Confused about Salvation in and outside the Church

[papabenefan]

Does the Church have a clear cut teaching on what the fate is for those ‘Christians’, especially Evangelical Christians, who reject most if not all of our sacraments, especially those necessary for salvation; Baptism and Eucharist? Thank you! God Bless!

 

[Marocchino]

Here are two great articles written on this question from, who is in my opinion, one of the best living theologians.

rtforum.org/lt/lt149.html

rtforum.org/lt/lt150.html

I hope they help.

 

[Wiseowl]

A Priest recently spoke about this on Catholic radio. He stated there is extraordinary circumstances and never being exposed to Catholicism may in fact be one of them to reach heaven without being Catholic. Most people follow the religion of their parents.

The Fr made it clear, only God knows for sure.

 

[adrift]

The Fr made it clear, only **God knows **for sure.

My emphasis:thumbsup:

 

[Dubay]

Then there is the possibility that it may be Tim Tebow time in heaven.

 

[1ke]

Does the Church have a clear cut teaching on what the fate is for those ‘Christians’, especially Evangelical Christians, who reject most if not all of our sacraments, especially those necessary for salvation; Baptism and Eucharist? Thank you! God Bless!

Well, what do you mean by “clear cut”?

The Church makes no pronouncement on any individual person, because we cannot know that.

The Church teaches the truth about the means of salvation established by Christ and entrusted to the Church and the ordinary requirements and means of salvation.

The Church also helps us understand the relationship of baptized non-Catholics and even the unbaptized to the Church and to God (who may employ extraordinary means of salvation in some cases.)

The most the Church can do is teach what we do know-- is it **possible **that God works outside his sacraments. The Church can make no prounouncement on **how **that might happen, the **likelihood **of it happening, or even if he does do so, because that has not been revealed.

Therefore, we are called to evangelize all nations (Mt 28:19-20). We are called to continually work for Christian unity (read documents on ecumenism of Vatican II and document such as Ut Unum Sint) and also to work to evangelize those not yet baptized (read the documents on interreligious dialog and Dominus Jesus). We are called to bring all into the fullness of truth found only in the Catholic Church.

I suggest you read the entire Catechism section on the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

Then there is the possibility that it may be Tim Tebow time in heaven.

Wait… Tebow died?

 

[Dubay]

Wait… Tebow died?

Let’s not rush anyone till there time is called,

That being said., I would have a hard time believing sacrements or otherwise some quality people like Tebow do not go to heaven when they do die.

God Bless.

 

[papabenefan]

Well, what do you mean by “clear cut”?

Well I understand that the teaching of the Church summed up in blunt briefness is ‘possible, but not likely’. I’ve only been a Catholic for a few years now, and after being an atheist for most my life, I loved the certainty the Catholic Church and Christ gave me. But the more I’ve been learning as of late (taking theology classes online through a seminary) the more confused I started to get while covering the sacraments one at a time, starting with Baptism. It seems we have clear instructions from Christ how necessary Baptism is for salvation, and the CHurch echo’s this, but then the Church also goes on to (almost to a degree) excuse whatever possible reason a non-Catholic Christian would have for not being Catholic, and not being baptized by water or even partake in the Eucharist for that matter. I understand how Baptism by desire is to be applied, but assuming “gross ignorance” as someone suggested to me, seems to excuse everyone at that point, and thus, no one is really held responsible for their choices. My main perspective on this, coming from my background, how am I to promote salvation in the Catholic Church as apposed to another Christian church, when my Church seems to say that you can be saved outside the Church so long as you play dumb what she teaches. I know how real-life discussions go with non-believers, and I want to be able to effectively tell them why the Catholic Church is the only church worth considering. Sorry for being so wordy!

 

[A_G]

Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, which means “outside the church there is no salvation,” is Church doctrine. It is basically saying that salvation is obtained through Jesus Christ. Jesus founded the Holy Catholic Church, and we need the Church for our salvation. If we reject the Church, we reject salvation.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (846-848 and 851) :

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

848 “Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men.”

851 Missionary motivation. It is from God’s love for all men that the Church in every age receives both the obligation and the vigor of her missionary dynamism, “for the love of Christ urges us on.” Indeed, God “desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth”; that is, God wills the salvation of everyone through the knowledge of the truth. Salvation is found in the truth. Those who obey the prompting of the Spirit of truth are already on the way of salvation. But the Church, to whom this truth has been entrusted, must go out to meet their desire, so as to bring them the truth. Because she believes in God’s universal plan of salvation, the Church must be missionary.

To be saved, we need the Church and Sacraments. However, salvation might be possible “outside” the Church. According to The Second Vatican Council, “Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.”

However, if they knowingly and willfully reject the Church, they are 100% “outside the Church”, and therefore there is no salvation for them. Only God Himself can judge for certain which souls fall into this category of having known and deliberately rejected His Church.

one of my favorite Bible verses sums it up:

Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me. (John 14:6)

dicit ei Iesus ego sum via et veritas et vita nemo venit ad Patrem nisi per me (John 14:6)

 

[ProdglArchitect]

1ke;9877915:

Well, what do you mean by “clear cut”?

Well I understand that the teaching of the Church summed up in blunt briefness is ‘possible, but not likely’. I’ve only been a Catholic for a few years now, and after being an atheist for most my life, I loved the certainty the Catholic Church and Christ gave me. But the more I’ve been learning as of late (taking theology classes online through a seminary) the more confused I started to get while covering the sacraments one at a time, starting with Baptism. It seems we have clear instructions from Christ how necessary Baptism is for salvation, and the CHurch echo’s this, but then the Church also goes on to (almost to a degree) excuse whatever possible reason a non-Catholic Christian would have for not being Catholic, and not being baptized by water or even partake in the Eucharist for that matter. I understand how Baptism by desire is to be applied, but assuming “gross ignorance” as someone suggested to me, seems to excuse everyone at that point, and thus, no one is really held responsible for their choices. My main perspective on this, coming from my background, how am I to promote salvation in the Catholic Church as apposed to another Christian church, when my Church seems to say that you can be saved outside the Church so long as you play dumb what she teaches. I know how real-life discussions go with non-believers, and I want to be able to effectively tell them why the Catholic Church is the only church worth considering. Sorry for being so wordy!

We don’t teach that we are the only way, just the most sure. Think of it like a calculus test. You can take the test with an Abacus, or you can take the test with a TI-89. Technically, you -could- get the correct answer with both devices, but you’re far more likely to with the TI-89. Other Christian denominations are the Abacus, Catholicism is the TI-89.

Further to this, this belief in salvation outside the church is not actually a guarantee either. Jesus explicitly stated that we must eat of His flesh and drink of His blood to be saved. We hope, pray and rely on the mercy of God that non-Catholics will be saved and will enter into Heaven after death, but we have no real way of knowing if they will or not.

The surest, and only “positive” way (as close to 100% as we can get when we consider the Bible and Divine revelation) is through the Catholic Church. When talking to your friends, ask them why they would go to a calculus test with an abacus when there’s a free TI-89 here waiting for them

 

[1ke]

Well I understand that the teaching of the Church summed up in blunt briefness is ‘possible, but not likely’.

I do not believe this accurately reflects the Church’s teaching. The Church would stop at possible.

You have added “not likely”. I don’t think it would be accurate to add “not likely” nor do I think it accurat to add “likely”. It is, rather, unknown.

but then the Church also goes on to (almost to a degree) excuse whatever possible reason a non-Catholic Christian would have for not being Catholic, and not being baptized by water or even partake in the Eucharist for that matter.

Hmm, I don’t think it does. Can you provide a document in which the Church does this?

I understand how Baptism by desire is to be applied, but assuming “gross ignorance” as someone suggested to me, seems to excuse everyone at that point, and thus, no one is really held responsible for their choices.

I don’t think the Church teaches this at all. Invincible ignorance is a very high bar. I think somewhere along the way you have obtained the erroneous idea (maybe from professors, maybe from misunderstanding something they said) that the Church tosses around “ignorance” like fairy dust. It does not. I would encourage you to talk to the professor in any particular class you are taking if you are not clear on something they said.

My main perspective on this, coming from my background, how am I to promote salvation in the Catholic Church as apposed to another Christian church, when my Church seems to say that you can be saved outside the Church so long as you play dumb what she teaches.

OK, now I know you are not understanding it properly becuase the Church absolutley does NOT teach this.

I know how real-life discussions go with non-believers, and I want to be able to effectively tell them why the Catholic Church is the only church worth considering. Sorry for being so wordy!

Ut Unum Sint
Dominus Jesus

 

[papabenefan]

papabenefan;9878085:

We don’t teach that we are the only way, just the most sure. Think of it like a calculus test. You can take the test with an Abacus, or you can take the test with a TI-89. Technically, you -could- get the correct answer with both devices, but you’re far more likely to with the TI-89. Other Christian denominations are the Abacus, Catholicism is the TI-89.

Further to this, this belief in salvation outside the church is not actually a guarantee either. Jesus explicitly stated that we must eat of His flesh and drink of His blood to be saved. We hope, pray and rely on the mercy of God that non-Catholics will be saved and will enter into Heaven after death, but we have no real way of knowing if they will or not.

The surest, and only “positive” way (as close to 100% as we can get when we consider the Bible and Divine revelation) is through the Catholic Church. When talking to your friends, ask them why they would go to a calculus test with an abacus when there’s a free TI-89 here waiting for them

Pretty sweet line there at the end, I’ll use it! Thank you so much for your advice

 

[The_GreyPilgrim]

Just a side note:

If I were an intellectually honest person, I would NOT want to put my soul on the line on the belief that despite the claims of the Catholic Church I would rather put my lot in protestantism because (insert reason here).

The Catholic Church makes claims based on absolute truths; things that it says are objectively real and necessary in terms of our salvation.

I think we do offense to that truth by allowing the Church’s distinctions to purposefully be taken as an “out” so that they can feel safe in their protestantism. The sin of presumption within the Church is just as dangerous as it is outside the Church.

 

[Sirach2]

It seems we have clear instructions from Christ how necessary Baptism is for salvation, and the CHurch echo’s this, but then the Church also goes on to (almost to a degree) excuse whatever possible reason a non-Catholic Christian would have for not being Catholic, and not being baptized by water or even partake in the Eucharist for that matter. I understand how Baptism by desire is to be applied, but assuming "gross ignorance" as someone suggested to me, seems to excuse everyone at that point, and thus, no one is really held responsible for their choices. My main perspective on this, coming from my background, how am I to promote salvation in the Catholic Church as apposed to another Christian church, when my Church seems to say that you can be saved outside the Church so long as you play dumb what she teaches.

We’ve seen this movie hundreds of times here. I sense an undertone of sarcasm that is usually resistant to whatever is offered by way of instruction. If I was a betting man, I would say you will enjoy the reruns over and again.

Now, in the remote possibility that you are sincere, go to your google search bar and type in: (or copy/paste in) “Salvation outside the Church” site:forums.catholic-questions.org. You’ll find 18 pages of this topic here at CAF where I’m sure you’ll find the answers.

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

There is NO salvation outside the church. Those who are saved are saved through the Church period. In the catechism of pope Pius X it says:

27 Q. Can one be saved outside the Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church?
A. No, no one can be saved outside the Catholic, Apostolic Roman Church, just as no one could be saved from the flood outside the Ark of Noah, which was a figure of the Church.

28 Q. How, then, were the Patriarchs of old, the Prophets, and the other just men of the Old Testament, saved?
A. The just of the Old Testament were saved in virtue of the faith they had in Christ to come, by means of which they spiritually belonged to the Church.

29 Q. But if a man through no fault of his own is outside the Church, can he be saved?
A. If he is outside the Church through no fault of his, that is, if he is in good faith, and if he has received Baptism, or at least has the implicit desire of Baptism; and if, moreover, he sincerely seeks the truth and does God’s will as best he can such a man is indeed separated from the body of the Church, but is united to the soul of the Church and consequently is on the way of salvation

30 Q. Suppose that a man is a member of the Catholic Church, but does not put her teaching into practice, will he be saved?
A. He who is a member of the Catholic Church and does not put her teaching into practice is a dead member, and hence will not be saved; for towards the salvation of an adult not only Baptism and faith are required, but, furthermore, works in keeping with faith.

So in ProdglArchitect’s example a protestant doesn’t even have an abacus (Or a natural ability to calculate.); he has to look over the catholic’s shoulder at the TI-89.

 

[Carolus_Martell]

Back in the day it was common for many priests, like Father Feeney, to instruct that outside the church there was no salvation. And that was that.

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

Back in the day it was common for many priests, like Father Feeney, to instruct that outside the church there was no salvation. And that was that.

Your named after my (Very many greats) Grandpa!
Anyhow, Feeneyism was condemned; we have martyred saints who were in the church only by baptism of blood. That doesn’t mean the Dogma of, “extra ecclesiam nulla salus” is any less true.

 

[papabenefan]

We’ve seen this movie hundreds of times here. I sense an undertone of sarcasm that is usually resistant to whatever is offered by way of instruction. If I was a betting man, I would say you will enjoy the reruns over and again.

Now, in the remote possibility that you are sincere, go to your google search bar and type in: (or copy/paste in) “Salvation outside the Church” site:forums.catholic-questions.org. You’ll find 18 pages of this topic here at CAF where I’m sure you’ll find the answers.

No, I’m very sincere. I admit that I let myself get a little flustered and worked up over the issue. It’s just that I was introduced to some material through a theology class and i over-reacted a bit. sorry. The info I’ve gotten here has been very very helpful. I just think of people like Kirk Cameron, and other evangelicals, and those churches full of lapsed Catholics (as Fr. Robert Barron recently pointed out in a YouTube video), who are either preaching against water baptism and sacraments in general (Kirk Cameron, who like to ambush people on the street and confuse them about Scripture), or have been lured into thinking that they don’t matter in terms of salvation. Again, I was an atheist till the age of 28 when I became Catholic, (I’m 33 now), and I’m so very very thankful for it, and I just wanted to know exactly what the Church teaches about this particular scenario. sorry again for any confusion. I know some people above were getting a little confused and somewhat harsh about what I do and don’t know about Church teaching, but that’s why this place exists in the first place. Thank you everyone! Please, no more criticism on this thread…I got the point, I’m good now, lol…

 

[JOE_OBERR]

Does the Church have a clear cut teaching on what the fate is for those ‘Christians’, especially Evangelical Christians, who reject most if not all of our sacraments, especially those necessary for salvation; Baptism and Eucharist? Thank you! God Bless!

Papabenefan, what stage of salvation are you referring to? Temporal salvation which begins at baptism and is the kernel and center of the gospel, i.e., man’s redemption by Jesus which is the liberation from all that oppresses us especially the slavery of sin and dominance of the evil one? Or are you referring to final salvation which is the fulfillment of temporal salvation and occurs when one enters heaven?
Joe