Which dogmas do we have that with certainty excludes universalism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter avemariagratiaplena
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Vico said:
There is hope for an individual to be saved, not all entirely .
Click to expand...
There is hope for each individual to be saved. If that hope is realized in each case, then all will be saved. The Church teaches that Catholics must accept the existence of Hell as a place of eternal damnation, but also that Catholic may hope that no one will be condemned to spend eternity there. The admissibility of that hope requires the possibility of its accomplishment.
 
Hodos said:
You nitpicked me for referring to specific scripture passages that speak clearly and authoritatively to the subject,
Click to expand...
When said person asked for a dogma, you didn’t provide one. The issue isn’t Scripture here but what the Church believes consistently.
Hodos said:
Are you offended when scripture is used to defend Church teaching?
Click to expand...
Scripture at the same time has never claimed to be a summary of all of Church teaching and doctrine. It would seem you are offended I called your bluff.
 
Last edited:
TMC said:
40.png
Vico:
There is hope for an individual to be saved, not all entirely .
Click to expand...
There is hope for each individual to be saved. If that hope is realized in each case, then all will be saved. The Church teaches that Catholics must accept the existence of Hell as a place of eternal damnation, but also that Catholic may hope that no one will be condemned to spend eternity there. The admissibility of that hope requires the possibility of its accomplishment.
Click to expand...
No, it does not follow. The sum of all uncertainties is uncertainty. The sum of all hopes is hope, a feeling and desire.

(Oxford) hope, noun:
a feeling of expectation and desire for a certain thing to happen.
Click to expand...
 
Julius_Caesar said:
When said person asked for a dogma, you didn’t provide one. The issue isn’t Scripture here but what the Church believes consistently.
Click to expand...
His initial question is “what teaching”. The implication that he Church doesn’t accept teachings clearly communicated in scripture is stunning. I would hope your colleagues would disagree with you on this. I do not believe you are even in agreement with your own Church on this matter. If not though, well…then the Reformation had a point.
Julius_Caesar said:
Scripture at the same time has never claimed to be a summary of all of Church teaching and doctrine. It would seem you are offended I called your bluff.
Click to expand...
I did not claim that it was. I merely referenced Christ’s clear teaching on the relevant point. If you deny his teaching, okay, that’s on you. I am not offended. Just surprised that scripture appears to be such a trigger for you. . . . Also, not sure how someone is “bluffing” by referring to Christ’s teaching on a particular manner, particularly when it wasn’t addressed to you. Interesting take on that though.
 
Last edited:
Hodos said:
His initial question is “what teaching”. The implication that he Church doesn’t accept teachings clearly communicated in scripture is stunning
Click to expand...
And if you read the title, you’d see the teaching refers to dogmas. The only implication is you selectively read. :man_shrugging:t6:

. . . .
 
Last edited:
Julius_Caesar said:
And if you read the title, you’d see the teaching refers to dogmas. The only implication is you selectively read. :man_shrugging:t6:
Click to expand...
Yeah, when answering doctrinal questions I tend to go to the primary source first.
Julius_Caesar said:
It would seem you, on the other hand are triggered, because you have nothing else to bring to the table. So maybe you could do yourself
Click to expand...
LOL, yes, I have nothing else to bring to the table when someone asks what Christ’s teaching is on salvation but his clear teaching as provided by his apostles. I am comfortable with that.
 
Last edited:
Hodos said:
yes, I have nothing else to bring to the table when someone asks what Christ’s teaching is on salvation
Click to expand...
Except that said person asked for dogmas. As in teaching of the Church.

So do you have said dogmas?
 
Julius_Caesar said:
So do you have said dogmas?
Click to expand...
Yes. I demonstrated them above. Do YOU? Again, you never mentioned a single dogmatic statement in your replies. So if you have nothing further to offer than to argue without providing anything relevant to the topic, then Bye.
 
Last edited:
Julius_Caesar said:
Scripture doesn’t automatically equal dogma. You need Church councils for that.

So no you do not.
Click to expand...
So the Trinity wasn’t a thing until Nicea? That’s a weird take. Are you actually agreeing with the Dan Brown conspiracy theorists?
 
Julius_Caesar said:
Did people define it as such in A D. 30? No.
Click to expand...
  1. Yes, they confessed there is one God. We see this in Deuteronomy forward.
  2. Yes, they confessed the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Examples abound, e.g. Matthew 28:18-20
  3. Yes, they confessed the Father as God. We see this in Genesis forward.
  4. Yes, they confessed the Son as God. Examples abound, e.g., John 1:1, Philippians 2:5-11, etc.
  5. Yes, they confessed the Holy Spirit as personal and as God. We see this in Acts 5 and in Hebrews 2 for example.
  6. Yes, they confessed that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct one from another. We see this for example in the Baptism of Jesus in Matthew 3, and also in the Great Commission in Matthew 28.
We see this in pre-nicene writings such as in Athenagoras who coined the Greek version of the term Trinity.

Yeah, it was always there. It was merely consolidated in creedal form in 381 at Constantinople. However the teachings that comprise the doctrinal summary known as the Trinitarian formula pre-existed Nicea by almost 300 years.
 
Last edited:
Hodos said:
  • Yes, they confessed there is one God. We see this in Deuteronomy forward.
  • Yes, they confessed the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Examples abound, e.g. Matthew 28:18-20
  • Yes, they confessed the Father as God. We see this in Genesis forward.
  • Yes, they confessed the Son as God. Examples abound, e.g., John 1:1, Philippians 2:5-11, etc.
  • Yes, they confessed the Holy Spirit as personal and as God. We see this in Acts 5 and in Hebrews 2 for example.
  • Yes, they confessed that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct one from another. We see this for example in the Baptism of Jesus in Matthew 3, and also in the Great Commission in Matthew 28.
Click to expand...
And yet, no Apostle goes around saying the Athanasian Creed. It’s development of doctrine
 
At the synod of Constantinople in 543 they condemned Origen’s belief of universalism.

Specifically, canon 9: “If anyone says or holds that the punishment of demons and impious human beings is temporary and that it will have an end at some time, and that there will be a restoration of demons and impious human beings, let him be anathema.”

However, 10 years later, while the 5th ecumenical council in 553 did condemn many of the heresies of 543, the anathemas do not outright condemn the universalism that the synod did.
 
Since the Catechism, CCC section 1033 to 1037, teaches us that hell indeed exists, and our ending up there is a real possibility, this would exclude a certainty of universal salvation. The best that we Catholics can officially have is a “hopeful universalism.”

CCC 1037 states: God predestines no one to go to hell, for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance.”

Church Fathers and theologians, most notably Hans Urs von Balthasar, have rightly pointed out that the Church has never declared that any particular individual is in hell, and so the faithful can, and even should, maintain the hope that no person is in hell. Philosophers and saints, such as Edith Stein, St. Benedicta of the Cross, have surmised how God might accomplish this while respecting our free will.

Good books which I have read on this topic include A Catholic Reading Guide to Universalism, by Fr. Robert Wild, Salvation and Damnation, by Fr. William J. Dalton, S.J., and of course, Dare We Hope That All Men Be Saved? by von Balthasar.
 
Last edited:
TMC said:
This is the clear conclusion of the teaching of both the Catechism and the Dogmatic Constitution.
Click to expand...
And as other people have said, we know some are in hell from that same source.

But for the third time, where is your source?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top