Download Audio — File Size: 9.27 MB — Duration: 9:19

Faith & Doctrine | History | The Seven Sacraments | Traditional Catholic Issues

Bro. Peter Dimond

In our material we emphasize the Gospel and dogmatic Catholic truth that no one at all can be saved without faith in Jesus Christ.  We also emphasize and defend the Church’s dogmatic teaching that the Catholic faith is required for salvation.  Sadly, these truths are widely denied today, including by most people who purport to be traditional Catholics.  It’s a huge problem.  For example, groups such as the SSPX, CMRI, SSPV, Fraternity of St. Peter, and many others (not to mention, of course, the Vatican II sect) hold that souls can be saved without faith in Jesus Christ. 

“Fr.” Isaac Relyea, No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church, May 9, 2020: “The question is: can someone save their soul who hasn’t physically entered the Church, say a Baptist, a Buddhist or a Jew?  And the answer, the Church says, [is] yes they can, and there’s what we call baptism of blood and baptism of desire.”

Fr. Chad Ripperger, Exorcist Explains How Catholics/Non-Catholics Are Saved, Oct. 3, 2024: “So even if the Buddhist in Tibet who has never heard of the Catholic Church, he’s going to give sufficient grace to be saved, and they can be saved, and the Church herself has said they can be saved, they’ve kind of set at least a minimum bar that they have to at least live a life according to the natural law and if they knew what the Catholic Church was they would want to be baptized.”

That is contrary to Catholic dogma and it actually constitutes a denial of the Gospel.  That false position (that souls can be saved without even faith in Jesus Christ) was taught, for example, by Marcel Lefebvre (the founder of the SSPX) and it’s printed in the SSPX’s books.  The SSPX openly teaches that souls can be saved in non-Catholic/non-Christian religions.  That is heresy.  Various CMRI priests are on record expressing the same blatantly heretical position, with one (named Bernard Welp) even admitting that he believes a Jew who rejects Jesus can be saved.   Years ago I also spoke with Benedict Hughes, a member of the CMRI sect, and in the conversation he admitted and we have a recording of this on our website that he believes that someone who does not believe in Jesus can be in the Church, and when I asked him if he believes that a Jew who rejects Jesus could be saved in that state he did not rule it out.  He's not Catholic he doesn't believe in Catholic dogma or the Gospel. 

Cistercian Theologian Peter De Lorca (1554-1606)

In the past we’ve quoted many dogmatic and papal pronouncements to refute the aforementioned faith-destroying heresy, but here I want to quote a Cistercian theologian named Pedro De Lorca who died in the early 1600s.  He became Superior General of his order in Spain.  He was not infallible or correct on everything, of course, but he was very strong on the necessity of explicit faith in Jesus Christ and the Trinity for salvation.  He made some very interesting statements on this topic, and he based his conclusions on dogmatic teaching.  Writing hundreds of years ago, he made some of the very same arguments we make on this issue.  To our knowledge, this is the first time that his statements on this issue have been translated from Latin into English.  Concerning the necessity of explicit faith and faith in the Gospel (and he also applies this to faith in the Holy Trinity), he wrote:

Pedro De Lorca, Commentaria, et disputationes in Secundam secundae Divi Thomae, edition 1614, p. 121: “Secondly, it [the necessity of explicit faith] is proven by the testimonies of the Church.  First is the Council of Trent, in the beginning of Sess. [5], in these words: Our Catholic faith without which it is impossible to please God.  Those words, Our and Catholic undoubtedly signify the common faith of Christians, which is explicit.  Second, in Firmiter de summa Trinitate and Extravag. Unam Sanctam, de majoritate & obedientia, when it is said, ‘There is one holy Catholic Church, which is the congregation of the faithful, outside of which there is neither salvation nor justification’, there is no doubt that the faith which constitutes the Catholic Church is the Catholic faith.  But the Catholic faith is explicit and is faith in the Gospel.  Third is from the Creed of Athanasius, in which the Catholic faith is explicitly handed down, and it concludes, ‘This is the Catholic faith, which, unless each one faithfully and firmly believes, he will not be able to be saved.’”

He argues that since the dogmatic decrees of the Church define that the Catholic faith is required for salvation, that demonstrates that explicit faith in Jesus Christ is absolutely required, since the Catholic faith is an explicit faith in Christ and the Gospel (not simply a belief that God as a rewarder).  He continues.

Pedro De Lorca, Commentaria, et disputationes in Secundam secundae Divi Thomae, edition 1614, p. 122: “… a faith obviously in the Gospel.  And furthermore, the explicit faith involved in the actual reception of baptism is necessary for infants; therefore, nothing less than an explicit faith [in the Gospel] is sufficient for adults; for it is not credible that God should demand less faith from adults than from infants.  Let the second reason [that explicit faith in Christ is necessary] be the fact that, by my reckoning, no Catholic will dare to concede at this time that any non-Christian can be saved.  But no one is a Christian except by explicit faith, for in this the Christian differs from the Jew.  Otherwise, a Jew could be called a Christian if indeed he professes implicit faith in Christ.” 

This is a very interesting statement.  He says that, in his view, no Catholic will dare to hold that at this time any non-Christian (such as a Jew) can be saved, because the idea is so opposed to Catholic teaching.  But almost all false traditionalist priests in our day, including the pseudo-clergy of the SSPX, CMRI, SSPV, FSSP, etc. hold that very heresy, that non-Christians can be saved without faith in Jesus Christ and the Holy Trinity.  That’s proof that they aren’t Catholic.  Concerning the objection of invincible ignorance, de Lorca wrote:

Pedro De Lorca, Commentaria, et disputationes in Secundam secundae Divi Thomae, edition 1614, p. 123: “… Augustine… plainly affirms that those who are in any way ignorant of the Gospel will be damned.  I also consider this to be the position of St. Thomas on account of that which I cited from Q. 10, Art. 1.  Nor could it not be the position of St. Thomas, since it is that of Augustine, of whom Thomas is the most faithful disciple and interpreter… It must be asserted, therefore, that no one can be justified by any event after the promulgation of the Gospel without an explicit faith in Christ, whether he be vincibly or invincibly ignorant, whether the means be at hand or not.  The two reasons by which we have proved the common position confirm this.  And it can further be confirmed by the following argument [a reductio ad absurdum]: [Reducing Their Argument To Its Absurd Conclusion]

    ‘An implicit faith in Christ nowadays suffices for salvation!  Ergo, a Jew or a heretic can be saved!  I prove the conclusion, seeing that he may be a Jew or a heretic, particularly an Arian, who is invincibly ignorant of the falsity of those things wherein his sect dissents from Catholic truth – a child for example or a highly simple person.  He has an implicit faith in Christ and an explicit faith in justification and his supernatural end.  Hence our conclusion!’

Yet the Council of Florence, in its final session in the Decree of Union, defines that no Jew or heretic can be saved.”

Here De Lorca correctly teaches that no one, no matter his state of ignorance (vincible or invincible), can be saved without explicit faith in Jesus Christ.  This is the Church’s teaching, because there’s no other name under Heaven by which men must be saved other than the name of Jesus.  As our material shows, the act by which people must be justified and forgiven in the name of Jesus Christ is baptism.  If someone is of good will and of the truth, God will bring that person to baptism and the true Christian faith, because He is all-good and all-powerful.  De Lorca also reduces the position of the heretics to its false conclusion.  He points out that if explicit faith in Christ is not required for salvation, as the heretics say, then an Arian or a Jew or a heretic can be saved.  But that is false, he points out, because the Council of Florence defined the opposite, that no Jew or heretic can be saved, and he references the bull Cantate Domino (the very bull we frequently cite on this topic).

In short, the position of almost all false traditionalist groups in our day at this period of the Great Apostasy, that souls can be saved in false religions and without faith in Jesus Christ, is a blatant denial of Catholic dogma and the teaching of the Gospel.  To support or agree with those heretical groups in the face of these facts is to commit grave sin and deny the Catholic faith.

 Copyright © 2024 Most Holy Family Monastery