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

[mtliddy]

Dear X Baptist
I am a life long Catholic with degrees in and years of study in theology. The dogma has not changed but our understanding of it has. How wonderful and blessed we are to live at a time when our understanding of the human mind and how it works is continually growing and God is giving us greater and greater insight into His creatures and the psychology of belief.

Fifty years ago I believed that no one but Catholics could go to heaven but after study and prayer I understand the concept of the “anonymous believer” the person who follows his concience, does not know the beauty of the church, is only exposed to negative or limited resources.

"To those to whom much is given, much is required! " God will judge me far more harshly if I am unfaithful, than those who have not have the graces that I have had. My Jewish neighbor who practices his Jewish faith, the evangelical who really believes that the bible is the only source of knowledge of God, the gentle Buddhist, the kind Sufi who prays daily, all of these are children of a loving God. God will not turn them away but they will experience Him differently when they die if they remain faithful.

You are blessed because he has lead you to a place where you can experience the fullness of His love in the Mass. I pray that you can come closer and understand more each day when you receive the Sacraments!

You are blessed because you are paying attention to His call in your heart. Don’t be hung
up on what is “objective truth” and “subjective truth” — how that truth is understood by our human minds.

This is still church dogma but the church does not use these words because they are a barrier to good people who simply do not understand.

I pray the Holy Spirit will give you greater insight each day!!

Terry

 

[Bookcat]

I’m sure that the Jews of Jesus’s day had a hard time accepting Jesus’s radical gospel. When He preached, some believed, and some didn’t. Jesus was ALL ABOUT MERCY, and yet He said that those who heard - but didn’t believe - were condemned because they did not believe. That’s simple to understand. Obviously, nobody can be condemned for not believing what they have never heard (ie: invincible ignorance), but Jesus said that once they’ve heard, they either believe or are condemned.

Today’s ecumenical message seems to be that unbelief is no longer condemned. Now it is categorized as “Invincible Ignorance” which includes any excuse imagineable. “No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church” and “invincible ignorance” have become such a confused mess that they almost mean nothing at all. I can’t believe that we’re the only family that is confused and frustrated by this.

I understand what the Church is saying today. I just don’t understand how this teaching could have changed so drastically from the Pre-Vatican II teaching. I know I’m supposed to submit to the Magisterium, but I’m having a tough time doing that when today’s Magisterium seems to totally contradict previous Magisteriums and the direct words of the Bible.

My friend you have been confused by the writings of sedvacantists etc…they strew quotes together like a fundamentalist…so i can understand your confusion…

I has always been that God will have to sort things out…only God knows if the person really knowingly rejected Jesus etc it has always been the case and still is today that the Church must proclaim the Gospel and that yes…some may be saved in ways only known by God (but still thru Jesus and in relation to his body) …but it is laid on our shoulders to preach the Gospel …today as it was in centuries past!

Again read the articles I posted…the Magisterium is not contradicting herself nor the words of the Bible…

Read also the document that I sent you in pm.

All these things just need to be understood…

“Faith seeking understanding” is our maxim…

just as when we come across *apparent *contradictions in the Bible…

as one Saint put it …perhaps Augustine…the problem is not in the text but in my understanding…

 

[inkaneer]

The Catholic Church has long held [like 2,000 years long] that the entire deposit of faith entrusted to the Apostles by Jesus was contained in the Catholic Church. But it has also recognized that in the other christian denominations as well as non christian organizations there is some share of that deposit of truth. Some, like the Orthodox Church have a greater share than others like the protestant denominations but none except the Catrholic Church has a full share. Thus salvation is dependant on being within that deposit of faith. Now the question arises as to how much of that deposit of faith one must have for salvation. That is left to God but the parable of the talents in Matthew 25 may provide a clue.

 

[fxcc]

I understand what the Church is saying today. I just don’t understand how this teaching could have changed so drastically from the Pre-Vatican II teaching. I know I’m supposed to submit to the Magisterium, but I’m having a tough time doing that when today’s Magisterium seems to totally contradict previous Magisteriums and the direct words of the Bible.

Here’s an in-depth explanation, incorporating a very rational (in my view) “reconciliation” of the apparently “contradictory” teachings:

chnetwork.org/journals/nesschurch/ness_7.htm

I marvel at the depth and lucidity of your questions, and the doggedness of your search for answers. May God provide you with them soon.

“Grant to us O Lord, thy Spirit of Understanding, to enlighten our minds with the light of Thy divine truth.”

Peace.

Francis

 

[Bookcat]

Today’s ecumenical message seems to be that unbelief is no longer condemned. Now it is categorized as “Invincible Ignorance” which includes any excuse imagineable. “No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church” and “invincible ignorance” have become such a confused mess that they almost mean nothing at all. I can’t believe that we’re the only family that is confused and frustrated by this.

That is not what the Church is saying…

it is not that they mean nothing at all…but that some have twisted the meanings…or misunderstood them…and i am not meaning of course the Church…

here is a good little document issued by the CDF on some aspects of evangelizion…where they confront some misguided ideas that you note above…which yes some are promoting…but which are not the ideas of the Church.
*
yes is possible* for even an atheist to be saved (by Jesus)…in a way only known to God…

but we must not depend on this! we must proclaim the Gospel!

But just as Paul was all things to all men…so some may be saved…so too must we be…

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20071203_nota-evangelizzazione_en.html

 

[Yoeman65]

I am really happy with this thread and so happy to have any baptist come into the fold.

I would like to highlight that Protestants today are NOT like those of 1500s and earlier. Ealier Protestans were raised in the Catholic faith and left or at least were immersed in the Church’s teachings.

Today there are EVEN CATHOLICS that have NO idea of the faith. They are CATHOLIC in name only. Similar to Protestants that “accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior” and FEEL saved but never again live any kind of life resembling what Jesus taught.

These ignorant (like a baby) people are on a mission to find and accept or reject Christ. I believe, like the ship analogy, that the Church is clarifying the dogmas continually.

Believe it or not it is because of the Church’s need to defend herself from anti-Catholic retoric, that She has become stronger. GOD works in mysterious ways!! Sort of aligns itself with answering the question of how a loving God can allow good people to experience pain.

In God’s wisdom, He understands that - storms/rain bring sun/flowers; and even greater, a clearer and greater love for them. People and the Church must go through this same pain to really appreciate the Bride that Christ left us (His Church).

Many Catholics have become complacent with being the chosen church, similar to the Jews of Jesus’ time. He never said the Jews were not the chosen, and I believe the Church is and will be for ever protected, but some need to be shaken awake.

Those descentors from without the Church are doing that for us today. They are ringing the gong and making us defend our Faith. Trust me, they are doing GOD’s work (some even to the extent of the work that JUDAS did). Like it or not, Judas was a key player in bringing about the will of GOD. I do not know where he is today, but I am thankful that he helped put in motion all of the future of salvation history.

Conclusion - Know and defend the Faith/Church - she is the hand of GOD here on earth and will NOT lead you wrong. Priests, parishiners, friends and foes may, but return to the “bulwark and foundation of truth” - the Church and She will lead you home. “ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC & APOSTOLIC - THE FOUR MARKS OF THE TRUE CHURCH”

 

[Bengoshi]

A good article by Jimmy Akin the chief apologist of Catholic Answers

chnetwork.org/journals/nesschurch/ness_7.htm

In A.D. 400, Augustine said, “When we speak of within and without in relation to the Church, it is the position of the heart that we must consider, not that of the body … All who are within in heart are saved in the unity of the ark” (Baptism 5:28:39).

Jimmy notes in it:

"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…"

and one must remember…that new questions etc come with new centuries etc…and every statement must be understood in the analogy of Faith…that is the totality of the Faith…

Wouldn’t this kind of thinking undermine objective truth? Do you mean that we are just supposed to be under the mercy and whim of the Magisterium of the RCC and be unable to understand the Bible and the papal/conciliar documents which are supposed to be the official interpretations of the Bible? If the the Magisterium has the power to interpret the Bible and its own documents in any way it pleases, then it would be tantamount to judicial legislation (as the Magisterium is like the Supreme Court which has the power to interpret laws but cannot go against the Constitution).

 

[Bookcat]

Wouldn’t this kind of thinking undermine objective truth? Do you mean that we are just supposed to be under the mercy and whim of the Magisterium of the RCC and be unable to understand the Bible and the papal/conciliar documents which are supposed to be the official interpretations of the Bible? If the the Magisterium has the power to interpret the Bible and its own documents in any way it pleases, then it would be tantamount to judicial legislation (as the Magisterium is like the Supreme Court which has the power to interpret laws but cannot go against the Constitution).

no.

no more than the early Christians were at the mercy of the whim of the Church then…

and no. not anyway it pleases…that is contrary to the Catholic Faith.

remember Peter talks of some twisting the writings of Paul to their own destruction…people of all ages can twist things…both of scripture or of other documents…

Jesus knew what he was doing when he founded a Church and gave men authority to teach in his name etc not merely a text to read and argue about.

(by the way we love the Bible…it is the written Word of God! …)

Oh and by the way RCC is not the proper name. It is Catholic Church.

 

[Yoeman65]

Wouldn’t this kind of thinking undermine objective truth? Do you mean that we are just supposed to be under the mercy and whim of the Magisterium of the RCC and be unable to understand the Bible and the papal/conciliar documents which are supposed to be the official interpretations of the Bible? If the the Magisterium has the power to interpret the Bible and its own documents in any way it pleases, then it would be tantamount to judicial legislation (as the Magisterium is like the Supreme Court which has the power to interpret laws but cannot go against the Constitution).

Your are trying to put your own fallible spin on it. YES, Jesus did leave a “Supreme Court”, we call it the Holy See. Remember in the upper room, after Jesus had given the KEYS (a sign of authority when the KING is out) to St. Peter (the rock), that Jesus said “What you forgive is forgiven, and (just as crucial), what you hold bound is held bound”. I think this was played out in the Acts when Paul and Peter were argueing about the way they should act. Paul made great points about the faith, but when all was said and done and PETER STOOD UP AND MADE A FINAL PROCLAMAITON, Paul fell in line.

Remember Paul was WAY more educated in the LAW than Peter. He was trained by the Rabbi that the Rabbis called Rabbi and he kept the Law until Jesus showed him what it was to follow HIM.

You are distorted about what it is to be a “Supreme Court” because ours (USA) has lost its bearing. They have forgotten the follow the guide book (Constitution) and the founders. Our “Supreme Court”, the Holy See and the Pope have stayed firm to the teachings of Jesus, the early Church (founders) and the guide book (Bible), which they both wrote and consolidated.

 

[Janet1983]

Not a shift.

Time.

and that on the part of the parties involved…

Catholics can still become heretics …or schismatics…

One must be formally within the Church at one point to be formally a *heretic *or schismatic…(an apostate is one who later totally rejects the Christian faith they once professed…)

not the children of the children of the children…

True. To be a heretic one has to be a member of the Catholic Church first.
Heresy is defined by Thomas Aquinas as “a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas.”
“It is a more serious sin not to perform what one has promised than not to perform what one has not promised.”

 

[Yoeman65]

Dear X Baptist

"To those to whom much is given, much is required! " God will judge me far more harshly if I am unfaithful, than those who have not have the graces that I have had. My Jewish neighbor who practices his Jewish faith, the evangelical who really believes that the bible is the only source of knowledge of God, the gentle Buddhist, the kind Sufi who prays daily, all of these are children of a loving God. God will not turn them away but they will experience Him differently when they die if they remain faithful.

This is still church dogma but the church does not use these words because they are a barrier to good people who simply do not understand.

I pray the Holy Spirit will give you greater insight each day!!

Terry

Terry, You go too far. Do not give the impression that all religions love the same GOD. This is heracy. Yes God can save but is is also pure justice. He is THE way and THE truth and THE life. Not ALL roads lead to him. One would need to be living PERFECTLY their understanding of GOD and seeking HIM PERFECTLY in their knowledge of HIM. This is a very, very, very slim thread for someone to hang on. If they even have an urging that they are wrong and don’t follow that then they might be DAMNED without the Church.

The Church prays that ALL might be saved and only throught Her merits and more specifically GOD’s grace might someone be saved.

Basically, if someone says I will just stay where I am because it is more comfortable here, they are choosing comfort over GOD’s will and GOD will give them what they desire for all eternity. HE loves us too much to NOT give us what we desire, EVEN if that is a desire to be away from HIM for all eternity.

 

[najmensi]

*Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Sess. 3, Chap. 2 on Revelation, 1870, ex cathedra: *

"Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be a recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding. The only meaning of the dogma Outside the Church there is no salvation is that which holy Mother Church has once declared in Her definitions. That meaning is that all who die without the Catholic Faith or outside the Church or in a non-Catholic religion cannot be saved."I looked this up in the documents of Vatican I …and IT DOES NOT EXIST.

yes, it doesn’t exist.

So, let’s see, what Pius IX really said.

Pope Pius IX (1846-1878)

Allocution Singulari Quadem, December 9, 1854:

For, it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood; but, on the other hand, it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, will not be held guilty of this in the eyes of God.

---

catecheticsonline.com/SourcesofDogma17.php

Encyclical Quanto conficiamur moerore, August 10, 1863:

And here, beloved Sons and Venerable Brothers, We should mention again and censure a very grave error in which some Catholics are unhappily engaged, who believe that men living in error, and separated from the true faith and from Catholic unity, can attain eternal life. Indeed, this is certainly quite contrary to Catholic teaching. It is known to Us and to you that they who labor in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion and who, zealously keeping the natural law and its precepts engraved in the hearts of all by God, and being ready to obey God, live an honest and upright life, can, by the operating power of divine light and grace, attain eternal life, since God who clearly beholds, searches, and knows the minds, souls, thoughts, and habits of all men, because of His great goodness and mercy, will by no means suffer anyone to be punished with eternal torment who has not the guilt of deliberate sin. But, the Catholic dogma that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church is well-known; and also that those who are obstinate toward the authority and definitions of the same Church, and who persistently separate themselves from the unity of the Church, and from the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, to whom ‘the guardianship of the vine has been entrusted by the Savior,’ (Council of Chalcedon, Letter to Pope Leo I) cannot obtain eternal salvation.

---

papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9quanto.htm

Letter, “Tuas libenter,” Dec. 21, 1863:

For, even if it were a matter concerning that subjection which is to be manifested by an act o f divine faith, nevertheless, it would not have to be limited to those matters which have been defined by express decrees of the ecumenical Councils, or of the Roman Pontiffs and of this See, but would have to be extended also to those matters which are handed down as divinely revealed by the ordinary teaching power of the whole Church spread throughout the world, and therefore, by universal and common consent are held by Catholic theologians to belong to faith.

---

catecheticsonline.com/SourcesofDogma17.php

---

Thomas John O’Brien : An advanced catechism, 1901 AD

Those, who through no fault of their own remain outside the Church, and who lead good lives, belong to the soul, or invisible part, of the Church, and will be saved.

---

s4.postimage.org/inAC9.jpg s1.postimage.org/Md_8S.jpg
click on picture to zoom it

 

[mariomarkham]

This is the way I see it:

There is only One Savior, Jesus.
There is only One Church IN Heaven.
It is Holy since it is in Heaven.
It is for everyone as Jesus said, so it is Universal, that is Catholic.
The Apostles are there also.
Therefore the Church IN Heaven is One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic.
Jesus would love to have Everyone in Heaven if we all accept Him.
But we all need to be Holy to go to Heaven.
And yet, no one is perfect enough.
Purgatory purifies us and makes us worthy.
Good Catholics are purified depending on how they behave here.
Good Protestants are purified in Purgatory and Baptized if need to.
All other Good people from any other religion can be Purified and Baptized in Purgatory.

I am Catholic because this makes sense to me.
So be Good.
See you all in Heaven.
mario

 

[Bengoshi]

For reference here is a listing of some of the degrees or statements.
review posts #2 , #4, and #5 here at
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=390318&

the statement “No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church.” 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, and the Magisterium after that will be intrepreting …etc, etc.etc.

in other words :
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!

This is a very self-serving statement don’t you think? Don’t you wonder how this looks like, especially to non-Catholics? It just seems totally absurd. I hope the RCC could come up with a better explanation/defense than this.

 

[EDWARDJL]

XBaptist,

I am very confused as well. I was pleased to hear the modern interpretation of this doctrine, which goes like this. There are people that are brought up in other faiths that believe in Christ and are validly baptized. They are invincibly ignorant of the Catholic church.

However, whether they know it or not, they are part of the Catholic church. There is only one baptism. In fact, you do not need to be within the physical bounds of the Catholic church to be in the Catholic church.

However, this is contrary to the pre- Vatican II teaching. You are right. Previously, you had to be physically within the boundary of the Catholic church. You had to be “on Peter’s Boat” and ackowledge the Pope as the leader of the church. Today protestants are referred to as “our separated brethren”. Prior to Vatican II, they were referred to a Heretics.

To me, these views seem to be opposed. If this is dogma, and is given ex cathera, then it is an infallable teaching of the Pope. So the questions raised, is how can you have two opposing views, which are both infallable.

 

[Bengoshi]

Looking at truth

I’ve only just spotted this thread, so hope I can help.
First, beware of Christopher Ferrara – he has dissenting and schismatic ideas. He will not give you the dogmas or doctrines with truth or clarity.

Christ’s Church knew from the beginning that non-Catholics could be saved:
Pope St Clement knew that non-Catholics could be saved from the beginning, for he wrote in about 95 A.D. to the Church in Corinth: “Those who repented for their sins, appeased God in praying and received salvation, even though they were aliens to God.” Catholic Apologetics Today, 1986, Fr William G Most, p 145].

Extra ecclesiam, nulla salus (literally, “outside the Church, there is no salvation”). Some people have wished to understand this saying in the most literal sense: that is, that the person who is not formally a practicing Catholic cannot be saved. The Church has condemned such an interpretation (cf. Denzinger-Schönmetzer, 3870-3873).

This is not to say that the maxim is false. Properly understood, it is quite true. The Latin word extra can mean either “without” or “outside.” The correct interpretation and sense of the maxim is that we cannot be saved without the Church. It is through the Church, which carries on and makes present the salvific work of Jesus Christ in the world, that all who are saved reach heaven (even if it is perhaps only there that they realize it). Those who, through no fault of their own, have never known Christ or his Church can still be saved. But their salvation, too, is the effect of Jesus working through his Church. In a positive sense, this theological principle “means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body” (CCC #846).
Encyclopedia of Catholic Doctrine, OSV].

I understand where you are coming from, however, upon reading the papal excerpts that he quoted, it would really seem that the pre-V2 church understood the maxim as an absolute condemnation to those who are not Roman Catholics. They even went on to explicitly state that heretics and schismatics (which would include the eastern orthodox churches) are not and cannot be saved unless they unite and submit themselves to the ROMAN pontiff, meaning become ROMAN Catholics.

If we then say that only their interpretation of the documents is in error, then what would happen to objective discernible truth? This is a quandary that XBaptist is also in. If the RCC is to defend its so-called infallibility, then this is an issue that really needs to be resolved, unless of course the RCC would just tell people to check in their brains before entering the RCC and submit with docility to the Magisterium.

 

[Bengoshi]

EWTN-as some kind of super liberal , modernistic tv station ?the thought of that is rather funny-why read the sedevacantist ultra wackos stuff?There is no authority other then the Church rhat interpret documents-none.So it doesn’t really matter what “they” say or what is quoted"usually out of context or twisted.These are interpretation of the authors.
EWTN is the most orthodox organization I can think of-so if they are denigrating it then more then likely they are heterodox.

Can we just please stick to answering the critics (Ferrara and Muggeridge) point-by-point instead of attacking them personally, which is the fallacy of argumentum ad hominem? Their points have the appearance of validity and have to be addressed.

 

[DustyOR]

There is no salvation outside of Christ.

Jesus said unto him, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no man cometh unto the Father, but by Me.’ ** John 14:6**

Neither is there salvation in any other; for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. Act 4:12**
**
There is only one way.
I find it quite amazing to speak of it as though membership in a particular denomination guarantees salvation.
To speak in such terms, is to make oneself the judge and there is only ONE
judge and that would be God.
We are His creation, nothing more.

 

[Bookcat]

again…not so new:

In A.D. 400, Augustine said, “When we speak of within and without in relation to the Church, it is the position of the heart that we must consider, not that of the body … All who are within in heart are saved in the unity of the ark” (Baptism 5:28:39).

 

[Bookcat]

Do not forget these:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6461037&postcount=25