Do Non-Catholics go to Heaven?

  • Thread starter Thread starter followingtheway
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sirach2 said:
    • The [Athanasian] creed originally was most likely written in Latin, while Athanasius composed in Greek.
    • Neither Athanasius nor his contemporaries ever mention the Creed.
    • It is not mentioned in any records of the [ecumenical councils (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecumenical_councils).
    • It appears to address theological concerns that developed after Athanasius died (including the filioque).
    • It was most widely circulated among Western Christians
    Sir Knight, this creed in which you put all of your marbles was not a dogma, nor was it ever mentioned in any of the ecumenical councils, including the 499 references cited in Vatican II’s deliberations. Athanasius was not even a pope invested with Magisterial Authority. Yet you reject all other Catholic solemn teachings to put your credence in this??? Oh my, I would have to agree that you are risking your salvation, and you are NOT in communion with Rome.

    Bump…

    I have seen some lengthly rosters of quotes intending to influence the reader that these quotes summarize the fullness of the Church’s teaching. However, they stop short of the Vatican II Council’s teaching and cherry-pick isolated statements taken out of the context in which they were written.

    Anne Scott rightly cited from Lumen Gentium. In seeking loopholes to discredit this document and the Council’s teaching therein, I’ve seen extensive false propaganda and various types of sophistries flouted from the private interpretations of the writer without any basis in truth whatsoever. It many ways, this comes straight from the pit, using the mind of the person to spead error.

    Lumen Gentium is clearly stated as a “Dogmatic Constitution” with the customary affirmation, “And We by the apostolic power given Us by Christ together with the Venerable Fathers in the Holy Spirit, approve, decree and establish it and command that what has thus been decided in the Council be promulgated for the glory of God.”

    The Vatican Council had over 2600 Bishops and another addition of theologians and other experts, adding up to 3000. It consisted of …
    • 1089 bishops from Europe
    • 489 bishops from South America
    • 404 bishops from North America
    • 374 bishops from Asia
    • 296 bishops from Africa
    • 84 bishops from Central America
    • 75 bishops from Oceania, which included Papua New Guinea, The Solomon Islands, New Zealand and Australia
    • 63 observers from other Christian Churches
    • 52 lay men and women over the whole four years.
    Furthermore, when this College of Bishops in union with the Pope constitutes a DOGMATIC writing, (look up the word in Webster) it is truly infallible. Two Thousand Six Hundred Bishops empowered by the Holy Spirit in a lawfully convened Ecumenical Council are not teaching error.

    Pope Benedict solemnly stated recently: “…some of those who put themselves forward as great defenders of the Council also need to be reminded that Vatican II embraces the entire doctrinal history of the Church.”

    If anyone doubts this, there are 499 footnotes to Lumen Gentium consisting of 304 general notes, and the rest are specific to the various chapters, the highest number of 75 cited for Chapter 3, which deals with the hierarchical structure of the Church. The references include statements from former Councils, Church Fathers, Saints, and they do indeed embrace the entire doctrinal teaching of the Church.

    When anyone so proudly impugns this document to project their own opinion, I will believe them when they have examined all 499 references in detail and can say with certainty they understand the Mind of the Church’s 2600 Council participants.
Click to expand...

  1. Very well written reply 👍

    Thanks for this! I wish Catholics would understand that they are not called to give full assent to the church only on matters they understand BUT on ALL matters of Faith and Morals.

    God Bless 🙂
 
Sir_Knight said:
It’s not an “interpretation” – it’s what it actually says …
Whoever wishes to be saved needs above all else to hold the Catholic Faith; unless each one preserves this whole and entire, he will without a doubt perish in eternity. Unless one believes this faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.
… there is no other possible meaning.

I’m not pointing to scripture. I’m pointing to what the Church says. How can I be disagreeing with the Church if I am REPEATING her teachings?

So I really don’t get what you are trying to do here. My only fear is that you are risking your own salvation by trying hard to get OUT of the Catholic Church by rejecting infallible declarations of past Popes.
Click to expand...
Sir Knight,

I’m not getting back into the discussion; but I will say that some of the things your Catholic brethren have said to you really bothers me. Suggesting you are espousing “heresy” or that you are in “schism” with the Catholic Church does little to help answer your questions.

I understand why it is difficult to reconcile Lumen Gentium with the teachings of earlier Popes. This issue has troubled me for quite some time, in that I can’t just blinding accept something that doesn’t make sense. However, my purpose is not to pull you away from the teachings of the Catholic Church.

There are other Catholics asking the same questions. I found quite a few in the Ask An Apologist Section of the Forums.

Link: forums.catholic-questions.org/search.php?searchid=8942675

Link: forums.catholic-questions.org/search.php?searchid=8942736

Maybe asking a Catholic Apologist how to reconcile infallible teachings that appear contradictory would be a good idea at this point–especially since you are getting pounded by some of your fellow Catholics.

Peace and blessings.
Anna

Edited to add more links:

What “No Salvation Outside the Church” Means, By Jim Blackburn (CAF)
Link: catholic.com/thisrock/2010/1005btb.asp

CAF Thread: no salvation outside the church
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=89003
 
Anna_Scott said:
I understand why it is difficult to reconcile Lumen Gentium with the teachings of earlier Popes. This issue has troubled me for quite some time, in that** I can’t just blinding accept something that doesn’t make sense.** However, my purpose is not to pull you away from the teachings of the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
To choose to be a Catholic IS TO accept the Church teaching whether you understand or do not understand.

So if you are interested in converting to the Catholic Church, you should be looking in to how you go from Faith in Christ to Faith in the church. After you choose the church, you give full assent. Whether you understand or do not understand is irrelevant.

I presented this to you before as well, but don’t know if you missed it

ewtn.com/library/scriptur/feeney.txt

This might help alleviate some of your difficulty to “make sense”. But again, this is not why you should embrace or reject the Catholic Faith.

God Bless 🙂
 
Anna_Scott said:
Sir Knight,

I’m not getting back into the discussion; but I will say that some of the things your Catholic brethren have said to you really bothers me. Suggesting you are espousing “heresy” or that you are in “schism” with the Catholic Church does little to help answer your questions.

I understand why it is difficult to reconcile Lumen Gentium with the teachings of earlier Popes. This issue has troubled me for quite some time, in that I can’t just blinding accept something that doesn’t make sense. However, my purpose is not to pull you away from the teachings of the Catholic Church.

There are other Catholics asking the same questions. I found quite a few in the Ask An Apologist Section of the Forums.

Link: forums.catholic-questions.org/search.php?searchid=8942675

Link: forums.catholic-questions.org/search.php?searchid=8942736

Maybe asking a Catholic Apologist how to reconcile infallible teachings that appear contradictory would be a good idea at this point–especially since you are getting pounded by some of your fellow Catholics.

Peace and blessings.
Anna
Click to expand...
I do not in any way want to speak for Sir Knight, he can talk for himself. But what I believe he is saying is the Pope has the AUTHORITY to speak on faith and morals rather on his own or in communion with all the BIshops.

Let me put this another way he can speak ON HIS OWN if he wants. And has done. But if he gives us a teaching right now we are to obey him.

For example he can say that we are going to go back to taking communion in the front of the Church and kneel before we receive it. He has that right.

But the next Pope has the authority to change it if he wants. But rather he does it one way or another it does not in any means change the word of God.

If it is said that you must kneel for Holy Communion and it is the word of God, then it can never change. I believe that is what he is trying to say, and people cannot understand this.

But the point of the matter is ANNA he has that right to do and say what he wants and we are to obey what he says. But some things can be changed, and some can’t. It in no way makes them any less better or true.
 
ddarko said:
To choose to be a Catholic IS TO accept the Church teaching whether you understand or do not understand.

So if you are interested in converting to the Catholic Church, you should be looking in to how you go from Faith in Christ to Faith in the church. After you choose the church, you give full assent. Whether you understand or do not understand is irrelevant.

I presented this to you before as well, but don’t know if you missed it

ewtn.com/library/scriptur/feeney.txt

This might help alleviate some of your difficulty to “make sense”. But again, this is not why you should embrace or reject the Catholic Faith.

God Bless 🙂
Click to expand...
rinnie said:
I do not in any way want to speak for Sir Knight, he can talk for himself. But what I believe he is saying is the Pope has the AUTHORITY to speak on faith and morals rather on his own or in communion with all the BIshops.

Let me put this another way he can speak ON HIS OWN if he wants. And has done. But if he gives us a teaching right now we are to obey him.

For example he can say that we are going to go back to taking communion in the front of the Church and kneel before we receive it. He has that right.

But the next Pope has the authority to change it if he wants. But rather he does it one way or another it does not in any means change the word of God.

If it is said that you must kneel for Holy Communion and it is the word of God, then it can never change. I believe that is what he is trying to say, and people cannot understand this.

But the point of the matter is ANNA he has that right to do and say what he wants and we are to obey what he says. But some things can be changed, and some can’t. It in no way makes them any less better or true.
Click to expand...
ddarko & rinnie,

I appreciate your comments and links. 🙂

As I said before, I am not entering this discussion again. I have already discussed this issue extensively on another thread.

Peace,
Anna
 
And this is another thing. It was said on the other thread that this ST did nto agree with this or that etc.

Where is it said that the opinon of a Saint to have the grace to understand or not understand a teaching mean that they automatically reject it. or that it gives us the choice to reject it or obey it. When push comes to shove they have to obey just like us. But they can also have thier own personal opinions. Just like the Popes personal opinions do not mean its the word of God either. But if the Pope says we must obey something we must.

As I believe Sir Knight is saying they cannot disobey In order to be a Roman Catholic you must OBEY all of the teachings of the RCC rather you understand them or not. That is what I believe he is saying.

To be honest you don’t even HAVE to agree with them, you must obey, Then it is for you to PRAY for the Grace of God to be able to understand what you fail to see so then it is much easier to obey.
 
Anna_Scott said:
ddarko & rinnie,

I appreciate your comments and links. 🙂

As I said before, I am not entering this discussion again. I have already discussed this issue extensively on another thread.

Peace,
Anna
Click to expand...
Thats cool Anna, you do have the free will to do so;) But if you could do one thing think about what I am saying.

If you don’t see what a teaching of the Church is saying Anna, does not mean it is not true, But if you trust the word of God you believe that if its said in his name, IT IS TRUE.

But its his GRACE that helps us to not only ACCEPT his truth, but come to UNDERSTAND his truth. And for some it really hard.

There are many things I could not see, and it took me years of praying and asking for Grace to see it, and then one day BOOM!! God made it simple.😃
 
Telstar said:
The only thing that I would add to this is by saying that the way people of other faiths can be saved and go to Heaven, is through the action and prayers of the Catholic Church, thus the teaching (and confusion) that there is ‘no salvation outside the Catholic Church’. At least, that’s the way I understand it.
Click to expand...
That’s how my priest explained it to me.
 
joclucsylv said:
That’s how my priest explained it to me.
Click to expand...
OR to make it even simplier as I have said earlier. ALL SALVATION COME FROM THE CC aka JESUS CHRIST.\

You cannot be saved without the Cross. Or as Jesus said you cannot get to the Father without going THRU the SON.

To say that you can be saved without Jesus Christ is just not Possible. Rather it is through ordinary means or extra ordinary means its all by the body and blood of Christ that OUR sins are forgiven. We could not be saved without the Cross.

As Christ Said Saul why are you persecuting ME, Saul asked who are you? The voice said JESUS the one you are persecuting.

Who was Saul persecuting? Simple the Catholic Church!! It was the ONLY Church that was there in that time.
 
Anna I understand you do not want to debate and that is fine.

But here is another thing to think about.

Jesus left us the Church and promised us he would not leave that Church and it would be led by the Holy Spirit until the end of age. That is the word of God and in the bible.

Now comes along Luther. Did the ChURCH leave Luther or did LUTHER leave the Church. IF Luther is correct then God lied to us, do you not agree?

But if Jesus told us the Truth which I believe with my whole being he will NEVER leave the CC. He promised us he would not.

Now Christ said there is ONLY ONE HOLY CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH. I belong to the OCAC that was started by Him. I can find a direct LINK to Peter. Do you see what I am saying.

There is only ONE Baptism which is the F S HS. Show me a teaching of Luther that the RCC adapted to. I can show you milllions Luther adapted to.

Show me one teaching of the RCC that was the true word of God that the Church recanted on. I can show you alot that Luther recanted on.🤷
 
It very different saying I’m not completely understanding of what is stated and “OBJECT” to the teaching to gain better understanding, this is very different then “rejecting” a teaching.

You are allowed to do this and you are allowed to argue your point. You are NOT required to follow Blind Faith in the CC today.

A great example today is Fr Gruner in Fatima. I find it odd so many Bishops spoke on his behalf this past May 2011 at the Vatican.
 
Anna_Scott said:
ddarko & rinnie,

I appreciate your comments and links. 🙂

As I said before, I am not entering this discussion again. I have already discussed this issue extensively on another thread.

Peace,
Anna
Click to expand...
No worries but I really wasn’t looking to discuss this issue with you. I merely pointed out that for you to say I cannot believe what I doesn’t make sense to me is not a valid point to accept or reject being a Catholic.

In fact, whether you understand or not after extensive discussions on the topic is irrelevant to giving full assent to a teaching.

God Bless 🙂
 
rinnie said:
I do not in any way want to speak for Sir Knight, he can talk for himself. But what I believe he is saying is the Pope has the AUTHORITY to speak on faith and morals rather on his own or in communion with all the BIshops.

Let me put this another way he can speak ON HIS OWN if he wants. And has done. But if he gives us a teaching right now we are to obey him.

For example he can say that we are going to go back to taking communion in the front of the Church and kneel before we receive it. He has that right.

But the next Pope has the authority to change it if he wants. But rather he does it one way or another it does not in any means change the word of God.

If it is said that you must kneel for Holy Communion and it is the word of God, then it can never change. I believe that is what he is trying to say, and people cannot understand this.

But the point of the matter is ANNA he has that right to do and say what he wants and we are to obey what he says. But some things can be changed, and some can’t. It in no way makes them any less better or true.
Click to expand...
I think the problem with Sir Knight is different.

His claim is the following
  1. Pope so and so claimed the following in history (history and is correct). It means that we cannot have salvation if we are not officially part of the Catholic Church (his interpretation)
  2. The church now states that one does not need to officially be part of the Catholic Church (correct)
  3. Therefore there is a contradiction in what is been taught
The error here is his interpretation in premise (1). The Catholic Church interprets it differently from how Sir Knight interprets it. From the perspective of the Catholic Church, there is NO contradiction.

Now whether Sir Knight is capable of understanding that there is no contradiction or not, he has no choice in the matter. As a Catholic, he must give full assent to the teaching and though he cannot say how, he must believe that they are not contradictory.

Since the church has made it explicitly clear, even by excommunicating those who do not agree, that to say no salvation is possible unless one is officially a member of the Catholic Church is WRONG, one must give full assent.

God Bless 🙂
 
ddarko said:
No worries but I really wasn’t looking to discuss this issue with you. I merely pointed out that for you to say I cannot believe what I doesn’t make sense to me is not a valid point to accept or reject being a Catholic.

In fact, whether you understand or not after extensive discussions on the topic is irrelevant to giving full assent to a teaching.

God Bless 🙂
Click to expand...
Exactly, is it not better to state I am not understanding, than out of fustration state I don’t believe this??? Then seek clarity?

Anna, your fine where you are, your a good Christian. All thats required is an open mind. Immediately I assumed we were once again stuck on the 14th century Bull. My mistake. Time changes peoples understanding I’m living proof of it. Took me decades to embrace a Marion devotion. I didn’t reject the teaching, contrary I was fully aware of the responsibility. Most of us in Catholic School chose to pass and pray straight to God. But we never disrespected the BVM and we respected those who did venerate Her. I seen it all my life in my own family. Me…I was LAZY.

Time and understanding change, I see this very differently now. Just another example of never say never. You just never know what you will come to see differently in a decade or two.

God Bless, Gary
 
GaryTaylor said:
It very different saying I’m not completely understanding of what is stated and “OBJECT” to the teaching to gain better understanding, this is very different then “rejecting” a teaching.

You are allowed to do this and you are allowed to argue your point. You are NOT required to follow Blind Faith in the CC today.

A great example today is Fr Gruner in Fatima. I find it odd so many Bishops spoke on his behalf this past May 2011 at the Vatican.
Click to expand...
I think you are confusing two things here.

Ones belief on Fatima is not something they need to give full assent to the church on. So having ones own interpretation of Fatima events is not schismatic.

BUT, Fr. Gruner’s recent endeavors in the name of “Traditional” Catholicism is indeed schismatic and rejected as such by the Apostolic Signatura.

God Bless 🙂
 
All -

The devil loves to use false “interpretation” of the scriptures to send people into Hell … by “interpreting” scripture in a way that it is opposed to the Catholic Sources of Dogma … the Catholic Sources of Dogma are the infallible truths from Heaven … not the Catholic writing of the Bible.

When Original Sin happened Heaven was closed for all men … we were all headed for Head.

This is made abundantly clear in the Old Testament … then the Catholic God re-opened Heaven in one prescribed way.

A couple Old Testament scriptures on this:

Catholic Faith (pre-fulfillment) writing of Ecclesiastes 9:3 >
“This is a very great evil among all things that are done under the sun, that the same things happen to all men: whereby also the hearts of the children of men are filled with evil, and with contempt while they live, and afterwards they shall be brought down to Hell.”

Catholic Faith (pre-fulfillment) writing of Isaias 5:14 >
“Therefore hath Hell enlarged her soul, and opened her mouth without any bounds, and their strong ones, and their people, and their high and glorious ones shall go down into it.”

Etc. – Additional scriptures on this in the Introduction Section of my site > > Immaculata-one.com.

After the fall of Adam and Eve, God re-opens Heaven by founding the Catholic Church through which Sanctifying Grace is re-introduced into the souls of men … to sanctify and justify these souls.

Sources of Catholic Dogma on Salvation which are infallible and unchangeable … cannot be rejected by false “interpretation” of scripture … or by recourse to some other non-Dogmatic source (doing this sends you into Hell) :

Council of Florence, Session 8, Pope Eugene IV, 22 Nov 1439 – Ex-Cathedra Dogma >
“Whoever wills to be saved, before all things it is necessary that he holds the Catholic Faith. Unless a person keeps this faith whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish eternally.”

Vatican Council of 1870, Session 2, Profession of Faith, Summary following Paragraph 14, Pope Pius IX – Ex-Cathedra Dogma >
“This true Catholic Faith, outside of which none can be saved, which I now freely profess and truly hold, is what I shall steadfastly maintain and confess, by the help of God, in all its completeness and purity until my dying breath.”

Fourth Lateran Council, Pope Innocent III, 1215 A.D. – Ex-Cathedra Dogma >
“There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one at all is saved.”

Etc. – more like Sources of Dogma on Section 1 of Immaculata-one.com.

The Catholic Sources of Dogma on Salvation are in no way ambiguous … you cannot use non-Dogmatic sources such as catechisms, false “interpretation” of scripture, Saints biographies, Martyrologies, etc … to reject Catholic Dogma.

If you do this you are headed for Hell, it’s that simple.

Rejecting Catholic Dogma for any “reason” causes your automatic excommunication from the Catholic Church … and you are therefore no longer a Christian. The infallible Catholic Dogma on automatic excommunication for heresy is listed on Section 13.2 of Immaculata-one.com.

The Catholic Sources of Dogma … that ignorance is not a loophole to get around other Dogma of the Catholic Church is listed on Section 5.1 of the above site.

Again, Christ re-opened Heaven in one prescribed way … the Catholic Church.

Jesus did not re-open Heaven via any of the heretic cults which are all started by men who were automatically excommunicated from Christianity for heresy.

Jesus also did not re-open Heaven via any of the many groups of un-baptized pagans. Anyone not baptized in water is in a pagan state … regardless of what labels they apply to their anti-Messiah soul damning groups.

The Catholic Sources of Dogma which specifically rule out the heresies of “baptism of desire” and “baptism of blood” are listed on Section 7.2 of the site – I have nineteen of them listed … such as::

Council of Chalcedon, Pope Saint Leo the Great, Letter to Flavian (martyr) section, 451 A.D. – Ex-Cathedra Dogma >
“For there are three who give testimony – Spirit and water and blood. And the three are one. In other words, the Spirit of Sanctification and the Blood of Redemption and the water of baptism. These three are one and remain indivisible. None of them is separable from its link with the others.”

Council of Florence, Pope Eugene IV, Session 8, Exultate Deo, 22 Nov 1439 – Ex-Cathedra Dogma >
“Holy baptism holds the first place among all the sacraments, for it is the gate of the spiritual life; through it we become members of Christ and of the body of the Church. Since death came into the world through one person, unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot, as Truth says, enter the Kingdom of Heaven. The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.”

Etc. – If you reject the Water Baptism Dogma, you are automatically excommunicated from Christianity (the Catholic Church) … and thus headed for Hell.

St. Alphonsus Liguori correctly stated that there are only three possible states for a human soul to be in … (1) Catholic, (2) heretic, and (3) pagan.
 
Mike4Dogma said:
All -

The devil loves to use false “interpretation” of the scriptures to send people into Hell … by “interpreting” scripture in a way that it is opposed to the Catholic Sources of Dogma … the Catholic Sources of Dogma are the infallible truths from Heaven … not the Catholic writing of the Bible.

When Original Sin happened Heaven was closed for all men … we were all headed for Head.

This is made abundantly clear in the Old Testament … then the Catholic God re-opened Heaven in one prescribed way.

A couple Old Testament scriptures on this:

Catholic Faith (pre-fulfillment) writing of Ecclesiastes 9:3 >
“This is a very great evil among all things that are done under the sun, that the same things happen to all men: whereby also the hearts of the children of men are filled with evil, and with contempt while they live, and afterwards they shall be brought down to Hell.”

Catholic Faith (pre-fulfillment) writing of Isaias 5:14 >
“Therefore hath Hell enlarged her soul, and opened her mouth without any bounds, and their strong ones, and their people, and their high and glorious ones shall go down into it.”

Etc. – Additional scriptures on this in the Introduction Section of my site > > Immaculata-one.com.

After the fall of Adam and Eve, God re-opens Heaven by founding the Catholic Church through which Sanctifying Grace is re-introduced into the souls of men … to sanctify and justify these souls.

Sources of Catholic Dogma on Salvation which are infallible and unchangeable … cannot be rejected by false “interpretation” of scripture … or by recourse to some other non-Dogmatic source (doing this sends you into Hell) :

Council of Florence, Session 8, Pope Eugene IV, 22 Nov 1439 – Ex-Cathedra Dogma >
“Whoever wills to be saved, before all things it is necessary that he holds the Catholic Faith. Unless a person keeps this faith whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish eternally.”

Vatican Council of 1870, Session 2, Profession of Faith, Summary following Paragraph 14, Pope Pius IX – Ex-Cathedra Dogma >
“This true Catholic Faith, outside of which none can be saved, which I now freely profess and truly hold, is what I shall steadfastly maintain and confess, by the help of God, in all its completeness and purity until my dying breath.”

Fourth Lateran Council, Pope Innocent III, 1215 A.D. – Ex-Cathedra Dogma >
“There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one at all is saved.”

Etc. – more like Sources of Dogma on Section 1 of Immaculata-one.com.

The Catholic Sources of Dogma on Salvation are in no way ambiguous … you cannot use non-Dogmatic sources such as catechisms, false “interpretation” of scripture, Saints biographies, Martyrologies, etc … to reject Catholic Dogma.

If you do this you are headed for Hell, it’s that simple.

Rejecting Catholic Dogma for any “reason” causes your automatic excommunication from the Catholic Church … and you are therefore no longer a Christian. The infallible Catholic Dogma on automatic excommunication for heresy is listed on Section 13.2 of Immaculata-one.com.

The Catholic Sources of Dogma … that ignorance is not a loophole to get around other Dogma of the Catholic Church is listed on Section 5.1 of the above site.

Again, Christ re-opened Heaven in one prescribed way … the Catholic Church.

Jesus did not re-open Heaven via any of the heretic cults which are all started by men who were automatically excommunicated from Christianity for heresy.

Jesus also did not re-open Heaven via any of the many groups of un-baptized pagans. Anyone not baptized in water is in a pagan state … regardless of what labels they apply to their anti-Messiah soul damning groups.

The Catholic Sources of Dogma which specifically rule out the heresies of “baptism of desire” and “baptism of blood” are listed on Section 7.2 of the site – I have nineteen of them listed … such as::

Council of Chalcedon, Pope Saint Leo the Great, Letter to Flavian (martyr) section, 451 A.D. – Ex-Cathedra Dogma >
“For there are three who give testimony – Spirit and water and blood. And the three are one. In other words, the Spirit of Sanctification and the Blood of Redemption and the water of baptism. These three are one and remain indivisible. None of them is separable from its link with the others.”

Council of Florence, Pope Eugene IV, Session 8, Exultate Deo, 22 Nov 1439 – Ex-Cathedra Dogma >
“Holy baptism holds the first place among all the sacraments, for it is the gate of the spiritual life; through it we become members of Christ and of the body of the Church. Since death came into the world through one person, unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot, as Truth says, enter the Kingdom of Heaven. The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.”

Etc. – If you reject the Water Baptism Dogma, you are automatically excommunicated from Christianity (the Catholic Church) … and thus headed for Hell.

St. Alphonsus Liguori correctly stated that there are only three possible states for a human soul to be in … (1) Catholic, (2) heretic, and (3) pagan.
Click to expand...
You don’t make any sense.

You quoted the OT scripture at the very beginning. But none of the OT prophets had baptism. So I presume according to your view, since they are not officially Catholic, they are in hell??? 🤷

And what exactly happened to the DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH
LUMEN GENTIUM ?

I presume you reject it, but on what basis? Either you give full assent or you don’t. If your answer is don’t, then all the dogma’s you quoted above are also false.

God Bless 🙂
 
ddarko said:
Sigh, I can only choose to argue with Catholics who actually know what they are talking about. You on the other hand are more interested in PROVING YOURSELF than actually believing in the Church. Good luck with that!
Click to expand...
I get the same impression:thumbsup:
 
ddarko said:
I think the problem with Sir Knight is different.

His claim is the following
  1. Pope so and so claimed the following in history (history and is correct). It means that we cannot have salvation if we are not officially part of the Catholic Church (his interpretation)
  2. The church now states that one does not need to officially be part of the Catholic Church (correct)
  3. Therefore there is a contradiction in what is been taught
The error here is his interpretation in premise (1). The Catholic Church interprets it differently from how Sir Knight interprets it. From the perspective of the Catholic Church, there is NO contradiction.

Okay now I am confused:D If you are saying that when the Pope claimed that there is no Salvation outside of the Catholic Church that was the truth then, and it is now. Then yes I agree with you.

Now if you are saying that the Church now claims that there is salvation outside of the CC I do not agree with you.

The way it was taught back then the ONLY way to Jesus Christ was through the Church the Church was the Catholic Church. The only way to CHrist is through his Church.

Now while Our brothers and sisters ARE indeed PART of the CC many do not even realize it. We are all one in our Baptism.

There is no contradiction is what I am saying, never was. Just how people understand it. Because at the time of the Apostles and even today may I add you are united to Christ with his Body the Church in the Sacrament of Baptism.

Although we are not in Perfect communion with our brothers and sisters in the faith, they are a part of Jesus Christ by Baptism through his Church. ANyone who accepts Christ is part of his body the Catholic Church.

As I am sure we agree Christ and his Church are united by the power of the Holy Spirit. They are one, as a bride is united to her husband as one.

We are united with them in our Baptism and our acceptance of Jesus CHrist as our Lord and Savior. There is only ONE truth Church, because there is only ONE GOD.

Now whether Sir Knight is capable of understanding that there is no contradiction or not, he has no choice in the matter. As a Catholic, he must give full assent to the teaching and though he cannot say how, he must believe that they are not contradictory.

Since the church has made it explicitly clear, even by excommunicating those who do not agree, that to say no salvation is possible unless one is officially a member of the Catholic Church is WRONG, one must give full assent.

God Bless 🙂
Click to expand...
 
Holy Mother Church is the final interpreter of Her documents - not a lay person who simply scans them looking for loopholes to condemn his neighbor in an attitude of elitist supremacy.

Paul’s epistle to the Romans, Chapter 2, commends the natural law written in the heart as obtaining salvation.
13 For it is not those who hear the law who are just in the sight of God; rather, those who observe the law will be justified. 14 For when the Gentiles [a/k/a pagans in his day] who do not have the law by nature observe the prescriptions of the law, they are a law for themselves even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the demands of the law are written in their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness when conflicting thoughts accuse or even defend them.

Those who accept the Kingdom as a child will easily give religious assent to those teachings that come forth from the Holy See, and that includes Vatican II - ALL of it. Those who argue with these teachings like the pharisees and refuse to believe unless they have hundreds of proofs, are completely lacking in simple trusting faith, without which no man can know God. Faith opens the door to God’s favor, not disagreement.

I could easily put forth the hundreds of posts that would contradict the errors being promoted here with respect to doctrine, but I see a propensity to disbelieve even in the face of proof and truth. Proof is not faith, and trust in the Magisterium as given to us by Jesus to guide us in safety is essential.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top