Unam Sanctum and Protestant Salvation

[OnlyAmbrose]

My understanding of current church teaching is that Protestants can be saved.

Bonafice VIII’s Unam Sanctum seems to disagree though.

newadvent.org/cathen/15126a.htm

Particularly, this sentence: “Now, therefore, we declare, say, determine and pronounce that for every human creature it is necessary for salvation to be subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff”

 

[VociMike]

There have been recent threads on this, so I’ll make my answer short. To “be subject to” the Roman Pontiff is another way of saying “to be a member of the Church”. One can be a disobedient subject, even a defiant subject, and still be a subject. Since salvation comes only through the Church, one must, in some form or fashion, be a member of that Church to be saved. Protestants are members through water baptism. Non Christians may become members by obeying the law of God written onto every human heart, but we cannot know this.

 

[bobzills]

There have been recent threads on this, so I’ll make my answer short. To “be subject to” the Roman Pontiff is another way of saying “to be a member of the Church”. One can be a disobedient subject, even a defiant subject, and still be a subject. Since salvation comes only through the Church, one must, in some form or fashion, be a member of that Church to be saved. Protestants are members through water baptism. Non Christians may become members by obeying the law of God written onto every human heart, but we cannot know this.

Would a Jew, who doesn’t want to have anything to do with Christianity, be subject to the authority of the Roman Pontiff?

 

[VociMike]

Would a Jew, who doesn’t want to have anything to do with Christianity, be subject to the authority of the Roman Pontiff?

The criterion is not whether somebody wants to have something do to with Christianity. The criterion is whether somebody wants to have something to do with God. If a non-Christian, by virtue of seeking to heed the law of God written into his heart, does want to have something to do with God, then we believe that person becomes joined in some unknown way with God’s one and only Church.

 

[Della]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church (for those who don’t have it):

Possible salvation of non-Christians: #s 846-848.

“Outside the Church there is no salvation”
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336
847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:
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.337
848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338

 

[bobzills]

The criterion is not whether somebody wants to have something do to with Christianity. The criterion is whether somebody wants to have something to do with God. If a non-Christian, by virtue of seeking to heed the law of God written into his heart, does want to have something to do with God, then we believe that person becomes joined in some unknown way with God’s one and only Church.

Basically then you are changing the usual meaning of the phrase “subject to the Roman Pontiff” to mean something else, such as equating this phrase with seeking to heed the law of God in your heart.
In other words, it looks like you are saying that it was always and everywhere the case that the correct interpretation of the phrase:
Being subject to the Roman Pontiff
is exactly the same thing as
seeking to heed the law of God in your heart?

 

[VociMike]

Basically then you are changing the usual meaning of the phrase “subject to the Roman Pontiff” to mean something else, such as equating this phrase with seeking to heed the law of God in your heart.
In other words, it looks like you are saying that it was always and everywhere the case that the correct interpretation of the phrase:
Being subject to the Roman Pontiff
is exactly the same thing as
seeking to heed the law of God in your heart?

Why would I seek to change the usual meaning of “subject to the Roman Pontiff”? What reason would I have for doing that?

I have tried to point out that one can be a rightful subject even if one is a defiant or unknowing subject. Do you agree or disagree?

I have tried to point out that in addition to formal, visible membership in the Church, the Church teaches that one may also have membership in her through other means. Do you agree or disagree?

One thing that is very important to note is that the Church does not say “is” in these other circumstances. She says “may”. While she does not rule out membership in the Church through other means, neither does she guarantee it for any person. That is because, outside of visible, formal union with the Church, there is no way to know the Church membership status of a person (even oneself). For example, a properly baptized baby is without question a member of the Church. A particular pagan who seems to our eyes to be seeking the will of God by seeking the good, the true and the beautiful, may also be a member of the Church, but nobody can say for sure.

Thus formal, visible membership in the Church gives one assurance that no other person can have.

 

[bobzills]

Why would I seek to change the usual meaning of “subject to the Roman Pontiff”? What reason would I have for doing that?.

The reason might be to assure those who do not want to be subject to the Roman Pontiff, that they will be saved anyhow as long as they seek to heed the law of God in their hearts.

 

[VociMike]

The reason might be to assure those who do not want to be subject to the Roman Pontiff, that they will be saved anyhow as long as they seek to heed the law of God in their hearts.

But as I said, there can be no such assurance.

 

[DJim]

Well, since the Council of Florence has infallibly taught that one becomes a member of the Church–and thus “subject to the Roman Pontiff”–via Baptism, this should make the meaning of Unam Sanctam abundantly clear.

The Church teaches:

1. Baptism is “necessary for salvation”
2. Baptism makes one a member of the Church.
3. Being a member of the Church means you are subject to the Roman Pontiff.

Thus being subject to the Roman Pontiff is “necessary for salvation.”

Unam Sanctam is merely another way of saying that Baptism is necessary for salvation.

BUT, the Church has always taught that the effects of Baptism are available to those who are impeded from receiving water baptism.

Therefore, Church membership–one of the “effects” of Baptism (according to Florence)–is available to those impeded from receiving water baptism…including Protestants…

Unam Sanctam is a different formula for the same truth we teach about baptism. Trying to make it into something that will damn Protestants is…um…slightly ridiculous?

DJim

 

[Chipper]

My understanding of current church teaching is that Protestants can be saved.

Bonafice VIII’s Unam Sanctum seems to disagree though.

newadvent.org/cathen/15126a.htm

Particularly, this sentence: “Now, therefore, we declare, say, determine and pronounce that for every human creature it is necessary for salvation to be subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff”

Here’s my take on that. I think people tend to confuse the phrase “subject to” with “submit to”. These are not the same thing.

You can be “subject” to authority, without submitting to it. This phrase just re-iterates, that Christ himself put St. Peter in charge. Therefore all salvation is “SUBJECT” to authority of St. Peter.

The protestants aren’t necessarily submitting to the Pope. But, like it or not they are “subject” to the authority of the Pope.

This is obvious, in that Christian writings (Bible) have arised out of the authority of the Church (Hence the Pope). As such, since they rely on the bible, they are relying on the guardian of the deposit of faith, the Catholic church, and it’s visible head the Pope. The very fact that they use the Bible, means they are subject to the authority.

 

[karlk]

Protestants are not members of the Church----Pius XII affirms this in Mystici Corporis —they are baptized yes—but they arent Catholics once they reach the age of reason and believe Protestant teachin(faith alone, sola scriptura, etc)----and no they cant be saved as a Protestant----the norm for all of mankind is to become a formal member of the Catholic church to be saved-----the exception to that is if a non- Catholic is invincibly ignorant of the true faith and has no other mortal sins on his soul and has the virtue of faith (if he knew the truth he would believe it) then he will be saved----------the Protestant and other non catholics are in grave danger and should be told so

 

[Prayer_Warrior]

Millions of Americans detest George Bush and would not consider themselves subject to him. But, in reality, they are subject to him, because he is president of the country. My point is that you can be subject to someone’s authority without submitting to them.

Catholics believe that Christ Himself is the Head of the Catholic Church. The Pope is His steward-- the keeper of the keys (of authority) that were given to Peter. Since we believe that Christ is the Head of the Church, we logically conclude that all salvation will come through the Church. In times past, it appeared that “the Church” was defined only by baptism or conversion into the Catholic faith. However, the Church has clarified its position that the Church is universal and that all peoples who seek God are joined to it to a certain extent (CCC 836). In fact, it really appears to me that the only believers who are truly outside the Church are the ones who know it is the True Church of Christ, but they still abandon her (for whatever reason). I come to this conclusion because of CCC 846 “Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it”