Extra ecclesiam - Outside the Church there is no salvation.

Catholic Exchange ^ | Kevin Knight

[NYer]

It's a stark sentence. Some Catholics even love its shock value, waving the doctrine like a flag in the face of their enemies. Other Catholics flatly refuse to believe it, and claim that this teaching was repudiated by the Second Vatican Council. Both groups are wrong.

Despite what some may think, this dogma is infallible, and all Catholics are required to believe it. This was repeated clearly at Vatican II, which said: "Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation."

At the same time, this dogma was never meant to be a sectarian battle cry, as if only Catholics may go to heaven.

So what is the correct interpretation of this sentence? What does the Catholic Church mean when she proclaims that Outside the Church there is no salvation?

OUTSIDE THE EARTH THERE IS NO LIFE
 
Saying that the Church is necessary for salvation is like saying that the earth is necessary for human life. Outside the Church there is no salvation, and outside the earth there is no life.

It's true, of course. The earth is our God-given home. If you leave here, you will die.

But if this is so, how do you explain the 445 astronauts who have flown into space and returned safely? If "outside the earth there is no life", how did Neil Armstrong ever walk on the moon?

The answer, of course, is simple: They didn't leave the earth; they just brought it with them. While they slept and walked on the moon, they were eating earth's food and breathing earth's air. Everything they had came from back home.
 
So when we say "outside the earth there is no life," we are saying that all of the means for survival are found on this planet. And when we say "outside the Church there is no salvation," we mean that all of the means of salvation -- doctrines, sacraments, and so on -- are found here, uncorrupted by error.
 
Some of these means can exist outside the visible bounds of the Church. For example, Protestants have most of the Bible, along with two of the seven sacraments. Nevertheless, these things are like the food and water on the Space Shuttle: they're life-giving, but they came from a place where they're far richer, more abundant and complete.

WHAT IT ALL MEANS

We may draw several conclusions from this.

First, if a person even suspects that the Church is necessary for salvation, but refuses to act on it before he dies, he will go to hell. As Vatican II stated, "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."

Second, if a person fails to enter or stay in the Church through no fault of his own, he may still be saved. Pope Pius IX said: "By Faith it is to be firmly held that outside the Apostolic Roman Church none can achieve salvation. This is the only ark of salvation. He who does not enter into it will perish in the flood. Nevertheless equally certainly it is to be held that those who suffer from invincible ignorance of the true religion are not for this reason guilty in the eyes of the Lord."

Finally, it's not enough simply to call yourself Catholic. There is nothing magic about registering at a parish. To go to heaven, you have to take advantages of the means offered by the Church. This includes praying often, giving alms to the poor, spreading the Gospel, going to Confession and believing in all of her teachings -- even the hard ones.
 
Pope John Paul II summed it up best: "People are saved through the Church, they are saved in the Church, but they always are saved by the grace of Christ. . . . This is the authentic meaning of the well-known statement Outside the Church there is no salvation."

[bornacatholic]

Gee, I didn't expect anything controversial to arise on this thread :)

[marron]

Thanks for this post. I'm relieved to know we have another Christian pope; that may sound strange to some ears, but its a relief just the same.

I agree with you; from what I have seen and read so far, he seems to be well grounded philosophically, and more importantly he seems to be genuine.

[muawiyah]

I think she had a vision of Mary as well. She was looking around for a church to plug into the other day.

[muawiyah]

And then, there is also "the General Assembly and the Church of the First Born".

[muawiyah]

Well, actually, "back in the day" there was a Church at Jerusalem.

[Uri’el-2012]

Pope John Paul II summed it up best:
"People are saved through the Church, they are saved in the Church,
but they always are saved by the grace of Christ.
. . . This is the authentic meaning of the well-known statement Outside the Church there is no salvation."

Isaiah 26:4 Trust in YHvH forever, for the LORD, YHvH is the Rock eternal.

b'shem Y'shua

[Alamo-Girl]

May the Lord's will be done in all things, on earth and in heaven.

Amen!

[Alamo-Girl]

I am glad also, dear marron!

[Asfarastheeastisfromthewest...]

Sorry but I don’t think you really expected me to respond to a long cut and paste of something that didn’t directly address the issue raised, did you? As for your reply, it has so many errors of interpretation in it and things out of context that one hardly knows where to start. For example, let’s just mention one which comes up in your first two sentences. You mention Matthew 5:14 and intone that this verse which mentions a ‘city that is set on an hill cannot be hid’ is referring to his church. You may have a point if you are using the broader meaning of the church as ‘the assembly of Christ’s true believers’ but as far as assuming that this is by any means referring to the Catholic Church where the word catholic means anything other than being synonymous with universal, I’d say you are totally off base. Verse 14 by the way comes after the passage that contains the beatitudes and related verses that uses the words ‘they, their(S), ye, your and yours (KJV) in every verse from 3 to 13 and even in the first part of 14 which states ‘Ye are the light of the world’. Do you think that these words refer to the church? Or were they meant to be absorbed and applied on an internalized individual basis?

Maybe you can clear something up for me. I believe the Bible is God’s Word and is infallible. I’m assuming that you believe the same. You also believe that the teachings of the Catholic church are infallible I assume. So, if these teachings come in conflict with each other, how is that rationalized? Two things that are both infallible but can’t be harmonized? They both can’t be right. Let me give one example. The church believes that sins can be forgiven by confession before a priest whereas scripture is quite clear on this: 1 Timothy 2:4 ‘Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.’ So which is infallible?

[wmfights]

"The Holy Spiirt is not given to us if we are Catholics.

I think that is your position"
______________________________
Why?

In my feeble understanding the HOLY SPIRIT indwells ALL believers who have placed their faith in JESUS CHRIST.

[TradicalRC]

As for your reply, it has so many errors of interpretation in it and things out of context that one hardly knows where to start. For example, let’s just mention one which comes up in your first two sentences. You mention Matthew 5:14 and intone that this verse which mentions a ‘city that is set on an hill cannot be hid’ is referring to his church. You may have a point if you are using the broader meaning of the church as ‘the assembly of Christ’s true believers’ but as far as assuming that this is by any means referring to the Catholic Church where the word catholic means anything other than being synonymous with universal, I’d say you are totally off base.

And by what authority do you say that Your Interpretation is correct and the Magisterium's is incorrect?

[Diego1618]

And then, there is also "the General Assembly and the Church of the First Born".

Yes....and many others, but.... the "Church of God" still predates the Catholic Church by a good number of years. It was the original.

[Iscool]

In my feeble understanding the HOLY SPIRIT indwells ALL believers who have placed their faith in JESUS CHRIST.

your understanding isn't feeble at all...That's exactly the way it works...And here are some words from the "First Pope"...

Act 15:7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
Act 15:8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;

Notice,,,filled with the Holy Spirit, without baptism...

Act 15:9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

You are on the mark...

[xzins]

Pope Pius IX said: "By Faith it is to be firmly held that outside the Apostolic Roman Church none can achieve salvation.

This pope is wrong in this statement.

While I believe that there is no Christianity other than Church Christianity, I do not believe that the Roman Church is the sole place one finds Christianity on this earth.

[wmfights]

"your understanding isn't feeble at all...That's exactly the way it works...And here are some words from the "First Pope"..."
_________________________________________
Thanks for the words of encouragement.

[Kolokotronis]

"Well into the writings of the Early Church Fathers they were still referring to themselves as "The Church of God". You can wish and hope as much as you want....but the term "Catholic" is a "Johnny Come Lately"."

You've got your history wrong there, Diego. No later than 107 AD, +Ignatius of Antioch decribed the structure and visible community of the "Catholic" Church in his Letter to the Smyrneans. He was the second successor to +Peter at Antioch and a disciple of the Holy Apostle John. Its likely the term was around substantially before 107.

[jude24]

It would seem to me that the issue is not whether "outside the church there is no salvation." That is, one way or another, affirmed by Orthodox, Catholics, and Protestants. The issue is where the bounds of "the Church" are.

Myself, I would argue that anywhere where the person and work of Christ are preached in an orthodox way, that is "the Church." Some subsets of "the church" may still be desparately wrong, but they're still "the church" nonetheless. God's not about to keep someone out of his Kingdom who believes that Jesus Christ died and rose for him and who tries to live according to the ethical requirements of Christianity just because he grew up in the wrong church. God's not arbitrary enough to expect us to muddle along to the right building down the road; he cares much more about the state of our hearts than whether we believe about some doctrinal debate most Christians couldn't articulate past the level of "my pastor says ______."

[betty boop]

...from what I have seen and read so far, he seems to be well grounded philosophically, and more importantly he seems to be genuine.

And very, very wise! Take a look at what he has to say about church-state relations!

I feel we are blessed in this man. May God ever prosper him!

Thank you so much for writing, dear friend!

[Kolokotronis]

"It would seem to me that the issue is not whether "outside the church there is no salvation." That is, one way or another, affirmed by Orthodox, Catholics, and Protestants. The issue is where the bounds of "the Church" are."

Interesting. As an Orthodox Christian, I wouldn't say that at all. I think The Church is quite well defined. Where I as an Orthodox Christian will not go is to say that so and so, because he/she is not a baptised member of The Church, he/she has no hope of theosis. I simply don't know what the Spirit does to whom.

[xzins]

Ping to my #94.

I would agree with Jude24's statement: "The issue is where the bounds of "the Church" are."

An apostolic church is more readily identifiable by being in spiritual unity with the apostles than in temporal descent from the apostles.

The true children are not those circumised in the flesh but those whose hearts have been circumcised. That has not changed.