Do Eastern Catholics believe anyone can be saved?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Erick_Ybarra
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes. But this is not orthodox as is clear from catholic history on the subject.

I know catholics who are still catholic but left at V2
 
Erick_Ybarra said:
Yes. But this is not orthodox as is clear from catholic history on the subject.

I know catholics who are still catholic but left at V2
Click to expand...
Ah but it is Orthodox, and we have been dealing with “mohammed” for 1400 years on and off, usual is its on.

I understand Catholic’s who are Traditional etc. I’m one of them, and the above teaching is from St Cyrian foward. At some point I had to admit I was wrong and they were right. That is the Christian thing to do when you know your wrong.

Here I’ll show ya…

An Eastern Orthodox bishop has expressed this doctrine as follows:

Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus. All the categorical strength and point of this aphorism lies in its tautology. Outside the Church there is no salvation, because salvation is the Church" (G. Florovsky, “Sobornost: the Catholicity of the Church”, in The Church of God, p. 53). Does it therefore follow that anyone who is not visibly within the Church is necessarily damned? Of course not; still less does it follow that everyone who is visibly within the Church is necessarily saved. As Augustine wisely remarked: “How many sheep there are without, how many wolves within!” (Homilies on John, 45, 12) While there is no division between a “visible” and an “invisible Church”, yet there may be members of the Church who are not visibly such, but whose membership is known to God alone. If anyone is saved, he must in some sense be a member of the Church; in what sense, we cannot always say.
—Kallistos Ware

from this terrible sight but easy…

google.com/url?q=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extra_Ecclesiam_nulla_salus&sa=U&ei=lCCMUOWYCbSG0QHi94DABA&ved=0CBsQFjAD&usg=AFQjCNEUNwdrOCEmefn1WVMv90Dua1nmzQ
 
Erick_Ybarra said:
Even Cornelius was told that he was not saved until he heard the gospel (acts 9).
Click to expand...
You apparently don’t know your Bible as well as you think. There’s no one named Cornelius mentioned in Acts 9.
I really don’t care what the catechism says, the idea that we need to approach the unbelieving world as though they might already be saved is** the sure sign of apostacy in the catholic church**.
Click to expand...
Well, you better start caring what it says Eric because you will never find a more scholarly, concise, and eloquent presentation of Christian truths than there. The truth is, you aren’t even reading it, or you’d know the context of what it says on this issue and properly understand it so that you wouldn’t still be listening to idiot YouTube videos by anti-Catholics that feed you own anti-Catholic biases as have been displayed in virtually every single one of your threads since you came on board here at CAF. I know, because I read a lot of it and have responded to you many times. I’ve found that you aren’t really listening, and this thread is a prize winning example of that.

There is no apostasy in the Catholic Church, because, properly understood, what the Church teaches is consistent with the Word of God and what the early church taught down through the 2,000 years of Christian history.
Erick_Ybarra said:
There is no practical difference between teaching that someone can be saved while living and dying believing in a false God however Jesus saves then apart from the doctrines they believed and the statement that they can be saved by their false religion.

Because if we are ready to say that we can be saved by christ still while believing false theology, then what’s the practical difference? None. Sure theologically and theoretically.
Click to expand...
This is ludicrous and seeks to stuff the Lord God of Hosts into a very small box, just as the Pharisees and Sadducees sought to do in Our Blessed Lord’s day. He came along and showed them that there was far more to being God’s people than they had ever thought of.

Your theological problem here is that you cannot answer the simple child’s question, “But what happens to people who never hear about Jesus?” If a person never hears anything about Our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ, and yet lives a good moral life according to the light of God’s grace that is given him (in context of Romans chapter 1), can they be saved?
Erick_Ybarra said:
It is interesting. No one here is seeing the practical ramifications to the Vatican II teachings.
Old Catholicism would enter into a land where Christ was not know, and immediately begin evangelizing the people for the purpose of salvation.
Click to expand...
Duh…:whacky: We still do. I suggest that you stop making up what you wish we believed and practiced and start discussing what we really do believe.:rolleyes:
Now, if this were to happen, then the Catholic Church would not assume that everyone is lost and condemned because of their sin, but rather would evangelize fellow believers in God who may be already saved. And if after years and years of evangelizing, the people of the land still do not have a “full” and “correct” understanding of the Catholic teaching, then they are not held liable for rejecting the truth because after all they did not know. And so in this community you would have the Catholic Church who believes that there is one gospel for salvation which requires faith and baptism, but at the same time God can save anyone however which way he wants, and therefore we are not to teach the outside world the condemnation of God. This would be a community of people who all agree to disagree and all sides affirm the veritable possibility of each side going to heaven.
Click to expand...
That’s a fine bit of fiction there Eric, but that’s all that is, since that is nowhere near how we function, though you and most other a-Cs desperately wish it was.

Just keep on listening to all these other anti-Catholic sources, like that girl’s channel on YouTube and just ignore us faithful Catholics who actually know and practice our most holy faith, because (according to you anyway…) we don’t know anything at all about the Bible, what we believe, and why. I suppose you’ll be very happy there in that anti-Catholic fantasy land you create.

Bishop Sheen was certainly correct when he said:
“Few people in America hate the Catholic religion,
but there are many who hate
what they mistakenly believe is the Catholic religion
—and if what they hate really were the Catholic religion,
Catholics would hate it too.”
 
Gary,
You are correct. We are on the same page. Those references are to paragraphs in the second edition to the Catechism. The reference to Dr Hahn was from a lighthouse CD called “God vs Allah”. Thanks for the reply:)
 
This is simply repugnant to the early Christian Church. Can you imagine if the Roman Empire saw that the Christians did not exclusive the gospel? If Christianity was self-proclaimed to be just “one” of the ways to God. Oh please, do not tell me the Catholic Church teaches that. By the fact of allowing people to be saved by Jesus in their other religions, this is in practical application, saying that there are more than “one” way to get to heaven.
Click to expand...
Here again, you create a fiction that bears no relationship at all to what authentic Catholic teaching is.

What would more likely be repugnant to the early church would be the errant modern doctrines that departed some 500 years ago and deny what the early church fathers wrote about.

Case in point: Bishop Ignatius of Antioch
CHAP. VII.–LET US STAND ALOOF FROM SUCH HERETICS.

They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer,(7) because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death(11) in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect,(13) that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that ye should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of(15) them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion[of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved.(16) But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.
Erick_Ybarra said:
Jesus, who has all authority in heaven and on earth, commanded the apostles to “Preach the gospel to every creature. They who believe and are baptized will be saved. They who do not believe will be condemned” (Mark 16:15).
Click to expand...
No! Really? 😛 And we’ve been about Our Father’s business for some 2,000 years, ever since that commission was issued to us through the apostles.
It breaks my heart and makes me weep to see how the Body of Christ has fudged this teaching.
Click to expand...
You’d be better off :crying::crying: over the corrupted teachings of some of the various n-C communities that preach things that the New Testament doesn’t, like Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide, and OSAS, etc etc etc. Those are the teachings that have been “fudged”…yet you believe them, don’t you?:sad_yes:
Please spare us the few instances where people are saved apart from baptism. Rather show where someone has been saved apart from faith in the true God.
Click to expand...
We don’t have to show you any of that. In part because until we all get to judgement, none of us will ever know those cases. The whole point is that is that these will be individuals who we never had contact with…they never heard the gospel, through no fault of their own, so how would you expect God to deal with them?
 
Erick_Ybarra said:
Islamic faith is based on early Christian heresy, Judaism, and paganism. If is condemned at the root, all its fruit too
Click to expand...
:yawn: No one is talking about Islam in this context. I doubt very seriously is many Muslims have not been exposed to the Gospel at this point because of their persistent interaction with Christians around the world.

I suppose that if you hurry, you yourself could catch a flight to a Muslim country and share your gospel with them, just to make sure. 👍
 
I must say, this teaching seems to me to be a kind of modernization, a departure from the original teaching. I have read many writings of the early church fathers which say that there is no salvation in a schismatic church. Does this teaching apply?

Also, are all catholics required to believe there is salvation outside the church? Do all the bishops believe this?
 
nightrider009 said:
I have read many writings of the early church fathers which say that there is no salvation in a schismatic church.
Click to expand...
Then perhaps we are all doomed, as the Church stands divided.
nightrider009 said:
Also, are all catholics required to believe there is salvation outside the church?
Click to expand...
How has it been concluded that the Church’s teaching on this point has been reversed, as suggested in this question?

Further, perhaps it would be prudent to ponder instead that not all within the Church will be saved.

The Little Number of Those Who Are Saved
Sermon by St. Leonard of Port Maurice (1676-1751)
a good read during Great Lent
 
Which Catholic teaching are you thinking of? You realize this requires much reading as a whole. Yet if we can focus on a specific it would indeed help.

Catholics believe there is No Salvation Outside the Church. The Eastern Bishop explained this very well in the paragraph above. In fact he ought to be commended on that paragraph.😉 I’ve never seen it explained so well with so few words. If I ever have the priviledge of meeting him I will personally thank him for it.
 
b0Bby123 said:
Gary,
You are correct. We are on the same page. Those references are to paragraphs in the second edition to the Catechism. The reference to Dr Hahn was from a lighthouse CD called “God vs Allah”. Thanks for the reply:)
Click to expand...
I haven’t heard the CD. however I have heard Dr Hahn speak on Islam with a few staff from Steubenville, the issue is we are seriously lost with common points to dialogue with Islam. In fact its a major concern he admits. Yet we have to communicate at a common point with those who are able. Obviously this is difficult in particular from the West. Whom of course they have little regard for.

The CCC used the word “profess” the God of Abraham, this is ecumenical dialogue, for we say Amen to that, perhaps we could start their with Islam inbetween battles. No doubt there understanding of Abraham has a few twists and turns we disagree with. As do the Jews.

Yet somewhere in the dilemma rational-ethical civil thinking will prevail. Perhaps not in our lives. The Churchs will be united, probably not in our lives. Persecution and martyrdom has been a constant in the Apostolic Churchs, till this day they are persecuted no different than NT Biblical. However they didn’t arrive at Rome with swords. They came preaching the Good News and were willing to perish gladly for it. We see the same in the M-E in fact we have accounts of muslims martyred for standing up for a Christians, not many but they exist. Bishops refuse to leave refuse to pick up a weapon. This is how the blood sanctified the ground from the start. That is the oath they take and why Bishops wear Red. So they remember, and the new animals would be the ones who didn’t remember.

Violence met with Violence= multiplied violence. If we create a cause then we have two different sides with a cause. This leaves dead on both sides, its just a fact of conflict.

We only know from our own history how God takes these situations and creates a Blessing.

My eye’s are getting blurred and I’m seriously spelling terrible now. I will catch up with the tread. Its a facinating topic if we can all descend a bit to communicate.

Peace all.
 
Hello… There is a lot of posts since mine just a couple hours ago!! Hot topic!!

First, can anyone tell me how to add quotes from other posts? I’m new.

Now for some reply’s

Vico,
HA! The conversation that we are having makes me laugh:) This is the first time that I have been in a conversation where the Catholic is consistently quoting from the Bible while I am consistently quoting from other sources! As usual very good post…

That said I agree that the Pope should clear up any misunderstandings. As I had said earlier there seems to be conflicting doctrines. However, as I tried to illustrate, the problem is not coming simply from the laity but from the higher echelons of the RCC.

In regards to you mentioning the the parable of the sower…Great!!.. The Bible should be the place to go for foundational truth (2 Tim 3:16). however, I believe the individual opinions of the Catholics that I referenced, as well as the doctrine in the Cathecism cannot be ignored so easily. I would give more leeway In a textbook that leans toward liberal Protestantism since there is no claims that the book is inspired. However, the teachings and traditions of the RCC are considered to be inspired. Therefore, other issues arise when seeing such contradictions.

Gary,
I’m interested how you created quotes in your post… how did you do that!

Unfortunately, I also see how you broke up my post to create a common flaw that everyone seems to do… even me sometimes:) That flaw is called cherry picking. You had taken a partial statement of mine and called a false premise based on no facts. This was despite the laundry list of sources and quotations from qualitative sources.

Also, you pointed out the creed as providing an argument for my assertions. I thank you for that:) I’m happy that you submitted it to my attention…it actually proves my point though that there are conflicting theologies within the RCC. Both are present and cannot negate the other out. unless you physically take it out. The question is, what is to be done? Can both ideas be kept? No, of course not… I’m happy that you and I are on the same opinion as to what theology is right but something must be done with the false theologies that have made it into inspired RCC doctrines.

Lastly, I can’t find the beginning of this “Muslim dilema”… What is the dilema? Does it pertain to the forum? Maybe I can provide some insight… I have a great deal of experience with the culture.

To Militant-
you hold true to your name. I have read the comments that you have made to Erik… There was a comment in this forum that the non-catholic Christians are expected to show respect to the opinions and sensitivities of Catholics in this forum and vice versa. Sir, you are not an exception. My biggest issue is with members…especially senior members that can’t be cordial. I humbly suggest that you learn some netiquette.

To All,
Again…I’m writing this quickly and I don’t feel like checking for grammar or spelling… my apologies in advance for that:)
 
Gary,
My apologies, I didn’t see your last post on Muslims. However, I’m still a little lost on what the dilema is.

You seem to have touched upon the main speaking points that Dr. Hahn provided in the lighthouse CD. However, I don’t know if he had also spoke about the idea that Muslims have access to heaven becuase they “worship the same god”, stating that it’s true because it’s in the Catechism. I have no exact quotes for you because I threw it out when I heard it. However, probably like the references you had listened to, he was trying to find a common ground between the Muslims and Catholics… However, I don’t believe that “worshiping the same god” is the one. I can go on and on about that but I think I covered those main points in the original post.

The one common ground that Catholics and Muslims do have is that they both revere Mary, the mother of Jesus very highly. Mary is depicted both in the Koran and Hadith as the greatest of all women. Muhammad is even to have reported to have said that Mary reached the level of perfection. Muslims, also refer to her as “Our Lady” (Sayyida) being considered a pure and holy in the Islamic world. I believe that Mary is even mentioned more than 30 times in the Koran The 19th surah of the Koran is even named after her! To show their respect there is even a legend at Lordes, France where the Muslim leader Mirat surrendered Charlemagne when he saw what he thought was an aparition of Mary. Mirat then surrendered the fort and converted to Catholicism. The town was then named after the Muslim that took on a new name after baptism.

So you can see how much the Muslims hold Mary in esteem. This I believe, could be the one unifyer that creates a universal church system like the one talked about in Revelation during the tribulation period… But I digress since this is a new topic entirely!

In going back to the Muslims there isn’t any sufficient common ground, therefore, there is no dilema. The simple truth is that Islam is diametrically oppossed to Christianity. No one can be saved except through Jesus Christ. Since they deny the death, ressurection, diety, and sonship of Jesus Christ, there can be no hope those who subscribe to Islam. I can say that confidently according to scriptures.

Thanks for your posts!
 
b0Bby123 said:
That flaw is called cherry picking. You had taken a partial statement of mine and called a false premise based on no facts. This was despite the laundry list of sources and quotations from qualitative sources
Click to expand...
Lots of that being done though which is why I suggested a starting point. Dr Hahn I couldn’t comment on what I didn’t see. The CCC I believe is misunderstood.with ecumenical dialogue in relation to No Salvation. As I pointed out with the links.
b0Bby123 said:
Also, you pointed out the creed as providing an argument for my assertions. I thank you for that:) I’m happy that you submitted it to my attention…it actually proves my point though that there are conflicting theologies within the RCC. Both are present and cannot negate the other out. unless you physically take it out. The question is, what is to be done? Can both ideas be kept? No, of course not… I’m happy that you and I are on the same opinion as to what theology is right but something must be done with the false theologies that have made it into inspired RCC doctrines.🙂
Click to expand...
I point that out to everyone who doesn’t follow it, but thank you. The Creed is not an issue with regards to the topic here East/West as far as… from Father to Son/Father and Son, we all agree the Father is the first principle. Thus the point is made. We all agree we are saved by the Most Holy Trinity. Being the point you wanted to address.
b0Bby123 said:
Lastly, I can’t find the beginning of this “Muslim dilema”… What is the dilema? Does it pertain to the forum? Maybe I can provide some insight… I have a great deal of experience with the culture.
Click to expand...
The reference to a dilemma came in regards to the CCC. I don’t have a dilemma with it.
 
b0Bby123 said:
Gary,
My apologies, I didn’t see your last post on Muslims. However, I’m still a little lost on what the dilema is.

You seem to have touched upon the main speaking points that Dr. Hahn provided in the lighthouse CD. However, I don’t know if he had also spoke about the idea that Muslims have access to heaven becuase they “worship the same god”, stating that it’s true because it’s in the Catechism. I have no exact quotes for you because I threw it out when I heard it. However, probably like the references you had listened to, he was trying to find a common ground between the Muslims and Catholics… However, I don’t believe that “worshiping the same god” is the one. I can go on and on about that but I think I covered those main points in the original post.

The one common ground that Catholics and Muslims do have is that they both revere Mary, the mother of Jesus very highly. Mary is depicted both in the Koran and Hadith as the greatest of all women. Muhammad is even to have reported to have said that Mary reached the level of perfection. Muslims, also refer to her as “Our Lady” (Sayyida) being considered a pure and holy in the Islamic world. I believe that Mary is even mentioned more than 30 times in the Koran The 19th surah of the Koran is even named after her! To show their respect there is even a legend at Lordes, France where the Muslim leader Mirat surrendered Charlemagne when he saw what he thought was an aparition of Mary. Mirat then surrendered the fort and converted to Catholicism. The town was then named after the Muslim that took on a new name after baptism.

So you can see how much the Muslims hold Mary in esteem. This I believe, could be the one unifyer that creates a universal church system like the one talked about in Revelation during the tribulation period… But I digress since this is a new topic entirely!

In going back to the Muslims there isn’t any sufficient common ground, therefore, there is no dilema. The simple truth is that Islam is diametrically oppossed to Christianity. No one can be saved except through Jesus Christ. Since they deny the death, ressurection, diety, and sonship of Jesus Christ, there can be no hope those who subscribe to Islam. I can say that confidently according to scriptures.

Thanks for your posts!
Click to expand...
Mine also. The Church is simply Trinity in belief. What they profess as the CCC states, we say great, don’t change our bottom line nor that God will decide all. Mary is a point yes Dr Hahn bought up. I’m not convinced of that. Yes we all know no-one can be saved but through Christ however we don’t know who he will save or who is ignorant of him. The muslim women I spoke about is a great example. I think there are some Catholics mislead by misunderstanding, which I would be all for in having clarrified.
 
b0Bby123 said:
To Militant-
you hold true to your name. I have read the comments that you have made to Erik… There was a comment in this forum that the non-catholic Christians are expected to show respect to the opinions and sensitivities of Catholics in this forum and vice versa. Sir, you are not an exception. My biggest issue is with members…especially senior members that can’t be cordial. I humbly suggest that you learn some netiquette.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: Another n-C who doesn’t have a clue what the name means. (Church militant and church triumphant)

Listen Bobby, You’re new here and before you get on my case about supposed disrespect, I suggest that you check Erik’s post history and note the tone and nature of his posts so far.

I am cordial and respectful, but I am also forthright when I see n-Cs or others who attempt to use this forum as a bully pulpit from which to assault the faith of Catholics.

Erik opened this thread with a link to an anti-Catholic YT video and then proceeds to question Eastern Catholics, (some of the best we have here on CAF!) with false allegations and assertions.

Like I said, I’ve interacted with Erik before and he’s notorious for just ignoring the posts of those of us who are knowledgeable about our most holy faith while trying to portray the Catholic faith in a poor light.

No one here is afraid of anything that we face from n-Cs/a-Cs because we have the answers, but it’s wrong to have you guys come on here with an agenda to see to proselytize faithful Catholics away from our faith. That is totally contrary to the very purpose of Catholic Answers Forums.

I was one of you for many years. (See My Testimony) So I know what the deal is when most n-Cs engage us about our faith.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top