Has Ecumenism changed the meaning of EENS?

[ImmaculataFides]

I might be mistaken here, do you consider ccc 1260 a valid teaching of the church or not ?

And if so , do you consider JPII’s statement to be in agreement with that teaching or not?

I was under the impression that you adhere to the “doctrine” that no one outside the catholic church can be saved, but I could be wrong and if I am I apologize

Yes, no one outside of the Catholic Church can be saved, that is an infallible teaching of the Church.

 

[reconman]

I have to reiterate a point.

We all agree that through baptism one becomes a member of Christ’s Church. I do not believe I need to post anything confirming this do I?

Apparently for some folks here you do. If you are not catholic (forget baptism), you are going to hell. It doesn’t matter what the CCC says, JPII said, Vatican II said, all that matters is what Pope Boniface VIII said (which was dismissed long ago). Sorry Lutherans, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodist etc. … You’re all forever out of luck.

And you better believe me, 'cause I know better than the church or the CCC or the pope or Vatican II or anyone

 

[reconman]

Yes, no one outside of the Catholic Church can be saved, that is an infallible teaching of the Church.

lol…Ok, I’ll ask you (and anyone else who wants to read this) one more time:

What does this mean:?

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… "

And this:

John Paul II:

“Since salvation is offered to all, it must be made concretely available to all”.

 

[Rence]

Sorry but that contradicts the Church teaching. Baptism is NECESSARY for salvation and there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.
These teachings have the full authority of God behind them.

Sorry, I don’t believe Jews and Muslims or anyone else is going to Hell just because they’re not Baptised. You can believe whatever you want to believe.

 

[sdegutis]

Sorry, I don’t believe Jews and Muslims or anyone else is going to Hell just because they’re not Baptised. You can believe whatever you want to believe.

Hell is one of the biggest reasons for widespread heresy and apostasy I’ve ever seen. And it makes sense; out of a sense of compassion, nobody wants to imagine anyone they love being in Hell.

Take a second to look at it from God’s eyes. There’s a certain Jew who lives very morally upright. He gives a tithe of all his possessions to God all the time. He isn’t an adulterer or a thief like a certain publican. However, when told about the Catholic Church, he politely declines. He likes his morality just the way it is, and doesn’t like “rules” like the ones the Catholic Church imposes on people.

How is this any different than Adam and Eve and their rebellion and self-sufficiency? Wasn’t the original sin just disobedience due to a false sense of self-sufficiency? Isn’t that what started all this? Isn’t that based in pride, the capital of all sins, the same sin that the devil chose to ride out of Heaven? How can this “virtuous” man be considered just in God’s eyes when he doesn’t recognize his true dependency on God?

 

[thistle]

Sorry, I don’t believe Jews and Muslims or anyone else is going to Hell just because they’re not Baptised. You can believe whatever you want to believe.

I believe what the Church teaches. I guess you don’t.

 

[reconman]

Take a second to look at it from God’s eyes. There’s a certain Jew who lives very morally upright. He gives a tithe of all his possessions to God all the time. He isn’t an adulterer or a thief like a certain publican. However, when told about the Catholic Church, he politely declines. He likes his morality just the way it is, and doesn’t like “rules” like the ones the Catholic Church imposes on people.

How is this any different than Adam and Eve and their rebellion and self-sufficiency?

Because the morally upright Jew in your example doesn’t know any better.

Adam and Eve did. They were told not to eat from the tree but did so anyway. The Jew in your example never did any such thing.

 

[sdegutis]

Because the morally upright Jew in your example doesn’t know any better.

Adam and Eve did. They were told not to eat from the tree but did so anyway. The Jew in you example never did any such thing.

Whether the Jew had sinned or not, he rejected the Savior, and relied on his own self-sufficiency in his own morality and upright conduct to save him from damnation. Yet he still was born of Adam and Eve’s family, and so just as he inherited life, so he also inherited Original Sin. And this sin on his soul would still damn him without some means to remove it.

Remember, every human needs the Savior whether they sinned or not. Faith in the Savior is the only path to justification. Even the men of old were justified by Faith, as Hebrews tells us. Even the Immaculate Conception who never committed an actual sin needed a Savior, as she confessed in her Magnificat.

 

[thewanderer]

Oh my goodness!!!

I can’t believve there is such a controversy over this!!!

The Church teaches as infallible doctrine that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church, ie everyone in heaven is a baptized Catholic…

However, that does not mean that everyone in heaven will have been visibly Catholic while living on earth. They will not all be baptized by the normal baptism of water and the holy spirit.

Thistle has the best post about this so far on this thread.

Two Church teachings:

• Baptism is NECESSARY for salvation (but does not ensure it. you must die in a state of grace)
• There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church

How can someone be baptised and a Catholic?

• Sacramental Baptism as a Catholic
• Baptism of Blood (non-Catholic dying for the Catholic faith)
• Baptism of desire - Explicit (those who want to know more about Christ and have the desire to get baptised but die before scaramental baptism - e.g.those in RCIA)
• Baptism of Desire - Implicit (those who may (not will) be saved through invincible ignorance meaning those who through no fault of their own do not know Christ, his Gospel and his Church but nevertheless in that ignorance still live a life in accordance with Christ’s teachings)

You may debate who is captured under invincible ignorance but outside the above four forms of baptism there is no salvation.

Not all Catholics are saved but everyone in Heaven is Catholic.

While there might be some people on this thread who actually disagree with this teaching and so believe in a heretical position, I’m fairly sure that the majority of the arguments on this thread are based on the misunderstanding of the people involved.

Some people assume that if yoou say there is no salvation outside of the Church you are denying the implicit baptism by desire which the Church teaches. In other words, they assume you mean that unless someone visibly belongs to the Catholic Church while alive there is no chance for them to be in heaven. In other words they are defending the possibility that there will be some people who live their lives as a visible muslim/jew/any other religion in heaven. Which everyone who accepts the teachings of the Church must accept is a possibility, even if they believe that it will only happen extremely rarely. Because such people seem to be denying that there is no salvation outside of the church (even if their more nuanced understanding is actually in line with Church teaching) those who are trying to explain that there is no salvation outside of the Church assume that they are denying the infallibly proclaimed doctrine.

So for everyone who is debating this issue, maybe it can be easily cleared up by just saying whether or not you agree with Thistle’s post. I find it hard to believe that there are many, if any that disagree with it.

 

[reconman]

Whether the Jew had sinned or not, he rejected the Savior, and relied on his own self-sufficiency in his own morality and upright conduct to save him from damnation.

No he did not reject the Savior. Are you implying that since he did not become a catholic because someone invited him to that he’s forever damned? Simply because he’s comfortable in his own religion and again does not know any better?

 

[sdegutis]

No he did not reject the Savior. Are you implying that since he did not become a catholic because someone invited him to that he’s forever damned? Simply because he’s comfortable in his own religion and again does not know any better?

Wait, hold on, I thought I was the one deciding what’s what in this hypothetical. Or is this not really a hypothetical, but an actual situation involving real people that you know? Because all I was trying to do was explain how it’s possible to see the idea of someone non-Catholic in Hell. But if you actually know someone who is (or are yourself) not Catholic but you don’t want to believe they might go to Hell, that’s a totally different story.

 

[reconman]

Oh my goodness!!!

I can’t believve there is such a controversy over this!!!

The Church teaches as infallible doctrine that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church, ie everyone in heaven is a baptized Catholic…

No it does not. I’ve already posted the ccc article at least a half dozen times which clearly

 

[thewanderer]

thewanderer;9368562:

Oh my goodness!!!

I can’t believve there is such a controversy over this!!!

The Church teaches as infallible doctrine that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church, ie everyone in heaven is a baptized Catholic…

No it does not. I’ve already posted the ccc article at least a half dozen times which clearly

confirms this, I’m weary of posting it. You all need to go back to catechism class or talk to your priest about this, because you are dead wrong

Do you agree with Thistle’s post from the beginning of this thread?

 

[thewanderer]

Sorry, I don’t believe Jews and Muslims or anyone else is going to Hell just because they’re not Baptised. You can believe whatever you want to believe.

Did you read his whole post???

There are more ways to be baptized than through the normal baptism by water.

 

[reconman]

reconman;9368600:

thewanderer;9368562:

Do you agree with Thistle’s post from the beginning of this thread?

No. It is outside the teaching of the church. Like I said, you all need to go back to catechism class or talk to a priest.

I can’t believe there are so many catholics here who have, and refuse to let go of, a complete fallacy.

 

[thewanderer]

thewanderer;9368605:

reconman;9368600:

No. It is outside the teaching of the church. Like I said, you all need to go back to catechism class or talk to a priest.

I can’t believe there are so many catholics here which have, and refuse to let go of, a complete fallacy.

I have read your quotes from the catechism and I fail to see how they contradict the position that both thistle and I hold

 

[sdegutis]

No. It is outside the teaching of the church. Like I said, you all need to go back to catechism class or talk to a priest.

I can’t believe there are so many catholics here which have, and refuse to let go of, a complete fallacy.

Having looked at what thistle’s post, and having read your interpretation of the same data, and having carefully considered both sides, I have no choice but to conclude that thistle’s position doesn’t make any logical fallacies, and I can’t find a single specific fallacy that you claim he has made. However it does appear that you’re either lacking information or imagination in trying to understand his point of view. Either way, I can’t find a single flaw in what he has said.

 

[reconman]

Wait, hold on, I thought I was the one deciding what’s what in this hypothetical.

You are, and I’ll ask you again, is this Jew going to hell simply because he refused an invitation to become a catholic?

That’s completely within your hypothetical

 

[thewanderer]

Having looked at what thistle’s post, and having read your interpretation of the same data, and having carefully considered both sides, I have no choice but to conclude that thistle’s position doesn’t make any logical fallacies, and I can’t find a single specific fallacy that you claim he has made. However it does appear that you’re either lacking information or imagination in trying to understand his point of view. Either way, I can’t find a single flaw in what he has said.

Exactly!!

 

[reconman]

reconman;9368621:

thewanderer;9368605:

I have read your quotes from the catechism and I fail to see how they contradict the position that both thistle and I hold

good grief, ok one more time:

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… "