Very confused on "No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church."

  • Thread starter Thread starter XBaptist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree with the part of the Magesterium being the guide (and that we shouldn’t be privately interpreting things), but what happens when the Magesterium actually contradicts what Christ said? (I know you’re going to say that the contradiction is only my interpretation!) Or when the Magesterium says one thing for 1900 years, and the opposite thing now? (Again… my private interpretation, but it’s very hard to just blindly accept what seems to be a contradiction.)
The Church is not contradicting herself here…nor teaching the opposite.
or contradicting what Christ said (nor does Christ contradict himself as noted…or the Apostles each other…but some can read certain things that way!)
 
Isn’t there supposed to be an apostasy in the last days? Maybe this is it. Maybe the “changed mind” of the Catholic Church is the thing that we were warned about - and that we’re not supposed to fall into it. Yet, then again, the gates of hell are not supposed to be able to prevail against the Church. If this is the apostasy, what are we supposed to do about it? Keep going to the Catholic Church no matter what it is teaching?
Yip…stick with Peter. Stay on the rock.

Jesus said the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church…so any apostasy will be those leaving the Church…leaving the office of unity…the office of Peter upon whom Jesus built his Church any through whom Jesus protects the Church and her teachings…
 
until I re-read the dogmas that have been taught, which seem to contradict these “common sense” approaches. It doesn’t seem “fair” that I would be condemned for being an ignorant (but devout) Baptist, but that’s what Paul, Jesus, the popes, and many saints seem to be saying. The Church’s current beliefs seem much more “reasonable,” but there is so much pre-V2 stuff that seems to be against the current teaching.
This actually shows the importance of the Magisterium …

One can take things in documents out of context…or privately as you say…

or even sayings of Jesus or Paul!

In 2nd Peter it even says that certain things are hard to understand…that some have twisted some the the things Paul wrote to their destruction…

so things need to be understood within the Church …by the analogy of Faith and as the Church understands them…

remember too language can change…and things can be misunderstood by later readers…just as fundamentalists do often with Scripture…

one of the reasons Jesus founded a Church…and did not just hand out a text…

🙂
 
I’m very sorry - I’m just not “getting it” yet. I’ll keep trying to understand. Oh - and I’m sorry if that Vatican 1 quote is erroneous - I found it in multiple places on the internet and never bothered to specifically look it up. But… there are so many such pronouncements even dating back to Ignatius (who died in 107, I think) and Clement (4th pope - pre 100’s) that this “no salvation outside…” message is a well-established theme. I can’t believe that all these statements were invented by sedevacantists.

I promise that I’ll keep re-reading your replies, and try to keep my mind open to them. Again, I’m sorry that I’m having so much trouble with this.
yes of course the phrase “no salvation outside the Church” has been around since the early centuries…

it is only one needs to understand what this means and what it does not…

but one must understand it rightly…and in the right context…each time it comes up…and that even authentic understandings in one sense do not exclude other aspects of a correct understanding…

just as one needs to understand that yes Jesus is the only mediator between God and man…(we all know we can also pray for others…and share in his one mediatorship)…

or that there is no other way of salvation but Jesus Christ…(yet some never hear of him …and yet can be saved…)

or that those who do not believe will be condemned…
yet we know that he can save some who have never even heard his name…

and that yes Jesus is the Son of God! (but yes…he is also man!)

or for instance one can read:

we are saved by grace.
we are justified by faith.
baptism now saves you…

these three go together…

and to put one against the other …

though there are those who do 🙂 “scripture says that one is justified by faith…but you Catholics say one is saved by baptism…you contradict the Bible!”

whereas in truth…we do hold one is justified by Faith (in Paul’s sense) and by baptism…and all of this is by grace…

one could produce many examples.

one needs to understand what something means and what it does not…
as it is understood within the analogy of Faith …by the Church…
 
yes Paul was Catholic …and yes this is not what he was talking about…he was talking of other ‘gospels’ which were opposed to the Gospel…not to listen to them…
First a note of clarification. Paul was not a Catholic, he was a Jew. There was no such thing as “Catholic” during his time. If you had asked him what he was he would have said a practicing Jew, and probably that he was a disciple of (or slave to) Christ.

We all have a tendency to project today’s ideas and points of view back to the early days of Christianity.

A simple question to ask oneself: Were the Jews, the Chosen People, saved before Christ’s time? And are they after? Since only a small part of the world was aware of Jesus and the Gospel for many years, how could those who were not made aware then be saved? Why didn’t God, who certainly had the power to do so, send Christ to every corner of the earth so that everyone would hear the Words of salvation?

Why would God pick a small group of people in a backwater of civilization as the only people who could be saved? Would He be that cruel to the rest alive at that time as to give them virtually no chance at salvation?
 
First a note of clarification. Paul was not a Catholic, he was a Jew. There was no such thing as “Catholic” during his time. If you had asked him what he was he would have said a practicing Jew, and probably that he was a disciple of (or slave to) Christ.

We all have a tendency to project today’s ideas and points of view back to the early days of Christianity.
Paul would not it seems have known the term Catholic…sure.

Paul was a follower of the Way…a disciple…an Apostle of Jesus Christ …a Christian…a slave or servant of Jesus…etc and thus as a member and an Apostle of the Church that Jesus founded…

members of whom where first called disciples…part of the Way…then in Antioch called Christians for the first time…this same Church that Jesus founded was later …after the martyrdom of Paul was called Catholic (likely during the lifetime still of John for Ignatius uses it early on as if it were well known) and we find the first written use again from Antioch (where they were called Christians for the first time) by Ignatius of Antioch in his letters…

and just as the first martyr Stephen …who died with Saul looking on…in the first pages of Acts can be said to be a Christian…even though that name was not yet invented…

so to can Paul be said to be a Catholic even though that name had yet to be given to the Church he was an Apostle of and member of…
 
The reason you are confused is because you have chosen to follow a religion that man has created for monitary value rather than follow the Word Of God.

The reason for your confusion is as times change so does mans opinions and beliefs, however God says in Malachi 3:6 “For I am the LORD, I change not;”

The Bible also says in 1Corinthians 14:33 “For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.” The early church was not in confusion because their teachings did not contradict the Word of God but was confirmed by it. Therefore they had the peace of God in their hearts.

My friend I am not advocating that you return to the Baptist Church. What I am saying is you need to find a church that teaches the Bible is the final authority and not man. Also that you “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” You may find that you have never been born again and the reason I mention this is that it seems you should know if you are saved that salvation comes not by religion, denomination, or church organization, but through Christ, “it is finished” work.

2Ti 3:15 “And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”
 
The reason you are confused is because you have chosen to follow a religion that man has created for monitary value rather than follow the Word Of God.

The reason for your confusion is as times change so does mans opinions and beliefs, however God says in Malachi 3:6 “For I am the LORD, I change not;”

The Bible also says in 1Corinthians 14:33 “For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.” The early church was not in confusion because their teachings did not contradict the Word of God but was confirmed by it. Therefore they had the peace of God in their hearts.

My friend I am not advocating that you return to the Baptist Church. What I am saying is you need to find a church that teaches the Bible is the final authority and not man. Also that you “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” You may find that you have never been born again and the reason I mention this is that it seems you should know if you are saved that salvation comes not by religion, denomination, or church organization, but through Christ, “it is finished” work.

2Ti 3:15 “And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”
Wow…created for monitary value.

You are barking up the wrong tree.
 
The reason you are confused is because you have chosen to follow a religion that man has created for monitary value rather than follow the Word Of God.

The reason for your confusion is as times change so does mans opinions and beliefs, however God says in Malachi 3:6 “For I am the LORD, I change not;”

The Bible also says in 1Corinthians 14:33 “For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.” The early church was not in confusion because their teachings did not contradict the Word of God but was confirmed by it. Therefore they had the peace of God in their hearts.

My friend I am not advocating that you return to the Baptist Church. What I am saying is you need to find a church that teaches the Bible is the final authority and not man. Also that you “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” You may find that you have never been born again and the reason I mention this is that it seems you should know if you are saved that salvation comes not by religion, denomination, or church organization, but through Christ, “it is finished” work.

2Ti 3:15 “And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”
hey…take a few minutes and read this text by Pope Benedict XVI

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2006/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20061108_en.html
 
The reason you are confused is because you have chosen to follow a religion that man has created for monitary value rather than follow the Word Of God.

The reason for your confusion is as times change so does mans opinions and beliefs, however God says in Malachi 3:6 “For I am the LORD, I change not;”

The Bible also says in 1Corinthians 14:33 “For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.” The early church was not in confusion because their teachings did not contradict the Word of God but was confirmed by it. Therefore they had the peace of God in their hearts.

My friend I am not advocating that you return to the Baptist Church. What I am saying is you need to find a church that teaches the Bible is the final authority and not man. Also that you “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” You may find that you have never been born again and the reason I mention this is that it seems you should know if you are saved that salvation comes not by religion, denomination, or church organization, but through Christ, “it is finished” work.

2Ti 3:15 “And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”
Who interprets the Bible text you read-God?Because everytime you lay your eyes on the bible you are interpreting it.Whose interpretation is correct-yours? mine? the church up the block’s?If the Holy Spirit helps you interpret the scripture then why so many takes on it? Why the vast differences in Protestantism.Or even in theBaptist churches.Some Baptist churches believe in OSAS others do not.Who’s got it right.?I love it when folks like you sit an yammer about bible is the final authority-who interprets and gleans what is read-isn’t it a man?Baptist aren’t men then.The elders don’t help you in the interpretation.And you became a baptist for what reason if churches are unnecessary?And the word is “monetary” if your going to insult us at least get the word right.I’ll let you go back to you Chick magazines!
 
The reason you are confused is because you have chosen to follow a religion that man has created for monitary value rather than follow the Word Of God.

"
Lets see…Pope Benedict XVI…what is happiness? Money?

What do you say???

“Happy are you who believe!” (cf. 1 Pet 2:7). Let us turn to Jesus! He alone is the way that leads to eternal happiness, the truth who satisfies the deepest longings of every heart, and the life who brings ever new joy and hope, to us and to our world. Amen."
~Pope Benedict XVI Homily Yankee Stadium April 2008
 
Many, many thanks to all of your for your help -

I’ll be reading what you have written when I get home from work tonight. I quickly scanned through your comments during my lunch hour, and am encouraged by what you said - maybe I’m finally going to be able to put this issue to rest!

Thanks very much!
 
I feel your pain and I know exactly were your coming from. I also used to be a Baptist and on my journey to the Church I had the same question. You always hear bad stuff about Vatican II and I thought maybe the council was caught up in the liberal/hippie movement of the 1960’s and tried to change this teaching to conform to the world and not the will of Christ.
Now I realize this wasn’t the case and what the council taught actually makes a lot of sense if understood correctly and in conformity with all the other councils. Pope Benedict is slowly teaching us to understand Vatican II as it was meant to be understood. God Bless our Papa Benedict!!!
I used to be in the Navy and sometimes I would see a ship far off in the distance and wonder what type of ship it was. As I sat on the deck waiting the ship would slowly get closer and closer. As more time past it’s details became more clear, e.t., what color it was, which country it was from, how it was built and so forth. I always knew it was a ship, but now I new more details about it. Therefore I could more better understand it’s purpose.
The development of doctrine, such as, “no salvation outside the Church”, works in the same way. Think about the Jews in the Old Testament and how they were told by the prophets, who were inspired by God, that the messiah would come and deliver them. Most of them naturally believed that this meant the messiah would deliver them from the bondage of the romans because that is how it was understood and taught. We now know two thousand years later, because we can see much clearer, that the Messiah instead had to be delivered and crucified to set us free from the bondage of sin and not the Romans. For centuries God revealed that the Messiah would come and deliver the Jews, but the reality and full understanding of this dogma didn’t become clear until after the time of Christ. The dogmas about the messiah didn’t change, they could not change because they came from God. Just our understanding of them became more clear with the passage of time and the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Another example of how doctrine can develop is the Holy Trinity. If you ever get a chance read the writings of Justin Martyr. He was a Catholic who lived around 150 AD and he had a debate with some Jews in regards to Jesus being God. In his letter “dialog with Trypho”, he goes through great lengths to explain how Jesus was God. He does a great job defending Christ’s divinity, but it’s obvious that he has no concept of the Holy Trinity like we do today. This is because the dogma of the Holy Trinity, One God, Three Persons, wouldn’t be made more clear and better understood until the council of Nicea, which took place a couple of hundred years after the time of Justin. The dogma about the divinity of Christ didn’t change form the time of Justin until the council of Nicea, but our understanding of it did. Over the passage of time, this dogma became more clearer and better understood thanks to the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
I could go on with other examples of how over time we come to more fully understand the doctrines that Christ has safeguarded to His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. It seems that God has always chosen to slowly make things more clear to His people. But rest assured that He will never let the Church error in Her official teaching. We have Jesus’ personal guarantee on that and that’s all I could ever need or want.
I’m confident that the teachings of Vatican II will be made more clear and better understood in the years to come. Teaching’s like “no salvation outside the Church”. You have to remember that a lot of people tried to distort the councils teaching during the 70’s and 80’s ( and unfortunately even today). Most of those people are dying off and our new priest and bishops are way more orthodox and faithful to the full traditions of the Church.
Always remember that Jesus wants everyone to be Catholic because this is His Church and He is proud of you for coming back to the flock that your ancestors left centuries ago. I prayed for you today before the Lord in the Blessed Sacrament and asked Jesus to help you find peace with your question. If I haven’t helped you I am faithful that He will find someone who will.
God Bless you my friend and welcome home. I love to hear about fellow ex-Baptist converting to the Church. Ex-Baptist make great Catholics!!!
 
Very confused on “No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church.”
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

**“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

335 Cf. Cyprian, Ep. 73.21:PL 3,1169; De unit.:PL 4,509-536.
336 LG 14; cf. Mk 16:16; Jn 3:5.
337 LG 16; cf. DS 3866-3872.
338 AG 7; cf. Heb 11:6; 1 Cor 9:16.

source:
vatican.va/archive/catechism/p123a9p3.htm#I
 
newadvent.org/cathen/03744a.htm

Incorporation with the Church can alone unite us to the family of the second Adam, and alone can engraft us into the true Vine. Moreover, it is to the Church that Christ has committed those means of grace through which the gifts He earned for men are communicated to them. The Church alone dispenses the sacraments. It alone makes known the light of revealed truth. Outside the Church these gifts cannot be obtained. From all this there is but one conclusion: Union with the Church is not merely one out of various means by which salvation may be obtained: it is the only means.

This doctrine of the absolute necessity of union with the Church was taught in explicit terms by Christ. Baptism, the act of incorporation among her members, He affirmed to be essential to salvation. “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: he that believeth not shall be condemned” (Mark 16:16). Any disciple who shall throw off obedience to the Church is to be reckoned as one of the heathen: he has no part in the Kingdom of God (Matthew 18:17). St. Paul is equally explicit. “A man that is a heretic”, he writes to Titus, “after the first and second admonition avoid,
knowing that he that is such a one is . . . condemned by his own judgment” (Titus 3:10 sq.). The doctrine is summed up in the phrase, Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus. This saying has been the occasion of so many objections that some consideration of its meaning seems desirable. It certainly does not mean that none can be saved except those who are in visible communion with the Church. The Catholic Church has ever taught that nothing else is needed to obtain justification than an act of perfect charity and of contrition. Whoever, under the impulse of actual grace, elicits these acts receives immediately the gift of sanctifying grace, and is numbered among the children of God. Should he die in these

dispositions, he will assuredly attain heaven. It is true such acts could not possibly be elicited by one who was aware that God has commanded all to join the Church, and who nevertheless should willfully remain outside her fold. For love of God carries with it the practical desire to fulfill His commandments. But of those who die without visible communion with the Church, not all are guilty of willful disobedience to God’s commands. Many are kept from the Church by ignorance. Such may be the case of numbers among those who have been brought up in heresy. To others the external means of grace may be unattainable. Thus an excommunicated person may have no opportunity of seeking reconciliation at the last, and yet may repair his faults by inward acts of contrition and charity.

It should be observed that those who are thus saved are not entirely outside the pale of the Church. The will to fulfill all God’s commandments is, and must be, present in all of them. Such a wish implicitly includes the desire for incorporation with the visible Church: for this, though they know it not, has been commanded by God. They thus belong to the Church by desire (voto). Moreover, there is a true sense in which they may be said to be saved through the Church. In the order of Divine Providence, salvation is given to man in the Church: membership in the Church Triumphant is given through membership in the Church Militant. Sanctifying grace, the title to salvation, is peculiarly the grace of those who are united to Christ in the Church: it is the birthright of the children of God. The primary purpose of those actual graces which God bestows upon those outside the Church is to draw them within the fold. Thus, even in the case in which God saves men apart from the Church, He does so through the Church’s graces. They are joined to the Church in spiritual communion, though not in visible and external communion. In the expression of theologians, they belong
to the soul of the Church, though not to its body. Yet the possibility of salvation apart from visible communion with the Church must not blind us to the loss suffered by those who are thus situated. They are cut off from the sacraments God has given as the support of the soul. In the ordinary channels of grace, which are ever open to the faithful Catholic, they cannot participate. Countless means of sanctification which the Church offers are denied to them. It is often urged that this is a stern and narrow doctrine. The reply to this objection is that the doctrine is stern, but only in the sense in which sternness is inseparable from love. It is the same sternness which we find in Christ’s words, when he said: “If you believe not that I am he, you shall die in your sin” (John 8:24). The Church is animated with the spirit of Christ; she is filled with the same love for souls, the same desire for their salvation. Since, then, she knows that the way of salvation is through union with her, that in her and in her alone are stored the benefits of the Passion, she must needs be uncompromising and even stern in the assertion of her claims. To fail here would be to fail in the duty entrusted to her by her Lord. Even where the message is unwelcome, she must deliver it.
 
I looked this up in the documents of Vatican I …and IT DOES NOT EXIST.
It is in Vatican 1, but I got the wrong reference - it’s Session III, Chapter 4 (not Chapter 2). Sorry about that…
 
yes Paul was Catholic …and yes this is not what he was talking about…he was talking of other ‘gospels’ which were opposed to the Gospel…not to listen to them…

we need to hold fast to the Gospel as taught by the Apostles and as proclaimed and understood by the Church…
The passage I was referring to is Galatians 1:6-9, which says:
(6) I wonder that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ, unto another gospel. (7) Which is not another: only there are some that trouble you and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
(8) But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. (9) As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema.

I don’t know what you mean by “he was talking of other ‘gospels’ which were opposed to the Gospel…” Maybe I’m not understanding what your definition of “gospel” is…?

If Catholicism was the original “Gospel”, then the Baptist “gospel” is a different gospel (or a perverted gospel, if we were to use Paul’s words). Almost every major tenet of the Catholic Gospel has been attacked and modified, including things including baptism, Eucharist, attainment of Salvation, necessity of good works, purgatory, Marian devotion, intercession of the saints, confession, the priesthood, (basically almost all the Sacraments!) etc. (I could go on and on here).
 
If Catholicism was the original “Gospel”, then the Baptist “gospel” is a different gospel (or a perverted gospel, if we were to use Paul’s words). Almost every major tenet of the Catholic Gospel has been attacked and modified, including things including baptism, Eucharist, attainment of Salvation, necessity of good works, purgatory, Marian devotion, intercession of the saints, confession, the priesthood, (basically almost all the Sacraments!) etc. (I could go on and on here).
The Gospel preached by Baptists…well contains in part the Gospel…and we recognize all that is true and good…especially that of our fellow Christians…

Catechism:

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276
 
It is in Vatican 1, but I got the wrong reference - it’s Session III, Chapter 4 (not Chapter 2). Sorry about that…
the quote is still not there…there is something similar to the first part…

remember it is the Church who is understanding these things …we look to the Church…(read the articles I posted) …
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top