No Salvation Outside The Church?

[guanophore]

“We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam (Denzinger 468)

“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino (Denzinger 714)

The Orthodox reject the Pope, they are in schism, and have been ever since 1054
newadvent.org/cathen/11329a.htm

There is a difference between being in a state of schism, and being a schismatic, just as there is a difference between unwittingly embracing heresies and being a heretic. You seem to be charging modern day Orthodox with the sins committed by their forebears.

an Orthodox Church. A heretical Church according to you.o God.

Is this correct? I did not see any post where she called the Orthodox heretics.

The Church affirms that they have valid doctrine, holy orders, and sacraments. Schism is not equivalent to heresy.

 

[kamaan]

There is a difference between being in a state of schism, and being a schismatic, just as there is a difference between unwittingly embracing heresies and being a heretic. You seem to be charging modern day Orthodox with the sins committed by their forebears.

Is this correct? I did not see any post where she called the Orthodox heretics.

The Church affirms that they have valid doctrine, holy orders, and sacraments. Schism is not equivalent to heresy.

Oops, I must admit I didn’t read all of the replies. I mistakenly thought that you were denying that Protestants were heretics Sorry about that!

 

[guanophore]

As further evidence of the division between Orthodox and Catholic, I am compelled to remind you of the Catholic martyrs who converted from the Orthodox faith to the Catholic Faith… and were martyred for it. If you pretend that there is hardly any difference between being Orthodox or being Catholic, you pretend their martyrdom was in vain. Why should they die for unity with the Pope, if by being Orthodox they were close enough for salvation?

It is not part of the faith of Holy Orthodoxy to put people to death who wish to be in unity with the successor of Peter in Rome.

In the same way, it is not part of Roman Catholic faith to put to death Protestant heretics, either. However, it was done. It is a mistake to equate the actions of sinful men who have departed from the faith of Christ (love your enemies and pray for those who persecute) with the teachings of the church. Jesus never taught His followers to put to death those who did not receive the faith, did he?

My point is that killing those with different beliefs is NOT part of Holy Orthodoxy. It is not a standard by which the proximity to salvation with orthodoxy can be measured. If Holy Orthodoxy were not “close enough for salvation”, what would be the point of affirming that their Holy Orders, Sacraments, and doctrines are valid? Why would Rome allow and encourage the faithful to partake of the sacraments there?

 

[itinerant1]

Just a few observations on “No Salvation Outside the Church.” There is a sense in which this is true. However, understanding that sense requires understanding the mystical nature of the Church as the Body of Christ. If we take the statement to mean that there is no salvation outside of being a “formal member” of the Catholic Church, then we are understanding the statement in a sense that is too restricted.

First, the statement “no salvation outside the Church” is especially true in the situation of one who rejects the Catholic Church, and is morally culpable for his act of rejection. Such a person has put his salvation in jeopardy.

Second, there are those who are of such a spiritual disposition that they would accept the Catholic faith if the message was ever presented to them. We might think of these people as implicit members of the Church even though they know nothing about Christ or Catholicism.

Consistent with the foregoing observation are those pagans or Gentiles who have never heard of Christ, but try to do what is right according to their conscience. St. Paul addressed this matter in his letter to the Church at Rome:

“For the ones that God will justify are not those who have heard the Law but those who have kept the Law. So, when gentiles, not having the Law, still through their own innate sense behave as the Law commands, then, even though they have no Law, they are a law for themselves. They can demonstrate the effect of the Law engraved on their hearts, to which their own conscience bears witness; since they are aware of various considerations, some of which accuse them, while others provide them with a defence . . . on the day when, according to the gospel that I preach, God, through Jesus Christ, judges all human secrets, Romans 2:13-16.”

St. Paul is talking about those gentiles who are justified or condemned according to whether they have followed the dictates of the natural moral law.

St. Thomas Aquinas says, “If a man born among infidels and barbarians does what lies in his power God will reveal to him what is necessary for salvation, either by inward inspiration or by sending him a preacher of the faith.” (Summa Theologica).

In sum, those who have not heard the Good News can be saved by following the dictates of the natural law. And those who have heard the Gospel message have the obligation of responding to this special grace by their conversion and living a holy life according to the teachings of the Church.

Are the “infidels and barbarians” who do what the natural law demands “outside the Church”? I will say, formally “yes”, implicitly “no”. The Holy Spirit works for the salvation of all men, including those who have never heard of Christ.

 

[cathdoki]

Someone posted this waaaaaaaaaaaaaay back on page 1. I thought it was worth reposting.

From the CCC

Wounds to unity

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ’s Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

Now, I have already been told that the CCC is not binding on the faithful. At least not in some eyes.

 

[OKAstro]

Someone posted this waaaaaaaaaaaaaay back on page 1. I thought it was worth reposting.

From the CCC

Wounds to unity

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ’s Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

Now, I have already been told that the CCC is not binding on the faithful. At least not in some eyes.

So why become Catholic? And how does this pertain to a lifelong Catholic who leaves the Church and joins a non-Catholic Church, because he disagrees with the CC teachings?

 

[cathdoki]

So why become Catholic? And how does this pertain to a lifelong Catholic who leaves the Church and joins a non-Catholic Church, because he disagrees with the CC teachings?

I don’t know.

What I do know is that we AND the Orthodox have the Eucharist. What more can be asked for?

Perhaps you should ask the authors of the CCC

 

[OKAstro]

I don’t know.

What I do know is that we AND the Orthodox have the Eucharist. What more can be asked for?

Perhaps you should ask the authors of the CCC

I have seen numerous posts here (including a few of my own) that clearly say rejecting the teachings of the Catholic Church by those who have been made aware of its truth (like those who leave the Church for a Protestant denomination) - means they have no salvation. These have been backed up by quotes from the CCC and numerous Popes.

There have been other posts that dispute these statements, saying that we are not interpreting them correctly - but no proof has been offered to back up these opinions. The CC interprets the Truth for us and has done so through the CC and other official Church teachings and explanations.

Unless you and these others can provide official CC teachings to back up your claims, I will follow what my CC teaches. Again - we are speaking about those who willfully reject the CC’s teachings (e.g. Protestants who are aware of the CC teachings/History and Catholics who leave the CC). We are not talking about those who have not been made aware of the Truth and thus have not rejected the CC.

So - please provide CC teachings to back up your opinions

Thanks

 

[cathdoki]

I have seen numerous posts here (including a few of my own) that clearly say rejecting the teachings of the Catholic Church by those who have been made aware of its truth (like those who leave the Church for a Protestant denomination) - means they have no salvation. These have been backed up by quotes from the CCC and numerous Popes.

There have been other posts that dispute these statements, saying that we are not interpreting them correctly - but no proof has been offered to back up these opinions. The CC interprets the Truth for us and has done so through the CC and other official Church teachings and explanations.

Unless you and these others can provide official CC teachings to back up your claims, I will follow what my CC teaches. Again - we are speaking about those who willfully reject the CC’s teachings (e.g. Protestants who are aware of the CC teachings/History and Catholics who leave the CC). We are not talking about those who have not been made aware of the Truth and thus have not rejected the CC.

So - please provide CC teachings to back up your opinions

Thanks

I’m sorry, I misunderstood. That is a much stickier situation. In that case, I’m not sure what to say, except to pray for them.

 

[OKAstro]

I’m sorry, I misunderstood. That is a much stickier situation. In that case, I’m not sure what to say, except to pray for them.

I do everyday.

One thing about the CC…it has preached consistently for 2000 years…no PC or relativism or changes in teaching (abortion, contraception, real presence, etc.).

We all need faith and grace to follow and believe in all the CC teaches, espescially those teachings we personaly struggle with.

 

[inkaneer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by inkaneer
First of all everyone is subject to the Pope whether they like it or acknowledge it or not.

This is not true. The Church only exercises jurisdiction over those who have been baptized (cf. Council of Trent, Session XIV, Sacrament of Penance, ch. 2… p 90 in my copy of “Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent”)

Secondly, there is a difference in what ought to be done and what a man chooses to do. While all the baptized may be subject to the Holy Father in a certain sense, those who reject his authority cannot be said to subject to the Pope in the sense which is necessary for their salvation (i.e., recognizing the truth of the authority of the office granted to Peter in the New Testament).

Look, God does not operate a cafeteria where man has the right to choose what he wants. And you are not only misquoting the Concil of Trent but this authority has nothing to do with any authority to judge anything. It is about doctrine and the binding and loosening powers. By the way, the correct language from Trent is:

"CHAPTER II.
On the difference between the Sacrament of Penance and that of Baptism

For the rest, this sacrament is clearly seen to be different from baptism in many respects: for besides that it is very widely different indeed in matter and form, which constitute the essence of a sacrament, it is beyond doubt certain that the minister of baptism need not be a judge, seeing that the Church exercises judgment on no one who has not entered therein through the gate of baptism. …"

It is speaking of Baptism and the difference between it and the sacrament of Pennance and not making a general statement on who is subject to the pope.

Quote:
Originally Posted by inkaneer
As for the Bull of Pope Eugene IV this was one of a number of papal Bulls issued during the Council of Florence which tried to deal with the Great Schism. These Bulls were directed to the various churches and if you google the Council of Florence you will see that. This Bull, Cantate Domino is not an infallible statement. It lacks at least one obvious and necessary requirement for it to be infallible. That is, it is not directed to the universal church.

“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches…" is a universal statement regarding the belief, practices, and teachings of the universal Church.

Nonetheless, it is not the only statement (by far!) of the necessity of the belonging to the Catholic Church for salvation. This Dogma has been consistently professed by the Church for ages. Schismatics (which the Orthodox are) are not in union with the Church, they are cut off by schism.

The Council of Florence, as posted on the EWTN website includes the Athanasian Creed
ewtn.com/library/councils/florence.htm
“Whoever wills to be saved, before all things it is necessary that he holds the catholic faith. Unless a person keeps this faith whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish eternally.”
“This is the catholic faith. Unless a person believes it faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.”

“As a dutiful mother is ever anxious about the health of her children and is uneasy until any dissension among them has been quietened, so and to a much greater extent holy mother church, which regenerates its children to eternal life, is wont to strive with every effort that all who go by the name of Christian may put aside all quarrelling and may guard in fraternal charity the unity of the faith, without which there can be no salvation.”

This may also be helpful:
ewtn.com/library/DOCTRINE/TRIGINFL.HTM
“ANY dogma is an INFALLIBLE doctrine, divinely & formally revealed by God as a necessary truth for salvation.”

First off, the Bull of Pope Eugene IV is not infallible as it does not meet the requirement of universality. It was directed to and applies to the Copts and the Copts only and not to the universal church as I stated. As for the quote from EWTN library it is true. Consider that a dogma is a formally defined doctrine and formally defined doctrines are infallible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by inkaneer
The Council of Florence is a little tricky as only parts of it are considered to be a general council and thus infallible. Part of the council is made up of Bulls [papal letters] as is the letter to the Copts. These, because they are not directed to the whole church are not infallible statements.

I am skeptical… I wonder if that’s how the SSPX intend to get around Vatican II? “It was intended to be a *pastoral *Council, nevermind that the Council Fathers issued a *dogmatic *decree on the Church”:rolleyes

The SPPX was schismatic because it denied the authority of the pope [actually several popes]. Whatever their intentions were does not matter. They were schismatic they didn’t get around anything. I have asked them why it took them so long to claim the election of Pope John XXIII was invalid. Where was the hue and cry immediately after the election? Why did over a decade go by before this accusation, which is/was their main argument to support their cause, was made? I got no answer.

 

[cathdoki]

I do everyday.

One thing about the CC…it has preached consistently for 2000 years…no PC or relativism or changes in teaching (abortion, contraception, real presence, etc.).

We all need faith and grace to follow and believe in all the CC teaches, espescially those teachings we personaly struggle with.

You are absolutely correct. And the things we struggle with are our own struggles, not because the CC is wrong. Like I said, I misunderstood what you were saying earlier.

 

[AnneElliot]

False. God has authority over all of His creation. Jesus (God) instituted the Church to be His spokesman here on earth (The Bride of Christ). “He who hears you, hears me”. The Church, on matters of faith and morals, speaks for God. All who enter into heaven enter through the Church. The normative way this happens is through baptism and formal membership, and active participation, in the Catholic Church. The Church also teaches that those not formally Catholic can also be saved through the Church. To say otherwise is to contradict Church teaching and take upon yourself the judgement of souls that is restricted solely to Jesus.

“…the Church exercises jurisdiction over no one who has not entered it through the gate of baptism” p. 90, The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent

This does not deny God’s authority. A non-Catholic cannot be absolved in the Confessional until he has entered the Church.

 

[davidv]

“…the Church exercises jurisdiction over no one who has not entered it through the gate of baptism” p. 90, The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent

This does not deny God’s authority. A non-Catholic cannot be absolved in the Confessional until he has entered the Church.

So what?

Jesus is not restricted by the Sacraments.

 

[AnneElliot]

guanophore,

Is there a way that, in the future, you can combine your posts instead of posting a slew of replies all in a row? I know you are responding to several different posts (and posters), but it’s rather difficult to follow you through all the different posts.

So, once again, you’ll have to forgive me if I inadvertently miss something. Feel free to bring it up and I will address it.

I was talking about your comments. Your interpretations, as much as you may think them equal to the Apostolic Teaching, are not.

Where did I claim my comments were equal to Apostolic Teaching? Don’t paint me as a proud tyrant, when I’ve done nothing but present the words of the Popes themselves.

AnneElliot;6933275:

Since there is no remission of sin outside of the Catholic Church

Where on earth did you come by such a preposterous notion? If you are quoting someone else’s preposterous notion, then I missed it. Where is origin of this drivel?

“We are compelled in virtue of our faith to believe and maintain that there is only one holy Catholic Church, and that one is apostolic. This we firmly believe and profess without qualification. Outside this Church there is no salvation and no remission of sins…” Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam (Denzinger 468)

This is not consistent with the Apostolic Teaching. God can remit the sins of anyone He desires, and His grace is sufficient to bring anyone to a perfect confession.

Not consistent with Apostolic Teaching?

It’s verbatim from Unam Sanctam. Are you saying a Pope of the Catholic Church taught error?

Cyprian of Carthage “When we say, ‘Do you believe in eternal life and the remission of sins through the holy Church?’ we mean that remission of sins is not granted except in the Church” (Letters, 69[70]:2 [A.D. 253]).

Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quidem #3, #4, #5 “There is little difference between this hideous form of indifference and the devilish system of indifference between the different religions. This belief embraces people who have strayed from the truth, who are enemies of the true faith and forget their own salvation, and who teach contradictory beliefs without firm doctrine. They make no distinction between the different creeds, agree with everybody, and maintain that the haven of eternal salvation is open to sectarians of any religion…
You see, dearly beloved sons and venerable brothers, how much vigilance is needed to keep the disease of this terrible evil from infecting and killing your flocks. Do not cease to diligently defend your people against these pernicious errors. Saturate them with the doctrine of Catholic truth more accurately each day. Teach them that just as there is only one God, one Christ, one Holy Spirit, so there is also only one truth which is divinely revealed. There is only one divine faith which is the beginning of salvation for mankind and the basis of all justification, the faith by which the just person lives and without which it is impossible to please God and to come to the community of His children. There is only one true, holy, Catholic church, which is the Apostolic Roman Church. There is only one See founded in Peter by the word of the Lord, outside of which we cannot find either true faith or eternal salvation. He who does not have the Church for a mother cannot have God for a father, and whoever abandons the See of Peter on which the Church is established trusts falsely that he is in the Church. Thus, there can be no greater crime, no more hideous stain than to stand up against Christ, than to divide the Church engendered and purchased by His blood, than to forget evangelical love and to combat with the furor of hostile discord the harmony of the people of God…
The narrow and difficult path which leads to life can be found not in the practice of the virtues alone or in the observance of precepts, but on the way of faith. Constantly arouse your faithful people so that they will persevere ever more firmly and constantly in the profession of the Catholic religion. Let them likewise endeavor to assure their calling and their election by means of good works. While you work at the salvation of your flock, strive also, in all goodness, patience, and teaching, to recall the unfortunate strays to the one fold of Christ and to Catholic unity. Address to them especially these words of St. Augustine: “Come, brothers, if you wish, so that you may be grafted to the vine. We are saddened to see you thus cut off and lying so. Count the bishops who have occupied the See of Peter; see this uninterrupted succession of popes. See the rock against which the powers of hell will not be able to prevail.” “Whoever eats the lamb outside of this house is an impious person. Whoever is not in Noah’s ark will perish in the flood.””
ewtn.com/library/encyc/p9singul.htm

 

[AnneElliot]

And this is the salient point, Anne. Modern Protestants, for the most part, do not separate themselves from the Catholic Church, nor were they every excommuncated. Most of them are born into and reared in families who belong to ecclesial communities that have been separated from the Apostolic faith for 500 years. Most of them have no clear idea what the Catholic Church teaches. Some don’t care, and some have been fed such a pack of lies about Catholicism that they have absolutely no motivation to learn about it. Some of them feel that their spiritual needs and walk with God are more than fulfilling where they are, and they feel no need or desire to look.

Modern Protestants don’t separate themselves from the Church?!? I don’t see them lining up outside the Confessionals and defending the Real Presence. That, is separation. These are not minor dogmatic contentions.

Perhaps you can help me find where it says all these people are going to hell?

It’s been posted numerous times throughout this thread. If you are not in the Church, you cannot hope for salvation.

How is this nonsense? Do you think all Hindus are going to hell too?

Syllabus of Errors “16. Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation, and arrive at eternal salvation.”

No, I am not. We have more unity with Orthodoxy than we do with the Protestants.

Nonetheless, the fact remains that the Orthodox are not in union with the Church. They are in schism.

The Church does not separate the Eastern Catholics from the Orthodox when it comes to the necessity to maintain their liturgies and cultural identities.

This has nothing to do with the point that the Church must “breathe with both lungs”, East & West. The two lungs of the Church must necessarily be united. A “lung” in schism is a separated lung and of no use to the body. You cannot breathe from a lung that is not attached.

Canonization is, among other things, to provide us with positive role models for our faith walk. Why would the church hold up someone who was imperfectly joined?

Because to enter heaven, you must be made perfect. Later on, you harp on the term “separated brethren”. I think you are forgetting, that while we might be able to “imperfectly” call them brothers, they are still separated. And unless they find union, they are outside the Church. A man is either in, or he is out… if you try to straddle the line, you will fall out.

At the same time, there are very saintly persons that are non-Catholic, whose souls are in heaven. Not all the martyrs are canonized.

So who are you canonizing that the Church has not? I’m not saying only the Saints whom the Church has canonized are in Heaven, but you are asserting either a) that someone who rejected the Faith is in Heaven, or b) that God withheld saving knowledge of Himself and His Church from someone and thus saved them because they were ignorant. Both are false.

I am not sure why you think our understanding of the Catechism emanates from “emotion”.

That point was addressed to cathdoki, not you, nor simply ‘an understanding of the Catechism’. Context.

They are called our separated brethren because they are “brethren”. They have been baptized into Christ. Since there is only one church, and all who have been baptized are brought into it, they are saved through the catholic church, whether they know it, or not.

Baptism is key, yes. The second a man is baptized validly he is Catholic. The moment he embraces heresy, he is a heretic. By our Baptism, we have a duty to study our faith and seek the Truth. Such study would lead someone to the Catholic Church where they can find salvation.

This is written to heretics and apostates, Anne. Our separated brethren do not qualify for either status.

What do you think “separated” means?
Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos “For since the mystical body of Christ, in the same manner as His physical body, is one, compacted and fitly joined together, it were foolish and out of place to say that the mystical body is made up of members which are disunited and scattered abroad: whosoever therefore is not united with the body is no member of it, neither is he in communion with Christ its head.” (#10)

No, but there is not an entire compendium of doctrine contained in the Gospels. The letters of Paul make it clear that it is possible for people to be saved who are not visible members of the Church.

Where? You and cathdoki need to back up your assertions with evidence. I can guess perhaps what you mean, but I am not a mind-reader. God has not granted me the ability to know what others are thinking.

Not a bit. Just your interpretations of them.

Where I have provided interpretation? I have posted the words of the Magisterium, verbatim (well, worthy English translations… if all would understand the original languages, I would use those).

 

[AnneElliot]

Indeed not. However, it seems that Anna has reserved for herself the right to judge the hearts and eternal destiny of those who do not share her theological perspectives.

Where have I condemned a particular soul to Hell? I reserve the right of Judgment to Our Lord. But it is my duty and responsibility to preach that without conversion, such souls are hellbound.

No arguement there. However, our understanding of it has developed over time. The plethora of ecclesial communities created by the heresies of the Reformation created spiritual offspring that are incompletely joined with the Church.

Our understanding does not change the essential meaning (i.e., that there is no salvation outside the Church).
“The faith which God has revealed has not been proposed like a theory of philosophy, to be elaborated upon by human understanding, but as a divine deposit to be faithfully guarded and infallibly declared. Therefore, that sense of sacred dogmas is to be kept forever which Holy Mother Church has once declared, and it must never be deviated from on the specious pretext of a more profound understanding. Let intelligence, and science, and wisdom increase, but only according to the same dogma, the same sense, the same meaning. If anyone shall have said that there may ever be attributed to the doctrines proposed by the Church a sense which is different from the sense which the Church has once understood and now understands: let him be anathema.” I Vatican Council,* Dei Filius*

Statements AFTER the Reformation:

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum #5 (and #9): “The Church…regarded as rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of doctrine different from her own…The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium…Whosoever is separated from the Church is united to an adultress. He has cut himself off from the promises of the Church, and he who leaves the Church of Christ cannot arrive at the rewards of Christ…He who observes not this unity observes not the law of God, holds not the faith of the Father and the Son, clings not to life and salvation.”

Pope Pius IX, Nostis et Nobiscum #10 “See to it that the faithful have fixed firmly in their minds this dogma of our most holy religion: the absolute necessity of the Catholic faith for attaining salvation.”

Pope St. Pius X, Iucunda Sane #9 “Where is the road which leads us to Jesus Christ? It is the Church. It is our duty to recall to everyone, great and small, the absolute necessity we are under to have recourse to this Church in order to work out our eternal salvation.”

Vatican I, * Papal Oath* “This true Catholic faith, outside which no one can be saved, which I now freely profess and truly hold, I do promise and swear that I will most constantly keep and confess whole and inviolate with the help of God until the last breath of my life, and that I will take great care that it be held, taught, and preached by my inferiors and by those who are placed under my charge.”

There is a difference between being in a state of schism, and being a schismatic, just as there is a difference between unwittingly embracing heresies and being a heretic. You seem to be charging modern day Orthodox with the sins committed by their forebears.

No, and their validly baptized children are Catholics. But when we come of age and have the use of reason, we are obliged to study and seek the Truth. To the degree to which we fail to do this, we are culpable.

It is not part of the faith of Holy Orthodoxy to put people to death who wish to be in unity with the successor of Peter in Rome.

What’s the point of this? Are you denying that St. Josaphat was a martyr? He should not have converted and stayed where he was?

If Holy Orthodoxy were not “close enough for salvation”, what would be the point of affirming that their Holy Orders, Sacraments, and doctrines are valid? Why would Rome allow and encourage the faithful to partake of the sacraments there?

Where does Rome encourage the faithful to partake of Orthodox sacraments?

 

[AnneElliot]

So what?

Jesus is not restricted by the Sacraments.

The Church teaches that there is no remission of sin outside the Church. That’s the point.

No, Jesus is not ‘restricted’ by the Sacraments. They are His. But He has not revealed to us any other means of salvation, nor that He would act outside of what He has revealed through His Church.

 

[OKAstro]

The Church teaches that there is no remission of sin outside the Church. That’s the point.

No, Jesus is not ‘restricted’ by the Sacraments. They are His. But He has not revealed to us any other means of salvation, nor that He would act outside of what He has revealed through His Church.

Hang in there Anne - you and I are singing from the same book (CCC and Popes’ teachings since the founding of the CC). I also have asked for official CC quotes/documents that refute what you (and I to a lesser extent) have been clearly quoting as CC teaching, but all we get is “that’s not what that means…” Perhaps because there is no official CC teaching that contradicts what the CCC and Pope’s have written

God Bless

 

[CoachSTL]

Could you please give me the chapter and verse that says salvation is through His body the church? Believers make up the body, the church. The church organization dosen’t make the body.

J,

At present I cannot. But, I can tell you that Jesus is the Church. You just do not have the full understanding of the meaning behind the word “Church”. Jesus and the Church are one in the same, and they separate, depending upon the context you are using the word.

When Jesus started preaching the gospel, he got people to believe in what He was saying about salvation. Some didn’t as well. But, Jesus also told them that believing in Him was not enough, that is why He Baptized them, Confirmed them, and gave Him His physical (mystical) Body too. Jesus’ followers (believers) believe in all of the things that Jesus passed on to them. Not just the fact that He is God. This is the full meaning of a believer.