Salvation outside the Catholic Church: What do we know about it – for certain?

Cardinal_Burke

Cardinal Burke may officially
weigh-in 
on this matter

All references to salvation in Vatican Council II are implicit, invisible and hypothetical. They are not explicit, visible in the flesh and seen in real life.

In fact, other than those who have been officially declared saints by the Catholic Church, no one living here on earth can possibly know the true status of anyone else’s – or even their very own – eternal soul.

Since salvation outside the Church is not the province of man – but solely of God – and hence, a great miracle – is it wise, prudent, or in any way appropriate for high level Catholic clerics to declare that God will (routinely) save anyone, so long as they try to live a “good” life, according to the dictates of their conscience? Furthermore – is it right and just for them to require others to believe it, too?

All of this and more is the subject of Lionel Andrade’s latest post.

Advertisements

6 Comments

  1. My limited understanding of “Feeney-ism” is that only the Baptism of water of recognized as the way to Salvation. Therefore, Baptism of Blood and of Desire are denied by the Feeney-ites, I infer.

    If I am correct in my inference, then Feeneyism is highly problematic, if not downright heretical. Moreover, there are sede-traddie congregations who follow Feeney. And they are at odds with other sede-traddie and just plain traddie groups who deny Feeneyism.

    This is why I keep looking to the SSPX for the eventual way out of the tragedy aka Vatican II. And why I keep referring to the SSPX as “the loyal opposition.”

    • “…of recognized…”

      Sorry for my sloppiness. Make that “is recognized.”

    • It’s complicated. It’s emotional. It’s doctrinal. It’s important and it’s more than just Feeneyism. It’s inevitably, all wrapped up in the crass, post Vatican II modernist reinterpretation and subsequent revision of virtually everything that Catholics have traditionally held sacred. Mostly – it gives me a headache!

      Doug

  2. My limited understanding of “Feeney-ism” is that only the Baptism of water of recognized as the way to Salvation. Therefore, Baptism of Blood and of Desire are denied by the Feeney-ites, I infer.

    We have to make the disinction between implicit-explicit, dejure-defacto etc otherwise we will be discussing this issue in circles.

    All salvation referred to in Vatican Council II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 is IMPLICIT, THEORETICAL, INVISIBLE, DEJURE(ACCEPTED IN PRINCIPLE ONLY),SUBJECTIVE FOR US, NOW IN HEAVEN and not EXPLICIT, PRACTICALLY KNOWN, VISIBLE,DEFACTO(known in reality),OBJECTIVE, ON EARTH (as compared to Heaven) and REAL (as opposed to hypothetical).

    So the Baptism of Desire and Blood which you have mentioned can only be hypothetical, a possibility and implicit for us human beings.Since it is only a possibility and not a known reality,in 2014, it does not contradict the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It is irrelevant to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.

  3. If I am correct in my inference, then Feeneyism is highly problematic, if not downright heretical. Moreover, there are sede-traddie congregations who follow Feeney. And they are at odds with other sede-traddie and just plain traddie groups who deny Feeneyism.

    All salvation referred to in Vatican Council II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 is IMPLICIT, THEORETICAL, INVISIBLE, DEJURE(ACCEPTED IN PRINCIPLE ONLY),SUBJECTIVE FOR US, NOW IN HEAVEN,
    so it does not contradict Fr.Leonard Feeney’s interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.

    The sedevacantists Most Holy Familu Monastery, CMRI and others assume that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are EXPLICIT, PRACTICALLY KNOWN, VISIBLE,DEFACTO(known in reality),OBJECTIVE, ON EARTH (as compared to Heaven) and REAL (as opposed to hypothetical).So for them these cases are exceptions to the dogma on salvation. This is irrational and also heretical. It is a denial of a defined dogma. It is also a contradiction of the Nicene Creed ‘I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin’.

  4. This is why I keep looking to the SSPX for the eventual way out of the tragedy aka Vatican II. And why I keep referring to the SSPX as “the loyal opposition.”

    For the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) salvation referrred to in Vatican Council II ( seeds of the Word (AG 11), good and holy things in other religions(NA 2), imperfect communion with the Church(UR 3), elements of sanctification and truth(LG 8), being saved in invincible ignorance(LG 16 etc)

    are

    EXPLICIT, PRACTICALLY KNOWN, VISIBLE,DEFACTO(known in reality),OBJECTIVE, ON EARTH (as compared to Heaven) and REAL (as opposed to hypothetical).So for them these cases are exceptions to the dogma on salvation. This is irrational and also heretical. It is a denial of a defined dogma. It is also a contradiction of the Nicene Creed ‘I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin’.


Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s