Salvation for non-Catholics

[Jared_Silvey]

I’m trying to collect statements from pre-Vatican II popes and saints that say it is possible for a non-Catholic who is ignorant of the truth of Catholicism to be saved. I would appreciate any quotes relating to this subject.

 

[setitstraight]

Oops, I mis-read your post - you want pre / I had post, so I deleted it. Sorry, can’t help.

 

[setitstraight]

Duplicate

 

[noma]

“There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace.” - Bl. Pope Pius IX

“If, then, we found a Protestant who never committed a mortal sin after Baptism, and who never had the slightest doubt about the truth of his religion, that person would be saved; because, being baptized, he is a member of the Church, and being free from mortal sin he is a friend of God and could not in justice be condemned to Hell.” - Baltimore Catechism

“If he is outside the Church through no fault of his, that is, if he is in good faith, and if he has received Baptism, or at least has the implicit desire of Baptism; and if, moreover, he sincerely seeks the truth and does God’s will as best he can, such a man is indeed separated from the body of the Church, but is united to the soul of the Church and consequently is on the way of salvation.” - Catechism of Pope Saint Pius X

I will continue to hunt for more.

 

[noma]

I will also argue for:

“And such a man can obtain salvation without being actually baptized, on account of his desire for Baptism, which desire is the outcome of faith that worketh by charity, whereby God, Whose power is not tied to the visible sacraments, sanctifies man inwardly” - St. Thomas Aquinas, Q. 68, Art.2

The latin used for desire is “desidero”, which can be taken as a longing for something, or grief over the absence of something. One of the senses does not imply knowledge of the thing someone feels absent. This to me suggests a “non-Catholic” salvation.

Whereby the person is Catholic (baptized by desire), but doesn’t know about the Catholic Church.

 

[The_Catholic]

I just wanted to say that I strongly believe that if a Baptized person, actual or by desire, commits a mortal sin after his/her baptism, and is not Catholic but lutheren, unitarian, Jehovah’s Witnesses, even an ignorant athiest, and realizes that theft, adultry, or murder, whatever he/she has done is wrong and they feel heartbroken about it and apologize to the ones they hurt, and to God if they are religious, and continue to live a moral life similar to what Christ taught on the sermon on the mount, and do not know God or His true Church because of ignorance, then they will still be saved, as they are part of the Church unknowingly.

 

[ricko]

I’m trying to collect statements from pre-Vatican II popes and saints that say it is possible for a non-Catholic who is ignorant of the truth of Catholicism to be saved. I would appreciate any quotes relating to this subject.

In research I’ve done on this subject in the past I never found any difference in pre-Vatican II or post-Vatican. The teaching remains the same.

 

[palmas85]

I just wanted to say that I strongly believe that if a Baptized person, actual or by desire, commits a mortal sin after his/her baptism, and is not Catholic but lutheren, unitarian, Jehovah’s Witnesses, even an ignorant athiest, and realizes that theft, adultry, or murder, whatever he/she has done is wrong and they feel heartbroken about it and apologize to the ones they hurt, and to God if they are religious, and continue to live a moral life similar to what Christ taught on the sermon on the mount, and do not know God or His true Church because of ignorance, then they will still be saved, as they are part of the Church unknowingly.

I don’t, and I don’t think the Church does either. Baptism by desire is a very nebulous term. How could you possibly define it? Apart from that Christ himself said that no man comes to the Father except through me. I think that if a person, through absolutely no fault of his own, has never heard the word of God through Christ and he lives correctly, a moral life and worships in a faithful way then he can be saved. Others, I don’t think so. Especially those who by their faith accept the life of Jesus and then deny his divinity. If they expressly deny Christs divinity, then I don’t think they can be saved at all.

Sorry, but I just don’t see how they could be. Express rejection is exactly that express rejection. There is no escape valve, at least not that I can see.

 

[Liberian]

Noma,

Thank you very much for the quotes. I was just on a Reformed Theology discussion board where somebody claimed that the Catholic Church had changed her teaching on salvation of non-Catholics. Your quotes were just what I needed.

• Liberian

 

[SPH1]

I’m trying to collect statements from pre-Vatican II popes and saints that say it is possible for a non-Catholic who is ignorant of the truth of Catholicism to be saved. I would appreciate any quotes relating to this subject.

Here is something from the Council of Trent which might be helpful:

history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct07.html

CANON IV.-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not ineed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.

CANON IV.-If any one saith, that the baptism which is even given by heretics in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, with the intention of doing what the Church doth, is not true baptism; let him be anathema.

 

[Veritas41]

the following article at CA has quotes from the Early Church Fathers on the subject:

catholic.com/library/Salvation_Outside_the_Church.asp

 

[The_Catholic]

I don’t, and I don’t think the Church does either. Baptism by desire is a very nebulous term. How could you possibly define it? Apart from that Christ himself said that no man comes to the Father except through me. I think that if a person, through absolutely no fault of his own, has never heard the word of God through Christ and he lives correctly, a moral life and worships in a faithful way then he can be saved. Others, I don’t think so. Especially those who by their faith accept the life of Jesus and then deny his divinity. If they expressly deny Christs divinity, then I don’t think they can be saved at all.

Sorry, but I just don’t see how they could be. Express rejection is exactly that express rejection. There is no escape valve, at least not that I can see.

Ok, so it’s totaly IMPOSSIBLE for them to stand before Christ and say “I was wrong in my beliefs about your Divinity, my God, forgive me. I honestly believed what I believed by what I saw in Holy Scripture, forgive me.” And God is to say, “See you, away with you into dammnation.”

Excuse me but that is PATHETIC! It’s individuals like you, and fanatic Catholics, “fanatic” I said, of the past that give Christianity a bad name. Men who have murdered for what they have believed.

I guess people of Islam, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Unitarians, etc, who live good and humble lives , AND produce fruits of the Holy Spirit, are all dammed because of ignorance. And that a Catholic who has the correct knowledge but lives a dirty life, but oh, he/she at least goes to confession every Saturday, but come monday he/she is back to drinking again, going to the strip club with friends, etc, until Saturday. But the non-Catholic who is actualy LIVING a fruitful life, well it’s just too bad for them. They had the correct way of living, but opps, they had the incorrect knowledge. Away with them into hellfire.

Forgive me for getting too emotional, but I can’t stomach thoughts like yours. They’re evil!

 

[squeekster]

Ok, so it’s totaly IMPOSSIBLE for them to stand before Christ and say “I was wrong in my beliefs about your Divinity, my God, forgive me. I honestly believed what I believed by what I saw in Holy Scripture, forgive me.” And God is to say, “See you, away with you into dammnation.”

Excuse me but that is PATHETIC! It’s individuals like you, and fanatic Catholics, “fanatic” I said, of the past that give Christianity a bad name. Men who have murdered for what they have believed.

I guess people of Islam, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Unitarians, etc, who live good and humble lives , AND produce fruits of the Holy Spirit, are all dammed because of ignorance. And that a Catholic who has the correct knowledge but lives a dirty life, but oh, he/she at least goes to confession every Saturday, but come monday he/she is back to drinking again, going to the strip club with friends, etc, until Saturday. But the non-Catholic who is actualy LIVING a fruitful life, well it’s just too bad for them. They had the correct way of living, but opps, they had the incorrect knowledge. Away with them into hellfire.

Forgive me for getting too emotional, but I can’t stomach thoughts like yours. They’re evil!

Why is it “pathetic”?
Did Jesus say or did He not say, and I quote

“I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”

Where is the escape clause that says God will just kind of look the other way if some person happens to have lived a good life, but did it without Jesus?

In fact, according to God’s Word in Romans 3:10, "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one."

Does God contradict Himself elsewhere? If so, where?

 

[slowbutfaithful]

If Christ’s forgiveness of Dysmas on the cross taught us anything, it’s that the salvation hinges on acknowledging Jesus as Messiah. Lacking that, rest is fruitless.

 

[Melchior]

Ok, so it’s totaly IMPOSSIBLE for them to stand before Christ and say “I was wrong in my beliefs about your Divinity, my God, forgive me. I honestly believed what I believed by what I saw in Holy Scripture, forgive me.” And God is to say, “See you, away with you into dammnation.”

Excuse me but that is PATHETIC! It’s individuals like you, and fanatic Catholics, “fanatic” I said, of the past that give Christianity a bad name. Men who have murdered for what they have believed.

I guess people of Islam, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Unitarians, etc, who live good and humble lives , AND produce fruits of the Holy Spirit, are all dammed because of ignorance. And that a Catholic who has the correct knowledge but lives a dirty life, but oh, he/she at least goes to confession every Saturday, but come monday he/she is back to drinking again, going to the strip club with friends, etc, until Saturday. But the non-Catholic who is actualy LIVING a fruitful life, well it’s just too bad for them. They had the correct way of living, but opps, they had the incorrect knowledge. Away with them into hellfire.

Forgive me for getting too emotional, but I can’t stomach thoughts like yours. They’re evil!

I guess what Jesus said about it matters little because it offends your sensibilites. Rejection of Christ is damnable. Every Christian who has ever believed the Creed has always believed that. Jesus said He who does not believe is condemned already. You cannot deny Christ and be saved. Good intentions don’t save people, otherwise Jesus died for nothing. What you believe is not Christian, it is Universalism. But you are calling the expilicit teachings of Christ himself pathetic. That is not a safe position to be in. It is certainly not Christian. Millions of Martyrs did not die spreading the Gospel thinking people could be saved apart from faith in Christ. Think of who you are mocking.

 

[Melchior]

It seems to be people want to make Baptism of desire something it is not. What it is, as far as my limited knowledge goes, is that those who have believed in Christ but are unable to be baptized before death have a baptism of desire. That is they desired to be baptized. Usually, the most obvious answer is the correct one.

 

[mikew262]

I just wanted to say that I strongly believe that if a Baptized person, actual or by desire, commits a mortal sin after his/her baptism, and is not Catholic but lutheren, unitarian, Jehovah’s Witnesses, even an ignorant athiest, and realizes that theft, adultry, or murder, whatever he/she has done is wrong and they feel heartbroken about it and apologize to the ones they hurt, and to God if they are religious, and continue to live a moral life similar to what Christ taught on the sermon on the mount, and do not know God or His true Church because of ignorance, then they will still be saved, as they are part of the Church unknowingly.

I pretty much agree with you except for the atheist part. I think they could be lost if they don’t turn to God. Be warned, however, your opinion is not shared by the majority of folks who post here and you’ll get plenty of rebuttals.

 

[ldv]

Here is the best answer I found for that question. I searched on web a while back. I will share it with you(it will take three posts).

Post #1

Question 103- Galileo according to the American Bible Association

Official Ex Cathedra Catholic Church teaching says the following:

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 almsgiving, 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, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.
There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one at all can be saved.
Pope Innocent III, 4th Lateran Council, 1215.

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, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.

If anyone shall say that real and natural water is not necessary for baptism, and on that account those words of our Lord Jesus Christ:‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit’ (John 3:5) are distorted into some sort of metaphor: let him be anathema.
Canon 2, Council of Trent.

Are these valid citations? If so, how are they consistent with Dominus Iesus and Baptism by blood and desire ?

I do note that all the references are pre-reformation, so they don’t refer to non-Catholic Christians.

Robert

 

[ldv]

Post # 2:

R. Sungenis: Robert, they are valid quotes, and are always used when debates of this nature arise. According to Catholic dogmatic protocol, they are still valid and applicable to today. In other words, we can still say “there is no salvation outside the Church.” That teaching will never change, because it is defined dogma.

But according to an encyclical by Pius IX, this teaching applies in the main to those who have heard of the Catholic Church. If they have heard of it, and are cognizant of its authority and decrees, then they are bound to enter it for salvation.

This was especially true during the days in which Unam Sanctum and Cantate Domino were written, since there was an uprising of the Jacobites and some Jews who were declaring that they did not need the Catholic Church to be saved. This was at a time in the mid-middle ages when Jews were becoming more prominent in society and were employing a lot of Catholics. They more or less got too big for their britches, so to speak. They began touting the Talmud, the Kabbala and other such Judaistic theological stances. But Eugene IV and Boniface VIII clamped down hard on them, and proclaimed that neither Jews nor heretics nor anyone else could be saved unless they embraced the Catholic Church.

Moreover, this was in a time when everyone knew the Catholic Church, and knew what She was proclaiming. The New World had not been discovered, and almost all issues of this nature were confined to Europe where everyone knew everyone else’s business, so to speak.

But as the world expanded, four centuries later Pius IX saw a world that now contained people that we knew had never heard of the Catholic Church. And if we can’t get down to Antartica to preach the Gospel, the question arose as to what becomes of these remote peoples. Pius IX’s answer was (I will underline the important sections):

“And here, beloved Sons and Venerable Brothers, We should mention again and censure a very grave error in which some Catholics are unhappily engaged, who believe that men living in error, and separated from the true faith and from Catholic unity, can attain eternal life. Indeed, this is certainly quite contrary to Catholic teaching.”
RS: So here we see that Pius IX affirms the dogma of Eugene IV and Boniface VIII. But he then adds something that neither Eugene IV nor Boniface VIII addressed, which was the issue of someone who has not heard of the Catholic Church:

“It is known to Us and to you that they who labor in invicible ignorance of our most holy religion, and who, zealously keeping the natural law and its precepts engraved in the hearts of all by God, and being ready to obey God, live an honest and upright life, can, since God who clearly beholds, searches, and knows the minds, souls, thoughts, and habits of all men, because of His great goodness and mercy, will be no means suffer anyone to be punished with eternal torment who has not the guilt of deliberate sin.”
RS: Pius IX then explains to what, precisely, the decrees of Eugene IV and Boniface VIII, applied, which is the same application I stated above:

“But, the Catholic dogma that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church is well-known; and also that those who are obstinate toward the authority and definitions of the same Church, and who perisistently separate themselves from the unity of the Church, and from the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, to whom ‘the guardianship of the vine has been entrusted by the Savior,’ cannot obtain eternal salvation.”
(Denzinger 1677)
Pius IX also said the following:

"For, it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood; but, on the other hand, it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, are not stained by any guilt in this matter in the eyes of God.
RS: Thus he is affirming the teaching of invincible ignorance. In the next section he tells us that we, as fallible and finite beings, cannot set the limits on who fulfills the category of invincible ignorance. This is God’s realm exclusively:

“Now, in truth, who would arrogate so much to himself as to mark the limits of such an ignorance, because of the nature and variety of peoples, regions, innate dispositions, and of so many other things? For, in truth, when released from these corporeal chains “we shall see God as He is” [1 John 3:2], we shall understand perfectly by how close and beautiful a bond divine mercy and justice are united; but, as long as we are on earth, weighed down by this mortal mass which blunts the soul, let us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, there is “one God, one faith, one baptism” [Eph. 4:5]; it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry.”
(Denzinger 1647).

 

[ldv]

Post # 3:

RS: In other words, beyond those who we see obstinately refuse to enter the Catholic Church, it is not for us to set the limits of God’s salvation. That is God’s domain, not ours. He is the judge, not us, and there is no “further inquiry,” that is, don’t even bother asking the question.

All of this, of course, concurs with the tenor and teaching of Dominus Jesus.

God be with you.
R. Sungenis

Seek The Truth!