Loading ...
According to a ZENIT report, at his general audience address on Wednesday, the Holy Father overturned the dogma of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, declaring that those with the spark and a commitment to peace and social justice will be saved. Okay, okay, that’s an unfair paraphrase, but come on, look at the ZENIT story yourself, which carries this headline: “Nonbelievers Too Can Be Saved, Says Pope.”
I don’t think, however, that the ZENIT report is entirely accurate about the import of the pope’s words. You can read the text of his address here. Instead of saying that nonbelievers can be saved, I think that the Holy Father is pointing towards a teaching of the Church which Blessed Pope Pius IX nicely expressed more than a century ago.
Pius IX, in his allocution, Singulari Quadem, makes clear that there is a state known as invincible ignorance; what it would take for one to be in a state of invincible ignorance, however, is not altogether clear. In any case, this is a matter for God to judge–not us–even as it remains for us to do our utmost to bring others to the Faith, to the Catholic Church, which is the Mystical Body of Christ.
Of the thousands of people who heard this address, how many were able to make the fine theological distinctions which need to be drawn about the doctrines which come into play in this very thorny area of theology? I think that these sorts of statements are only fuel for the sede vacantists and an enticement to laxity for those who know of the Church but see no problem in remaining outside of it.
I’m curious to hear the opinions of others about the prudence of this sort of address.
Pardon me for adding another critique of the Holy Father’s words on Wednesday, but why the reference to the Shoah? Benedict XVI said:
“The first part of the Psalm (cf. verses 1-4) has, as a background, the land of exile, with its rivers and canals, which watered the plain of Babylon, headquarters of the deported Jews. It is as a symbolic anticipation of the extermination camps in which the Jewish people — in the century that just ended — were led to an infamous operation of death, which has remained as an indelible disgrace in the history of humanity.”
That interpretation is purely gratuitous, as far as I can see. What does Super flumina Babylonis have to do with Nazi death camps? Really, what do the people who dwelt in exile in Babylon have to do with the people whom the Nazis put to death in those camps? As Norman Solomon, an eminent scholar of Judaism, explains in his Oxford introduction to Judaism, the Jewish religion, whatever exactly that is, as we have it today, did not exist before the destruction of the second temple at Jerusalem. The heirs of the Israelite people beside the streams in Babylon are the people of the Catholic Church, not the recalcitrant who scoff at Christ’s divinity.
The Holy Father is so perspicacious as to see Nazi death camps in Psalm 136, yet he had nothing to say about the concluding verses of that beautiful psalm: “O daughter of Babylon, miserable: blessed shall he be who shall repay thee thy payment which thou hast paid us. Blessed be he that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock.”
Yikes. It would get a little messy if we had to explain that one at a general audience address. Well, that’s not so much of a problem because those particular lines would be among the verses that were cut out of the Novus Ordo Breviary. In other words, Bugnini said that they can be safely ignored, so they can safely be ignored.
I am very thankful that Benedict is our Holy Father, but I am still waiting for him to live up to his reputation as enforcer of the Faith.
“I am very thankful that Benedict is our Holy Father, but I am still waiting for him to live up to his reputation as enforcer of the Faith.”
What would you have our Papa do?
Give us some serious, conservative bishops; give us wide and easy access to the old rite of the Mass; preach the Faith to the whole world, since he is on the world stage, reminding all that there is no other name under Heaven by which we may be saved.
I don’t know much about these matters, but aren’t bishops confirmed by the Holy See when there is a vacancy in some diocese or a new diocese is erected? So until a bishop resigns or there are new dioceses, our Papa really can’t raise priests to the episcopacy - but when he can, I’m sure he will give us some holy and serious bishops.
Why shouldn’t he rather instruct us as to the proper way of saying the Mass of the Roman Rite and bring Latin back into the Novus Ordo instead?
Is he not preaching the faith right now?
Speeches like this just make me shake my head. References to the massacres of Jews in World War II are about as politically safe as you can get. The Holy Father mentions the Holocaust, “which has remained as an indelible disgrace in the history of humanity.” A really provocative address would have pointed out that EVERY sin and disgrace, including genocide, is “delible” provided one repents and turns to Christ. And that while the Jews of Bethlehem — presumably kinsmen of the Holy Family and fellow descendants of King David — refused them shelter at the inn and in their home, the people who came to visit Our Lord (other than the shepherds) were Chaldean Magi, i.e. the descendants of the Babylonian persecutors of the Jews. So maybe Jews should become Christians and do the Christian thing — forgive and forget past injustices, including the “Holocaust,” just as Our Lord would forgive and forget their former rejection of Him.
Deirdre, there are certain notorious repeat offenders, like Bishop Matthew Clark in Rochester and Cardinal Mahoney in Los Angeles, of whom it seems that they should have been removed along ago. Being the Supreme Pontiff, Benedict can do something like that at any time, whether it is practical is another question.
I would love to see Latin return to the Novus Ordo. I think that we would see a very different Church today, I mean, in her human elements, if the Novus Ordo had been done, all along, in Latin, versus Deum, and with the dignity that was required in the old Mass. To be sure, even when done this way, there are still important differences between the old and the new Mass, but the congregation would barely notice them. And it is the congregation, the people assisting at the Mass, which breathes in its spirituality from the rite of the Mass.
About teaching the Faith, what I have in mind is the need to proclaim Christ Jesus, and Him crucified, to the many people with whom the Holy Father comes in contact: the Jews, the protestants, the buddhists, whomever else besides. In reading the reports of the Holy Father’s speeches at the synagogues, for instance, I get the impression that he did not go there to convert them to the Faith.
I understand that one such as he must always speak with tact and circumspection, but I think that this can be done while also leaving no doubt that none can be saved outside of the Church.
Someone made an interesting point on the FreeRepublic.com Religion thread, in response to an excerpt