Unam Sanctam?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bob_Schiffer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
. . . continued (on sola fide issue) . . .

Catholics affirm ALL the verses and add the word “alone” to none of them when it is not there.

So it is very uncomfortable for Protestants when Catholics start asking them about verses that discuss the importance and necessity of works and the actual verses that allude to the necessity of good works to get to Heaven (either implicitly or explicitly).

I once had a Protestant friend say: “OK. How many good works do you need to get to Heaven and which ones? Where is the “check list”?”

This is a reflection of the Protestant mindset looking for everything to be written down (a checklist mentality or a sola Scriptura mentality).

I said: “Well Rick, I could ask the same thing. How much faith do you need? Do you need the faith the “size” of a mustard seed or more? You have the same issue Rick only you are blind to it. The fact is Rick, that’s WHY we are judged by God. You do the best you can to allow SUPERNATURAL faith, hope, and charity to be lived out in and through you, and trust God will be Salvific on your judgment day Rick”.

He actually could see it (but did not change his beliefs based upon what he could now see as truth). I backed up these arguments with Bible verses and kept asking him if he affirmed this verse and that verse.

When confronted with the parable of the sheep and goats or other clear teachings on the necessity of works, Protestants often punt and start to attack a straw man saying something like: “Well WE believe we are justified by faith Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:28, and Galatians 2:16”, you Catholics DON’T!”

But we as Catholics DO affirm these verses too.

But the Protestant has to keep telling themselves that Catholics do not believe in these verses while ADDING the word “ALONE” (“SOLA”) to these verses in their minds when the word “ALONE” isn’t there in the texts. Why?

Perhaps because it causes too much cognitive dissonance in them. They cannot bring themselves to saying: Well this is God’s truth, but I am obstinately not going to affirm it anyway!” Or maybe it is just because there are spiritual blocks here causing blindness. Or maybe some other reasons or combination of reasons.

Look Bob, if you want, I can post more verses that talk about the necessity of works. If you already know them, I won’t bother. I can also post Catholic Catechetical teachings that talk about the necessity of faith (to prevent you from the straw man of “Well you Catholics don’t believe you are justified by FAITH. We Protestants affirm Paul. You Catholics don’t!”).

Or if you want a few more verses about any other topic we touched on above, I would be more than happy to do the homework and post them–it’s not too much work actually.

Not much work because we have (actually “had” as right now we are on hold while I am trying to get through a cancer thing and my strength and immunity are not up to par–but hopefully we will be starting back up in the future–if not, that is God’s will too and I rejoice in it either way) – we have a Catholic Bible study group here just loaded with good strong “Evangelical Catholics” where way too many verses and Catechetical and historical statements and Council quotes are probably brought out—way more than we need—to really hammer home these points for our group. So it is almost as easy as cut and paste frequently.

Your call Bob.

I hope this helps.

God bless.

Cathoholic
 
People who have never heard of Christ might be saved. But it is due to Christ acting as their unseen savior, for nobody comes to the Father but through Christ.
 
It is vital to understand JoeT777’s query that doesn’t “without the Church there is no salvation” make “all Christian faiths and Churches equally valid, one and the same?” misunderstands the doctrine and dogma.

The definitions of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), Pope Boniface VIII in 1302 and the Council of Florence (1442) were associated with combating defections from Catholic unity and refuting heresies. The Council of Trent (16th century) solemnly defined the dogma of baptism by desire, recognizing “that actual membership of Christ’s Church is not required to reach one’s eternal destiny.” (Fr John A Hardon, The Catholic Catechism, 1975, p235).

Vatican II which defined in The Dogmatic Constitution On The Church #8 (Vatican II) that “The one mediator, Christ, established and ever sustains here on earth His holy Church…(T)his is the sole Church of Christ which in the Creed we profess to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic.” Fr John Hardon, S.J., describes as “unequivocal” (= clearly defined), “for the first time in conciliar history — the Church is not one of many branches.” [See *The Catholic Catechism
, 1975, Doubleday, p 213]

Vatican II reaffirmed in the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (*Lumen Gentium *#16) that non-Catholics may obtain salvation: “Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do His will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience – those too may achieve eternal salvation.”

“Thus the Church is (in its way) as indispensable as Christ for man’s salvation…as a divinely instituted means, provided a person knows that he must use this means to be saved.” (The Catholic Catechism, Fr John A Hardon, SJ, 1974, p 236). Thus, just as without Christ there is no salvation, so without the Church there is no salvation. [CCC # 846 – # 848].

I see… thank you for citing the specific doctrines.
. . . continued (on sola fide issue) . . .

Catholics affirm ALL the verses and add the word “alone” to none of them when it is not there.

So it is very uncomfortable for Protestants when Catholics start asking them about verses that discuss the importance and necessity of works and the actual verses that allude to the necessity of good works to get to Heaven (either implicitly or explicitly)…
Well, it’s not exactly the case of Protestant influence. Some, if not most, of my ‘good’ friends are Protestants (Born-Again, not sure if it’s the same thing) though. But anyway, thanks so much for sharing this. It will prove useful for defending my faith. 🙂

I do still have one question unanswered though, I asked it in a previous post in this thread:
Also, Pope Boniface was charged for multiple sins, such as immorality, heresy, simony, corruption, etc. I was wondering if this reputation for seeking temporal power would somehow affect the impact of this doctrine.
And another question: how about sola gratia? It seems like it is the only sola that does not conflict with Church teaching. Again, thanks to everyone for their time. God bless.
 
Pope Bl.John Paul II referenced Unam Sanctam along with the two Concilliar definitions of “extra ecclesiam nulla salus” when demonstrating that this dogma belongs to Tradition:
Pope Bl. 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).

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/alpha/data/aud19950531en.html
The definition at the end of the Bull has traditionally been received as such–a universal and definitive judgment by the Pope, and therefore infallible. It is simply a reformulation of the dogma concerning the necessity of belonging to the Church, with a further clarification that the Church it is necessary to belong to is the one subject to the Roman Pontiff (since Christ gave charge of his flock to St. Peter, to be part of Christ’s flock, one must belong to the flock shepherded by the successor of St. Peter).

Other parts of the Bull dealing with the political relationship between the Church and State have generally been considered contingent on the circumstances existing at that time (see for example, Pope Pius XII’s September 7, 1955 Allocution to the 10th International Congress on Historical Sciences, where he said “This medieval conception was conditioned by its era.”).

More here:
newadvent.org/cathen/15126a.htm
 
The Most Unholy "Holy Fathers"
“Boniface VII was NOT a true Pope, but a false antipope. His corruption was so bad that the good CATHOLIC people of Rome deposed and executed him.

“I suspect that there is some confusion here regarding Boniface VIII and Boniface VII. Pope Boniface VIII valiantly sought to restore the role of the papacy in the Christian world. Unfortunately, the civil powers proved too great. He sought to bring peace to England and France by banning taxation of clergy to pay for wars. However, economic forces and French commerce forced him to back off. An exception was made in cases of national emergency and defense. He issued *UNAM SANCTAM *on November 18, 1302, emphasizing the superior status of his spiritual power over that of temporal rulers. King Philip IV rejected his claims. His councilor, the Colonna family, and various other enemies seized the Pope and abused him. Outraged citizens of Rome freed the Pope but shocked that such humiliation might be perpetrated against his person, the poor Pope died on October 12.”
From: Andrew Apologetic Ministries
apologetics.scriptmania.com/2900.htm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top