Salvation outside the church

  • Thread starter Thread starter gsaman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
mgrfin said:
You must be on a different thread. No one presented any evidence for or against except me.

Who answered me? Who contradicted me, and with what evidence?

It is like the question of conscience. No one presented any argument, and they are shocked, shocked to learn that you must follow your conscience in all things.

peace
Click to expand...
Who and what evidence—Pope Benedict XVI then Card. --Oh I forgot – seems you already turned a blind eye and deaf ear to what he had to say. I guess the sections in the catechism that dispute your assertion also fell by the wayside.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3364393#post3364393

Quote:
With Irenaeus, the Decalogue is interpreted as a preparation for friendship with God and justice towards our neighbour (n. 2063). If thus on the one hand the Decalogue is seen completely in the context of the covenant and salvation history, as an event of word and response, nevertheless, it is manifested at the same time as a rational ethics, as a reminder of what reason is truly able to perceive. We cite Ireneaus again: “From the beginning, God had implanted in the heart of man the precepts of the natural law. Then he was content to remind him of them. This was the Decalogue (Adv. haeres. 4, 15, 1)” (n. 2070). This is an important trait in the ethics of the Catechism: it was the call to reason and to man’s ability to understand. The moral teaching developed from the Decalogue is rational morality, which certainly lives with the reason, which God has given to us, while with His word, He reminds us of what is deeply inscribed in the soul of everyone…

ADDRESS OF CARDINAL JOSEPH RATZINGER
 
mgrfin said:
You must be on a different thread. No one presented any evidence for or against except me.

Who answered me? Who contradicted me, and with what evidence?
Click to expand...
Do the Baltimore Catechism, Catholic Encyclopedia, Catechism Explained by Frs. Spirago and Clarke, or Catechism of the Catholic Church ring any bells?
No one presented any argument,
Click to expand...
Clearly you’ve been absent from this thread for the last few pages.
and they are shocked, shocked to learn that you must follow your conscience in all things.
Click to expand...
More liked shocked at your complete ignoring of the posts that refuted your false claims. I do believe we have a case of denial syndrome here.
 
Walking_Home said:
Click to expand...
Non-responsive. I’ll send the Holy Father my email address so he can send me his responses directly

peace.

PS I don’t mean to be uncharitable. But none of this has anything to do with the topic. If you have something on the topic, I’d love to hear it.

This clawing attitude is very common here, and gets people nowhere.

We are overlimit, and the thread is about to be closed.

Peace.
 
mgrfin said:
Non-responsive. I’ll send the Holy Father my email address so he can send me his responses directly

peace.

PS I don’t mean to be uncharitable. But none of this has anything to do with the topic. If you have something on the topic, I’d love to hear it.

This clawing attitude is very common here, and gets people nowhere.

We are overlimit, and the thread is about to be closed.

Peace.
Click to expand...
Let’s end it with what the Church has dogmatically defined 3 times: The answer to your question Gsman is;

Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215: “With our hearts we believe and with our lips we confess but one Church, not that of the heretics, but the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside which we believe that no one is saved.”

Pope Boniface VIII, Bull Unam Sanctum, 1302: “With Faith urging us we are forced to believe and to hold the one, holy, Catholic Church and that, apostolic, and we firmly believe and simply confess this (Church) outside which there is no salvation nor remission of sin…”

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Bull Cantate Domino, 1441: “The most Holy Roman Catholic Church firmly believes, professes, and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, 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 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.”

AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!!!
 
mgrfin said:
Non-responsive. I’ll send the Holy Father my email address so he can send me his responses directly

peace.

PS I don’t mean to be uncharitable. But none of this has anything to do with the topic. If you have something on the topic, I’d love to hear it.

This clawing attitude is very common here, and gets people nowhere.

We are overlimit, and the thread is about to be closed.

Peace.
Click to expand...
The Holy Father may have to do much more than sending your response. Like evaluating that “theology degree” and the institution you got it from.
 
louey said:
Let’s end it with what the Church has dogmatically defined 3 times: The answer to your question Gsman is;

Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215: “With our hearts we believe and with our lips we confess but one Church, not that of the heretics, but the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside which we believe that no one is saved.”

Pope Boniface VIII, Bull Unam Sanctum, 1302: “With Faith urging us we are forced to believe and to hold the one, holy, Catholic Church and that, apostolic, and we firmly believe and simply confess this (Church) outside which there is no salvation nor remission of sin…”

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Bull Cantate Domino, 1441: “The most Holy Roman Catholic Church firmly believes, professes, and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, 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 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.”

AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!!!
Click to expand...
Are these infallible statements?

Did each intend to define a doctrine?

Did each do it 'ex cathedra?

Was it a matter of faith and morals?

Did he do it, and did he tell us he was doing it?
Such words as,
"by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that_________________ "

How come you have not used the statement of Pius XII in “Mystici Corporis” and the Letter to the Bishop of Boston relative to Fr. Feeney?

Remember there are only a handful of defined statements (infallible) by the Holy Pontiffs…

I don’t mean to shock you but none of these Pontiffs defined this dogma. I want to hear him say, I define.

peace
 
mgrfin said:
Are these infallible statements?

Did each intend to define a doctrine?

Did each do it 'ex cathedra?

Was it a matter of faith and morals?

Did he do it, and did he tell us he was doing it?
Such words as,
"by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that_________________ "

How come you have not used the statement of Pius XII in “Mystici Corporis” and the Letter to the Bishop of Boston relative to Fr. Feeney?

Remember there are only a handful of defined statements (infallible) by the Holy Pontiffs…

peace
Click to expand...
The answer to the first 4 questions is yes, and I am shocked that you ask such a question, as you should know this. It is dogma; there is no salvation outside the Church. I did not use them for several reasons, but the major reason I chose only to quote the infallible prouncements; as we know they are truth, and can not be contradicted. (the “them” is refering to Mystici Corporis, and the letter regarding Fr. Feeney)
 
louey said:
The answer to the first 4 questions is yes, and I am shocked that you ask such a question, as you should know this. It is dogma; there is no salvation outside the Church. I did not use them for several reasons, but the major reason I chose only to quote the infallible prouncements; as we know they are truth, and can not be contradicted. (the “them” is refering to Mystici Corporis, and the letter regarding Fr. Feeney)
Click to expand...
“Shocked, shocked, I’m absolutely shocked!”

Please. They are not infallible statements.

I’m confused: why didn’t you use Mystici Corporis, and the letter to Boston???

peace
 
mgrfin said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walking_Home View Post
The Holy Father may have to do much more than sending your response. Like evaluating that “theology degree” and the institution you got it from.

A pontifical institution?

peace
Click to expand...
Now a days – the name Catholic attached to a school does not mean they are good. Seems --from your assertion on natural law/the Decalogue --that may be true of a “pontifical” institution.
 
mgrfin said:
“Shocked, shocked, I’m absolutely shocked!”

Please. They are not infallible statements.

I’m confused: why didn’t you use Mystici Corporis, and the letter to Boston???

peace
Click to expand...
They are infallible pronouncements and I can not believe I am arguing about this with someone who claims to know the Catholic faith! They are not infallible, that is why I did not use them. And I did not want to begin a debate about Fr. Feeney. However, I will refer to Pope Pius XII if you insist;" We wish that they, each and every one of them, …may be zealous and eager to tear themselves out of the state in which it is not possible for them to be without fear regarding their eternal salvation. For, even though they may be ordained toward the mystic Body of the Redeemer, by a certain unknowing desire and resolution, they still remain deprived of so many precious gifts and helps from heaven, which one can enjoy only in the Catholic Church. Let them, therefore, come back to Catholic unity, and united with us in the organic oneness of the Body of Jesus Christ may they hasten to the one Head in society of glorious love…We wait for them with open arms to return, not to a stranger’s house, but to their own, their Father’s house.”
(Mystici Corporis Christi)

Mystici Corporis Christi: “5. Moreover, We trust that Our exposition of the doctrine of the Mystical Body of Christ will be acceptable and useful to those also who are without the fold of the Church… if they turn their gaze to the Church, if they contemplate her divinely-given unity—by which all men of every race are united to Christ in the bond of brotherhood—they will be forced to admire this fellowship in charity, and with the guidance and assistance of divine grace will long to share in the same union and charity.”

Mystici Corporis Christi: 22. Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed. “For in one spirit” says the Apostle, “were we all baptized into one Body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free”. As therefore in the true Christian community there is only one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith. And therefore, if a man refuse to hear the Church, let him be considered—so the Lord commands—as a heathen and a publican. It follows that those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit.
Pope Pius XII upholds the dogma, EENS in Mystici Corporis Christi. I will also add to add even more credence to the othodoxy of Pope Pius XII on the dogma EENS.Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, 1950: “14. Some want to reduce to a minimum the meaning of dogmas; and to free dogma itself from terminology long established in the Church… 27. … Some reduce to a meaningless formula the necessity of belonging to the True Church in order to gain eternal salvation… 28. These and like errors, it is clear, have crept in among certain of Our sons who are deceived by imprudent zeal for souls or by false science.”
 
Walking_Home said:
Now a days – the name Catholic attached to a school does not mean they are good. Seems --from your assertion on natural law/the Decalogue --that may be true of a “pontifical” institution.
Click to expand...
Im sorry. You don’t have your facts straight.

I hold all our posters with the deepest charity, and with prayers.

peace
 
mgrfin said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walking_Home View Post
Now a days – the name Catholic attached to a school does not mean they are good. Seems --from your assertion on natural law/the Decalogue --that may be true of a “pontifical” institution.

Im sorry. You don’t have your facts straight.

I hold all our posters with the deepest charity, and with prayers.

peace
Click to expand...
Again—using yourself as your own authority–does not give you credibility.
 
louey said:
QUOTE]

Look, let me make it easy for you. There have been maybe 3 dogmas defined infallibly by the Roman Pontiffs since St. Peter.

Some authors argue there may be as many as 10. I hold to the 3 theory, so stop this quoting of documents other than the Assumption, the Immaculate Conception, and the Infallibility of the Pope.

As for your problem with EENS, let me explain to you the Church’s stance on this: When we say “Outside the Church there is no salvation” we mean that those who through their own grave fault do not know that the Catholic Church is the true Church, or knowing it, refuse to join it, cannot be saved.

It does not mean that everyone who is not a Catholic will be condemned. It does mean that no one can be saved unless he belongs in some manner to the Catholic Church, either actually or in desire, for the means of grace are not given without relation to the divine institution established by Christ.

Maybe, if you would meditate on some of Vat 2’s documents you would come to understand what ‘in some manner to the Catholic Church’ means. But opponents to Vat 2 yell and scream about the documents so much, they don’t think they teach anything, or that they can learn something from them.

The EENS people have been in a dither for the past 40 years. If I were the Holy Father, I would have put them in their place ages ago. They hold fast to a very improbable truth about there being no such thing as baptism of desire. But, I’m not the Pope.

So, mull over that, get all the conditions down pat, and then you are ready to argue it with anybody, including people from St. Benedict Center.

Prayers for our friends and enemies in all charity.

peace
Click to expand...
 
mgrfin said:
louey;3371413:
QUOTE]

Look, let me make it easy for you. There have been maybe 3 dogmas defined infallibly by the Roman Pontiffs since St. Peter.

Some authors argue there may be as many as 10. I hold to the 3 theory, so stop this quoting of documents other than the Assumption, the Immaculate Conception, and the Infallibility of the Pope.

As for your problem with EENS, let me explain to you the Church’s stance on this: When we say “Outside the Church there is no salvation” we mean that those who through their own grave fault do not know that the Catholic Church is the true Church, or knowing it, refuse to join it, cannot be saved.

So, mull over that, get all the conditions down pat, and then you are ready to argue it with anybody, including people from St. Benedict Center.

peace
Click to expand...
Who is the “we” you are referring to? Did you even read what Pope Pius XII said:

Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, 1950: “14. Some want to reduce to a minimum the meaning of dogmas; and to free dogma itself from terminology long established in the Church… 27. … Some reduce to a meaningless formula the necessity of belonging to the True Church in order to gain eternal salvation… 28. These and like errors, it is clear, have crept in among certain of Our sons who are deceived by imprudent zeal for souls or by false science.”

He is speaking to people like you. What do I or should anyone care what “some author’s” say, you don’t even say who these authors are. I care only what the Church has taught, upheld dogmatically. You are not an authority, nor is the “we” and I am not either. The Catholic Church is the authority, and it is a dogma that there is NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
Click to expand...
 
mgrfin said:
Joe was a right wing conservative. That’s fascism to me, especially after listening to him at the Army/McCarthy hearings. Guilt by innuendo…
Click to expand...
mgrfin said:
He was only 48 when he died. Reportedly of alcoholism…
Click to expand...
Ummmm. I’m confused. Did “guilt by innuendo” suddenly get dropped from the fascism criteria, or did you just become a fascist?

DD
 
louey said:
The Catholic Church is the authority, and it is a dogma that there is NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
Click to expand...
But in the practical order of the real world situation,what does this actually mean? Is it not true that if an individual is not an official member of the Catholic Church and enrolled in a specific Catholic parish belonging to a Catholic Church in union with the Holy See, it is still possible for that person to be saved? So for example, a Jew can be saved, a Moslem can be saved, a Hindu can be saved, a Jehovah’s Witness can be saved, a Mormon can be saved, a Buddhist can be saved, a Protestant can be saved. Is it not true that it is possible for all of these people to be saved and not go to hell, whether or not they are officially baptised by water members of the Catholic Church, and whether or not they are officially on the rolls of a Catholic parish in union with the Holy See, in virtue of either invincible ignorance or baptism of desire or such?
 
louey said:
mgrfin;3371432:
Who is the “we” you are referring to? Did you even read what Pope Pius XII said:

Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, 1950: “14. Some want to reduce to a minimum the meaning of dogmas; and to free dogma itself from terminology long established in the Church… 27. … Some reduce to a meaningless formula the necessity of belonging to the True Church in order to gain eternal salvation… 28. These and like errors, it is clear, have crept in among certain of Our sons who are deceived by imprudent zeal for souls or by false science.”

He is speaking to people like you. What do I or should anyone care what “some author’s” say, you don’t even say who these authors are. I care only what the Church has taught, upheld dogmatically. You are not an authority, nor is the “we” and I am not either. The Catholic Church is the authority, and it is a dogma that there is NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
Click to expand...
That’s Feeneyism. That is not the teaching of the Catholic Church. Your quoted opinion is too strick, and too extreme.

Charity towards all who post here, as well as prayers.

peace
Click to expand...
 
DustinsDad said:
Ummmm. I’m confused. Did “guilt by innuendo” suddenly get dropped from the fascism criteria, or did you just become a fascist?

DD
Click to expand...
I think you should get on topic. If you don’t have anything good to say about someone, say nothing.

You are being guilty of an uncharitable post.

Charity, prayers and peace
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top