Is there salvation outside the Catholic church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter richardmc
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a question for all involved here. Do you accept that “The Constitution On The Catholic Church (Lumen Gentium)” and “Dominus Iesus” both come from the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, i.e. The Magisterium and must be accepted as having the same authority of the other documents of the writings and teaching of Church Fathers, popes and councils cited through out this thread?

Cstudent, maybe this is a good thing for you or perhaps it is not but I was about to start using the sermon of Our Holy Father you quoted. From the first time I read this homily I was struck by his conclusion why people take the strict attitude and literal meaning of EENS.
TOME asked:“The Constitution On The Catholic Church (Lumen Gentium)” and “Dominus Iesus” both come from the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, i.e. The Magisterium
Yes I do 🙂
TOME stated;both come from the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, i.e. The Magisterium and must be accepted as having the same authority of the other documents of the writings and teaching of Church Fathers, popes and councils cited through out this thread
No there are levels of authority even in Magisterial documents: (1) Definitive Dogma, (2) Authoritative Doctrine, (3) Non-definitive, Doctrine, (4) Prudential admonitions.

A de fide ( i.e. Definitive Dogma) statement by a Pope or a Council is the highest authority and all other documents must be seen in the light of those already clearly defined dogmas not the other way around:

**Pope Pius XII, “HUMANI GENERIS”- AUGUST 12, 1950 **
21…This deposit of faith our Divine Redeemer has given for authentic interpretation not to each of the faithful, not even to theologians, but only to the Teaching Authority of the Church. But if the Church does exercise this function of teaching, as she often has through the centuries, either in the ordinary or extraordinary way, it is clear how false is a procedure which would attempt to explain what is clear by means of what is obscure. Indeed the very opposite procedure must be used. Hence Our Predecessor of immortal memory, Pius IX, teaching that the most noble office of theology is to show how a doctrine defined by the Church is contained in the sources of revelation, added these words, and with very good reason: **“in that sense in which it has been defined by the Church.” **

According to standards presently employed by the Holy See and codified in Canon Law, there are three kinds of magisterial statement, three levels of authoritative teaching which establish the “the order of the truths to which the believer adheres.”[1] They are (1) truths taught as divinely revealed, (2) definitively proposed statements on matters closely connected with revealed truth, and (3) ordinary teaching on faith and morals. A fourth category, ordinary prudential teaching on disciplinary matters, is commonly accepted by theologians and can be inferred from the text of Cardinal Ratzinger’s Donum Veritatis.
Richard R. Gaillardetz, Teaching With Authority: A Theology of the Magisterium in the Church, Theology and Life Series, Vol 41 (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1997), 102.

also see
:http://www.trosch.org/the/ottintro.htmLudwig Ott:
:http://www.ewtn.com/library/scriptur/4levels.txtFather Most
 
This is what the catechism says:

1258
The Church has always held the firm conviction that those who suffer death for the sake of the faith without having received Baptism are baptized by their death for and with Christ. This Baptism of blood, like the desire for Baptism, brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament.

This is what the popes say:…
I agree there is a problem here. Most Catholics won’t agree to that because they think they are being unfaithful but lets be honest the Catechism is in direct conflict with the Council of Florence. So we should address it it.

First the Catechism (&Catechisms in general) is not an infallible document. Neither was The catechism of Trent:
**Catechism of the Council of Trent- Fifteenth printing, TAN Books, Introduction XXXVI: ** “Official documents have occasionally been issued by Popes to explain certain points of Catholic teaching to individuals, or to local Christian communities; whereas the Roman Catechism comprises practically the whole body of Christian doctrine, and is addressed to the whole Church. Its teaching is not infallible; but it holds a place between approved catechisms and what is de fide.

Catechism of the Council of Trent, Tan Books, p. 243: “For the Eucharist is the end of all the Sacraments, and the symbol of unity and brotherhood in the Church, outside of which none can attain grace.”
This isn’t true Actual grace can be obtained outside the Church.:rolleyes:

The new Catechism also casts a shadow on the above “teaching” by saying:
1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.60 Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament.The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are “reborn of water and the Spirit.” God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.
vatican.va/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a1.htm

then this line: “God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.”( No footnote? Which Pope or Council defined this?)

So is God deceiving us by giving us the sacrament(s)? Was it our idea and he is just humoring us? No, Jesus himself established the sacraments and made no room for exceptions for baptism.Fr. William Jurgens," The Faith of the Early Fathers", Vol. 3, pp. 14-15 footnote 31.post 218

The Catechism contradicts itself here. I hope it will be clarified soon. Thats all I can make of it:imsorry::sad_bye: :bighanky:
 
This is not my perception of the quote. The quote suggests that it is no longer necessary to believe non Catholics will be damned simply (i.e for no other reason) than not being Catholic (i.e. formally in the visible Church).

The implication is that it is now understood that salvation may be obtained by those outside the visible Church- most likely when the ignorant desire the necessary helps while meeting the other necessary criteria.
Good point! sorry:blushing:
 
Part of the clarification in the Feeney affair was left from your post :
The following is from the letter of the Holy Officw in the matter of Fr. Feeney:" But it must not be thought that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated by perfect charity. Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person has supernatural faith: “For he who comes to God must believe that God exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him” (Heb. 11:6). The Council of Trent declares (Session VI, chap. 8): “Faith is the beginning of man’s salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and attain to the fellowship of His children” (Denzinger, n. 801).
Please note the need for “PERFECT charity” something to which every Christian must aspire with the help of the sacraments. Considering my own need for the sacraments,especialy the sacrament of the Eucharist, I find it hard to fathom the development of “pefect” charity outside the Church and the help of the sacraments, but God’s graces are God’s business and His alone
I just realized they re-opened this thread! :clapping: I will be catching up with the current posts and will reply to the ones directed to me.

Danno, this post was great! You pointed out something to me that I knew and was right under my nose the whole time, but I forgot where to locate it. I agree that it would be extremely difficult or even impossible for someone without access to the sacraments to have perfect charity. It is certainly difficult enough for me and I’m assuming for most Catholics who are receiving regularly the Divinity of Christ into their bodies at least weekly as well as regularly (in my case at least weekly) gaining special graces in the sacrament of confession, which I am eternally grateful for btw.

I remember reading in the Catechism of the Council of Trent that it is so extremely difficult for someone to have perfect contrition (which is contingent on perfect charity) for their mortal sins and thereby be forgiven. The Catechism states that for this reason God gave us the sacrament of confession knowing our weakness as humans to attain such a supernatural grace and state. In the sacrament of confession, imperfect contrition (aka “attrition”) will suffice for the forgiveness of mortal sins. I don’t see it very likely that non-Catholics would be able to attain such perfect contrition/charity especially on any regular basis. I found this article on the parts necessary to have perfect contrition: catholicfirst.com/thefaith/prayers/perfectactcontrition.cfm One of them requires supernatural actual grace as well. In addition, the definition given by the Holy Office rules out the possibility that any atheists or even polytheists could be saved unless they have supernatural faith in God. Just something too to keep in mind. I’ve done very indepth studies and have even led a discussion group on the topic of EENS and invincible ignorance, and I feel like I keep learning more the more I study it. Right now, what has really hit me is that we have no guarantee at all that anyone who is not part of the visible Catholic Church will be saved at all. It is possible, but there is no guarantee. And the more I study it, the more and more difficult it seems that anyone not part of the visible Church with access to the sacraments could be saved. I believe it possible, but right now, I am strongly doubting it happens to any large degree. Hence, EENS really does mean what it says because those who will be saved (if any) through invincible ignorance, do not be a significant number that should be at all emphasized. Hence, the Church never put emphasis on this theolgocial truth of the possibilty for those invincibly ignorant to be saved because of the slim few who would actually attain and cooperate with the limited grace available to thereby be saved.
 
…A further question, and I open this to all, possibly the basis for a new thread, is whether an ecumenical council called as a pastoral council (and the only council ever so called) has the authority to make any dogmatic statement. Remember that Pius V is said to have overstepped his authority in the promulgation of **Quam primum.
Here was a thread I started a while ago on whether Vatican II was infallible. The thread was eventually closed without explanation, but it contains many interesting points of discussion that you may find helpful: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=291854
 
A couple of things.

First, I do not want to get into the debate over Fr. Feeney, yet some aspects of this chapter in American ecclesical history are important to this discussion.I tried but I could not find the complete text of the Holy Office to Cardinal Cushing concerning Fr Feeney but what parts I did find nothing about the desire being animated by perfect charity. I am asking this not as a challange but I find this to be extremely interesting and I am wondering about the context in which this passage was written.

What I did find, of this letter, I also found interesting and very revelant to our discussion. I found especially interesting the passage, “…it is not always required that a person be incorporated in reality as a member of the Church, but it is required that the person belong to at least in desire and longing.
It is not always necessary that this desire be explicit.” Further on the letter reads, “God also accepts an implicit desire, so called because it is contained in the good disposition of the soul by which a person wants his or her will to be comformed to God’s will”. This is strongly rooted in Thomistic Theology. l also remember Thomas writing that the desire is made concrete by the person’s acts of charity. More importantly, this position was confirmed in the Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium) # 16.

Also, since I already mentioned St. Thomas, napad, the passage from the catechism concerning how God need not work through the sacraments (Baptism) is straight from Thomistic Theology as well. I think more light could be shed on the points you made in post in response to ron77nyc if we expand to study the nature of a sacrament (and not just a particular definition) or better in a new thread. But, I think it does all of us well to remember that the sacraments are saving acts of Christ “In” and “Through” the Church which means God has the power to act outside the ordinary means of the visible activity of The Church. So there really is no contradiction in the statement you questioned.
 
I just realized they re-opened this thread! :clapping: I will be catching up with the current posts and will reply to the ones directed to me.

Danno, this post was great! You pointed out something to me that I knew and was right under my nose the whole time, but I forgot where to locate it. I agree that it would be extremely difficult or even impossible for someone without access to the sacraments to have perfect charity. It is certainly difficult enough for me and I’m assuming for most Catholics who are receiving regularly the Divinity of Christ into their bodies at least weekly as well as regularly (in my case at least weekly) gaining special graces in the sacrament of confession, which I am eternally grateful for btw.

I remember reading in the Catechism of the Council of Trent that it is so extremely difficult for someone to have perfect contrition (which is contingent on perfect charity) for their mortal sins and thereby be forgiven. The Catechism states that for this reason God gave us the sacrament of confession knowing our weakness as humans to attain such a supernatural grace and state. In the sacrament of confession, imperfect contrition (aka “attrition”) will suffice for the forgiveness of mortal sins. I don’t see it very likely that non-Catholics would be able to attain such perfect contrition/charity especially on any regular basis. I found this article on the parts necessary to have perfect contrition: catholicfirst.com/thefaith/prayers/perfectactcontrition.cfm One of them requires supernatural actual grace as well. In addition, the definition given by the Holy Office rules out the possibility that any atheists or even polytheists could be saved unless they have supernatural faith in God. Just something too to keep in mind. I’ve done very indepth studies and have even led a discussion group on the topic of EENS and invincible ignorance, and I feel like I keep learning more the more I study it. Right now, what has really hit me is that we have no guarantee at all that anyone who is not part of the visible Catholic Church will be saved at all. It is possible, but there is no guarantee. And the more I study it, the more and more difficult it seems that anyone not part of the visible Church with access to the sacraments could be saved. I believe it possible, but right now, I am strongly doubting it happens to any large degree. Hence, EENS really does mean what it says because those who will be saved (if any) through invincible ignorance, do not be a significant number that should be at all emphasized. Hence, the Church never put emphasis on this theolgocial truth of the possibilty for those invincibly ignorant to be saved because of the slim few who would actually attain and cooperate with the limited grace available to thereby be saved.
Welcome back, and I mean that sincerely. You are a real asset to this discussion
 
A couple of things.

I tried but I could not find the complete text of the Holy Office to Cardinal Cushing concerning Fr Feeney but what parts I did find nothing about the desire being animated by perfect charity. I am asking this not as a challange but I find this to be extremely interesting and I am wondering about the context in which this passage was written.

.
The text is over 6000 characters so I will send it in two parts

Accordingly, the Most Eminent and Most Reverend Cardinals of this Supreme Congregation, in a plenary session held on Wednesday, July 27, 1949, decreed, and the august Pontiff in an audience on the following Thursday, July 28, 1949, deigned to give his approval, that the following explanations pertinent to the doctrine, and also that invitations and exhortations relevant to discipline be given:

We are bound by divine and Catholic faith to believe all those things which are contained in the word of God, whether it be Scripture or Tradition, and are proposed by the Church to be believed as divinely revealed, not only through solemn judgment but also through the ordinary and universal teaching office (Denzinger, n. 1792).

Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.

However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church.
Now, in the first place, the Church teaches that in this matter there is question of a most strict command of Jesus Christ. For He explicitly enjoined on His apostles to teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever He Himself had commanded (Matt. 28: 19-20).

Now, among the commandments of Christ, that one holds not the least place by which we are commanded to be incorporated by baptism into the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, and to remain united to Christ and to His Vicar, through whom He Himself in a visible manner governs the Church on earth.

Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.

Not only did the Savior command that all nations should enter the Church, but He also decreed the Church to be a means of salvation without which no one can enter the kingdom of eternal glory.

In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man’s final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the sacrament of regeneration and in reference to the sacrament of penance (Denzinger, nn. 797, 807).

The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.

However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.

These things are clearly taught in that dogmatic letter which was issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943, On the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ (AAS, Vol. 35, an. 1943, p. 193 ff.). For in this letter the Sovereign Pontiff clearly distinguishes between those who are actually incorporated into the Church as members, and those who are united to the Church only by desire.

Discussing the members of which the Mystical Body is-composed here on earth, the same august Pontiff says: “Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed.”

Toward the end of this same encyclical letter, when most affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions those who “are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire,” and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but on the other hand states that they are in a condition “in which they cannot be sure of their salvation” since “they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church” (AAS, 1. c., p. 243). With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire, and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally well in every religion (cf. Pope Pius IX, Allocution, Singulari quadam, in Denzinger, n. 1641 ff.; also Pope Pius IX in the encyclical letter, Quanto conficiamur moerore, in Denzinger, n. 1677).
 
The text is over 6000 characters so I will send it in two parts
.
But it must not be thought that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated by perfect charity. Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person has supernatural faith: “For he who comes to God must believe that God exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him” (Heb. 11:6). The Council of Trent declares (Session VI, chap. 8): “Faith is the beginning of man’s salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and attain to the fellowship of His children” (Denzinger, n. 801).
From what has been said it is evident that those things which are proposed in the periodical From the Housetops, fascicle 3, as the genuine teaching of the Catholic Church are far from being such and are very harmful both to those within the Church and those without.

From these declarations which pertain to doctrine, certain conclusions follow which regard discipline and conduct, and which cannot be unknown to those who vigorously defend the necessity by which all are bound’ of belonging to the true Church and of submitting to the authority of the Roman Pontiff and of the Bishops “whom the Holy Ghost has placed . . . to rule the Church” (Acts 20:28).

Hence, one cannot understand how the St. Benedict Center can consistently claim to be a Catholic school and wish to be accounted such, and yet not conform to the prescriptions of canons 1381 and 1382 of the Code of Canon Law, and continue to exist as a source of discord and rebellion against ecclesiastical authority and as a source of the disturbance of many consciences.

Furthermore, it is beyond understanding how a member of a religious Institute, namely Father Feeney, presents himself as a “Defender of the Faith,” and at the same time does not hesitate to attack the catechetical instruction proposed by lawful authorities, and has not even feared to incur grave sanctions threatened by the sacred canons because of his serious violations of his duties as a religious, a priest, and an ordinary member of the Church.

Finally, it is in no wise to be tolerated that certain Catholics shall claim for themselves the right to publish a periodical, for the purpose of spreading theological doctrines, without the permission of competent Church authority, called the “imprimatur,” which is prescribed by the sacred canons.

Therefore, let them who in grave peril are ranged against the Church seriously bear in mind that after “Rome has spoken” they cannot be excused even by reasons of good faith. Certainly, their bond and duty of obedience toward the Church is much graver than that of those who as yet are related to the Church “only by an unconscious desire.” Let them realize that they are children of the Church, lovingly nourished by her with the milk of doctrine and the sacraments, and hence, having heard the clear voice of their Mother, they cannot be excused from culpable ignorance, and therefore to them apply without any restriction that principle: submission to the Catholic Church and to the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.

In sending this letter, I declare my profound esteem, and remain,
Your Excellency’s most devoted,
F. Cardinal Marchetti-Selvaggiani.
A. Ottaviani, Assessor.
(Private); Holy Office, 8 Aug., 1949."
 
Danno,
Thanks for the text. I read through it very quickly. I am about to beging the secong leg of my travels anf for the next few hours I will be driving around 500 miles. This will give me a lot of time to think but not much time to do anything else.

As quickly as I read the letter, the part of being motiviated by perfect charity makes sense. Agai, I see the influence of St. Thomas coming through these words.

Also, a couple more thoughts. First, faith is an unmerited gift from God which then makes the line about how this implicit desire can produce affects unless it come from supernatural faith.

Again, all though I could only look at this briefly, I think I detect St. Thomas thoughout the letter. Which is interesting because it was during the mid- 20th century that we find the theologies of the nro-thhomist beginning to have their full effect.

Basically,for those unfamiliar with the term neo-thomist, these were theologians and philosophers who basically threw out the textbooks and went back to the actual writngs of St. Thomas. As I see it it reminds me of what happened when the Vatican was able to have Michaelangelo’s work in the Sistene chapel cleaned and restored to its original beauty - it became almost a new work. The same with the works of the neo-thomist, Thomas’ works were rediscovered with a depth that had been lost through generations of interpretations.

But again, Thank you for your post.
 
I just realized they re-opened this thread! :clapping: I will be catching up with the current posts and will reply to the ones directed to me.

Danno, this post was great! You pointed out something to me that I knew and was right under my nose the whole time, but I forgot where to locate it. I agree that it would be extremely difficult or even impossible for someone without access to the sacraments to have perfect charity. It is certainly difficult enough for me and I’m assuming for most Catholics who are receiving regularly the Divinity of Christ into their bodies at least weekly as well as regularly (in my case at least weekly) gaining special graces in the sacrament of confession, which I am eternally grateful for btw.

I remember reading in the Catechism of the Council of Trent that it is so extremely difficult for someone to have perfect contrition (which is contingent on perfect charity) for their mortal sins and thereby be forgiven. The Catechism states that for this reason God gave us the sacrament of confession knowing our weakness as humans to attain such a supernatural grace and state. In the sacrament of confession, imperfect contrition (aka “attrition”) will suffice for the forgiveness of mortal sins. I don’t see it very likely that non-Catholics would be able to attain such perfect contrition/charity especially on any regular basis. I found this article on the parts necessary to have perfect contrition: catholicfirst.com/thefaith/prayers/perfectactcontrition.cfm One of them requires supernatural actual grace as well. In addition, the definition given by the Holy Office rules out the possibility that any atheists or even polytheists could be saved unless they have supernatural faith in God. Just something too to keep in mind. I’ve done very indepth studies and have even led a discussion group on the topic of EENS and invincible ignorance, and I feel like I keep learning more the more I study it. Right now, what has really hit me is that we have no guarantee at all that anyone who is not part of the visible Catholic Church will be saved at all. It is possible, but there is no guarantee. And the more I study it, the more and more difficult it seems that anyone not part of the visible Church with access to the sacraments could be saved. I believe it possible, but right now, I am strongly doubting it happens to any large degree. Hence, EENS really does mean what it says because those who will be saved (if any) through invincible ignorance, do not be a significant number that should be at all emphasized. Hence, the Church never put emphasis on this theolgocial truth of the possibilty for those invincibly ignorant to be saved because of the slim few who would actually attain and cooperate with the limited grace available to thereby be saved.
Welcome back:tiphat:
Yeah we were lucky! That they put it back. There has been some good information on both sides of the discussion and everyone seems civil. It would have been a shame to lose it.👋
 
Danno,
Thanks for the text. I read through it very quickly. I am about to beging the secong leg of my travels anf for the next few hours I will be driving around 500 miles. This will give me a lot of time to think but not much time to do anything else.

As quickly as I read the letter, the part of being motiviated by perfect charity makes sense. Agai, I see the influence of St. Thomas coming through these words.

Also, a couple more thoughts. First, faith is an unmerited gift from God which then makes the line about how this implicit desire can produce affects unless it come from supernatural faith.

Again, all though I could only look at this briefly, I think I detect St. Thomas thoughout the letter. Which is interesting because it was during the mid- 20th century that we find the theologies of the nro-thhomist beginning to have their full effect.

Basically,for those unfamiliar with the term neo-thomist, these were theologians and philosophers who basically threw out the textbooks and went back to the actual writngs of St. Thomas. As I see it it reminds me of what happened when the Vatican was able to have Michaelangelo’s work in the Sistene chapel cleaned and restored to its original beauty - it became almost a new work. The same with the works of the neo-thomist, Thomas’ works were rediscovered with a depth that had been lost through generations of interpretations.

But again, Thank you for your post.
Have a safe trip! 🙂
 
Also, since I already mentioned St. Thomas, napad, the passage from the catechism concerning how God need not work through the sacraments (Baptism) is straight from Thomistic Theology as well. I think more light could be shed on the points you made in post in response to ron77nyc if we expand to study the nature of a sacrament (and not just a particular definition) or better in a new thread. But, I think it does all of us well to remember that the sacraments are saving acts of Christ “In” and “Through” the Church which means God has the power to act outside the ordinary means of the visible activity of The Church. So there really is no contradiction in the statement you questioned.
I did a search on New Advent site of the Fathers of the Church and the Summa but this phase : “God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.” didn’t come up.

Could you give me a reference when you get a chance? Thanks:)
 
I did a search on New Advent site of the Fathers of the Church and the Summa but this phase : “God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.” didn’t come up.

Could you give me a reference when you get a chance? Thanks:)
This is from vatican.va/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a1.htm

VI. THE NECESSITY OF BAPTISM

1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.59 He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.60 Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament.61 The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are “reborn of water and the Spirit.” God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but **he himself is not bound by his sacraments. **

1258 The Church has always held the firm conviction that those who suffer death for the sake of the faith without having received Baptism are baptized by their death for and with Christ. This Baptism of blood, like the desire for Baptism, brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament.

1259 For catechumens who die before their Baptism, their explicit desire to receive it, together with repentance for their sins, and charity, assures them the salvation that they were not able to receive through the sacrament.

1260 "Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery."62 Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.

1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,"63 allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.
 
Napad,
I apologize that I cannot give more time to providing you a better answer but my suggestion is to google “St Thomas Aquinas, Baptism of Desire” or just St. Thomas and Baptism.

Again, I wisj I could give you a better answer but I just do not have the time right now.
 
Napad,
I apologize that I cannot give more time to providing you a better answer but my suggestion is to google “St Thomas Aquinas, Baptism of Desire” or just St. Thomas and Baptism.

Again, I wish I could give you a better answer but I just do not have the time right now.
Sorry I did a pretty extensive search through Google with the phrase
& St Thomas together and no this line seems like a novelty. It sounds like it should be a quote from somewhere but I can’t find it.

BTW even if it was in St. Thomas it wouldn’t change anything since no doctor or father of the Church is a higher authority than a Pope or council. Aquinas wrote before Florence and Trent and was wrong on the Immaculate Conception so he could also be wrong on baptism of desire. But he also says that expliciate faith in Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation which would exclude Pagans, Jews and Atheists

check out some interesting things about Trent and “desire” in my two post on another thread
post 1
post 2
 
I did a search on New Advent site of the Fathers of the Church and the Summa but this phase : “God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.” didn’t come up.

Could you give me a reference when you get a chance? Thanks:)
catholic.com/library/necessity_of_baptism.asp

**Cyprian of Carthage **
“[T]he baptism of public witness and of blood cannot profit a heretic unto salvation, because there is no salvation outside the Church.” (Letters 72[73]:21 [A.D. 253]).

“[Catechumens who suffer martyrdom] are not deprived of the sacrament of baptism. Rather, they are baptized with the most glorious and greatest baptism of blood, concerning which the Lord said that he had another baptism with which he himself was to be baptized [Luke 12:50]” (ibid., 72[73]:22).

Cyril of Jerusalem
“If any man does not receive baptism, he does not have salvation. The only exception is the martyrs, who even without water will receive the kingdom.
. . . For the Savior calls martyrdom a baptism, saying, ‘Can you drink the cup which I drink and be baptized with the baptism with which I am to be baptized [Mark 10:38]?’ Indeed, the martyrs too confess, by being made a spectacle to the world, both to angels and to men [1 Cor. 4:9]” (Catechetical Lectures 3:10 [A.D. 350]).

John Chrysostom
“Do not be surprised that I call martyrdom a baptism, for here too the Spirit comes in great haste and there is the taking away of sins and a wonderful and marvelous cleansing of the soul, and just as those being baptized are washed in water, so too those being martyred are washed in their own blood” (Panegyric on St. Lucian 2 [A.D. 387]).

Ambrose of Milan
“But I hear you lamenting because he [the Emperor Valentinian] had not received the sacraments of baptism. Tell me, what else could we have, except the will to it, the asking for it? He too had just now this desire, and after he came into Italy it was begun, and a short time ago he signified that he wished to be baptized by me. Did he, then, not have the grace which he desired? Did he not have what he eagerly sought? Certainly, because he sought it, he received it. What else does it mean: ‘Whatever just man shall be overtaken by death, his soul shall be at rest [Wis. 4:7]’?” (Sympathy

Augustine
“There are three ways in which sins are forgiven: in baptism, in prayer, and in the greater humility of penance; yet God does not forgive sins except to the baptized” (Sermons to Catechumens on the Creed 7:15 [A.D. 395]).

“I do not hesitate to put the Catholic catechumen, burning with divine love, before a baptized heretic. Even within the Catholic Church herself we put the good catechumen ahead of the wicked baptized person. . . . For Cornelius, even before his baptism, was filled up with the Holy Spirit [Acts 10:44–48], while Simon [Magus], even after his baptism, was puffed up with an unclean spirit [Acts 8:13–19]” (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:21:28 [A.D. 400]).

“That the place of baptism is sometimes supplied by suffering is supported by a substantial argument which the same blessed Cyprian draws from the circumstance of the thief, to whom, although not baptized, it was said, ‘Today you shall be with me in paradise’ [Luke 23:43]. Considering this over and over again, I find that not only suffering for the name of Christ can supply for that which is lacking by way of baptism, but even faith and conversion of heart * baptism of desire*] if, perhaps, because of the circumstances of the time, recourse cannot be had to the celebration of the mystery of baptism” (ibid., 4:22:29).

“When we speak of within and without in relation to the Church, it is the position of the heart that we must consider, not that of the body. . . . All who are within [the Church] in heart are saved in the unity of the ark** [by baptism of desire]” **(ibid., 5:28:39).

“[According to] apostolic tradition . . . the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal. This is the witness of Scripture too” (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:24:34 [A.D. 412]).

“Those who, though they have not received the washing of regeneration, die for the confession of Christ—it avails them just as much for the forgiveness of their sins as if they had been washed in the sacred font of baptism. For he that said, ‘If anyone is not reborn of water and the Spirit, he will not enter the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5], made an exception for them in that other statement in which he says no less generally, ‘Whoever confesses me before men, I too will confess him before my Father, who is in heaven’ [Matt. 10:32]” (The City of God 13:7 [A.D. 419]).
 
catholic.com/library/necessity_of_baptism.asp

**Cyprian of Carthage **
“[T]he baptism of public witness and of blood cannot profit a heretic unto salvation, because there is no salvation outside the Church.” (Letters 72[73]:21 [A.D. 253]).

“[Catechumens who suffer martyrdom] are not deprived of the sacrament of baptism. Rather, they are baptized with the most glorious and greatest baptism of blood, concerning which the Lord said that he had another baptism with which he himself was to be baptized [Luke 12:50]” (ibid., 72[73]:22).

Cyril of Jerusalem
“If any man does not receive baptism, he does not have salvation. The only exception is the martyrs, who even without water will receive the kingdom.
. . . For the Savior calls martyrdom a baptism, saying, ‘Can you drink the cup which I drink and be baptized with the baptism with which I am to be baptized [Mark 10:38]?’ Indeed, the martyrs too confess, by being made a spectacle to the world, both to angels and to men [1 Cor. 4:9]” (Catechetical Lectures 3:10 [A.D. 350]).

John Chrysostom
“Do not be surprised that I call martyrdom a baptism, for here too the Spirit comes in great haste and there is the taking away of sins and a wonderful and marvelous cleansing of the soul, and just as those being baptized are washed in water, so too those being martyred are washed in their own blood” (Panegyric on St. Lucian 2 [A.D. 387]).

Ambrose of Milan
“But I hear you lamenting because he [the Emperor Valentinian] had not received the sacraments of baptism. Tell me, what else could we have, except the will to it, the asking for it? He too had just now this desire, and after he came into Italy it was begun, and a short time ago he signified that he wished to be baptized by me. Did he, then, not have the grace which he desired? Did he not have what he eagerly sought? Certainly, because he sought it, he received it. What else does it mean: ‘Whatever just man shall be overtaken by death, his soul shall be at rest [Wis. 4:7]’?” (Sympathy

Augustine
“There are three ways in which sins are forgiven: in baptism, in prayer, and in the greater humility of penance; yet God does not forgive sins except to the baptized” (Sermons to Catechumens on the Creed 7:15 [A.D. 395]).

“I do not hesitate to put the Catholic catechumen, burning with divine love, before a baptized heretic. Even within the Catholic Church herself we put the good catechumen ahead of the wicked baptized person. . . . For Cornelius, even before his baptism, was filled up with the Holy Spirit [Acts 10:44–48], while Simon [Magus], even after his baptism, was puffed up with an unclean spirit [Acts 8:13–19]” (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:21:28 [A.D. 400]).

“That the place of baptism is sometimes supplied by suffering is supported by a substantial argument which the same blessed Cyprian draws from the circumstance of the thief, to whom, although not baptized, it was said, ‘Today you shall be with me in paradise’ [Luke 23:43]. Considering this over and over again, I find that not only suffering for the name of Christ can supply for that which is lacking by way of baptism, but even faith and conversion of heart * baptism of desire*] if, perhaps, because of the circumstances of the time, recourse cannot be had to the celebration of the mystery of baptism” (ibid., 4:22:29).

“When we speak of within and without in relation to the Church, it is the position of the heart that we must consider, not that of the body. . . . All who are within [the Church] in heart are saved in the unity of the ark** [by baptism of desire]” **(ibid., 5:28:39).

“[According to] apostolic tradition . . . the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal. This is the witness of Scripture too” (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:24:34 [A.D. 412]).

“Those who, though they have not received the washing of regeneration, die for the confession of Christ—it avails them just as much for the forgiveness of their sins as if they had been washed in the sacred font of baptism. For he that said, ‘If anyone is not reborn of water and the Spirit, he will not enter the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5], made an exception for them in that other statement in which he says no less generally, ‘Whoever confesses me before men, I too will confess him before my Father, who is in heaven’ [Matt. 10:32]” (The City of God 13:7 [A.D. 419]).
I didn’t see that phase in your post. Did I miss it?

Yeah I know baptism of desire (BOD) has some history but it is still a theory like Limbo. It also has a history opposed to it but people speak about it as though BOD is a dogma it isn’t it is a theory that I have some serious issues with.

Just for the sake of augment in all those quotes was there mention of pagans or Jews or atheists or Muslims being saved? If we can agree that non of the Church Fathers above agreed with that then maybe we can make some progress.
 
I didn’t see that phase in your post. Did I miss it?

Yeah I know baptism of desire (BOD) has some history but it is still a theory like Limbo. It also has a history opposed to it but people speak about it as though BOD is a dogma it isn’t it is a theory that I have some serious issues with.

Just for the sake of augment in all those quotes was there mention of pagans or Jews or atheists or Muslims being saved? If we can agree that non of the Church Fathers above agreed with that then maybe we can make some progress.
I believe that the seeming contradiction can be thus resolved: If a pagan saw a Christian suffering martyrdom for the faith and were so moved that he said, “That good man’s belief must be the truth, even though I once opposed it and the Christ for Whom he dies, and because of his witness (martyr) I will profess his religion even though they will kill me before I can actually join the Church.” That would constitute bapism of blood. But the unbaptized believer in Arianism who was willing to die for the name of Christ but unwilling to assent to what Christ teaches through His Chuch would not be baptized, by blood, desire, or whatever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top