Wednesday, May 26, 2010

SEEING THROUGH THE KUNG DECEPTION ON THE DOGMA EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

A few days back on a Catholic Forum on the Internet, Jim had an insight. He began to look differently at the familiar mantra “except those in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire”.

The Baptism of Desire is always implicit. It is hypothetical, subjective and de jure he observed.

So how can the Baptism of desire and invincible ignorance contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus i.e. everybody needs to be an explicit member of the Catholic Church to be saved?

And if it did not contradict the dogma (even if it did) it would mean every Jew, Muslim or Buddhist is on the way to Hell.

The infallible teaching says everyone explicitly needs the baptism of water to avoid Hell. It says everyone needs Catholic Faith, which is objective, it has to be learnt and one’s knowledge can be tested explicitly.

So the mantra is a deception when it suggests the baptism of water and invincible ignorance are explicit and can be judged in specific persons.

This error is being repeated parrot-like by just about every Catholic. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) Doctrine Committee in the Clarification on Fr. Peter Phan repeats a few times that the Church is necessary for salvation ‘except for those in invincible ignorance…’ The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) says everybody needs to enter the Church for salvation except for those in invincible ignorance and with the baptism of desire.

Here is part of the Forum discussion:-

What do you mean by implicit Baptism of Desire? When is the Baptism of Desire not implicit?
Do you assume that the Catechism and Vatican Council II is referring to explicit baptism of desire and invincible ignorance?
Jim says:
This (Baptism of Desire) is obviously purely speculative, conceptual, de jure...
So when I meet a Jew or Muslim in Boston I can tell him that the Catholic Church teaches that he needs Catholic Faith and the Baptism of water to go to Heaven says Scott Hahn correctly .(As Jim says the Baptism of Desire is hypothetical. So we wouldn’t know any particular case in Boston). So everyone with no exception needs to enter the Church to avoid Hell and if anyone has the baptism of desire or is in invincible ignorance it would be known only to God.

The mantra had been popularized in the writings of Fr.Hans Kung, who is still allowed to offer Holy Mass. Fr.Kung saw the mantra as referring to explicit and de facto salvation-instead of a possibility ,something hypoterical, de jure (in principle only).

After this faulty premise Kung rationalized that the popes are no more infallible.He believed that Vatican Council II had created a ‘revolution’ even thought the mantra (Lumen Gentium 16) was not mentioned for the first time in the Council, as he could suggest.The Hans Kung Deception was popularized by the secular Jewish-Left media.


Since King  interpreted the mantra as referring to explicit salvation he believed the dogma was contradicted.

The popes and Councils, on the contrary, interpreted  the mantra as a reference to de jure salvation.It was also accepted in principle, as a concept by St.Thomas Aquinas.Only a concept.

Jim, could now say that the USCCB, SSPX,Patrick Madrid and Fr.Hans Kung are in heresy (why mention the mantra if you know it is de jure and does not contradict the infallible teaching?).Jim also knows there is no church document which says Fr.Leonard Feeney was  excommunicated for heresy.

Alongwith Jim, there is a whole group of young people,Catholics with a good religious formation.They have been fortunate. They should be ready to explain things at another level; the level of Vatican Council II.
They now see through the Kung Deception on Lumen Gentium 16 and extra ecclesiam nulla salus.