Posted on 11/23/2004 9:07:40 AM PST by Stubborn
Father Michael Muller was one of the most widely read theologians of the 19th Century. He ranks as one of the greatest defenders of the dogma “Outside the Church there is no salvation” in modern times. Father Muller always submitted his works to two Redemptorist theologians and to his religious superiors before publication, thus we are sure of the doctrinal soundness of his teachings. This article, first published in 1875, is one of the finest treatments of the doctrinal truth that Our Lord founded one true Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation. Father Muller’s firm writings are desperately needed in our time when this doctrine is denied by those who are the most influential members of our Holy Church. We publish Father Muller’s excellent little Catechism as an antidote to the prevalent religious indifferentism — an indifferentism that is the direct result of what Blessed Pius IX denounced as “Liberal Catholicism”.
As to your question, Does that mean that all those outside the old covenant before the promulgation of the new law (e.g. from Pentecost onwards) automatically were not saved? I am having difficulty understanding "Those outside the old covenant". Here I am assuming you are refering to pagans or unbelievers or those who did not believe in a Redeemer to come - if thats the case, then they were unjust or sinful since they denied the revelations as promulgated through the OT prophets and would have gone to hell if they died under the old law.
And thanks for your thoughtful reply!:-)
See post #90
I've read post 90. All of your quotes are post schism. Am I to take your response to my post to be that, in fact, all you have to rely upon to support your assertion that outside the ROMAN Catholic Church there is no salvation are the innovative and self-serving pronouncements of medieval popes and the proclaimations of non-Ecumenical Councils? If so, that's fine, I expect nothing more from modern, traditional Roman Catholics, but why did you call upon +Cyprian of Carthage who most assuredly would disagree with your comments?
By the way, did +Cyprian of Carthage go to Hell?
I am having difficulty understanding "Those outside the old covenant". Here I am assuming you are refering to pagans or unbelievers or those who did not believe in a Redeemer to come - if thats the case, then they were unjust or sinful since they denied the revelations as promulgated through the OT prophets and would have gone to hell if they died under the old law.
Sorry - please allow me to elaborate. Yes, I mean pagans, but not just those simply "denied the revelations", but those who had no chance to know - let's say a pagan in the far east, for sake of argument. Or, for that matter, those in Greece (giants like Aristotle) - for example:
In Athens, to share the Gospel, St. Paul directed the Athenians' attention to one of their own altars dedicated to "the unknown God," telling them, "the One Whom you worship without knowing, Him I proclaim to you" (Acts 17:23).Were those who had already died been damned? It makes me wonder why I am so fortunate to be born into a Catholic family and be baptised without my knowing (an unmistakable blessing, you could say, whilst these others struggled for so long in vain).
I realise that St. Francis Xavier view on the pagan's ancestors was rather bleak, hence his urgency in bringing them into the fold. Personally, I would love to believe in the dogma EENS as a black and white issue, but sometimes these type of "exceptional" issues bother me. Perhaps I should just leave these to God, and get on with preaching what we do know (i.e. the declared teachings of the faith - not the theories that undermine them).
Your version of St. Cyprian of Carthage is just that - your version.
Actually, that isn't true at all.
When Christ actually gives the Apostles the "keys" to bind and loose on Earth and Heaven, it is given to ALL of the Apostles equally.
Yes, He appears to have mentioned it to Peter first, but actions speak louder than words. And Christ acted in this case.
And we'd love to hear YOUR version of St. Cyprian of Carthage. It should have for interesting reading.
A favorite point of mine as well.
I also would like to ask Hermann to comment on this one.
We cannot say for certain if some people back then heard of God or not, but we do have God's promise that He placed knowledge of Himself, His laws and of good and evil in us all. As such, we must believe that He did it for a reason, not for the heck of it, and those who possibly never heard of Him were guilty of not seeking, rather than innocent by virtue of ignorance - unless back then, like today, ignorance was a virtue.
As to why you were so lucky, well, perhaps you can thank your parents, and their parents, and all your ancestors who kept the faith and handed it down from generation to generation, as you are expected to do for your children and so on.
http://www.catholictreasures.com/cartdescrip/11050.html
Only referred to in that way by Catholic liberals on Freepnet as far as I can tell.
Catholics where I live don't even know the word "Magesterium", the vast majority of whom voted for John Kerry and support same sex marriage. But this is just in my neck of the woods (Mass.)
"Suffice to say that, per Scripture as interpreted by the Church, as well as what Vatican Council I infallibly declared, what I posted accurately reflects what the Church teaches. Namely, the Pope singularly has authority over the whole Church - including Councils and the Magisterium."
Surely you do not claim that the Pope of Rome or a non Ecumenical Council such as Vatican I has any authority over the Patriarchs, metropolitans or bishops or clergy of the Eastern Church, do you? That would violate any number of canons of the Ecumenical Councils. Canons IV, VI, VIII, XV & XVI of the First Council of Nicea, Canon II of the First Council of Constantinople, and Canon VIII of the Third Ecumenical Council, among others. The last mentioned canon is particularly telling:
" OUR brother bishop Rheginus, the beloved of God, and his fellow beloved of God bishops, Zeno and Evagrius, of the Province of Cyprus, have reported to us an innovation which has been introduced contrary to the ecclessiastical constitutions and the Canons of the Holy Apostles, and which touches the liberties of all. Wherefore, since injuries affecting all require the more attention, as they cause the greater damage, and particularly when they are transgressions of an ancient custom; and since those excellent men, who have petitioned the Synod, have told us in writing and by word of mouth that the Bishop of Antioch has in this way held ordinations in Cyprus; therefore the Rulers of the holy churches in Cyprus shall enjoy, without dispute or injury, according to the Canons of the blessed Fathers and ancient custom, the right of performing for themselves the ordination of their excellent Bishops. The same rule shall be observed in the other dioceses and provinces everywhere, so that none of the God beloved Bishops shall assume control of any province which has not heretofore, from the very beginning, been under his own hand or that of his predecessors. But if any one has violently taken and subjected [a Province], he shall give it up; lest the Canons of the Fathers be transgressed; or the vanities of worldly honour be brought in under pretext of sacred office; or we lose, without knowing it, little by little, the liberty which Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Deliverer of all men, hath given us by his own Blood.
Wherefore, this holy and ecumenical Synod has decreed that in every province the rights which heretofore, from the beginning, have belonged to it, shall be preserved to it, according to the old prevailing custom, unchanged and uninjured: every Metropolitan having permission to take, for his own security, a copy of these acts. And if any one shall bring forward a rule contrary to what is hero determined, this holy and ecumenical Synod unanimously decrees that it shall be of no effect."
These were universal synods with abosolute power over the affairs of the Church, of which Rome was a part. If Rome changed this after the seven Ecumenical Councils, was that not innovation, by what right was it done and how come it took Rome so long to figure out that it had this power?
Are her (the Church's) members corrupt....yes,some. Has Hell prevailed against Her...who made you the judge? Christ promised us it wouldn't happen. (Matthew 16)
I call on Christians to come home to the Catholic Church and you specifically deaconjim...we need you!
The Body of Christ has open wounds and festering sores..she needs healing..and so do you..do not build your house on shifting sands on ever splintering Protestant "denominations."
Don't be consoled by the bickering between trads and neo-cons. We're inside..bickering like brothers at Thanksgiving. You are outside the Church. Brother, please come Home.
By what authority are you allowed to travel back in time, declare Cyprian an Orthodox Christian and cherry pick your church? I'm confused by this position. Is Peter not the rock?
Obviously, you missed the point. The Catholic Church has been corrupted, and no longer represents Christ. Christians, however, make up the Body of Christ and are His church, regardless of denomination. My faith is in Christ, not any organization of men calling themselves a church (protestant denominations included).
Doctrinal soundness as determined by religious superiors in the same hierarchical organization that claims to be the the exclusive interpreter and representative of Christ on Earth is a sure sign of something. Not the veracity or even relevancy of his 'answers' or the truth, but that's never really mattered to the connotatively-challenged and those incapable of abstract thought.
What are you Deacon of, then? That's an ecclesial term..yet you reject ecclesiology..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.