Ch.1. Paragraph 1
1. Christ is the Light of nations. Because this is so, this Sacred Synod gathered together in the Holy Spirit eagerly desires, by proclaiming the Gospel to every creature,(1) to bring the light of Christ to all men, a light brightly visible on the countenance of the Church. Since the Church is in Christ like a sacrament or as a sign and instrument both of a very closely knit union with God and of the unity of the whole human race, it desires now to unfold more fully to the faithful of the Church and to the whole world its own inner nature and universal mission. This it intends to do following faithfully the teaching of previous councils. The present- day conditions of the world add greater urgency to this work of the Church so that all men, joined more closely today by various social, technical and cultural ties, might also attain fuller unity in Christ.
What is it about this paragraph that should give concern to the faithful Catholic?
"What is it about this paragraph that should give concern to the faithful Catholic?"
The first offending phrase is:
"Since the Church is in Christ like a sacrament or as a sign and instrument both of a very closely knit union with God and of the unity of the whole human race..."
Firstly we have the novel idea of the Church being referred to as being "like a sacrament". This is not necessarily problematic in itself, but it is a novel use of the word "sacrament" in Catholic theology - it is introduced without any citation or source from Scripture or Tradition to support it. The translation here is much toned down from Flannery's edition which states "the Church, in Christ, IS IN THE NATURE OF SACRAMENT.."
The expression introduces a new meaning for the word "sacrament" without any justification or explanation. It is ripe for future corruption, distortion and misinterpretatrion.
Also you have this ambiguous expression "is IN CHRIST like a sacrament" - can the Church not be in Christ? Does the Church extend its borders outside of Christ? Does she have an existence apart from Him?
But the novel use of the term "sacrament" serves to hide and distract one's attention from the most dangerous part of this sentence. This is where we see the theology of Karl Rahner infiltrating the document right at the outset and providing a "time-bomb" which the modernists will return to later. It is the clause:
"a sign and instrument.(..).of the unity of the whole human race".
Here we have both a novel and erroneous idea of the purpose of the Church. It is quite nonsense to claim that the Church is an instrument of the "unity of the whole human race". Implicitly it introduces the heresy of universalism into the document, and it also implicitly denies the following Catholic doctrines:
a) Predestination - the Church is only an instrument of unity of the elect, not the whole human race. She is actually a sign and instrument of division between the elect and the reprobate.
b) The existence of hell and damnation - we know from Scripture that hell is already populated and that many more, maybe most, will go there. If the Church is an instrument of unity of the WHOLE human race, then we would have to deny that anyone is in hell.
c) The City of God and the city of satan - the opposition of the Church and "the world" are implicitly denied. Thus the ground is laid for the opening up of the Church to infiltration by the world and its prince. It flies in the face of the admonitions of Scripture and the attitude pervades most of the council's documents.
d) Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus.
It thus sets the scene for the whole subsequent syncretistic, "one world religion" theology of the modernists that has poured into the Church in the wake of the council.
The second offending phrase is:
"The present- day conditions of the world add greater urgency to this work of the Church so that all men, joined more closely today by various social, technical and cultural ties, might also attain fuller unity in Christ."
Here we see "unity in Christ" being treated as some kind of extension of a "unity" that results from "social, technical and cultural ties" - a naturalistic conception of unity which is primarily anthropocentric rather than theocentric. It is some kind of unity which man is building by his own power rather than a unity which comes as a result of communion with God. Unity in Christ is thus just an extension of this "natural unity".
Again, the groundwork is being laid for the naturalistic one-world-religionists. Quite apart from which, the analysis that "all men" are being "joined more closely today" is surely suspect when, in fact, social and cultural disintegration were/are the order of the day rather than social and cultural cohesion.