Extra Ecclesia Nulla Salus

[Dave]

Status of "Saint Benedict Center"
Question from Eric Giunta on 01-23-2002:
I understand from James Akin in the apologetics forum that people are allowed to adhere to a literalistic interpretation of "Outsdie the Church there is no salvation" and that the Saint Benedict Center, followers of McFeeny, are within the confines of the Church.
What the heck?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

If this is true, it's really embarrasing. It's embarrasing that I belong to a Church that claims to be infallible and to teach authoritatively, and should do so.

Yet bishops do nothing to stop liturgical abuses in their dioceses.

Bishops continue to allow heretical teachers to teach at Catholic univerisites.

When was the last time we've seen a heretic dissident excommunicated by a bishop or the Church?

And now this?

Stuff like this makes me consider converting to Orthodoxy. At least Orthodoxy doesn't claim to teach with the same authority as the Catholic Church. And there is much less dissent there.

Dissent in the Church does not bother me; what really bugs me is that today's leadership doesn't seem to have the guts to take care of it; does not have the guts to take action.

Is my informtation wrong, or is there some encouragement I can look toward?


Answer by Bill Bilton on 01-24-2002:
The doctrine that "Outside the Church there is no salvation" is one that is constantly misinterpreted by those who won't submit to the Magisterium of the Church. Faith does not depend upon our ability to reason to the truth but on our humility before the Truth presented to us by those to whom Christ entrusted that task. This is why the First Vatican Council taught that it is the task of the Magisterium ALONE to determine and expound the meaning of the Tradition - including "outside the Church no salvation."
Concerning this doctrine the Pope of Vatican I, Pius IX, spoke on two different occasions. In an allocution (address to an audience) on December 9th, 1854 he said:

We must hold as of the faith, that out of the Apostolic Roman Church there is no salvation; that she is the only ark of safety, and whosoever is not in her perishes in the deluge; we must also, on the other hand, recognize with certainty that those who are invincible in ignorance of the true religion are not guilty for this in the eyes of the Lord. And who would presume to mark out the limits of this ignorance according to the character and diversity of peoples, countries, minds and the rest?

Again, in his encyclical Quanto conficiamur moerore of 10 August, 1863 addressed to the Italian bishops, he said:

It is known to us and to you that those who are in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion, but who observe carefully the natural law, and the precepts graven by God upon the hearts of all men, and who being disposed to obey God lead an honest and upright life, may, aided by the light of divine grace, attain to eternal life; for God who sees clearly, searches and knows the heart, the disposition, the thoughts and intentions of each, in His supreme mercy and goodness by no means permits that anyone suffer eternal punishment, who has not of his own free will fallen into sin.

These statements are consistent with the understanding of the Church contained in the documents of Vatican II, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, as well as explaining why the rigorist position of Fr. Feeney (that all must be actual members of the Catholic Church to be saved) has been condemned by the Magisterium. It is ironic that precisely those who know their obligation to remain united to the Magisterium, and thus on whom this doctrine is morally binding, keep themselves from union with the Roman See on this point.

[Dave]

Outside the Church no salvation
Question from Beth B. on 08-25-2000:
Mr. Donovan, I read your explanation regarding "Outside the Church No Salvation", and am a little unclear about something. When you refer to "those who won't submit to the Magisterium of the Church", are you referring to people such as Father Feeney, who believe that only Roman Catholics will be saved? If not, then to whom are you referring, and how do these individuals misinterpret the Church's teaching?

Answer by Colin B. Donovan, STL on 09-21-2000:
The greatest obligation flowing from this doctrine falls on those who "say" they have the Catholic faith, since those ignorant of their responsibility will not be held accountable by God. It is of the nature of faith to be docile, teachable, to those with the God-given authority to teach. If someone says "I am a Cub's fan" but wears "Mets" clothing, without judging their conscience, one can legitimately question their adherence to Cub fandom. If someone says "my faith is as Catholic as anyone else's," but lacks docility to the Teaching Church, without judging their guilt before God, it is legitimate to question their adherence to the Catholic Faith. [b]Lack of docility, or dissent, is external evidence of the absence of supernatural faith, without which we cannot please God, and thus cannot be saved.
The Catholic who will not adhere to the Magisterium is the one will not be taught by the Church, or who fails to accept the teachings of the Church, as the Church gives them and explains them, NOT as they presume them to mean. If done knowingly and freely, as with any grave sin, it separates the person from Christ and the Church. As with any grave sin, to die in that state is to be separated from God forever. Thus, the fallen Catholic is more miserable than any other person, since God gave them every opportunity.[/b] (emphasis mine)
The correct understanding of the Church's teaching on this matter can be found in the new document from Rome, Dominus Iesus. I have also summarized this teaching on a FAQ Outside the Church No Salvation.

The basic errors in this matter consist in "everyone can go to heaven and the Church doesn't really matter," or, "only actual members of the Catholic Church go to heaven." The latter was Fr. Feeney's.

[Guest JeffCR07]

That is the single best thing I've read all day!

- Your Brother In Christ, Jeff

[CatholicCrusader]

computer error :crash:

Edited August 2, 2004 by CatholicCrusader

[CatholicCrusader]

computer error :crash:

Edited August 2, 2004 by CatholicCrusader

[CatholicCrusader]

He doesn't say that a person who is "invicibly ignorant" is therefore saved. Here is an explanation of what "invincible ignorance" actually means, written in the last quarter of the 19th century, right after Vatican I and these statements of Blessed Pope Pius IX by Fr. Michael Müller.

[quote]The Background: Father Michael Müller is well known for his magnificent books The Blessed Sacrament, Prayer: the Key to Salvation, The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and The Sinner's Return to God. He also authored many works that are now out of print. In 1875, he wrote a small booklet entitled A Familiar Explanation of Christian Doctrine3 in which he emphasized the doctrine that "outside the Church there is no salvation." His book was attacked by liberal-leaning American clergymen at the time. The main attack came from a "prominent Catholic priest" whom Father Müller only referred to as "Sir Oracle" (S.O.). Father Müller responded to these assaults with his superb 292 page book, The Catholic Dogma, which bears the Permisu Superiorum from his Redemptorist Order. What follows is taken verbatum from pages 211 to 218 of that book. The reader will immediately notice that in clarifying the teaching on invincible ignorance, Father Müller is also combatting the same errors so prominent in our own day.

 
"But, suppose", some one will say, "a person, in his inculpable ignorance, believes that he is on the right road to Heaven, though he is not a Catholic; he tries his best to live up to the dictates of his conscience. Now, should he die in that state of belief, he would, it seems, be condemned without his fault. We can understand that God is not bound to give Heaven to anybody, but, as He is just, He certainly cannot condemn anybody without his fault."

Whatever question may be made still in regard to the great truth, in question is sufficiently answered in the explanation already given of this great truth4. For the sake of greater clearness, however, we will answer a few more questions. In the answers to these questions we shall be obliged to repeat what has already been said.

Now, as to the question just proposed, we answer with St. Thomas and St. Augustine: "There are many things which a man is obliged to do, but which he cannot do without the help of divine grace: as, for instance, to love God and his neighbor, and to believe the articles of faith; but he can do all this with the help of grace; and 'to whomsoever God gives His grace He gives it out of Divine Mercy: and to whomsoever He does not give it, He refuses it out of divine justice, in punishment of sin committed, or at least in punishment of original sin," as St. Augustine says. (Lib. de correptione et gratia, c. 5 et 6; Sum. 22. q. ii art. v.) "And the ignorance of these things of salvation, the knowledge of which men did not care to have, is, without doubt, a sin for them; but for those who were not able to acquire such knowledge, the want of it is a punishment for their sins", says St. Augustine; hence both are justly condemned, and neither the one nor the other has a just excuse for being lost." (Epist. ad Sixtum, Edit. Maur. 194, cap. vi., n. 27.)

Moreover, a person who wants to go east, but, by an innocent mistake, gets on a train going west, will, as soon as he finds out his mistake, get off at the next station, and take a train that goes east. In like manner, a person who walked on a road that he, in his inculpable ignorance, believed was the true road to Heaven, must leave that road, as soon as he finds out his mistake, and inquire for the true road to Heaven. God, in His infinite mercy, will not fail to make him find out, in due time, the true road to Heaven, if he corresponds to His grace. Hence we asked the following question in our Familiar Explanation:

"What are we to think of the salvation of those who are out of the pale of the Church without any fault of theirs, and who never had any opportunity to know better?"

To this question we give the following answer:

"Their inculpable (invincible) ignorance will not save them; but if they fear God and live up to their conscience, God, in His infinite mercy, will furnish them with the necessary means of salvation, even so as to send, if needed, an angel to instruct them in the Catholic Faith, rather than let them perish through inculpable ignorance." (St. Thomas Aquinas)
Liberal Objections

S. O. remarks about this answer, "that the author is not theologically correct, for no one will ever be punished through, by, or because of inculpable ignorance." In these words, S. O. impudently imputes to us what we never have asserted, namely, that a man will be damned on account of his inculpable ignorance. From the fact that a person tries to live up to the dictates of his conscience, and cannot sin against the true religion on account of being invincibly ignorant of it, many have drawn the false conclusion that such a person is saved, or, in other words, is in the state of sanctifying grace, making thus invincible ignorance a means of salvation. This conclusion is contra "latius hos quam permissæ". To give an example. Rev. Nicholas Russo, S. J., professor of philosophy in Boston College, says in his book, The True Religion and its Dogmas:
"This good faith being supposed, we say that such a Christian (he means a baptized Protestant) is in a way a member of the Catholic Church. Ignorance alone is the cause of his not acknowledging the authority of his true mother. The Catholic Church does not look upon him as wholly a stranger; she calls him her child; she presses him to her maternal heart; through other hands she prepares him to shine in the kingdom of Heaven. Yes, the profession of a creed different from the true one will not, of itself, bar the gates of Heaven before this Christian; invincible ignorance will, before the tribunal of the just God, ensure the pardon of his errors against faith; and, if nothing else be wanting, Heaven will be his home for eternity."

We have already sufficiently refuted these false assertions, and we have quoted them, not for the purpose of refuting them, but for the purpose of denying emphatically what follows after these false assertions, namely:

"This is the doctrine held by almost all theologians, and has received the sanction of our late Pope Pius IX. In his allocution of December 9, 1854, we read the following words: 'It is indeed of faith that no one can be saved outside the Apostolic Roman Church; that this Church is the one ark of salvation; that he who has not entered it will perish in the deluge. But, on the other hand, it is equally certain that, were a man to be invincibly ignorant of the true religion, he would not be held guilty in the sight of God for not professing it.' "

The True Teaching of Pius IX

Now, in which of these words of Pope Pius IX is any of the above false assertions of the Rev. N. Russo, S. J., sanctioned? In which words does Pius IX say that a Protestant in good faith is in a way a member of the Catholic Church? Does not Pius IX teach quite the contrary in the following words:5

"Now, whoever will carefully examine and reflect upon the condition of the various religious societies, divided among themselves, and separated from the Catholic Church -- which, from the days of Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Apostles, has ever exercised, by its lawful pastors, and still does exercise, the divine power committed to it by this same Lord -- will easily satisfy himself that none of these societies, singly nor all together, are in any way or form that one Catholic Church which our Lord founded and built, and which He chose should be; and that he cannot by any means say that these societies are members or parts of that Church, since they are visibly separate from Catholic unity ...

"Let all those, then, who do not profess the unity and truth of the Catholic Church, avail themselves of the opportunity of this (Vatican) Council, in which the Catholic Church, to which their forefathers belonged, affords a new proof of her close unity and her invincible vitality, and let them satisfy the longings of their hearts, and liberate themselves from that state in which they cannot have any assurance of their own salvation. Let them unceasingly offer fervent prayers to the God of Mercy, that He will throw down the wall of separation, that He will scatter the darkness of error, and that He will lead them back to the Holy Mother Church, in whose bosom their fathers found the salutary pastures of life, in whom alone the whole doctrine of Jesus Christ is preserved and handed down, and the mysteries of heavenly grace dispensed."

Now does not Pius IX say in these words, very plainly and distinctly, that the "members of all other religious societies are visibly separated from Catholic unity; that in this state of separation they cannot have salvation; that, by fervent prayer, they should beseech God to throw down the wall of separation, to scatter the darkness of error, and lead them to the Mother Church, in which alone salvation is found."

And in his Allocution to the Cardinals, held Dec. 17, 1847, Pius IX says: "Let those, therefore, who wish to be saved, come to the pillar and the ground of faith, which is the Church; let them come to the true Church of Christ, which, in her bishops, and in the Roman Pontiff, the Chief Head of all, has the succession of apostolical Authority, which has never been interrupted, which has never counted anything of greater importance than to preach, and by all means to keep and defend the doctrine proclaimed by the Apostles at Christ's command ... We shall never at any time abstain from any cares or labors that, by the grace of Christ Himself, we may bring those who are ignorant, and who are going astray, to THlS ONLY ROAD OF TRUTH and SALVATION.'' Now does not Pius IX teach most clearly in these words that the ignorant cannot be saved by their ignorance, but that, in order to be saved they must come to the only road of truth and salvation, which is the Roman Catholic Church.

Again, does not Pius IX most emphatically declare, in the words quoted above by the Rev. N. Russo, S. J., that "It is indeed of faith, that NO ONE can be saved out of the Apostolic Roman Church?" How, then, we ask, can the Rev. N. Russo, S. J. say in truth, that a Protestant in good faith, such as he described, is in a way a member of the Catholic Church? That the Catholic Church does not look upon him as wholly a stranger? That she calls him her child, presses him to her maternal heart, prepares him, through other hands to shine in the kingdom of God? That the profession of a creed different from the true one will not, of itself, bar the gates of Heaven before this Christian, etc.? How can this professor of philosophy at the Boston College assert all this, whilst Pius IX teaches the very contrary? And mark especially the scandalous assertion of the Rev. N. Russo, S. J., namely: "This our opinion is the doctrine which has received the sanction of our late Pope Pius IX" To prove his scandalous assertion, he quotes the following words of Pius IX: "It is equally certain that, were a man to be invincibly ignorant of the true religion, he would not be held guilty in the sight of God for not professing it."

If, in these words, Pius IX says what no one calls in question, that invincible ignorance of the true religion excuses a Protestant from the sin of heresy, does Pius IX thereby teach that such invincible ignorance saves such a Protestant? Does he teach that invincible ignorance supplies all that is necessary for salvation -- all that you can have only in the true faith? How could the Professor of philosophy at the Jesuit College in Boston draw such a false and scandalous conclusion from premises in which it is not contained?[/quote]

Continued in next post...

[CatholicCrusader]

[quote]Pius IX has, on many occasions, condemned such liberal opinions. Read his Allocution to the Cardinals, held Dec. 17, 1847, in which he expresses his indignation against all those who had said that he had sanctioned such perverse opinions. "In our times", says he, "many of the enemies of the Catholic Faith direct their efforts towards placing every monstrous opinion on the same level with the doctrine of Christ, or confounding it therewith; and so they try more and more to propagate that impious system of the indifference of religions. But quite recently -- we shudder to say it certain men have not hesitated to slander us by saying that we share in their folly, favor that most wicked system, and think so benevolently of every class of mankind as to suppose that not only the sons of the Church, but that the rest also, however alienated from Catholic unity they may remain, are alike in the way of salvation, and may arrive at everlasting life. We are at a loss, from horror, to find words to express our detestation of this new and atrocious injustice that is done to us."

Mark well, Pius IX uttered these solemn words against "certain men'', whom he calls the enemies of the Catholic Faith, -- he means liberal minded Catholics and priests, as is evident from other Allocutions, in which he says that he has condemned not less than forty times their perverse opinions about religion. Is it not, for instance, a perverse and monstrous opinion, when the Rev. N. Russo, S. J., says: "The spiritual element (of the Church) comprises all the graces and virtues that are the foundation of the spiritual life; it includes the gifts of the Holy Ghost; in other words, it is what theologians call the soul of the Church. (Now follows the monstrous opinion) This mysterious soul is not limited by the bounds of the exterior organization (of the Church); it can go far beyond; exist even in the midst of schism and heresy unconsciously professed, and bind  to our Lord hearts that are connected by no exterior ties with the visible Body of the Church. This union with the soul of the Church is essential to salvation; so essential that without it none can be saved. But the necessity of belonging likewise to the Body of the Church, though a real one, may in certain cases offer no obstacle to salvation. This happens whenever invincible ignorance so shrouds a man's intellectual vision, that he ceases to be responsible before God for the light which he does not see?" The refutation of this monstrous opinion is sufficiently given in all we have said before. The very Allocution of Pius IX, from which the Rev. N. Russo quotes, is a direct condemnation of such monstrous opinions.6

Now these modern would-be theologians are not ashamed to assure us most solemnly that their opinions are the doctrine held by almost all theologians, and yet they cannot quote one proof from Holy Scripture, or from the writings of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, to give the least support to their opinions.

The Rev. N. Russo and S. O. seem not to see the difference between saying: Inculpable ignorance will not save a man, and inculpable ignorance will not beaver dam a man. Each assertion is correct, and yet there is a great difference between the two. It will be an act of charity to enlighten them on the point in question.

Neither Saves nor Condemns
Inculpable or invincible ignorance has never been and will never be a means of salvation. To be saved, it is necessary to be justified, or to be in the state of sanctifying grace. In order to obtain sanctifying grace, it is necessary to have the proper dispositions for justification; that is, true divine faith in at least the necessary truths of salvation, confident hope in the divine Savior, sincere sorrow for sin, together with the firm purpose of doing all that God has commanded, etc. Now, these supernatural acts of faith, hope, charity, contrition, etc., which prepare the soul for receiving sanctifying grace, can never be supplied by invincible ignorance; and if invincible ignorance cannot supply the preparation for receiving sanctifying grace, much less can it bestow sanctifying grace itself. "Invincible ignorance", says St. Thomas Aquinas, "is a punishment for sin". (De Infid. q. x., art. 1.) It is, then, a curse, but not a blessing or a means of salvation.

But if we say that inculpable ignorance cannot save a man, we thereby do not say that invincible ignorance damns a man. Far from it. To say, invincible ignorance is no means of salvation, is one thing; and to say, invincible ignorance is the cause of damnation, is another. To maintain the latter would be wrong, for inculpable ignorance of the fundamental principles of faith excuses a heathen from the sin of infidelity, and a Protestant from the sin of heresy; because such invincible ignorance, being only a simple involuntary privation, is no sin.

Hence Pius IX said "that, were a man to be invincibly ignorant of the true religion, such invincible ignorance would not be sinful before God; that, if such a person should observe the precepts of the Natural Law and do the will of God to the best of his knowledge, God, in His infinite mercy, may enlighten him so as to obtain eternal life; for, the Lord, who knows the heart and thoughts of man, will, in His infinite goodness, not suffer any one to be lost forever without his own fault."7

[i]Footnotes added by publisher[/i]
 
Footnotes:

1. Encyclicals of Pope Pius IX's: Singulari Quidem, Singulari Quadam, and Quanto Conficiamur Moerore

2. Bishop George Hay (1729-1811) from Scotland was one of the greatest Catholic teachers and apologists of the early 19th Century. His three famous works are The Sincere Christian, The Devout Christian and The Pious Christian (all out of print). His works have received high praise from many Catholic bishops of the 19th Century. Paul Cardinal Cullen said, "the learned Bishop's writings display a great power of reasoning, and great critical acumen, while they supply an inexhaustible mine of erudition and Scriptural knowledge".

3. The book received the approval of a number of learned priests and theologians at the time, and was printed with the Imprimatur of the Most Rev. J. Roosevelt Baily, Archbishop of Baltimore and the Very Reverend Joseph Helmpraecht, the Provincial of the Redemptorist in the U.S.

4. See The Catholic Dogma, pp. 136 to 211.

5. The author here notes "which Rev. N. Russo, S.J. quotes on pp. 163-166".

6. The author refers the reader to the preface of The Catholic Dogma in which Pope Pius IX is quoted at length on the teaching that outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation.

7. The next chapter in Fr. Müller's book is entitled "How Almighty God Leads to Salvation Those Who Are Inculpably Ignorant of the Truths of Salvation." Fr. Müller explains that "Almighty God, who is just and condemns no one without his fault, puts, therefore, such souls as are in invincible ignorance of the truths of salvation, in the way of salvation, by either natural or supernatural means." (p. 218) He then gives instances in Church history where God has employed both natural and supernatural means to lead the invincibly ignorant into the Church.[/quote]

[Guest JeffCR07]

I don't have time to post at length here (I gotta get home from work) but I will address the most fundamental assertation being made here.

[quote]none of these societies, singly nor all together, are in any way or form that one Catholic Church which our Lord founded and built, and which He chose should be; and that he cannot by any means say that these societies are members or parts of that Church, since they are visibly separate from Catholic unity ...[/quote]

and

[quote]"Let all those, then, who do not profess the unity and truth of the Catholic Church, avail themselves of the opportunity of this (Vatican) Council, in which the Catholic Church, to which their forefathers belonged, affords a new proof of her close unity and her invincible vitality, and let them satisfy the longings of their hearts, and liberate themselves from that state in which they cannot have any assurance of their own salvation. Let them unceasingly offer fervent prayers to the God of Mercy, that He will throw down the wall of separation, that He will scatter the darkness of error, and that He will lead them back to the Holy Mother Church, in whose bosom their fathers found the salutary pastures of life, in whom alone the whole doctrine of Jesus Christ is preserved and handed down, and the mysteries of heavenly grace dispensed."[/quote]

this is what was said, now look at the conclusion:

[quote]Now does not Pius IX say in these words, very plainly and distinctly, that the "members of all other religious societies are visibly separated from Catholic unity; that in this state of separation they cannot have salvation; that, by fervent prayer, they should beseech God to throw down the wall of separation, to scatter the darkness of error, and lead them to the Mother Church, in which alone salvation is found."[/quote]


Actually, no, he does not do any such thing. First off, as we can see from Quote 1, he notes that the [i]societies[/i], that is, the organizations of protestant religions, are not comparable to the Catholic Church. He in no way shape or form even insinuates that the individual members of those religions are incapable of becoming mysteriously connected to the Catholic Church (even without their own knowledge).

Moreover, the Holy Father's words are being directly [i]misquoted[/i] please note the large difference:

The Holy Father says:

[quote]liberate themselves from that state in which they [i]cannot have any assurance[/i] of their own salvation[/quote]

He says the Holy Father says:

[quote]in this state of separation they cannot have salvation[/quote]

This is a most drastic error. The Pope Pius IX was merely restating what the Church has always and will always teach: that there is no "sure road to salvation" besides the Catholic Church. Moreover, what the Holy Father really said does not even remotely preclude the possibility that a member of a protestant church cannot be, as I said before, mysteriously connected to the Catholic Church through invincible ignorance or "baptism by blood or desire."

Also, this entire post does nothing to combat the argument that one who denies the teachings of the Holy Father and the Magesterium is in questionable schismatic standing.

- Your Brother In Christ, Jeff

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

[b]The Beginning: The Apostolic Fathers against the rigorist interpretation of “Extra Ecclesium Nulla Salus” (No Salvation Outside the Church):[/b]
[quote]Pope St. Clement of Rome
"Let us go through all generations and learn that in generation after generation the Master has given a place of repentance for those willing to turn to him. Those who repented for their sins, appeased God in praying, [b]and received salvation, even though they were aliens to God[/b]" (1 Clement, no. 7 [AD 95]).[/quote]
(St. Clement I was ordained by the Apostle St. Peter.)

[quote]St. Justin Martyr
We have been taught that Christ is the first-begotten of God, and we have declared him to be the Logos of which all mankind partakes [John 1:9]. [b]Those, therefore, who lived according to reason [Greek, logos} were really Christians[/b], even though they were thought to be atheists, such as, among the Greeks, Socrates, Heraclitus, and others like them. . . . Those who lived before Christ but did not live according to reason [logos] were wicked men, and enemies of Christ, and murderers of those who did live according to reason [logos], whereas those who lived then or [b]who live now[/b] according to reason [logos] are Christians. Such as these can be confident and unafraid (First Apology 46 [A.D. 151]).[/quote]

[quote]St. Irenaeus of Lyons
The Church "is the entrance to life; all others are thieves and robbers. On this account we are bound to avoid them... We hear it declared of the unbelieving and the blinded of this world that they shall not inherit the world of life which is to come... [b]Resist them [the rigorists] in defense of the only true and life giving faith, which the Church has received from the Apostles and imparted to her sons[/b]." (Against Heresies, Book III [circa 200 A.D.]).[/quote]
(St. Irenaeus was a disciple of St. Polycarp, who was a disciple of the Apostle St. John.)

[quote]Clement of Alexandria
"Before the coming of the Lord, philosophy was necessary for justification to the Greeks; now it is useful for piety . . . for it brought the Greeks to Christ as the law did the Hebrews" (Miscellanies 1:5 [A.D. 208]).[/quote]
(Clement speaks about salvation before Jesus, but it does allude to some kind of baptism of desire.)

[quote]Origen of Alexandria
"[T]here was never a time when God did not want men to be just; he was always concerned about that. Indeed, he always provided beings endowed with reason with occasions for practicing virtue and doing what is right. In every generation the wisdom of God descended into those souls which he found holy and made them to be prophets and friends of God" (Against Celsus 4:7 [A.D. 248]).[/quote]
(Origen speaks about salvation before Jesus, but it does allude to some kind of baptism of desire.)

[quote]St. Augustine
"[b]I do not hesitate to put the Catholic catechumen, burning with divine love, before a baptized heretic[/b]. Even within the Catholic Church herself we put the good catechumen ahead of the wicked baptized person . . . For Cornelius, even before his baptism, was filled up with the Holy Spirit [Acts 10:44-48], while Simon [Magus], even after his baptism, was puffed up with an unclean spirit [Acts 8:13-19]" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:4[6] [A.D. 400]).[/quote]
(Feeneyite rigorists deny salvation for Catechumens.)
[quote]St. Augustine continued
"The apostle Paul said, 'As for a man that is a heretic, after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him' [Titus 3:10]. But those who maintain their own opinion, however false and perverted, without obstinate ill will, especially those who have not originated the error of bold presumption, but have received it from parents who had been led astray and had lapsed . . . [b]those who seek the truth with careful industry and are ready to be corrected when they have found it, are not to be rated among heretics[/b]" (Letters 43:1 [A.D. 412]).
"When we speak of within and without in relation to the Church, [b]it is the position [i]of the heart[/i] that we must consider[/b], not that of the body…. All who are within [the Church] in heart are saved in the unity of the ark (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 5:28 [39]).[/quote]

[b]The Popes just before the Vatican II Council against the rigorist interpretation of “Extra Ecclesium Nulla Salus” (No Salvation Outside the Church):[/b]
[quote]Pope Bl. Pius IX
We all know [b]that those who suffer from invincible ignorance[/b] with regard to our holy religion, if they carefully keep the precepts of the natural law which have been written by God in the hearts of all men, if they are prepared to obey God, and if they lead a virtuous and dutiful life, can, by the power of divine light and grace, attain eternal life. For God, who knows completely the minds and souls, the thoughts and habits of all men, will not permit, in accord with His infinite goodness and mercy, anyone who is not guilty of a voluntary fault to suffer eternal punishment (no. 7).
On Promotion of False Doctrines (Quanto Conficiamur Moerore)
"It must, of course, be held as a matter of faith that outside the apostolic Roman Church no one can be saved, that the Church is the only ark of salvation, and that whoever does not enter it will perish in the flood. On the other hand, it must likewise be held as certain that those who are affected [b]by ignorance of the true religion[/b], if it is invincible ignorance, are not subject to any guilt in this matter before the eyes of the Lord" (no. 7).
On the Church in Austria (Singulari Quidam)[/quote]

[quote]Pope Pius XII
“…those who do not belong to the visible Body of the Catholic Church ... [b]by an unconscious desire and longing they have a certain relationship with the Mystical Body of the Redeemer[/b]” (Mystici Corporis 103).
“…those who do not belong to the visible Body of the Catholic Church ... we ask each and every one of them to correspond to the interior movements of grace, and to seek to withdraw from that state in which they cannot be sure of their salvation. [b]For even though by an unconscious desire and longing they have a certain relationship with the Mystical Body of the Redeemer[/b], they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in he Catholic Church. Therefore may they enter into Catholic unity and, joined with us in the one, organic Body of Jesus Christ, may they together with us run on to the one Head in the society of glorious love” (Mystici Corporis 103).[/quote]


[b]The Vatican II Council against the rigorist interpretation of “Extra Ecclesium Nulla Salus” (No Salvation Outside the Church):[/b]
[quote]Vatican II: Decree on the Church's Missionary Activity
Hence, those cannot be saved, [b]who knowing that the Catholic Church was founded through Jesus Christ, by God, as something necessary[/b], still refuse to enter it or remain in it (Ad Gentes Divinitus, no. 7).[/quote]
(People who knowingly reject the fact that the Catholic Church is God’s plan for salvation cannot be saved.)
[quote]"Those who, [b]through no fault of their own[/b], do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do His will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience -- those too may achieve eternal salvation" (Lumen Gentium, no. 16).[/quote]

[b]The Holy Office (1949):[/b]
[quote][b]The Holy Office, Aug 9, 1949, condemning doctrine of L. Feeney (DS 3870):[/b]
"It is not always required that one be actually incorporated as a member of the Church, but this at least is required: that one adhere to it in wish and desire. [b]It is not always necessary that this be explicit[/b]... but when a man labors under invincible ignorance, God accepts even an implicit will, called by that name because it is contained in the good disposition of soul in which a man wills to conform his will to the will of God."[/quote]
(Also, Pope Pius XII personally condemned Fr. Feeney’s position, and personally checked the English translation of his letter of condemnation.)

[b]The position of the Catholic Church as written in the new Catechism:[/b]
[quote]The Catechism of the Catholic Church:

VI. THE NECESSITY OF BAPTISM

1257 The Lord himself affirms that [b]Baptism is necessary for salvation[/b].60 He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.61[b] Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament[/b].62 The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." [b]God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments[/b].

1258 The Church has always held the firm conviction that those who suffer death for the sake of the faith without having received Baptism are baptized by their death for and with Christ. This Baptism of blood, like the desire for Baptism, brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament.

1259 For catechumens who die before their Baptism, their explicit desire to receive it, together with repentance for their sins, and charity, assures them the salvation that they were not able to receive through the sacrament.

1260 "Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery."63 [b]Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity[/b].

1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,"64 allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.

[u]Footnotes:[/u]
60 Cf. Jn 3:5.
61 Cf. Mt 28:19-20; cf. Council of Trent (1547) DS 1618; LG 14; AG 5.
62 Cf. Mk 16:16.
63 GS 22 § 5; cf. LG 16; AG 7.
64 Mk 10 14; cf. 1 Tim 2:4.[/quote]

[EDIT]: Fr. Feeney was excommunicated in 1953 for [b]disciplinary reasons[/b], not because of his teachings. Thus when the excommunication was lifted, the Holy Office's condemnation of his teachings (1949) was not. This is an important error made by many Feeneyites who believe that the lifting of Fr. Feeney's excommunication justifies their belief in his condemned interpretation of EENS.

Edited August 2, 2004 by thedude