Fr. Feeney and Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus |
|
Or, The Case Against Baptism of Desire and of Blood |
INTRODUCTION
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) -- there is no Salvation outside the Church -- is the explicit doctrine of the Catholic Church. It is a de fide doctrine, to be believed by every Catholic under pain of heresy and excommunication. Our Lord Jesus Christ firmly established the Church for which one must enter and belong in order to be saved. Being outside her pale would deprive a person of the necessities required for salvation. Christ founded ONE Church and intend it to be indivisible, as He said, "My Father and I are One." He gave authority and power (the Keys) to one man and to NO one else (Matt xvi:18-19). He gave the explicit command that all nations be taught all that He had taught and to baptize each one in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. And He intend for His Church to endure unto the consumation of the world. He gave His unconditional guarantee that evil will never prevail against her and that He will be with her till the end (Matt xxviii:19-20).
Those who reject Matthew as referred to above have imperiled their salvation, unless at some point in life, prior to death, of course, they have formally rejected their errors and entered the Church. They must have been formally baptized and taught the basic tenets of the Church. Firm acceptance of Jesus Christ as a personal Lord and Savior and belief in the Bible only is not the means to salvation. Baptism transforms a person born into sin into adopted sons of Jesus Christ, washing away Original Sin and making him a member of the Church. Baptism also places a distinctive and indelible mark or "character," never to be effaced, upon the baptized person's soul, marking that soul the property of the Holy Trinity, and remains even with the soul of the apostate, a mark to be recognized even in Hell. Any person who is baptized, even by a heretical and schismatic Church, becomes a member of the Catholic Church. That this person will not embrace the Catholic faith but believe in a heretical one becomes a matter between him and God. However, the letter and spirit of the law of EENS applies to him.
Many will shout EENS is not fair! God desires the salvation of all. True. But it is also true that without God's cooperation, man cannot save himself, and that God will not save unless He has man's cooperation. This is more or less what the debate on EENS is all about.
On one side of the debate is the proposition: strictly those members of the Catholic Church will be saved. On the other side is the proposition: those who, through no fault of their own, have never heard the Gospel preached to them and thus were not baptized, can and are saved.
Thus Baptism of Desire (BOD) and Invincible Ignorance. A third consideration, Baptism of Blood, or martyrdom, is not so much a debatable issue as Desire and Ignorance.
One side of the debate states: only water Baptism will save, no exceptions. The other side states: if a person is sincere enough to want (desire) to become a member of the Church and seeks to be baptized but through some unfortunate mishap loses his life before he can be formally baptized, is saved. The merits of Christ are applied to him as though he has been formally baptized.
The debate on Baptism of Desire is moot and will produce no winners. Until the Church defines it formally and infallibly, the debate will rage on, because those who are against it will concede only after such promulgation. The Pope and an Oecumenical Council needs to definitively and infallibly define the doctrine before the "water only" adherents will put the whole issue to rest. But does it really matter for such an event to happen? The Popes have convoked and the Church has convened General Councils precisely to define Church teaching and condemn heresy. Nothing has been left out; hitherto, every conceivable heresy has been exposed and anathemized.
Prior to the emergence of Fr. Feeney and his advocacy of water only baptism, the question of "desire" was never even brought up, much less discussed. Its acceptance goes back to St. Augustine, who allowed that the explicit desire to be baptized or to die for Our Lord was, in certain cases, the equivalent to the Sacrament. Fr. Feeney, his congregation, and followers began to question the status of Desire, Blood and Invincible ignorance vis-a-vis pronounced Catholic doctrine, and finding none, put forth the assertion that it is null and void.
The debaters are practising, traditional Catholics. "Traditional" differentiates them from conservative, progressive, and liberal Catholics. Those traditional Catholics who profess belief in Baptism of Desire have explicitly stated their belief in EENS and water baptism and do not reject the de fide doctrine. Unlike those Catholics who, following the teaching of the new (and heretical) Church, accept the notion of salvation for all, there is no doubt about the sincerity of these pro- and anti- BOD debaters. What separates pro and anti BOD is the interpretation of John 3:5. There lies the distinction. Who has the Truth? The answer lies in antiquity, and can be arrived at by the simple application of the threefold test of Church's catholicity: what is and what is not True Tradition.
It would be a ponderous task to read through every letter, message, and post on the issue. But brevity does no justice either. I have endeavored to post all pertinent messages, pro and con, and not include any that are redundant.
The Forum is forthcoming in much of its entirety (it is doubtful that there would ever be any resolution, as long as the strict interpretation of EENS is maintained). Two views are presented in the folowing pages: First, "Contra Fr. Feeney and his exclusive doctrine of EENS. Second, a defense of Fr. Feeney.
Posted: 9/97