No Salvation Outside The Church?

[The_Reginator]

First there is no proof that" tradition" is really from God. It contradicts and changes the intent of the revealed word there by making another gospel. You blindly accept the word of men over the written word of God. That’s dangerous.

Faith is based on the revealed word. **Interpretation comes from what the bible teaches **not mans will.

Jesus did not leave any book behind when He ascended into heaven. He DID leave behind one thing though: HIS CHURCH.

“The written word of God” is what His Church recorded from the oral Traditions of the apostles. The bible is a Catholic book. It cannot interpret itself.
The Holy Spirit is the only guide. The Holy Spirit works through God’s Church.
The only reason we have ‘denominations’ nowadays is because mere mortals took it upon themselves to interpret the bible, under the impression that the Holy Spirit was guiding them rather than guiding the Church that God gave us.

 

[rovimax]

Jesus did not leave any book behind when He ascended into heaven. He DID leave behind one thing though: HIS CHURCH.

“The written word of God” is what His Church recorded from the oral Traditions of the apostles. The bible is a Catholic book. It cannot interpret itself.
The Holy Spirit is the only guide. The Holy Spirit works through God’s Church.
The only reason we have ‘denominations’ nowadays is because mere mortals took it upon themselves to interpret the bible, under the impression that the Holy Spirit was guiding them rather than guiding the Church that God gave us.

It can’t be clearer than this…

 

[Scoobyshme]

First there is no proof that" tradition" is really from God. It contradicts and changes the intent of the revealed word there by making another gospel. You blindly accept the word of men over the written word of God. That’s dangerous.

Faith is based on the revealed word. Interpretation comes from what the bible teaches not mans will.

So, you don’t believe the Bible? Or is it St. Paul’s epistles you don’t believe?

2 Thes 2:15: So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether BY WORD OF MOUTH (i.e., ORALLY, NOT WRITTEN) or by letter from us.

2 Thes 2:15 places oral tradition (teachings) on an equal footing with written tradition.

The Bible SAYS it doesn’t hold ALL that Jesus taught. See John 21:25. Yet, the Bible SAYS that Jesus commanded the Apostles to teach ALL that He taught. The part that’s not written down is in ORAL tradition, i.e., ORAL teaching.

No book is self-interpretive. Human beings, when left to their own devices, filter any book through their own life experiences, prejudices, biases, understanding, etc. This is self-interpretation. That’s why there are literally thousands of disagreeing Protestant denominations, all relying on personal interpretation of Scripture. If you had a 2nd grade class of 100 students and gave them a one problem math test: 2 + 2 = and received 100 DIFFERENT answers, logically speaking, how many at most could be correct? 1. What’s the least number that could be correct. 0.

Plus, there is no guarantee that your English translation of the Bible is correct. In fact, there are many errors because there are just some words in the ancient Greek and Hebrew that don’t interpret well.

So, you’re left with two choices. 1) Self-interpret and leave yourself open to the constant errors of Protestantism. or 2) Rely on the Church founded by Jesus Christ which WROTE the New Testament and has preserved the ORAL teaching for 2000 years, thus ensuring the fullness of ALL of Christ’s teaching. This same Church, by the way, is the Church St. Paul referred to in 1 Tim 3:15 as the “pillar and foundation of truth.”

 

[jericho777]

Do you have any proof of this charge?

The Bible is a sacred book, but it cannot teach.

Tradition cannot be verified outside of what you say. The bible on the other hand is the word of God and has proven itself time after time.

The bible certainly reveals God’s will and purpose for our lives. The Holy Spirit inspired scriptures to teach us.

 

[davidv]

Tradition cannot be verified outside of what you say. The bible on the other hand is the word of God and has proven itself time after time.

The bible certainly reveals God’s will and purpose for our lives. The Holy Spirit inspired scriptures to teach us.

Tradition and Scripture are both validated in the same way. It is by the testimony of the Apostles and their succesors. For without Tradition, there would be no Bible. Without Tradition you would have no assurance of the Inspiration of the Bible. Jesus commissioned the Church, not a book, to teach us.

 

[jericho777]

Jesus did not leave any book behind when He ascended into heaven. He DID leave behind one thing though: HIS CHURCH.

“The written word of God” is what His Church recorded from the oral Traditions of the apostles. The bible is a Catholic book. It cannot interpret itself.
The Holy Spirit is the only guide. The Holy Spirit works through God’s Church.
The only reason we have ‘denominations’ nowadays is because mere mortals took it upon themselves to interpret the bible, under the impression that the Holy Spirit was guiding them rather than guiding the Church that God gave us.

He left the OT which is able to make us wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 2Tim 3:15

The Holy Spirit inspired men of God to write God’s will for His people. When you read any written material you are able to know what the author is saying.

Why were there three major sects of Jews in the OT. They had serious disagreements with each other but they were still in fellowship with each other. You all have many different kinds of catholics, just read peoples tag lines and you will see they believe very different things. Why aren’t you all the very same?

 

[jericho777]

So, you don’t believe the Bible? Or is it St. Paul’s epistles you don’t believe?

2 Thes 2:15: So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether BY WORD OF MOUTH (i.e., ORALLY, NOT WRITTEN) or by letter from us.

2 Thes 2:15 places oral tradition (teachings) on an equal footing with written tradition.

The Bible SAYS it doesn’t hold ALL that Jesus taught. See John 21:25. Yet, the Bible SAYS that Jesus commanded the Apostles to teach ALL that He taught. The part that’s not written down is in ORAL tradition, i.e., ORAL teaching.

No book is self-interpretive. Human beings, when left to their own devices, filter any book through their own life experiences, prejudices, biases, understanding, etc. This is self-interpretation. That’s why there are literally thousands of disagreeing Protestant denominations, all relying on personal interpretation of Scripture. If you had a 2nd grade class of 100 students and gave them a one problem math test: 2 + 2 = and received 100 DIFFERENT answers, logically speaking, how many at most could be correct? 1. What’s the least number that could be correct. 0.

Plus, there is no guarantee that your English translation of the Bible is correct. In fact, there are many errors because there are just some words in the ancient Greek and Hebrew that don’t interpret well.

So, you’re left with two choices. 1) Self-interpret and leave yourself open to the constant errors of Protestantism. or 2) Rely on the Church founded by Jesus Christ which WROTE the New Testament and has preserved the ORAL teaching for 2000 years, thus ensuring the fullness of ALL of Christ’s teaching. This same Church, by the way, is the Church St. Paul referred to in 1 Tim 3:15 as the “pillar and foundation of truth.”

You assume that the oral tradition was not written down into scripture. That’s why you keep coming up with new dogmas or traditions. We are told to hold fast to the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. Our faith was completely delivered to us. There is nothing new to add.

When you use something other than scripture to interpret scripture you corrupt its true meaning.

 

[jericho777]

Tradition and Scripture are both validated in the same way. It is by the testimony of the Apostles and their succesors. For without Tradition, there would be no Bible. Without Tradition you would have no assurance of the Inspiration of the Bible. Jesus commissioned the Church, not a book, to teach us.

God dosen’t need the traditions of men to validate His word.

 

[davidv]

God dosen’t need the traditions of men to validate His word.

True, God doesn’t “need” anything. However, He chose to use the Church (made up of humans) to accomplish His mission of drawing all to Himself.

While in the upper room speaking to the Apostle Jesus declares:
John 16:13:

When theSpirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.

It was this very Spirit that guided the Church in defining the canon of Scripture.

 

[f_Paul_Francis]

M

The multitude of contradictory responses here are clear evidence of the confusion that surrounds this doctrine and of the pedestrian misunderstandings that often accompany it.

In the order of justice, heaven (salvation) is a supernatural reward for supernatural acts. One cannot perform such acts (our Lord referred to them as “fruits that can endure”) unless united to Him, in His Mystical Body. That there are necessary means of salvation is a very timely topic, one that needs careful and serious attention - attention, I might add, that has been dangerously lacking for many years. At the top of the list of those means one could adduce “the Faith of Peter in union with Peter.”

One writer above has already adroitly noted, it is one thing to acknowledge that there are necessary means of salvation; quite another to say who has failed to obtain them. It is by no means our business to make that judgment. In fact, it honors God’s majesty to pray for any of the dead when we pass a cemetery, recognizing that He alone is Judge of how an individual has responded to His graces.

Our duty is to familiarize ourselves with what we need to get to heaven, not to take them lightly or to speculate about how God would dispense from them.

fpf

 

[inkaneer]

The word church has been bantered about here without definition. Some of you are using it in ways that are quite different than others. So let’s get some basics down first. First Jesus came into the world to forgive sin and did so. Jesus established a church based on the Apostles with authority to forgive sin. That church was given the mission to baptize and teach the gospel. Scriptural references for the above statements are Mt 16:18,19; Mt 18:18; John 20:23; Mt 28:19.

That church, by the process of elimination, is the Catholic Church as it is the only Church that claims authority to forgive sin. However, there are other assemblies of people who share some beliefs in common with the Catholic Church but do not hold all that the chutrch teaches. These people are in the church only so far as their beliefs are Catholic beliefs. So, of the faith they have a share but whether that share is sufficient for their salvation is left to God. Thus salvation resides in the church established by Jesus because since that church will never teach error its teachings and beliefs are true. But a bigger problem for non Catholic assemplies is sin and its remission. John 20:23 is quite clear that the church was given the power to forgive or retain sin. Non Catholic assemblies themselves deny they have the power to forgive sin. The forgiveness of sin therefore is another reason that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.

 

[mo3]

You assume that the oral tradition was not written down into scripture.

You assume that “everything” was written down. Please quote chapter and verse that says “everything” was written?

That’s why you keep coming up with new dogmas or traditions.

Do you mean like the Divinity of Christ at the Council of Nicea?

We are told to hold fast to the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. Our faith was completely delivered to us.

This doesn’t mean it was delivered to “you” perfectly. This doesn’t mean you understand it perfectly.

When you use something other than scripture to interpret scripture you corrupt its true meaning.

Does this mean you can’t use your mind to interpret scripture? What about the Holy Spirit? If you believe you are guided by the Holy Spirit to “interpret” scripture, then why can’t the Holy Spirit guide the Catholic Church when interpreting scripture?

God bless.

 

[f_Paul_Francis]

God dosen’t need the traditions of men to validate His word.

M

It is a grave mistake to understand that which we receive from the apostles (eg, the Word of God, the offices of priesthood, the celebration of the Sacraments) to be merely the “traditions of men.” A bias in this regard indicates a contempt for Christ’s own choice: namely, that from among men there be those who receive and exercise His pastorship.

If you reject the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, by whose authority do you make the decisions touching upon salvation? Certainly not the Bible by itself. As has already been pointed out, you would not be able even to identify the Scriptures, save that the Catholic Church did so first.

 

[jdwood983]

Those who knowingly and deliberately (that is, not out of innocent ignorance) commit the sins of heresy (rejecting divinely revealed doctrine) or schism (separating from the Catholic Church and/or joining a schismatic church), no salvation would be possible until they repented and returned to live in Catholic unity

So anyone who willfully commits heresy or chooses to become schismatic and never repent are not allowed into the Kingdom

That said, we should never presume that any particular person is doomed to Hell (cf Matthew 7:1-2). We should pray for the Mercy of God that their souls are not taken to Hell, that they might spend some time in Purgatory before entering the Kingdom.

 

[Acts831]

If it’s possible to be saved without being Catholic, what’s the purpose of this website/forum? Why should someone convert to the Catholic Church and worry about mortal and venial sins, what the Pope teaches, etc., when it’s possible to find salvation without being Catholic?

The Bible tells us to let our yes mean yes and our no mean no… To say that there is no salvation outside the church means that persons who are not catholic (who are thus, outside the church) can be saved by some sort of extraordinary means is a kind of doublespeak that renders the teaching meaningless.

 

[tominator2]

My view has always been, that God’s justice is perfect, which means in practical terms none of us has any chance of meriting heaven. EXCEPT - that God’s mercy is also perfect, and so He applies the fruits of His Son’s death and resurrection to those who choose Him.

We do this visibly by formally joining His Church (John 3:5, Acts 2:41,47) and following God’s teachings in the Church (Matt 28:18-20). In this way, we can objectively share in God’s eternal life. Some will share in that life without visible membership in the Church, but only God knows who those are: The Church gives us moral assurance of our salvation.

T2.

 

[cathdoki]

First there is no proof that" tradition" is really from God. It contradicts and changes the intent of the revealed word there by making another gospel. You blindly accept the word of men over the written word of God. That’s dangerous.

Faith is based on the revealed word. Interpretation comes from what the bible teaches not mans will.

Ah, my friend, you really are not paying attention to the argument. There are many things that Jesus said and did that are not recorded in the bible. They were used as proof of who Jesus is. Now come on, you know that. It says so in the Gospel. These oral teachings that were never written down are considered Sacred Oral Tradition. Nothing in Sacred Oral Tradition contradicts what’s in the Gospel, if you read it carefully.

 

[IMFORGOD]

You know this gets me steamed. I watched my father die in 1995 My Dad was a protestant and as a gift from GOD my niece witnessed my dad ascend to heaven my niece at that time was barely 2 and started to act more mature than what I have read here so far on this message, Yes people from outside the catholic church will enter the kingdom of GOD. JESUS even tells that HE has other sheep that we know nothing about…
How about a reference point I have included from the douay-rheims web page from the book of John 10:[14] I am the good shepherd; and I know mine, and mine know me. [15] As the Father knoweth me, and I know the Father: and I lay down my life for my sheep.

[16] And other sheep I have, that are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd. [17] Therefore doth the Father love me: because I lay down my life, that I may take it again. [18] No man taketh it away from me: but I lay it down of myself, and I have power to lay it down: and I have power to take it up again. This commandment have I received of my Father
:tsktsk:

 

[cathdoki]

You know this gets me steamed. I watched my father die in 1995 My Dad was a protestant and as a gift from GOD my niece witnessed my dad ascend to heaven my niece at that time was barely 2 and started to act more mature than what I have read here so far on this message, Yes people from outside the catholic church will enter the kingdom of GOD. JESUS even tells that HE has other sheep that we know nothing about…
How about a reference point I have included from the douay-rheims web page from the book of John 10:[14] I am the good shepherd; and I know mine, and mine know me. [15] As the Father knoweth me, and I know the Father: and I lay down my life for my sheep.

[16] And other sheep I have, that are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd. [17] Therefore doth the Father love me: because I lay down my life, that I may take it again. [18] No man taketh it away from me: but I lay it down of myself, and I have power to lay it down: and I have power to take it up again. This commandment have I received of my Father
:tsktsk:

I think you’ve got to realize when it is said there is no salvation outside the CC, that all Christians are in some way Catholic. Perhaps not in full communion, but still Catholic. Catholic means universal. All Christians are universally united in Christ.

 

[cathdoki]

If it’s possible to be saved without being Catholic, what’s the purpose of this website/forum? Why should someone convert to the Catholic Church and worry about mortal and venial sins, what the Pope teaches, etc., when it’s possible to find salvation without being Catholic?

The Bible tells us to let our yes mean yes and our no mean no… To say that there is no salvation outside the church means that persons who are not catholic (who are thus, outside the church) can be saved by some sort of extraordinary means is a kind of doublespeak that renders the teaching meaningless.

That my friend is not the understanding of the CC nor what it teaches. Please read the CCC.

If Muslims (paragraph 841) have a place in God’s plan of salvation, then how can other Christians not?