If John 6 is speaking of the eucharist, how can non Catholics be saved?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chaddicus_Finch
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Harystolho said:
Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, Constitution 1, 1215, ex cathedra: “There is indeed one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which nobody at all is saved, in which Jesus Christ is both priest and sacrifice.”
Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302, ex cathedra:
“With Faith urging us we are forced to believe and to hold the one, holy, Catholic Church and that, apostolic, and we firmly believe and simply confess this Church outside of which there is no salvation nor remission of sin… Furthermore, we declare, say, define, and proclaim to every human creature that they by absolute necessity for salvation are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff.”
Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, Session 2, Profession of Faith, 1870, ex cathedra: “This true Catholic faith, outside of which none can be saved, which I now freely profess and truly hold…”

You are right, there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church
Click to expand...
Except for those who are invincibly ignorant.
 
eazyduzit said:
Is this the official view of Rome today?
Click to expand...
The view of the CC was, is and has always been: outside of the Church there is no salvation.

However, if you are baptized into the Body of Christ, through a Trinitarian baptism, with water, you are joined to the Catholic Church, even if imperfectly.

“The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter.” Those “who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church.” With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound “that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord’s Eucharist.”–CCC
scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a9p3.htm#841
 
adrift said:
I can’t find where it says this which canon is it?
Click to expand...
Denzinger: Sources of dogma (old numbering), see 1000, specifically mentions the Catholic faith (**“Hanc veram Catholicam Fidem, extra quam nemo salvus esse potest”) rather than Catholic Church:The Profession of Faith of the Council of Trent *

[From the Bull of Pius IV, “Iniunctum nobis,” Nov. 13, 1565]

994 I, N., with firm faith believe and profess all and everything which is contained in the creed of faith, which the holy Roman Church uses, namely: I believe * in one God the Father Almighty, creator of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, and born of the Father before all ages, God of God, light of light, true God of true God, begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father, by whom all things were made; who for us men and for our salvation descended from heaven, and became incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man; he was also crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered and was buried; and he rose on the third day according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven; he sitteth at the right hand of the Father, and will come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, of whose kingdom there shall be no end; and in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who together with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified; who spoke through the prophets; and in one holy Catholic and apostolic Church. I confess one baptism for the remission of sins, and I await the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

995 The apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions and all other observances and constitutions of that same Church I most firmly admit and embrace. I likewise accept Holy Scripture according to that sense which our holy Mother Church has held and does hold, whose [office] it is to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures; I shall never accept nor interpret it otherwise than in accordance with the unanimous consent of the Fathers.

996 I also profess that there are truly and properly seven sacraments of the New Law instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord, and necessary for the salvation of mankind, although not all are necessary for each individual; these sacraments are baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, penance, extreme unction, order, and matrimony; and * that the- confer grace, and that of these baptism, confirmation, and order cannot be repeated without sacrilege. I also receive and admit the accepted and approved rites of the Catholic Church in the solemn administration of all the aforesaid sacraments. I embrace and accept each and everything that has been defined and declared by the holy Synod of Trent concerning original sin and justification.

997 I also profess that in the Mass there is offered to God a true, proper sacrifice of propitiation for the living and the dead, and that in the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist there is truly, really, and substantially present the body and blood together with the soul and the divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and that there takes place a conversion of the whole substance of bread into the body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the blood; and this conversion the Catholic Church calls transubstantiation. I also acknowledge that under one species alone the whole and entire Christ and the true sacrament are taken.

998 I steadfastly hold that a purgatory exists, and that the souls there detained are aided by the prayers of the faithful; likewise that the saints reigning together with Christ should be venerated and invoked, and that they offer prayers to God for us, and that their relics should be venerated. I firmly assert that the images of Christ and of the Mother of God ever Virgin, and also of the other saints should be kept and retained, and that due honor and veneration should be paid to them; I also affirm that the power of indulgences has been left in the Church by Christ, and that the use of them is especially salutary for the Christian people.

999 I acknowledge the holy Catholic and apostolic Roman Church as the mother and teacher of all churches; and to the Roman Pontiff, the successor of the blessed Peter, chief of the Apostles and vicar of Jesus Christ, I promise and swear true obedience.

1000 Also all other things taught, defined, and declared by the sacred canons and ecumenical Councils, and especially by the sacred and holy Synod of Trent, (and by the ecumenical Council of the Vatican, *particularly concerning the primacy of the Roman Pontiff and his infallible teaching), I without hesitation accept and profess; and at the same time all things contrary thereto, and whatever heresies have been condemned, and rejected, and anathematized by the Church, I likewise condemn, reject, and anathematize. This true Catholic faith, outside of which no one can be saved, (and) which of my own accord I now profess and truly hold, I, N., do promise, vow, and swear that I will, with the help of God, most faithfully retain and profess the same to the last breath of life as pure and inviolable, and that I will take care as far as lies in my power that it be held, taught, and preached by my subjects or by those over whom by virtue of my office I have charge, so help me God, and these holy Gospels of God.

Here it is in Latin and English: preces-latinae.org/thesaurus/Symbola/Tridentinae.html*
 
Chaddicus_Finch said:
I’ve asked this question twice on the “ask an apologist” forum but apparently it doesn’t qualify, so I figured I’d ask it here.

I am about to start RCIA after being a protestant for 18 years (and grown up my entire life in protestant churches). This was one question I had regarding what seems like conflicting church teaching and talking to one of my protestant friends about me converting, he asked the same question.

In John 6, Jesus says:

“Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you will not have life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. Just as the living Father has sent me and I live because of the Father, so also whoever eats me, the same shall live because of me. This is the bread that descends from heaven. It is not like the manna that your fathers ate, for they died. Whoever eats this bread shall live forever.”

If this is to be taken as the eucharist, how can non Catholics be saved since they cannot partake of his body and blood?
Click to expand...
Very simply the non-believer is sanctified through the believer. Remember the words of St. Paul who has also stated this in one of his letters, the unbeliever is sanctified by the one who believes. This means whenever we come to the throne of Grace to receive the Lord Jesus, the Lord Jesus not only imparts His life into us but He also gives it to the rest of the world. The believer sanctifies the unbeliever because the believer has come to receive the One who is able to do this. The Chalice does pour itself into the world in ways we can never fathom!
 
Telstar said:
Ben and I have had several conversations about this subject, that’s very true. But, although he may already know the basics of what it means to a Catholic, I still don’t think he fully understands it yet. He’s certainly not alone, because it’s clear to me that there are many others who are also confused about the spiritual effects of Baptism on the soul. So, I thought I would try to approach the subject in a slightly different way this time.

My explanation is not based on my own personal ‘interpretation’ of the passage, but on the teachings of the Catholic Church. I do not “assume” anything on my own. I trust the teaching of the Church, because those teachings have remained consistent for nearly 2000 years. There’s a very good reason for that, which is because of the guidance of the Holy Spirit, Who has never failed to do exactly what Jesus promised He would do. He leads the Church into all truth, the same way He lead the Apostles.

This is the kind of confusion that can happen when everyone tries to interpret the Bible on their own, without the guidance of the Church that first introduced it to the world. There are so many different opinions out there, that no one can even agree on what one single word might mean. How can anyone expect to ever know the truth of every other word that’s written in it? There will always be disagreements, so how can you possibly know who’s actually correct?

That is your personal opinion, which is based on your own interpretation of that passage. But, Jesus never intended for one sentence to explain everything, or the Bible wouldn’t need to be a very big book. And John wouldn’t have made a point to mention that there were so many other things that Jesus taught and did, that the number of books that would need to be written would fill the world.

This is why the Magisterium and Holy Tradition is so important. Together, they help us to understand some of those many other things that were not written in the Gospels. Many things were only handed down through word of mouth, from Jesus to the Apostles, through an oral tradition which was eventually written down in the years that followed, and has continued to be more fully explained for the past 2000 years. That tradition came to the Catholic Church from the Jewish Tradition that used the same teaching method for thousands of years before Jesus used it. The written scriptures were only a part of Jewish Tradition. Most teachings were passed on to the next generation by word of mouth, through the careful memorization of their stories and traditions.
Click to expand...
This is not a personal opinion. It is the weight of scripture. Just as you said yourself, it takes more than one verse to nail down an interpretation. So here are 15 more verses that agree with Jn.3:15.
Jn.1:12,3:18,5:24,17:3,17
Acts 10:44, 11:14,17
Rm. 4:5, 5:1,10:9,10
Eph.2:8
Jms.1:21
1Pt.1:23
1Jn.5:1
John then says in 1Jn.5:13 “These things have I WRITTEN unto you. …that ye may know that ye have eternal life. …” In ALL these things there is no mention of BAPTISM or COMMUMION.
This is why i believe have the weight of scripture on my side. But if there is more to support your side ,then I’m going with you.
 
Vico said:
chief of the Apostles and vicar of Jesus Christ, I promise and swear true obedience.

1000 Also all other things taught, defined, and declared by the sacred canons and ecumenical Councils, and especially by the sacred and holy Synod of Trent, (and by the ecumenical Council of the Vatican, *particularly concerning the primacy of the Roman Pontiff and his infallible teaching), I without hesitation accept and profess; and at the same time all things contrary thereto, and whatever heresies have been condemned, and rejected, and anathematized by the Church, I likewise condemn, reject, and anathematize. This true Catholic faith, outside of which no one can be saved, (and) which of my own accord I now profess and truly hold, I, N., do promise, vow, and swear that I will, with the help of God, most faithfully retain and profess the same to the last breath of life as pure and inviolable, and that I will take care as far as lies in my power that it be held, taught, and preached by my subjects or by those over whom by virtue of my office I have charge, so help me God, and these holy Gospels of God.

[/INDENT]Here it is in Latin and English: preces-latinae.org/thesaurus/Symbola/Tridentinae.html
Click to expand...
Thank you for the link. It does not say that protestants can’t be saved.
It is true that there is no salvation outside of the Church and this article gives an explanation as does the catechism.
What “No Salvation Outside the Church” Means
 
chimo said:
Very simply the non-believer is sanctified through the believer. Remember the words of St. Paul who has also stated this in one of his letters, the unbeliever is sanctified by the one who believes. This means whenever we come to the throne of Grace to receive the Lord Jesus, the Lord Jesus not only imparts His life into us but He also gives it to the rest of the world. The believer sanctifies the unbeliever because the believer has come to receive the One who is able to do this. The Chalice does pour itself into the world in ways we can never fathom!
Click to expand...
To me this is not a legitimate use of the verse or Paul could not have written in Rm.9 that he wished to be accursed if his brethren could be saved. Everyone must trust Christ for themselves. God has no grandchildren.
It only means they are spiritually encouraged.
 
eazyduzit said:
To me this is not a legitimate use of the verse or Paul could not have written in Rm.9 that he wished to be accursed if his brethren could be saved. Everyone must trust Christ for themselves. God has no grandchildren.
It only means they are spiritually encouraged.
Click to expand...
The quotation is from 1Cor. 7 where Paul refers to a believing wife sanctifying her unbelieving husband and vice versa. If a believer can sancify the unbeliever than it can happen as well with those who come to the Eucharist who can help sancify those who do not come to the Eucharist. St. Paul was jealous for his own race to know what he knows. This does not mean the Jewish people are not saved. In some mysterious act which God grants to them on behalf of the Church God can save them as well. Paul wanted his Jewish people to know more but since the grace and mercy of God can be more applicable in and through the Church it can be also said that this grace and mercy is poured into the world because of the Church. Now I am referring to the Eucharist here. The power of the Eucharist is not properly understood by Protestants who do not accept the real presence of our Lord. Protestants think of the Eucharist as only symbolic which of course they can only present the Eucharist as. The Apostlolic Churches which have the power to change the bread and wine into Jesus Christ have this authority to dispense the Graces contained in such an Eucharistic encounter into the rest of the world. That is incredible! Therefore by this action which the Church celebrates the Holy Communion the Lord is able to send forth His Graces elsewhere. That is how the Lord can save those outside the Church. Since those outside the Church cannot come to the Sacraments or come to hear the saving Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ the means to save them can still come when a believer comes to receive the Lord Jesus in Holy Communion. This enables the Lord to dispense His Graces not only to the receiver but to those who live in the world who have not heard the Gospel.
 
Chaddicus_Finch said:
I’ve asked this question twice on the “ask an apologist” forum but apparently it doesn’t qualify, so I figured I’d ask it here.

I am about to start RCIA after being a protestant for 18 years (and grown up my entire life in protestant churches). This was one question I had regarding what seems like conflicting church teaching and talking to one of my protestant friends about me converting, he asked the same question.

In John 6, Jesus says:

“Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you will not have life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. Just as the living Father has sent me and I live because of the Father, so also whoever eats me, the same shall live because of me. This is the bread that descends from heaven. It is not like the manna that your fathers ate, for they died. Whoever eats this bread shall live forever.”

If this is to be taken as the eucharist, how can non Catholics be saved since they cannot partake of his body and blood?
Click to expand...
If exclusivism is your concern then consider the question another way: If John 6 is speaking about the necessity of partaking of Jesus* in any case*, whether physically via the Eucharist or strictly spiritually via hearing and believing, then how can non-Christians be saved?
 
Chaddicus_Finch said:
I’ve asked this question twice on the “ask an apologist” forum but apparently it doesn’t qualify, so I figured I’d ask it here.

I am about to start RCIA after being a protestant for 18 years (and grown up my entire life in protestant churches). This was one question I had regarding what seems like conflicting church teaching and talking to one of my protestant friends about me converting, he asked the same question.

In John 6, Jesus says:

“Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you will not have life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. Just as the living Father has sent me and I live because of the Father, so also whoever eats me, the same shall live because of me. This is the bread that descends from heaven. It is not like the manna that your fathers ate, for they died. Whoever eats this bread shall live forever.”

If this is to be taken as the eucharist, how can non Catholics be saved since they cannot partake of his body and blood?
Click to expand...
Have you yet learned about “Spiritual Communion”? Many Catholics who cannot make Communion as frequently as they like (e.g. daily while they can only assist at Mass weekly) will recite a prayer pleading for Jesus to give them some of the grace of communion. Since spiritual communion is not a sacrament and can be made privately, there is no practical limitation to it at all.

A common Act of Spiritual Communion is:My Jesus,
I believe that You
are present in the Most Holy Sacrament.
I love You above all things,
and I desire to receive You into my soul.
Since I cannot at this moment receive You sacramentally,
come at least spiritually into my heart.
I embrace You as if You were already there and unite myself wholly to You.
Never permit me to be separated from You.

Amen.The bold sections read similarly to me as parts of various forms of the “sinner’s prayer” popular among some branches of Protestantism.
 
In John 6 Jesus commands we must eat His flesh and blood

“The bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

In Luke 22 Jesus Commands that we eat His body and blood

And he took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body which is given for you.

Só anyway one looks at it, we must partaking of This bread and cup.

Discernig what we receive is the wisdom of Him. Yes! There is symbolism in His true body!

A symbol is two things coming together! The Spirit and Body of the Son of God!

Still, the problem is when there are Communions at odds with one another!

Can there be different loaves??? What constitutes a true ‘Loaf’?
 
eazyduzit said:
Why does everyone assume Jesus was speaking of baptism when it is not mentioned? :confused:
Click to expand...
Water here (John 3:5) is referring to baptism. In fact, it is mentioned if you look at the context, after Jesus finished talking to Nicodemus, the disciples went and started baptizing people, and John the Baptist is mentioned baptizing people also. Jesus said to enter the kingdom of God you must be born of water and Spirit. John the Baptist came baptizing with water, Jesus will baptize with the Holy Spirit.

Romans 6:3-4, “Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.”

Col.2:12-13, “You were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.”

Titus 3:5, “He saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit.”

No Church Father referred to John 3:5 as anything other than water baptism. Your view has no Scriptural support, and you are not on the right side of historical Christianity.
 
Cybophonia said:
Jungmann admits early Christians didn’t offer mass as** propitiatory sacrifice**. In admitting the earliest fathers such as those who wrote the Didache, Ignatius, Clement, Justin Martyr, Aristides, Athenagoras and Minucius Felix did not teach the mass was the same propitiatory sacrifice of Christ, Catholic Jesuit scholar and priest Joseph A. Jungmann notes, “before Irenaeus . . . no offering was recognized in the Church except that which consisted in thanksgiving. . . . ‘God does not demand an offering of victim or drink, nor of any visible things’
Click to expand...
St. Ignatius

“Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead.”

“Letter to the Smyrnaeans”, paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.

“Take care, then who belong to God and to Jesus Christ - they are with the bishop. And those who repent and come to the unity of the Church - they too shall be of God, and will be living according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic, he will not inherit the Kingdom of God. If any man walk about with strange doctrine, he cannot lie down with the passion. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is **one Flesh **of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of His Blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons.”

-Epistle to the Philadelphians, 3:2-4:1, 110 A.D.

St. Justin Martyr

“God has therefore announced in advance that all the sacrifices offered in His name, which Jesus Christ offered, that is, in the Eucharist of the Bread and of the Chalice, which are offered by us Christians in every part of the world, are pleasing to Him.”

“Dialogue with Trypho”, Ch. 117, circa 130-160 A.D.

Didache

“On the Lord’s own day, assemble in common to break bread and offer thanks; but first confess your sins, so that your sacrifice may be pure. However, no one quarreling with his brother may join your meeting until they are reconciled; your sacrifice must not be defiled. For here we have the saying of the Lord: ‘In every place and time offer me a pure sacrifice; for I am a mighty King, says the Lord; and my name spreads terror among the nations.’”

-Ch 14
 
benhur said:
So John was making people “born again” ? Can you show me OT support ? What was circumcision and barmitzvah ?
Click to expand...
Not born again, but an act of repentance and readying themselves for the Lord. Jesus was telling Nicodemus that he should have understood this since baptism was a integral to Jesus’ ministry.

Circumcision was how a person was entered into the covenant with God. Baptism replaces this as the entry process for people to be entered into the New Covenant with God.
 
eazyduzit said:
What Clement is claiming seems questionable or even heretical to my ears. Of course we have the Holy Spirit within us now, but not as a mixture. According to the bible, we are the pot and God is the treasure, there is no mixture or confusion.

Also, as to our nourishment, it is always the word of God first and doctrine in the epistles.
Click to expand...
And he would say the same of your personal theological views. Why is your claim to orthodox Christianity stronger than his?
 
eazyduzit said:
Why does everyone assume Jesus was speaking of baptism when it is not mentioned? :confused:
Click to expand...
Because that is how Christians have understood that passage for 2000 years. Why should we change that understanding and replace it with your personal opinion instead?
 
eazyduzit said:
This is not a personal opinion. It is the weight of scripture. Just as you said yourself, it takes more than one verse to nail down an interpretation. So here are 15 more verses that agree with Jn.3:15.
Jn.1:12,3:18,5:24,17:3,17
Acts 10:44, 11:14,17
Rm. 4:5, 5:1,10:9,10
Eph.2:8
Jms.1:21
1Pt.1:23
1Jn.5:1
John then says in 1Jn.5:13 “These things have I WRITTEN unto you. …that ye may know that ye have eternal life. …” In ALL these things there is no mention of BAPTISM or COMMUMION.
This is why i believe have the weight of scripture on my side. But if there is more to support your side ,then I’m going with you.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church doesn’t pit verses of Scripture against other verses of Scripture as if they are in contrast. The deposit of faith in the Catholic Church incorporates ALL of those verses, and all the others into her teachings, into a unified whole. The books chosen to be in the Bible were selected based on their fidelity to the deposit of faith the Church already possessed.

Do you even understand what the purpose of the Bible is? WHY was it canonized?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top