Shocking Cardinal Ratzinger Quote regarding EENS- How do we deal with this?

ARE BELIEVERS OF OTHER RELIGIONS SAVED?
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger Responds

VATICAN CITY, SEP 5 (ZENIT.org).- "How is it possible to explain the unique character of Christ and of the Catholic Church to a Jew or a Lutheran, a reporter asked Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, during a press conference to present the "Dominus Iesus" declaration, which is concerned, precisely, with the unique and universal salvation of Christ and the Church.

Referring to a believing Jew, Cardinal Ratzinger clarified that "we are in agreement that a Jew, and this is true for believers of other religions, does not need to know or acknowledge Christ as the Son of God in order to be saved, if there are insurmountable impediments, of which he is not blameworthy, to preclude it. However, the fact that the Son of God entered history, made himself part of history, and is present as a reality in history, affects everyone."

The German Cardinal continued: "I think it is important to explain that Christ did not go away to heaven, but has remained in history." Because of this, "we can say that the hidden and real presence of Christ in history affects us all, even those who are opposed or cannot encounter Christ. This is a reality that transforms history; it is something important for others, without violating their conscience."

In speaking of the universal character of the Church's salvation with a Lutheran, Cardinal Ratzinger said that "we all recognize objectively that the Church should be one, and we should all desire to find ourselves in a renewed Catholic Church on the road toward the future. However, this objective necessity must be distinguished from the state of conscience of persons who learn their faith in their community and are nourished by the world of God in it." This state of conscience impedes some Christians from understanding the importance and necessity of unicity and the unity of the Church.
ZE00090509
---------------------------------------------------------------
At first I saw this quote only on sedevacantist sites, so then I did some research of my own and retrieved it from the web archiver:
http://web.archive.org/web/20000816181547/zenit.org/english/
----------------------------------------------------------------
How do we deal with this? Manicipia, if you could give you input on this it would be appreciated.

RashaLampa wrote:ARE BELIEVERS OF OTHER RELIGIONS SAVED?
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger Responds

VATICAN CITY, SEP 5 (ZENIT.org).- "How is it possible to explain the unique character of Christ and of the Catholic Church to a Jew or a Lutheran, a reporter asked Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, during a press conference to present the "Dominus Iesus" declaration, which is concerned, precisely, with the unique and universal salvation of Christ and the Church.

Referring to a believing Jew, Cardinal Ratzinger clarified that "we are in agreement that a Jew, and this is true for believers of other religions, does not need to know or acknowledge Christ as the Son of God in order to be saved, if there are insurmountable impediments, of which he is not blameworthy, to preclude it. However, the fact that the Son of God entered history, made himself part of history, and is present as a reality in history, affects everyone."

The German Cardinal continued: "I think it is important to explain that Christ did not go away to heaven, but has remained in history." Because of this, "we can say that the hidden and real presence of Christ in history affects us all, even those who are opposed or cannot encounter Christ. This is a reality that transforms history; it is something important for others, without violating their conscience."

In speaking of the universal character of the Church's salvation with a Lutheran, Cardinal Ratzinger said that "we all recognize objectively that the Church should be one, and we should all desire to find ourselves in a renewed Catholic Church on the road toward the future. However, this objective necessity must be distinguished from the state of conscience of persons who learn their faith in their community and are nourished by the world of God in it." This state of conscience impedes some Christians from understanding the importance and necessity of unicity and the unity of the Church.
ZE00090509
---------------------------------------------------------------
At first I saw this quote only on sedevacantist sites, so then I did some research of my own and retrieved it from the web archiver:
http://web.archive.org/web/20000816181547/zenit.org/english/
----------------------------------------------------------------
How do we deal with this? Manicipia, if you could give you input on this it would be appreciated.

The best way to deal with this statement is to pretend he never said it.

I would rather try to face reality.

RashaLampa wrote:ARE BELIEVERS OF OTHER RELIGIONS SAVED?
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger Responds

Referring to a believing Jew, Cardinal Ratzinger clarified that "we are in agreement that a Jew, and this is true for believers of other religions, does not need to know or acknowledge Christ as the Son of God in order to be saved, if there are insurmountable impediments, of which he is not blameworthy, to preclude it. However, the fact that the Son of God entered history, made himself part of history, and is present as a reality in history, affects everyone."

The German Cardinal continued: "I think it is important to explain that Christ did not go away to heaven, but has remained in history." Because of this, "we can say that the hidden and real presence of Christ in history affects us all, even those who are opposed or cannot encounter Christ. This is a reality that transforms history; it is something important for others, without violating their conscience."

How do we deal with this? Manicipia, if you could give you input on this it would be appreciated.

But how can anyone be “shocked” after having been presented with statements such as these being made constantly by approved theologians, to include Cardinal Ratzinger, since at least the 16th century?

Of course, Cardinal Ratzinger is referring to invincible ignorance, for which the Jew cannot be blamed. But neither is he suggesting that this ignorance can save. If a Jew is saved, it will be by or Lord, if not as a visible and corporal member, than as a virtual member through the bonds of faith and charity. Shocking? Well, yes; it still is, even if it is theologically reconcilable with the dogmas of the Church (as if that can diminish the initial “shock” of such statements).

A few other points:

1. Nowhere did Cardinal Ratzinger suggest that a Jew or a Lutheran could be saved outside the Church*.
2. The Church has never defined or settled definitively whether an explicit faith in our Lord and the essential mysteries is necessary as an intrinsic, or as an extrinsic, necessity of means; though, for Catechumens, it is an intrinsic necessity.
3. Dominus Iesus, as Fr. Harrison suggests, seems to have settled the matter in favor of the former, but it is still open to theological debate. For me, there is no question; “Now this is eternal life: That they may know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." (John 17:3).
4. A Jew who dies in ignorance of our Lord (objectively speaking), will certainly come to KNOW our Lord, and accept him with an explicit profession of faith - and will be united to the Body of Christ

* John Paul II , in Decretum pro Jacobitis, DS 1351, declared:

Since Christ brings about salvation through his Mystical Body, which is the Church, the way of salvation is connected essentially with the Church. The axiom extra ecclesiam nulla salus"--"outside the Church there is no salvation"--stated by St. Cyprian (Epist. 73, 21; PL 1123 AB), belongs to the Christian tradition. It was included in the Fourth Lateran Council (DS 802), in the Bull Unam Sanctam of Boniface VIII (DS 870) and the Council of Florence.

But, I don't know why Cardinal Ratzinger did not simply cite the words of our Lord when addressing the Jews. And He had plenty to say! Must we “qualify” everything our Lord said to the Jews with these mind-numbing theological distinctions that even the believing Jews find insulting to their faith? Must we make excuses for their rebellion and blindness by making it appear that their salvation is all but assured, when it hangs on the thinnest of theological distinctions which depends totally on a Jew being capable of “invincible ignorance” and a “perfect charity” which somehow erases or excuses an objectively willful rejection of our Lord?

There, I feel better.

Our Lord was not shy in telling Jews the truth:

John 5:45-46 But do not think I will accuse you before the Father. Your accuser is Moses, on whom your hopes are set. If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?"

John 8:56-58 'Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad." "You are not yet fifty years old," the Jews said to him, "and you have seen Abraham!" "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I AM!" At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself.

John 14:6-7 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well.

John 10:24-33 The Jews gathered around him, saying, "How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly." Jesus answered, "I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father’s name speak for me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. I and the Father are one." Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, "I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?" "We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."

John 1:11-12 'He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.'

Insurmountable impediments? Is there any such thing as an impediment that can serve as an impenetrable barrier to grace?

Of course, St. Paul was one of those Christ-hating Jews; only his conversion was not of the invisible death-bed type. Does that make a Jew's potential conversion (known only to God) any less dramatic? Perhaps not - but what are the odds if there has been no evidence of a desire for conversion?

What did Pope Pius IX say about the hope of salvation for those who remain in their false religions?

MRyan wrote:
2. The Church has never defined or settled definitively whether an explicit faith in our Lord and the essential mysteries is necessary as an intrinsic, or as an extrinsic, necessity of means; though, for Catechumens, it is an intrinsic necessity.

The fact that no one who wishes to be saved can be saved without a knowledge and belief in the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation is the reason why the Holy Office under Pope Clement XI responded that a missionary must, before baptism, explain these absolutely necessary mysteries to an adult who is at the point of death.

Response of the Sacred Office to the Bishop of Quebec, Jan. 25, 1703:
“Q. Whether a minister is bound, before baptism is conferred on an adult, to explain to him all the mysteries of our faith, especially if he is at the point of death, because this might disturb his mind. Or, whether it is sufficient, if the one at the point of death will promise that when he recovers from the illness, he will take care to be instructed, so that he might put into practice what has been commanded him.
“A. A promise is not sufficient, but a missionary is bound to explain to an adult, even a dying one who is not entirely incapacitated, the mysteries of faith which are necessary by a necessity of means, as are especially the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation.”[Denzinger 1349a]

Another question was posed at the same time and answered the same way.

Response of the Sacred Office to the Bishop of Quebec, Jan. 25, 1703:
“Q. Whether it is possible for a crude and uneducated adult, as it might be with a barbarian, to be baptized, if there were given him only an understanding of God and some of His attributes… although he does not believe explicitly in Jesus Christ.
“A. A missionary should not baptize one who does not believe explicitly in the Lord Jesus Christ, but is bound to instruct him about all those matters which are necessary, by a necessity of means, in accordance with the capacity of the one to be baptized.”[Denzinger 1349b]

RashaLampa wrote:

MRyan wrote:
2. The Church has never defined or settled definitively whether an explicit faith in our Lord and the essential mysteries is necessary as an intrinsic, or as an extrinsic, necessity of means; though, for Catechumens, it is an intrinsic necessity.

The fact that no one who wishes to be saved can be saved without a knowledge and belief in the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation is the reason why the Holy Office under Pope Clement XI responded that a missionary must, before baptism, explain these absolutely necessary mysteries to an adult who is at the point of death.

Response of the Sacred Office to the Bishop of Quebec, Jan. 25, 1703:

No, you would appear to be reading into it what is not there (Roguejim - where are you - what's that word again?). The question answered by the Holy Office was specific to the situation of a catechumen (or "barbarian") where death is near and the sacrament of baptism is at hand. In these specific instances, baptism shall not be conferred until the essential mysteries are taught to the catechumen.

The respective letters say nothing about the possibility of sanctification and salvation when the sacrament is “impossible” to receive.

It says one must believe in the Trinity and the Incarnation does it not?

Rasha is right MRyan :

“A. A missionary should not baptize one who does not believe explicitly in the Lord Jesus Christ, but is bound to instruct him about all those matters which are necessary, by a necessity of means, in accordance with the capacity of the one to be baptized.”[Denzinger 1349b]

Belief in the Trinity and our Lord and savior is a necessity of means.

I agree with Astoria:

The best way to deal with this statement is to pretend he never said it.

RashaLampa wrote:It says one must believe in the Trinity and the Incarnation does it not?

Of course it does, because it is true; but you are missing the point. Neither of the Letters addresses the situation of desire. Belief in the essential mysteries is a necessity of means; and, for the catechumen who is near death and baptism is available, it shall not be conferred until such belief is acknowledged and professed.

Question: If a catechumen who explicitly requests the sacrament and professes His faith in God and in Jesus Christ, without yet understanding our Lord’s salvific role in the Incarnation and Redemption, but dies before he can be taught these essential mysteries, can he possibly be saved if he also possesses a sincere contrition and ardent charity?

If I follow your logic, you would say that the Holy Office Letter says NO, he cannot be saved because he was not taught all of the essential mysteries, which are necessary for the reception and administration of baptism by a necessity of means.

Correct?

Duckbill, do me a favor and respond to my previous response on St. Thomas Aquinas and the difference he recognized between intrinsic and extrinsic necessity with respect to that which is intrinsic as a necessity of means ("without which [salvation] cannot be" - Faith, charity and grace), and that which is extrinsic to our salvation as necessities of means (divine institutions such as Church and sacraments - helps to our salvation).

Thanks.

Referring to a believing Jew, Cardinal Ratzinger clarified that "we are in agreement that a Jew, and this is true for believers of other religions, does not need to know or acknowledge Christ as the Son of God in order to be saved, if there are insurmountable impediments, of which he is not blameworthy, to preclude it. However, the fact that the Son of God entered history, made himself part of history, and is present as a reality in history, affects everyone."

Ratzinger is clearly saying there is no need for Faith in the Trinity or Jesus Christ as Lord. His reasoning I can only guess at but he is utterly wrong. I have no problem with him being wrong, since he was a speculative theologian and never intended for people to take his word as "Gospel". I see no need to defend a wrong premise, as you seem to.

But even you say that Faith is a necessity according to Aquinas but Ratzing is saying the opposite

[quote="MRyan"]

RashaLampa wrote:
Question: If a catechumen who explicitly requests the sacrament and professes His faith in God and in Jesus Christ, without yet understanding our Lord’s salvific role in the Incarnation and Redemption, but dies before he can be taught these essential mysteries, can he possibly be saved if he also possesses a sincere contrition and ardent charity?

If I follow your logic, you would say that the Holy Office Letter says NO, he cannot be saved because he was not taught all of the essential mysteries, which are necessary for the reception and administration of baptism by a necessity of means.

I really don't get the point of your first question.
How can someone have faith in God and Jesus Christ without understanding His salvific role? The mystery of the Incarnation includes the understanding of a salvific role- God became man to save us.

Also the fact that someone is called a "catechumen" assumes that they are being taught the Faith. It was also a period of testing- someone would not arrive to the point of baptism without having the sufficient knowledge- the bare minimum of which is the Trinity and the Incarnation.

From those two quotes it is pretty clear the the minimum knowledge one must have is of the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation. It doesn't say that they had to have studied theology or anything.

[quote="RashaLampa"]

MRyan wrote:

RashaLampa wrote:
Question: If a catechumen who explicitly requests the sacrament and professes His faith in God and in Jesus Christ, without yet understanding our Lord’s salvific role in the Incarnation and Redemption, but dies before he can be taught these essential mysteries, can he possibly be saved if he also possesses a sincere contrition and ardent charity?

If I follow your logic, you would say that the Holy Office Letter says NO, he cannot be saved because he was not taught all of the essential mysteries, which are necessary for the reception and administration of baptism by a necessity of means.

I really don't get the point of your first question.
How can someone have faith in God and Jesus Christ without understanding His salvific role? The mystery of the Incarnation includes the understanding of a salvific role- God became man to save us.

Also the fact that someone is called a "catechumen" assumes that they are being taught the Faith. It was also a period of testing- someone would not arrive to the point of baptism without having the sufficient knowledge- the bare minimum of which is the Trinity and the Incarnation.

From those two quotes it is pretty clear the the minimum knowledge one must have is of the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation. It doesn't say that they had to have studied theology or anything.

OK, so let’s drop “catechumen” (I meant it only in the informal sense) and refer instead to any dying “adult” or "ignorant adult" who is approached by a missionary where it is soon discovered that he has not been instructed in all of the essential articles of faith, even if he knows that Jesus is his savior (he did not learn this from the missionary). The adult dies during his remaining instruction - before he can receive and acknowledge belief in all the essential articles of faith, such as the Trinity and the Resurrection.

Forget about adding to, or detracting from, the hypothetical - and just answer this:

Can a soul who knows one or some of the essential articles, but not all of them, and has not the capacity or opportunity to learn the remaining articles, be saved by the desire for baptism through the bonds of faith and charity?

If you insist that one cannot express an explicit faith in our Lord without also expressing an explicit belief in the Trinity, the Incarnation and the Resurrection, then this will probably be very brief.

Rasha,

Let’s face it, my hypothetical is more farcical than plausible (as your initial objection indicated), for it is certainly true that anyone who has an explicit knowledge of our Lord as a Redeemer also has an explicit knowledge of His Incarnation and the Trinity.

No wonder this exchange was very brief! OK, I had one of those slap-my-forehead moments (while reading Aquinas) ... I'm allowed a couple of those per year (or month, or week).

Sorry for the confusion.

Yeah I was a bit confused there LOL. Fr. Brian Harrison also mentions this Holy Office letter in his talk on EENS. I don't know if you heard that talk or not.
It is still available on the SBC store website. Very good and I think, if I am not mistaken, that you and Fr. Harrison hold the same position (explicit faith)

http://store.catholicism.org/can-an-implicit-faith-in-christ-be-sufficient-for-salvation-mp3.html

The text of the talk used to be on the SBC site but I was told that Fr. Harrison asked that it be taken down because he was revising it. Luckily, I saved a copy on my hard drive before it disappeared. If anyone on this forum wants a copy you can PM me.