Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus

[CollegeKid]

1. Basically the parts where it says protestants can be saved. To me that contradicts “outside the Church there is no salvation”.
2. Paragraph 841 in my original post.

The teaching that protestants cannot be saved assumes that they would continue as protestants while knowing that the true church is the Catholic Church. What do you make of the parts of Catholic tradition which acknowledge that some people, during their life times and through no fault of their own (taking into account factors like invincible ignorance or never being reached by missionaries), no matter what their religion, will not be made aware of the truth of the Catholic faith?

Something to keep in mind is that the pronouncement from the Fourth Lateran Council on the impossibility of salvation for protestants, jews, heretics and pagans included the phrase (paraphrasing): “unless they be joined to her (the Church) before death.”

What happened at the Second Vatican Council was a deepening of the understanding of how someone can be joined to the Church at or before death. The Church declared that God can bring people into his Church, the Catholic Church which is the Mystical Body of Christ even if they never make a formal profession of faith or if they never receive water baptism during their life, if they respond as best they can to the graces they receive from Him during the course of life.

If I’m not mistaken, in one of your earlier posts you acknowledged the history of the Church’s teaching that they can be saved who, laboring under invincible ignorance never formally enter the Church in this life as compatible with Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.

Doesn’t it seem plausible that 500 years after the Reformation this category would apply to at least some protestants? These are people who’ve been taught for generations now that the Catholic Church is wrong and they are right. Not everyone brought up in centuries-old Reformed faith traditions will be able to get rid of such a mindset. These folks don’t have the advantage of being around in the days of Luther, Zwingli, Calvin and the rest so as to be able to scrutinize their actions, teachings and motives.

 

[CollegeKid]

By the way, this article might help shed some light on the Catechism section 841, corresponding to Lumen Gentium 14 and 16 on Jews and Muslims in the plan of salvation.

 

[CollegeKid]

Also, I realized a made a rather sloppy error in one of my references. The “unless they be joined to her before death” clause does not reference protestants, as the quote I was thinking of apparently did not come from Lateran IV, but actually the Council of Florence in 1442, according to this excerpt from another thread (assuming this is in no way inaccurate):

“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.”

Pope Eugene IV, Papal Bull Cantate Domino (1442) Promulgated during a solemn session at the Ecumenical Council of Florence, using the strongest authoritative language seemingly fulfilling Vatican I’s criteria for infallibility.

LINK TO THREAD

 

[SemperFidelis]

By the way, this article might help shed some light on the Catechism section 841, corresponding to Lumen Gentium 14 and 16 on Jews and Muslims in the plan of salvation.

This as well as your other two posts have helped tremendously. I am finally able to start to seeing the connections between that paragraph and the other paragraphs in the Catechism and Lumen Gentium and the plethora of others (Lateran IV, Florence, Church Fathers, Papal encyclicals, etc.). Thank you very much and God Bless!

 

[Genesis315]

I’m not sure if this is in the correct location but here goes:

I have just come upon another stumbling block on my journey to reach the Tiber. I have been studying the phrase extra ecclesiam nulla salus or “outside the Church there is no salvation.” It seems to me that the Church has changed its dogma in this regard and that the Second Vatican Council has contradicted the Fourth Lateran Council. Lumen Gentium and the recent works that have been written about it seem to contradict Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. I understand that there have always been provisions for those who through no fault of their own have never heard the Gospels, but it seems according to the wording of Lateran IV and the Church Father’s both before and after the council that Orthodox, Protestant, non-Christian’s could not receive salvation if they were not in communion with Rome and its Pontiff. This new document issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH seems to agree with the theology of Vatican II, which in turn seems to me to disagree with the teachings of Lateran IV. Furthermore the doctrine of “outside the Church there is no salvation” seems to be ignored in this following paragraph in the Catechism:

841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day."330

Can someone explain this all to me?

Give this letter from the Holy Office in 1949 a read:

matt1618.freeyellow.com/appendixe.html

It really helps. Point being is this: to be a member of the Church is to be Baptized and profess the one true faith. But, if one of these two things is lacking through no fault of the person, but the person has supernatural faith (loves God with all his heart mind, and soul, seeks to follow his will by following the natural law, etc.) such a person has an implicit desire to be Baptized and profess the faith God has revealed and that counts too. Such a person, while not in full visible Communion, is indeed a member of the Church in a certain way (it is sometimes said they are united to the Soul of the Church, since the Holy Spirit is the soul, and it is He who sanctifies the individual in question).

Since Muslims acknowledge the one God creator of the universe, they are similar to the pagans St. Paul comes across in Acts–as he says to them, they worship the one true God without knowing it. Like St. John says, how can someone love the parent and not the child? That love and complete submission to God (supernatural faith), provided they are not at fault for loving Christ, implies a faith in the Son of God.

I hope that helps!

Same thing with non-Catholic Christians. We tend to give them the benefit of the doubt and not charge them with the sins of separation. Unless they are guilty of them (which only God can judge on an individual basis) they are united in some way to the Church by supernatural faith in Christ and Baptism, but it is not full visible communion.

 

[CollegeKid]

This as well as your other two posts have helped tremendously. I am finally able to start to seeing the connections between that paragraph and the other paragraphs in the Catechism and Lumen Gentium and the plethora of others (Lateran IV, Florence, Church Fathers, Papal encyclicals, etc.). Thank you very much and God Bless!

Thank you. Up until now I had always figured my apologetical skills were pretty shabby. Well whether they are or not is to miss the bigger picture. I’m glad I was able to help.

 

[Genesis315]

By the way, a point that is often lost is that idolators and atheists (those that do not acknowledge one Supreme God) cannot have the supernatural faith necessary. Even Vatican II’s Lumen Gentium, distinguishes them from those that can be united to the Church and saved. While those can achieve salvation, Lumen Gentium says idolators and atheists only receive “helps” which direct towards salvation. These are the graces that direct towards supernatural faith and knowledge of the one God (as He draws all men to Himself), but they are not salvific in and of themselves unless they enkindle salvific faith. This is why Lumen Gentium says that missionary activity should be focused on them first and foremost since they are most in danger.

 

[Genesis315]

Thank you. Up until now I had always figured my apologetical skills were pretty shabby. Well whether they are or not is to miss the bigger picture. I’m glad I was able to help.

You’re legit --this is often a confusing topic for some, but you seem to have it right.

 

[CollegeKid]

I’m humbled by your generous words.

 

[GoldenArrow]

In the end, I think Vatican II’s understanding is just a clearer understanding of the concept of Baptism of desire, and an acknowledgment that if people were capable of understanding the full truth they would be Catholic.

In the end the Church is still proclaiming that salvation is only through the Church, while acknowledging that people who are doing their best to find and follow God’s will, but who are not capable for whatever reason of fully understanding and accepting the Catholic Church as they see it, can still be saved through Her even if they may not be aware that that is happening. That, of course, does not apply to people who believe the Church to be the true Church and consciously choose to remain outside.

Kudos!

 

[MilesXpisti]

It really helps. Point being is this: to be a member of the Church is to be Baptized and profess the one true faith. But, if one of these two things is lacking through no fault of the person, but the person has supernatural faith (loves God with all his heart mind, and soul, seeks to follow his will by following the natural law, etc.) such a person has an implicit desire to be Baptized and profess the faith God has revealed and that counts too. Such a person, while not in full visible Communion, is indeed a member of the Church in a certain way (it is sometimes said they are united to the Soul of the Church, since the Holy Spirit is the soul, and it is He who sanctifies the individual in question).

Since Muslims acknowledge the one God creator of the universe, they are similar to the pagans St. Paul comes across in Acts–as he says to them, they worship the one true God without knowing it. Like St. John says, how can someone love the parent and not the child? That love and complete submission to God (supernatural faith), provided they are not at fault for loving Christ, implies a faith in the Son of God.

I hope that helps!

Same thing with non-Catholic Christians. We tend to give them the benefit of the doubt and not charge them with the sins of separation. Unless they are guilty of them (which only God can judge on an individual basis) they are united in some way to the Church by supernatural faith in Christ and Baptism, but it is not full visible communion.

As a Catholic, I recognize merely the possibility rather than the likelihood of the baptism of desire. I understand that the conciliatory nature of the language of the synodal documents of Vatican II were well-meaning, but it did in my estimation great harm to the causes of evangelization and conversion of non-Catholics, especially in the ever-secularized post-conciliar period.

One thing that I do reject on principle (perhaps allowing on individual basis of extraordinary merit), is the fostering that the salvific sacramental economy extends to those outside the visible bounds of Holy Mother Church; the very notion that the Holy Spirit would allow one to abide in error, and more to the point endow such a person with the gifts of the faith, is beyond odious.

 

[Bishopite]

1. Basically the parts where it says protestants can be saved. To me that contradicts “outside the Church there is no salvation”.
2. Paragraph 841 in my original post.

It does sound difficult and a bit harsh without a complete explanation. I’m a former Southern Baptist and the first time I heard extra eclessiam nulla salus. If you are thinking of it in the most strict sense then that only Catholics who are formally within the church could be saved. However, in a more broad sense it means anyone who is faithful to what they know (Luke 12:48) for the Catholic church is well aware of those who follow Christ but aren’t Catholic, and those who follow what they know to be true because they have never heard of Jesus and have never rejected what they have never heard. Protestants can surely be saved if they are faithful to what they know, however if they know the Catholic church is necessary for salvation, then they are most certainly culpable to at least investigate the church’s claims as you are doing and I give you a lot of credit for doing so.

Paul talks about those in Rom 1:19-20 who are made aware of God through creation and have no excuse for God has written the gospel on everyones heart. He then goes on to say in chapter 2 that those who knew much more are even more so without excuse.
Then says in verses 6-7 “For he [God] will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life”

Paul extends God’s grace not just to Christians but to everyone. Catholicism teaches that everyone receives sufficient grace in order to be saved, if they respond to that grace, God will give them sanctifying or saving grace for them to follow Him. Everyone has the opportunity to be saved and God knows how much people really know in their hearts and Paul said that those who “seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life” extends to everyone because everyone is given some grace in order to follow what they know to be true.