Author Topic: Patrick Henry Omlor (Read 116285 times)

Persto · « **Reply #170 on:** August 21, 2026, 05:06:14 PM »

https://archive.org/stream/huttongibson_robberchurch_book/huttongibson_robberchurch_book_djvu.txt
The Robber Church - Part 3

"Outside" And "Within"
We have thus far studied the meanings of "the Church" and "salvation" in the
divinely revealed dogma: "Outside the Church there is no salvation." It now
remains to examine carefully the precise meaning, as the Church understands it,
of the word "outside," The opposite of "outside" is "within." In those doctrinal
pronouncements of the Church that we have quoted thus far, it can be seen that
either the word "outside" or the word "within" is used in speaking of this dogma.

As a start, let it be said (without explanation at this time) that being "within" the
Church cannot be equated with being a member of the Church. In order to
understand this it is imperative that we study and define precisely what
constitutes actual membership in the Catholic Church. Also let us see that the
Roman Catholic Church is the Mystical Body of Christ; that is these two
expressions can be equated.

"If We would define and describe this true Church of Jesus Christ - which is the
One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, Roman Church - we shall find no expression more
noble, more sublime or more divine than the phrase which calls it 'the Mystical
Body of Jesus Christ 1 ." (Pius XII, encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi, June 29,
1943).

"Some say they are not bound by the doctrine, explained in Our Encyclical Letter
of a few years ago, and based on the sources of revelation, which teaches that
the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the
same thing" (Pius XII, encyclical Humani Generis, Aug. 12, 1950, emphasis
added).

Who are the "members" of the Church, Christ's Mystical Body? "To be really
( reapse ) included as members of the Church," continues the same Pius, "are
only those who have been baptized AND profess the true faith AND who have
not unhappily withdrawn from Body-unity or for grave faults have been excluded
by legitimate authority. . . . And so, if a man refuse to hear the Church, let him be
considered - so the Lord commands - as a heathen and a publican. It follows
that those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in one body
such as this; and cannot be living the life of its one divine Spirit" For not every
sin," continues Pius XII in Mystici Corporis Christi, "however grave and enormous
it be, is such as to sever a man automatically from the Body of the Church, as
does schism, or heresy, or apostasy" (emphasis added throughout).

From the above it should be amply clear at this point what is required to be an
actual member of the Church, a member of Christ's Mystical Body. Contrast this
with the teaching of Vatican II in its "Decree on Ecuмenism": "For men who
believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the
Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect. . . . But in spite of
them [i.e., certain 'obstacles' to 'unity'] it remains true that all who have been
justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ's body, and have a right to be
called Christian, and so are correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the
Catholic Church" {The Sixteen Docuмents of Vatican 1 1, official N.C.W.C.
translation, published by the Daughters of St. Paul, P-197 ). A little later we will
be dissecting this manifest contradiction of the above stated teaching of Pope
Pius Xll's Mystici Corporis.

Now, is it possible for a non-member of the Church to be "within" the Church?

The answer is in the affirmative. A catechumen, for example, is a person who
explicitly desires to become an actual member of the Church. Therefore, while
still a catechumen he obviously is not yet an actual member, or else his "explicit
desire" to become a member would be a contradiction in terms. But, even
though he is a non-member, a catechumen may possibly already be "within" the
Church (this does not mean that all catechumen are already within the Church, of
course). If a catechumen is already within the Church, such a one may attain
eternal salvation if he dies before becoming an actual member. The Church has
accepted as true Catholic doctrine the teaching of St. Ambrose in his sermon De
obitu Valentinianf.

"But I hear that you are sorrowing because he [the Emperor Valentinian II]
did not receive the rites of baptism. Tell me, what else is there in us but
will, but petition? Now, quite recently it was his intention to be baptized
before coming into Italy. He let it be known that he wanted to be baptized
by me very shortly, and it was for that reason, above all others, that he
decided to have me sent for. Does he not, then, have the grace he
desired? Does he not have what he prayed for? Surely, because he
prayed for it, he has received it. Hence it is that 'the soul of the just man
will be at rest, whatever kind of death may overtake him'."

"St. Ambrose was speaking of an instance in which a man who had been
a catechumen had died before he had an opportunity to receive the
sacrament of baptism. He had passed from this life, then, as a non-
member of the ecclesia fidelium. At the moment of his death he was not
one of the fideles. Yet, according to St. Ambrose, this man had died a
good death. He had prayed for the grace of baptism, and God had given
him this answer to his prayer. He had passed from this life 'within' rather
than 'outside' the Church of the faithful. He had been able to attain eternal
salvation." (Fenton, op. cit., P. 11 ).

Also the Church teaches that a non-member can be saved as being "within" the
Church, if he sheds his blood for Christ before he is able to be actually baptized;
and this presupposes that he has at least the implicit desire to enter the Church.
Let us quote Monsignor Fenton again:

"Thus the Fathers of the Fourth Lateran Council and all the other
churchmen who have drawn up authoritative statements of the Church's
teaching on the necessity of the Church for the attainment of eternal
salvation were well aware of what St. Augustine had taught about men
who suffered martyrdom for the sake of Christ before having had the
opportunity to receive the sacrament of baptism. In his De civitate Dei, St.
Augustine taught that 'whosoever dies for Christ, not having received the
laver of regeneration, has this avail him for the forgiveness of sins as
much as if these sins had been forgiven in the sacred font of baptism.'

Since the forgiveness of mortal or original sin is accomplished only in the
infusion of the life of sanctifying grace, the person whose sins are forgiven
is in the state of grace. If such a person dies in the state of grace, he will
inevitably attain to the Beatific Vision. He will be saved, as having died
'within' and not 'outside' the true Church." (op. cit., p.10).

Let us summarize this discussion on what is meant by "outside" and "within" the
Church. There are two classes of persons, and two classes only, who are
"within" the true Church: (1 ) all actual members of the visible Roman Catholic
Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, who possess membership as defined by the
Sovereign Pontiff Pius XII in his encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi ; and (2)
certain nonmembers of the Catholic Church - and this is a limited and restricted
category - who desire to enter the Church as members. All other persons are
outside the true Church, and these persons cannot be saved if they die in this
condition.

Needless to say, just because a person is within the Church is no guarantee that
he will indeed be saved finally. It should be observed that those who are within
the Church by virtue of being actual members possess immeasurable
advantages over these who are within the Church only by virtue of their desire to
enter. An actual member of the Church can sin, even mortally, and still remain
within the Church. "For not every sin," says Pius XII in Mystici Corporis,
"however grave and enormous it be, is such as to sever a man automatically
from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy or apostasy. Men may
lose charity and divine grace through sin and so become incapable of
supernatural merit, and yet not be deprived of all life, if they hold on to faith and
Christian hope, and ... are moved to prayer and penance for their sins. ... No
reason to despair of the health of whatever is still part of the body, once it has
been cut off, it can be neither cured nor healed" (emphasis added).

On the other hand, a non-member who happens to be within the Church (by
virtue of his desire to enter, and this will be explained shortly) must be and
remain in the state of sanctifying grace in order to remain within the Church. In
qualifying the nature of this desire of which we are speaking, the Holy Office
Letter Suprema Haec Sacra (Aug. 8, 1949) states: "But it must not be thought
that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It
is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated
by perfect charity. Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person
has supernatural faith " (emphasis added).

Persto · « **Reply #171 on:** August 22, 2026, 11:15:15 AM »

https://archive.org/stream/huttongibson_robberchurch_book/huttongibson_robberchurch_book_djvu.txt
The Robber Church - Part 3

Desire
This key word must be understood very clearly, lest many grave errors might
arise. By no means do all "Christians" who belong to the various non Catholic
sects, even though they may be validly baptized, possess that desire which is
required of a non-member of the Church in order for him to qualify as being
"within" the Church. By no means, Vatican II notwithstanding!

The desire of which we speak may be either explicit or implicit. Explicit desire is
such, for example, as that of a catechumen, namely, a clearly expressed desire
to enter the Church. But one may be within the Church, and thus able to attain
eternal salvation, even though he may not even know of the Church, or know that
the Church is necessary for salvation. Desire such as this is called implicit.
However, a person cannot possibly have this implicit desire unless he fulfills two
necessary conditions : (1) He must be in invincible ignorance of the Catholic
Church and of its necessity for salvation. Invincible means unable to be
conquered. Such ignorance, it goes without saying, is not culpable. And, in
addition to being invincibly ignorant, (2) he must be constantly and "carefully
observing the natural law and its precepts which God has inscribed in the hearts
of all, and . . . live an honest and upright life" (encyclical Quanto Conficiamur
Moerore, Pius IX, Aug. 10, 1863). That is to say, he must possess perfect charity
and supernatural faith, or, stated simply, he must be living, through God's infinite
goodness and mercy, the supernatural life of sanctifying grace.

The following teachings of Pope Pius IX, namely, Singulari Quadam (Dec. 9,
1854) and Quanto Conficiamur Moerore (Aug. 10, 1863), will shed much light on
what the Church Herself understands by "implicit desire." First, let us quote a
lengthy excerpt from the allocution Singulari Quadam :

"Not without sorrow have we seen that another error, and one not less
ruinous [than the error of crass rationalism dealt with in the previous
section of the allocution], has taken possession of certain portions of the
Catholic world, and has entered into the souls of many Catholics who
think that they can well hope for the eternal salvation of all those who
have in no way entered into the true Church of Christ. For that reason they
are accustomed to inquire time and time again as to what is going to be
the fate and the condition after death of those who have never yielded
themselves to the Catholic faith and, convinced by completely inadequate
arguments ( vanissimisque adductis rationibus), they await a response that
will favor this evil teaching. Far be it from Us, Venerable Brethren, to
presume to establish limits to the divine mercy, which is infinite. Far be it
from Us to wish to scrutinize the hidden counsels and judgments of God,
which are 'a great deep, 1 and which human thought can never penetrate.

In accordance with Our apostolic duty, We wish to stir up your episcopal
solicitude and vigilance to drive out of men's minds, to the extent to which
you are able to use all your energies, that opinion, equally impious and
deadly, that the way of eternal salvation can be found in any religion
( quavis in religione reperiri posse aeternae salutis viam). With all the skill
and learning at your command, you should prove to the people entrusted
to your care that this dogma of the Catholic faith is in no way opposed to
the divine mercy and justice.

"Certainly we must hold it as of faith that no one can be saved outside the
apostolic Roman Church, that this is the only Ark of salvation, and that the
one who does not enter it is going to perish in the deluge. But,
nevertheless, we must likewise hold it as certain that those who labor in
ignorance of the true religion, if that [ignorance] be invincible, will never be
charged with any guilt on this account before the eyes of the Lord. Now,
who is there who would arrogate to himself the power to indicate the
extent of such [invincible] ignorance according to the nature and the
variety of peoples, regions, talents, and so many other things? For really
when, loosed from these bodily bonds, we see God as He is, we shall
certainly understand with what intimate and beautiful a connection the
divine mercy and justice are joined together. But, while we live on earth,
weighed down by this mortal body that darkens the mind, let us hold most
firmly, from Catholic doctrine, that there is one God, one faith, one
baptism. It is wrong to push our inquiries further than this.

"For the rest, as the cause of charity demands, let us pour forth continual
prayers to God that all nations everywhere may be converted to Christ.
And let us do all in our power to bring about the common salvation of
men, for the hand of the Lord is not shortened and the gifts of heavenly
grace will never be lacking to those who sincerely wish and pray to be
comforted in this light. Truths of this kind must be deeply implanted in the
minds of the faithful so that they may not be corrupted by the false
doctrines that tend to encourage the religious indifference ( doctrinis eo
spectantibus, ut religionis foveant indifferentiam) which we see being
spread abroad and strengthened to the ruination of souls."

In this passage Pope Pius IX certainly does not say, nor does he imply, that
everyone who is in invincible ignorance will automatically be saved, or is
automatically "within" the church. What he says is that those who are invincibly
ignorant will not be punished "on this account' ( hujusce rei). That is to say,
invincible ignorance of the true Church (or of anything else, for that matter) is not
sinful in the eyes of God; and the all-merciful and all-just God never punishes
anyone who in invincibly, and therefore inculpably, ignorant of any matter
whatsoever. However, such persons (who are invincibly ignorant of certain
particular things) may very well be punished eternally for other sins.

Quanto Conficiamur Moerore
On August 10, 1863, slightly less than a decade after the issuance of his
allocution Singulari Quadam (which was cited just above) the same Pontiff
PiusIX released his encyclical Quanto Conficiamur Moerore. In a key passage
of this encyclical, quoted below, he explains and elucidates the Church's
teaching on "invincible ignorance."

"And here, Our Beloved Sons and Venerable Brethren, We must mention
and reprove a most serious error into which some Catholics have fallen,
imagining that men living in errors and apart ( alienos ) from the true faith
and from the Catholic unity can attain to eternal life. This, of course, is
completely opposed to Catholic doctrine. It is known to Us and to you that
those who labor in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion, and who,
carefully observing the natural law and its precepts which God has
inscribed in the hearts of all, and who, being ready to obey God, live an
honest and upright life, can, through the working of the divine light and
grace, attain eternal life, since God, who clearly sees, inspects; and
knows the minds, the intentions, the thoughts, and the habits of all, will, by
reason of His goodness and kindness, never allow anyone who has not
the guilt of willful sin to be punished by eternal sufferings. But it is a
perfectly well known Catholic dogma that no one can be saved outside
the Catholic Church, and that those who are contumacious against the
authority of that same Church, and who are pertinaciously separated from
the unity of that Church and from Peter's successor, the Roman Pontiff, to
whom the custody of the vineyard has been entrusted by the Saviour,
cannot obtain eternal salvation.

"God forbid, however, that the children of the Catholic Church should in
any way ever be the enemies of those who are in no way joined to us in
the same bonds of faith and of charity. But let them [the Catholics] rather
strive always to take care of these people when they [those outside the
Church] are poor or sick or afflicted by any other ills. Primarily, let them
strive to take these people out of the darkness of error in which they
unfortunately live, and bring them back to the Catholic truth and to the
loving Mother Church that never ceases to hold out its maternal hands
affectionately to them, and to call them back to its embrace so that,
established and strengthened in faith, hope, and charity, and bringing
forth fruit in every good work, they may attain eternal salvation."

Suprema Haec Sacra
On August 8, 1949, the Holy Office issued a letter, addressed to the Archbishop
of Boston, which letter was occasioned by the controversy that had been stirred
up by the St. Benedict Center in Cambridge, which was at that time the
headquarters of the "Boston Heresy." This letter, known as the Suprema Haec
Sacra, begins by making explicit mention of this Center and of the "unfortunate
controversy" that was there given birth. In that this letter is the most
comprehensive, as well as the most recent, summary of the true Catholic
teaching on the dogma "Outside the Church there is no salvation," we will quote
the entire doctrinal portion of it.

"Accordingly the Most Eminent and Most Reverend Cardinals of this
Supreme Congregation, in a plenary session, held on Wednesday, July
27, 1949, decreed, and the August Pontiff in an audience on the following
Thursday, July 28, 1949, deigned to give his approval, that the following
explanations pertinent to the doctrine, and also that invitations and
exhortations relevant to discipline, be given.

"We are bound by divine and Catholic faith to believe all those things
which are contained in the word of God, whether it be Scripture or
Tradition, and are proposed by the Church to be believed as divinely
revealed, not only through solemn judgment but also through the ordinary
and universal teaching office ( magisterium ).

"Now, among these things which the Church has always preached and
will never cease to preach there is also contained that infallible statement
by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.

"However, this dogma must be understood in the sense in which the
Church itself understands it. For Our Saviour gave the things that are
contained in the deposit of faith to be explained by the ecclesiastical
magisterium and not by private judgments.

"Now, in the first place, the Church teaches us that in this matter we are
dealing with a most strict precept of Jesus Christ. For He explicitly
ordered His apostles to teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever
He Himself had commanded.

"Now, not the least important among the commandments of Christ Is that
one by which we are command to be incorporated by baptism into the
Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, and to remain united to
Christ and to His Vicar, through whom He Himself governs the Church on
earth in a visible manner.

"Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been
divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the
Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ
on earth.

"The Saviour not only gave the precept that all nations should enter the,
Church, but He also established the Church as a means of salvation
without which no one may be able to enter the kingdom of eternal glory.

"In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to
be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed towards man's
final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also
be obtained in certain circuмstances when these helps are used only in
intention or desire ( ubi voto solummodo vel desiderio adhibeantui). This
we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both with reference
to the sacrament of regeneration and with reference to the sacrament of
penance.

"In its own way, the same thing must be said about the Church, insofar as
the Church itself is a general help to salvation. Therefore, in order that
one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be
incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is required that
at least he be united to it by intention and desire.

"However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens;
but, when a person is involved in invincible ignorance, God accepts also
an implicit intention ( votum ) which is so called because it is included in
that good disposition of the soul whereby a person wishes his will to be
conformed to the will of God.

"These things are clearly taught in that dogmatic letter which was issued
by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943, 'On the
Mystical Body of Jesus Christ.' For in this letter the Sovereign Pontiff
clearly distinguishes between those who are really (in re) incorporated into
the Church as members and those who are joined to it only in intention (in
voto).

"Discussing the members of whom the Mystical Body is composed here
on earth, the same August Pontiff says: 'Only those who have received
the laver of regeneration, who profess the true faith, who have not
miserably separated themselves from the fabric of the Body or been
expelled by legitimate authority by reason of very serious offences, are
actually to be counted as members of the Church. 1

"Towards the end of the same encyclical letter, when most affectionately
inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic
Church (qui ad Ecclesiae Catholicae compagem non pertinent), he
mentions those who are 'ordered to the Redeemer's Mystical Body by a
sort of unconscious desire and intention,' and these he by no means
excludes from eternal salvation, but, on the contrary, asserts that they are
in a condition in which 'they cannot be secure about their own eternal
salvation,' since they still lack so many and such great heavenly helps to
salvation that can be enjoyed only in the Catholic Church.'

"With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal
salvation all those united to the Church only by implicit desire and those
who falsely assert that men can be saved equally ( aequaliter ) in every
religion.

"Nor must we think that any kind of intention of entering the Church is
sufficient in order that one may be saved. It is requisite that the intention
by which one is ordered to the Church should be informed by perfect
charity; and no explicit intention can produce its effect unless the man
have supernatural faith: 'For he who comes to God must believe that God
exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him.' The Council of Trent
declares: 'Faith is the beginning of man's salvation, the foundation and
root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and
attain the fellowship of His children'."

Summary and Conclusions

There is only one true Church of Jesus Christ, the universal Church of the
faithful, which is the Holy Roman Catholic Church, presided over by the Supreme
Pontiff, the Bishop of Rome, who is the Vicar of Jesus Christ on earth. Outside
this Church there is absolutely no salvation; no one at all can possibly be saved
unless he is within this Church at the time of his death. This is an infallible
dogma, and it does not admit of any exceptions whatsoever. To say that it does
have exceptions is, in effect, to deny the dogma. Cardinal Newman in his Letter
to the Duke of Norfolk, erred seriously when he claimed that this dogma has
"exceptions." This was an unfortunate manner of expression. Monsignor Fenton
has a good discussion on this error of Newman's (op. cit., pp. 124-6), and the key
passage from this discussion is given below:

"Newman taught that the principle 'out of the Church, and out of the faith,
is no salvation' admits of exceptions. He believed that what Pope Pius IX
had taught in his encyclical Quanto conficiamur moerore indicated the
existence of such exceptions. In support of his contention, he quotes the
following lines from the encyclical:

' We and you know, that those who lie under invincible ignorance as
regards our most holy religion, and who, diligently observing the natural
law and its precepts, which are engraven by God on the hearts of all, and
prepared to obey God, lead a good and upright life, are able, by the
operation of the power of divine light and grace, to obtain eternal life. 1

"According to the Letter to the Duke of Norfolk, these words of Pope Pius
IX conveyed what Newman called 'the doctrine of invincible ignorance -
or, that it is possible to belong to the soul of the Church without belonging
to the body.' He concluded his treatment of the dogma with this question:

'Who would at first sight gather from the wording of so forcible a universal
['Out of the Church, and out of the faith, is no salvation'], that an exception
to its operation, such as this, so distinct, and, for all we know, so very
wide, was consistent with holding it?'

"If Newman's words mean anything, they assert that the Church holds and
proposes as a dogma, which no Catholic can ever think of disputing, a
statement which it contradicts at the very same time." (Fenton, op. cit.,
P-125).

If we wish to adhere to this dogma, as the Church Herself teaches it and
understands it, we must reject all notions of an "invisible" true Church, ie
reject the departure from the above doctrine of the Magisterium of the Church
where Vatican II speaks of such things as "full" ( plene ) unity with the Church or
"full" membership in the Church, as opposed to a so-called "incomplete" or "less
full" (no plene) unity or membership. Supposedly, many "good Christians" of the
various sects possess such "non plane " unity. All of mankind is divided into
these two mutually exclusive and distinct categories: members of the true Church
and non-members of it. There is no such thing as "full" membership and "partial"
membership. Such blurring of distinctions is a convenient tool for the heretics.
(We still bear in mind, of course, that some non-members may be "within" the
Church, as has been explained already.)

The following passage from Msgr. Fenton's book is apropos at this
juncture:

"In this section of the Singulari quadam Pope Pius IX goes on to urge the
Bishops of the Catholic Church to use all of their energies to drive from
the minds of men the deadly error that the way of salvation can be found
in any religion. To a certain extent this is a mere restatement of the
erroneous opinion according to which we may well hope for the salvation
of men who have never entered in any way into the Catholic Church, the
first misinterpretation of Catholic teaching reproved in this section of the
allocution. Yet, in another way, the error that the way of salvation can be
found in any religion has its own peculiar and individual malignity. It is
based on the false implication that the false religions, those other than the
Catholic, are in some measure a partial approach to the fullness of truth
which is to be found in Catholicism. According to this doctrinal aberration,
the Catholic religion would be distinct from others, not as the true is
distinguished from the false, but only as the plenitude is distinct from
incomplete participations of itself. It is this notion, the idea that all other
religions contain enough of the essence of that completeness of truth
which is to be found in Catholicism, to make them vehicles of eternal
salvation, which is thus reproved in the Singulari quadam." (Fenton, op.
cit., P. 47).

We must reject the erroneous idea that the Catholic Church is only the "ordinary"
means of salvation, and that God also uses other "churches" (so-called) as a
means of salvation, such as is clearly taught by Vatican II.

We must reject the erroneous idea that the Catholic Church is a "perfect"
realization of the true Church of Jesus Christ, while the other sects and
"churches" (so-called) are somehow "less perfect" realizations of the one true
Church. In his momentous encyclical Pascendi (against the Modernists), Pope
St. Pius X exposed the fallacy of such distinctions: "In fact, Modernists ....
some rather obscurely, others very openly, contend that all religions are true. . . .
In the conflict of different religions the Modernists might be able to contend for
one thing at most, that the Catholic religion, inasmuch as it is the more vivid, has
more truth; and likewise that it is more worthy of the name of Christian, inasmuch
as it corresponds more fully with the origins of Christianity."

We must reject the erroneous idea that all those who have ever been baptized,
whether they be Catholics or non-Catholics, still remain somehow "incorporated
into Christ," regardless of what their present state of soul is and regardless of
what their present relationship to the true visible Catholic Church may or may not
be.

We must reject the erroneous idea that the Mystical Body of Christ and the
Roman Catholic Church are not quite exactly one and the same thing. And
therefore we must reject the totally erroneous and dangerous idea that the true
Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ merely "subsists in" the Catholic Church, as is
taught by Vatican 11 .

Persto · « **Reply #172 on:** August 23, 2026, 06:33:15 PM »

https://archive.org/stream/huttongibson_robberchurch_book/huttongibson_robberchurch_book_djvu.txt
The Robber Church - Part 3

The Doctrines of the Robber Church
Viewed alongside the true Catholic teaching which has been set forth in this
article, the following doctrines of the Robber Church ran be readily seen for what
they are. Emphasis is added throughout.

"This is the unique Church of Christ which in the creed we avow as one, holy,
catholic, and apostolic. . . . This Church, constituted and organized in the world
as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church . . (Vatican 1 1 's Dogmatic
Constitution on the Church).

What Church do they mean by "this Church?" What Church is "this Church"
which "subsists in" the Catholic Church? Commenting on
this passage of Vatican 1 1 , Rev. Gregory Baum explains what it means and he
quotes the official explanation of Vatican ll's Theological Commission. Says
Baum: "The final text of the Constitution says that the Church of Christ 'subsists
in' the Catholic Church. The Church of Christ, then, is realized and embodied in
the Catholic Church; conversely, the Catholic Church is the realization of the
Church of Christ on earth, according to Catholic faith the only institutionally
perfect realization of this Church, but there is no simple and unqualified identity.
The explanation for the change of words given to the Council by the Theological
Commission says: 'Instead of is we now say subsists in, so that the expression
corresponds better with what is affirmed about the ecclesial elements which are
present elsewhere." (Gregory Baum, "The Ecclesial Reality of the Other
Churches," in The Church and Ecuмenism, Concilium 4, p.70).

"This same understanding," continues Baum, "is carried through the entire
Constitution on the Church. When the chapter on the People of God (Chapter 2)
comes to the question of who is incorporated in the Church of Christ, it modifies
[!] the teaching of Mystici Corporis Christi. This encyclical had insisted that
reapse (really) members of the Church are only men joined by the bonds of faith,
sacraments and hierarchical communion, i.e., only Roman Catholics. . .

However, in the final text of the Constitution (i.e., Vatican 1 1's Dogmatic
Constitution on the Church) we read that the Catholic faithful are plene (fully)
incorporated in the Church. This implies that apart from the full participation in
the mystery of the Church there are other, less perfect, ways. This remarkable
change [!] from reapse to plene, introduced because of the demands of the
Council Fathers, makes the doctrine consistent with what is taught in other parts
of the Constitution. In fact, the report given by the Theological Commission to
the Council reminds us that all the baptized are in some way incorporated in the
Church. . . . We conclude that on these three points the Constitution on the
Church has gone far beyond the teaching of Mystici Corporis Christi. According
to the Constitution the Catholic Church is the institutionally perfect realization of
the Church of Christ on earth."

"Though the ecclesial Communities which are separated from us lack the fullness
of unity with us flowing from Baptism, and though we believe they have not
retained the proper reality of the eucharistic mystery in its fullness ..." (Vatican
1 1 's Decree on Ecuмenism),

"The brethren divided from us also use many liturgical actions of the Christian
religion. They most certainly can truly engender the life of grace ... These
liturgical actions must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community
of salvation." (Ibid.)

"It follows that the separated Churches and Communities, though we believe
them to be deficient in some respects [!], have been by no means deprived of
significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ
has not refrained from using them as a means of salvation.. ( Decree on
Ecuмenism).

"The attainment of union is the concern of the whole Church. ..This concern itself
reveals already to some extent the bond of brotherhood between all Christians
and it helps toward that full and perfect unity . . (ibid.).

"The daily Christian life of these brethren is nourished by their faith in Christ [do
all these "brethren" have the gift of supernatural faith?] ... Their faith in Christ
bears fruit ..." ( Decree on Ecuмenism). Their "faith in Christ" (so-called) bears
no fruit unless it brings them closer to being within the Catholic Church. "On this
account those who would strive for salvation apart from the Church, wander from
the way and are struggling in vain" (Pope Leo XIII, encyclical Tametsi, Nov. 1,
1900 ).

"For it is only through Christ's Catholic Church, which is 'the all-embracing means
of salvation,' that they can benefit fully from the means of salvation" ( Decree a
Ecuмenism).

"For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion
with the Catholic Church, even though this communion is imperfect' (Decree on
Ecuмenism).

"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 [which needs the Church as the infallible interpreter, they fail to mention],
the life of grace [non-Catholics receive actual graces, but they cannot be living
the life of grace unless they are within the Catholic Church], faith, hope and
charity [certainly not supernatural faith, hope and charity, as is implied] . .
(Decree on Ecuмenism).

"Cooperation among Christians vividly expresses that bond which in fact already
unites them . . (ibid.).

"Nevertheless, the divisions among Christians prevent the Church from attaining
the fullness at catholicity proper to her [Catholicity is one of the four marks of the
Catholic Church, which, from the beginning, she has possessed in all fullness], in
those of her sons who, though attached to her by Baptism, are yet separated
from full communion with her [Her sons? just anybody who happens to have
once been baptized is now dignified with the title of "son" of the true Church?
Incredible!]" (Decree on Ecuмenism).

"Whenever the Sacrament of Baptism is duly administered as Our Lord instituted
it, and is received with the right disposition, a person is truly incorporated into the
crucified and glorified Christ. . (ibid.). But he does not necessarily remain
incorporated.

Walter J. Burghardt, S.J., an expert of the "Robber Church," writes: ... "The grace
of Christ is at work, richly and incessantly, not only within Protestants but within
Protestantism, not only within the Orthodox but within Orthodoxy, not only within
Anglicans but within Anglicanism": (Theology Digest, Winter 1970, P. 359). "How
can the Catholic theologian," asks Burghardt, "reconcile with his traditional
understanding of 'one true Church' the recognition by Vatican 1 1 of other
Christian churches, not simply as sociological phenomena but as ecclesial
realities... as structures splendidly fruitful for the grace that saves? As yet there
is no 'Catholic answer.' Understandably so, for the Council has confronted the
theologian with development, with evolution, in the Catholic understanding of the
mystery that is the Church" (op. cit., p.360). "First, all of us who are baptized
(Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox) have been incorporated through baptism into
Christ; and because we have been incorporated into Christ, all of us belong in a
very real way to the Church of Christ.... This is not fiction; this is 'for real.'

Despite our unchristian division, we are more one than ever we used to dream;
for the same Christ is our one life, and in some mysterious fashion we all belong
to the one Church of Christ... The reality which is the Church of Christ transcends
the institutional Catholic Church, is realized to some extent in other Christian
communities; they too are communities of grace and salvation, alive with the
presence and grace of the one same Christ" (Burghardt, op. cit. pp. 360-1,
emphasis added).

In his " History of the Decree on Ecuмenism," the Progressive Werner Becker
makes many interesting observations on the debates that took place at the
Council (over this Decree) . "Some of the Fathers," says Becker, "wanted to see
an explicit mention of the necessity of the Catholic Church for salvation and of
the infallibility of the Pope. Was it sufficient to speak of the Church of Rome in
patristic terminology as a communion of love, without taking into account the
warnings of the encyclical Mystici Corporis against separating the 'juridical
Church' and 'the Church of love?' Was it right to see the Church as something
dynamic, as a communion (communio), in which there were different ways and
levels of participation? The objection was also raised that the Holy Spirit could
only be described as the soul of the Catholic Church in its concrete form, and
could only be effective per accidens outside the frontiers of the Church... Was not
the discussion of separated Christians 'more than polite' (Cardinal Ruffini)? Are
they all without exception of good faith? What is the purpose of this laudatio
protestantium ? ...But these objections could not prevent the overwhelming
impression that in the debate, to the surprise of many, a genuine breakthrough
towards ecuмenical thought became evident. Almost everyone saw the schema
as constituting a great step forward ... As Cardinal Leger declared, the
acceptance and approbation of so many bishops represented a 'true conversion.'
(Commentary on the Docuмents of Vatican 1 1 , Vol. 2, pp. 33-4, emphasis
added).

"A true conversion," yes, to the kingdom of Satan. 0 miserable bishops! In
betraying His Mystical Body they betray the Master Himself. Infinitely better off is
the poor pagan who is afflicted only by invincible ignorance! "Never to have
known Jesus Christ in any way is the greatest of misfortunes, but it involves no
perversity or ingratitude. But, after having known, to reject or forget Him, is such
a horrible and mad crime as to be scarcely credible" (Pope Leo XIII, encyclical
Tametsi).

Let us conclude this section by quoting once again from Rev. Gregory Baum.

"The encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi taught a strict identity between the Body
of the Lord and the Church of Rome. ... At the Council, several bishops
expressed their disapproval of asserting this doctrine without qualifications.
Among the many Fathers who criticized the draft proposal De Ecclesia for
teaching this simple identity, Cardinal Lercaro, Archbishop of Bologna, said:,,,, ' .

. . The Church as society and the Mystical Body of Christ express two distinct
aspects ... But these two aspects can never be the same in the existential and
historical order. In that order, these two aspects do not always enjoy the same
fullness of extension; in fact, conflicts arise between them, and will continue to
arise until the very end of human history. Then and only then will the identity and
equality of the Church and the Mystical Body be consummated and made
manifest." Thus Lercaro.

"How does the Constitution on the Church solve this problem?" asks Baum. "It
asserts and defends the fundamental article of Catholic faith that the earthly body
of the Lord and the Catholic Church refer basically to the same reality, yet the
wording of this declaration indicates ... that the Body of Christ and the Catholic
Church are not simply identical but diverse aspects of the same complex reality"
(Baum, op. cit., pp. 68-9).

Again Baum: "The teaching of the Constitution on the Church, therefore, leaves
theological space for other Churches. The Church of Christ that constitutes one
single complex reality with the Catholic Church is present in other Christian
Churches, even though according to Catholic faith these are only institutionally
imperfect or inadequate realizations of Christ's Church. ... It is, of course,
obvious that on her pilgrimage the Catholic Church is not and never will be,
simply speaking, the perfect realization of Christ's Church" (p. 72).

And finally, on P. 82 of the same article, Rev. Baum reaches the logical
conclusions that necessarily flow from the teachings laid down by the Robber
Council Vatican 11: "It will be remembered that toward the beginning of this
essay, I stated that the Catholic Church is the institutionally perfect realization of
the Church of Christ, while other Churches, not in communion with Rome, are
institutionally imperfect realizations of the same Church. Expressing myself in
this careful way, I left room for the complementary aspect that permits me to say
that concretely and actually the Church Of Christ may be realized less, equally,
or even more in a Church separated from Rome than in a Church in communion
with Rome. This conclusion is inescapable on the basis of the understanding of
Church that emerges from the teaching of Vatican Council II." (Emphasis added).

Persto · « **Reply #173 on:** August 24, 2026, 12:53:35 PM »

https://archive.org/stream/huttongibson_robberchurch_book/huttongibson_robberchurch_book_djvu.txt
The Robber Church - Part 3

Ambiguities? Or Worse?
The principals of the Robber Church are accomplished masters of ambiguity.
Newspeak is their "native language." One fatal result of allowing these Robbers
free rein in their glib use of Newspeak is pointed out in the following astute
remarks that appeared in the Parish Bulletin of St. Peter's Church, Cambridge,
Mass., Apr. 25, 1971 : "In the transmission of the faith from generation to
generation there can be a distortion, a series of masked heresies, which
gradually empty the faith of its divinely communicated content. . . . Ambiguities of
language which today seem quite irrelevant may be susceptible in later years to
misunderstanding, and then to new points of view which find justification for what
is objectively false. The Church has always recognized the danger of falsification
in poorly worded professions of faith and in loosely phrased formulas of prayer.
The language of the ancient creeds was through much screening and re-
formulation presented. So too the language of the liturgy. We are now beginning
to understand the hidden implications of some of the hastily composed
translations of the liturgical tests. Generations as yet unborn may find in the
scholarly language of the present day a lack of doctrinal accuracy which will
create theological problems later on."

If we focused our attention only on those teachings of Vatican 11 that are
ambiguous, and merely ambiguous, we would still be kept busy for quite a longtime. In this series on "The Robber Church," we have been concerned mainly
with pointing out passages in these decrees of Vatican II that are, considered in
themselves, irreconcilable (in our opinion) with true Catholic doctrine. To
conclude this series we will next study a passage from the Decree on
Ecuмenism, a passage which contains the central attack on the doctrine of the
Mystical Body of Christ.

"Saul, Saul, Why Persecutest Thou Me?"
"And Saul, as yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples
of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked of him letters to Damascus, to the
ѕуηαgσgυєs, that if he found any men and women of this way, he might bring
them bound to Jerusalem. And as he went on his journey, it came to pass that
he drew nigh to Damascus; and suddenly a light from heaven shined round about
him. And falling on the ground, he heard a voice saying to him: 'Saul, Saul, why
persecutest thou Me?' Who said: 'Who art thou, Lord?' And he: 'I am Jesus
whom thou persecutest. It is hard for thee to kick against the goad.' And he
trembling and astonished, said: 'Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?"'

Thus the account of the conversion of St. Paul, as found in the Acts of the
Apostles, chapter 9. Our Lord did not say to Saul: "Why persecutest thou My
followers?"; but rather: "Why persecutest thou Me". Christ, in speaking thus,
taught and illustrated that beautiful facet of the doctrine of the Mystical Body, that
there is an intimate bond of union existing between Him, the Head of the Mystical
Body, and each individual member of this Body; and also a most intimate bond of
union, a supreme spiritual solidarity, between all the individual members
themselves. Consequently, any attack whatsoever upon any individual member
or members of this Mystical Body is simultaneously an attack upon Christ
Himself. "Why persecutest thou Me ?"

Saul's persecution was directed against the physical bodies of those Christians,
those early members of Christ's Mystical Body. Today the assault is directed
against minds and souls. Today the Mystical Body is attacked from the very
standpoint of its existence as a doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church; the
Robber Church effectively denies the existence of the Mystical Body! This
denial, of course, is not open, but, on the contrary, it is extremely subtle and
therefore all the more dangerous. Reiterating and re-emphasizing his teaching
set forth in Mystici Corporis Christi (June 29, 1943), that the Mystical Body of
Christ is identical with and categorically to be equated to the Roman Catholic
Church, His Holiness Pius XII wrote in his later encyclical Humani Generis :
"Some say they are not bound by the doctrine, explained in Our Encyclical Letter
of a few years ago, and based on the sources of revelation, which teaches that
the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the
same thing. Some reduce to a meaningless formula the necessity of belonging to
the true Church in order to gain eternal salvation."

The Robber Church, through its many "spokesmen," agents and lackeys, and
primarily through the decrees it was able to get "approved" by Vatican II,
"reduces to a meaningless formula" the doctrine of the Mystical Body. To reduce
this doctrine (or any doctrine) to a meaningless formula, to "water it down" and
therefore effectively deny it, while at the same time paying it lip service, is the
customary modus operandiot Modernists, Masons, and, of course, the
"Robbers" with whom we are dealing. The "Decree on Ecuмenism" is a vehicle
of persecution against the Mystical Body that makes Saul's persecution appear
as but childish sport. Saul persecuted only the mere physical bodies of his
victims, and, moreover, he acted as an outsider. The present-day persecutors
attack the very doctrine itself, and, moreover, they operate "insidious and hidden
in the very veins of the Church" (St. Pius X, encyclical Editae Saepe ). On Nov.
1 , 1964, the "Decree on Ecuмenism" was approved. At this present time, within
the short space of seven years, it has taken its toll on a universal basis. Today
the widespread utter faithlessness in this revealed doctrine is visible for all to
behold. This faithlessness in the doctrine of the Mystical Body stems, as from its
fountainhead, from the devastating religious indifferentism that is fostered and
encouraged by some of the decrees of Vatican 11 . Those who might ever have
wondered how eventually will be fulfilled these words of Christ, "But yet the Son
of Man, when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on earth?" (Luke 18:8),
need look no farther than the satanic tide of apostasy and universal faithlessness
unleashed upon Christendom by the Robber Church's Vatican II.

A Key Passage

"Nihilominus, justificati ex fide in baptismate, Christo incorporantur, ideoque
christiano nomine jure decorantur et a filiis Ecclesiae catholicae ut fratres in
Domino merito agnoscuntur." (From Vatican 11's "Decree on Ecuмenism".)

The Decree on Ecuмenism, corrupt in spirit throughout, contains many open and
central attacks upon true Roman Catholic doctrine, and these open attacks are
often contained concisely in passages consisting of but a few words. The
passage cited above illustrates this well. In explaining this passage, what it
actually says, how it is today interpreted, and its overall poisonous effect upon
the Catholic Faith, our approach will be as follows:

(1) First, the true Catholic doctrine on the point that is at stake will be
expounded, by quoting the decree Exultate Deo of the General Council of
Florence, and Pope Pius Xll's encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi.

(2) We will examine an earlier version of the above-cited text, namely, the
" draft version" or so-called "Schema of 1963," which bore the title Schema
Decreti de Oecuмenismo. This earlier version of this passage, as it stood when
it was proposed to the Council Fathers in April 1963, did indeed leave much to be
desired, but at least, as it then stood, it could be reconciled with Catholic
doctrine.

(3) Next, we will quote, giving the official N.C.W.C. English translation as well
as several other variant but acceptable translations, the final and approved
version of this passage in question. And the remarkable change of wording from
the "Draft Schema of 1963" - a change that is doctrinally absolutely untenable -
will be immediately manifest.

(4) Then we will again refer to the Latin text of this passage (given above), in
order to show that the English versions cited in (3) are accurate as translations.

(5) In passing, we will call attention to the footnote which the Council itself
appended to this passage, which footnote cites a certain reference source in
order to support its false teaching. We will see, needless to say, that this
theological reference source does not support the "teaching" of this passage.

(6) Finally, in order to refute in advance any possible charges that we are
"quoting out of context" or giving a false interpretation or slant to this passage,
we will quote several well-known "Progressive" commentators (those on the
"inside," who helped, directly or indirectly, to draft this decree or later to tout it) ,
thereby proving that the way we are interpreting this passage, based on what it
actually says, is the way it is generally interpreted.

Persto · « **Reply #174 on:** August 25, 2026, 07:40:42 PM »

https://archive.org/stream/huttongibson_robberchurch_book/huttongibson_robberchurch_book_djvu.txt
The Robber Church - Part 3

What The Church Teaches
Pope Eugene IV's Bull Exultate Deo, which was later incorporated into the Acts
of the Council of Florence as the "Decree for the Armenians," teaches: "Holy
baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all
the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of
the Church" ( Denz . 696). From the use of the words janua (gateway) and
efficimur (we are made), it is entirely obvious that the meaning and sole purport
of this passage is simply this: through holy baptism we enter (via the janua:
gateway) the Mystical Body of Christ. That is to say, we become for the first time
members of the Mystical Body through the reception of this sacrament; or, to
quote the exact words of this passage, "we are made" (efficimur) members of the
Mystical Body by means of baptism.

Consequently it is true to say that a person who receives baptism, even as a
member of a Protestant community, provided that the Roman Catholic Church
recognizes it as a valid baptism, becomes at that time a member of the Mystical
Body, because with the reception of this Sacrament original sin is remitted and
also all personal or actual mortal sins.. Thus the baptized person at the time is
living in the state of sanctifying grace, and he has just entered the "janua" of the
Body of the Church. This is one aspect of the teaching under discussion.

And here is another aspect. The Church also clearly teaches that not all
persons, once having become members, necessarily remain members of the
Church throughout their entire lifetimes. Mystici Coropris Christi teaches: "If we
would define and describe this true Church of Jesus Christ - which is the One,
Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, Roman Church - we shall find no expression more
noble, more sublime or more divine than the phrase which calls it 'the Mystical
Body of Jesus Christ 1 ." The fact that a baptized person can lose membership
and be severed from the Mystical Body is very clearly taught in this same
encyclical: "To be really ( reapse ) included as members of the Church are only
those who have been baptized and profess the true faith and who have not
unhappily withdrawn from Body-unity or for grave faults been excluded by
legitimate authority. . . . And so if a man refuse to hear the Church, let him be
considered - so the Lord commands - as a heathen and a publican. It follows
that those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the one body
such as this, and cannot be living the life of its one divine spirit" (emphasis
added). The Pontiff specifically names "schism or heresy or apostasy" as crimes
which "sever a man automatically from the Body of the Church."

What, then, is required to become and remain a member of the Mystical Body?
Valid baptism, first of all, and then "profession of the same faith, and their sharing
of the same sacred rites, through participation in the same sacrifice and practical
observance of the same laws" ( Mystici Corporis Christi). Lastly, "They, therefore,
walk the path of dangerous error, who believe that they can accept Christ as
Head of the Church, while they reject genuine loyalty to His Vicar on earth"
(ibid.).

The Draft Version of 1963

Paragraph 22 of the "draft version" of what later became the "Decree on
Ecuмenism," as that early version stood in the spring of 1963, stated that
through the Sacrament of Baptism "a man becomes truly incorporated into the
crucified and glorified Christ and is reborn to a sharing of the divine life-" This
statement stresses the first aspect of the teaching we are discussing, namely,
that by Baptism a person becomes a member of the Mystical Body. In point of
fact, by actually using this word "becomes," the above statement is in harmony
with the teaching of Exultate Deo (cited earlier), which employs the word
"efficimud: we are made (members). Therefore, this passage of the "Draft
Version of 1963," as it stands, is orthodox. It is deficient, however, in its failure
even to mention ( suppressio veri) the other complementary aspect of this
teaching; namely, that of Mystici Corporis Christi which points out that this
membership is not necessarily permanent. In this early draft version it was only
an omission, but, as shall be seen, the final version contains a denial of it.

The Final and "Approved" Text

We began this discussion by quoting the Latin test of this wholly subversive
passage from the Decree on Ecuмenism, which begins: "Nihilominus, . Here is
my own translation of this passage: "Nevertheless, those who have been
justified through faith, in Baptism are united with the Body of Christ, and therefore
by right they are honoured by the name of Christian, and by the sons of the
Catholic Church they are deservedly acknowledged as brothers in the Lord." It
should be carefully noted - and we will refer to this again shortly - that all the
verbs in this sentence are in the present tense : "they are united with the body"

( incorporantur ); "they are honoured" ( decorantur ); "they are acknowledged"

( agnoscuntui ).

The Latin verb incorporo merits attention. This word is made up of "in" and
"corpora," the latter part being derived from the noun corpus, which means
"body." Hence the definition, and the sole definition, of "incorporo" that is given
by the very authoritative Latin-English Lexicon of F, P. Leverett is as follows:
"INCORPORO, to unite with the body " (p. 419, editions of 1884 and 1931).

Since incorporantur, (the word used by the Decree on Ecuмenism in this
passage) is in the present tense, passive voice, the most accurate and literal
translation is the one I have given, namely, "they are united with the Body (of
Christ)."

The Universal Latin Lexicon of Facciolatus and Forcellinus, 1828 edition, gives
as the first definition of "incorporo"-. "to embody." Thus it could also be translated
as "they are embodied (in Christ)." The official N.C.W.C. translation renders it
as: "they are members of Christ's Body" and this is certainly an acceptable
translation. The N.C.W.C. translation of the whole passage is: "But even in spite
of them it remains true that all who have been justified by faith in Baptism are
members of Christ's body, and have a right to be called Christian, and so are
correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church."

The most widely read English version of the Decrees of Vatican 11 , edited by
Walter M. Abbott, S.J., translates it as follows: "Nevertheless, all those justified
by faith through baptism are incorporated into Christ . . "

The subversion is there for all to see, both in Latin and in English! The point is
clearly implied that all those who were at any time baptized are now united with
the Body of Christ, are now members of Christ's Mystical Body are now
incorporated into Christ. The use of the present tense, incorporantur, admits of
no other interpretation. If the Council Fathers had meant to say that Baptism is
the gateway through which we become members, and thus to take into
consideration the clear teaching of Mystici Corporis Christi that membership in
the Church is not necessarily permanent, then the text should have read:
"Nevertheless all those who have been justified by faith in baptism have been
(not 'are') united with the Body of Christ... " That is, incorporati sunt," not
incorporantur."

As this decree went from version to version, a clever and devastating change,
was introduced into the text. Whereas it stated at first that we "become"
members of the Mystical Body through Baptism, the final version claims that all
who have been baptized "are" members,

The Footnote

Footnote 17 immediately follows the word " incorporantur 1 ' in the Latin text of this
passage. The source cited in this footnote is the very sentence of the Bull
Exultate Deo that we quoted, earlier! The Authors of this Decree not only subvert
the Faith, but they have the colossal effrontery to attempt to have the
Magisterium of the Church support their heresy! As stressed, earlier, Exultate
Deo, using the words "janua" and " efficimur ," teaches simply that Baptism is the
gateway to the spiritual life and by it we, are made at that time members of the
Church. To claim that it says more than this is to err and to contradict the clear
teaching of the Church.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Patrick Henry Omlor (Read 116285 times)

Persto

Re: Patrick Henry Omlor

Persto

Re: Patrick Henry Omlor

Persto

Re: Patrick Henry Omlor

Persto

Re: Patrick Henry Omlor

Persto

Re: Patrick Henry Omlor