Help, I'm thinking about leaving the Church

[Erethorn]

Again, the Church felt a need to expound on earlier teaching. It does not contradict anything stated earlier, those that do not know Christ through the Catholic Church will go to Hell.

It does contradict, because what was stated earlier had nothing to do with knowing Christ; it simply, clearly and obviously stated: “Those who are not in the Catholic Church” !!!

I believe Catholics consider the Orthodox to have valid Sacraments. And there have been talks going on for awhile about reconciling. So, I would not be so concerned here.

The Catholic Church infaliblly stated at Constance that Orthodox, being schismatics and not being Catholics, would go to hell.

I’m sorry, but this is a narrow minded way of looking at things. And selfish, I think.

What’s selfish ? Loving one’s father !!! Wanting to be with him ? Not accepting that a most wonderful man, a most loving father, would go to hell forever, for not atending Mass ?!!

First, mortal sin is a choice. Your father chooses to sin mortally. Yes, it is uncomforting. But it is by his own doing. The Church doesn’t set arbitrary rules but it does it for our own good.

My father is a far better man than I would ever be. For his part, he respects God and religion, but does not want to go to Mass every Sunday. By the Church’s judgement, that is enough to land him in hell.

Lastly, at the end of time, God will let us know who was judged and why, so that we know he was a fair and just God. Obviously, we may be a bit shocked as to whose where.

So I will spend the time before the end of time wandering why my family burns in hell, but once end of time and Judgement comes, I will be relieved by the answers, and I will be content to say: Burn, mother, burn, father, burn, my wife, burn, burn, my child, burn, God is just and His Church was right, I’ll have a good time up here and it’s fair that you should burn !!!

 

[Erethorn]

What the Church is still saying is A is not B, but expanding on what A is not B actually means.

TuAtem:

The whole point here is that the authoritative interpretation of the Church’s own authoritative texts belongs to the Church.

I’m sorry, but what you two say is that the Church can teach anything, despite common logic, and we should believe it no matter what ?

 

[ComputerGeek25]

It does contradict, because what was stated earlier had nothing to do with knowing Christ; it simply, clearly and obviously stated: “Those who are not in the Catholic Church” !!!

Again, nothing changed. Those that are not in the Church still have a chance to be in Hell. But this presumes that one knows the Church and it’s teachings. All the Church did was add this in, which does not change the fact that if one willfully rejects the Church, they are doomed. But that is for God to decide.

The Catholic Church infaliblly stated at Constance that Orthodox, being schismatics and not being Catholics, would go to hell.

I believe attitude have changed towards the Orthodox.

I don’t think the schism was ever done infallably though. The door was still left open for reconcilliation - as we see today.

What’s selfish ? Loving one’s father !!! Wanting to be with him ? Not accepting that a most wonderful man, a most loving father, would go to hell forever, for not atending Mass ?!!

Jesus left us the Sacraments and let his Church bind and loose. Jesus said to celebrate the Eucharist, and to be fed by this. God commanded us to keep the Sabath holy.

Therefore the Church has made this a requirement for our benefit.

My father is a far better man than I would ever be. For his part, he respects God and religion, but does not want to go to Mass every Sunday. By the Church’s judgement, that is enough to land him in hell.

The Church does not judge. God judges. If he willfully chooses to reject the Commandments then he will be judged accordingly.

So I will spend the time before the end of time wandering why my family burns in hell, but once end of time and Judgement comes, I will be relieved by the answers, and I will be content to say: Burn, mother, burn, father, burn, my wife, burn, burn, my child, burn, God is just and His Church was right, I’ll have a good time up here and it’s fair that you should burn !!!

Again, I don’t think it will be this brash. We all have free will and people have to choose between good and evil.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

I’m sorry, but what you two say is that the Church can teach anything, despite common logic, and we should believe it no matter what ?

Nope. The Church has been consistent.

 

[TuAutem]

Your ‘logic’ is wrong, and ridiculously wrong: You have decided, against all that the Catholic church says it teaches, that what it *really *teaches is contained in this 15th century document, which can only be interpreted by you. (The church’s official interpretation of the document, apparently, has no weight when deciding what it really means.)

Then, because of this new interpretation, that only you know about, you have decided, once again **against **what the Church teaches, that your family are going to hell. And that this proves that the Creator is unjust (whose will you alone can see so clearly, since no one else would presume to say that your family are condemned to hell, especially not for what you have mentioned here, none of which meets the official Church’s teaching’s criteria to conclude that they are hell-bound).

It’s quite a religion you have made for yourself, here, but it is not Catholicism. For my part I am aghast that you can choose to reject God, preferring hell, rather than accept that your family is NOT condemned by the Catholic church to hell, and even if they were, that through your prayers you could save them.

 

[supertubos]

I’ve been a catholic for about a year and a half now, having been an atheist before that.

Recently I started to have very serious doubts about the Church.

My problems fall in two main categories:

1. I have a hard time believing in the infailibility of the Church.

When I started looking into Christianity, and exploring different Churches, it was a requisite for me that the True Church should not claim a monopoly on salvation.

In other words, I would NEVER join a Church who said “Everyone who does not belong to our Church goes to hell”.

(…)

1. I have trouble accepting the Church’s teaching on the matter of mortal sin, specificaly, the fact that some actions are deemed sufficient to send one in hell.

Case in point: there is a certain person I love most dearly. By any measure, that person is a very good, king, gentle and loving man. However, despite being a Catholic, he lives with his spouse without being married in the Church, and he also doesn’t attend Mass.

The Catholic Church clearly teaches that he will go to hell. This I cannot accept. If, by any chance, I should end up in Heaven, I would never ever be happy there, knowing that said person is in hell.

(…)

Attention: THIS COMMENTARY IS BLUNT, not disrespectful, but I am telling some (as I think ) hard truths. The intention is to help, not to hurt, like a surgeon does to a tumor.

I think that you do not have the competence to analyze those documents, unless you have a degree in theology and … even so… The Catholic dogma has got 2000 years of History. some battles took centuries to solve. Do you know long did it take to formulate the Creed as we have today? Do you know that whole centuries of battles with deaths were caused by some of the dogmas?

Just to compare one paragraph with another written years before or later, take it out of context and ask here to give a short answer is like me asking if someone knows the formula for the nuclear fusion so that it may be transformed into manageable form of energy. Not even the thousands of physicist know that and I am pretty ignorant to understand the answer. I have got here the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas of Aquinas and it is 14 volumes !!!

So, you are going the wrong way. But if you want an answer, be prepared to take a full course of Theology, 4 years full time.

Taking question

1: Yes, outside the Church there is no salvation. But the trouble is that there is a big confusion about what is the Church. some simply say it is the building !! Others say that it is the pope, others, the Bishops, others the Catholics, and so on. Most forget that the Church is Jesus Christ. He is the vine and all we are the branches. He who stay with Him are alive (=Heaven) like the branches of the vine which stay connected to the trunk. Those who stay away from Him are dead (=Hell) as the branches that are cut off the vine.

Now, how about the Jews, the Muslims, Paris Hilton, Hitler and the man of Papua New Guinea ? All must be saved by Christ, through Christ and in Christ !!! How is it done? Bluntly I dont know and I dont care. It is God’s business and not ours. When you try to get answers without having the capacity to understand you get in deep trouble.

In short: those who dont know that Jesus Christ exists are saved by Him and are in good hands. It’s none of my business to ask Jesus how.

So, Christ is Infallible, the Church is Infallible, right?

2.Another case very different is the question of mortal, venial sin. Erethorn, you are new in the Church and you are not aware of the changes. The idea of mortal and venial sin has got a long story and not very nice one. I am not going to dwell on the history of it for there would be not enough space. We here may write only so many words.

Bluntly, and I ask my fellow Catholics not to judge me, there is no such a thing as mortal an venial sin. It was a Catholic convention, if you do grave sins, then it was mortal and you would go to hell and if small you would go to Purgatory. I was raised like that and I suffered a lot. My educators sometimes classified me: “You committed a mortal sin!” and I was in hell. I ran to confession and I was pardoned and suddenly I was in Heaven and then again in Hell and in Heaven like a roller coast. That type of Theology made many Christians suffer unjustly. Suppose that a man leads a wholly life for 90 years and in the last second commits a mortal sin, is he going to Hell? It is crazy…

So now Theologians talk about choice: do you choose God or against God. Do you want to obey to Him or do you want to stray away from His Will? Like a car that goes from New York to Florida sometimes may make mistakes and go round but in the end, he goes to Florida, so our way to God. We want to go to God, but we sin but God knows that we want to go to Him, He may punish us (or the life does) but He knows we live Him BUT we are weak. The Catholic Church never said that your friend goes to Hell. Where did you hear that? The Judgement is done by God not by us. Jesus said: “the way you judge you will be judged”

So, dont kill yourself reading things that are not for you. If you do not understand, dont pretend that you understood something that you did not understand and … let’s leave the Church for reasons that not even you understand.

Dont expect that we understand everything. But I tell you: nowhere you will find anything closer to the Catholic Church.

If you do not understand, dont put the blame on the Church, put the blame on you that do not understand, right?..

 

[Ahimsa]

I will be forced to leave Crhistianity altogheter.

…and do what?

 

[ctkrcia]

Erethorn, the church indeed teaches that only Catholics will enter Heaven. However, one must understand what that means. It does NOT mean that every person must join the Catholic church here on earth in order to enter heaven.

You came through RCIA, right? You probably saw some people who were baptized in Protestant traditions. They were not required to be baptized again to enter the church. Why? Because the church recognized that baptism and its graces are only received ONCE. The only conditions are the Trinitarian formula and flowing water. In an emergency, anyone - even a non-Christian - can perform baptism if their intention is honest.

The point is that, whether they choose to accept it or not, all baptized Christians are part of the Catholic church - they are just incomplete in their faith. As a matter of fact, we are all considered to be incomplete in our faith until Confirmation. At that point, we state that we accept and follow all the teachings of the church. The church speaks as having the “fullness” of truth. There are elements of truth in all Christian communities - that’s what makes them Christian.

One very important point here is that doctrine (and therefore teachings) develop over time as God reveals wisdom to men. The teaching of the Trinity was not expressed for decades after the resurrection. The Bible was not formally assembled and given to the faithful until the year 400 or so. As time passes, some things become clearer while others seem fainter. One example is slavery. The Bible never condemns slavery. However, we now have the wisdom to know it is impossible for one person to “own” another.

So when one dies and they enter heaven, they are part of God’s universal church which exists in heaven and on earth. That universal church on earth is the Catholic church. In heaven, there are no denominations, schisms, apostasies, or other separations. All in heaven are one with God. His love is so great we cannot even imagine it. In heaven, we will actually love each person there with more love than we collectively share here on earth.

To your second point, realize that the church doesn’t have the authority to withhold heaven from anyone. Our eternal destination is up to God and His judgement alone. What the church does is use the wisdom gained over its history to guide the faithful. For this reason, the church has never declared any souls to be in hell - officially, infallibly, or otherwise. The church has declared souls to be in heaven. Those are called saints. However, we can be fairly certain there are millions of souls in heaven that will never be declared saints here on earth.

The one thing I would suggest for you is to pray for the wisdom to understand how much God loves YOU. Seriously. Work on this and this alone for the next few days, weeks, months, years. Most of us (myself included) never fully understand this. Once you get a semblance of understanding of this, ask yourself a question. If you get to heaven, would God, who loves you SO MUCH, ever do anything to hurt you there? Careful consideration yields the obvious answer, “no”. Would you feel pain due to the absence of those who you loved while on earth? Not at all. Some theologians even speculate that we won’t even realize their absence because God’s love is so great. In heaven there is no pain, no suffering, no wants, no needs in heaven. Everything is perfect.

Therefore, what are we to do here on earth for those we love who choose not to follow God and His church? Pray. Pray for them. Pray for the conversion of their heart. Pray that God will allow them into heaven. Pray that God will allow us into heaven to spend eternity with Him and them. But, be assured, those who make it into heaven will be far happier than they can ever come close to imagining here on earth. Mostly because they will be in the presence of Love Himself. Perfect Love.

 

[Anthony_V]

It does contradict, because what was stated earlier had nothing to do with knowing Christ; it simply, clearly and obviously stated: “Those who are not in the Catholic Church” !!!

The Catholic Church infaliblly stated at Constance that Orthodox, being schismatics and not being Catholics, would go to hell.

What’s selfish ? Loving one’s father !!! Wanting to be with him ? Not accepting that a most wonderful man, a most loving father, would go to hell forever, for not atending Mass ?!!

My father is a far better man than I would ever be. For his part, he respects God and religion, but does not want to go to Mass every Sunday. By the Church’s judgement, that is enough to land him in hell.

So I will spend the time before the end of time wandering why my family burns in hell, but once end of time and Judgement comes, I will be relieved by the answers, and I will be content to say: Burn, mother, burn, father, burn, my wife, burn, burn, my child, burn, God is just and His Church was right, I’ll have a good time up here and it’s fair that you should burn !!!

1. On your first dilemma, all grace comes from the Church through Christ. This grace is necessary for salvation. This does not necessarily mean that you have to indefinitely be in communion with the Church as we see it. The communion with the Church may come in extraordinary circumstances; For it is the grace that we need from the Church, not the Church itself. The Church is the vessel of said grace, not the fount of it. All grace comes from God himself, and it is under his jurisdiction that the Church may administer said grace by the sacraments. With that said, God is not conformed to the sacraments, but rather uses them as the mainstream economy, if you will. If God graces you in a manner sufficient to remove your mortal sins, then you are in communion with the Church, because the Church is in communion with God through Jesus Christ. This is how he saves those who dearly seek him, but have not found the Church or are inaccessible to it.
2. It seems that is a matter of opinion, or I am not comprehending the stated clearly. It would be nice to have a reference so I may help you (if you wish to provide one). Again, going back to number one, God is not limited to bringing someone into the Catholic faith moments before they die through true contrition. It is not the matter of being an Orthodox that merits you eternal damnation. It is the matter of not being in communion with the Church’s graces. Again, this does not confine God to the graces of the Church. He is the one who supplies said graces.
3. When in Heaven, we have no attachment to that which is not God. We cannot cling to other people, or things, no matter how important they may be to you. God is the one who has given these things to you, and it is ultimately in him that we find our happiness. Gifts are good, but only because they’re from God. He will be your bliss, and your comfort. His arm is not too short. I wouldn’t be too hasty to say that your family will land in Hell.
4. That is God’s judgement, and his mercy is far greater than yours or mine will ever be. He loves your father more than you do, and loves you more than you do, and loves your family more than you do. He will not, by any means, simply abandon his people. His graces are extraordinary, and his love is enough to consume even the hardened criminal. Do not fear!
5. At the end of time and judgement, you will see what grief the people have caused Jesus Christ. You will not run to the people, but towards your Lord because he is your love. He will comfort you, because he is what you need. You will not be joyous by the damnation of others. But it will not matter, because you will be consumed in Christ’s love, which is greater than any amount of sorrow. Do not be afraid, he is your love. Do not be afraid, for he is the love of your family. Do not be afraid, for he is the love of the world. Those who seek him will find him. Those who love Christ will be saved by Christ’s own love.

Closing thought)
Love grows like nature. You look at plants and trees and grass and flowers. They all grow in silence. Even babies grow in silence for nine months. So will your love for God increase by loving others. Do not cease praying for those lead astray. It seems as though this is your hearts desire-- to bring people closer to God. You are not offended by God or his Church, but because of the gap between God and his people. You are not crazy Love is bittersweet here on Earth. Pray always and often for these people. You will grow in love for God, and his Church.

 

[Warrior1979]

Your ‘logic’ is wrong, and ridiculously wrong: You have decided, against all that the Catholic church says it teaches, that what it *really *teaches is contained in this 15th century document, which can only be interpreted by you. (The church’s official interpretation of the document, apparently, has no weight when deciding what it really means.)

Then, because of this new interpretation, that only you know about, you have decided, once again **against **what the Church teaches, that your family are going to hell. And that this proves that the Creator is unjust (whose will you alone can see so clearly, since no one else would presume to say that your family are condemned to hell, especially not for what you have mentioned here, none of which meets the official Church’s teaching’s criteria to conclude that they are hell-bound).

It’s quite a religion you have made for yourself, here, but it is not Catholicism. For my part I am aghast that you can choose to reject God, preferring hell, rather than accept that your family is NOT condemned by the Catholic church to hell, and even if they were, that through your prayers you could save them.

The problem is that he has a question, he cites sources that indicate is it contradictory, and nobody can dispute it.

 

[Erethorn]

Attention: THIS COMMENTARY IS BLUNT, not disrespectful, but I am telling some (as I think ) hard truths. The intention is to help, not to hurt, like a surgeon does to a tumor.

I am not easily offended, don’t worry.

I think that you do not have the competence to analyze those documents, unless you have a degree in theology and … even so…

I have a degree in philosophy and one in law. Is that enough ? I might lack the english to express my ideeas, but, believe me, they are quite clear to me.

Unless what you are saying is that no-one, unless he has a bunch of diplomas in theology, is entitled to ever question the Church…

1: Yes, outside the Church there is no salvation. But the trouble is that there is a big confusion about what is the Church. some simply say it is the building !! Others say that it is the pope, others, the Bishops, others the Catholics, and so on. Most forget that the Church is Jesus Christ. He is the vine and all we are the branches. He who stay with Him are alive (=Heaven) like the branches of the vine which stay connected to the trunk. Those who stay away from Him are dead (=Hell) as the branches that are cut off the vine.

Do you, honest to God, believe that the conciliar Fathers of Constance believed that ? When they said: no heretic, no schismatic, do you honestly believe they thought that Orthodox could be saved ?

Now, how about the Jews, the Muslims, Paris Hilton, Hitler and the man of Papua New Guinea ? All must be saved by Christ, through Christ and in Christ !!! How is it done? Bluntly I dont know and I dont care. It is God’s business and not ours. When you try to get answers without having the capacity to understand you get in deep trouble.

In other words, believe and don’t question ?

2.Another case very different is the question of mortal, venial sin. Erethorn, you are new in the Church and you are not aware of the changes. The idea of mortal and venial sin has got a long story and not very nice one. I am not going to dwell on the history of it for there would be not enough space. We here may write only so many words.

I may be new as a member of the Church, but I might also be older than you as a person interested in religion in general and the Catholic Church in particular.

Bluntly, and I ask my fellow Catholics not to judge me, there is no such a thing as mortal an venial sin. It was a Catholic convention, if you do grave sins, then it was mortal and you would go to hell and if small you would go to Purgatory. I was raised like that and I suffered a lot. My educators sometimes classified me: “You committed a mortal sin!” and I was in hell. I ran to confession and I was pardoned and suddenly I was in Heaven and then again in Hell and in Heaven like a roller coast. That type of Theology made many Christians suffer unjustly. Suppose that a man leads a wholly life for 90 years and in the last second commits a mortal sin, is he going to Hell? It is crazy…

Yeah, that’s the question I am asking, but guess what, the Church says YES ! If he does, he IS going to hell !

The Catholic Church never said that your friend goes to Hell. Where did you hear that? The Judgement is done by God not by us. Jesus said: “the way you judge you will be judged”

My father, not only my friend. And yes, check the CCC, the Church says that not going to Mass is grave matter, and for that you might go to hell, regardless of the rest of your life.

So, dont kill yourself reading things that are not for you. If you do not understand, dont pretend that you understood something that you did not understand and … let’s leave the Church for reasons that not even you understand.

Dont expect that we understand everything. But I tell you: nowhere you will find anything closer to the Catholic Church.

If you do not understand, dont put the blame on the Church, put the blame on you that do not understand, right?..

You might be right, but I would rather start my own meager religion than remain in one I perceive (for the moment) as being unkind and untrue.

 

[jsaldar]

I used to have the same question regarding mortal sin.

You have to meet the 3 conditions. Ignorance makes a person only commit venial sin not mortal, since this means they never had knowledge it was a bad thing.

So I guees the more you know the more that is expected of you.

 

[FCEGM]

. . .You might be right, but I would rather start my own meager religion than remain in one I perceive (for the moment) as being unkind and untrue.

Well, since you admit that your perception may only be of the moment, leaving would be a foolish thing to do, especially when your perception is erroneous. Extra ecclesia nulla salus is what the Church teaches and has always taught; it must, however, be properly understood. This sort of apparent contradiction you are seeing can easily be brought up concerning Scripture itself in many examples (“The Father is greater than I”, e.g,). The non-theologian also sees it in ecclesiastical pronouncements and different Fathers, and you give this example of the necessity of the Church for salvation. The difference, of course, is a development in understanding how the Church is necessary for salvation. In the papal (and/or patristic) statements of earlier centuries what was the context and the truth of those statements? What, if not that the visible Church is necessary for salvation? And this is still true today and will not change. The difference between the papal statements of earlier ages and the Catechism of statements of our more recent popes in our time is in applying this revealed Truth on the necessity of the Church for salvation regarding those not in the visible Church.

Vatican II is speaking after 400 years of Christian heterodoxy (not at an earlier time free from schisms and wholesale breaking away from the Church), with whole generations born outside of the Catholic Tradition. Thus, Vatican II was able to address what the the Church Fathers could not: the phenomenon of “invincible ignorance", i.e., if someone is outside of the Catholic communion through no fault of their own, then they cannot be accused of schism. Catholic morality has always taught: “If there is no knowledge, then there is no responsibility; if there is no responsibility, then there can be no sin.” Thus, extra ecclesia nulla salus does not apply to someone who does not know any better. It never did.

Note that the Catechism’s text keeps an essential element of the earlier teaching: membership in the visible Church is necessary for salvation, because the Church is a necessary instrument by God’s choice in salvation (this is true also for Mary and with similar causality involved in salvation).

So, yes, “extra ecclesia nulla salus” is still a part of official Catholic doctrine and there is nothing contradictory in the Catechism to what earlier popes have said. You should also look at John Paul II’s encyclical Redemptoris Missio. That, with the Catechism, shows that the visible Church is still necessary for salvation, but that since it is obviously not the fault of many millions that they have not adequately been evangelized they can not be blamed for culpable ignorance (but inculpable ignorance) and that since God gives sufficient grace to be saved to all, all have the chance to be saved through sufficient grace which is mysteriously IN CHRIST, therefore in the Church in some way.

The difference between the papal statements of earlier ages and our time is in applying this revealed Truth on the necessity of the Church for salvation regarding those not in the visible Church.Here is St. Augustine on the subject: *“there are some in the visible body of the Church who are not of its soul, and some have its soul who are not in the visible body." *

This, from The Catholic Catechism, written by John Hardon, S.J., 1975, is helpful on the issue:

“The Catholic Church makes claims about herself that are easily misunderstood, especially in the modern atmosphere of pluralism and ecumenism. Among these claims, the most fundamental is the doctrine of the Church’s necessity for salvation. Not unlike other dogmas of the faith, this one has seen some remarkable development, and the dogmatic progress has been especially marked since the definition of papal infallibility. It seems that as the Church further clarified her own identity as regards the papacy and collegiality, she also deepened (without changing) her self-understanding as the mediator of salvation to mankind. . .

“. . .Actual incorporation into the Church takes place by baptism of water. Those who are not actually baptized may, nevertheless, be saved through the Church according to their faith in whatever historical revelation they come to know and in their adequate cooperation with the internal graces of the Spirit they receive.

“On both counts, however, whoever is saved owes his salvation to the one Catholic Church founded by Christ. It is to this Church alone that Christ entrusted the truths of revelation which have by now, though often dimly, penetrated all cultures of mankind. It is this Church alone that communicates the merits won for the whole world on the cross.

“Those who are privileged to share in the fullness of the Church’s riches of revealed wisdom, sacramental power, divinely assured guidance, and blessings of community life cannot pride themselves on having deserved what they possess. Rather they should humbly recognize their chosen position and gratefully live up to the covenant to which they have been called. Otherwise what began as a sign of God’s special favor on earth may end as a witness to his justice in the life to come.” (pp. 234-6).

 

[gferrer]

Sorry, it’s not Vatican I, it’s the Council of Florence:

(N)o one remaining outside the Catholic Church, not just pagans, but also Jews or heretics or schismatics, can become partakers of eternal life; but they will go to the “everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt. 25:41), unless before the end of life they are joined to the Church… And no one can be saved, no matter how much alms he has given, even if he sheds his blood for the name of Christ, unless he remains in the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church" - from the papal bull Cantate Domino

I think “…joined to the Church…” is the key phrase. As someone else pointed out in this thread, St. Augustine observes that there may be those “joined to the Church” who are not in visible communion. It may not seem to be the author’s intent to allow this interpretation; that said, we have no means of reading his mind to discern his intention, which is why the church’s ongoing teaching authority is so important. It is through the living Magisterium that these issues can be clarified.

That said, another issue arises; namely, does this “escape clause” empty the teaching of any meaning? Not at all; anyone who is convinced that the Catholic Church is established by Jesus Christ is required under pain of sin to enter.

Also, consider the context of the Council of Florence. It was a council to reunite the Catholic and Orthodox churches. This teaching emphasizes why the reunion was of such great importance. The reunion was short-lived, unfortunately, as the Turks ensured the selection of an anti-union Patriarch of Constantinople after the 1453 conquest.

 

[NFrancis]

Here are some quotes from the early Church Fathers:

Justin Martyr:

“We have been taught that Christ is the first-begotten of God, and we have declared him to be the Logos of which all mankind partakes [John 1:9]. Those, therefore, who lived according to reason [Greek, logos] were really Christians, even though they were thought to be atheists, such as, among the Greeks, Socrates, Heraclitus, and others like them. . . . Those who lived before Christ but did not live according to reason [logos] were wicked men, and enemies of Christ, and murderers of those who did live according to reason [logos], whereas those who lived then or who live now according to reason [logos] are Christians. Such as these can be confident and unafraid” (First Apology 46 [A.D. 151]).

Iranaeus:

“In the Church God has placed apostles, prophets, teachers, and every other working of the Spirit, of whom none of those are sharers who do not conform to the Church, but who defraud themselves of life by an evil mind and even worse way of acting. Where the Church is, there is the Spirit of God; where the Spirit of God is, there is the Church and all grace” (Against Heresies 3:24:1 [A.D. 189]).

“[The spiritual man] shall also judge those who give rise to schisms, who are destitute of the love of God, and who look to their own special advantage rather than to the unity of the Church; and who for trifling reasons, or any kind of reason which occurs to them, cut in pieces and divide the great and glorious body of Christ, and so far as in them lies, destroy it—men who prate of peace while they give rise to war, and do in truth strain out a gnat, but swallow a camel. For they can bring about no ‘reformation’ of enough importance to compensate for the evil arising from their schism. . . . True knowledge is that which consists in the doctrine of the apostles, and the ancient constitution of the Church throughout all the world, and the distinctive manifestation of the body of Christ according to the successions of the bishops, by which they have handed down that Church which exists in every place *” (ibid., 4:33:7–8).

Clement of Alexandria:

“Before the coming of the Lord, philosophy was necessary for justification to the Greeks; now it is useful for piety . . . for it brought the Greeks to Christ as the law did the Hebrews” (Miscellanies 1:5 [A.D. 208]).

Cyprian of Carthage:

“Let them not think that the way of life or salvation exists for them, if they have refused to obey the bishops and priests, since the Lord says in the book of Deuteronomy: ‘And any man who has the insolence to refuse to listen to the priest or judge, whoever he may be in those days, that man shall die’ [Deut. 17:12]. And then, indeed, they were killed with the sword . . . but now the proud and insolent are killed with the sword of the Spirit, when they are cast out from the Church. For they cannot live outside, since there is only one house of God, and there can be no salvation for anyone except in the Church” (Letters 61[4]:4 [A.D. 253]).

Jerome:

“Heretics bring sentence upon themselves since they by their own choice withdraw from the Church, a withdrawal which, since they are aware of it, constitutes damnation. Between heresy and schism there is this difference: that heresy involves perverse doctrine, while schism separates one from the Church on account of disagreement with the bishop. Nevertheless, there is no schism which does not trump up a heresy to justify its departure from the Church” (Commentary on Titus 3:10–11 [A.D. 386]).

Augustine:

“We believe also in the holy Church, that is, the Catholic Church. For heretics violate the faith itself by a false opinion about God; schismatics, however, withdraw from fraternal love by hostile separations, although they believe the same things we do. Consequently, neither heretics nor schismatics belong to the Catholic Church; not heretics, because the Church loves God; and not schismatics, because the Church loves neighbor” (Faith and the Creed 10:21 [A.D. 393]).*

 

[NFrancis]

You can find various articles about this here:
google.com/cse?cx=008187825485874300314%3A1bfkl0u3vji&ie=UTF-8&q=salvation+outside+the+chuch&sa=Search

Jesus told his followers, “I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd” (John 10:16). After his Resurrection, Jesus gave the threefold command to Peter: “Feed my lambs. . . . Tend my sheep. . . . Feed my sheep” (John 21:15–17). The word translated as “tend” (poimaine) means “to direct” or “to superintend”—in other words, “to govern.” So although there are sheep that are not of Christ’s fold, it is through the Church that they are able to receive his salvation.

When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. (Rom 2:14-16)

The Church teaches this because of another passage in Scripture: “John said to him, ‘Teacher, we saw a man casting out demons in your name, and we forbade him, because he was not following us.’ But Jesus said, ‘Do not forbid him; for no one who does a mighty work in my name will be able soon after to speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is for us’” (Mark 9:38–40).

 

[admonsta]

(N)o one remaining outside the Catholic Church, not just pagans, but also Jews or heretics or schismatics, can become partakers of eternal life; but they will go to the “everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt. 25:41)

Here’s my take on it: A person places himself outside the Catholic Church. This quote is explaining that it is not limited to pagans (or non-believers) who can wilfully be against the Church, but also those who ARE members of Judaism (Jews) or Christianity (Heretics and Schismatics), who have deliberately denied the truth that they know and have therefore placed themselves outside the Catholic Church. One can be baptised Catholic and therefore will be a Catholic forever, but can be outside the Church because they have wilfully disobeyed. It does not say that just because a person is a pagan or a heretic that they are outside the Catholic Church. The Church is much broader than those of us who are baptised, believing and practicing Catholics. Our membership is relative to our life experience and our real knowledge of the truth. People have been given varying amounts of truth, but every bit of truth belongs to God’s Church. If a person lives by the truth he has been given, then he is as much as he can be, in the Church.

It also uses the word “remaining” meaning that a person must be in this state unto death to be included in this statement.

My brother committed suicide last year and initially I thought that he didn’t have a chance of Heaven. This made me really sad because he had a very difficult life and he just couldn’t take it any more. I now realise two things: first, he was not of sound mind or body, so his culpability was reduced, and the Church teaches that we never despair of suicides because we don’t know the extent of God’s mercy. We don’t know when God decides that life has finished, or what chances He offers to us before the judgement.

About preferring Hell with your family to Heaven without them - do you really think that if you went to Hell to be with them, you’d be WITH them? It’s Hell. There is no love in Hell. Also, imagine if you deliberately tried to go to Hell, and when you got there, your family had gone to Heaven by the grace of God.

Many people have told you that your interpretation of the passage you quoted is incorrect, and I think you’d be hard pressed to find a good Catholic apologist who agreed with you. You might want to check your motives in persisting with your disagreement. What is more important - the sentence in the document you have quoted, or the Church’s teaching on what it means?

I suggest you go back through a process of reasoning to determine whether you truly believe that the Catholic Church is the true church (apart from these two issues). If everything else lines up, then you need to decide whether to accept the interpretation of the passage you quoted, or stick with your own. If you accept the interpretation, it seems there isn’t too much difficulty for you. There are always things in Catholicism that are hard for people to accept. For me it’s hard to accept that even one person could go to Hell. I choose not to think too hard about it because it chills me to the core. I trust in God to be just and merciful and I pray for sinners. My biggest job on this earth is to get myself to Heaven, and then to drag as many people with me as I can. In your case, if you are worried about your father’s destination, don’t leave the Church in protest; try and convince him of his error. I don’t really understand why regular Sunday Mass is such a problem for him, unless he is also in some form of protest against the Church’s rules. Pray for him constantly and trust in God to provide him with all he needs to be saved.

And be very very careful of Pride.

 

[911mom]

Please do not leave the church! You will be in my prayers. Admittedly I do not have a theological degree nor a desire to obtain one. Just a simple faith. I do have a few small comments to add. First, God loves you and created each and every one of us and doesn’t want to see us choose to end up in Hell! (for those on this forum who tend uncharitably to pick things apart - no I’m not advocating Universal Salvation!) I’m convinced that though there is no Salvation apart from Jesus and all the saved are part of his Holy Catholic church we humans no matter how faithful do not have the ability to judge another’s salvation and status. Unless the Saint has been revealed to the church as a role model we can never know someone else’s final destination - nor is it our job to act as judge. I do trust, as Saint Faustina described, in a very loving, just and merciful God who has the ability to act outside of our limited understanding of time and space. God has revealed by Christ and his Church that has His arms wide open to recieve our soul with love and joy until the very last nano second of our Earthly journey. It is our work on Earth to continually prayer for the daily conversion/perseverence of our own soul and those in need of our prayers. Jesus I Trust in You.

 

[Erethorn]

This quote is explaining that it is not limited to pagans (or non-believers) who can wilfully be against the Church, but also those who ARE members of Judaism (Jews) or Christianity (Heretics and Schismatics), who have deliberately denied the truth that they know and have therefore placed themselves outside the Catholic Church.

However much I look at the quote, it’s meaning does not change for me.

It **doesn’t say anything **about “being wilfully against the Church”, it says and implies **nothing **about “deliberately denying the truth”. It clearly and bluntly says - “Those who live outside the Church”.
It makes it very clear who it refers to: pagans, jews, heretics and schismatics. No distinction is made, they are all bundled togheter.

Even more important, it goes on and elaborates, as if to drive home the point, that it also applies to those who are very charitable, and even to those who die for Christ:

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 fastings, 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 blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.

How can you imagine that one who is charitable, gives alms, fasts, exercises Christian piety and sheds his blood for Christ could also be “deliberately denying the truth” ?! Don’t you see the contradiction in your argument ? And yet the Council of Constance says, with all the infailibility of the Church behind it, that such people will go into everlasting fire, unless the are Catholic.

Many people have told you that your interpretation of the passage you quoted is incorrect, and I think you’d be hard pressed to find a good Catholic apologist who agreed with you. You might want to check your motives in persisting with your disagreement. What is more important - the sentence in the document you have quoted, or the Church’s teaching on what it means?

I’m sorry, but absolutely every interpretation I have read, both here and elsewhere, however well intended, looks like rationalisation, sounds and smells like rationalisation, is rationalisation
I understand and believe that the current teaching is true. Bu it was not always so.

The more important for me is that the teaching of the Church should not contradict itself. I cannot accept anything and everything, be it against logic and reason.
.

I suggest you go back through a process of reasoning to determine whether you truly believe that the Catholic Church is the true church (apart from these two issues). If everything else lines up, then you need to decide whether to accept the interpretation of the passage you quoted, or stick with your own. If you accept the interpretation, it seems there isn’t too much difficulty for you.

What you are asking me to do is to abanddon reason, and accept whatever the Church teaches ? Because to me, it amounts to that: it is against logic, against common sense and against reason to accept that “nobody” could in fact mean “somebody”.

I think “…joined to the Church…” is the key phrase. As someone else pointed out in this thread, St. Augustine observes that there may be those “joined to the Church” who are not in visible communion.** It may not seem to be the author’s intent to allow this interpretation;** that said, we have no means of reading his mind to discern his intention, which is why the church’s ongoing teaching authority is so important.** It is through the living Magisterium that these issues can be clarified**.

What you are saying is that the Church can basically change it’s teaching, because we can never be sure what the original author (though guided by the Holy Spirit) has meant.

What if, 20 years from now, the Church should say: “We have alvays said that there is no salvation but trough Christ, but… let’s clarify that issue… let’s see what the Church has really meant by that until now…”

Vatican II is speaking after 400 years of Christian heterodoxy (not at an earlier time free from schisms and wholesale breaking away from the Church), with whole generations born outside of the Catholic Tradition. Thus, Vatican II was able to address what the the Church Fathers could not: the phenomenon of “invincible ignorance", i.e., if someone is outside of the Catholic communion through no fault of their own, then they cannot be accused of schism.

But the quote is not from the Church Fathers, it is from the Council of Constance. The schism was already centuries old at that time.

And the way the conciliar fathers adress the issue of schism and the salvation of the Eastern Orthodox is thus: unless you become catholic, you go to hell.

The point is that, whether they choose to accept it or not, all baptized Christians are part of the Catholic church - they are just incomplete in their faith.

If the fathers of Florence had believed that, there would be no mention of schismatics (Eastern Orthodox) as being outside the Church and bereft of means for salvation. But there is:
*
It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels”*

I see that I am warned agains pride, but to me it is not a matter of pride. I am not interpreting, I see a rather simple and clear sentence, and now the Church wants me to believe that what was once black and still is black was actually not black, but white.

 

[supertubos]

You might be right, but I would rather start my own meager religion than remain in one I perceive (for the moment) as being unkind and untrue.

1. Ok, that you are not offended.
2. I am not English I am Portuguese.
3. What can I do? You do not have a competence to reflect on those subjects, why did not you take a degree in theology. I tell you, you would fail in any exam of theology, though you have a degree in toraxic surgery and another in nuclear atomic energy.
4. “unless he has a bunch of diplomas in theology, is entitled to ever question the Church…” missed the point. You do not understand what you are saying, that’s what I tell you. Anyone can question the Church, but a PhD in theology can tell you that you are missing the questioning…
5. “Fathers of Constance” ? are you worried about that? Not me! I am more worried in giving money to the poor of Sudan, in helping orphan girls in my town to read and write, and so on. The Fathers of Constance?
6. Boy, you have nothing to think about? That would give a doctorate thesis in Theology and … ooops,you have brilliantly solved the problem saying: “NO” How dare you?
7. Jesus is who saves all the world. I don’t know what your questioning of this is. It is He who judges the living and the Dead. That’s in the Creed. If you question this, you are not leaving the Church, you’ve left already. And you question for whom to answer?
8. You say you are older than me. I am 63. What about you?
9. NO, the Church does not say that the guy who committed a last minute sin goes to hell. NO. You did not even seem to understand the ridicule of the situation. And I told you that this matter of mortal sins is outdated but you keep on……
10. “So, dont kill yourself reading things that are not for you. If you do not understand, dont pretend that you understood something that you did not understand and … let’s leave the Church for reasons that not even you understand.” – I could not catch this one. What is the meaning. And you father and your friend are wrong. Judgments are for God. Don’t touch God’s authority.
11. “I would rather start my own meager religion than remain in one I perceive” – tell you, I wish will have many followers. Not me ! Your religion will be a tiny, tiny one, on the dimension of your little tiny thoughts no one cares about.
12. Or rather, you may say that you do not understand God, that you are zero and he is the Infinite and He will fill you with His Wisdom and His Love. And then, through God, you will be great.
13. My dear fellow, it is easy to question. Now I will question you: How is it that God is 3 Persons in one Nature? How is it that Jesus is 2 natures in one Person? How is it that God is immanent and Transcendent at the same time? How is that God is in the Holy Communion?
14. My answer, I believe, I don’t understand. I am expecting yours, for these are the fundamental creeds of the Catholic Church.
15. Last word: you leave the Church and you will find emptiness. Go on questioning inside but believe me, there are answers for all you questions, simply some are not to be understood in this world. God Bless You…