A quick question on Extra Ecclesia Nulla Salva

  • Thread starter Thread starter Leo_The_Great
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Leo_The_Great said:
Is it PERMISSIBLE to hold the view that only the Baptized will be among those who persevere to the end and attain to final glorification?

DO we have to believe that those Justified by BOD will be given the gift of final perseverance?

In other words, can we believe that only those with the sacramental character of baptism will enter into heaven; and that though others be justified for a time, they will all fall away?
Click to expand...
Baptism of Desire is part of our Christian Tradition. It is held by all of the Apostolic Churches, Catholic and Orthodox. I’m uncertain about Protestants.

One has to understand what it means. In short, there are two possible scenarios, maybe three.
  1. There is the catechumen who dies before Baptism. That one is self-explanatory.
  2. There is the infant that dies before Baptism. In that case, the question is, would that child have been baptized had he or she lived long enough? The desire of the individual or the desire of the parent suffices to fulfill the requirements for baptism of desire.
  3. Then there is the non Christian who dies unbaptized (ie. Jew or Muslim). Again, the question is, would that person have wanted Baptism if he or she had understood its necessity? Only God knows the answer the the question. However, assuming that the answer is affirmative, because this non-Christian was a person who tried to do what he or she believed to be God’s will, then that person’s charity (love for the will of God) is a manifest expression of their desire. They died without Baptism not through some evil choice, but because of ignorance that can often come from a lack of understanding.
Point number three is always a bone of contention for people who are too black and white. Some people believe that knowing involves being told about the faith. Once you hear the Gospel, you now have enough information to jump right in and become a good Catholic. However, the human psyche does not function that way. Even Scripture proves this. Knowing requires a little more than just hearing something. It requires processing what one hears, understanding it and then once one has understood it, one accepts or rejects it. Often, very honest people will hear the Gospel message, process it and not understand it. They reject it based on their erroneous conclusion. The problem is not ill will, but bad processing.

I always offer the example of mathematics. Most of us went to high school and many of us went to college and graduate school. Anyone who went past grade 9 had advanced mathematics and learned enough to graduate. However, most high school graduates and even PhDs will tell you that they don’t understand math beyond the basic operations. It’s not a choice. They simply did not get it. They could repeat what they saw the teacher do. That was enough to pass, but it was not true comprehension.

The same thing happens with faith. I believe that it happens at an even deeper level than mathematics. In the end, most people figure that they can live without Euclidean Geometry, Calculus and Statistics. Faith, on the other hand, touches a very deep and personal chord in people’s lives. In order for them to accept it, it must be acceptable in their minds. This is a combination of several factors:
  1. presentation: how well it’s presented
  2. comprehension: what does the person actually hear, not what was said, but what has he or she heard. People don’t always hear things the way that we say them.
  3. gift of faith: God gives his gifts in due time and in due measure.
Of the three, the only one that is guaranteed is the gift of faith. God will not withhold that gift. But as we all know, grace builds on nature. Therefore, if you don’t have the faith properly explained and witnessed to you and if you do the math 2 + 2 and you get 5, you’re going to reject the Gospel. That takes us back to the original question. If the person had done the math correctly and understood, would he or she have chosen to be Baptized? If that answer is affirmative, then you have the potential for salvation . . . provided that the person is faithful to those truths that he or she does understand. That person would have desired to be baptized. We have to remember that Baptism is not a gurantee of salvation. It’s only the beginning.

Theology can only work with logic and Revelation. We cannot read God’s mind or force his hand. Therefore, this is the best answer that we can give using what we know about God and about human beings.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
This has been perhaps the most controversial issue within the Church over the last 100 years or more. I say within the Church as I believe there is room for speculation on both sides. This does not mean of course that some can accept and others can reject EENS, for it is after all a Dogma of the Faith. Anyone with the audacity to reject this dogma, or any dogma for that matter, places themselves outside the Church ipso facto. Anyone who maintains it is not a dogma, does not know enough about the Catholic faith to be debating the teachings of the Church. Some liberals seem to think dogmas such as these can be changed, or are no longer relevant to the Church today, as though the Church of our fathers was a different Church, or as if God would have one set of Dogmas and judge a Generation by one set of rules and the next generation by another.

Since the Church has not declared Baptism of Desire or Blood to be de fide, then no one can be accused of rejecting a de fide dogmatic teaching of the Church. Baptism of desire and Blood is merely a common opinion among theologians and Church prelates. Some Fathers accepted these teachings, others rejected them, some proposed BOB and rejected BOD and vice versa. Also, common opinion among theologians is not equal to dogma and never has been.

That being said, I personally believe that a person being martyred before they receive baptism, or someone who desires baptism and to become a member of the Church and is prevented from doing so before death; will be justified before God and will receive a “baptism of desire”.

Is there such thing as “* implicit desire*”? - I believe this is where theologians can speculate, in keeping with the dogmas of the Church of course. I certainly do not accept what the liberals mean when they speak on this. There is a strong desire among liberals today to try and push everybody into this bracket. Thus they presume to tell Catholics that a Satanist who performs black masses (and yes, a Catholic DID tell me this!!) may have an “Implicit desire” to be a Catholic, or the protestant who devotes his life to badmouthing the Pope and Catholic doctrine, the saints, calling the Blessed Virgin all manners of iniquities etc may also desire “deep down” to be Catholic. And yet, they tell me, I cannot object to this since I “Cannot judge others” and they inform me that this is what our Lord meant when he said “Judge not, and you shall not be judged”. It is lucky that I have such experts in exegesis to instruct me.😃

Thus, the liberals think the “exception” (and it is no exception really) is greater than the rule, they would have us believe that more people are saved * without* Baptism than with it. They appear to feel that it is an act of Charity to try and justify every false sect out there, and to try and push every atheist, Jew, Muslim, Pagan, Protestant, snake worshiper in the world through this “loophole” which seem to expand the more they “understand the dogmas more clearly”. Indeed, it seems that they now understand ” Outside the Church there is no Salvation" so clearly, that its actual meaning is “Outside the Church there is no Salvation, except for everyone outside the Church since they know not what they do”.

One thing is for certain, ignorance, even invincible ignorance, neither saves nor has saved anyone. It neither saves nor damns. If invincible ignorance excuses one of the culpability of not practicing the faith and knowing its truths, it most certainly does not excuse one for sin; mortal sin. Mortal Sin alone is enough to condemn one either inside or outside of the Church.

I think someone who adheres to a stricter interpretation of the dogma should be given as much freedom to do so as the liberals seem to have. They do not deny one truth of the faith in doing so. When asked what the largest religion in the world is, perhaps the liberals should answer honestly and say: Invincible Ignorance!
 
HANG ON,

The Church has consistently and constantly taught that those who die with ONLY the stain of original sin go to hell to undergo punishment. THat is a dogma.

Tell me, how many KINDS of people can die in original sin alone?

I know of only 2.
  1. Infants.
  2. The mentally handicapped.
If this is not the meaning of the dogma, then why was it ever defined? Can a dogma be defined to make a hypothetical abstract point, or can it only be made in accord with actual real life scenarios?

Good job. Iota.

ANd Leo, you are right, the crisis is in our understanding of Original sin.

Hell is our default destination, NOT heaven.

Why do so many Catholics deny that?

ACtually JREDUCATION, what is wrong with the answers given by the “BLack and White” Bishops of the 19th century dealing with the exact same scenario; Protestants growing up in communities that were not formally heretical.

Why are their “Black and white” answers insufficient fro today?

I submit for your considferation Fr. Michael Mueller on EENS:

Father Michael Muller ranks as one of the greatest defenders of the dogma “Outside the Church there is no salvation” in modern times. He was one of the most widely read theologians of the 19th Century. This article, first published in 1875, is one of the finest treatments of the doctrinal truth that Our Lord founded one true Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation.
  1. Is it not all the same to God whatever religion a person professes?
If it were all the same to God whatever religion a person professes, God would not have forbidden, in the First
Commandment, to worship Him in any other than in the true religion. Nor would Christ have solemnly
declared: “He who will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and the publican.” (Matt. 18:17)

Ex Cathedra: “The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, heretics, and schismatics can ever be partakers of eternal life, but that they are to go into the eternal fire ‘which was prepared for the devil and his angels,’ (Mt. 25:41) unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this Ecclesiastical Body, that only those remaining within this unity can profit from the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and that **they alone **can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, almsdeeds, and other works of Christian piety and duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.” - Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Feb. 4, 1442.
  1. Who, then, will be saved?
Christ has solemnly declared that only those will be saved who have done God’s will on earth as explained, not by private interpretation, but by the infallible teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. “Not everyone,” says Christ, “who saith to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of Heaven; but he that doth the will of My Father Who is in Heaven, he shall enter the kingdom of Heaven.” (Matt. 7:21) The will of the heavenly Father is that all men hear and believe His Son, Jesus Christ. “This is My beloved Son. Hear Him.” (Luke 9:35)
Now Jesus Christ said to His Apostles and to all their lawful successors: “He that heareth you heareth Me, and he that despiseth you despiseth Me, and he that despiseth Me despiseth Him, the heavenly Father, that sent Me.” Hence all those who do not listen to Jesus Christ speaking to them through Saint Peter and the Apostles in their lawful successors, despise God the Father. They do not do His will, and therefore Heaven
will never be theirs.
  1. Must, then, all who wish to be saved, die united to the Catholic Church?
All those who wish to be saved, must die united to the Catholic Church. For out of her there is no salvation, because only she teaches what Jesus Christ requires of everyone to be saved, and because only to her did Christ leave the means to obtain all the graces necessary for salvation. Hence Jesus said to His Apostles and to all their lawful successors: “Go and teach all nations: teach them to observe all things whatsoever I
have commanded you. He that believeth not all these things shall be condemned.”

Our Divine Savior says: “No one can come to the Father, except through Me.” If we then wish to enter Heaven, we must be united to Christ — to His [Mystical] Body, which is the Church, as Saint Paul says. Therefore, outside the Church there is no salvation.

Again, Jesus Christ says: “Whoever will not hear the Church, look upon him as a heathen and a publican,” a great sinner. Therefore outside the Church there is no salvation.

Holy Scripture says: “The Lord added daily to the Church such as should be saved.” (Acts 2:47) Therefore the Apostles believed and the Holy Scriptures teach that there is no salvation out of the Church.
  1. What did Saint Augustine and the other bishops of Africa, at the Council of Zirta, in 412, say about the salvation of those who die outside the Roman Catholic Church?
“Whosoever,” they said, “is separated from the Catholic Church, however commendable in his own opinion his life may be, he shall for the very reason that he is separated from the union of Christ not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him.” (John 3:36)

THe present opinion today doesn’t sound like the constant teaching to me all that much.
 
Gregory I:
All those who wish to be saved, must die united to the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Gregory, how do you respond to Jesus’s words in Mark 9:38?
John said to him, “Teacher, we saw someone driving out demons in your name, and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow us.”

Jesus replied, "Do not prevent him. There is no one who performs a mighty deed in my name who can at the same time speak ill of me. **For whoever is not against us is for us. **
Click to expand...
John was indignant that one of their company was demonstrating a gift of the Spirit. Only the twelve were supposed to be the in-crowd, and John resented an outsider doing the works THEY were called to.

Do you believe that the baptism of Protestants is invalid?
That they do NOT have the gift of the Holy Spirit that their baptism confers?
That they will be damned because they are Protestants?

Fr. Mueller believed and preached that Protestants will be damned. From the Slaves of the IHM, St. Benedict Center:
Q. Have Protestants any faith in Christ?
A. They never had.
**Q. *Why not? ***
A. Because there never lived such a Christ as they imagine and believe in.
**Q. *In what kind ****of Christ do they believe? *
A. In such a one whom they can make a liar with impunity, whose doctrines they can interpret as they please, and who does not care what a man believes, provided he be an honest man before the public.
Q. Will such a faith in such a Christ save Protestants?
A. No sensible man will assert such an absurdity.
Q. What follows from this?
A. That they die in their sins and are damned.
Click to expand...
Is this your belief as well? … against Church clear teaching from Vatican II, by the way. Yet you dare to teach here those opinions that contradict it.

The conclusion of the above scripture from Mark seems appropriate to mention,
“And whosoever shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me; it were better for him that a millstone were hanged around his neck, and he were cast into the sea.”
 
Leo_The_Great said:
I was just curious. THat’s Father Feeney in a nutshell, and the church never condemned his ideas, and he died in communion with the church, and his slaves of the immaculate heart of mary are in communion with the church at present.

SO I was just Curious.

He was never asked to retract his views when he was rehabilitated.
Click to expand...
The Church did condemn Fr. Feeney’s ideas.
 
Gregory I:
The Church has consistently and constantly taught that those who die with ONLY the stain of original sin go to hell to undergo punishment. THat is a dogma.
Click to expand...
Explain to me please where all the souls went who lived before Christ and all of whom died with original sin? Sunday’s gospel from Mt. 27:52 stated, “tombs were opened, and the bodies of many saints who had fallen asleep were raised. And coming forth from their tombs after his resurrection, they entered the holy city and appeared to many.”

By your flawed understanding, all of these people should be in hell. None of these were baptized. What about God’s Divine Mercy? Could not God have imparted baptism of desire through a virtuous life, as they followed the natural law written in their hearts, as St. Paul described in Romans?
 
Sirach2 said:
Explain to me please where all the souls went who lived before Christ and all of whom died with original sin?

In the Limbo of the Fathers in one of the abodes of the dead, also known as Ambraham’s bosom, a place of Paradise without the vision of God.

Sunday’s gospel from Mt. 27:52 stated, “tombs were opened, and the bodies of many saints who had fallen asleep were raised. And coming forth from their tombs after his resurrection, they entered the holy city and appeared to many.”

How is this relevant?

By your flawed understanding, all of these people should be in hell.

Nope, wrong. These People died under the Old Covenant, and were subject to its requirements. And there is nocontradiction because the principle effect of Original sin is it deprives one of the vision of GOd. ALl the dead before CHrist did NOT have the vision of God. THis is universally known and assumed and taught by the Church. THat is the effect of original sin.

None of these were baptized. What about God’s Divine Mercy? Could not God have imparted baptism of desire through a virtuous life, as they followed the natural law written in their hearts, as St. Paul described in Romans?

THey did not die under the new covenant, and are not subject to the requirements of it. But the effects of original sin are not established by the new covenant, they simply have been more fully explained: Original sin separates everyone from God. As such, it is damning. This is the traditional and Tridentine Catholic teaching.
Click to expand...
 
“The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, heretics, and schismatics can ever be partakers of eternal life, but that they are to go into the eternal fire ‘which was prepared for the devil and his angels,’ (Mt. 25:41) unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this Ecclesiastical Body, that only those remaining within this unity can profit from the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and that they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, almsdeeds, and other works of Christian piety and duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.” - Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Feb. 4, 1442.
Click to expand...
This was never declared Ex Cathedra. Only two dogmas have been declared Ex Cathedra: The Asumption and The Immaculate Conception. Outside of these, the only other Ex Cathedra statements made by popes have been canonizations, which are always Ex Cathedra when the pope does the canonizing.

This certainly had the force of authoritative teaching. No denies this. However, Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI have reworded it, because as Pope John Paul wrote, there is a poor understanding about ecclessiology among Catholics. Therefore, we tend to limit the extension of the Church to her physical state. Pope Benedict explains in several works that the Church is a living body with a soul that extends beyond her physical boundaries. Pope John Paul explains that where ever you can find any Catholic truth, you find it because the Church is present through some mystery that only God understands. Those who know these truths are morally bound to observe them and bound to continue their search until they reach the fulness of truth that subsists in the Catholic Church.

None of the modern popes denies what Pope Eugene said, but they clarify what he said. The reason is historical context. Pope Eugene was speaking to Catholics who were departing from the faith, not to those who were born outside of the Catholic faith. Popes John XXIII, Paull VI, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI are speaking to Catholics about those who are born outside of the physical boundaries of the Catholic Church.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Question has been answered. Thank you for participating.

CLOSED
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top