No Salvation Outside The Church

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Hananiah' date='May 5 2004, 04:09 PM']


Well, for one thing I do not consider non-Catholics brothers and sisters in Christ. I consider them heretics and schismatics in need of evangelization. This is often saddening, however I think in the long run this attitude will save more souls than the "we possess the fullness of Christ's Church whereas you only possess part" approach. [/quote]
If they are baptised they are your brothers and sisters in Christ whether you like it or not.

[amarkich]

Hello everyone. As you probaby know, I am very interested in this topic, hence my signature. I had previously typed the equivalent of a few pages, but I imprudently clicked a link on the website (I had a New Message) without saving what I had written. I do not have time to do this now, but I want to make just one comment. The Church has never said that we are "brothers" of heretics and schismatics, as they are rightly called by Hananiah. These who are outside the Church are outside the Ark of Salvation and will surely perish should they remain outside of it (c.f., fill-in any Doctor of the Church or any Saint for that matter). Those who are outside the Church who happen to be heretics (e.g., Protestants) are not our brothers anymore than those who are outside the Church who happen to be Rationalists and atheists. As far as I can see, the idea of heretics and schismatics being our "brothers" in Christ is simply an extention of the "brotherhood of the human race" and other New Age and Masonic beliefs infiltrating the Church. The Church is very firm in standing against not only heresies but also heretics themselves, and we must do the same, remembering that we should do our best to convert them at the same time, as they cannot reach Heaven otherwise. We must act, in a sense, the way that the government does. As the government's central goal in justice is first punishment and then rehabilitation, so our goal should be first to defend Truth and then to convert others to the One Truth. God bless.

[Hananiah]

[quote name='BeenaBobba' date='May 5 2004, 02:40 PM'] What do you think that "know" means? Sure, just about everyone knows that Catholicism exists, but there are non-Catholics who do not know Catholicism to be the truth. If that were the case, they'd probably be Catholic. There is a difference between knowing that Catholicism is the truth and rejecting it (in which case salvation is not possible) and knowing that Catholicism exists but sincerely believing that Catholicism is not fully true. [/quote]
If the only people who fell under the the condemnation of Unam Sanctam, Cantate Domino, et al were people who believed the Catholic Church to be the true Church of Christ, but rejected her anyway, this would only include about a dozen people in the entire course of Church history. Unam Sanctam says that [i]anyone[/i] who consciously rejects the Roman Pontiff excludes himself from membership in Christ's Church. It does not distinguish between those who sincerely believe they have the truth and those who know they are living a lie.

[quote]Many Protestants, because of a variety of social, psychological, and educational factors, [i]sincerely[/i] believe that what they believe is true -- and that Catholicism is false.  Many of them, also, love God and wish to follow Him.[/quote]
And many Jews, Muslims, and Pagans also belsincerely believe that what they believe is true, love God, and wish to follow Him. However, Cantate Domino is not very optimistic about their prospects for eternal salvation if they do not convert to Catholicism before their death. In fact, Cantate Domino even excludes from salvation Protestants and Eastern Orthodox who are so sincere in their beliefs that they would die for Christ.

[quote]The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church. (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.)[/quote]

[quote]The Catholic Church has said that salvation is [i]possible[/i] for those who are not [b]official[/b] members of the Catholic Church if they love God, follow Him, and are invincibly ignorant.[/quote]
I agree that it is possible for one to be a spiritual member of the Catholic Church without being a member of the visible insitution. One becomes a spiritual member of the Catholic Church through baptism (by water, desire, or blood) and remains so until such time as one severs this connection by mortal sin, or by denying subjection to the Roman Pontiff. So, baptized Protestant children can properly be called Christians, as can adults who live in very isolated Christian communities (e.g. Ethiopia, Syria) and who never consciously reject the Catholic Church.

[quote]If a Protestant, for example, was raised to believe that the Eucharist was just symbolic, that Catholics were heretical to believe otherwise, and that he was doing God's work in trying to convert Catholics from their "error" out of love, then I think it'd be pretty reasonable to say that they're invincibly ignorant.[/quote]
I agree. Invincible ignorance would excuse him from the guilt of the sin of heresy. He would be a heretic in good faith, which would make God more willing to grant him the graces required for conversion, and lessen his punishments in hell if he never converted, as compared to a heretic in bad faith.

[quote]Many Protestants who later convert to Catholicism testify that, had they been convinced of the truth of Catholicism sooner, they would have certainly been Catholic.  Ever read [i]Lumen Gentium[/i] and [i]Dominus Iesus[/i]?  Those who do not know that the Catholic Church is the one true Church [i]can possibily[/i] be saved.  If a Protestant does not know that the Catholic Church is the one true Church, then they can possibily be saved.[/quote]
Ok. They [i]can[/i] be saved. The next question to ask is [i]how[/i]. Cantate Domino can answer that for us; they must join the Catholic Church.

[quote]Then you'd disagree with the Catechism, which says that one must have [b]full knowledge[/b] that something is sinful (along with grave matter and full consent of the will) for someone to be guilty of mortal sin, no?  If someone is a Protestant and does not have full knowledge that the Catholic Church is the truth, how can they be held accountable?[/quote]
One who is privy to invincible ignorange will not be held accountable for the sin of rejecting the Catholic Church. However, since the Catholic Church is an absolutely necessary means of salvation (you can find many documents which compare her to Noah's ark) this will not change the fact that such a person must convert to her in order to be saved. It's like if your dad gave you a bike and told you that, in order to escape the floodwaters rising around you, you had to pedal to higher ground as fast as possible, and you didn't do it. Invincible ignorance might excuse you from the sin of disobeying your father, but it wouldn't change the fact that you would drown.

[quote]If they sin, then truthfully and sincerely repent and are fully contrite, why wouldn't they be able to be saved, presupposing their invincible ignorance of the truth of the Catholic Church?[/quote]
Even one, venial sin merits eternal death for those not in a familial, covenant relationship with the Father through Christ and His Church. Heretics and schismatics, like the Judaizers whom St. Paul condemned, would have to be perfect in order to be saved outside the Catholic Church.

[quote]Your position seems too close for comfort to rigorist Feeneyism (which the Catholic Church condemns).[/quote]
There are important differences. I acknowledge the validity of baptisms by desire and by blood, and I also acknowledge the possibility that there are large numbers of Christians who are spiritual, but not formal, members of the Catholic Church and hence can be saved (i.e. people who are baptized but never consciously reject the Catholic Church).

[quote]Then what do think of their Trinitarian water baptisms? If they're not "Christian" because of that, do you believe that they need to be re-baptized? I certainly hope you're not a Donatist.[/quote]
No, Jennifer, I'm not a Donatist. Like I said before, anyone who recieves a valid Trinitarian baptism becomes a spiritual member of the Catholic Church. One who, at a later time, rejects the Catholic Church, severs this tie, and is "severed from Christ, cut off from grace" (Gal 5:4).

God bless,
Ben

[PedroX]

Hannaniah,

A very thoughtful, and well stated post. I will need to ponder this more, but I wanted to give you some props upfront.

peace...

[Hananiah]

Thank you.

[cmotherofpirl]

Many people reject the Catholic Church based on the lies they have been told, and not actual Catholic Church teachings.

If I believed all the things my poor Baptist aunt was taught about the Catholic Church I would reject it too.

Evangelize all, and trust in the Mercy of God.

Hananiah that was an excellent post.

Edited May 6, 2004 by cmotherofpirl

[Katholikos]

We know that the decrees of the Councils are infallible teaching.

John A. Hardon, S.J.'s Modern Catholic Dictionary says this about encyclicals:
"A papal document treating of matters related to the general welfare of the church, sent by the pope to the bishops. Used especially in modern times to express the mind of the Pope to the people. Although not of themselves an infallible document, encyclicals may (and generally do) contain pronouncements on faith and morals that are [i]de facto[/i] infallible because they express the ordinary teaching of the Church.

About Papal Bulls, Father Hardon says: "The most solemn and weighty form of papal letter. The name is derived from the Latin [i]bulla[/i], the disklike leaden seal attached to such a document. It is used by the Pope in appointing a bishop. Formerly all papal letters of major importance, including canonization decrees, were called bulls, but the current [i]Acta Apostolicae Sedis[/i] gives some of these papal letters various names."


Does anyone know the degree of weight given to the pronouncements of bulls?

[cmotherofpirl]

It depends on which one, who it was directed to, and what it concerned.

[Katholikos]

duplicate post deleted

Edited May 6, 2004 by Katholikos

[Katholikos]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='May 5 2004, 08:15 PM'] Many people reject the Catholic Church based on the lies they have been told, and not actual Catholic Church teachings.

If I believed all the things my poor Baptist aunt was taught about the Catholic Church I would reject it too.

[/quote]
I was like your poor Baptist aunt. I thought the Catholic Church was evil, the enemy of democracy and truth, and that it was my duty to oppose her. I'll be forever grateful to God for giving me the willingness to open my mind and heart and unlearn all the bull-oney I was taught.

God bless and Mary keep, Likos.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='amarkich' date='May 5 2004, 09:58 PM'] Hello everyone. As you probaby know, I am very interested in this topic, hence my signature. I had previously typed the equivalent of a few pages, but I imprudently clicked a link on the website (I had a New Message) without saving what I had written. I do not have time to do this now, but I want to make just one comment. The Church has never said that we are "brothers" of heretics and schismatics, as they are rightly called by Hananiah. These who are outside the Church are outside the Ark of Salvation and will surely perish should they remain outside of it (c.f., fill-in any Doctor of the Church or any Saint for that matter). Those who are outside the Church who happen to be heretics (e.g., Protestants) are not our brothers anymore than those who are outside the Church who happen to be Rationalists and atheists. As far as I can see, the idea of heretics and schismatics being our "brothers" in Christ is simply an extention of the "brotherhood of the human race" and other New Age and Masonic beliefs infiltrating the Church. The Church is very firm in standing against not only heresies but also heretics themselves, and we must do the same, remembering that we should do our best to convert them at the same time, as they cannot reach Heaven otherwise. We must act, in a sense, the way that the government does. As the government's central goal in justice is first punishment and then rehabilitation, so our goal should be first to defend Truth and then to convert others to the One Truth. God bless. [/quote]
I thought those people properly baptised were our brothers
and sisters in Christ, however imperfectly joined to the Church.
Most people do not sit down and say "Gee, I'm going to be a heretic
today." They follow the creed they were raised in, and while they
are techically material heretics, they are not formal heretics, and
that is a big difference.
Nobody here said we should not evangelize our non-catholics
baptised brothers and sisters. Please stop implying this.