Traditionalist priests part of the confusion, fallen for ‘invincible ignorance, baptism of desire’ virus
They mean there are people who can be saved in invincible ignorance or with the baptism of desire even though they are not visible, to us, as members of the Catholic Church.
We don’t know of a single case of a person being saved with the baptism of desire or invincible ignorance. So how can you postulate a theology claiming there are such cases in the present times, worse still, that you know of them.
The teaching extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the extra ordinary Magisterium of three popes and Councils, and the ordinary Magisterium of many popes does not mention cases of invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire as exceptions. It is assumed that only God will know of these cases.
The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the church there is no salvation) says there is only one way of salvation and every one needs to enter the Church formally, to be saved.
The pope and the SSPX say there is only one way of salvation and the pope implies that Jews are saved in general through this one way and so they do not have to convert.
The SSPX ‘s position is full of confusion since they also believe all Jews need to convert in the present times.
A Fr. Cedraka is on line who considers it a mortal sin to affirm the rigorist interpretation of the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus since it does not take into account persons in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire. When asked for explanations he does not respond and the traditionalist forum, Fisheaters, of which he is a member will not discuss this subject.Since they also assume that we know who in particular is saved in invincible ignorance etc and so to affirm the rigorist interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus is heresy!
Pages 217-218: “This is then what Pius IX said and what he condemned. It is necessary to understand the formulation that was so often employed by the Fathers of the Church: ‘Outside the Church there is no salvation.’ When we say that, it is incorrectly believed that we think that all the Protestants, all the Moslems, all the Buddhists, all those who do not publicly belong to the Catholic Church go to hell. Now, I repeat, it is possible for someone to be saved in these religions, but they are saved by the Church, and so the formulation is true: Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. This must be preached.”[Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, pp. 217-218] (Emphasis added)
‘it is possible for someone to be saved in these religions, but they are saved by the Church’
There are two SSPX camps. One says
There are two SSPX camps. One says
1.Every one needs to enter the Church except for those in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire and other such cases of which we know of personally.
The other says :
2. Everyone needs to enter the Catholic Church for salvation and there are no exceptions. Those in invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire etc are known only to God.
Camp 1 says baptism of desire etc are defacto known to us. Camp 2 says baptism of desire etc is only accepted in principle (de jure). De facto we do not know any case.
So with so much of confusion among the SSPX it is no surprise that they have remained silent over the one way of salvation heresy, which negates an ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Pope John Paul II ‘s Dominus Iesus 20.
SSPX priests who understand the situation do not know a way out. They realize there can be no such thing as an explicit or implicit baptism of desire that we can know of. Yet they need to be faithful to the misinterpretation of the teachings of Archbishop Lefebvre on this subject.DICI is silent over the pope’s comment since they are not sure of themselves.
It is the SSPX priests who have interpreted Archbishop Lefebvre using the same liberal mantra ‘everybody needs to enter the Catholic Church except for those in invincible ignorance etc... .’ now being used by the pope .
This is heresy. 1) It is implying that we can know people in genuine invincible ignorance etc and they are exceptions to everybody needing to explicitly enter the Church.(ex cathedra dogma) 2) It is irrational. No SSPX priest knows a single case of explicit or implicit baptism of desire. How can he ever claim anyone is an exception? And if he does not know any exceptions in particular why mention it?
When an SSPX priest agrees that there is no external-seeable baptism of desire (explicit) that anyone of us can know he is in agreement with the communities of Fr. Leonard Feeney. He is saying the same thing. There is no baptism of desire (external or implicitly knowable).Implciitly it can exist. Explicilty it is unknown to us.
When an SSPX priest realizes that the baptism of desire, invincible ignorance can only be a concept we accept in principle (as Abp. Lefebvre in the passage quoted above) then he is saying the same as the Saint Benedict Centre, (SBC) New Hampshire and the Sisters of St. Benedict Centre, Worcester,USA, communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney approved by the Church. The SBC has posted a definition of the baptism of desire on their website (Catholicism.org). So the SBC states there is a baptism of desire as a concept. So how can Fr.Cedraka, Fr.Scott and Fr.Laisney of the SSPX claim on line that the supporters of Fr.Leonard Feeney are in heresy?
On the issue of there being no explicit or implicit baptism of desire that we can know of, some of the SSPX members and the communities of Fr. Leonard Feeney are in agreement.
On the issue of the ex cathedra dogma saying there are no exceptions to everyone needing to enter the Church with no exception , Archbishop Lefebvre is in accord with Fr. Leonard Feeney.
If the SSPX does not interpret Lumen Gentium 16,Vatican Council II as referring to de jure, implicit salvation, then it is the Kung Deception. If they interpret Lumen Gentium 16 as referring to something defacto-personally-knowable then it is heresy.
If they do not see the Baptism of Desire as implicit then they would contradict the ex cathedra dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The dogma refers to explicit entry into the Catholic Church, through the baptism of water and Catholic Faith, which is explicit and objectively verifiable.
Here is the ex cathedra dogma.
The dogma like Ad Gentes 7 does not say that there is only one way of salvation and Jews do not have to enter the Church in the present times for salvation; to avoid Hell. The dogma like John 3:5, John 6, Mark 16:16 says that Jews need to convert in the present times to avoid Hell. 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
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, 302.). 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: http://nosalvationoutsideofthecatholicchurch.blogspot.com/ )
Posts
