The papal accusers have been coalescing around a particular answer to this question, the answer given by Michael Voris of Church Militant, and the answer of others on the far right, which is that non-Christians cannot be saved, since the time of Christ, if they know about Christianity and the Catholic Church, but do not convert and become a formal member before death.

As my book Forgiveness and Salvation for Everyone proves from magisterial teaching, everyone, from Catholics to non-Catholic Christians to Jews and Muslims to other non-Christian believers to non-believers (atheists), can be saved and very many are saved without conversion to Catholicism or Christianity or even to belief in God. Of what use is it, to be Catholic then, if anyone can be saved? The easiest path to Heaven is to be a believing and practicing Catholic. The further away from Catholic Christianity one goes, the more difficult the path of salvation. But God is infinitely merciful, so He makes salvation accessible to everyone.

Pope Saint John Paul II: “The universality of salvation means that it is granted not only to those who explicitly believe in Christ and have entered the Church. Since salvation is offered to all, it must be made concretely available to all.” [RM 10]

Does this contradict the dogma that Outside the Church, There is no salvation? No, it does not. Non-Catholics are saved by being members of the Church at least implicitly. Protestants and Orthodox are members by baptism; if their heresies and schism is not to the extent of actual mortal sin, then they can be saved. Non-Christian believers and non-believers can be saved by a baptism of desire, and by perfect contrition, which can also be implicit. But in every case, they are saved by Christ, even if they do not realize that in loving their neighbor, they love Christ implicitly (Mt 25).

The Council of Florence, dogmatically taught the following:

“It [“the holy Roman church”] firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Catholic Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.”

But this dogma requires interpretation. And my interpretation is that Jews, Muslims, heretics, schismatics, believers of any religion or no religion, as they continue in good conscience through the end of their life, have not committed the actual mortal sin described above. No one is sent to Hell for mere objective mortal sin, but only for actual mortal sin. (In my view, those who die in a state of original sin alone have committed the actual mortal sin of omission of never having found sanctifying grace in their lives despite ample opportunity afforded to them by God.) So if the above sin of declining or failing to become Catholic is made with a sincere but mistaken conscience, then they do not go to Hell.

And this interpretation does not contradict the dogma, but rather understands it as referring to actual mortal sin, rather than to mere objective mortal sin. The interpretation is justified because the Church has always taught that for sins to deserve eternal punishment, they must have all three aspects of actual mortal sin: grave matter and full deliberation and full knowledge [Benedictus Deus, 1336]

HOWEVER, the schismatic who reject Pope Francis generally interpret the above teaching as referring to mere objective mortal sin. They believe — and this is quite a grave error on soteriology — that Jews, Muslims, other non-Christian believers, agnostics and atheists all go to Hell unless they convert to Christianity, or to Catholicism. The problem, of course, is that those who believe this error are schismatics and heretics. And so, under their own misinterpretation of this teaching, they too would go to Hell. It’s ironic and would be rather funny, if it was not such a serious subject. They condemn themselves who condemn others.

[Matthew]
{7:2} For with whatever judgment you judge, so shall you be judged; and with whatever measure you measure out, so shall it be measured back to you.

The position of Bishop Athanasius Schneider in his book Christus Vincit is essentially to contradictory positions. He clearly asserts the position that only Christians are saved, and he seems to suggest that perhaps only Catholic Christians are saved. Then he does quote statements from the Magisterium saying that non-Christians might be saved in a way known only to God. The problem is that, given the salvation theology asserted by Schneider, there is no path to salvation in his description and understanding. None whatsoever. In my salvation theology, the path is by a baptism of desire or baptism of blood, and by implicit perfect contrition, as a way to repent from actual mortal sin. In his soteriology, there is no path. He does repeatedly state that they might be saved, but then he always follows this assertion with a claim that he can’t see any way that can happen. It’s supposedly known only to God.

The general position that is seen in the followers of Schneider and other far right leaders is “we can see any way that they can be saved” and “you can’t prove that any of them are saved” and “if it is possible, it is rare” and “maybe none of them are saved in reality, even though it is theoretically possible”. And these positions are simply mitigated Feeneyism or occult Feeneyism.

They make the bare assertion that non-Catholics or non-Christians can be saved. But they provide for them no actual path of salvation. It is worship with the lips but not the heart. It is exterior assertion of Church teaching, without interior assent. This is an increasingly common heresy on the far right, a neo-Feeneyism. Some of them go so far as to try to rehabilitate Fr. Feeney himself and to support modern-day followers of Feeney.

RLCJ