I
inkaneer
Guest
I don’t see any contradiction. Here is why. Let’s not forget that the Council of Basle/Ferra/Florence occurred in 1431-1445 and was concerned with healing of the Eastern Schism which it accomplished but only temporarily. Also one must be careful with the council of Florence as not all of the results of the council are considered infallible. For instance in the same session as the above quote is taken [11th session Feb, 1442] There is also a listing of the canonical books of the Bible. However, it is the council of Trent in 1547 that is listed as the infallible formal definition of the biblical canon and not the council of Florence even though the canonical lists are identical. Why? Good question. Here is my answer. The council was specifically directed towards those Apostolic churches which were previously in schism and were now re-aligning themselves with Rome in the fifteenth century [1400-1499]. The particular session in question, SESSION 11 of February 4, 1442 that the quote is taken from, is entitled *Bull of union with the Copts * and addresses specific issues between the Coptic church and Rome. A Bull is nothing more than a letter and gets its name from the stamp that is impressed on the sealing wax. That stamp is called, in Latin, a bulla. So the quotation cited is contained in a letter to the Coptic Church and therefore applies only to the Coptic Church and is not to be applied ‘across the board’ to everyone. As such, since it is not directed to the universal church session11 of 1442 is not infallible teaching. And what appears to be a contradiction is no contradiction at all.I think we firmly agree on the modern interpretation of no salvation outside the Catholic Church. It can include Baptized Christians who are invincibly ignorant of the Catholic faith. This would include Protestants. Obviously, the current Catechism would reflect the modern interpretation. However, the quote below is from the Council of Florence in 1442. It is very obvious that the meaning of no salvation outside the Catholic Church, meant being a member of the physical church and particpating in the sacraments.
The modern interpretation seems to contradict the earlier interpretation. The original question on this thread was asking how this teaching could be dogmatic and infallible on the one hand, and on the other hand, have a modern interpretation that contradicts the earlier interpretation.
"It firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the catholic church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the catholic church. (Council of Florence session 11 - February 4, 1442"