S
sdegutis
Guest
If nothing else, your obsession with Jews having an alternate path to salvation is just plain unhealthy.
- Status
V
Vouthon
Guest
A
adrift
Guest
Because a canonized saint said something does not mean that the Church accepts it as being dogma. There are saints whose works are not accepted. If you are trying to say that because St. Ignatius of Santhia said this and was made a saint than it must be true is unwarranted and lack of knowing about what canonization is and what it isn’t.
V
Vouthon
Guest
Amen!
You will note, brother, that I never said this when quoting him. I am well aware that simply because one has been canonized does not mean that everything they write or say has to be theologically legit or accurate.
I quoted him because I desire to rebut our brother/sister Immaculata, when he/she claimed that the view propounded by the Holy Father was heresy and (implicitly) an innovation post-Vatican II.
I am showing rather this this view is a venerable, legitimate and ancient opinion shared by many Doctors, Saints and theologians down the centuries which has a long pedigree in Catholicism and was not thought up by the Holy Father from a vacuum.
I have maintained that it is not a magisterial teaching, yet anyway but neither is it heresy.
T
tskrobacz
Guest
The word of the living God…
might come from the mouth of Abraham
might come from the mouth of Jesus
might come from the mouth of Mohamed
might come from the mouth of the woman at the well or from mouth of the Buddha
The word of the living God…
might come from the mouth of a Poet, from a child
Sometimes, the word of the living God comes from our own mouth
in those moments that we express what we did not know we knew
This is the word of the living God.
It knocks the bottom out of what we thought reality to be
the truth of this living word discloses, evokes hours, no - a life time, of pondering
This heart felt pondering sustains the Spirit led upheaval that leaves us without any solid footing in our ultimately unsubtantial ego self.
Riding the waves of this upheaval leads us to an utter calmness
a peace that surpasses understanding.
The word of God is like that
it tips over mountains
it drains the sea
it dissolves the foundations of who we thought ourselves to be.
might come from the mouth of Abraham
might come from the mouth of Jesus
might come from the mouth of Mohamed
might come from the mouth of the woman at the well or from mouth of the Buddha
The word of the living God…
might come from the mouth of a Poet, from a child
Sometimes, the word of the living God comes from our own mouth
in those moments that we express what we did not know we knew
This is the word of the living God.
It knocks the bottom out of what we thought reality to be
the truth of this living word discloses, evokes hours, no - a life time, of pondering
This heart felt pondering sustains the Spirit led upheaval that leaves us without any solid footing in our ultimately unsubtantial ego self.
Riding the waves of this upheaval leads us to an utter calmness
a peace that surpasses understanding.
The word of God is like that
it tips over mountains
it drains the sea
it dissolves the foundations of who we thought ourselves to be.
A
andreashofer
Guest
What does the Catholic Church teach about ecumenism???
I have no clear understanding of Vatican II and that causes me great confusion!!!
What does it lead to?
Cry, cry, cry
Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen
I have no clear understanding of Vatican II and that causes me great confusion!!!
What does it lead to?
Cry, cry, cry
Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen
T
tskrobacz
Guest
I would ask what does your lived experience teach you about the possibility of a God revealed in all things and through all people…a God completely beyond our knowing and therefor infinitely knowable? I think you will find your answer there on ecumenism.
N
NorthTexan88
Guest
I’ve been having issues lately explains this to non-Catholics, if anyone has any advice on how to word things that would be great!
Basically, whenever someone asks me if the Church teaches that there can be salvation outside of the Church I say yes, but I wouldn’t count on it. Then I explain invincible ignorance. As soon as I explain this the person automatically says “Oh good I’m going to claim that so I don’t have to become Catholic”. I can only imagine how many times this has happened to people if this has happened to me so many time, and I think it does a lot of damage and puts people’s souls at risk, also it seems it leads to religious pluralism in some cases.
So I’ve just started saying that there is no salvation outside outside of the Church bc people always seem to want the easy way out. How can I explain things better?
Basically, whenever someone asks me if the Church teaches that there can be salvation outside of the Church I say yes, but I wouldn’t count on it. Then I explain invincible ignorance. As soon as I explain this the person automatically says “Oh good I’m going to claim that so I don’t have to become Catholic”. I can only imagine how many times this has happened to people if this has happened to me so many time, and I think it does a lot of damage and puts people’s souls at risk, also it seems it leads to religious pluralism in some cases.
So I’ve just started saying that there is no salvation outside outside of the Church bc people always seem to want the easy way out. How can I explain things better?
C
clem456
Guest
Ask them, what about love? God IS love. I’m sure your non-Catholic friends love their wives. Would they treat their wives in this minimalist way?
“Dear, what is required of me to gain your love?”
You might get slapped for such a comment. Why would God accept such patronization? We are not in a position to fool God, he knows when we have given Him everything, or when we have tried to slip by with minimalcommittment. Catholicism requires giving everything, not checking off the requirements. None of us merit heaven of our own efforts. No amount of genuflecting and crossing yourself will get you to heaven.
R
Rocky24
Guest
The Word of God is proclaimed by the Catholic Church.
What you just wrote sounds like it came from Sr Joan Chittister
M
MarMax
Guest
Not going to read 26 pages, especially when the answer is simple.
Anyway… No EENS an ecumenism are not at odds, unless one wishes to redefine one or both of these concepts.
EENS must be properly understood as all Salvation is through Christ who is the Bridegroom to the Bride, which is the Church, and the two are joined in perfect union via the doctrine of matrimony. Those who are not “visible” Catholics can still make it to heaven, but not without much more effort insofar as lacking access to the Sacraments and the Graces which they give. Mortal sin is mortal sin.
Ecumenism is simply dialogue between groups of baptized Christians who are subscribing to non-Catholic or schismatic sects to get them back into the Church and understanding the necessity of being subject to the Successor of St. Peter. It doesn’t mean Fr. So-and-So goes to the LGBT-“Christians” conference and says flowery junk about how caring and sincere Pastor Joan and her flock of homosexuals are, and they are A-OK being wrong and practicing homosexual; it doesn’t mean allowing an Imam to read from the koran during Vespers… such as recently happened in Denver.
There is no Salvation Outside the Church… which is the Mystical Body of Christ. People are saved, if not Catholic, in their false religion and not by it. It would be better to say that all saved are Catholic. There are no Muslims in heaven, nor Protestants, etc. Just Catholics. This is not the ridiculous anonymous-Christian thing posited by some, and it’s much more nuanced than that, yet, not. We cannot take this to the level of not making an effort to correct fallacy. We must understand that invincible ignorance is the only thing getting any non-Catholic to heaven. It is our job to overcome that invincible ignorance, as ignorance can lead to damnation more easily than knowing and choosing to reject. To be saints, we must correct (first ourselves). If we are not seeking to be saints, we are by default seeking to be damned. There are no non-saints in heaven. No one gets to heaven for being a good Baptist or Muslim, etc. They are saved in spite of that, due to their invincible ignorance. However, they must seek to be the best they can if they are not going to become Catholic. It gets crazily confusing but Romans 2 makes it easier to understand if we take that model of natural law and apply it. For Protestants, it’s very weird as they are generally baptized validly. That places even more burden on them in many ways. See BC#3Q510-511.
We can’t redefine terms and concepts, nor submit to modern chimeras of these terms.
For EENS, see Baltimore Catechism #3 Questions 510-513, Catechism of Pope St. Pius X Questions 27-29, and for any SSPX lurkers, take a good hard look at “Open Letter to Confused Catholics” Chapter 10, under the title Ecumenism by Abp. Marcel Lefebvre.
Once you properly understand EENS, and specifically BC#3Q513, Ecumenism makes sense. This more liberal understanding of EENS does NOT excuse evangelizing and proper preaching! Otherwise, St. Anthony of Padua wouldn’t have done the work he did in correcting heretics!
An easier way to understand Ecumenism is thinking of it as “You-Come-In-ism”. It’s not the ridiculous junk we often see today; not in the least.
Anyway… No EENS an ecumenism are not at odds, unless one wishes to redefine one or both of these concepts.
EENS must be properly understood as all Salvation is through Christ who is the Bridegroom to the Bride, which is the Church, and the two are joined in perfect union via the doctrine of matrimony. Those who are not “visible” Catholics can still make it to heaven, but not without much more effort insofar as lacking access to the Sacraments and the Graces which they give. Mortal sin is mortal sin.
Ecumenism is simply dialogue between groups of baptized Christians who are subscribing to non-Catholic or schismatic sects to get them back into the Church and understanding the necessity of being subject to the Successor of St. Peter. It doesn’t mean Fr. So-and-So goes to the LGBT-“Christians” conference and says flowery junk about how caring and sincere Pastor Joan and her flock of homosexuals are, and they are A-OK being wrong and practicing homosexual; it doesn’t mean allowing an Imam to read from the koran during Vespers… such as recently happened in Denver.
There is no Salvation Outside the Church… which is the Mystical Body of Christ. People are saved, if not Catholic, in their false religion and not by it. It would be better to say that all saved are Catholic. There are no Muslims in heaven, nor Protestants, etc. Just Catholics. This is not the ridiculous anonymous-Christian thing posited by some, and it’s much more nuanced than that, yet, not. We cannot take this to the level of not making an effort to correct fallacy. We must understand that invincible ignorance is the only thing getting any non-Catholic to heaven. It is our job to overcome that invincible ignorance, as ignorance can lead to damnation more easily than knowing and choosing to reject. To be saints, we must correct (first ourselves). If we are not seeking to be saints, we are by default seeking to be damned. There are no non-saints in heaven. No one gets to heaven for being a good Baptist or Muslim, etc. They are saved in spite of that, due to their invincible ignorance. However, they must seek to be the best they can if they are not going to become Catholic. It gets crazily confusing but Romans 2 makes it easier to understand if we take that model of natural law and apply it. For Protestants, it’s very weird as they are generally baptized validly. That places even more burden on them in many ways. See BC#3Q510-511.
We can’t redefine terms and concepts, nor submit to modern chimeras of these terms.
For EENS, see Baltimore Catechism #3 Questions 510-513, Catechism of Pope St. Pius X Questions 27-29, and for any SSPX lurkers, take a good hard look at “Open Letter to Confused Catholics” Chapter 10, under the title Ecumenism by Abp. Marcel Lefebvre.
Once you properly understand EENS, and specifically BC#3Q513, Ecumenism makes sense. This more liberal understanding of EENS does NOT excuse evangelizing and proper preaching! Otherwise, St. Anthony of Padua wouldn’t have done the work he did in correcting heretics!
An easier way to understand Ecumenism is thinking of it as “You-Come-In-ism”. It’s not the ridiculous junk we often see today; not in the least.
R
Rocky24
Guest
This ^
T
TrueLight
Guest
Amen. Ecumenism described this way makes perfect sense to me and doesn’t appear to be a jarring about face.
F
flameburns623
Guest
The first problem I see here is that there were no ex cathedra Papal declarations prior to the First Vatican Council of 1870, because the dogma of Papal Infallibility had NOT YET BEEN DEFINED.
The second problem is in the faulty understandings of Baptism by Desire and of Invincible Ignorance. A person who is invincibly ignorant of their duty to be visibly joined to the Catholic Church, and who responds to the grace of God in doing all they know to be joined to Him is INVISIBLY a member of the Catholic Church, tho they APPEAR otherwise.
M
MarMax
Guest
So… Our Lady wasn’t Immaculately Conceived until 1854; Assumed until 1950?
Negatory.
That which is true, though as of yet undefined, is always true.
Lutheranism is not in the body of the Church, being a heretical ideology. Lutherans, as individuals, may, but we cannot broad-brush Lutherans into this category. As I said, it’s nuanced and yet not.
F
flameburns623
Guest
The Trinity has always been the Trinity, but no one in the first several centuries of the Church could have spoken of the Trinity AS SUCH: the dogma had not yet been defined, the language to speak of the Godhead as a Trinity did not exist. Christ is True God and True Man–but one could not have used such language to describe Christ until the dogma had been defined. The Pope could not have defined the dogma of EENS in the 1400’s “Ex Cathedra” because that language is anachronistic: it had not been marshalled to define the Papal charism of Infallibility. Someone has tampered with the text cited and imported a term coined in the 19th century to make it appear that Pope Eugene IV was making an infallible statement. Papal Infallibility may have been implicit in Christ’s charge to St. Peter, but it only became EXPLICIT in 1870.
M
MarMax
Guest
That which is defined ex cathedra is defined ex cathedra regardless of if someone writes “ex cathedra” post-writing. The portion is question is not in quotes, and is merely making known this is a statement defined… ex cathedra. When Papal Infallibility was defined is immaterial, as definition is done only once something is called into question or needs be defined. Whether explicitly defined as such or implicitly prior to the declaration of this immutable truth. Otherwise, everything pre-1870 is not ex cathedra when in fact it is recognized as such, if meeting the onus of that definition.
F
flameburns623
Guest
My understanding is that the Charism of Infallibility was never excercised prior to being defined, except in the prophylactic sense that no pope was able to define as dogma any false or heretical teaching.
M
MarMax
Guest
This doesn’t change that something infallibly declared is infallible even if the definition was not declared prior.
F
flameburns623
Guest
One of the requirements of the excercise of the Charism of Infallibility is the EXPLICIT INTENTION of a Pope to excercise that Charism. Intentional excercise of an undefine charism prior to that charism beiing defined is improbable at best. In any case this evades my central point, which is that the Church teaches us we may hope that a Protestant/Buddhist/Luciferian/Totemist who is, through no fault of their own invincibly ignorant of their obligation to join the Catholic Church: and who otherwise responds to God’s grace in good conscience to the best of their ability; are thereby, invisibly, members of the Church, though never visibly joined to Her. No violation of EENS occurs in such cases, so rare or so frequent as such may happen, by God’s Grace and Mercy.
This doesn’t change that something infallibly declared is infallible even if the definition was not declared prior.
- Status