Thank you very much for your replies…!
I think I am having this trouble because of the forceful language that is used to define and defend this dogma in the pre-Vatican II Church. It doesn’t seem that the current teaching of the Church is a “development” of the dogma, but rather a renunciation of it. As in the words of my priest: “They don’t believe that anymore.” Seems my priest believes that the dogma is actually reversed, and he’s fine with that.
Here’s an example of the “forceful” pre-VII language that I’m talking about. (Also, the following even seems to veto the idea of further developments of dogma, as I understand it.) Anyway, here’s the quote:
*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 showed my priest this quote (and several other quotes as well), but his response is that I have to trust the Church’s interpretation of these dogmas and not my own. I’m really struggling with putting my faith into something that doesn’t make any sense to me… that in fact seems to contradict itself. This is why I left the Baptists - because it didn’t make sense to me.
Sorry - I’m not trying to be difficult - it just comes naturally…
I am going back to this post to ask the poster, XBaptist, where you obtained it. The reason I ask this is because I researched the alleged source [First Vatican Council, Sess. 3, Chap. 2 on Revelation] and found nothing there. Instead this is what I found:
Chapter 2 On revelation
The same holy mother church holds and teaches that God, the source and end of all things,
can be known
with certainty from the consideration of created things,
by the natural power of human reason : ever since the creation of the world, his invisible nature has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. [13]
It was, however, pleasing to his wisdom and goodness to reveal
himself and
the eternal laws of his will
to the human race by another, and that a supernatural, way.
This is how the Apostle puts it : In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son [14] .
It is indeed thanks to this divine revelation, that those matters concerning God
which are not of themselves beyond the scope of human reason,
can, even in the present state of the human race, be known
by everyone
without difficulty,
with firm certitude and
with no intermingling of error.
It is not because of this that one must hold revelation to be absolutely necessary; the reason is that God directed human beings to a supernatural end,
that is a sharing in the good things of God that utterly surpasses the understanding of the human mind; indeed eye has not seen, neither has ear heard, nor has it come into our hearts to conceive what things God has prepared for those who love him [15] .
Now this supernatural revelation, according to the belief of the universal church, as declared by the sacred council of Trent, is contained in
written books and
unwritten traditions,
which were
received by the apostles from the lips of Christ himself,
or came to the apostles by the dictation of the holy Spirit,
and were passed on as it were from hand to hand until they reached us [16].
The complete books of the old and the new Testament with all their parts, as they are listed in the decree of the said council and as they are found in the old Latin Vulgate edition, are to be received as sacred and canonical.
These books the church holds to be sacred and canonical
not because she subsequently approved them by her authority after they had been composed by unaided human skill,
nor simply because they contain revelation without error,
but because,
being written under the inspiration of the holy Spirit,
they have God as their author,
and were as such committed to the church.
Now since the decree on the interpretation of holy scripture, profitably made by the council of Trent, with the intention of constraining rash speculation, has been wrongly interpreted by some, we renew that decree and declare its meaning to be as follows: that
in matters of faith and morals,
belonging as they do to the establishing of christian doctrine,
that meaning of holy scripture must be held to be the true one,
which holy mother church held and holds,
since it is her right to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of holy scripture.
In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret holy scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the fathers."
I suspect you got your quote from a non Catholic source.
I am not saying that all the encyclicals that Redbert quoted are ex cathedra for I would have to chack on that one as well, but the purpose of declaring something as ex cathedra gives it the mark of infallibility. It means exactly that, that the pope is speaking from the chair of Peter, the supposed “first pope” of the Catholic Church.
