Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus

[Veridicus]

"Outside the Church, there is No Salvatoin." What precisely does this mean beacuse it seems there have been different connotations applied to the statement at different times in Church history and I would like a seasoned response when I am asked that is as close to the longstanding tradition of the Church as possible. (when under question by protestand and sedevancantist, alike)?

My current understanding is that all grace flows from Christ, through the Church. This means that to be in the bosom of Mother Church is the surest means of salvation. But what about our protestant brethren who desist from joining the true Church? There is no way the Catholic Church will ever say that Lutheranism is an acceptable alternative; so how does one get "saved" if they are Lutheran? Is it like a 'baptism of desire' in that at their death they have in an 'extraordinary' way been a member of the true Church even if not physically present at the Eucharist? Does grace flow into the Protestant Churches FROM the Catholic Church? We are called to respect what is "holy and true," so does this mean that (insert protestant denomination here) experience salvific grace from those things that they share in common with the Catholic Church? (like prayer, the bible, charity etc.) It seems like these would be examples of 'sanctifying grace' at best rather than 'salvific grace' if salvation subsists within the Catholic Church as the statement suggests.

I would really appreciate a deep theological explanation of this because I'm tired of receiving feel-good non-substantial responses from people I've asked in person..."only God knows" yadayadayada... the Church would not have consistently made such statements as "Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus" throughout the centuries if there wasn't a proper purpose, meaning, and gravity to the statment.

Thank you

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Veridicus' post='1770026' date='Feb 2 2009, 05:40 PM']"Outside the Church, there is No Salvatoin." What precisely does this mean beacuse it seems there have been different connotations applied to the statement at different times in Church history and I would like a seasoned response when I am asked that is as close to the longstanding tradition of the Church as possible. (when under question by protestand and sedevancantist, alike)?

My current understanding is that all grace flows from Christ, through the Church. This means that to be in the bosom of Mother Church is the surest means of salvation. But what about our protestant brethren who desist from joining the true Church? There is no way the Catholic Church will ever say that Lutheranism is an acceptable alternative; so how does one get "saved" if they are Lutheran? Is it like a 'baptism of desire' in that at their death they have in an 'extraordinary' way been a member of the true Church even if not physically present at the Eucharist? Does grace flow into the Protestant Churches FROM the Catholic Church? We are called to respect what is "holy and true," so does this mean that (insert protestant denomination here) experience salvific grace from those things that they share in common with the Catholic Church? (like prayer, the bible, charity etc.) It seems like these would be examples of 'sanctifying grace' at best rather than 'salvific grace' if salvation subsists within the Catholic Church as the statement suggests.

I would really appreciate a deep theological explanation of this because I'm tired of receiving feel-good non-substantial responses from people I've asked in person..."only God knows" yadayadayada... the Church would not have consistently made such statements as "Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus" throughout the centuries if there wasn't a proper purpose, meaning, and gravity to the statment.

Thank you,[/quote]

I am not an ecclesiologist and my training in that field is limited to one undergrad course, but I will do my best to explain. First, I must also say that there are different interpretations about this among ecclesiologists; I am giving you the best I can.

The documents of Vatican II regarding EENS essentially say that Protestant denominations do not have the fullness of what Christ intended for Christianity, though they have some of what Christ intended. They lack the fullness of the means of salvation (the sacraments) found in the Catholic Church. However, they do have Baptism (those that practice it validly, that is). Baptism makes a person a Catholic; it is a Catholic sacrament. Baptism is also salvific; those who are baptized are washed of original sin and wiped clean, such that a newly baptized person would go straight to heaven if he died. So clearly, if Protestants have this, one can find salvation within their ranks. However, recall that it is a Catholic sacrament. The things that are salvific within Protestantism are the remnants they retain from the Catholic faith. Therefore, Protestantism in itself, which is in essence a negation of certain truths rather than a positive proposal ("protestant" means "protesting;" the very nature of Protestantism is to deny some truths of the Catholic faith, so that part of any Protestant faith that can truly be called "Protestant" is untrue, since it is a negation of the truth; with that in mind, it would be absurd to say that Protestantism itself can be salvific or that any good can come from it), offers no good, but only retains those goods against which it has not protested, including Baptism (though most Protestants deny the other sacraments and since none of them have valid priesthood, they could only have those sacraments that do not require a priest, namely Baptism, which can be done by anyone in case of emergency, and Marriage, which is conferred by spouses on one another with the priest acting simply as a witness [in the Latin Rite]). So the Truth necessary for salvation is entirely Catholic and so are the sacraments. The fullness of the faith subsists in the Catholic Church, but the Protestant "ecclesial communities" (which is the proper term for a Protestant "Church") are imperfectly connected to the Catholic Church through those matters of faith and through the sacraments they retain. So in short, you are correct, there is no salvation outside the Church, but Protestants are not entirely severed from the Church, and can share in salvation to the degree that they are ignorant of their separation and insofar as they practice the faith to the best of their knowledge and participating in those salvific things taken from the Catholic faith. If a Protestant becomes aware that the Catholic Church is the true Church and that Protestantism is lacking, then that person must enter the fullness of communion or else be guilty of the same heresy begun by the Protestant reformers. However, if they are unaware, then there is for all practical reasons no difference between a person who is Baptized and subsequently uncatechized, but tries to follow the little he knows of the faith, and a Protestant who is Baptized and follows what he knows of the true faith, that is, what has been retained by the Protestants from the Catholic Church.

For an example of something similar, consider the first Korean saints. They are the only civilization in the history of Christianity that was never evangelized. Instead, Koreans made contact with traders who had Bibles and Church texts for sale but were not themselves evangelists. The Koreans read the Bible and were convinced of the truth of it. On their own, the set up a Church resembling the Catholic Church and did baptize. When Catholic missionaries arrived, they found Christians already there who had a thriving underground for generations. They came to find out, however, that the Koreans never had been evangelized, and therefore never had a bishop, and without that apostolic lineage, they never had valid priests, which meant they only had Baptism and Marriage. They had Baptism, though, because it does not require a priest. So they were validly Baptized faithful Christians, but they had been celebrating invalid sacraments and had several misunderstandings about the faith, much like today's Protestants who mean well but do not know any better. Now, the funny thing was that when this missionary reached them, he told them where he was from. He tried to explain in terms they understood and when they finally got it, the Koreans rejoiced right away because they had found someone who was on commission from what they called "the chief of Rome." The Koreans even had knowledge of Papal Primacy! Certainly these people were not outside the Church; they were simply lacking the fullness of communion, and as so many Protestants today are, it was through no fault of their own. God is very merciful.

I hope this helped.

God bless,

Micah