Faith and Morals - Salvation outside the Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter GordonBOPS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Genesis315:
shannon e,

I don’t think you realize we are agreeing here:) . We both agree formal membership in the Church is not necessary:thumbsup: . But, being united to the Church is necessary. Non-Catholics who are saved, are still saved through the Church. They are united in a mystical way. The sacrament of Baptism is what normatively makes us members. Now, if one has Baptism of desire (see your CCC quote above) that person is also mystically united to the Church. 🙂
Click to expand...
Genesis315,
Yes, we agree that formal membership in the Church is not nec.🙂

This may be a big case of splitting hairs-- but maybe not.
To me: saying that one is mystically united is **very **different than saying that one is saved by. I agree w/ mystically united. I do not agree w/ saved by. Jesus Saves. The Church does not save. The Church is a tool. A sacrament. (A wonderful, grace-imparting, sacred, Holy, etc. tool)

Why am I being so stubborn about this? Because I think that your view could be misleading to others. I worry that your view is elevating our Church, as awesome as she is, to a level that is somehow equal to the Trinity. And I think that is wrong.

Can you help me to understand how your view doesn’t do that?
 
shannon e:
Genesis315,
This may be a big case of splitting hairs-- but maybe not.
To me: saying that one is mystically united is **very **different than saying that one is saved by. I agree w/ mystically united. I do not agree w/ saved by. Jesus Saves. The Church does not save. The Church is a tool. A sacrament. (A wonderful, grace-imparting, sacred, Holy, etc. tool)

Why am I being so stubborn about this? Because I think that your view could be misleading to others. I worry that your view is elevating our Church, as awesome as she is, to a level that is somehow equal to the Trinity. And I think that is wrong.

Can you help me to understand how your view doesn’t do that?
Click to expand...
I agree 100% with your first paragraph. Christ uses the Church as a tool to save us. I mean, for us Catholics, He has given us Baptism as a tool for our salvation. My point is that the tool of the Church is universal.

Sorry, my post messed up. I’ll get you the support for my position here in a second!
 
This whole document is a great read on this subject if you have time (it was written by our current pope) (my bolding)

CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH
DECLARATION******
"DOMINUS IESUS"
****ON THE UNICITY AND SALVIFIC UNIVERSALITY **
OF JESUS CHRIST AND THE CHURCH
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html
  1. From what has been stated above, some points follow that are necessary for theological reflection as it explores the relationship of the Church and the other religions to salvation.
Click to expand...
Above all else, it must be firmly believed that “the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk 16:16; Jn 3:5), and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through baptism as through a door”.77 This doctrine must not be set against the universal salvific will of God (cf. 1 Tim 2:4); “it is necessary to keep these two truths together, namely, the real possibility of salvation in Christ for all mankind and the necessity of the Church for this salvation”.78

The Church is the “universal sacrament of salvation”,79 since, united always in a mysterious way to the Saviour Jesus Christ, her Head, and subordinated to him, she has, in God’s plan, an indispensable relationship with the salvation of every human being.80For those who are not formally and visibly members of the Church, “salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church, but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation. This grace comes from Christ; it is the result of his sacrifice and is communicated by the Holy Spirit”;81 it has a relationship with the Church, which “according to the plan of the Father, has her origin in the mission of the Son and the Holy Spirit”.82
 
ok, try try again…(posting weirdness)

sorry it took me so long, :o but I wanted to read it (and more thru the link) carefully.

I stand corrected.

Yes, you may print and frame 😃

Thank you for the pleasant discussion and thanks for the charitable correction.

Peace!
 
An important aspect of this teaching that Pius XII emphasized is that one can be united to the Catholic Church by “a certain unconscious yearning and desire.” This is another way of saying that if one understood perfectly well of the truth that Christ desired that we are to be bodily and spiritually in union with the Catholic Church and submit to his Vicar on earth, they would.

They are saved not by their wisdom, but may be saved by their unintended ignorance of this salvific truth.

It is important to also note that invincible ignorance and “unconscious desire” to be united the Christ’s Church and submit to the Vicar of Christ is not, in and of itself, sufficient for salvation, but the gifts of faith and charity are also required. According to Pius XII, “supernatural faith” is also needed, and one must also live out that faith in “perfect charity.”

Protestants, would disagree, saying that it is “faith alone” that matters. Depending upon which Protestant sect they belong to, their version of “faith alone” means something different. Catholicism teaches we cannot be saved without faith. But a “faith alone” soteriology insufficiently describes all that Christ desires from the faithful. Catholicism contends that faith without love is nothing (as did St. Paul). And we also understand that Christ’s words, “He who hears you, hears me” meant that he established a hierarchical perpetual Church to be the channel of his teaching and grace, and that we are to obey those appointed by Him as our lawful pastors (cf. Heb 13:17). It’s a package deal, and no cute slogan like “faith alone” adequately captures the true soteriology of Christianity.

So, with regard to who is and is not joined to the Catholic Church, it is the position of the heart that matters. Those joined in heart, but not in body, if it is through no fault of their own, may also be on the way of salvation, according to the pre-Vatican II and post-Vatican II Catholic Church, if they have supernatural faith and live in perfect charity (charity due to one’s love of God above all else).
 
40.png
itsjustdave1988:
They are saved not by their wisdom, but may be saved by their unintended ignorance of this salvific truth.
Click to expand...
I believe the operative word here is “may.” As a canonized Saint is a member of the human family that we know to be in union with the Eternal God in heaven, it would do us well to reflect upon the Church’s position on such a title. Has the Church ever canonized a non-Catholic? No. Nor will it ever for the simple fact that the Church possesses the fullness of all revealed Truth of the Divine Lord and His Salvific Passion. There is **no more certain path to heaven than that which is found in the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. **

Now, does this mean that only Catholics can get to heaven? Absolutely not. It would be arrogant for fallible men to ascribe limitations to the mercy of our Divine Savior. Rather, it is understood that the salvation of a soul outside the Church is uncertain, as opposed to impossible.

For those who feel the Church’s use of the word “may,” regarding the salvation of souls outside the Church, in some way diminishes the necessary evangelic mission of the Church to convert all souls to the one, truth faith, I think that they misunderstand was is truly being said. For example, suppose you were at a roulette table in Vegas and instead offering money as a wager, you put down your salvation. Would you then be content to place your bet on a number with a mere “possibility” of winning, or would you not strive to ensure that your soul was indeed placed upon a number that was sure to win?

For this reason, “may” should not be a cause for much jubilation among non-Catholics concerned about their salvation and Vatican II never changed this fact.
 
40.png
itsjustdave1988:
An important aspect of this teaching that Pius XII emphasized is that one can be united to the Catholic Church by “a certain unconscious yearning and desire.” This is another way of saying that if one understood perfectly well of the truth that Christ desired that we are to be bodily and spiritually in union with the Catholic Church and submit to his Vicar on earth, they would.

They are saved not by their wisdom, but may be saved by their unintended ignorance of this salvific truth.

It is important to also note that invincible ignorance and “unconscious desire” to be united the Christ’s Church and submit to the Vicar of Christ is not, in and of itself, sufficient for salvation, but the gifts of faith and charity are also required. According to Pius XII, “supernatural faith” is also needed, and one must also live out that faith in “perfect charity.”

Protestants, would disagree, saying that it is “faith alone” that matters. Depending upon which Protestant sect they belong to, their version of “faith alone” means something different. Catholicism teaches we cannot be saved without faith. But a “faith alone” soteriology insufficiently describes all that Christ desires from the faithful. Catholicism contends that faith without love is nothing (as did St. Paul). And we also understand that Christ’s words, “He who hears you, hears me” meant that he established a hierarchical perpetual Church to be the channel of his teaching and grace, and that we are to obey those appointed by Him as our lawful pastors (cf. Heb 13:17). It’s a package deal, and no cute slogan like “faith alone” adequately captures the true soteriology of Christianity.

So, with regard to who is and is not joined to the Catholic Church, it is the position of the heart that matters. Those joined in heart, but not in body, if it is through no fault of their own, may also be on the way of salvation, according to the pre-Vatican II and post-Vatican II Catholic Church, if they have supernatural faith and live in perfect charity (charity due to one’s love of God above all else).
Click to expand...
Just one point, Dave, and this is experiential or anectdotal: most Protestants of my aquaintance who traditionally cling to “sola fide” do so so as not to impinge in any way on the Sacrifice of the Cross. They do not believe that we can add anything to what Christ did for us in His Passion and Death (unfortunately, they do not seem to realize that Holy Mother Church teaches exactly the same thing). This does not, however, prevent most of them from living lives of true charity (works). Creedaly, they proclaim “sola fide.” Experientially, they still live out charity (at least in my experience).
 
JKirkLVNV,

I believe we’ll be judged more by our likeness to Christ rather than our imperfect notions of Christ.
 
40.png
itsjustdave1988:
JKirkLVNV,

I believe we’ll be judged more by our likeness to Christ rather than our imperfect notions of Christ.
Click to expand...
Yes, I think that’s so.
 
mike182d,

Yes, those outside the Church in body, but joined to her in soul may be on the way of salvation, depending upon if they have, 1) at least an implicit desire to be joined to the Catholic Church, 2) have supernatural faith, 3) perfect charity.

If they have all three above, they are in a state of grace. If they end their earthly lives in such a state, they will be eternally glorified in heaven.
 
JKirk question: DO YOU BELIEVE WHAT PAT MADRID SAID IN HIS DEBATE WITH JAMES WHITE—"THAT MANY OF YOU (protestants) RUN THE RISK OF GOING TO HELL FOR NOT ENTERING THE CATHOLIC CHURCH?? YES OR NO???
 
just answer the question–do you ageewith Madrid’s satatement—“many of you RUN THE RISK of going to hell for not entering the catholic faith.” yes or no–???
 
40.png
nsmyrtle:
just answer the question–do you ageewith Madrid’s satatement—“many of you RUN THE RISK of going to hell for not entering the catholic faith.” yes or no–???
Click to expand...
I agree with the Catechism of the Catholic Church, promulgated by our late and beloved Holy Father of happy memory, Pope John Paul II. Nsmyrtle and Moderatorstinks, you both seem terribly abrupt with me for someone I don’t know…or do I? And Marineboy, you still haven’t provided the link for the debate. As I said, I searched Whites site and Envoy. I would truly be happy to read it if you can post it for me.
 
Jkirk noone asked you about the cAtechism did they–why dont you answer the question–anyway–let me pose the question a different way—lets say Madrid didnt say it-he did but lets say he didnt—do you agree with the statements about protestants–(now remember I AM NOT ASKING YOU IF YOU WOULD POSE IT THIS WAY OR ABOUT THE APPROACH OR PRUDENCE JUST WHETHER YOU AGREE OK) that Protestestants run the risk of going to hell for not entering the catholic church–YES OR NO??? p.s. you can doa google search on catholic protestant debates sola scriptura—and yo will find the transcript–madrid says tis at the end of the debate–he was vp of catholic answers at the time—
 
Young man, you aren’t going to get around me. This isn’t a court and no one’s going to throw me in jail for contempt for refusing to bend to a yes or no question (which is the worst they could do to under the current system. If some others were put in charge, I rather imagine dolorous processions to stakes piled high with cords of wood). I suspect that I’m quite a bit older than you and I know I’ve watched “A Man for All Seasons” more often than you have. In response to your question “that Protestestants run the risk of going to hell for not entering the catholic church–YES OR NO???”, I repeat what I said earlier: I agree with the Catechism of the Catholic Church, promulgated by our late and beloved Holy Father of happy memory, Pope John Paul II. I believe what it says. And I will respond to the question that way every time you pose it. And I will cut and paste the Catechism to respond to your every post about this subject…no matter how many user names you go through.
 
40.png
niecea:
Jkirk noone asked you about the cAtechism did they–why dont you answer the question–anyway–let me pose the question a different way—lets say Madrid didnt say it-he did but lets say he didnt—do you agree with the statements about protestants–(now remember I AM NOT ASKING YOU IF YOU WOULD POSE IT THIS WAY OR ABOUT THE APPROACH OR PRUDENCE JUST WHETHER YOU AGREE OK) that Protestestants run the risk of going to hell for not entering the catholic church–YES OR NO??? p.s. you can doa google search on catholic protestant debates sola scriptura—and yo will find the transcript–madrid says tis at the end of the debate–he was vp of catholic answers at the time—
Click to expand...
I think I found the debate you were referring to. I did not find that statement in there. Did you paraphrase P. Madrid’s words?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top