Faculty indicates we can judge now whom Jesus will judge as having a good conscience or being in invincible ignorance.
The Urbaniana University Faculty of Missiology's political correctness has taken them into the ludicrous. In the hide and seek with Catholic mission doctrine, students are taught the irrational and amusing.
The Dep’t of Missiology with a straight face says there can be the knowledge of a person being saved from Hell who has the baptism of desire. We can know this personally and judge a case. Wow!
It is also amusing if not sad, to see worldly students want to accept this new teaching. They must be obedient ,I guess.
No one will ask-is not explicit baptism of desire known only to God?
How can we humans know a single case of the baptism of desire?
How could we say for example that there were 10 baptism of desire cases in Rome this month?
The Dep’t. of Missiology teaches that the ex cathedra extra ecclesiam nulla salus salus ‘developed’. They claim Vatican Council II (Lumen Gentium 16) refers to this explicit, knowable judgable invincible ignorance in a non Catholic.
Wow! They have discovered in Rome, the city of aqueducts and land of Marconi, an explicit, knowable baptism of desire which is just like explicit baptism of water.
This ‘new find’ is being officially taught in the Urbaniana Pontifical University in Rome. On this very subject Prof. Sandra Mazzolini will conduct a seminar in the new academic year (2010-2011) beginning this month.
If you think I am clowning around check the university Handbook, Calendarium. It’s all there.
The ‘new find’ i.e. the discovery of formal, visible baptism of desire cases,which is being taught at the Urbaniana, is like everyone there praising The Emperors New Clothes in the Hans Christian Anderson fable.
“Did you know there is explicit, formal, visible baptism of desire?” it could be whispered.” So now we don’t have to believe in that interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus”.
Lumen Gentium 16 indicates that the Emperor has no clothes. LG 16 never uses the world ‘explicit’, formal or visible.
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.-Lumen Gentium 16,Vatican Council IITrue. Whenever they do achieve salvation it is always implicit (to us) and known only to God.
The Church Councils and the Church Fathers knew this truth. So they said everyone, all with no exception, need to be an EXPLICIT member of the Church. How? Through explicit baptism of water and Catholic Faith.
So LG 16 (implicit) does not contradict the dogma (explicit).
Then where is the basis for the ‘development’ of extra ecclesiam nulla salus? How can you interpret it differently from the past with no Church documents or text to state otherwise? If you cite LG 16 it is ludicrous .Your saying there is an objectively knowable baptism of desire.
There is no Church Document to support this Urbaniana clowning.
The rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus can be seen in the text of the dogma. It is confirmed in Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II (’all people need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation). It’s there also in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 845- the Church is like the Ark of Noah in which all need to enter.CCC846 the Church is like a door. These are images used by the Church Fathers for extra ecclesiam nulla salus). Dominus Iesus 20 (salvation is open for all but to receive it one has to enter the Church). Redemptoris Missio 55 ( in inter religious dialogue it must be remembered that the Church is the ordinary means of salvation).
Redemptoris Missio, Lumen Gentium 16, Mystici Corporis etc acknowledge there can be people saved in other religions. However this is possible only ‘in certain circumstances’ (Letter of the Holy Office 1949). Its a possibility, a probability, known only to God. It is always unknowable and hidden for us. For us it can only be a concept, something we accept in principle.
LG 16 is one of two reasons given for the ‘development ' of doctrine. The second excuse is Fr. Leonard Feeney. Both reasons are factually incorrect.
The Cardinal Ottaviani, Letter of the Holy Office 1949 (Haec Suprema) supported Fr. Leonard Feeney but the Jewish Left media reported the contrary. There was no clarification by the Archbishop of Boston, Cardinal Richard Cushing. The secular media repeated falsely that the excommunication was for heresy.
Neither was there an apology from the Jesuits for expelling Fr. Feeney from the community.
The Haec Suprema referred to ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible ‘teaching .The text of the dogma indicates all Jews in Boston need to convert into the Catholic Church to avoid Hell. This was the teaching of Fr. Feeney. So how can he be in heresy?
Here is the text of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which was the basis of mission for Catholics down the centuries.
1. “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215). Ex cathedra.A Jesuit apology to Fr. Leonard Feeney’s communities is still overdue.
2. “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, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.).Ex cathedra.
3. “The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.) Ex cathedra – from the website Catholicism.org and “No Salvation outside the Church”: Link List, the Three Dogmatic Statements Regarding EENS
There is no Church Document which says Fr. Leonard Feeney was excommunicated for heresy. The Haec Suprema (published in the Denzinger Encridion) states the ex communication was for ‘disobedience’.
The priest who represented the Church, before the lifting of the ex communication, said in a Press Conference that Fr.Leonard Feeney was not asked to recant (Salvation Outside the Church? Sullivan, Paulist Press). He could still hold to the rigorist interpretation of the dogma.
Time showed that it was the Archbishop of Boston and the Jesuits who were in heresy.
So how can Urbaniana claim a ‘development of doctrine’ based on the case of Fr. Leonard Feeney?
Also how can an ex cathedra dogma (Cantate Domino, Council of Florence) be superseded by the ordinary Magisterium (Vatican Council II, Letter of the Holy Office 1949) even with a factually false interpretation?
The Urbaniana Handbook (Calendarium. MLT 3005, Second Semester) says there will be a seminar on ‘The development and interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus’ (Lo sviluppo e interpretazione dell’ extra ecclesiam nulla salus)
Monkey business.
Posts
