call upon Matthew and have them banned. :rolleyes:

Now the Feeneyites have turned this into a Feeneyism thread!

No. Just the response for this request:

I posted the entire article here: http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=34921

 Please identify exactly what parts of the article you find objectionable.  Objecting to the "Soul of the Church" terminology isn't going to gain you any converts since that exact terminology is also used in the Baltimore Catechism and in The Pius X Catechism which are approved catechisms of the Catholic Church.  Objecting to that terminology will just make you look like a dissenter.

 Cantarella, I think it would be best if you stick to a criticism of this article because this article can be assumed to be an exposition of the topic in question which is agreeable to the CMRI.  But if you insist on attacking CMRI clergy, in justice you should be specific about what you heard said, where and when it was said and by whom.  Otherwise, your criticism amounts to nothing more than a gossip-based calumny.  If you do post specifics, I will attempt to bring it to the attention of the CMRI clergy and we will see if they agree with your accusations or not.

Nothing to do with "Fenneyism", but the heretical CMRI stance on "Salvation Outside the Church", via NO SACRAMENTS AT ALL. But of course, Nado & Mabel would not know this, since they do not even comprehend what "Feeneyism" consist of, to begin with. In the mean time, and in lack of a better argument, they must content themselves with posting silly interruptions.