Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus

[Carson Weber]

BLAZEr,

I'm pretty tired of them myself.

[Laudate_Dominum]

Me too, but on the other hand many people have these kind of issues and maybe its more charitable to discuss them instead of telling people to basically keep it to themselves? Not sure though because a lot of times these discussions seem to violate the phorum guidelines and don't really end in a productive way.

Edited March 25, 2004 by Laudate_Dominum

[IcePrincessKRS]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='Mar 25 2004, 12:35 AM'] a lot of times these discussions seem to violate the phorum guidelines and don't really end in a productive way.

[/quote]
Yep.

I wish that threads that were Catholic to Catholic dialogue could be more civil discussion rather than one or more parties ending up condescending and the entire thread going to pot (which happens entirely too often with such threads).

If you read the description this section of the phorum is really intended for interfaith dialogue, so its even sadder that we Catholics decide we need to resort to such petty bickering.

[BLAZEr]

I know, I had a little sissy fit . . .

I apologize . . . it's just so hard to have a "normal" conversation with people who are more Catholic than the pope . . .

They have a word for these people . . . Waldensians

[IcePrincessKRS]

heh.... I wasn't talking about you in particular Blazer. I just meant the general course in which these kinds of threads tend to go. At least you apologized, which is more than can be said for the majority of people who throw "sissy fits" (I always called it a hissy fit....).

[Hananiah]

[quote]I apologize . . . it's just so hard to have a "normal" conversation with people who are more Catholic than the pope . . . [/quote]

That's a canard. You probably consider yourself more Catholic than Liberius, Blazer.

By the way, I don't believe there's such a thing as more or less Catholic. It is an either/or. One either believes every dogma the Church teaches, or one is an heretic.

Well, perhaps it is possible for one person to be "more" Catholic than another in so far as one Catholic might believe a dogma in its original intent while another might, while not outrightly rejecting it, believe in a watered down form which renders it almost meaningless.

Edited March 25, 2004 by Hananiah

[BLAZEr]

blah blah blah . . . [Edited by Ice Princess: Play nice! ]

[Hananiah]

Go back to the original definition of the dogma.

[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]

Obviously, any interpretation of [i]extra ecclesiam nulla salus[/i] in which the dogma does not exclude heretics and schismatics is wrong, ipso facto. No amount of mental and exegetical gymnastics will ever be able to reconcile Cantate Domino with the modern notion that all sincere Protestants and Eastern Orthodox are privy to a partial communion with the Catholic Church which will enable them to attain salvation.

Edited March 25, 2004 by Hananiah

[BLAZEr]

so, ummm now a Bull is Dogmatic?


Actually, can you post the Latin . . . I'd like to see his actual words . . .

[Livin_the_MASS]

I need to look that up for myself????

[quote]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]


????

[Hananiah]

Eugene wasn't just speaking by himself there; he was speaking as the head of the Council of Florence. Also, this isn't the only place the dogma is defined. Unam Sanctam does the same, as does the Fourth Lateran Council.

Sorry, I wouldn't know where to find the Latin.

[Bruce S]

It is the height of arrogance to tie DENOMINATIONAL choice [being a Roman Catholic] to salvation.

Jesus taught that confessing and alliance to HIS divinity was the key to salvation, never once did He tie it to a visible church on earth.

Salvation was simple, easily accomplished, and flowed naturally from this conversion experience.

This is what gets Catholics such a bum rap in the world today, JP II knows that, and WOULD if he could, END this ... but, it is that need to be always right, and the ties to the past teachings that stops his promoting this as infallible.

Sheesh.

Edited March 25, 2004 by Bruce S

[Ellenita]

Woah, this is a tough cookie!

However, with respect to babies which have been aborted, and unbaptised infants through no fault of their own.....I'm absolutely convinced that God is far greater in His mercy, love and grace than any of us can ever comprehend, so who are we to suggest they might not be in heaven? In fact, until, (and hopefully! ) we get there ourselves we will never know....I suspect, if we are not too busy praising God, we're going to get a shock at who might be there anyway.....!!


[b]IcePrincess[/b], you are doing a wonderful job as Mod -thanks! :wub: As a new convert, it's quite tiring keeping up with all the infighting, and it's appreciated that you keep it clean!


[quote]JP II knows that and WOULD if he could END this, but it is that need to always be right and the ties to the past teachings that stops his promoting this as infallible.[/quote]

Bruce, do you have some supporting evidence fo this statement?

[p0lar_bear]

CatholicCrusader,

Just out of curiosity, how is your position different than the condemned teachings of Fr. Feeney?

(Oh, and just in case, I know that he was not technically excommunicated for these teachings, but they were condemned by the Holy See nonetheless.)

[DojoGrant]

If Baptism unites all to the Church in, at least, an incomplete but partial way, and it is the only sacrament necessary for salvation, then all not completely united to the Church can still achieve salvation.

If Scripture and teaching are from the Church, which includes Baptism, and Baptism is the only Sacrament necessary for salvation, then those who are Baptised are Baptised into and through the Church. They do not have the other Sacraments to aid them, but they are not ipso facto excluded from eternal salvation.

So I don't see what the point of this argument is. We should preach the full Gospel and bring as many as we can into full communion with Christ's Church, but we do not say that they are damned either, because that implies a pre-death judgement takes place, and THAT is heresy.