No Salvation Outside of the Catholic Church

[Winchester]

In light of the recent abuse of the idea perpretrated more than once by a newbie, I resurrect this thread.

There is no Salvation outside the Catholic Church is a true statement. What it means to be outside the Catholic Church is perhaps a little harder to grasp.

[Resurrexi]

"This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved." (Second Ecumenical Vatican Council, [i]Lumen Gentium[/i], 14)

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='02 August 2005 - 03:37 PM' timestamp='1123015030' post='668853']
It is important when dealing with this doctrine to remember the Church's teaching on mortal sin, because for a mortal sin to be imputable to the moral agent (including the sin of not entering into full communion with the Catholic Church), it must be committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent. In other words, if a man – through no fault of his own – is invincibly ignorant of the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church, and as a consequence fails to enter into communion with the Church, this sin may not be imputable to him. Moreover, if he follows the light of grace and keeps the natural moral law he may yet be saved, even though he will be lacking all of the many graces and spiritual helps that are found only within the Catholic Church, and which are meant to bring him to salvation. But if such a man is saved, he is still saved through the grace of God that flows to him from the Catholic Church, even though he is invincibly ignorant of this truth. That being said, any man who knows that membership in the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation, but either fails to enter into communion with the Church, or if already a member of the Church, fails to remain in communion with her, such a man stands self-condemned and will not achieve eternal salvation.
[/quote]


[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='02 August 2005 - 04:54 PM' timestamp='1123019669' post='668919']
[b]thank you[size="5"][i] [u]ape[/u][/i][/size]..[/b] i'm not sure if you're trying to convince me of anything or...
for a Catholic, that explanation would suffice, but not for me. you have to presume that they wrote that with the mortal sins criteria or its basic idea in mind. i think the way they wrote it indicates that they did not have that in mind. i dunno, sounds like a cop out that argument..
anyway, whatever your purpose for stating that, it is good food for thought.

is that link thedude gave us stopping at st. gregory of nazi round late 300's for everyone else, or is it just me?
[/quote]
Did anyone else notice this? I think it's funny.

Edited October 1, 2009 by Nihil Obstat

[N/A Gone]

I always understood this statement as the fact that our salvation is through the Catholic Church. It is the gifts/teachings of her that she has preserved that have been brought into protestant communities that are able to provide salvation. It is the charity she offers and the example she is. Not a membership situation.

[dairygirl4u2c]

i coulda swore once i read cyprian saying 'no salvation outside' in a strict sounding sense, and then later saying that the ingorant etc could be saved. but i can't find that lenient passage, maybe im wrong.
point being, cyprian was from early on, 200s'ish, it wouldn't make sense for him to be trying to cop out, and indicates how later generations could have sounded like a contradiction, but really weren't.

[Winchester]

It's not a copout, it's a proper understanding of authority and the means of salvation. We are not saved by knowledge. For God, ignorance is an excuse. We are not saved by knowledge; misunderstanding cannot be a reason for condemnation. We must be aware of our choices for them to count.

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote]"There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one at all can be saved" Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council finished 1215

Aquinas life: 1225 - 1274 Summa Theologica, 1266-1273. taught that those who expressly wanted to be baptized catholic but died before actual baptism could be saved. (this is the most lenience i could find in the time of these quotes)

"We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff" Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam published 1302 [/quote]

'no one at all', 'every human creature'... these sound pretty absolute.
you can also combine that with the common understanding that developed. people say that just because people misunderstood, didn't mean they were right. but that sounds pretty convenient too.

kinda like that wikipedia entry says (not citing as authoritatively final... just take it with a grain of salt- and it is just a 'controversy' doesnt mean any position is right):
[quote]Controversy for the Catholic Church
Those who disagree with the Church's interpretation of the teaching "outside the Church there is no salvation" claim that the Church has contradicted itself in its teachings on faith and morals. They say that the medieval Church statements indicate that no person could possibly be saved unless a member of the physical Church on earth, and that this was the meaning intended by the Popes of the time, who made no "lenient statements" on the matter. People like Father Leonard Feeney and some traditionalists believe their understanding of the original doctrine to be correct and that, if the Church were now to teach that the salvation of non-Catholics is possible, it would contradict its earlier teaching, and would violate the doctrine of the Church's infallibility. Some sedevacantists hold that the Second Vatican Council did in fact defect from the Church's infallible teaching, and that what is today generally recognized as the Catholic Church is a counterfeit, which therefore is not infallible.[/quote]

[Akalyte]

Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Sallus. 100% correct. Christ is the way the truth and the life, the very entrance into heaven. If the catholic church is his very church (which can be traced to him and the leaders apointed by him), that means there is none else. This was meant to be because his coming marked the end of the world. He wouldnt confuse us by creating a half a million different sects and denominations. That is satan's creation because satan like all villains, he divides and conquers. The Catholic church is not divided and conquered, because the body still has a head. All else have been severed from the head due to the sad fact that those who leave the catholic church feel entitled to build there own churches therefore challening Christ some unknowingly and pridefully to their own destruction. Thus says the spirit of God..

[dairygirl4u2c]

im not sure of any other explicit contradictions. there's surely debateable ones... eg limbo, death penalty, 'the pope is God' etc. i dont rememebr the others.

and aside from lack of contradiction.. there's simply far out teachings that most sane people dont really believe. it's like you'd have to believe the crazy stuff to be catholic, or just tell yourself 'if that's what God wants then that's the way it is... but hopefully this isn't right" etc. that's what religious people do. i was a religious person, once, i know i did it too.

limbo
[quote]The teaching of Carthage was infallibly approved as a rule of the Faith by Pope Zosimus and Pope Innocent I and by the ecumenical councils, which were approved by other popes.

“It has been decided likewise that if anyone says that for this reason the Lord said: “In my house there are many mansions”: that it might be understood that in the kingdom of heaven there will be some middle place or some place anywhere where happy infants live who departed from this life without baptism, without which they cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven, which is life eternal, let him be anathema. For when the Lord says: “Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he shall not enter into the kingdom of God” [John 3:5], what Catholic will doubt that he will be a partner of the devil who has not deserved to be a coheir of Christ? For he who lacks the right part will without doubt run into the left [cf. Matt. 25:41,46].”[/quote]

[Kitty]

[quote name='Winchester' date='01 October 2009 - 05:42 PM' timestamp='1254433347' post='1975829']

There is no Salvation outside the Catholic Church is a true statement.
[/quote]

I will always refuse to believe this.

I know several people who have died who were not religious, but they were the most gracious, compassionate, loving people you've ever known, perhaps even more than people you would meet in the Catholic church. How could someone completely selfless and giving go to hell. Absolute bullcarp and I refuse to believe a statement like that.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Kitty' date='01 October 2009 - 11:33 PM' timestamp='1254458015' post='1976083']
I will always refuse to believe this.

I know several people who have died who were not religious, but they were the most gracious, compassionate, loving people you've ever known, perhaps even more than people you would meet in the Catholic church. How could someone completely selfless and giving go to hell. Absolute bullcarp and I refuse to believe a statement like that.
[/quote]
Aren't you listening to the explanations here?

[eagle_eye222001]

[quote name='Kitty' date='02 October 2009 - 12:33 AM' timestamp='1254458015' post='1976083']
I will always refuse to believe this.

I know several people who have died who were not religious, but they were the most gracious, compassionate, loving people you've ever known, perhaps even more than people you would meet in the Catholic church. How could someone completely selfless and giving go to hell. Absolute bullcarp and I refuse to believe a statement like that.
[/quote]

They could end up in heaven. The Catholic Church has not condemned anyone into hell.


http://www.catholic.com/library/Salvation_Outside_the_Church.asp

[i]The Catechism of the Catholic Church, following historic Christian theology since the time of the early Church Fathers, refers to the Catholic Church as "the universal sacrament of salvation" (CCC 774–776), and states: "The Church in this world is the sacrament of salvation, the sign and the instrument of the communion of God and men" (CCC 780).

Many people misunderstand the nature of this teaching.

Indifferentists, going to one extreme, claim that it makes no difference what church one belongs to. Certain radical traditionalists, going to the other extreme, claim that unless one is a full-fledged, baptized member of the Catholic Church, one will be damned.

The following quotations from the Church Fathers give the straight story. They show that the early Church held the same position on this as the contemporary Church does—that is, while it is normatively necessary to be a Catholic to be saved (see CCC 846; Vatican II, Lumen Gentium 14), there are exceptions, and it is possible in some circumstances for people to be saved who have not been fully initiated into the Catholic Church (CCC 847).

Notice that the same Fathers who declare the normative necessity of being Catholic also declare the possibility of salvation for some who are not Catholics.

These can be saved by what later came to be known as "baptism of blood" or " baptism of desire" (for more on this subject, see the Fathers Know Best tract, The Necessity of Baptism).

The Fathers likewise affirm the possibility of salvation for those who lived before Christ and who were not part of Israel, the Old Testament People of God.

However, for those who knowingly and deliberately (that is, not out of innocent ignorance) commit the sins of heresy (rejecting divinely revealed doctrine) or schism (separating from the Catholic Church and/or joining a schismatic church), no salvation would be possible until they repented and returned to live in Catholic unity.[/i]

[Mark of the Cross]

I looked into the eyes of a Muslim once and was not surprised to see the light of the lord.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Akalyte' date='01 October 2009 - 07:58 PM' timestamp='1254448717' post='1976023']
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Sallus. 100% correct. Christ is the way the truth and the life, the very entrance into heaven. If the catholic church is his very church (which can be traced to him and the leaders apointed by him), that means there is none else. This was meant to be because his coming marked the end of the world. He wouldnt confuse us by creating a half a million different sects and denominations. That is satan's creation because satan like all villains, he divides and conquers. The Catholic church is not divided and conquered, because the body still has a head. All else have been severed from the head due to the sad fact that those who leave the catholic church feel entitled to build there own churches therefore challening Christ some unknowingly and pridefully to their own destruction. Thus says the spirit of God..
[/quote]

[OraProMe]

The notion that Catholic dogma undergoes development and evolution has been condemned (Pascendi & Lamentabilli Sane) but it appears to me that EENS has under gone significant change in understanding. The Athanasian creed definitely seems very strict on the issue as do the medieval statements from the Church (one must be subject to the Roman Pontiff). I don't really see how the verses in the bible about being born again of WATER or "unless a man eat of my flesh and drink of my blood he does not have life in him" can be seen as consistent with Baptism of Desire. First we had the strict understanding of EENS, then catechumens who died before being baptised could be saved, now we have the implicit desire for baptism. To be honest it seems to me like EENS has been adapted to changing theological and social factors. The only conclusion I can come to is that "Outside the Church there is No Salvation" is a man made doctrine.

There's also a Feenyite community in Still River who have been regularized without renouncing their position too, if that's of any consequence.

Edited October 2, 2009 by OraProMe

[Winchester]

[quote name='OraProMe' date='02 October 2009 - 03:59 AM' timestamp='1254470381' post='1976128']
I don't really see how the verses in the bible about being born again of WATER or "unless a man eat of my flesh and drink of my blood he does not have life in him" can be seen as consistent with Baptism of Desire. [/quote]
Thief on the cross.

[dairygirl4u2c]

if the catholic church is true though.. and i concede it could be, im gonna be kickin myself for planting all these seeds of doubt and destruction. that's for sure. im glad our God is merciful.

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote name='OraProMe' date='02 October 2009 - 03:59 AM' timestamp='1254470381' post='1976128']
The notion that Catholic dogma undergoes development and evolution has been condemned (Pascendi & Lamentabilli Sane) but it appears to me that EENS has under gone significant change in understanding. The Athanasian creed definitely seems very strict on the issue as do the medieval statements from the Church (one must be subject to the Roman Pontiff). I don't really see how the verses in the bible about being born again of WATER or "unless a man eat of my flesh and drink of my blood he does not have life in him" can be seen as consistent with Baptism of Desire. First we had the strict understanding of EENS, then catechumens who died before being baptised could be saved, now we have the implicit desire for baptism. To be honest it seems to me like EENS has been adapted to changing theological and social factors. The only conclusion I can come to is that "Outside the Church there is No Salvation" is a man made doctrine.

There's also a Feenyite community in Still River who have been regularized without renouncing their position too, if that's of any consequence.
[/quote]

im pretty sure that the pope who said 'no development', was talking about contradictive development. not that you're sayin he's not. but it could be those literal passages mean something lenient, if there were indicators that said so. i just dont see it, not that it's not there. we'd have to do a dissertation, maybe there's more out there etc. then that would be proper development.
or when Jesus says 'you must eat my flesh', that i dont think would necessarily mean a baby would have to, or someone in the womb. that'd be taking him too literally. language isn't meant to be taken like that. this is different than 'no salvation outside..' at least possibly, cause it seems that their intention was strict. that's why i often consider the orthodox church to be formidable, they believe it, and anglicans episcopols etc are at least interesting.

[Laudate_Dominum]

This thread is 4u2c. I am here 4u2c. I love that. This post is 4u2c. Excellent posts 4u2c by dairy.

[sacredheartandbloodofjesus]

Ive heard that no matter what Salvation comes from and through the Catholic Church, its merits, graces and so on and God can apply this salvation to whomsoever he wishes. But it comes from the Catholic Church and its graces. I could explain it alot better but hopefully you guys do the reasoning and come to understand what this means, because quite honestly I dont like typing.