Has Church Doctrine changed on no salvation outside the Church?

There’s a post over at catholicism.org, a site associated with a group that supports strongly the proposition of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which examines whether certain statements in Vatican II documents, and in some papal statements, etc., which have seemingly ‘softened’ the Church’s position on the prospects of salvation for those outside the Church, really constitute a change or not.  It’s a long article, too long go into depth here, I’d just suggest reading it and pondering it.  The beginning is thus:

The exclusive doctrine of “no salvation outside the Church” has been reduced to a liberal inclusiveness that offers the hope of salvation to anyone, of any religion or no religion, who, as Dr. David VanDrunen puts it, “sincerely follows the truth and goodness that they know in their own experience.” Tom Brown will try to prove in his article that the doctrine of “no salvation outside the Church” has not been changed by the Church, but it has been “developed.” Developed? Well, it can hardly be denied that the inclusivist soteriological speculations of one of our holy father’s teachers, Karl Rahner, S.J., were manifest in Vatican II’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium). Rahner will always be known for so thoroughly demolishing the Church’s salvation doctrine, with his heresy of “the Anonymous Christian,” that in the end, even someone who denies Christ can be saved “in Christ” because “existentially [he] is committed to those values which for the Christian are concretized in God.”

VanDrunen’s evaluation — his personal observation, that is — is similar to the warnings that Saint Benedict Center had been making since the 1940s. From one loophole, many will be spawned — salvation can be achieved from explicit baptism of desire to implicit baptism of desire, from implicit baptism of desire to explicit rejection of Christ and baptism, from rejection of Christ to the implicit “anonymous Christian” who espouses explicit atheism. There you have it: inclusivity to the total exclusion of exclusivity.

The piece at catholicism.org is based on a post on the same topic at Called to Communion: Reformation Meets Rome.  That original, written by Tom Brown, takes to task an “orthodox Presbyterian” (oxymorons are fun!) who says the Church has changed its Doctrine.  I like this citation that came from Brown’s piece:

Regarding those inculpably ignorant of the gospel (only God knows if there are such non-handicapped adults): Vatican II teaching on the salvation doctrine in Lumen Gentium can with difficulty be interpreted in an orthodox sense if by the term “grace” one understands “sanctifying grace,” which cannot illumine a soul attached to false religion. With sanctifying grace are the three theological virtues of Faith, Hope, and Charity. In an unbaptized adult, Faith is the beginning  of justification. Scripture and tradition are clear (and St. Thomas teaches) that, after the Incarnation and Pentecost, for an act of Faith to be “pleasing to God” (Heb 11:6) it must be an explicit belief in the Trinity and the Incarnation. That is why it is necessary to send missionaries to preach. “Faith cometh by hearing.” (Romans 10:17)

Anyways, I found it to be very interesting.  My own belief in Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus is very strong.  I fear for those who are not in visible union with the Church. I pray for them, alot.  That includes the roughly 90% of American Catholics who reject some part(s) of Church Doctrine. 

I hope my friends Steve B and Larry B (no relation), and other reader like Catechist Kevin and Simon would appreciate this topic.  Please feel free to post any comments.