It is the Catholic Church that makes us Christians.....

[FrDavid96]

OK, so you are not saying then that someone must be a joined member of the Catholic Church (visible) to be saved, but that salvation comes through Christ and the Catholic Church (body of Christ) regardless of what church one belongs to, correct?

So there is no salvation outside the Church. I agree with that. So even someone who knows nothing about the Catholic Church (also the mystical body of Christ and a visible Church) but who responds in some way to God’s grace, can be saved, and that since all salvation comes only through Jesus Christ, it also comes through his body, the Church?

That makes sense. So while the Catholic Church considers someone who was brought up in an evangelical household and knows nothing about the Catholic Church (visible), but who was properly baptized in the name of the Triune God, a saved Christian, even though he/she knows nothing about the Catholic Church,(visible) their salvation which is recognized by the Catholic Church (visible) actually came about because of the Catholic Church (body of Christ), correct?

Is my understanding of your position correct?

Yes!

In fact, that’s a fairly good summary of what we read in the Vatican II documents. I’m looking for a single quote to provide to support that, but can’t easily find one. The only distinction I would make, and this is a very subtle one yet still important is that Catholics never declare a person to be “saved” in the evangelical Protestant sense. Salvation is an ongoing, lifelong process, not a single moment.

 

[wisdomseeker]

OK, so you are not saying then that someone must be a joined member of the Catholic Church (visible) to be saved, but that salvation comes through Christ and the Catholic Church (body of Christ) regardless of what church one belongs to, correct?

So there is no salvation outside the Church. I agree with that. So even someone who knows nothing about the Catholic Church (also the mystical body of Christ and a visible Church) but who responds in some way to God’s grace, can be saved, and that since all salvation comes only through Jesus Christ, it also comes through his body, the Church?

That makes sense. So while the Catholic Church considers someone who was brought up in an evangelical household and knows nothing about the Catholic Church (visible), but who was properly baptized in the name of the Triune God, a saved Christian, even though he/she knows nothing about the Catholic Church,(visible) their salvation which is recognized by the Catholic Church (visible) actually came about because of the Catholic Church (body of Christ), correct?

Is my understanding of your position correct?

Everyone know about the CC. that is the danger of it. even people who cant even sign their names knows about the CC. the CC is everywhere. it is impossible for a person not know about the CC.

The CC doesnt say that they will be saved. it only says, they might. The Church also says that those who rejects her are in danger of loosing their salvation. this has always been the teachings of the Church.

 

[Cable]

To learn more of your faith traditions and beliefs to better understand Catholicism…I’m not sure I have many disagreements with my faith…but I know Catholics do.

For me, I know that some of your beliefs contradict, not me personally, but the teachings of the Church. Getting back to the efficacy of the sacraments, namely Baptism, this is a little to address it (not meant to be complete) from a Biblical standpoint: "Baptism is Salvific, Not Just Symbolic
Matt. 28:19-20 - Jesus commands the apostles to baptize all people “in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” Many Protestant churches are now teaching that baptism is only a symbolic ritual, and not what actually cleanses us from original sin. This belief contradicts Scripture and the 2,000 year-old teaching of the Church.

Acts 2:38 - Peter commands them to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ in order to be actually forgiven of sin, not just to partake of a symbolic ritual.

Matt. 28:19-20; Acts 2:38 - there is nothing in these passages or elsewhere in the Bible about baptism being symbolic. There is also nothing about just accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior in order to be saved.

Mark 16:16 - Jesus said “He who believes AND is baptized will be saved.” Jesus says believing is not enough. Baptism is also required. This is because baptism is salvific, not just symbolic. The Greek text also does not mandate any specific order for belief and baptism, so the verse proves nothing about a “believer’s baptism.”

John 3:3,5 - unless we are “born again” of water and Spirit in baptism, we cannot enter into the kingdom of God. The Greek word for the phrase “born again” is “anothen” which literally means “begotten from above.” See, for example, John 3:31 where “anothen” is so used. Baptism brings about salvation, not just a symbolism of our salvation.

Acts 8:12-13; 36; 10:47 - if belief is all one needs to be saved, why is everyone instantly baptized after learning of Jesus?

Acts 16:15; 31-33; 18:8; 19:2,5 - these texts present more examples of people learning of Jesus, and then immediately being baptized. If accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior is all one needs to do to be saved, then why does everyone in the early Church immediately seek baptism?

Acts 9:18 - Paul, even though he was directly chosen by Christ and immediately converted to Christianity, still had to be baptized to be forgiven his sin. This is a powerful text which demonstrates the salvific efficacy of water baptism, even for those who decide to give their lives to Christ.

Acts 22:16 - Ananias tells Paul, “arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins,” even though Paul was converted directly by Jesus Christ. This proves that Paul’s acceptance of Jesus as personal Lord and Savior was not enough to be forgiven of his sin and saved. The sacrament of baptism is required.

Acts 22:16 - further, Ananias’ phrase “wash away” comes from the Greek word “apolouo.” “Apolouo” means an actual cleansing which removes sin. It is not a symbolic covering up of sin. Even though Jesus chose Paul directly in a heavenly revelation, Paul had to be baptized to have his sins washed away.

Rom. 6:4 - in baptism, we actually die with Christ so that we, like Him, might be raised to newness of life. This means that, by virtue of our baptism, our sufferings are not in vain. They are joined to Christ and become efficacious for our salvation.

1 Cor. 6:11 - Paul says they were washed, sanctified, and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, in reference to baptism. The “washing” of baptism gives birth to sanctification and justification, which proves baptism is not just symbolic.

Gal. 3:27 - whoever is baptized in Christ puts on Christ. Putting on Christ is not just symbolic. Christ actually dwells within our soul. " ScriptureCatholic.com

 

[Discipulo]

It is interesting that during baptism protestants ARE baptized into the Catholic Church(Body of Christ) so we are technically in an imperfect communion with them.

 

[wisdomseeker]

It is interesting that during baptism protestants ARE baptized into the Catholic Church(Body of Christ) so we are technically in an imperfect communion with them.

Can you post where the Church says they are baptized into the CC?

 

[FrDavid96]

Can you post where the Church says they are baptized into the CC?

Here’s one example

1. Whenever the Sacrament of Baptism is duly administered as Our Lord instituted it, and is received with the right dispositions, a person is truly incorporated into the crucified and glorified Christ, and reborn to a sharing of the divine life, as the Apostle says: “You were buried together with Him in Baptism, and in Him also rose again-through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead”.

Baptism therefore establishes a sacramental bond of unity which links all who have been reborn by it. But of itself Baptism is only a beginning, an inauguration wholly directed toward the fullness of life in Christ. Baptism, therefore, envisages a complete profession of faith, complete incorporation in the system of salvation such as Christ willed it to be, and finally complete ingrafting in eucharistic communion.

Though the ecclesial Communities which are separated from us lack the fullness of unity with us flowing from Baptism, and though we believe they have not retained the proper reality of the eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Orders, nevertheless when they commemorate His death and resurrection in the Lord’s Supper, they profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and look forward to His coming in glory. Therefore the teaching concerning the Lord’s Supper, the other sacraments, worship, the ministry of the Church, must be the subject of the dialogue.

Vatican II Decree UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html

In other words, a valid non-Catholic baptism unites a person to the Church, without actually making a person a member of the Church.

 

[FrDavid96]

Can you post where the Church says they are baptized into the CC?

I almost missed the most obvious one:

I believe in one, holy,
catholic and apostolic Church.
I confess one baptism
for the forgiveness of sins

The Nicene Creed (actually Nicaea and First Constantinople)

There’s only one Church and there’s only one Baptism.

Therefore there is no such thing as Baptism that does not unite a person, in some way, to that one Church.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Here’s one example

1. Whenever the Sacrament of Baptism is duly administered as Our Lord instituted it, and is received with the right dispositions, a person is truly incorporated into the crucified and glorified Christ, and reborn to a sharing of the divine life, as the Apostle says: “You were buried together with Him in Baptism, and in Him also rose again-through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead”.

Baptism therefore establishes a sacramental bond of unity which links all who have been reborn by it. But of itself Baptism is only a beginning, an inauguration wholly directed toward the fullness of life in Christ. Baptism, therefore, envisages a complete profession of faith, complete incorporation in the system of salvation such as Christ willed it to be, and finally complete ingrafting in eucharistic communion.

Though the ecclesial Communities which are separated from us lack the fullness of unity with us flowing from Baptism, and though we believe they have not retained the proper reality of the eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Orders, nevertheless when they commemorate His death and resurrection in the Lord’s Supper, they profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and look forward to His coming in glory. Therefore the teaching concerning the Lord’s Supper, the other sacraments, worship, the ministry of the Church, must be the subject of the dialogue.

Vatican II Decree UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html

In other words, a valid non-Catholic baptism unites a person to the Church, without actually making a person a member of the Church.

I always thought that is concerning Catholics only who are baptized and have the Eucharist which signifies unity among Catholics and not those outsied the church.

the other paragraph is related to some protestants groups about dialoguing. I dont see where it says that protestants are part of the the Church. I feel that there is an error of enterpretation here.

I know that the Church calls them christians but dont see where they are part of the Church.

 

[FrDavid96]

I always thought that is concerning Catholics only who are baptized and have the Eucharist which signifies unity among Catholics and not those outsied the church.

I’m not sure exactly what you mean by that sentence. Perhaps if you address that in a post by itself it might be helpful for the conversation.

The whole section of that document is about separated Christians (specifically in the West)–in fact, the whole document is about that topic… Since I don’t know what you mean, I’m taking my best guess at a response here.

Originally, I wanted to cut out the part about the Eucharist because it isn’t what we’re talking about here, but I decided to leave it in to keep the paragraph whole.

the other paragraph is related to some protestants groups about dialoguing. I dont see where it says that protestants are part of the the Church. I feel that there is an error of enterpretation here.

I know that the Church calls them christians but dont see where they are part of the Church.

What’s important here is the important distinction between being “united to” the Church on the one hand, and being “fully members” of the Church on the other.

“Baptism therefore establishes a sacramental bond of unity which links all who have been reborn by it.”
A “bond of unity” is the same thing as saying “united-to” So they are “united to the Church” but not members of the Church. That’s why I put emphasis on it in my previous post.

No, Protestants are not “part of the Church.” Yes, they are still outside the Church.

It’s what I said before
“In other words, a valid non-Catholic baptism unites a person to the Church, without actually making a person a member of the Church.”

That section from UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO is just one example. There are other places in Church teaching (like other Vat II documents), the Catechism, and other Church documents that express this idea. I can’t possibly quote them all. It would become a thesis paper instead of a CAF post.

I know this posts sounds redundant and repetitive. I suppost my thinking is that if I keep saying it in different ways, one way will come through. In other words, bear with me I’m feeling a bit tired at the moment.

 

[FrDavid96]

Do you agree or dissagree? Why or why not?

Psalms 127:1
"Unless the Lord builds the house, those who build it labor in vain. Unless the Lord watches over the city, the watchman stays awake in vain."

To get back to the original question

Here’s a quote from Vatican II that answers it
8. Christ, the one Mediator, established and continually sustains here on earth His holy Church, the community of faith, hope and charity, as an entity with visible delineation (9*) through which He communicated truth and grace to all. But, the society structured with hierarchical organs and the Mystical Body of Christ, are not to be considered as two realities, nor are the visible assembly and the spiritual community, nor the earthly Church and the Church enriched with heavenly things; rather they form one complex reality which coalesces from a divine and a human element.(10*) For this reason, by no weak analogy, it is compared to the mystery of the incarnate Word. As the assumed nature inseparably united to Him, serves the divine Word as a living organ of salvation, so, in a similar way, does the visible social structure of the Church serve the Spirit of Christ, who vivifies it, in the building up of the body.(73) (11*)

This is the one Church of Christ which in the Creed is professed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic, (12*) which our Saviour, after His Resurrection, commissioned Peter to shepherd,(74) and him and the other apostles to extend and direct with authority,(75) which He erected for all ages as “the pillar and mainstay of the truth”.(76) This Church constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him,(13*) although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure. These elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward catholic unity.

That’s from Vatican II’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium #8
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html
The numbers within the text are footnotes that I just don’t feel like excising. The bolding is, of course, my own.

 

[Psalm_51]

I always thought that is concerning Catholics only who are baptized and have the Eucharist which signifies unity among Catholics and not those outsied the church.

the other paragraph is related to some protestants groups about dialoguing. I dont see where it says that protestants are part of the the Church. I feel that there is an error of enterpretation here.

I know that the Church calls them christians but dont see where they are part of the Church.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

838 "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."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 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."324

 

[Psalm_51]

Yes!

In fact, that’s a fairly good summary of what we read in the Vatican II documents. I’m looking for a single quote to provide to support that, but can’t easily find one. The only distinction I would make, and this is a very subtle one yet still important is that Catholics never declare a person to be “saved” in the evangelical Protestant sense. Salvation is an ongoing, lifelong process, not a single moment.

I understand now why my statement claiming your statement was false is false and I agree with you now. I agree that justifcation is an ongoing lifelong process. Many Protestants do believe that salvation is a one-time event, the only major act of grace in one’s life. I like to talk about salvation at baptism as initial justification and that we are justified only by God’s grace and not because of anything that we did or did not do - even the faith necessary to respond to God’s offer of salvation is a gift of God. But post-justification, after we are made new creatures in Christ at baptism, we have a new will and our bent is no longer to run from God, but towards him and we still must cooperate with his grace throughout our lives, just as we had to cooperate with him and accept his grace which led to our baptism. And God is still active in our salvation, sanctification, and ultimately our glorification, for all salavation is of God, our obedience and good works naturally should flow from our faith and our wills must be active (we are not puppets) to do his will. Jesus said if you love him, do what he commands. Jesus said that those who did not feed the hungry, give water to the thirsty, he did not know. So our faith, our salvation, our good works, our conscious acts of obedience, our repentance, our being given absolution, our contrition, our acts of penance, all come from God, to his glory. And his active and efficacious grace in our lives comes through the sacraments. So God’s grace continues in our lives in a real, objective way after we are “saved” throughout our entire lives on earth.

 

[wisdomseeker]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

838 "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."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 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."324

This does not say they are part of the Church. This is about seeking them to come into the Church.

 

[Psalm_51]

This does not say they are part of the Church. This is about seeking them to come into the Church.

What do you think this means:

The Church knows that** she is joined **in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian,

 

[wisdomseeker]

I’m not sure exactly what you mean by that sentence. Perhaps if you address that in a post by itself it might be helpful for the conversation.

The whole section of that document is about separated Christians (specifically in the West)–in fact, the whole document is about that topic… Since I don’t know what you mean, I’m taking my best guess at a response here.

Originally, I wanted to cut out the part about the Eucharist because it isn’t what we’re talking about here, but I decided to leave it in to keep the paragraph whole.

What’s important here is the important distinction between being “united to” the Church on the one hand, and being “fully members” of the Church on the other.

“Baptism therefore establishes a sacramental bond of unity which links all who have been reborn by it.”
A “bond of unity” is the same thing as saying “united-to” So they are “united to the Church” but not members of the Church. That’s why I put emphasis on it in my previous post.

No, Protestants are not “part of the Church.” Yes, they are still outside the Church.

It’s what I said before
“In other words, a valid non-Catholic baptism unites a person to the Church, without actually making a person a member of the Church.”

That section from UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO is just one example. There are other places in Church teaching (like other Vat II documents), the Catechism, and other Church documents that express this idea. I can’t possibly quote them all. It would become a thesis paper instead of a CAF post.

I know this posts sounds redundant and repetitive. I suppost my thinking is that if I keep saying it in different ways, one way will come through. In other words, bear with me I’m feeling a bit tired at the moment.

Thank you Father. God keep you always in His ways.

 

[wisdomseeker]

What do you think this means:

The Church knows that** she is joined **in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian,

I think this is talking about the belief. we are joined on the believing on baptism. it does not say they are part of the Church. it does not.

People have the tendency to enterpret things the way they think it should be.

Just like lutherans enterpretation of the holy father words on teh Eucharist. They came to enterpret as if the holy father says that their communion is the same as the Eucharist in the CC. the holy father has denied such. yet they keep holding on to their enterpretation.

 

[wisdomseeker]

What do you think this means:

The Church knows that** she is joined **in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian,

And I think this is talking about ecumenism only. Selected quotes gives different impression. Reading the whole document tells us what is being talking about. The mystitcal body are baptized Catholics only, as i understand.

 

[FrDavid96]

And I think this is talking about ecumenism only. Selected quotes gives different impression. Reading the whole document tells us what is being talking about. The mystitcal body are baptized Catholics only, as i understand.

Sort of yes and sort of no. The Mystical Body is the same as the Church. Different words for expressing the one reality. So strictly speaking, to say “the mystical body are Catholics only” is accurate, but that doesn’t complete the idea. In the context of this thread we also have to add that those who are outside of the Mystical Body are still joined to (imperfectly, incompletely) that Mystical Body.

Only Catholics are actual full members of the Mystical Body, but baptised non-Catholics are joined to, united to, even in-imperfect-communion-with, the Mystical Body. There are all kinds of different ways of saying it.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Sort of yes and sort of no. The Mystical Body is the same as the Church. Different words for expressing the one reality. So strictly speaking, to say “the mystical body are Catholics only” is accurate, but that doesn’t complete the idea. In the context of this thread we also have to add that those who are outside of the Mystical Body are still joined to (imperfectly, incompletely) that Mystical Body.

Only Catholics are actual full members of the Mystical Body, but baptised non-Catholics are joined to, united to, even in-imperfect-communion-with, the Mystical Body. There are all kinds of different ways of saying it.

Yeah, father David. Its like this, it is not there but lets try to make it be there. No wonder what once was clear and concise it is now confusing and unclear. It is like someone tried but did not quite did it. Maybe it is not to be.

 

[FrDavid96]

Yeah, father David. Its like this, it is not there but lets try to make it be there. No wonder what once was clear and concise it is now confusing and unclear. It is like someone tried but did not quite did it. Maybe it is not to be.

I don’t know what you’re getting at. Truly I don’t. I’ve tried over and over again to explain the Church’s teaching on this. I’ve quoted 2 Vatican II documents that explain it. Others have quoted the Catechism. Do you need more Church documents? Is that it? Or could I somehow explain it any differently?

I’ve been about as clear as I possibly can be–to the point of being redundant, I must admit. I’ve reached the stage where I hardly see any point in just repeating it again. Nevertheless here it is:

Baptised Christians are spiritually united to the Church, but not full members of the Church.

What is it you want? What are you looking for? What is it you want to hear?

I simply cannot understand just “what” you are asking or saying in these posts.

I get the impression that something is troubling you. What is it? Believe me, I’m trying to be helpful here.