When the defacto-dejure analysis is not used there could be confusion and the creation of a false theology.
Whether we are aware of it or not, we could be using either the defacto-dejure analysis or the irrational defacto-defacto model.
St. Pius XII uses the standard defacto-dejure analysis in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. The secular media interprets the Letter with the defacto-defacto model. It seems irrational. It does not make sense.
For example:
De facto-dejure model
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 refers to the dogma and so says that everyone de facto needs to enter the Church for salvation and there are no defacto exceptions.
It also says de jure, in principle and known only to God, a non Catholic can be saved with the baptism of desire ‘in certain circumstances’ (Letter of the Holy Office 1949).
Defacto-defacto model
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 according to the secular media says every one de facto needs to enter the Church for salvation and there are de facto exceptions.
For the media and the liberals there are those who can be saved defacto with the baptism of desire which is defacto known to us.
If the defacto-dejure analysis is not used some Magisterial texts would appear odd e.g. CCC 1257.
Would the Catechism of the Catholic Church be saying that the church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water.Defacto every one needs the baptism of water given to adults with Catholic Faith. However God is not limited to the Sacraments. So there are some defacto, known cases on earth who can be saved in invincible ignorance or with the baptism of desire?! In actuality every one needs the baptism of water but also in actuality some people on earth do not need it and they are known to us.
Irrational!
The defacto-dejure analysis was was used in Vatican Council II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church etc.It does not contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction.
-Lionel Andrades
Posts
