Salvation outside the church

[jimmy]

I think it is similar to the way the Catechism articulates the necessity of Baptism in CCC 1257:
God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.
*

The only way we know with certainty that we can be saved is by being baptized into the Catholic Church. This is the way that God has revealed to us as the ordinary way in which we can be saved.

However, since God is not bound to operate only in this way, there exists the possibility that others may be saved in some extraordinary way known to God alone.

Since we know that Jesus is the only Way to the Father and the only One who can save, and since we know that the Church is the Body of Christ on earth, we can still say that these non-Catholics who might be saved are truly saved through Christ and the Church, even if it is in a mysterious way known only to God. Christ is the One who paid the price and shed His blood. He can dispense that salvific gift any way He chooses.

Really, I find the Church’s articulation in the Catechism to be brilliant. First, it emphasizes the importance of the the Church as this ordinary way to salvation which gives us certainty. This discourages laxity in our evangelization efforts because the Church is vitally important. Second, it emphasizes God’s mercy and His ability to work outside of the means He has revealed to us. This discourages presumption in assuming we know the fate of any person’s soul. It also gives us hope that even those who have not been baptized may be counted among the elect.

So really, it gives us the best of both worlds. We cannot take a “live and let live” attitude as though the Church makes no difference. But neither can we adopt a smug, superior attitude as though we alone are going to Heaven. This teaching helps us navigate between those two opposite extremes.

Does that make sense?

That sounds like a cop out to me. God sets this rule that you must be a member of the Catholic Church to be saved, and then makes five billion exceptions for those who aren’t members of the Catholic Church. The only ones the rule matters to then are those who are faithful members of the Catholic Church. Everyone else is subject to the exception. That is a really convenient way to get around a doctrine you don’t like.

I can’t say I mind though. I never understood or liked the idea of no salvation outside the Church. I always thought it was rediculous to condemn everyone who wasn’t Catholic.

Although I might agree with the change, I do have a problem with the continuity though. The only way you can say that there is continuity between the past doctrine and the present doctrine is if you deny the law of noncontradiction, which they might want to do (some Catholics like to use paradox and mystery to say the Catholic faith is “both/and”. It covers both extremes. ex. faith/works). The original idea was that physical membership in the Catholic Church was necessary for all, not just those who are already members. Now the plan of salvation includes protestants, the Jews, then muslims, then Hindus, buddhists, agnostics. It is like concentric circles of the truth with Catholics at the middle. It doesn’t really matter whether you are a member of the Catholic Church. What matters is that you follow the truth as you know it, and you will be saved.

 

[Sirach2]

This account would picture Gentiles coming into Israel’s kingdom once it is established on this earth at the Lord’s 2nd advent. Jews will evangelize the Gentiles in this earthly kingdom. And the 12 apostles will sit on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel.

You lost me. Are you saying that the Gentiles are not presently part of God’s kingdom … and won’t be part until Jesus’ second advent?

Ac 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean. (KJV)

Note the big “BUT.” God had to send the vision three times in order to make His will understood. Peter finally recognized it in the “but” portion of this verse. On the surface, it appears we are in agreement that Gentiles were to receive the gospel. Are you saying something else with the “second advent” part of your post?

 

[jimmy]

Church teaching:

• Baptism is necessary for salvation (but does not ensure it as you must die in a state of grace).
• There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.

So how can you be baptised and Catholic/deemed to be Catholic? There are 4 ways:

• Sacramental Baptism as a Catholic
• Baptism of Blood (non-Catholic dying for the Catholic Faith)
• Baptism of Desire - Explicit (e.g. a catechumen going through RCIA)
• Baptism of Desire - Implicit (invincible ignorance which means those who through no fault of their own do not know Christ, His Gospel, or His Church but still live a life according to the teachings of Christ in that ignorance)

You can debate who may or may not be included under invincible ignorance but outside the above 4 there is no salvation.

Not all Catholics go to Heaven but everyone in Heaven is Catholic.

It is an absolute necessity to be baptised into the Catholic Church; except under one of these four conditions of course. This is a self contradiction. You make an imperitive of baptism, and then turn around and say that the effects can be had by anyone.

 

[Jehannette]

It is an absolute necessity to be baptised into the Catholic Church; except under one of these four conditions of course. This is a self contradiction. You make an imperitive of baptism, and then turn around and say that the effects can be had by anyone.

One cannot choose, as an act of one’s own free will, Options 2-4.

 

[QuickCat]

QC, did you note, in my previous post, that none of the Bibilical quotes you proffered had the word “ONLY”?

You added that, yes?

No, I didn’t notice that in your previous?] post. Where is it?
QC

 

[QuickCat]

You lost me. Are you saying that the Gentiles are not presently part of God’s kingdom … and won’t be part until Jesus’ second advent?

Note the big “BUT.” God had to send the vision three times in order to make His will understood. Peter finally recognized it in the “but” portion of this verse. On the surface, it appears we are in agreement that Gentiles were to receive the gospel. Are you saying something else with the “second advent” part of your post?

The “kingdom” that Peter offers in Acts 3:19-21 and the “kingdom” proclaimed as “at hand” in the 4 gospels is that earthly kingdom promised to Israel. At present it is still future after the Body of Christ is raptured off this earth. Gentiles are being saved in this “dispensation of the grace of God” [Eph. 3:2] by the preaching of the gospel of the grace of God that was given to Paul for us. God’s over all “kingdom” has an earthly aspect [Israel] and a heavenly aspect [the Body of Christ]. In this dispensation those that are being saved become a “new creation” in the Lord Jesus Christ [2 Cor. 5:17]. In this Body there is neither Jew nor Gentile, etc., we are one in Christ [Gal. 3:28]. But in the earthly kingdom Israel will be the head and not the tail and the 12 apostles of the circumcision [James, Peter et al] will sit upon 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel [Mt. 19:28]. We should be very careful not to mix these two callings.
QC

 

[Sirach2]

This looks like self-taught mumbo-jumbo, and not Catholicism, QC. I am not following you whatsoever, but I note that your religion says “no.” To discuss it further, you would require a more thorough study of our faith. For now, I’ll pass and let you hold your own truth.

 

[jimmy]

One cannot choose, as an act of one’s own free will, Options 2-4.

So? What’s your point? The contradiction is still there. There is a law that is declared by the Church, and it just occurs that all those who have not yet submitted to the Church may be subject to the exceptions. The law only applies to those who happen to be Catholic.

What is the point of preaching and spreading the faith? Assume that the Church preaches the gospel to a group of people who have never heard it, and they assert the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church for salvation. What if you come to the conclusion that it is irrational? Of course you’re subject to the exception of baptism by implicite desire. You really didn’t understand what the Catholic Church really taught so you can’t be held accountable. But if they do join then they are stuck and subject to the law, unless of course they come to the conclusion that Catholicism is irration. Then of course they might leave the Catholic Church, but they are subject to the law of invincible ignorance.

The law applies only to those who are devout members of the Catholic Church.

 

[Jehannette]

So? What’s your point? The contradiction is still there. There is a law that is declared by the Church, and it just occurs that all those who have not yet submitted to the Church may be subject to the exceptions. The law only applies to those who happen to be Catholic.

What is the point of preaching and spreading the faith? Assume that the Church preaches the gospel to a group of people who have never heard it, and they assert the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church for salvation. What if you come to the conclusion that it is irrational? Of course you’re subject to the exception of baptism by implicite desire. You really didn’t understand what the Catholic Church really taught so you can’t be held accountable. But if they do join then they are stuck and subject to the law, unless of course they come to the conclusion that Catholicism is irration. Then of course they might leave the Catholic Church, but they are subject to the law of invincible ignorance.

The law applies only to those who are devout members of the Catholic Church.

The law applies to everyone:

1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are “reborn of water and the Spirit.” God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

You can read the Catechism here:

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

The Mobile edition at the bottom of the webpage is very nice; works on my cheap (and free) Verizon phone.

 

[PRmerger]

Pr, did you notice that you ignore all the Scriptures I cite? Question: Is the church Israel?
QC

I have no idea what your Scripture verses are supposed to indicate. And I have no idea what “Is the church israel” means.

Israel is a country in the Middle East.
Israel is also a nation of people in the OT to whom God revealed himself.
Israel is also a person in the OT also named Jacob.

So what do you mean by “is the church israel”?

 

[PRmerger]

Peter was sent to Cornelius, a devout man who worshipped Israel’s God. Peter, after being given all the “Great Commissions” noted that it was “unlawful” for him to come to the Gentiles. He asked: “Why did you send for me?” He preached the gospel of the kingdom to Cornelius, the same gospel that our Lord Jesus Christ, John the Baptist and the 12 preached to Israel in the gospels. This account would picture Gentiles coming into Israel’s kingdom once it is established on this earth at the Lord’s 2nd advent. Jews will evangelize the Gentiles in this earthly kingdom. And the 12 apostles will sit on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel.

Ac 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean. (KJV)

Ac 10:29 Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for: I ask therefore for what intent ye have sent for me? (KJV)

Ac 10:35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. (KJV)
Ac 10:36 The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all

Mt 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

QC

Are you saying that you have to be Jewish to be saved?

Are you Jewish?

 

[PRmerger]

That sounds like a cop out to me. God sets this rule that you must be a member of the Catholic Church to be saved, and then makes five billion exceptions for those who aren’t members of the Catholic Church.

You do know that anyone who is baptized using the Trinitarian formula in water is a member of the Catholic Church, yes? So not sure how you get the 5 billion demographic.

 

[PRmerger]

No, I didn’t notice that in your previous?] post. Where is it?
QC

This post:

Incidentally, QC, I did a word search for the word “ONLY” in the above passages, and the only time “ONLY” appeared was in your comment (which I bolded). Is this not adding to Scripture?

Again, “ONLY” appears 0 times in the Biblical passages you quoted.

Referring to this post below:

Hmmm! You mean the Word of God [the Bible] isn’t doctrinal for the Body of Christ???
Come through Christ and the apostles??? Do you not know that our Lord Jesus Christ came ONLY to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel?” He sent the 12 ONLY to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel.” The twelve, through their leaders [James, Peter and John] agreed to confine their ministries to Israel.

Mt 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. (KJV)

Mt 10:5 ¶ These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: (KJV)
Mt 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. (KJV)

Ga 2:8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles (KJV)
for He who did work with Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, did work also in me in regard to the nations, (YLT)
Ga 2:9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. (KJV)

Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, very clearly presents the gospel of the grace of God [Acts 20:24] to a lost and dying world. The dispensation of the grace of God was committed to him for us [Eph. 3:2ff].

Hope this helps.
QC

Not a single verse you quoted has the word “only” there.

You have added to Scripture, QC.

 

[PRmerger]

So? What’s your point? The contradiction is still there. There is a law that is declared by the Church, and it just occurs that all those who have not yet submitted to the Church may be subject to the exceptions. The law only applies to those who happen to be Catholic.

And anyone who is baptized using water and the Trinitarian formula is Catholic, although he may be imperfectly joined.

 

[jimmy]

You do know that anyone who is baptized using the Trinitarian formula in water is a member of the Catholic Church, yes? So not sure how you get the 5 billion demographic.

Well, considering that there are about 7 billion people on the planet and 2 billion Christians it makes sense. But I should include the protestants in the exception so it should be 5.8 billion exceptions.

I am not quite sure what your point is in mentioning that all those who are baptized are Catholics. I realize the teaching, but it is irrelevant. As the quote in the op from Florence mentions, no heretic will recieve salvation, even if he spills his blood for the faith. He must be a formal member of the Church.

This idea that protestants are Catholic because they were baptised is ridiculous. They will condemn Catholics as evil, and the Catholic Church as the whore of babylon, but you are going to call them Catholic. All you are doing is muddying the water so that the words become meaningless and no one understands what the hell you are trying to say. Everyones a Catholic in their heart, even if they condemn the Catholic Church as evil. What does it even mean to be Catholic when we say that protestants are Catholic, and even an agnostic might be Catholic “in their heart” if they follow the truth as they see it?

It’s like a scientific theory that tries to cover everything and ends up not being scientific because by trying to cover everything it rejected every possible way in which it could be tested. This attempt to claim continuity with the no salvation outside the Church, while trying to say that everyone can be saved does the same thing. It tries to cover everything, and in the process it makes it impossible to even have a conversation on the issue, because it makes the former idea meaningless but it is still trying to claim continuity with it. They say no salvation outside the Church is still the teaching of the Catholic Church but then they make 5.8 billion exceptions as I mentioned above. All they are doing is making language meaningless.

 

[PRmerger]

Well, considering that there are about 7 billion people on the planet and 2 billion Christians it makes sense. But I should include the protestants in the exception so it should be 5.8 billion exceptions.

Ok. Fair enough.

I am not quite sure what your point is in mentioning that all those who are baptized are Catholics. I realize the teaching, but it is irrelevant. As the quote in the op from Florence mentions, no heretic will recieve salvation, even if he spills his blood for the faith. He must be a formal member of the Church.

The Council of Florence was when?

When did the Protestant Reformation start?



Just wondering, then, how Protestants could be “heretics” when there weren’t any around when the Council of Florence convened.

 

[Jehannette]

As the quote in the op from Florence mentions, no heretic will recieve salvation, even if he spills his blood for the faith. He must be a formal member of the Church.

The Council of Florence did not say that; rather, the Council says, “unless before death they are joined with Her.” The Council could have used a much stronger word, say, “incorporated,” “embodied,” etc. To “join” is “to come into close association or relationship”:

merriam-webster.com/dictionary/join

The Latin term is likely not any different. Consider what the Council of Florence while at Basel stated:

The holy synod especially condemns and censures, in the book, the assertion which is scandalous, erroneous in the faith and offensive to the ears of the pious faithful, namely: Christ sins daily and has sinned daily from his very beginning, even though he avers that he does not understand this as of Christ our saviour, head of the church, but as referring to his members, which together with Christ the head form the one Christ, as he asserts. Also, the propositions, and ones similar to them, which the synod declares are contained in the articles condemned at the sacred council of Constance, namely the following. Not all the justified faithful are members of Christ, but only the elect, who finally will reign with Christ for ever. The members of Christ, from whom the church is constituted, are taken according to the ineffable foreknowledge of God; and the church is constituted only from those who are called according to his purpose of election. To be a member of Christ, it is not enough to be united with him in the bond of charity, some other union is needed. Also the following

ewtn.com/library/councils/florence.htm

“Salutary repentance” is something that is always “in the cards,” so to speak:

2283 We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives.

Of course, what the Triune God could do for those who take their own lives He can also do for everyone else.

This will be my last post for this thread; thanks everyone for a wonderful discussion!

 

[PRmerger]

This idea that protestants are Catholic because they were baptised is ridiculous. They will condemn Catholics as evil, and the Catholic Church as the whore of babylon, but you are going to call them Catholic.

Well, when you are baptized, jimmy, you are joined, indelibly, to Christ’s Body. Nothing can change that fact. The universe is changed forever.

Now, to the degree that you divorce yourself from the One True Faith is the degree that you are not consonant with the teachings of the Apostles, so you are, indeed, a separated member of Christ’s Body.

All you are doing is muddying the water so that the words become meaningless and no one understands what the hell you are trying to say.

I understand it quite well. As do lots of folks here on the CAFs.

And even if a teaching did make people confused, does that necessitate its removal from the deposit of faith?

I mean, seriously, do you understand the dogma of the Trinity? It’s as simple as EENS and as profound as EENS. Simple *and *profound. How 'bout that? Not a contradiction, but, indeed, a mystery.

Everyones a Catholic in their -]heart/-] soul

Yep. :yup: It happens at baptism. That indelible mark.

 

[Sirach2]

Jimmy, I believe PRmerger is expressing what she knows by faith. Without citing a document to prove her point, people tend to dismiss her truth. It is sad that we always have to be on the offensive with fingers pointed to the exact teaching before anyone will believe the witness.

I’m not aware how extensively you have studied Vatican II documents, but you may be edified to read this paragraph that speaks of what PR was saying.
Lumen Gentium:

1. The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter. (14*) For there are many who honor Sacred Scripture, taking it as a norm of belief and a pattern of life, and who show a sincere zeal. They lovingly believe in God the Father Almighty and in Christ, the Son of God and Saviour. (15*) They are consecrated by baptism, in which they are united with Christ. They also recognize and accept other sacraments within their own Churches or ecclesiastical communities. Many of them rejoice in the episcopate, celebrate the Holy Eucharist and cultivate devotion toward the Virgin Mother of God.(16*) They also share with us in prayer and other spiritual benefits.
   Likewise we can say that in some real way they are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too He gives His gifts and graces whereby He is operative among them with His sanctifying power. Some indeed He has strengthened to the extent of the shedding of their blood. In all of Christ’s disciples the Spirit arouses the desire to be peacefully united, in the manner determined by Christ, as one flock under one shepherd, and He prompts them to pursue this end. (17*) Mother Church never ceases to pray, hope and work that this may come about. She exhorts her children to purification and renewal so that the sign of Christ may shine more brightly over the face of the earth.

There is also another beautiful writing, Mystici Corporis, that explains this relationship of the baptized with us, and they are truly incorporated into Christ’s mystical Body, albeit imperfectly. We pray that one day, along with Our Lord’s priestly prayer, there will be one fold, one Shepherd.

By the way, I have attended many of your liturgies and find a special sacred beauty in your manner of celebration. I knew your Bishop Gregory Mansour personally while he was pastor in my area of Pennsylvania. What a holy man!

 

[jimmy]

Sirach, I read the documents of Vatican II a few years ago. I read the LG a few times so I have an idea of what was said. I understand what PRmerger is saying about protestants and other nonCatholic Christians. The only problem I have with what PRmerger said is that it is naive. It reduces everything to degrees, and that is not how it was before. There is a problem of continuity. It says that protestants are Catholic in so far as they hold to the truth. We could also bring in Nostra Aetate and mention the Jews and muslims and other nonChristians. They are all joined to the Church in so far as they hold to the truth. It makes a joke of the statements about EENS from earlier centuries.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not too fond of EENS and the insistence on condemning everyone outside the Church as going to hell. I am just pointing out a problem of continuity that I have had.