A Contradiction?

[SFD]

That is the way it is currently going stmaria. It is no longer about Truth bringing freedom in Christ–but about keeping them in blindness–for it is much easier to be saved.

Yes, it’s called Indifferentism…precisely what was being addressed by Pope Pius IX (and these statements are abused by the liberals and modernists), Pope Leo XIII in Satis Cognitum, Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos, and Pope Pius XII in Mystici Corporis Christi.
Pope Pius XI:

But the Only-begotten Son of God, when He commanded His representatives to teach all nations, obliged all men to give credence to whatever was made known to them by “witnesses preordained by God,”[16] and also confirmed His command with this sanction: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be condemned.”[17] These two commands of Christ, which must be fulfilled, the one, namely, to teach, and the other to believe, cannot even be understood, unless the Church proposes a complete and easily understood teaching, and is immune when it thus teaches from all danger of erring. In this matter, those also turn aside from the right path, who think that the deposit of truth such laborious trouble, and with such lengthy study and discussion, that a man’s life would hardly suffice to find and take possession of it; as if the most merciful God had spoken through the prophets and His Only-begotten Son merely in order that a few, and those stricken in years, should learn what He had revealed through them, and not that He might inculcate a doctrine of faith and morals, by which man should be guided through the whole course of his moral life.

1. These pan-Christians who turn their minds to uniting the churches seem, indeed, to pursue the noblest of ideas in promoting charity among all Christians: nevertheless how does it happen that this charity tends to injure faith? Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment “Love one another,” altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt version of Christ’s teaching: “If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you.”[18] For which reason, since charity is based on a complete and sincere faith, the disciples of Christ must be united principally by the bond of one faith. Who then can conceive a Christian Federation, the members of which retain each his own opinions and private judgment, even in matters which concern the object of faith, even though they be repugnant to the opinions of the rest? And in what manner, We ask, can men who follow contrary opinions, belong to one and the same Federation of the faithful?

SFD

 

[catharina]

The Church has repeated at least three times since Vatican II that other eccesial communities are not totally detached from her; therefore, there is the hope of salvation, even though the connection is a less than ideal connection.

Which part of this teaching are we missing here?

Vatican II, Ratzinger and John Paul have made this statement over and over again.

They have also said that the Lord uses other ecclesial communities as a means to salvation for their members, through the few connections that they have to the Catholic Church.

To deny that someone can be saved because he or she is not a member of the physical Church is to deny what the Holy Father himself taught on this matter. There are connections that we cannot see, but Christ sees and uses.

No one is saying that those connections are perfect. That would be like saying that a broken arm is a good thing. The bone is severed, but the arm is still part of the body and worth saving.

Just as a skilled physician will do everything in her power to save the arm, so does the Divine physician do everything in his power to save those who are not in full communion with the Church. This is a message of hope, rather than doom and gloom.

JR

Before I leave for a bit and take a rest, I must add that I learned of the three possible Baptism-s in 1950-51. I was in the first grade in a Catholic school taught by Dominicans. The teaching came up as a part of our discusssion regarding the Faith and the Sacrament of Baptism. My classmates and I were six and seven years old. The teaching made perfect sense to us. Some might need to become again as little children … .

 

[catharina]

Yes, it’s called Indifferentism…precisely what was being addressed by Pope Pius IX (and these statements are abused by the liberals and modernists), Pope Leo XIII in Satis Cognitum, Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos, and Pope Pius XII in Mystici Corporis Christi.

SFD

How much more indifferent and how far outside the Faith are those who claim that the Chair of Peter is vacant, making of themselves an entirely different law?

Modernism seems to take many forms.

 

[Walking_Home]

You are so mistaken.

It is Jesus Himself Who is Truth. I know that to be so because Jesus said it. Jesus describes His Church as “My Church” not as “Myself.” Yes, He is head of the Church but He does not describe His Church as Truth. Revise your thinking to fit with Christ’s.

That is, as has been written, “Put on the mind of Christ.”

---

Quite a protestant thing to say.

 

[catharina]

---

Quite a protestant thing to say.

In your opinion.
Perhaps your favorite flavor is protestant.

 

[JReducation]

Yes, it’s called Indifferentism…precisely what was being addressed by Pope Pius IX (and these statements are abused by the liberals and modernists), Pope Leo XIII in Satis Cognitum, Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos, and Pope Pius XII in Mystici Corporis Christi.

SFD

SFD

I you look at what was addressed by John Paul II, Ratzinger when he was a Cardinal, and the Ecumenical Directory, no one is talking about indifferentism or about some Christian association. Everyone is on the same page, unity.

The steps and the methods are slow and very systematic, but the goal is still unity.

We can’t stop our study of this issue at Pius XII. More has been said and done. More has been accomplished too.

It can be a frustrating process, because it takes time, but we have to have patience.

 

[Walking_Home]

In your opinion.
Perhaps your favorite flavor is protestant.

---

Well since our Lord Christ **cannot **be separated from His Church–that leaves You and your protestant train of thought.

 

[SFD]

Whoever sets himself or herself up as the judge of another’s soul in relation to eternal salvation has made the self into God. We know that outside the Church there is no salvation. We know that the Church teaches the truth of Baptism by water, by desire, by fire. We cannot ever know what passes between another soul and Almighty God throughout the earthly life of that soul or at the moment of corporal death. To state otherwise is a LIE.

(To state otherwise also invites the judgment of Almighty God.)

Fire “baptism”?

Men only judge externals. The Civil Courts can only judge externals. The Church can only judge externals.

I don’t know why judging “internal dispositions” is always brought up as if it were relevant.

SFD

 

[JReducation]

---

Well since our Lord Christ **cannot **be separated from His Church–that leaves You and your protestant train of thought.

That was an unkind response. She was trying to make a point, not to offend you.

Give her a break!

Besides, we must remember that the Church is not just about teaching this or that, it’s about love and mercy. Don’t forget today’s message in the liturgy.

Mercy is for all. Mercy is the sister to charity.

JR

 

[SFD]

SFD

I you look at what was addressed by John Paul II, Ratzinger when he was a Cardinal, and the Ecumenical Directory, no one is talking about indifferentism or about some Christian association. Everyone is on the same page, unity.

The steps and the methods are slow and very systematic, but the goal is still unity.

We can’t stop our study of this issue at Pius XII. More has been said and done. More has been accomplished too.

It can be a frustrating process, because it takes time, but we have to have patience.

The unity of Faith already exists.
Mortalium Animos:

1. And here it seems opportune to expound and to refute a certain false opinion, on which this whole question, as well as that complex movement by which non-Catholics seek to bring about the union of the Christian churches depends. For authors who favor this view are accustomed, times almost without number, to bring forward these words of Christ: “That they all may be one… And there shall be one fold and one shepherd,”[14] with this signification however: that Christ Jesus merely expressed a desire and prayer, which still lacks its fulfillment. For they are of the opinion that the unity of faith and government, which is a note of the one true Church of Christ, has hardly up to the present time existed, and does not to-day exist. They consider that this unity may indeed be desired and that it may even be one day attained through the instrumentality of wills directed to a common end, but that meanwhile it can only be regarded as mere ideal. They add that the Church in itself, or of its nature, is divided into sections; that is to say, that it is made up of several churches or distinct communities, which still remain separate, and although having certain articles of doctrine in common, nevertheless disagree concerning the remainder;

“Agreement and union of minds is the necessary foundation of this perfect concord amongst men, from which concurrence of wills and similarity of action are the natural results. Wherefore, in His divine wisdom, He ordained in His Church Unity of Faith; a virtue which is the first of those bonds which unite man to God, and whence we receive the name of the faithful - ‘one Lord, one faith, one baptism’ (Eph. iv., 5). That is, as there is one Lord and one baptism, so should all Christians, without exception, have but one faith.”

…]

"If we consider the chief end of His Church and the proximate efficient causes of salvation, it is undoubtedly spiritual; but in regard to those who constitute it, and to the things which lead to these spiritual gifts, it is external and necessarily visible. The Apostles received a mission to teach by visible and audible signs, and they discharged their mission only by words and acts which certainly appealed to the senses. So that their voices falling upon the ears of those who heard them begot faith in souls - ‘Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the words of Christ’ (Rom. x., 17). And faith itself - that is assent given to the first and supreme truth - though residing essentially in the intellect, must be manifested by outward profession - ‘For with the heart we believe unto justice, but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation’ (Rom. x., 10)

The fundamental fact is that Holy Church is that group of men who profess the true faith. Those who don’t are outside. This is why St. Athanasius could write, during the depths of the Arian crisis, “Even if Catholics faithful to tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ.”

SFD

 

[Walking_Home]

That was an unkind response. She was trying to make a point, not to offend you.

Give her a break!

Besides, we must remember that the Church is not just about teaching this or that, it’s about love and mercy. Don’t forget today’s message in the liturgy.

Mercy is for all. Mercy is the sister to charity.

JR

---

Yes – love and mercy—that is why She teaches Christ Crucified–and Her mission is to preach the gospel to ALL nations–Baptizing in the Name of the Father, the Son and of the Holy Spirit. The most uncharitable thing any Catholic can do – is not teach the Faith-- and lead those on the outside to believe Christ and His Church are not necessary.

 

[SFD]

JR:

Not every theologian has to say what the Church teaches. The Church wants theologians to challenge our minds, while respecting the faith of the Church.

Rahner has no respect for the dogma of original sin, as he denies it. No theologian or Christian can deny a dogma…read the CE excerpt again.

SFD

JReducation, can you respond to this post?

SFD

 

[SFD]

That was an unkind response. She was trying to make a point, not to offend you.

Give her a break!

Besides, we must remember that the Church is not just about teaching this or that, it’s about love and mercy. Don’t forget today’s message in the liturgy.

Mercy is for all. Mercy is the sister to charity.

JR

Pope Pius XI:

…nevertheless how does it happen that this charity tends to injure faith? Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment “Love one another,” altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt version of Christ’s teaching: "If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you."

Are you correctly understanding Charity, JR?

SFD

 

[JReducation]

The unity of Faith already exists.

The fundamental fact is that Holy Church is that group of men who profess the true faith. Those who don’t are outside. This is why St. Athanasius could write, during the depths of the Arian crisis, “Even if Catholics faithful to tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ.”

SFD

This is why I suggested that you read Et Unum Sint and the Ecumenical Directory, if you have not already done so. Because John Paul believes that they (other eccesial communities) are not completely separated from the Church and therefore, do have access to salvation and that the goal of Peter is to bring that communion to perfection. Which is a different, but important perspective from that of his predecessors.

JR

 

[JReducation]

Are you correctly understanding Charity, JR?

SFD

I understand that St. Francis, St. John Vianney, Blessed John XXIII or Mother Teresa would have responded with a much gentler tone.

I especially remember Mother Teresa, her tone was always gentle, no matter how serious the issue was.

Then there are some living models of charity who have a very gentle way with people, such as Archbishop Charles Chaput, OFM, Cap. and Cardinal Sean O’Malley, OFM, Cap and Bishop Lori. They have served as models of kindness for me. I’m greatful to them. I learned from them that I must be gentle in my responses to people.

JR

 

[JReducation]

---

Yes – love and mercy—that is why She teaches Christ Crucified–and Her mission is to preach the gospel to ALL nations–Baptizing in the Name of the Father, the Son and of the Holy Spirit. The most uncharitable thing any Catholic can do – is not teach the Faith-- and lead those on the outside to believe Christ and His Church are not necessary.

The bold is mine

You lost me. How is this uncharitable? This is what St. Francis of Assisi preached and this is the rule that he wrote for his friars, to embrace Christ crucified and to preach the Gospel.

This is what Mother Teresa taught her sisters, to embrace Christ crucified and to quench his thirst, regardless of whether the person was Muslim, Hindu, Christian or Communist. These were her own words.

Do you mean to tell me that you disagree with this?

You really lost me on this one.

JR

 

[Jeanette_L]

**I Corinthians 13: 1 - 13

If I speak in human and angelic tongues, but do not have love, I am a resounding gong or a clashing cymbal. And if I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.

If I give away everything I own, and if I hand my body over so that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.

Love is patient, love is kind. It is not jealous, love in not pompous, it is not inflated, it is not rude, it does not seek its own interests, it is not quick tempered, it does not brood over injury, it does not rejoice over wrongdoing but rejoices with the truth. It bears all thing, believes all things, hopes all things endures all things.

Love never fails. **If there are prophecies, they will be brought to nothing; if tongues, they will cease; if knowledge, it will be brought to nothing. For we know partially and we prophesy partially, but when the perfect comes, the **partial will pass away. When I was a child I used to talk as a child, think as a child, reason as a child; when I became a man, I put aside childish things. At present we see indistinctly, as in a mirror, but then face to face. At present I know partially; then I shall know fully as I am fully known. So faith, hope, love remain, these three; the the greatest of these is love.
**

St Paul was admonishing the Corinthians for their pride. Their pride in their spiritual gifts, their pride in their spiritual knowledge, their pride in being in the Body of Christ. Their pride kept them from the true fruit of anyone who is filled with God’s Spirit and Grace, and that is love.

He tells them that with everything they think they know, in the end it will pass away because it is imperfect knowledge. Nothing to boast about. Nothing to be puffed up about. Just a lot of noise without the love of God flowing into a dying world.

All I hear from some people around here are puffed up claims as to their perfect knowledge of what the Church teaches and what God is and isn’t going to do on the day of judgment for each soul that stands before Him. These are all interpretations of Church teachings. They are making the error of the Fundamentalist Protestant, that their interpretations have to be right because it is the ones they hold dear. All others be damned.

But the Scriptures here are clear, our knowledge is imperfect and without love, it is garbage.

Examine your hearts and see if Christ and his Mercy is being made manifest or if pride is ruling the day. And hope that you have not wounded people and will be held accountable on your own day of judgment. And of all days to be behaving in this way, Divine Mercy Sunday. What are you all thinking?

 

[SFD]

This is why I suggested that you read Et Unum Sint and the Ecumenical Directory, if you have not already done so. Because John Paul believes that they (other eccesial communities) are not completely separated from the Church and therefore, do have access to salvation and that the goal of Peter is to bring that communion to perfection. Which is a different, but important perspective from that of his predecessors.

JR

Which is a different, but important perspective from that of his predecessors

What a curious thing to say…what does it mean? Different, but important, that is.

SFD

 

[SFD]

I Corinthians 13: 1 - 13

If I speak in human and angelic tongues, but do not have love, I am a resounding gong or a clashing cymbal. And if I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.

If I give away everything I own, and if I hand my body over so that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.

Love is patient, love is kind. It is not jealous, love in not pompous, it is not inflated, it is not rude, it does not seek its own interests, it is not quick tempered, it does not brood over injury, it does not rejoice over wrongdoing but rejoices with the truth. It bears all thing, believes all things, hopes all things endures all things.

Love never fails. **If there are prophecies, they will be brought to nothing; if tongues, they will cease; if knowledge, it will be brought to nothing. For we know partially and we prophesy partially, but when the perfect comes, the **partial will pass away. When I was a child I used to talk as a child, think as a child, reason as a child; when I became a man, I put aside childish things. At present we see indistinctly, as in a mirror, but then face to face. At present I know partially; then I shall know fully as I am fully known. So faith, hope, love remain, these three; the the greatest of these is love.

St Paul was admonishing the Corinthians for their pride. Their pride in their spiritual gifts, their pride in their spiritual knowledge, their pride in being in the Body of Christ. Their pride kept them from the true fruit of anyone who is filled with God’s Spirit and Grace, and that is love.

He tells them that with everything they think they know, in the end it will pass away because it is imperfect knowledge. Nothing to boast about. Nothing to be puffed up about. Just a lot of noise without the love of God flowing into a dying world.

All I hear from some people around here are puffed up claims as to their perfect knowledge of what the Church teaches and what God is and isn’t going to do on the day of judgment for each soul that stands before Him. These are all interpretations of Church teachings. They are making the error of the Fundamentalist Protestant, that their interpretations have to be right because it is the ones they hold dear. All others be damned.

But the Scriptures here are clear, our knowledge is imperfect and without love, it is garbage.

Examine your hearts and see if Christ and his Mercy is being made manifest or if pride is ruling the day. And hope that you have not wounded people and will be held accountable on your own day of judgment. And of all days to be behaving in this way, Divine Mercy Sunday. What are you all thinking?

I’m merely following Pope Pius XI…do you think he deserves your admonition too?

SFD

 

[JReducation]

Which is a different, but important perspective from that of his predecessors

What a curious thing to say…what does it mean? Different, but important, that is.

SFD

John Paul’s perspective is different, because he acknowledges that salvation comes through the Church, but he sees connections between the Church and other ecclesial communities that his predecessors had not mentioned. Maybe they had not considered them, who knows.

This is why he says that God uses these other communities as means to salvation, because they have not been completely severed from the Church, even pagans.

I can see where he’s coming from. JPII was both a theologian and a philosopher. He very much understood that the truth that the Church posesses can be found through natural moral law, scripture, prayer and liturgy.

So what he saw was that there was much out there in other ecclesial communities that belons to the deposit of faith found in the Catholic Church. Therefore, those who are faithful to whatever they do have of that deposit, even though it’s incomplete, share in the salvific grace of Christ. In other words, Christ is their saviour as well and acts to save them through what they have.

This is how he explains that the old covenant with Israel is not rescinded, but it is really the same covenant that he has with the New Israel, because it is fulfilled in the Church. So, the Jews are not outside of the loop (pardon the expression) but have a step to go to catch up with the covenant’s progression and fulfillment. However, they are still within the covenant.

This was never considered this way by John Paul’s predecessors. This is why I say it’s a different perspective, not a contradiction.

He preserves the essence of what his predecessors said, “Outside the Church there is no salvation.” The he adds, “but if we look closely, no community has been lost, because none of them are completely separated from the Church. There is still hope in God’s mercy. Their union is damaged, not severed.”

As to individuals, that’s a whole other story. He wasn’t speaking about individuals who sin against whatever truths they know, be they Catholic or other. He was talking about entire communities still being in communion, though imperfect.

I hope that makes some sense. I’m trying to shove a lot of info in a short space. But do reread Et Unum Sint and the DE. The explanation there is better than any summary that I can make.

JR