Early church fathers and salvation

[zaida]

Hi everyone - From my reading it is my understanding that some of the early Church Fathers acknowledged that people who were “seemingly” outside of the Church could be “saved”…(origen talking about Socrates and his “logos”, Paul himself discussing people who “followed the law as written in their hearts…”)…Then it seems that many Popes made very STRONG statements that there is “no salvation outside the Church” but did not qualify it by saying there might be those who are in the Church because the actively seek God. The Popes just made these (seemingly) harsh statements…then, in the 19th and 20th centuries, qualifications seemed to be added, culminating in Vatican II, acknowledging that people not seemingly in the Church mught nevertheless be saved…(thos einvincibly ignorant, who no fault of their own, etc…)…

So! Was there a discontinuity? Trying to be academically honest, it feels and seems like a discontinuity…As if we went from the early church fathers, who were in a sense “inclusivist”, to the Popes in between, who were hard line, and then back to an inclusivist stance…

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks!

 

[GelasianumVetus]

You also have to look at it through the historical context in which these people were writing. The fact that some of these popes were writing these things to those in the West who were seeking to be without the Church is very important. Note that they didn’t send any letters (that I know of) to the Orthodox, for instance, saying that they could not be saved. Yes, they sent them letters encouraging them to ‘return’ to the Church, but nothing declaring that they couldn’t be saved. This fact shows that even they had some idea, however developed or not, that the salvation which flows from the Church is not limited to the visible communion of those in union with Rome.

What we are supposed to see from what those Popes wrote, is not the idea that one must, under any and all circumstances, be a visible member of the Catholic Church to be saved. The point that they were making was that Christ and the Church cannot be separated. If there is no savior besides Christ, there is no salvation which is not in some way mediated through His Body, that is, the Church.

Also remember that “no salvation outside the Church” is just as old as Origen. We first see the phrase, if I remember correctly, in St. Cyprian. Furthermore, the word that is translated “outside” is “extra” in Latin, which can hold meanings other than outside, such as without, apart from, aside from, besides. Just because we have traditionally translated it as ‘outside’ does not mean that earlier theologians, didn’t understand the formula with ‘extra’ having one of those other shades of meaning.

There is a great difference between “no salvation outside/apart from the Church” and “no one can be saved who is not visibly in the Church”.

 

[JimmytheButcher]

Like… Socrates.