K
Kathryn_Ann
Guest
**
Thank you for clarifying that johndoe! I didn’t think I had said that myself, but you have every right to ask any question you like. I appreciate your candor.
Kathryn Ann**
- Status
Thank you for clarifying that johndoe! I didn’t think I had said that myself, but you have every right to ask any question you like. I appreciate your candor.
Kathryn Ann**
J
johndoe100
Guest
Thanks for your patience Kathryn, because this topic also came up at our Men’s Retreat last month. I got up and said that it’s the mission of the Catholic Church to sanctify the laity, and it didn’t go over well. I’m starting to think that the modern problem is going to Confession on Saturday? Are we starting to borrow from the Protestants rather than go through the Sacrament Process. In my parish the loudest Protestant voices seem to be in our Bible Studies, Chior, and Charismatic Prayer Groups. The rest of us pray the Rosary.
K
Kathryn_Ann
Guest
K
Kathryn_Ann
Guest
Oh my! I’ve come across similar things these first several years as a Catholic convert!
I think I’m getting better, now that I understand that many people have not experienced real Protestantism as some converts have.
There are so many errors in Protestantism, so many falsehoods, such lack of understanding the true history of the Church, that I think some are led down a dangerous path. New trends come up, and sometimes I question them if they seem “Protestant” in feeling or nature.
But yes, as a fairly new convert, I recognize how legalistic I am sometimes, then other times, I might not always understand what I see happening in the Church hierarchy. I began this thread because I saw so much ecumenism that I wondered how I should live out my life as a Catholic. How to live in peace with people of other faiths while speaking the Truth of Christ’s Holy Church?
Everyone here has been very patient with me on this particular question. Now I see that I can learn a new balance: I can speak the truth in love and also speak up when people of other religions are following grave errors. I must also care for them and pray for them and not pretend that all is well if they remain outside the Ark of the Church.
I really appreciate all these replies and yours, and as I just posted a few moments ago, these forums are very helpful to me and I am so very grateful!
Kathryn Ann:heaven:
A
adrift
Guest
R
reconman
Guest
CCC 1260: … "Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved… "
Are you saying that the CCC is wrong on such a fundamental question as this?
A
adrift
Guest
Perhaps you could clarify if you hold the position that you have to be actual members of the Catholic Church because that is how I am reading you. If so, it is a position that has been condemned.
M
MariaG
Guest
Absolutely! That must be our assumption and not rely on possibilities.
M
mattkubes
Guest
You keep arguing around the issue. Did you read my post on how St Thomas Aquinas resolved this issue? I don’t mean to speak for another poster, but nothing in Colin Donovan’s quotation is contradicted by what I or Wasserfall have been saying. Although keep in mind that Pope Boniface VIII completely outweighs you or Mr. Donovan on this point:
“Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” - Unam Sanctam, 1302
How do we reconcile clear statements like this one with current speculation re: invincible ignorance? I still maintain that St Thomas’ suggestion is the most reasonable. God will instruct those of the elect who happen to be inculpably ignorant before they die, even if He must do so miraculously. God’s free gift of Faith, which none of us deserve, is not optional for salvation.
Edit: So yes, we are perfectly free to hold that in this sense all those who are to be saved will have been actual members of the Catholic Church. There is nothing heretical, schismatic, or otherwise opposed to Catholic doctrine in this understanding.
K
Kathryn_Ann
Guest
Hi MariaG.:angel1:
Thanks to the patience of people here on this thread and in these forums,
I hope I’m beginning to understand things better each day. I have so much to learn!
Kathryn Ann
:heaven::hug1::grouphug:
R
reconman
Guest
From "Redemptoris Missio " John Paul II:
“…The universality of salvation means that it is granted not only to those who explicitly believe in Christ and have entered the Church. Since salvation is offered to all, it must be made concretely available to all…”
Keep in mind that JP II completely outweighs you on this point.
D
Diana_Catherine
Guest
You’re right. The possibility isn’t excluded, I have friends and family, as I am sure everyone does, that I am praying for.
And you are right. It is 844 in the catechism but (and I could be proven wrong, I am not an expert) if you follow the footnotes 844 and 847 lead to 16 in Lumen Gentium and they are in a different order. The reason I said that was because in her post she said to notice the last line and frequently you might hear someone defend salvation outside the Catholic church by that one line but there is a much bigger part to it in Lumen Gentium that gets forgotten, explaining how men are deceived and follow errors and then goes on to discuss the mandate the Church has to preach the Gospel and the Church.
M
mattkubes
Guest
The position I explained in the part of my quotation that you cut out contradicts neither of the popes we’ve quoted. Instead, you’ve seemingly rejected the statement of Pope Boniface VIII flat out. That’s dangerous territory. And if you understand Pope JPII’s quotation as espousing universalism, then you’ve uncharitably implied that he was guilty of grave heresy. Therefore, guided by charity, we are bound not to interpret his words this way.
K
Kathryn_Ann
Guest
Adrift, thank you for what you posted below. It’s a way to think of all this that I needed to see. This really helps me. I realize that we may certainly not all be in agreement here, but from my perspective (as someone just converting to the Church in 2004,) I need to keep studying diligently so that I can come to an understanding. I know each person here has reasons for coming to his or her conclusions. I’m just needing to see what people who have studied longer than I have, have been in the Faith longer, and can point to historic writings, have to say on this subject.
Blessings,
Kathryn Ann:heaven:
The doctrine that “Outside the Church there is no salvation” is one that is constantly misinterpreted by those who won’t submit to the Magisterium of the Church. Faith does not depend upon our ability to reason to the truth but on our humility before the Truth presented to us by those to whom Christ entrusted that task. This is why the First Vatican Council taught that it is the task of the Magisterium ALONE to determine and expound the meaning of the Tradition - including "outside the Church no salvation."Concerning this doctrine the Pope of Vatican I, Pius IX, spoke on two different occasions. In an allocution (address to an audience) on December 9th, 1854 he said:
“We must hold as of the faith, that out of the Apostolic Roman Church there is no salvation; that she is the only ark of safety, and whosoever is not in her perishes in the deluge; we must also, on the other hand, recognize with certainty that those who are invincible in ignorance of the true religion are not guilty for this in the eyes of the Lord. And who would presume to mark out the limits of this ignorance according to the character and diversity of peoples, countries, minds and the rest?”
Again, in his encyclical Quanto conficiamur moerore of 10 August, 1863 addressed to the Italian bishops, he said:
“It is known to us and to you that those who are in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion, but who observe carefully the natural law, and the precepts graven by God upon the hearts of all men, and who being disposed to obey God lead an honest and upright life, may, aided by the light of divine grace, attain to eternal life; for God who sees clearly, searches and knows the heart, the disposition, the thoughts and intentions of each, in His supreme mercy and goodness by no means permits that anyone suffer eternal punishment, who has not of his own free will fallen into sin.”
These statements are consistent with the understanding of the Church contained in the documents of Vatican II, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, as well as explaining why the rigorist position of Fr. Feeney (that all must be actual members of the Catholic Church to be saved) has been condemned by the Magisterium. It is ironic that precisely those who know their obligation to remain united to the Magisterium, and thus on whom this doctrine is morally binding, keep themselves from union with the Roman See on this point.
Answered by Colin B. Donovan, STL
Blessings,
Kathryn Ann:heaven:
The doctrine that “Outside the Church there is no salvation” is one that is constantly misinterpreted by those who won’t submit to the Magisterium of the Church. Faith does not depend upon our ability to reason to the truth but on our humility before the Truth presented to us by those to whom Christ entrusted that task. This is why the First Vatican Council taught that it is the task of the Magisterium ALONE to determine and expound the meaning of the Tradition - including "outside the Church no salvation."Concerning this doctrine the Pope of Vatican I, Pius IX, spoke on two different occasions. In an allocution (address to an audience) on December 9th, 1854 he said:
“We must hold as of the faith, that out of the Apostolic Roman Church there is no salvation; that she is the only ark of safety, and whosoever is not in her perishes in the deluge; we must also, on the other hand, recognize with certainty that those who are invincible in ignorance of the true religion are not guilty for this in the eyes of the Lord. And who would presume to mark out the limits of this ignorance according to the character and diversity of peoples, countries, minds and the rest?”
Again, in his encyclical Quanto conficiamur moerore of 10 August, 1863 addressed to the Italian bishops, he said:
“It is known to us and to you that those who are in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion, but who observe carefully the natural law, and the precepts graven by God upon the hearts of all men, and who being disposed to obey God lead an honest and upright life, may, aided by the light of divine grace, attain to eternal life; for God who sees clearly, searches and knows the heart, the disposition, the thoughts and intentions of each, in His supreme mercy and goodness by no means permits that anyone suffer eternal punishment, who has not of his own free will fallen into sin.”
These statements are consistent with the understanding of the Church contained in the documents of Vatican II, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, as well as explaining why the rigorist position of Fr. Feeney (that all must be actual members of the Catholic Church to be saved) has been condemned by the Magisterium. It is ironic that precisely those who know their obligation to remain united to the Magisterium, and thus on whom this doctrine is morally binding, keep themselves from union with the Roman See on this point.
Answered by Colin B. Donovan, STL
W
wasserfall
Guest
I already answered this. Did you read it?
Indeed, but pay close attention to this excerpt:
“God … in His supreme mercy and goodness by no means permits that anyone suffer eternal punishment, who has not of his own free will fallen into sin.”
The only way in which such an invincibly ignorant person could be saved is if they are culpable of no sin.
Personally I don’t know of anyone who fits that description.
Maybe all of your protestant friends and relatives are sinless. I hope so. That would be very nice.
R
reconman
Guest
“Since salvation is offered to all, it must be made concretely available to all”.
How am I to interpret this then? Did He not mean “all?”
I’m apparently guilty of “grave heresy” since the meaning of “all” means one thing to you and your pre- Vatican II notions of church teachings, and it means something completely different to me and the rest of the present day church.
W
wasserfall
Guest
Kathryn Ann, don’t be mislead by Adrift.
Pope Pius IX said explicitly, as quoted above, that someone outside the Church through invincible ignorance can only be saved “who has not of his own free will fallen into sin”.
Do you know anyone who has not willfully committed a grave sin? I don’t.
I will add that, on top of that requirement for lack of culpability of grave sin, the hypothetical invincibly ignorant must be cleansed of original sin. Ordinarily this happens through baptism. So most protestants (those validly baptized) at least don’t have to worry about this hurdle, but non-Christians not only have to die without being culpable of grave sin, they also have to have made an act of perfect contrition and charity towards a God whom they really don’t know. Something which is almost impossible to do.
Pope Pius IX is reminding us in the quotes above, that no man will be unjustly condemned by God to an eternity in hell. But we must remember that each of us are justly bound for hell at the very moment of our conception, because we are conceived in original sin and have no right to heaven.
The teaching of the Church is very clear: outside of the Church there is no salvation. The only reason this is a problem is because people allow their emotions to rule their reason and resist the constant, clear teaching of the Church because they have friends or relatives who are outside the Church and they refuse to believe that their friends or relatives are bound for hell.
Unfortunately, this sort of head-in-the-sand approach to the very real danger of hell for friends and relatives almost certainly guarantees their damnation, because instead of praying and working to bring friends and relatives into the Church, people allow themselves to be lulled by the devil into believing that their friends and relatives have a reasonable expectation of salvation.
And so ultimately, the more firm one’s conviction is that non-Catholic friends and relatives will be saved, the more likely those same friends and relatives are to suffer the eternal torments of hell.
A
adrift
Guest
This is just away not to answer. I must conclude that you indeed hold a position that the Church condemns.
W
wasserfall
Guest
Vatican II changed no teaching of the Church whatsoever.
This has been confirmed multiple times by not only the currently reigning Pope.
Indeed Vatican II was not capable of changing Catholic dogma in any way whatsoever.
M
mattkubes
Guest
The means of salvation is offered to all, but only the elect accept it and are subsequently saved. That is the constant and current teaching of the Church on this matter. Their names were written in the book of life from before the foundation of the earth (Apocalypse 13:8 & 17:8). We are discussing how we reconcile this teaching with the theoretical possibility of a person who is ignorant of the faith through no fault of his own. To this end, St Thomas said that God will provide a means of learning the Faith to these people, even if it takes a miracle (instruction by an angel or an internal locution).
- Status