Has the Catholic Church not contradicted itself already?

[Thal59]

Andreas Hofer:

Your post was good until this point, and perhaps I just misunderstand you, but Catholic doctrine and dogma pertain to all human beings because they are absolute, universal truths. If the Church declares a doctrine concerning those outside the Church it is doctrine for every single human.

Now, some disciplines of sacraments actually do create disparities. One instance is marriage. The marriages of non-Catholics to non-Catholics can be recognized by the Church as valid, but Catholics who intentionally marry outside the Church do not contract valid marriages (e.g. marrying a non-Catholic without a dispensation) because they fall under the judgment of the Church in such matters whereas those outside of its visible structures are not. But the Church making morally binding demands on her children is not the same as the Church declaring a doctrine or dogma.

In short, Catholic dogma and doctrine apply to everyone, Catholic discipline only to Catholics.

I am sorry to have to disagree with you on the basis that your reply makes no sense at all! In your answer, a Hindu can marry in a Hindu wedding at a pagan temple in India, and such a wedding would be considered valid (?) by the church, but Catholic dogma regarding the ever-virgin Mary would be binding on them?

Catholic disciplines are based on Catholic dogmas and doctrines. You cannot bind one onto all people while loosing them from the other at the same time. While you are correct that the “truths” of the church are absolute, you cannot demand that a person who has known only Hinduism or Islam must adhere to a faith that is not their’s, while they seek after God in the religion they were born into.

This is why the original post quotes…

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church…

Thal59

 

[jordan]

Asimis:

Ok, is there any article online dealing with the rejection of the council or parts of it?

By the way the Council started at Basel and was moved to Florence.

Thanks.

If you read the entire article from the link you provided, you will get a sense for Pope Eugenius’ exasperation with that council.

Basel and Florence were completely separate councils. The quotation of Eugenius in dispute here came from a “Bull of Union with the Copts.” This was not directed to the"Catholic" Church, but at the Egyptian Christians.

This “Bull” would not be considered an infallible statement in any event, but as Vincent stated earlier in this thread, the statement was directed to a group who KNEW the Catholic Church and the necessity of faith in its teachings.

As in a link I provided earlier to a CA tract, the possibility of salvation for those who DO NOT KNOW has a long history in Catholic teaching, and has been nicely clarified by VII. There is no contradiction in historic Church teaching.

God bless.

jb

 

[Damascene]

This Bull of Union (Cantate Domino) is unquestionably infallible and ex cathedra, under the criteria traditionally held by theologians and laid down at Vatican I & Vatican II.

However, there is no contradiction. What are the dogmatic points laid down here?

(1) “those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life”

(2) “the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fasting’s, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward”

(3) “no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed his blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church”

It is obvious that “within the Catholic Church”, “in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church”, and “remaining in” “the unity of the ecclesiastical body” are identical statements. We can therefore conclude as to what precisely this unity is: not the unity of communion of the faithful, but the unity of charity.

The Council of Trent says:

Can. 25. If anyone shall say that the just ought not to expect and hope for an eternal recompense from God and the merit of Jesus Christ for the good works which have been performed in God, if by doing well and in keeping the divine commandments they persevere even to the end: let him be anathema. (Canons on Justification)

From this it is clear that for all the justified can “exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward”. Therefore even catechumens, who desire to be in the Church, are within the ecclesiastical unity (this was commonly recognized before Florence, including by St. Thomas - it is certain that Florence meant not to condemn it). And it is not incredible that someone visibly unconnected to the Catholic Church could be connected to her nonetheless. Cardinal De Lugo (1583-1660) says: “Those erring invincibly about some articles [of faith], and believing others, are not formally heretics, but have supernatural faith, by which they believe the true articles, and so acts of perfect contrition are able to proceed from this, through which they will be justified and saved.” Their situation is analogous to the catechumen: they are in the Church, connected by the bonds of faith, hope, and charity and by their very intention to join her, even though implicit. That this doctrine was the intention of Vatican II is made quite clear by the footnote to the Letter of the Holy Office, Suprema Haec Sacra, which teaches precisely this: “no salvation outside the Church” does not exclude those who, infused with the supernatural virtues, are connected to the Church by desire, even if implicit.

 

[Vincent]

The most Holy Roman Church believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatic’s cannot become participants in eternal life…

It is very clear, it does not says those who rejected the Catholic Church or those who joined it and the left it, it not only includes those but EVERYONE who is “not living withing the Catholic Church”.

What’s clear is that the text doesn’t say “EVERYONE”. Rather, it says, “those”. The question is, who are “those”, specifically?

Are they the pagans, Jews, heretics and schismatics who don’t have “full knowledge” about the necessity of being Catholic? Just by reading the text itself, you’d conclude, “Maybe. Maybe not.” Vatican II answers that question.

Pope Pius IX, about a century before Vatican II, wrote in continuity with Pope Eugenius’s declaration:

“Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments.”

(emphasis added)

Pope Pius IX clarifies what Pope Eugenius was getting at. The Second Vatican Council took up what both Popes taught.

 

[RSiscoe]

Asimis:

That looks all fine and dandy but here is what the quote says:

The most Holy Roman Church believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatic’s cannot become participants in eternal life…

It is very clear, it does not says those who rejected the Catholic Church or those who joined it and the left it, it not only includes those but EVERYONE who is “not living withing the Catholic Church”.

This is in direct contradiction to what VII stated when it says that the Muslims and Jews are included in the plan of salvation and that other Christian denominations even while not being in full communion with The Catholic Church can obtain salvation.

Actually, if you read the passage from Vatican II carefully, it does not say they will be saved. All if says is that Mulsims, Jews (and everyone else) are included in the plan of salvation. That just means that if they are supposed to be Catholic.

Jesus died for all - for those who believe and those who do not. Those who do not were included in the plan, but they will not be saved, because of their unbelief.

Every heretic, every Jew, every Muslim will be lost. That is an infallibly truth of the Church. That’s why missionaries used to give thier lives to bring the Gospel to those outside the Church. (The issue of “invinvible ignorance” is another matter.)

The newer writings are far to ambiguous, and even misleading. That is why so many Catholics are confused. Many now go so far as to reject the clear teachings of the Church in favor of their interpretation of the newer ambiguous statements.

 

[RSiscoe]

Vincent:

What’s clear is that the text doesn’t say “EVERYONE”. Rather, it says, “those”. The question is, who are “those”, specifically?

Are they the pagans, Jews, heretics and schismatics who don’t have “full knowledge” about the necessity of being Catholic? Just by reading the text itself, you’d conclude, “Maybe. Maybe not.” Vatican II answers that question.

Pope Pius IX, about a century before Vatican II, wrote in continuity with Pope Eugenius’s declaration:

“Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments.”

(emphasis added)

Pope Pius IX clarifies what Pope Eugenius was getting at. The Second Vatican Council took up what both Popes taught.

But be sure to read what Pope Pius IX wrote just before the quote you provided. Funny, but that part is never quoted.

 

[JimG]

Andreas Hofer:

I think a better way of speaking about this is focusing on the honest cooperation with grace made by the individual throughout the course of his life instead of hypothesizing about ‘another shot’ at salvation. . . . - there’s no reason to assume we must always be given “one more chance.”

Hmm, that makes sense to me, that one is judged by his cooperation with the grace available to him throughout his entire life. The Church teaches that everyone is given sufficient grace for salvation. My point was not to provide one more chance, but rather to speculate that if God had not provided that grace during one’s life, he would surely provide it during one’s final moments.

It also appears, from Jordan’s post, that the papal bull in question was directed at a particular group in a particular historical situation.

 

[Vincent]

RSiscoe:

But be sure to read what Pope Pius IX wrote just before the quote you provided. Funny, but that part is never quoted.

The paragraph immediately preceding the quote is . . .

“Now, since our Apostolic Office demands we carefully and zealously defend the cause of the Church committed to us by Christ, we condemn those who attack and despise the Church itself, its sacred laws, ministers, and this Apostolic See. Hence, with this letter, once more we confirm, proclaim and condemn totally and singly that which in many consistorial allocutions and in our other Letters we have been forced to deplore, declare and condemn.”

. . . which doesn’t seem to be relevant to the discussion.

 

[GoodSamaritan]

To me, there is a MUCH simpler explanation for this and it lies in the definition of the Catholic Church. Please do not see the Church as merely an earthly entity–it isn’t. It is the Church which exists on earth (Church Militant), in Purgatory (Church Hopeful), and in Heaven (Church Triumphant).

Now, whether it be in this earthly life or when a person dies, he/she will meet Jesus face to face. When this happens, they are given all the Truth which they lacked in their earthly life and they are then free to choose to enter the Catholic Church or they may turn away and relegate themselves to eternal life apart from God (aka, Hell). Think of the Catholic Church as a ‘funnel’, in which ALL people must enter to have union with God.

Now, look at the Pope’s statement again. It seems clear that NO person living (not necessarily alive on earth but, since our soul lives after our body dies, simply ‘alive’…) can enter Heaven except through the Catholic Church. Should a Jew choose to remain Jewish and not accept the Truth given him at death, he chooses an eternal life without God. Same goes for a Hindu, Buddhist, etc.

As for infallibility, many have questioned whether this statement was made ex cathedra. For me, it is irrelevant. The teaching is sound and loyal to Catholic Dogma.

 

[RSiscoe]

Vincent:

The paragraph immediately preceding the quote is . . .

“Now, since our Apostolic Office demands we carefully and zealously defend the cause of the Church committed to us by Christ, we condemn those who attack and despise the Church itself, its sacred laws, ministers, and this Apostolic See. Hence, with this letter, once more we confirm, proclaim and condemn totally and singly that which in many consistorial allocutions and in our other Letters we have been forced to deplore, declare and condemn.”

. . . which doesn’t seem to be relevant to the discussion.

You’re right. I was referring to the paragraph after, rather than before the above quote.

"Also well known is the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. Eternal salvation cannot be obtained by those who oppose the authority and statements of the same Church and are stubbornly separated from the unity of the Church and also from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff, to whom “the custody of the vineyard has been committed by the Savior.”[4]
The words of Christ are clear enough: “If he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you a Gentile and a tax collector;”[5] “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me;”[6] “He who does not believe will be condemned;”[7] “He who does not believe is already condemned;”[8] “He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters.”[9] The Apostle Paul says that such persons are “perverted and self-condemned;”[10] the Prince of the Apostles calls them “false teachers . . . who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master. . . bringing upon themselves swift destruction.”[11]

 

[RSiscoe]

GoodSamaritan:

To me, there is a MUCH simpler explanation for this and it lies in the definition of the Catholic Church. Please do not see the Church as merely an earthly entity–it isn’t. It is the Church which exists on earth (Church Militant), in Purgatory (Church Hopeful), and in Heaven (Church Triumphant).

Now, whether it be in this earthly life or when a person dies, he/she will meet Jesus face to face. When this happens, they are given all the Truth which they lacked in their earthly life and they are then free to choose to enter the Catholic Church or they may turn away and relegate themselves to eternal life apart from God (aka, Hell). Think of the Catholic Church as a ‘funnel’, in which ALL people must enter to have union with God.

Now, look at the Pope’s statement again. It seems clear that NO person living (not necessarily alive on earth but, since our soul lives after our body dies, simply ‘alive’…) can enter Heaven except through the Catholic Church. Should a Jew choose to remain Jewish and not accept the Truth given him at death, he chooses an eternal life without God. Same goes for a Hindu, Buddhist, etc.

The Church has never taught that. After death it is too late. When death arrives, the chance to accept the truth and live accordingly has passed. After death comes judgment - no second chance. If that were not the case everyone would be saved, because everyone would accept the truth when they saw It “face to face”.

As for infallibility, many have questioned whether this statement was made ex cathedra. For me, it is irrelevant. The teaching is sound and loyal to Catholic Dogma.

It was made at a Church Council and ratified by the Pope. It is ex-Cathedra. What is not ex-Cathedra is the new Catechism, yet many will reject the dogmaticaly defined dogma in favor of an ambibuous Catechism

 

[GoodSamaritan]

The Church has never taught that. After death it is too late. When death arrives, the chance to accept the truth and live accordingly has passed. After death comes judgment - no second chance. If that were not the case everyone would be saved, because everyone would accept the truth when they saw It “face to face”.

Well, if you’re gonna make that assertion, let’s see a little evidence. Teachings say that the Church is NECESSARY for salvation and that those who, through no fault of their own, are not in the Church, are not damned–you do the math. If your position were true, all those who lived before Jesus are damned.

Are you saying that the Catechism actually got the teaching wrong? If you don’t mind, I’ll take the Magisterium’s word for it.

Here’s a good piece on salvation outside the Church.

totustuus.com/outside.htm

 

[RSiscoe]

GoodSamaritan:

Well, if you’re gonna make that assertion, let’s see a little evidence. Teachings say that the Church is NECESSARY for salvation and that those who, through no fault of their own, are not in the Church, are not damned–you do the math. If your position were true, all those who lived before Jesus are damned.

The Church teaches two things: One is that it is necessary for salvation; the other is that “outside of the Church there is no salvation”.

So yes, you are right: The Church is necessary for salvation, but don’t forget that “outside” of the Church there is no salvation.

Are you saying that the Catechism actually got the teaching wrong? If you don’t mind, I’ll take the Magisterium’s word for it.

Yes, you should beleive what the magesterium teaches. The following is an infallible quote from the Magesterium:

*Pope Eugene IV ( A.D. 1441 ) " The most Holy Roman Church believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatic’s cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart " into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" ( Matt. 25:21), unless before the end of life the same has been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fasting’s, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed his blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." *

 

[Asimis]

Does it not seems that this passage is refering to those who have rejected The Church or who were once part of it and left? That is what it seems to me, it is not refering to those who have never heard of The Church and are ignorant thru no fault of their own.

RSiscoe:

Yes, you should beleive what the magesterium teaches. The following is an infallible quote from the Magesterium:

Pope Eugene IV ( A.D. 1441 ) " The most Holy Roman Church believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatic’s cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart " into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" ( Matt. 25:21), unless before the end of life the same has been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fasting’s, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed his blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church."

 

[RSiscoe]

Asimis:

Does it not seems that this passage is refering to those who have rejected The Church or who were once part of it and left? That is what it seems to me, it is not refering to those who have never heard of The Church and are ignorant thru no fault of their own.

With all due respect, that is a far stretch. It does not say “those who have left”, or “those who have rejected”. What is says is “those who are not living within” - and those who are not in the “bosom” of the Church.

This doctrine really should not be so controversial. This is what has been taught clearly since the beginning. The Catholic Church is the kingdom of God on earth - it is the mystical body of Christ. To be saved, a person must be a member of the mystical body of Christ. A non-Catholic Christian (whether a heretic or schismatic) is cut off from the Church, as a branch is cut off from a tree.

Augustine used the analogy of a limb that is amputated from the body. He said, just as the amputated limb does not partake of the spirit (but dies) so to the amputated member of the Church (heretic of schismatic) does not possess the spirit, and thus will not be saved.

The Liberals in the church today have so watered down the 2000 year old teaching, that it is completely foreign to us. But all we need to do is read what the Church, and saints have consistently taught for 2000 years. Then, when we are exposed to the watered down version, we will not be misled.

 

[MariaG]

Maybe this article will help some.

Here is a sample:

In heaven there is sufficient light to see who’s there. But at the mysterious periphery of the communion of saints, it’s difficult to see what God is up to, so the Church doesn’t presume to judge. It simply bears in mind the tradition summed up in the Catechism’s paragraph 1257: “God has bound salvation to the sacrament of baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.”

The rest is found here. catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0207fea3.asp

God Bless,
Maria

 

[Damascene]

RSiscoe:

To be saved, a person must be a member of the mystical body of Christ.

Catechumens are not members of the Mystical Body, according to Pius XII. Can they be saved without sacramental reception of Baptism?

 

[Mordocai]

This thread is extremely interesting to me.
Like mentioned above, it would SEEM to be a contradiction.
And the one (can’t remember who it was) who’s been defending the fact that all the statements work together has made excellent arguments to which I agree with but with one final connection that I feel needs to be addressed for me to be fully convinced of the non-contradictions of the church. If protestants can be considered invincibly ignorant, then what about the statement that even if someone is martyred for Christ can not go to heaven? This seems clear that protestants, even being martyred, can’t be saved.

I look at it this way.
Two completely different worlds! The Church is a growing one that unfortunately must adapt to the “advancements” of mankind. It wasn’t a reformation, but a revolution for protestantism. For example, using the Rosary in the 3rd century would be odd. (mainly because it hadn’t been around lol but the point is that matters of faith have been added as they’ve been revealed) Now, this is NOT to say, that if somehow I transported to the 3rd century and used the Rosary to pray that God wouldn’t accept the prayer. On the contrary, He transcends time and praying with the Rosary is between me and Heaven. So what am I saying about the Church?
What works in one era will not always work in another era. In the Early Church, every Christian was Catholic. They understood that. Then the Protestant Revolution comes about. O ****, now these people are convinced they’re Christian but they deny the Church, what are we to do? Jesus is ever merciful, and those who really do believe they are making efforts FOR Christ (which is ultimately what it’s all about) can be saved. But hey, consider this? Purgatory is the saving net in this issue. The Catholic Church is Christ’s Church. That doesn’t change just because men say differently. Truth is objective with God you see.
So in conclusion.
True Saints of Christ’s Church in this life go right to Heaven (I would say Pope John Paul went straight to Heaven, but this is just opinion) But if you’re in purgatory, you ARE saved. You are just purified to enter into His glory. Being in Heaven means you are a saint, no?
So what about these protestants? They are convinced they have valid reasons to reject the Church. Well, they ARE trying for what they believe is truth. So God is merciful to those who love Him.
In summary.
Not everyone takes full advantage of God’s grace.
Not everyone is on a high spiritual level.
God is merciful to the reactions and choices we make.
Of course God does not change, but we do. And the Church in it’s authority must adapt also.
God’s justice demands damnation for heretics!
But His mercy does not want it…
Perhaps in the early Church there was an emphasis on Justice (and there’s nothing wrong with that) and now there is an emphasis on His Divine Mercy.
So the problem, to me at least, is settled.
What say you?
(Writing long posts like this is my way of thinking out loud. I type and edit and get the answer I’m searching for. Talking to ourselves in our head often leads to the discovery of the answers! )

Mordocai

 

[Mordocai]

God just gave me the answer.
Hope He gives you the grace to understand this.
No salvation outside the Church.
ALL fall short of the Glory of God and ALL are damned.
But it is through Christ’s mercy that we are saved.
The Church isn’t saying, “Unless you’re Catholic, you go to Hell.”
No, we ALL go to hell. We all deserve it.
But God established a means of attaining Salvation (Jesus) and Jesus established a means of knowing truth (The Church)
No salvation outside the Church because we all fall short of God’s glory.
As I said before. His justice demands damnation. But His mercy many times does not allow it.
Purgation of Souls becomes necessary for God to purify us and to teach us the things we “didn’t get” during our life on earth.

Hope this clears everything up! I know it does for me!

Boomshahkalahka!
Mordocai

 

[jordan]

All:

If you cannot find contradiction in our 2,000 year old collection of humanity, you haven’t looked. There are ways to understand authoritative teachings without focusing on what doesn’t seem to jive (although it can be a good learning exercise).

The Catholic Church has the “fullness” of orthodoxy. “Mere Christianity” is good. But what of those whose “pastors” teach their flock that they can abort, contracept, sodomize, euthanize, etc. Truth is objective, and Our Lord left us with a “Rock.” The world needs to know where the Truth is, and spreaders of division do the devil’s work.

Unity in Truth. Learn. Teach. Obey.

jb