Unam Sanctam

[thistle]

Thistle, you have provided no magisterial quotes or citations to support your claim that “the Church actually teaches” the position that you expressed. You also have not replied to my argument that a conscious choice of an objectively grave sin must meet all the conditions of actual mortal sin in order to result in a loss of sanctifying grace and a loss of salvation if the person does not repent.

Do you believe that all atheists, agnostics, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and other non-Christians, as well as all Protestants, will be condemned to Hell IF they know about Christ and the Catholic Faith, AND do not choose to convert? Or would you allow some instances in which a person knows of Christ and Catholicism, does not convert, and yet is saved

Yes to the first part and no to the second part.

 

[Sirach2]

Thistle:

Ron Conte:

Do you believe . . .

Yes to the first part and no to the second part.

I believe goldfish can fly. Does my belief make it true?

 

[JM3]

I believe goldfish can fly. Does my belief make it true?

I believe goldfish cannot fly. Does my belief make it false?

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Ron,

Do you believe that all atheists, agnostics, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and other non-Christians, as well as all Protestants, will be condemned to Hell IF they know about Christ and the Catholic Faith, AND do not choose to convert? Or would you allow some instances in which a person knows of Christ and Catholicism, does not convert, and yet is saved?

I don’t believe that merely knowing ABOUT Christ and the Catholic Faith, and then rejecting it, is sufficient to bring condemnation.

Mere intellectual knowledge is not sufficient to demand belief in the conscience. Thus, when the Church speaks of rejecting the Catholic Faith or falling away from it, she must be referring to a rejection that goes a lot deeper than the mere intellect.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Sirach2]

To JM3…

I believe it depends upon which textbook rules it out with true facts.

Facts always trump personal belief, which is the basis of this discussion. Facts - not personal belief. The Church has issued too many factual teachings that overrule private beliefs. Who is presenting the real truth? Who is misinformed? Who needs to do some more homework? This topic has been all over the forum and the consensus would say that goldfish fly.

 

[Sirach2]

Mere intellectual knowledge is not sufficient to demand belief in the conscience. Thus, when the Church speaks of rejecting the Catholic Faith or falling away from it, she must be referring to a rejection that goes a lot deeper than the mere intellect.

Good point, Marduk!

When we present a person for baptism, the Church always asks,
Q. “What do you ask of the Church?”
A. “Faith.”

 

[JM3]

Facts always trump personal belief,

Faith is belief despite the facts.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__PX.HTM

CCC

155 In faith, the human intellect and will co-operate with divine grace: "Believing is an act of the intellect assenting to the divine truth by command of the will moved by God through grace."27

 

[JM3]

1. Pope John Paul II taught that some persons can outwardly reject the Church, and yet still be saved by their mystical membership in the Church.

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_07121990_redemptoris-missio_en.html

Can you show me, exactly, where it says this? I can’t find it.

 

[Gorgias]

Can you show me, exactly, where it says this? I can’t find it.

1. The universality of salvation means that it is granted not only to those who explicitly believe in Christ and have entered the Church. Since salvation is offered to all, it must be made concretely available to all. But it is clear that today, as in the past, many people do not have an opportunity to come to know or accept the gospel revelation or to enter the Church. The social and cultural conditions in which they live do not permit this, and frequently they have been brought up in other religious traditions. For such people salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation. This grace comes from Christ; it is the result of his Sacrifice and is communicated by the Holy Spirit. It enables each person to attain salvation through his or her free cooperation.

(Emphasis mine.)

 

[JM3]

(Emphasis mine.)

It doesn’t say anything about rejecting the Church and still being saved.

 

[Gorgias]

It doesn’t say anything about rejecting the Church and still being saved.

But it is clear that today, as in the past, many people do not have an opportunity to come to know or accept the gospel revelation or to enter the Church. The social and cultural conditions in which they live do not permit this, and frequently they have been brought up in other religious traditions.

“Many people do not… accept the gospel … or enter the Church.” So, we know we’re talking about non-Catholics or non-Christians.

“The social or cultural conditions… do not permit this… they have been brought up in other religious traditions.” This pretty clearly presumes that they’ve accepted other traditions; in other words, they’ve rejected the Catholic Church implicitly by accepting another tradition.

In other words, the document is identifying that some reject the Church by their acceptance of another tradition, and yet, the document asserts, they may attain to salvation.

 

[JM3]

1. The Magisterium teaches that a grave sin does not cause the loss of the state of grace unless it is committed with full knowledge and full deliberation.

Thistle’s position speaks only of a “conscious” rejection of the Church, not of a rejection committed with full knowledge and full deliberation. A consciously committed grave sin does not necessary include full knowledge and full deliberation.

How about we show what the Church teaches and not your interpretation.

CCC

1857 For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent."131

1858 Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: "Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother."132 The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.

1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart133 do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.

1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. the promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.

1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

 

[JM3]

“Many people do not… accept the gospel … or enter the Church.” So, we know we’re talking about non-Catholics or non-Christians.

“The social or cultural conditions… do not permit this… they have been brought up in other religious traditions.” This pretty clearly presumes that they’ve accepted other traditions; in other words, they’ve rejected the Catholic Church implicitly by accepting another tradition.

In other words, the document is identifying that some reject the Church by their acceptance of another tradition, and yet, the document asserts, they may attain to salvation.

What?!

Talk about reading into something that isn’t there.

“frequently they have been brought up in other religious traditions” does not mean “that some reject the Church by their acceptance of another tradition.”

In the famous words of Monday Night Football, “C’mon, man.”

 

[Gorgias]

What?!

Talk about reading into something that isn’t there.

“frequently they have been brought up in other religious traditions” does not mean “that some reject the Church by their acceptance of another tradition.”

Two types of people are being discussed here: those who do not know the gospel, and those who have not accepted the gospel. Those who do not know it cannot be considered to have rejected it, so they’re not the subject of our current conversation.

So, let’s look at the case of people who have not accepted the Gospel. How else would you describe the situation of someone who ‘knows’ but does not ‘accept’ the Gospel or the Church, and yet, accepts another tradition… other than saying that they’ve rejected the Church (or Gospel) in favor of their other tradition?

 

[JM3]

Two types of people are being discussed here: those who do not know the gospel, and those who have not accepted the gospel. Those who do not know it cannot be considered to have rejected it, so they’re not the subject of our current conversation.

So, let’s look at the case of people who have not accepted the Gospel. How else would you describe the situation of someone who ‘knows’ but does not ‘accept’ the Gospel or the Church, and yet, accepts another tradition… other than saying that they’ve rejected the Church (or Gospel) in favor of their other tradition?

Salvation in Christ Is Offered to All

1. The universality of salvation means that it is granted not only to those who explicitly believe in Christ and have entered the Church. Since salvation is offered to all, it must be made concretely available to all. But it is clear that today, as in the past, many people do not have an opportunity to come to know or accept the gospel revelation or to enter the Church. The social and cultural conditions in which they live do not permit this, and frequently they have been brought up in other religious traditions. For such people salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation. This grace comes from Christ; it is the result of his Sacrifice and is communicated by the Holy Spirit. It enables each person to attain salvation through his or her free cooperation.

For this reason the Council, after affirming the centrality of the Paschal Mystery, went on to declare that "this applies not only to Christians but to all people of good will in whose hearts grace is secretly at work. Since Christ died for everyone, and since the ultimate calling of each of us comes from God and is therefore a universal one, we are obliged to hold that the Holy Spirit offers everyone the possibility of sharing in this Paschal Mystery in a manner known to God."19

Not to have the opportunity to know or the opportunity to accept does not mean they reject the gospel or the Church.

“The social and cultural conditions in which they live do not permit this, and frequently they have been brought up in other religious traditions” means they have not had the choice to accept or reject.

Dialogue with Our Brothers and Sisters of Other Religions

55…Indeed Christ himself “while expressly insisting on the need for faith and baptism, at the same time confirmed the need for the Church, into which people enter through Baptism as through a door.” 101 Dialogue should be conducted and implemented with the conviction that the Church is the ordinary means of salvation and that she alone possesses the fullness of the means of salvation.102

LG 14 “Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.”

 

[Gorgias]

LG 14 “Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.”

LG 14 deals with Catholics, not non-Catholic Christians (#15) or non-Christians (#16). Our discussion here is clearly dealing with non-Catholics; either you’re consciously attempting to be misleading, or you’re simply mis-reading Lumen gentium. I doubt it’s the former. Either way, your assertion here doesn’t hold.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

The same teaching was infallibly defined by a subsequent Ecumenical Council:

“And since it arises from the necessity of salvation that all the faithful of Christ are to be subject to the Roman Pontiff, just as we are taught by the testimony of the divine Scriptures and of the holy Fathers, and as is declared by the Constitution of Pope Boniface VIII of happy memory, which begins ‘Unam Sanctam,’ for the salvation of the souls of the same faithful, and by the supreme authority of the Roman pontiff and of this holy See, and by the unity and power of the Church, his spouse, the same Constitution, being approved by the sacred Council, we renew and approve.”
(Pope Leo X, Fifth Lateran Council, Session 11, 19 December 1516)

So it is infallible. The subjection of the faithful to the Pope is a necessary part of the plan of salvation, just as all seven Sacraments are a necessary part of that plan. However, this does not imply that non-Catholics cannot be saved. They can be saved by being members of the Church non-formally, in other words by a mystical membership in the Church, even if they outwardly reject Her.

Fourth Lateran Council: “There is indeed one universal church of the faithful, outside of which nobody at all is saved, in which Jesus Christ is both priest and sacrifice.”

Pope John Paul II: “Since Christ brings about salvation through his Mystical Body, which is the Church, the way of salvation is connected essentially with the Church. The axiom ‘extra ecclesiam nulla salus’ – ‘outside the Church there is no salvation’ – stated by St. Cyprian (Epist. 73, 21; PL 1123 AB), belongs to the Christian tradition. It was included in the Fourth Lateran Council (DS 802), in the Bull ‘Unam Sanctam’ of Boniface VIII (DS 870) and the Council of Florence (Decretum pro Jacobitis, DS 1351). The axiom means that for those who are not ignorant of the fact that the Church has been established as necessary by God through Jesus Christ, there is an obligation to enter the Church and remain in her in order to attain salvation (cf. LG 14). For those, however, who have not received the Gospel proclamation, as I wrote in the Encyclical ‘Redemptoris Missio,’ salvation is accessible in mysterious ways, inasmuch as divine grace is granted to them by virtue of Christ’s redeeming sacrifice, without external membership in the Church, but nonetheless always in relation to her (cf. Redemptoris Missio, n. 10). It is a mysterious relationship. It is mysterious for those who receive the grace, because they do not know the Church and sometimes even outwardly reject her. It is also mysterious in itself, because it is linked to the saving mystery of grace, which includes an essential reference to the Church the Savior founded. In order to take effect, saving grace requires acceptance, cooperation, a ‘yes’ to the divine gift. This acceptance is, at least implicitly, oriented to Christ and the Church. Thus it can also be said that ‘sine ecclesia nulla salus’ – ‘without the Church there is no salvation.’ Belonging to the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, however implicitly and indeed mysteriously, is an essential condition for salvation.” (All Salvation Comes through Christ, General Audience, 31 May 1995.)

RC This suggests it all ends up being almost an apriori tautology with little practical meaning/help.

I mean do we not end up saying “every human creature must be subject to the Roman Pontiff if such persons accept the truth of the Catholic Church.”

 

[JM3]

LG 14 deals with Catholics, not non-Catholic Christians (#15) or non-Christians (#16). Our discussion here is clearly dealing with non-Catholics; either you’re consciously attempting to be misleading, or you’re simply mis-reading Lumen gentium. I doubt it’s the former. Either way, your assertion here doesn’t hold.

If it only deals with Catholics, then why would it say “would refuse to enter”, since a Catholic has already entered? Perhaps, you don’t realize what is being said here.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

To JM3…

I believe it depends upon which textbook rules it out with true facts.

Facts always trump personal belief, which is the basis of this discussion. Facts - not personal belief. The Church has issued too many factual teachings that overrule private beliefs…

Sirach, most of the Church’s teachings aren’t “factual” in the usual meaning of that word.
Facts generally refer to the certainty that derives from knowledge through demonstration (Aquinas). The certainty we have in our Church’s teachings derives from faith - as does the certainty that comes from personal belief.

Perhaps what you are trying to say is that official teaching trumps private beliefs because error is highly likely in private beliefs? Or maybe I have no idea what you are saying here .

BTW If **I know **goldfish don’t fly (because I have demonstrated this with many many experiments) does that make me a liar?

 

[Blue_Horizon]

So, let’s look at the case of people who have not accepted the Gospel. How else would you describe the situation of someone who ‘knows’ but does not ‘accept’ the Gospel or the Church, and yet, accepts another tradition… other than saying that they’ve rejected the Church (or Gospel) in favor of their other tradition?

Gorgias I believe you are exploiting an ambiguity in what “has not accepted the Gospel” may mean.

Just because someone is aware of the Gospel or Catholicism and is unmoved…that does not of itself necessarily mean rejection. Neither is the difference between merely hearing and actually listening simply a matter of good-will. Ignorance has many causes and degrees and is not always due to malice.

Choice is surely on a continuum between “human acts” and the “acts of a man”. For many “hearing the Gospel”, in the cultural context within which they live, probably amounts to more of “an act of a man” rather than a “human act.”