In the case of the NAB I'd say the truth is DEEP within. Extremely deep. Almost unfathomably deep.
The Vatican has said that valid baptism makes you a member, but distancing one’s self from the Catholic Church may imperil one’s soul.
In nit picking mode: I think it's important to say Baptism is the "ordinary" (that is prescribed by the "order" not in the sense of "everyday" or "usual, though the first sense should lead to the second - uh - ordinarily) means of becoming a Christian (= member of The Church). But it is not the beginning of God's call or the Spirit's action. The guy I'm sponsoring for baptism at the Vigil is certainly ready to give his life to Christ and to accept Him as Lord -- so much so that I'd say "to all intents and purposes" he has done so.And as far as imperiling the soul goes, it would be worse for Forest Keeper or anyone whose conscience (which is more an affair of thought than of "gut feeling") informed by study, prayer, deliberation, consultation with wise and holy people and so forth told him that we are wrong. Following your conscience may lead one to do something wrong, but it is always wrong not to follow one's conscience, I (with Aquinas) would say.
I would say, in the face of corrupt Catholics everywhere and my own manifest, ah, imperfections, that my THINKING is that Dominus Iesus of on the ball, and that the full ministrations of grace, with all the help and "consolations" they can provide are so wonderfully beneficial that to reject them is to lose a lot. And in that way, the peril is increased to those outside the Church.
There are other aspects which are less blatantly supernatural. Accommodating myself to the incredible diversity of people in the RC Church, seeking in the spirit of Romans 14-15 to seek the good of those whose style of piety is different from my own, making myself subject in small things to others, these are good for one, and provide opportunities which with grace can lead to virtue. (So I hear, anyway.)
I guess I"m trying to say that if the best you can do and think leads someone to think we are wrong, then they must not seek to enter into closer union with us. But, I think, in so doing they, miss out on some good stuff.
Of course, they think something similar about us. All I'm trying to do here is to develop the notion of imperiling the soul" Not to say, "We're right and you're not, nyah!"
That sounds fair enough to me, MD. It has been a pet theory of mine that even though AT LEAST one of our respective theologies is filled with problems, that God might nevertheless wish us to hold the beliefs that we do.
That's ecumenical relativism. That's denying that Protestantism is a grave error.