Vatican II Council:"all who have been justified by faith in Baptism ARE MEMBERS of Christ's body,

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bartolome_Casas
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Vatican II documents are not invalidating the Council of Trent which was needed to redefine Church, its nature and mission, certain parameters of authority, but re-assert its God given authority as truly the Church Christ founded…especially now in light of the fracturing of Christianity.

The other is that the Church is a living being, like a living sacrament. Faith and science go together. I remark on the great progress of social sciences in the past 40 years and how it has greatly helped people overcome personal problems, which prior seemed hopeless. The Church draws on science.

The Bible and Church are to bring us to union with God, to have faith and morals. But we are also to study and grow intellectually in the study of science. We are being exposed to all kinds of different people in the world, we are all on different levels even in every Catholic parish. Faith is mystery. We cannot judge other people, but we can judge people’s fruits, whether they are of the Spirit or not.

We have no right to condemn other people. We may see an action that is bad…but the person is living, and we are not seeing at the same time perhaps, that person’s conscience speaking to them that what they just did was bad, so stop…and the person is processing this right in front of us, and deciding not to do it again,…but we don’t see that, we see just the outward action…but we don’t see the person being ‘convicted’ and deciding right there not to repeat the action.

What happens in cases like these, we, the observer, get stuck on what we just witnessed in that person and then condemn them. If they continue, it is time to pray for them and help redirect them, but if they don’t listen, and you see something continue that is sinful, then you move away from the sin…but keep the person in prayer.

Vatican II is telling us we cannot judge, we know how hard it is for many people today with its demands, to understand the fullness of the Catholic faith. It is very deep and broad, and with so countless charisms of different kinds of peoples and cultures within it. We have seen the witness of non-Catholic Christians lay down their lives for Christ in other parts of the world, who witness to the Word of God.

So instead, we have to be thankful He has given us grace to understand our faith. And just continue to live it out and share it with others and not to be discouraged in these ‘last days’. We cannot even judge ourselves.

We have to keep on living in Christ and grow in Him.
 
Here’s the link to the full text on the Vatican web site:

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html

The quote in the title above is in Chapter 1, section 3.

This document is from 1964. It has never been set aside or degraded by the Church. It is the teaching of the Catholic Church. All the popes and bishops have endorsed it, taught it, and promoted it.
Bartolome Casas,

What is your point?

Peace,
Anna
 
Yes, I’ll agree with this. No one is trying to argue that by merit of being a Protestant or other non-Catholic one can “achieve” salvation. But a recognized, Baptized, practicing, “good” Catholic is not the only person who goes to heaven. God is, well… God. He will have mercy on whoever he wants however He sees fit.
You see, somehow you are making the same mistake that a lot of people that have a more strict interpretation understanding of EENS make. You are calling some people non-Catholic. You cannot always know who is NOT a Catholic, just because someone is baptized in a protestant Church that does not automatically imply that he is not a Catholic, same thing for people that have never heard of Christ but still follow natural law to the letter.
 
But didn’t Vatican ll also reaffirm “no salvation outside of the Catholic Church”? I understand this to mean that this only applies to those who believe the Catholic Church to be the true but refuses to enter her and not those who no fault of their own do not know the Catholic faith.
 
It means that anyone by God’s grace has been baptized in the trinitarian formula is a member of the Body of Christ (aka the Catholic Church). Being as there is no other true Christian church, that means that they are (in some mysterious way) Christian (Catholic). If a person, by no fault of their own, never enters into full communion with the Catholic Church (which is what we would call converting) then we can talk about salvation. It does not, however, change their status as separated brethren. They are still in an ecclesial community that teaches things contrary to the deposit of faith. Since such is their status, it is our duty as Christian’s in full communion with the Church and with the full deposit of faith to share this knowledge with them.

Eh? :aok:
 
You see, somehow you are making the same mistake that a lot of people that have a more strict interpretation understanding of EENS make. You are calling some people non-Catholic. You cannot always know who is NOT a Catholic, just because someone is baptized in a protestant Church that does not automatically imply that he is not a Catholic, same thing for people that have never heard of Christ but still follow natural law to the letter.
I actually didn’t make that mistake. In fact, I made a point NOT to make that mistake. That’s why I prefaced the word “Catholic” with words like “recognized” and “practicing.” I agree fully with you, I guess I just don’t word my comment well enough.
 
I think that you are wrong! Only Catholics get into heaven. Extra ecclesia nulla salus is a dogma.
John 316 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
 
John 316 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
Brace yourself… I predict that you’re about to be told off by many members for quoting Bible verses out of context. We all love this quote, but the rest of the New Testament IS there for a reason. If all we needed to understand was this verse, then we wouldn’t need the rest of the New Testament.
 
John 316 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
Brace yourself… I predict that you’re about to be told off by many members for quoting Bible verses out of context. We all love this quote, but the rest of the New Testament IS there for a reason. If all we needed to understand was this verse, then we wouldn’t need the rest of the New Testament.
Melanilove,

I doubt you will find a single Catholic who would deny salvation through faith in Christ.
**
John 3:16** is quoted in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
Compendium
OF THE
CATECHISM
OF THE
CATHOLIC CHURCH
  1. In what way does God reveal that he is love?
God revealed himself to Israel as the One who has a stronger love than that of parents for their children or of husbands and wives for their spouses. God in himself “is love” (1 John 4: 8.16), who gives himself completely and gratuitously, who “so loved the world that he gave his only Son so that the world might be saved through him” (John 3:16-17). By sending his Son and the Holy Spirit, God reveals that he himself is an eternal exchange of love.
**PART THREE
LIFE IN CHRIST
SECTION ONE
MAN’S VOCATION LIFE IN THE SPIRIT**
CHAPTER THREE
GOD’S SALVATION: LAW AND GRACE
1987 The grace of the Holy Spirit has the power to justify us, that is, to cleanse us from our sins and to communicate to us "the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ" and through Baptism:34
Code:
But if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him. For we know that Christ being raised from the dead will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. The death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. So you also must consider yourselves as dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.35
1991 Justification is at the same time the acceptance of God’s righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ. Righteousness (or “justice”) here means the rectitude of divine love. With justification, faith, hope, and charity are poured into our hearts, and obedience to the divine will is granted us.
The area of disagreement among Catholics and some Protestants is usually the role of the Sacraments and security of the believer (OSAS); but these are issues that would require their own threads. They are off topic for this discussion.

Most Catholics will welcome you and engage in charitable discussion. Most will not “tell you off,” as Catholic4Christ suggests.

So, welcome to the forums, Melanilove!

Peace,
Anna
 
I think that you are wrong! Only Catholics get into heaven. Extra ecclesia nulla salus is a dogma.
You see, somehow you are making the same mistake that a lot of people that have a more strict interpretation understanding of EENS make. You are calling some people non-Catholic. You cannot always know who is NOT a Catholic, just because someone is baptized in a protestant Church that does not automatically imply that he is not a Catholic, same thing for people that have never heard of Christ but still follow natural law to the letter.
From the Catechism:

847 This affirmation [Extra ecclesia nulla salus] is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: . . .

LUMEN GENTIUM is an infallible document from Vatican II:

DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH
LUMEN GENTIUM

SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964
CHAPTER II
ON THE PEOPLE OF GOD
15. The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter. (14*) For there are many who honor Sacred Scripture, taking it as a norm of belief and a pattern of life, and who show a sincere zeal. They lovingly believe in God the Father Almighty and in Christ, the Son of God and Saviour. (15*) They are consecrated by baptism, in which they are united with Christ.They also recognize and accept other sacraments within their own Churches or ecclesiastical communities.

Many of them rejoice in the episcopate, celebrate the Holy Eucharist and cultivate devotion toward the Virgin Mother of God.(16*) They also share with us in prayer and other spiritual benefits. Likewise we can say that in some real way they are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too He gives His gifts and graces whereby He is operative among them with His sanctifying power. . . . .
  1. Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God.(18*) In the first place we must recall the people to whom the testament and the promises were given and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh.(125) On account of their fathers this people remains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts He makes nor of the calls He issues.(126)
But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Mohammedans, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things,(127) and as Saviour wills that all men be saved.(128) Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.(19*)

Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel.(20*) She knows that it is given by Him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life. . .

At certain points in history, it certainly seemed that Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus was aimed at those who were not subject to the Roman Pontiff. Some infallible teachings were very specific, and they didn’t leave much room for arguments of semantics regarding the definition of “Catholic,” or being “Catholic” without knowing it.

The Papal Bull of Pope Boniface VIII is a good example:

Pope Boniface VIII in his Papal Bull Unam Sanctam (A.D. 1302): “We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”
Link: ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/B7UNAM.HTM

The Catholic Argument has been, at least on other threads, that the teaching of Vatican II does not contradict the infallible teachings of the past, but more fully defines them.

However, Catholic Traditionalists see Vatican II and EENS somewhat at odds: See Link: catholicism.org/eens-popes.html

It’s a complicated subject. 🙂

Peace,
Anna
 
LUMEN GENTIUM is an infallible document from Vatican II:
I was raised in the Catholic school system before Vatican II and was taught that only Catholics go to heaven. The Traditional Mass was alive and well.

The Council of Trent infallibly taught that the Mass was to remain in Latin. Why? Because they knew what could happen when the Mass was translated into many languages: the Mass could become corrupt. If that was taught infallibly what gave Vatican II the right to disregard what the Council of Trent taught? Many people left the church after the Mass was changed into English. And it is not too easy to find a Latin Mass where I live.

I am under the impression that nothing was infallibly taught at Vatican II that it was a pastoral council and these were suggestions coming out of the council. Suggestions that turned Catholicism on its head. Why be Catholic if I can get to heaven anyway? And I am aware of all the liberal rhetoric.

All paths lead to heaven, the Traditional Mass put on the back burner reducing Catholics to resemble Protestants, dogma being reinterpreted in a liberal way and on and on.:mad:

God help us all.
 
I was raised in the Catholic school system before Vatican II and was taught that only Catholics go to heaven. The Traditional Mass was alive and well.

The Council of Trent infallibly taught that the Mass was to remain in Latin. Why? Because they knew what could happen when the Mass was translated into many languages: the Mass could become corrupt. If that was taught infallibly what gave Vatican II the right to disregard what the Council of Trent taught? Many people left the church after the Mass was changed into English. And it is not too easy to find a Latin Mass where I live.

I am under the impression that nothing was infallibly taught at Vatican II that it was a pastoral council and these were suggestions coming out of the council. Suggestions that turned Catholicism on its head. Why be Catholic if I can get to heaven anyway? And I am aware of all the liberal rhetoric.

All paths lead to heaven, the Traditional Mass put on the back burner reducing Catholics to resemble Protestants, dogma being reinterpreted in a liberal way and on and on.:mad:

God help us all.
The Council of Trent didn’t infallibly teach the Mass had to be in Latin, because what language the Mass is in can change, since it wasn’t always in Latin. V2 didn’t change any teaching, but reaffirmed teaching. You can be saved if you aren’t Catholic, but not because you aren’t Catholic; you’re saved in spite of being part of a false religion. That is Catholic teaching. The only path that leads to heaven is Jesus Christ through the Catholic Church. 🙂
 
I was raised in the Catholic school system before Vatican II and was taught that only Catholics go to heaven. . . .

I am under the impression that nothing was infallibly taught at Vatican II that it was a pastoral council and these were suggestions coming out of the council. . .
Phyllo,

Lumen Gentium is a Dogmatic Constitution of the Catholic Church and was “solemnly promulgated” by his holiness Pope Paul VI. Does this not define LG as infallible?

DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH
LUMEN GENTIUM

SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html

Peace,
Anna
 
The question which comes into play by Traditionalists is if V-II was indeed a ecumenical council. Thats the defining factor of Infallible in this case. The Pope and Magisterium wouldn’t be of question in regards to LG. IMO the arguement and counter-arguement is in this area.

Pope Benedict affirms V-II as did Blessed JP-II.
 
I am under the impression that nothing was infallibly taught at Vatican II that it was a pastoral council
Pastoral Council is a statement made by Pope Paul VI on January 12, 1966. Not really a sound arguement IMHO.

Heres the Popes paragraph which is used…

“There are those who ask what authority, what theological qualification the Council intended to give to its teachings, knowing that it avoided issuing solemn dogmatic definitions engaging the infallibility of the ecclesiastical Magisterium. The answer is known by whoever remembers the conciliar declaration of March 6, 1964, repeated on November 16, 1964: given the Council’s pastoral character, it avoided pronouncing, in an extraordinary manner, dogmas endowed with the note of infallibility.”
 
Phyllo,

Lumen Gentium is a Dogmatic Constitution of the Catholic Church and was “solemnly promulgated” by his holiness Pope Paul VI. Does this not define LG as infallible?

DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH
LUMEN GENTIUM

SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html

Peace,
Anna
No that does not make it infallible. However, there are different level of assent that we ought or should give to the different teachings. What I am saying that just because something is not explicitly defined as infallible does not mean that we are could or should ignore it. “Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma” by Dr. Ludwig Ott has a good explanation on the different degrees to which we must look at when addressing a Church teaching. This is another interesting reading: “FOUR LEVELS OF THE CHURCH’S TEACHING
 
Phyllo,

Lumen Gentium is a Dogmatic Constitution of the Catholic Church and was “solemnly promulgated” by his holiness Pope Paul VI. Does this not define LG as infallible?

DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH
LUMEN GENTIUM

SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html

Peace,
Anna
I don’t know but I just emailed 2 people that should know and if I hear from the I will post their answers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top