"no salvation except that within the Church"

[Gorgias]

Let’s test that highlighted statement

Let’s!

If they are “in” the Church, they can walk off the street and receive the sacraments of …oh let’s say… Penance and the Eucharist in any parish… right?

No; I disagree with your premise. Reception of the sacraments, normatively, is for those who are in full communion with the Church. We’re not asking the question “are Protestants in full communion with the Church?” but rather, “are Protestants in the Church?”.

However, since you ask…

• Can Protestants confess to a Catholic priest? NO

Actually, the answer is a qualified ‘yes’. See canon 844 §4 (emphasis mine):

If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.

catholic.com/quickquestions/as-a-protestant-who-wishes-to-stay-focused-on-the-lord-may-i-confess-my-sins-to-a-pri

You seem to be misinterpreting the answer to this question, which centers on whether a Protestant can take advantage of the sacrament of reconciliation as a means of ‘becoming more focused on the Lord’. The answer to that question, of course, is ‘no’.

• Can Protestants receive the Eucharist? Near proximity of death.

So, again, as you point out, the answer is a qualified ‘yes’.

Therefore, by the standards you’ve set up here, the answer is ‘yes’ – although that should not be construed to mean that Protestants are ‘in full communion with the Catholic Church.’

Thanks for helping disprove your own assertion.

 

[Even_So]

That wouldn’t make any sense. That would be like being fully human but asking that people identify you as a daisy. Even if you had a name tag that said, “No, really… I’m a daisy!”, no one would say that you’re a flower; we’d say you were ‘Even So’…

Makes as much sense as a professed atheist getting in to Heaven. Or a man wanting to be identified as a woman and visa versa. Or gays in church leadership. The world is making nonsense of sense, and now it is deemed sensible with glorification. Don’t think we have judgement coming? Hang on.

And who you callin’ a daisy?

 

[Even_So]

Here’s why

Do Protestants

1. 
   *]-]accept all the means of salvation given to the Church /-]
   *]-]together with her entire organization, /-]
   *]-] who by the bonds constituted by the profession of faith, i.e. the Catholic profession of faith the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and communion—are joined in the visible structure of the Church of Christ, /-]
   *]-]who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops./-]
   
   Protestants are NO on all 4 points.
   
   Ergo they are **NOT **“in” the Church.

1. 
   So Steve, is that an emphatic no?

 

[Gorgias]

Makes as much sense as a professed atheist getting in to Heaven.

Not at all: if a person is an atheist because they’ve never had the opportunity to understand and accept the Gospel of Christ, then they still may be saved.

And who you callin’ a daisy?

Well… I could’ve called you ‘buttercup’… :flowers:

 

[Michael_Francis]

Makes as much sense as a professed atheist getting in to Heaven. Or a man wanting to be identified as a woman and visa versa. Or gays in church leadership. The world is making nonsense of sense, and now it is deemed sensible with glorification. Don’t think we have judgement coming? Hang on.

And who you callin’ a daisy?

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Church_Militant]

Makes as much sense as a professed atheist getting in to Heaven. Or a man wanting to be identified as a woman and visa versa. Or gays in church leadership. The world is making nonsense of sense, and now it is deemed sensible with glorification. Don’t think we have judgement coming? Hang on.

And who you callin’ a daisy?

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[steve_b]

Let’s!

steve

If they are "in"

Let’s finish testing that thought.

if they are “in” the Catholic Church then they are “in”. If they are “in” the Catholic Church, then nothing else is necessary to be “in”. Otherwise “in” doesn’t mean “in”.

Carrying this further,

That means I can as a Catholic, join any Protestant organization with no consequences to me or my immortal soul what-so-ever, because Protestants are “in” the Catholic Church and therefore, I’m still “in” the Catholic Church going to a Protestant assembly.

THAT is what you’re saying.
G:

However, since you ask…
Actually, the answer is a qualified ‘yes’. See canon 844 §4 (emphasis mine):

special circumstances in one’s proximity of death, ≠ being “in” the Church. It shows charity of the Church towards one who currently is not “in” the Catholic Church
G:

You seem to be misinterpreting the answer to this question, which centers on whether a Protestant can take advantage of the sacrament of reconciliation as a means of ‘becoming more focused on the Lord’. *The answer to that question, of course, is ‘no’*.

Then you prove my point

Would you say that about a Catholic?

Catholics most certainly take advantage of the sacrament of reconciliation, AND OFTEN, to become closer and more focused on the Lord…true?

Therefore, what you discribe is the difference between one who is in the Catholic Church vs one who is NOT.
G:

So, again, as you point out, the answer is a qualified ‘yes’.

giving a sacrament to someone outside the Church who is “in proximity of death” is NOT proof of that person being “in” the Church. It shows the mercy of the Church towards someone close to death who asks, because they are not in the Catholic Church.

In extension,

If they were “in” the Catholic Church they certainly wouldn’t have to wait for proximity of death to receive the sacraments in the Catholic Church. Nor would there be a need to get a bishops approval to give the sacrament to THEM
G:

Therefore, by the standards you’ve set up here, the answer is ‘yes’ – although that should not be construed to mean that Protestants are ‘in full communion with the Catholic Church.’

If protestants are “in” the Church then they are in the Church. One doesn’t have to be squishy on the answer. Your answer shows you don’t quite believe your own answer.

 

[simoncyreno]

632 The frequent New Testament affirmations that Jesus was “raised from the dead” presuppose that the crucified one sojourned in the realm of the dead prior to his resurrection.478 This was the first meaning given in the apostolic preaching to Christ’s descent into hell: that Jesus, like all men, experienced death and in his soul joined the others in the realm of the dead. But he descended there as Savior, proclaiming the Good News to the spirits imprisoned there.479

633 Scripture calls the abode of the dead, to which the dead Christ went down, “hell” - Sheol in Hebrew or Hades in Greek - because those who are there are deprived of the vision of God.480 Such is the case for all the dead, whether evil or righteous, while they await the Redeemer: which does not mean that their lot is identical, as Jesus shows through the parable of the poor man Lazarus who was received into “Abraham’s bosom”:481 "It is precisely these holy souls, who awaited their Savior in Abraham’s bosom, whom Christ the Lord delivered when he descended into hell."482 Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him.483

634 "The gospel was preached even to the dead."484 The descent into hell brings the Gospel message of salvation to complete fulfilment. This is the last phase of Jesus’ messianic mission, a phase which is condensed in time but vast in its real significance: the spread of Christ’s redemptive work to all men of all times and all places, for all who are saved have been made sharers in the redemption.

635 Christ went down into the depths of death so that "the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live."485 Jesus, “the Author of life”, by dying destroyed "him who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and [delivered] all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong bondage."486 Henceforth the risen Christ holds “the keys of Death and Hades”, so that "at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth."487

Comment: Christ preached the Gospel to all the dead - from Adam to the good thief - whether evil or righteous - and “those who hear will live.” It seems to me there is an element of personal choice by very dead people here - to accept or reject the Gospel as preached to them all directly from the Son of God.

 

[Gorgias]

if they are “in” the Catholic Church then they are “in”. If they are “in” the Catholic Church, then nothing else is necessary to be “in”. Otherwise “in” doesn’t mean “in”.

You are treating this question as if it were digital: that is, as if there were only two options – ‘in’ or ‘out’. In the context of this thread (i.e., ‘salvation’), the Church doesn’t answer the question in quite such a cut-and-dried way.

That means I can as a Catholic, join any Protestant organization with no consequences to me or my immortal soul what-so-ever, because Protestants are “in” the Catholic Church and therefore, I’m still “in” the Catholic Church going to a Protestant assembly.

No. Let’s try this again: what you’re talking about here is ‘full communion with the Catholic Church’, and the responsibilities and duties that proceed from that full communion. That’s not what’s in play in this question – we’re not talking about ‘full communion with the Church’.

THAT is what you’re saying.

Nah… really, it’s not. That’s what you’re hearing.

special circumstances in one’s proximity of death, ≠ being “in” the Church. It shows charity of the Church towards one who currently is not “in” the Catholic Church

One who is not baptized is not able to receive any other sacrament. This is not ‘charity’, but recognition of one’s status as Christian.

Would you say that about a Catholic?

No – because a Catholic, also, does not approach reconciliation in order to “become more focused on the Lord”. He does so in order to be absolved of his sins!

Catholics most certainly take advantage of the sacrament of reconciliation, AND OFTEN, to become closer and more focused on the Lord…true?

Nope. Not primarily. One approaches reconciliation in order to be absolved of sin and return to a state of grace.

giving a sacrament to someone outside the Church who is “in proximity of death” is NOT proof of that person being “in” the Church. It shows the mercy of the Church towards someone close to death who asks, because they are not in the Catholic Church.

Tell ya what: go ask your priest whether a Muslim – who is close to death – can go to confession. Let me know what he says. (If it doesn’t include the statement “after baptism”, then you will already know your answer.)

If they were “in” the Catholic Church they certainly wouldn’t have to wait for proximity of death to receive the sacraments in the Catholic Church. Nor would there be a need to get a bishops approval to give the sacrament to THEM

No – if they were in full communion with the Catholic Church, then they wouldn’t have to wait. You’re so close to getting it… you just keep forgetting to add the critical phrase “in full communion with”!!! :sad_yes:

If protestants are “in” the Church then they are in the Church. One doesn’t have to be squishy on the answer. Your answer shows you don’t quite believe your own answer.

In all charity, it only shows that you don’t understand the answer.

 

[Church_Militant]

I think it’s more important to think with exactly what the church has said and not quibble over the details especially since the matter is ultimately God’s to decide.

The church teaches that the church is bound by the sacraments and that God, though being the one to institute them, is not. That is enough for me.

How does that effect my faith sharing? Little…because I believe that we all need to hear the Gospel and to daily take up our cross and follow Him as he commanded. So I share our most holy faith with everyone that I can and leave the fruits of any seeds planted to Him whose vineyard I labor in.

I know that I have found the fullness of truth and I wish that everyone could share in it and my efforts are always to that end, while doing my best to insure that I live out this faith that I profess with the constant help of the Holy Spirit and God’s super abundant grace.

 

[steve_b]

You are treating this question as if it were digital: that is, as if there were only two options – ‘in’ or ‘out’. In the context of this thread (i.e., ‘salvation’), the Church doesn’t answer the question in quite such a cut-and-dried way.

the context is a conditional statement on salvation.

the condition is …“except within the Church”

Full Definition of WITHIN

: in, or into the interior, : inside

G:

No. Let’s try this again: what you’re talking about here is ‘full communion with the Catholic Church’, and the responsibilities and duties that proceed from that full communion. That’s not what’s in play in this question – we’re not talking about ‘full communion with the Church’.

since the definition of “within” above is (in or into the interior : inside )

then ( in, or into the interior,… inside) suggests to me nothing other than what I’ve been saying i.e. one who is “fully incorporated”.
G:

No – because a Catholic, also, does not approach reconciliation in order to “become more focused on the Lord”. He does so in order to be absolved of his sins!

Nope. Not primarily. One approaches reconciliation in order to be absolved of sin and return to a state of grace.

You’re making a (both / and) into an (either / or ).

And just to be clear I said previously

steve

Catholics most certainly take advantage of the sacrament of reconciliation, AND OFTEN, to become closer and more focused on the Lord…true?

Wouldn’t you agree, reconciliation does both?

1. 
   *]forgives sin
   *]makes one closer and more focused on the Lord
   G:
   

   Tell ya what: go ask your priest whether a Muslim – who is close to death – can go to confession. Let me know what he says. (If it doesn’t include the statement “after baptism”, then you will already know your answer.)

   If a baptized Protestant isn’t near death, the priest isn’t to give the Protestant that sacrament either. Or let’s put it this way they are not supposed to.
   
   The reason being, the Protestant who is NOT dieing, will go about their life after that sacrament, living as a Protestant believing as a Protestant, which is why the Church doesn’t have open reception of the sacraments in the first place.
   G:
   

   No – if they were in full communion with the Catholic Church, then they wouldn’t have to wait. You’re so close to getting it… you just keep forgetting to add the critical phrase “in full communion with”!!! :sad_yes:

   “in”, “within” , “inside” , are the same, It’s definitional as I quoted above.
   
   Are you arguing that “in full communion” ≠ “within”, “in”, “inside”

 

[Gorgias]

the context is a conditional statement on salvation.

the condition is …“except within the Church”

Please show me the word “within” in the phrase extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Wouldn’t you agree, reconciliation does both?

1. 
   *]forgives sin
   *]makes one closer and more focused on the Lord

1. 
   Primarily, it absolves one of sin. It doesn’t make one ‘focused on the Lord’, per se, which is what the citation you provided was talking about.
   

   If a baptized Protestant isn’t near death, the priest isn’t to give the Protestant that sacrament either. Or let’s put it this way they are not supposed to.

   Please re-read the canon. “In danger of death” is only one of the two possible reasons that a Protestant may be permitted to approach the sacrament of reconciliation. Why do you keep misrepresenting what the Church is saying? Is it intentional, or are you just trying too hard to prove your point?
   

   “in”, “within” , “inside” , are the same, It’s definitional as I quoted above.

   And, it’s not at all part of the phrase.
   

   Are you arguing that “in full communion” ≠ “within”, “in”, “inside”

   In a way: “in full communion” is a proper subset of “in” – all those who are “in full communion” with the Church are “in” the Church; but not all those who are “in” the Church are “in full communion” with the Church.
   
   Paragraph 3 of Unitatis Redintegratio reads:
   

   Even in the beginnings of this one and only Church of God there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly condemned. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions made their appearance and quite large communities came to be separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame. The children who are born into these Communities and who grow up believing in Christ cannot be accused of the sin involved in the separation, and the Catholic Church embraces upon them as brothers, with respect and affection. For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect. The differences that exist in varying degrees between them and the Catholic Church - whether in doctrine and sometimes in discipline, or concerning the structure of the Church - do indeed create many obstacles, sometimes serious ones, to full ecclesiastical communion. The ecumenical movement is striving to overcome these obstacles. But even in spite of them it remains true that all who have been justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ’s body, and have a right to be called Christian, and so are correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church.

 

[Even_So]

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h...umblr_npm06psX2f1qih8pao1_500_zpsmhsagdky.jpg

I was waitin for that. Great movie.

 

[Even_So]

632 The frequent New Testament affirmations that Jesus was “raised from the dead” presuppose that the crucified one sojourned in the realm of the dead prior to his resurrection.478 This was the first meaning given in the apostolic preaching to Christ’s descent into hell: that Jesus, like all men, experienced death and in his soul joined the others in the realm of the dead. But he descended there as Savior, proclaiming the Good News to the spirits imprisoned there.479

633 Scripture calls the abode of the dead, to which the dead Christ went down, “hell” - Sheol in Hebrew or Hades in Greek - because those who are there are deprived of the vision of God.480 Such is the case for all the dead, whether evil or righteous, while they await the Redeemer: which does not mean that their lot is identical, as Jesus shows through the parable of the poor man Lazarus who was received into “Abraham’s bosom”:481 "It is precisely these holy souls, who awaited their Savior in Abraham’s bosom, whom Christ the Lord delivered when he descended into hell."482 Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him.483

634 "The gospel was preached even to the dead."484 The descent into hell brings the Gospel message of salvation to complete fulfilment. This is the last phase of Jesus’ messianic mission, a phase which is condensed in time but vast in its real significance: the spread of Christ’s redemptive work to all men of all times and all places, for all who are saved have been made sharers in the redemption.

635 Christ went down into the depths of death so that "the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live."485 Jesus, “the Author of life”, by dying destroyed "him who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and [delivered] all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong bondage."486 Henceforth the risen Christ holds “the keys of Death and Hades”, so that "at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth."487

Comment: Christ preached the Gospel to all the dead - from Adam to the good thief - whether evil or righteous - and “those who hear will live.” It seems to me there is an element of personal choice by very dead people here - to accept or reject the Gospel as preached to them all directly from the Son of God.

Dang, that sounds about right to me! I do wonder about your comment myself. How stupid are the ones to say no?

I think it’s more important to think with exactly what the church has said and not quibble over the details especially since the matter is ultimately God’s to decide.

The church teaches that the church is bound by the sacraments and that God, though being the one to institute them, is not. That is enough for me.

How does that effect my faith sharing? Little…because I believe that we all need to hear the Gospel and to daily take up our cross and follow Him as he commanded. So I share our most holy faith with everyone that I can and leave the fruits of any seeds planted to Him whose vineyard I labor in.

I know that I have found the fullness of truth and I wish that everyone could share in it and my efforts are always to that end, while doing my best to insure that I live out this faith that I profess with the constant help of the Holy Spirit and God’s super abundant grace.

Dang, that was good too. For a huckleberry.

 

[Amillennialist]

Your concerns, beliefs, and reasons are very Catholic-sounding.

The Catholic Church teaches that anyone can get to Heaven, even an atheist. At the end of the day, it is not having the right belief that gets us into Heaven but having the right kind of love. One thing is sure: Whoever gets to Heaven does so through Christ’s grace and his death on the cross.

Jesus said that He is the only way to Heaven.

Anything else is heresy.

 

[fbl9]

Let’s test that highlighted statement

If they are “in” the Church, they can walk off the street and receive the sacraments of …oh let’s say… Penance and the Eucharist in any parish… right?

• Can Protestants confess to a Catholic priest? NO catholic.com/quickquestions/as-a-protestant-who-wishes-to-stay-focused-on-the-lord-may-i-confess-my-sins-to-a-pri
• Can Protestants receive the Eucharist? Near proximity of death. Who Can Receive Communion? | Catholic Answers

That does NOT demonstrate someone who is “in” the Chuirch …agreed?

I wrestled with this view as well. For myself I settled on Protestants are not really in, some are sitting on the window ledges while others are clinging to the roof. And ultimately I remember that it is written to the effect that to say who gets to heaven is to bring Christ down, while to say who is condemned is to raise Christ up, neither of which we can do.

 

[steve_b]

Please show me the word “within” in the phrase extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The topic of the thread is obviously stated as a paraphrase and not a quote. But we know what is meant.

To make it an exact quote

“they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.” [846 (Catechism of the Catholic Church - Paragraph # 846)

Therefore, definitionally,

**In **= used to indicate location or position within something

Just as I quoted the following in an earlier post

**within ***= *in, or into the interior, : inside

G:

Primarily, it absolves one of sin. It doesn’t make one ‘focused on the Lord’, per se, which is what the citation you provided was talking about.

As I said before, you make (both / and ) into an (either / or )
G:

Please re-read the canon. “In danger of death” is only one of the two possible reasons that a Protestant may be permitted to approach the sacrament of reconciliation. Why do you keep misrepresenting what the Church is saying? Is it intentional, or are you just trying too hard to prove your point?

844
§4. If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.

§5. For the cases mentioned in §§2, 3, and 4, the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops is not to issue general norms except after consultation at least with the local competent authority of the interested non-Catholic Church or community.

Note the conditions and restrictions

A Protestant in order to receive the sacraments we’re talking about,

• the situation must be danger of death or some grave situation
• they must manifest the Catholic faith in these sacraments,
• must be disposed to live up to the same standards as a Catholic in receiving those sacraments.

How many fit that discription, or agree to those conditions before a priest can give then those sacraments discussed ?.
G:

And, it’s not at all part of the phrase.

already been answered
G:

In a way: “in full communion” is a proper subset of “in” – all those who are “in full communion” with the Church are “in” the Church; but not all those who are “in” the Church are “in full communion” with the Church.

Paragraph 3 of Unitatis Redintegratio reads:

Re: #3 (all emphasis mine)

“Nevertheless, our separated brethren, whether considered as individuals or as Communities and Churches, **are **not blessed with that unity which Jesus Christ wished to bestow on all those who through Him were born again into one body, and with Him quickened to newness of life - that unity which the Holy Scriptures and the ancient Tradition of the Church proclaim. For it is only through Christ’s Catholic Church, which is “the all-embracing means of salvation,” that they can benefit fully from the means of salvation. We believe that Our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the head, in order to establish the one Body of Christ on earth to which all should be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the people of God.”

“fully incorporated” is the norm for “unity” and therefore, what “in” the Catholic Church] means.

Notice it says “Our seperated brothers are NOT blessed with [that unity] Our Lord wished to bestow on ALL through baptism”.

IOW, they aren’t blessed with being “in unity” with the Catholic Church.

definitionally,

unity = the state of being in full agreement

 

[bjryman]

I wrestled with this view as well. For myself I settled on Protestants are not really in, some are sitting on the window ledges while others are clinging to the roof. And ultimately I remember that it is written to the effect that to say who gets to heaven is to bring Christ down, while to say who is condemned is to raise Christ up, neither of which we can do.

…and don’t forget that the issue of “full communion” with the Church, is a value judgement statement. That is, if the Protestant has met the elements of salvation, but of course does not engage in all the CC sacraments, sacramentals, rubrics, rules, etc. … he/she is not in full communion with the Church, but is saved and destined to meet God in heaven.

This may be a bad analogy but it’s like someone who takes and old basic car to a destination and one that has all the best equipment to maximize the ride. Both get you to the desired destination.

 

[Jeannie52]

Wow, I was born and raised in a Roman Catholic family and I feel so uplifted after reading all that you wrote! So informative and helpful to understand that it is through his Church only that we can be saved through Baptism. Living on this earth, we pilgrims live one day at a time as we await His second coming! Allelujah! Allelujah!

 

[Jeannie52]

I looked back on pages of discussion on this thread…it’s amazing.