CA tract on No Salvation Outside Church does not . .

  • Thread starter Thread starter UKcatholicGuy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
U

UKcatholicGuy

Guest
Have you all read the CA tract on salvation outside the church? Either the tract (and all the Church Fathers it quotes) is out of line with Vatican II, or Vatican II is out of line with traditional Catholic teaching. I’m not promoting ANY agenda here, I’m sincerely a little confused. The tract seems to be more in line with so-called rad/trad thinking than JP2 thinking. Read it here catholic.com/library/Salvation_Outside_the_Church.aspand share your thoughts please. thanks
 
40.png
UKcatholicGuy:
Have you all read the CA tract on salvation outside the church? Either the tract (and all the Church Fathers it quotes) is out of line with Vatican II, or Vatican II is out of line with traditional Catholic teaching. I’m not promoting ANY agenda here, I’m sincerely a little confused. The tract seems to be more in line with so-called rad/trad thinking than JP2 thinking. Read it here catholic.com/library/Salvation_Outside_the_Church.aspand share your thoughts please. thanks
Click to expand...
Quoted directly from the tract:

The following quotations from the Church Fathers give the straight story. They show that the early Church held the same position on this as the contemporary Church does—that is, while it is normatively necessary to be a Catholic to be saved (see CCC846; Vatican II, Lumen Gentium 14), there are exceptions, and it is possible in some circumstances for people to be saved who have not been fully initiated into the Catholic Church (CCC847).

Notice that** the same Fathers** who declare the normative necessity of being Catholic also declare the possibility of salvation for some who are not Catholics.

Additionally, the tracts have received their nihil obstat and imprematur, meaning that they are in alignement with the magisterium, so I am not quite understanding your critique.
 
40.png
Scott_Lafrance:
Additionally, the tracts have received their nihil obstat and imprematur, meaning that they are in alignement with the magisterium, so I am not quite understanding your critique.
Click to expand...
the CA tract makes it sound like it’s normally necessary to be a member of the Church to be saved, although there are some exceptions. Vatican II, however, clarifies that all humans, whether they acknowledge God/Jesus or not, are members. Thus, all humanity is in the Church and is saved.

I give you CCC 836:

“And to [the Church], in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, called by God’s grace to salvation.”

So, the CA tract is not in accord with V2, which clearly taught us that, while God likes Catholics the best, all humanity is saved-- just in different ways. So one of them has to be wrong, either the tract or V2.
 
40.png
UKcatholicGuy:
the CA tract makes it sound like it’s normally necessary to be a member of the Church to be saved, although there are some exceptions. Vatican II, however, clarifies that to be a member of the Church, one need only be a human being. Thus, all humanity is in the Church (or at least a large chunk of humanity).

I give you CCC 836:

“And to [the Church], in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, called by God’s grace to salvation.”

So, the CA tract is not in accord with V2, which clearly taught us that, while God likes Catholics the best, all humanity is saved-- just in different ways. So one of them has to be wrong, either the tract or V2.
Click to expand...
It is true that all men are called, but some ignore that call. Just because God is calling every one to salvation does not mean that all who are called will answer.
 
The CA tract does not differ from Catholic teaching. Please read the Magesterial document Dominus Jesus for clarification.
 
And to [the Church], in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, called by God’s grace to salvation."
Click to expand...
One needs to read the Catechism with more attention to it’s nuances. As you’ll notice, the list goes from a fuller degree of communion (the Catholic faithful) to a minimum possiblity. The last group, as the previous poster pointed out, is called to salvation but (because of their response to whatever light God gives them) not necessarily chosen.
 
Well, accoding to Mark Brumley in How Not to Share Your Faith,
invincible ignorance is “ignorance of the *truth *of *what *the
Catholic Church teaches] – the *fact *that it is true – through
no fault of his own.” (pg 67).

If a person simply has knowledge of *what *the Church teaches,
this does not necessarily remove invincible ignorance. And
if someone is invincibly ignorant, I think the standard of
final judgment is lower. Hence, in my opinion, I think this is
one instance where (CCC847) applies.

Jeff
 
I was baptised lutheran,married a catholic,and a registered active member of my wife,s parish(work in food pantry,attend mass weekly,etc)no i don,t take communion due to my respect for the churches laws,plus my beliefs of the spiritual presence as opposed to transubstantiation.i,m lutheran in a theological sense,but catholic on moral issues(abortion,euthanasia,social justice,etc.)I respect the bishop of romes position and look to him for christian guidance,but don,t think he is infallible or speaks for all christendom.what is the churches position about someone like me in a interfaith marriage?is there salvation for me in the churches eyes?I have no doubt in my own salvation,all who are baptised and believe will be saved if they repent and take up the cross daily,i ask with all due respect to my catholic brothers in christ of whom i have much respect and love, in christ,celt
 
40.png
azcelt:
I was baptised lutheran,married a catholic,and a registered active member of my wife,s parish(work in food pantry,attend mass weekly,etc)no i don,t take communion due to my respect for the churches laws,plus my beliefs of the spiritual presence as opposed to transubstantiation.i,m lutheran in a theological sense,but catholic on moral issues(abortion,euthanasia,social justice,etc.)I respect the bishop of romes position and look to him for christian guidance,but don,t think he is infallible or speaks for all christendom.what is the churches position about someone like me in a interfaith marriage?is there salvation for me in the churches eyes?I have no doubt in my own salvation,all who are baptised and believe will be saved if they repent and take up the cross daily,i ask with all due respect to my catholic brothers in christ of whom i have much respect and love, in christ,celt
Click to expand...
None of us here can judge you or read your heart. Have you sought the Truth with an open heart, following God’s graces and you still find that the Church is in error? Or do you simply reject Catholicism without a second thought because you believe the Catholics are wrong? Only God knows if your ignorance is truly invincible.
 
yes i have sought the truth with an open heart,and i certainly don,t reject the church as a whole,i,m in agreement with much of canon law and catholic theology,however after much study and rcia classes i can,t in good conscience say that i believe in everything that the catholic church teaches(i refuse to be a cafeteria catholic)after many years of theological studies i,ve been humbled enough to realize thay there are many things that are open for debate and that i,m not sure about(purgatory,transubstantiation,papal infallibility,etc.)i guess i,m just a mere christian or apostle creed christian if you will,as i said i,m here with the utmost respect for catholicism,i was just curious about salvation for someone with my beliefs,which i believe are a lot different then your average protestant. in christ,celt
 
Hey az,

thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut. Like the other poster said, none of us here can judge your standing with God. If anyone tells you otherwise, he is a liar. I would point out that St Augustine said that anyone who rejects one part of the faith rejects the whole faith. I’m not sure if this is doctrine or his personal opinion, but it’s at least something to consider. I include myself in this, as I’m Catholic, but I have trouble with certain Church teaching from time to time. My best advice for you is to take the Church’s word for it that they’re the True Church of Christ and that the Holy Spirit is guiding her. If you don’t accept a certain stance the Church holds, just pray about it and take a leap of faith. You don’t need to have everything figured out first. Jesus calls us to have faith like a child. So trust the Lord, that He is guiding His Catholic Church-- remember, the Lord, not man, is guiding the Church, so there’s nothing to fear!

God bless and happy searching!
 
U Kcatholic Guy The Ca Tract Ios Absolutley Correct–and U, Form What I Read In The Earlier Post Are A Heretic—u Should Examine Your Soul --cause I Think You Are In Grave Trouble–
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top