Unum Sanctam

[Alethiaphile]

The teachings of Unam Sanctam were also taught by:
(snip)
and Pope John Paul II:
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).”

Unam Sanctam was not simply a reiteration of “Extra ecclesiam nulla salus”. It used EENS as a premise in the following syllogism:

1. There is no salvation outside of the Church
2. The only true Church is that subject to the Roman Pontiff, i.e. to be in the Church, one must be subject to the Roman Pontiff.
   Therefore, to be saved, one must be subject to the Roman Pontiff
   (and in the immediate context of the Bull, that meant not just subjection in theological matters, but in political matters as well)

That conclusion, despite being an “infallible” proclamation, goes beyond anything said by John Paul II, and is contradicted by several documents of Vatican II.

 

[Rogerteder]

You are reading “into” Unam Sanctam." The words do not say a person must be politically obedient to the Pope. Nor does it say that it means formal membership in the Church. There is no contradiction in Unam Sanctam and JPII or Vatcian II. You may conclude JPII clarified or explained, but he did not contradict it. As Catholics we must interpret Church documents as the Church herself understands them not as we interpret them.

p.s. Let me also add that one may have to be obedient to the Pope, in political matters, if political matters overlapped with moral matters. example: abortion, civil rights, cloning, stem cells.

 

[NHInsider]

In any discussion around Unum Sanctum it is essential to remember that at the time of its promulgation the Protestant Reformation had not yet occurred. The French to whom it was addressed were all Catholics or Jews (and the Church’s record on Jews of that era is not pretty, but that’s another thread).

The point being, that if you were a French Catholic in the 1300s refusing to submit to the authority of the Pope, you were separating yourself from the Church just as surely as the heretics against whom Irenaeus wrote in the second century. The Bull doesn’t speak to the question of non-catholic Christians at all. So to address the questions of salvation of non-catholic Christians, or good pagans, or faithful Jews, or any of the rest, you have to take Unum Sanctum as just one piece of documentation among many, some of which have in fact addressed those issues. To try and force Unum Sanctum to answer those questions is to do violence to the text, and no more valid than to take one verse out of the Old Testament and use it to “prove” that Christians approve of slavery or genocide.

 

[Alethiaphile]

You are reading “into” Unam Sanctam." The words do not say a person must be politically obedient to the Pope. Nor does it say that it means formal membership in the Church. There is no contradiction in Unam Sanctam and JPII or Vatcian II. You may conclude JPII clarified or explained, but he did not contradict it. As Catholics we must interpret Church documents as the Church herself understands them not as we interpret them…

The document says what it says, and it says “It is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” Those are Boniface VIII’s words, not mine.

 

[RedBert]

For reference here is a listing of some of the degrees or statements.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=404199&highlight=salvation+outside+the+church

the statement has often been repeated in various ways at various times and it seems so very plain and so very clear.

In previous posts where I and others were questioning Papal degrees or statements (Many were Ex Cathedra), we were linked to this

chnetwork.org/journals/nesschurch/ness_7.htm
The “Necessity” of Being Catholic by James Akin

see the section on " Private Judgment?"

*“**What the radical traditionalists have forgotten is that they are not the interpreters of previous papal statements; the Magisterium is, and their personal interpretations may not go against the authoritative teaching of the current ***Magisterium.

The idea that they can by private conscience interpret centuries old papal decrees puts them in the same position as Protestants, interpreting centuries old biblical documents. The radical traditionalist simply has a larger “Bible,” but the principle is the same: private interpretation rules! This completely defeats the purpose of having a Magisterium, which is to provide a contemporary source that can identify, clarify, and explain previous authoritative statements, whether from the Bible, Apostolic Tradition, or itself

Much of the current flap over Feeneyism could be avoided** if conservative Catholics would remind themselves of the fact that it is the Magisterium, not them and their private judgment, which is the interpreter of previous Magisterial statements**,”

so remember that

it is the current Magisterium which is the interpreter of previous Magisterial statements. not you; even-though the statement has often been repeated in various ways at various times and it seems so very plain and so very clear to you.

you do NOT have the authority to interpret what the plain and clear previous Papal statement actually meant.

And also remember ; the next Magisterium will be intrepreting this Magisterium, etc, etc.

 

[pnewton]

What false accusations have I made to what Pope?

This pope had more than just an issue of Mood. He was a rascal.

:whacky:

 

[Rogerteder]

For reference here is a listing of some of the degrees or statements.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=404199&highlight=salvation+outside+the+church

the statement has often been repeated in various ways at various times and it seems so very plain and so very clear.

In previous posts where I and others were questioning Papal degrees or statements (Many were Ex Cathedra), we were linked to this

chnetwork.org/journals/nesschurch/ness_7.htm
The “Necessity” of Being Catholic by James Akin

see the section on " Private Judgment?"

*“**What the radical traditionalists have forgotten is that they are not the interpreters of previous papal statements; the Magisterium is, and their personal interpretations may not go against the authoritative teaching of the current ***Magisterium.

The idea that they can by private conscience interpret centuries old papal decrees puts them in the same position as Protestants, interpreting centuries old biblical documents. The radical traditionalist simply has a larger “Bible,” but the principle is the same: private interpretation rules! This completely defeats the purpose of having a Magisterium, which is to provide a contemporary source that can identify, clarify, and explain previous authoritative statements, whether from the Bible, Apostolic Tradition, or itself

Much of the current flap over Feeneyism could be avoided** if conservative Catholics would remind themselves of the fact that it is the Magisterium, not them and their private judgment, which is the interpreter of previous Magisterial statements**,”

so remember that

it is the current Magisterium which is the interpreter of previous Magisterial statements. not you; even-though the statement has often been repeated in various ways at various times and it seems so very plain and so very clear to you.

you do NOT have the authority to interpret what the plain and clear previous Papal statement actually meant.

And also remember ; the next Magisterium will be intrepreting this Magisterium, etc, etc.

Took the words right from my mouth. you may think you know what Boniface VIII meant. but what you think may not be true. It is the Church who will tell us what he really meant, and what church teaching is.

 

[RedBert]

Took the words right from my mouth. you may think you know what Boniface VIII meant. but what you think may not be true. It is the Church who will tell us what he really meant, and what church teaching is.

Sure, who are we to think we know what are the meaning of words,
because the clear and plain statements may mean something completely different.(according to the Magisterium)

and that really helps with 100% record on Papal infallibility too!