Replies

That whole statement is guesswork on your part and it is not taught that way by the Church. You are reading too much of the politically correct gobbledygook in the CCC. You need to read the Trent Catechism.

I fully admit I'm no catechist. However, I don't get you saying that the Trent Catechism is somehow superior or overrides the CCC.

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body: Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

Nothing I said contradicts the Catechism. I didn't "grant" salvation to the Protestants or non-Christians, nor am I saying "Being a good person" will get you to Heaven. If someone through no fault of their own is ignorant of Christ and His Church still wears the law of God on his heart he may...may...MAY be saved. But it's IN SPITE of their non-Catholic status.

Feel free to take it up with His Holiness if you disagree.

This is from an article on the Catechism by the St. Benedict Center.

On page 224, under a heading, Outside the Church there is no salvation, paragraph #846 begins:

How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Here, at the very beginning of the discussion, we encounter trickery. First, we are told that the "affirmation" cannot easily be understood; it must be explained to us! This is typical Modernist "hokum." What could be more clear than the words used by Pope Boniface VIII in his Bull Unam Sanctam in 1302:

"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."

Then we are told it is just an "affirmation" by Church Fathers; the catechumen is not informed that it is a dogma of the Church, defined infallibly by three Popes, one in Council. Finally, the exclusive negative formula of the dogma is restated in the form of an inclusive affirmative truism, or obvious truth. What does this do to the meaning of the dogma? Pope Innocent III had declared ex cathedra:

"There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one at all is saved." (Lateran Council IV, 1215)

In the philosophical science called Logic, this proposition is known as a UNIVERSAL NEGATIVE; it permits no exceptions at all! On the other hand, by substituting for it the simple truism that "all salvation comes from Christ ... through the Church ..." the door is opened to every exception imaginable, and that includes Rahner's "universal salvation." Let us demonstrate our point:

Universal Affirmative: "All men have rational souls" This proposition does not rule out the possibility of creatures, other than men, also having rational souls.

Universal Negative: "Outside of men, there are no rational souls" This proposition permits no exceptions; only men have rational souls. (Note: Angels are intellectual spirits, not rational souls.)

Even if everything else in the Catechism were Traditional and orthodox, which it is not, this piece of sleight-of-hand alone justifies our rejecting it. Here, its Modernist authors completely change the meaning of the key dogma of the Church.

The Catechism continues, quoting another truism from Vatican II:

" ... Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it." (Lumen Gentium 14)

It then introduces its first exception, "This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church, and quotes Lumen Gentium 16:

"Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience those too may achieve eternal salvation."

With the positively stated, non-qualifying formula for the dogma as its reference, the Catechism introduces exceptions based on a distinction between "knowing" or "not knowing" about the Church. This distinction, with its ultimate destructive effect on the de fide requirements for salvation, is a logical consequence of the denial of Original Sin by the heretic Pelagius in the 4th century. This heresy was laid to rest by Saints Augustine and Jerome, and the Papally approved Councils of Carthage (418) and Orange (529), but was resurrected in the infamous 1949 "Letter to the Archbishop of Boston," to which the decrees of Vatican II, and its catechism, give credit for the resurrection. It is a novel teaching which, heretofore, has never been approved by the Church. We disregard and reject it, as Pope John Paul II says we must.

On page 320 of the Catechism, under a topic heading, The Necessity of Baptism, we are taught the following in numbered paragraphs:

#1257 Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. ...God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

Both of these sentences are novelties, never before taught by the Church. The first contradicts the Council of Trent's Canon V on Baptism: "If anyone saith that Baptism is optional, that is, not necessary unto salvation, let him be anathema." The second infers that Christ deceived us when He said, "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." By this clear, unequivocal statement, Our Lord not only bound salvation to the Sacrament of Baptism, but He also bound Himself to the same Sacrament.

In their determination to make salvation easily available to all men, and nullify the necessity of the Church, these Modernist fabricators deliberately ignore the fact of the Providence of God His proven willingness to provide a teacher and the Sacrament for every worthy man who needs them, as demonstrated in the cases of Cornelius the Centurion, the Eunuch of Candace, and Saul of Tarsus, all related in the Acts of the Apostles.