Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus

  • Thread starter Thread starter Apologia100
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
tru_dvotion:
What pnewton is proposing is following the current trend of religious humanism. Of course from that perspective, everything is just somebody’s point of view. To the humanist, every other view, other than his own, is just a fallacy.
Click to expand...
I have never read any work of humanistic philosophy so I can hardly be following a trend I know nothing of. My source of information is the Catechism, which may be considered humanistic by some, but it is all I have as a sure norm. The point of view one the topic at hand I have esoused was copied from Fr. Corapi and his work on the Catechism and from Peter Kreeft.

I believe these sources better than anonymous posters.

Humanist, indeed.
 
40.png
beng:
What he’s proposing is incorrect and no where in the CCC. It’s not a technicallity.
Click to expand...
Hi beng, I was reffering to this:

**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.I stated it was a technicality. From your statement you don’t agree…?
 
Michael C:
Hi beng, I was reffering to this:

**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.I stated it was a technicality. From your statement you don’t agree…?
Click to expand...
CC-847 DOES NOT negate EENS. One CAN NOT enter the Kingdom of Heaven unless he’s a member of the Church. Membership of the Church is necessity of precept and necessity of means (just like baptism).

If a person is truly invincible ignorance, somehow and someway God will join him/her with the Church.

EENS is NOT just technicallity.
 
pnewton said:
I have never read any work of humanistic philosophy so I can hardly be following a trend I know nothing of. My source of information is the Catechism, which may be considered humanistic by some, but it is all I have as a sure norm. The point of view one the topic at hand I have esoused was copied from Fr. Corapi and his work on the Catechism and from Peter Kreeft.I believe these sources better than anonymous posters.
Click to expand...
I have not red Fr. Corapi or Peter Kreeft. I would be very careful at taking anybody’s interpretation of Catholic Dogma, because there is no such thing. Humanism is the new evil, and many fall prey to it. I am not advocating for you to consider anything I say as truth. What I am advocating is to hold onto the timeless, unalterable truth contained in our faith. Truth does not change with the times. If Fr Corapi or Peter Kreeft explanations would not have been acceptable 100 or 600 years ago, they are not acceptable today: certainly not if they contradict Catholic Dogma. Do not look for personal interpretation of modern man, not even if he is a priest. Many priests have fallen prey to modernism and to new age heresies. Go to the core, go to the truth, it is still there, it is unchangeable, it is timeless. Read the Catechism and meditate on the Dogmas: look for truth, do not look for sources that satisfy your current point of view, because there is always a chance that one is in error.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
beng:
CC-847 DOES NOT negate EENS. One CAN NOT enter the Kingdom of Heaven unless he’s a member of the Church. Membership of the Church is necessity of precept and necessity of means (just like baptism).

If a person is truly invincible ignorance, somehow and someway God will join him/her with the Church.

EENS is NOT just technicallity.
Click to expand...
Hi beng, I think your tone is coming across wrong. It looks like you’re yelling. That happens sometimes when writing. Peace.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=22144
 
Beng (and Bones), I think what Michael means the large letters and heavily accented lettering appear like shouting. Certainly, all capital letters represent shouting. I have seen images and posts that are particularly offensive: For instance a large grinning head or “Read my lips” in huge red lettering is definitely offensive. I think the comment is with good intent. I personally believe if you highlighted a bit less, and did not use oversize letters it would not be to your determent. My 1c
 
40.png
beng:
I use capital to emphasize.

Btw, are you saying that my tone is wrong or what I said is wrong? If the later, what is it?
Click to expand...
Hi beng, did you see the attached link?
 
Michael thank you for taking this topic to the “Ask an Apologist forum.” I found the answer given precise and in line with the Catechism and other orthodox teachers of the faith, such as I listed above.
 
40.png
tru_dvotion:
Beng (and Bones), I think what Michael means the large letters and heavily accented lettering appear like shouting. Certainly, all capital letters represent shouting. I have seen images and posts that are particularly offensive: For instance a large grinning head or “Read my lips” in huge red lettering is definitely offensive. I think the comment is with good intent. I personally believe if you highlighted a bit less, and did not use oversize letters it would not be to your determent. My 1c
Click to expand...
Hi tru_dvotion, I didn’t think beng was out of line or being “mean” but I think sometimes the way we write can be interpreted that way. It’s always nice to throw a 'Peace" or God Bless you" in there.
 
Michael C:
Hi tru_dvotion, I didn’t think beng was out of line or being “mean” but I think sometimes the way we write can be interpreted that way. It’s always nice to throw a 'Peace" or God Bless you" in there.
Click to expand...
Michael, I know that. That is why I posted. Beng is not mean. There are computer savvy people who manage not to get into trouble yet they have been most offensive in how they converse and approach some people. I never found Beng to be like that. Thank you for pointing it out.
 
40.png
tru_dvotion:
Sigh… Has it not been pleasant and cordial today up until now? Is this the beginning of more immature behavior?
Click to expand...
They will know we are christians by our Love? 😉
 
Michael C:
Hi beng, maybe somethings getting “lost in the sauce”. I thought this link was interesting.

ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=386797&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=3000&Author=&Keyword=salvation+outside+the+Church&pgnu=1&groupnum=0

Maybe we’re arguing the same case?
Click to expand...
From Fr Levis:

That means that the mystery of everyone’s personal salvation is, somehow or other, thru the Church. This dogma does not demand the actual and physical union of all withing the Church.

The blue one is right on. But the red one is not, if we read it as what it is. See, without JOINNING with the Church, there’s no way one could enter the Kingdom of Heaven. It’s simply impossible. The Church is the body of Christ and outside of it there’'s no salvation.

IF what Fr Levis meant by the red one is that the dogma does not demand that one be a card carrying member of the Church or even always attend the Catholic Church down the corner, then he’s not mistaken. But if what he meant is that one need not become full member of the Church to enter Heaven, he would be off the base.
 
CCC - A sure norm for teaching the faith JPII

"However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272
(My Bold)

To take the example of EENS, (no salvation outside the Church) the CCC is quite clear

CCC 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

CCC 838 - The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."[322] Those “who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church.”[323]

Both of these reference Lumen Gentium. Robert Burns OP pointed out that

“no responsible Catholic theologian would publicly deny them (Vat II documents) as teachings of the Church”

So really the so called EENS ‘traditionalists’ who try to damn everyone outside the visible Catholic Church (in communion with Rome) really don’t have a leg to stand on. They can try to use their own interpretations of isolated Florence and Unam Sanctam quotes until they are blue in the face. They are on there own. The Pope, Bishops, and clergy do not endorse these ‘traditionalists’ point of view. Which they are entitled to of course.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top