Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

No Salvation Outside the Church
Catholic Answers ^ | 12/05 | Fr. Ray Ryland

Posted on 06/27/2009 10:33:55 PM PDT by bdeaner



Why does the Catholic Church teach that there is "no salvation outside the Church"? Doesn’t this contradict Scripture? God "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:4). "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me" (John 14:6). Peter proclaimed to the Sanhedrin, "There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).

Since God intends (plans, wills) that every human being should go to heaven, doesn’t the Church’s teaching greatly restrict the scope of God’s redemption? Does the Church mean—as Protestants and (I suspect) many Catholics believe—that only members of the Catholic Church can be saved?

That is what a priest in Boston, Fr. Leonard Feeney, S.J., began teaching in the 1940s. His bishop and the Vatican tried to convince him that his interpretation of the Church’s teaching was wrong. He so persisted in his error that he was finally excommunicated, but by God’s mercy, he was reconciled to the Church before he died in 1978.

In correcting Fr. Feeney in 1949, the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office (now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) issued a document entitled Suprema Haec Sacra, which stated that "extra ecclesiam, nulla salus" (outside the Church, no salvation) is "an infallible statement." But, it added, "this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church itself understands it."

Note that word dogma. This teaching has been proclaimed by, among others, Pope Pelagius in 585, the Fourth Lateran Council in 1214, Pope Innocent III in 1214, Pope Boniface VIII in 1302, Pope Pius XII, Pope Paul VI, the Second Vatican Council, Pope John Paul II, and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Dominus Iesus.

Our point is this: When the Church infallibly teaches extra ecclesiam, nulla salus, it does not say that non-Catholics cannot be saved. In fact, it affirms the contrary. The purpose of the teaching is to tell us how Jesus Christ makes salvation available to all human beings.

Work Out Your Salvation

There are two distinct dimensions of Jesus Christ’s redemption. Objective redemption is what Jesus Christ has accomplished once for all in his life, death, resurrection, and ascension: the redemption of the whole universe. Yet the benefits of that redemption have to be applied unceasingly to Christ’s members throughout their lives. This is subjective redemption. If the benefits of Christ’s redemption are not applied to individuals, they have no share in his objective redemption. Redemption in an individual is an ongoing process. "Work out your own salvation in fear and trembling; for God is at work in you" (Phil. 2:12–13).

How does Jesus Christ work out his redemption in individuals? Through his mystical body. When I was a Protestant, I (like Protestants in general) believed that the phrase "mystical body of Christ" was essentially a metaphor. For Catholics, the phrase is literal truth.

Here’s why: To fulfill his Messianic mission, Jesus Christ took on a human body from his Mother. He lived a natural life in that body. He redeemed the world through that body and no other means. Since his Ascension and until the end of history, Jesus lives on earth in his supernatural body, the body of his members, his mystical body. Having used his physical body to redeem the world, Christ now uses his mystical body to dispense "the divine fruits of the Redemption" (Mystici Corporis 31).

The Church: His Body

What is this mystical body? The true Church of Jesus Christ, not some invisible reality composed of true believers, as the Reformers insisted. In the first public proclamation of the gospel by Peter at Pentecost, he did not invite his listeners to simply align themselves spiritually with other true believers. He summoned them into a society, the Church, which Christ had established. Only by answering that call could they be rescued from the "crooked generation" (Acts 2:40) to which they belonged and be saved.

Paul, at the time of his conversion, had never seen Jesus. Yet recall how Jesus identified himself with his Church when he spoke to Paul on the road to Damascus: "Why do you persecute me?" (Acts 9:4, emphasis added) and "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting" (Acts 9:5). Years later, writing to Timothy, Paul ruefully admitted that he had persecuted Jesus by persecuting his Church. He expressed gratitude for Christ appointing him an apostle, "though I formerly b.asphemed and persecuted and insulted him" (1 Tim. 1:13).

The Second Vatican Council says that the hierarchical structure of the Catholic Church and the mystical body of Christ "form one complex reality that comes together from a human and a divine element" (Lumen Gentium 8). The Church is "the fullness of him [Christ] who fills all in all" (Eph. 1:23). Now that Jesus has accomplished objective redemption, the "plan of mystery hidden for ages in God" is "that through the Church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places" (Eph. 3:9–10).

According to John Paul II, in order to properly understand the Church’s teaching about its role in Christ’s scheme of salvation, two truths must be held together: "the real possibility of salvation in Christ for all humanity" and "the necessity of the Church for salvation" (Redemptoris Missio 18). John Paul taught us that the Church is "the seed, sign, and instrument" of God’s kingdom and referred several times to Vatican II’s designation of the Catholic Church as the "universal sacrament of salvation":

"The Church is the sacrament of salvation for all humankind, and her activity is not limited only to those who accept her message" (RM 20).

"Christ won the Church for himself at the price of his own blood and made the Church his co-worker in the salvation of the world. . . . He carries out his mission through her" (RM 9).

In an address to the plenary assembly of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (January 28, 2000), John Paul stated, "The Lord Jesus . . . established his Church as a saving reality: as his body, through which he himself accomplishes salvation in history." He then quoted Vatican II’s teaching that the Church is necessary for salvation.

In 2000 the CDF issued Dominus Iesus, a response to widespread attempts to dilute the Church’s teaching about our Lord and about itself. The English subtitle is itself significant: "On the Unicity and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church." It simply means that Jesus Christ and his Church are indivisible. He is universal Savior who always works through his Church:

The only Savior . . . constituted the Church as a salvific mystery: He himself is in the Church and the Church is in him. . . . Therefore, the fullness of Christ’s salvific mystery belongs also to the Church, inseparably united to her Lord (DI 18).

Indeed, Christ and the Church "constitute a single ‘whole Christ’" (DI 16). In Christ, God has made known his will that "the Church founded by him be the instrument for the salvation of all humanity" (DI 22). The Catholic Church, therefore, "has, in God’s plan, an indispensable relationship with the salvation of every human being" (DI 20).

The key elements of revelation that together undergird extra ecclesiam, nulla salus are these: (1) Jesus Christ is the universal Savior. (2) He has constituted his Church as his mystical body on earth through which he dispenses salvation to the world. (3) He always works through it—though in countless instances outside its visible boundaries. Recall John Paul’s words about the Church quoted above: "Her activity is not limited only to those who accept its message."

Not of this Fold

Extra ecclesiam, nulla salus does not mean that only faithful Roman Catholics can be saved. The Church has never taught that. So where does that leave non-Catholics and non-Christians?

Jesus told his followers, "I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd" (John 10:16). After his Resurrection, Jesus gave the threefold command to Peter: "Feed my lambs. . . . Tend my sheep. . . . Feed my sheep" (John 21:15–17). The word translated as "tend" (poimaine) means "to direct" or "to superintend"—in other words, "to govern." So although there are sheep that are not of Christ’s fold, it is through the Church that they are able to receive his salvation.

People who have never had an opportunity to hear of Christ and his Church—and those Christians whose minds have been closed to the truth of the Church by their conditioning—are not necessarily cut off from God’s mercy. Vatican II phrases the doctrine in these terms: 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 consciences—those too may achieve eternal salvation (LG 16).

Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery (Gaudium et Spes 22).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches:

Every man who is ignorant of the gospel of Christ and of his Church but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity (CCC 1260).

Obviously, it is not their ignorance that enables them to be saved. Ignorance excuses only lack of knowledge. That which opens the salvation of Christ to them is their conscious effort, under grace, to serve God as well as they can on the basis of the best information they have about him.

The Church speaks of "implicit desire" or "longing" that can exist in the hearts of those who seek God but are ignorant of the means of his grace. If a person longs for salvation but does not know the divinely established means of salvation, he is said to have an implicit desire for membership in the Church. Non-Catholic Christians know Christ, but they do not know his Church. In their desire to serve him, they implicitly desire to be members of his Church. Non-Christians can be saved, said John Paul, if they seek God with "a sincere heart." In that seeking they are "related" to Christ and to his body the Church (address to the CDF).

On the other hand, the Church has long made it clear that if a person rejects the Church with full knowledge and consent, he puts his soul in danger:

They cannot be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or remain in it (cf. LG 14).

The Catholic Church is "the single and exclusive channel by which the truth and grace of Christ enter our world of space and time" (Karl Adam, The Spirit of Catholicism, 179). Those who do not know the Church, even those who fight against it, can receive these gifts if they honestly seek God and his truth. But, Adam says, "though it be not the Catholic Church itself that hands them the bread of truth and grace, yet it is Catholic bread that they eat." And when they eat of it, "without knowing it or willing it" they are "incorporated in the supernatural substance of the Church."

Extra ecclesiam, nulla salus.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR



Fr. Ray Ryland, a convert and former Episcopal priest, holds a Ph.D. in theology from Marquette University and is a contributing editor to This Rock. He writes from Steubenville, Ohio, where he lives with his wife, Ruth.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Ecumenism; Theology
KEYWORDS: catholic; church; cult; pope; salvation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 421-440441-460461-480 ... 2,801-2,817 next last
To: bdeaner
When I was an Evangelical, before I was in full communion with the Church, I found it very disturbing that some of the large Evangelical churches in the U.S. refused to take a stand against abortion.

Funny. When I was in that same position I found it disturbing that God didn't do anything my co-religionists promised.

441 posted on 06/28/2009 8:01:04 PM PDT by papertyger (A difference that makes no difference is no difference)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 440 | View Replies]

To: PugetSoundSoldier

PugetSoundSoldier

Your post, I think is raising 2 questions. 1) Did St. Paul becoming the “Apostle to the Gentiles” break Apostolic Succession and 2) Was St. Paul and Apostle. I will try to tackle the notion of Apostolic Succession first, and then address the office of Apostle and how St. Paul was indeed an Apostle. I apologize for the length, but I did try to answer your questions and objections honestly and sincerely.

First, Apostolic Succession is one of the marks of the Church, as expressed in the Nicene Creed. It is one of the major theological marks as to how the Catholic Church understands the “nature of the Church.” As I noted in a previous post, The Catholic Church’s understanding of the Church (i.e. its ecclesiology) is linked to its Theology about God. The Holy Trinity reveals the nature of God, which is God is a God of perfect communion and love and relationship. The Father eternally generates the Son and the Son returns of the love of the Father and the bond of love is the Holy Spirit. The second person of the Trinity, Christ, became incarnate (i.e. Christ has a fully human and divine nature) and founded a Church (Mt 16) which St. Paul describes as the pillar and foundation of Truth (1 Tim 3: 15). The Church is described by St. Paul as the body of Christ (1 Cor 12: 12-14), the Bride of Christ (Eph 5: 26-27) and by St. Peter as the People of God (1 Pet 2: 9-10). Since Christ has one Body, and One Bride, and one people, and since God is a God of perfect communion (Holy Trinity), the Church then is ontologically also one.

Hence, the Catholic Church’s doctrine of the nature of the Church is tied to its theology of God, and its theology (Christology) about Christ and thus the Church is “Christ’s” instrument for salvation for all people.

The Churches faith comes from Christ, to the Apostles, down to us today via “apostolic succession.” Thus, from the Catholic perspective, to be Church proper, requires Apostolic Succession, which leads to valid Holy Orders (Bishops, etc) an thus a valid Holy Eucharist. As St. Ignatius (107 AD) indicated “where there is the Eucharist there is Christ” and hence the Church. In addition, the Catholic Church sees that Christ appointed St. Peter with a special role in the early Church (Mt 16), which is also indicated in two other Petrine texts found in St. Luke and St. John’s Gospel, where Christ tells St. Peter that he prayed especially for him to strengthen his brethren, and for St. Peter to “feed Christ’s Lambs”, respectively. As a result, the Church of Rome and its Bishop has a Primacy among the Churches.

The Patristic sources and Tradition, as later codified in the canons of the Council of Nicea, 325 A.D., and Chalcedon, 451 AD, is consistent with this claim. For example, St. Clement of Rome, 3rd successor from St. Peter, wrote a letter to the Church in Corinth in circa 90 AD to address a schism that had occurred in that Church. Please note that Clement is writing from the “Church of Rome” to the “Church of Corinth” in the Eastern Roman empire. As I noted earlier, St. Ignatius of Antioch, in around 107 AD wrote of the Church of Rome indicating that it “Presides in Love” among the Churches and states “not as Peter and Paul do I command you”, etc.

In 144 AD, the first named Gnostic Heretic, Marcion, came from the Eastern Roman empire to Rome and stated that the Church should not use the Old Testament, and adopt only St. Luke’s Gospel and certain epistles of St. Paul. When he was told that this not part of the Apostolic Tradition, Marcion hardened his position and he eventually would be excommunicated by “the Church of Rome in 144 AD” when St. Pius I was Bishop of Rome. Please note, had Marcion’s view won out, the New Testament would not look like it does today. This is the second major example, after St. Clements intervention with the Church of Corinth, where the Bishop of Rome exercised the primacy to protect apostolic tradition.

St. Irenaeus of Lyon, in 170AD, wrote against the Gnostic heretics and stated that because the Church of Rome can trace its origins back to St.’s Peter and Paul,, that it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority. I think this quote is perhaps the strongest with respect to both ST. Peter and St. Paul being in Rome. Again, for full disclosure, this quote is taken from Fr. Jurgens “The Faith of the Early Fathers: Vol. 1” published by Liturgical press in 1970 (a Catholic translation). Still, the translations of protestant patristic scholars (i.e. Lightfoot) are consistent with Fr. Jurgen’s translation.

St: Irenaeus writes:

“But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition” (inter A.D. 180/199)

“The blessed apostles [Peter and Paul], having founded and built up the church [of Rome], they handed over the office of the episcopate to Linus. Paul makes mention of this Linus in the epistle to Timothy [2 Tim. 4:21]. To him succeeded Anencletus, and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was chosen for the episcopate. He had seen the blessed apostles and was acquainted with them. It might be said that he still heard the echoes of the preaching of the apostles and had their traditions before his eyes. And not only he, for there were many still remaining who had been instructed by the apostles. In the time of Clement, no small dissension having arisen among the brethren in Corinth, the Church in Rome sent a very strong letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace and renewing their faith. . . To this Clement, Evaristus succeeded; and Alexander succeeded Evaristus. Then, sixth after the Apostles, Sixtus was appointed; after him, Telesphorus, who also was gloriously martyred. Then Hyginus; after him, Pius, and after him, Anicetus. Soter succeeded Anicetus, and now, in the twelfth place after the apostles, the lot of the episcopate [of Rome] has fallen to Eleutherus. In this order, and by the teaching of the apostles handed down in the Church, the preaching of the truth has come down to us” (Against Heresies 3:3:3 [inter A.D. 180/199]

So, please note the Fathers link the Church of Rome’s primacy to both St. Peter and St. Paul and the notion of apostolic succession flows from the theology of Apostle [which both Peter and Paul were].

Second, I will discuss the office of Apostle. The word apostle means “one who is sent” and as Pope Benedict explains in his book “Principles of Catholic Theology: Building Stones for A Fundamental Theology” (pp. 273-284), Catholic doctrine understands the office of Apostle in reference to Christ. It is clear in the Gospels that Apostleship is an institution established by Christ and is referred to as a calling (c.f. Mark 3:13-19) and the apostles share in Christ mission and can make Christ’s kingdom present by signs and healings (c.f. Mt 10: 7-9). The ministry of the Apostles is also described as one of preaching that men should repent (c.f. Mk 6:12-13) involved in healing, exorcism, preaching (c.f. Luke 9:1-6) and in Matthew, rather than specific missionary commands, we see a conferral of authority (c.f. Mt 10:1).

The Gospels also note that the Church community should listen to the Apostles and if Christ were preaching through them which presents a theology that links the closeness of the Apostles mission with Christ as we read “anyone who listens to you, listens to me and anyone who rejects you rejects me and the one who sent me” (c.f. Lk: 10:16; Mt 10:40). Once again, the word “send” or “being sent”, which is what Apostle means. If we understand Christ in relation to the Father as being sent by the Father (c.f. John 3:17), then the office of Apostle has an Christological reference point. As Pope Benedict points out, Christ is, by nature, the One sent by the Father, whose whole Being consists of being sent and who, as pure Mediator, has no other relationship to the Father than that of being his complete repraesentiao among men, thus the concept of mission in the end of St. John’s Gospel where we read “As the Father sent me, so I am sending you” (c.f. John 20:21) helps us link the interpretation as Jesus as “Apostle”, i.e. the one sent by the Father, and now Christ in sending the Apostles indicates that Apostleship is an office instituted by Christ. As Pope Benedict further notes, “If Mission means representation of him who sends and is consequently, mediation to him who sends it, it cannot be doubted that this central office of the evolving Church qualifies as a ministry of mediation

After the Ascension, the Gospels (Mt 28: 16-20) and Acts of the Apostles (c.f. Acts 1:15-26) clearly indicate that the ministry of the Apostles did not end with Christ Ascension as they are commanded to make disciples of all nations (c.f. Mt 29:19). It is also clear that others besides the original twelve could by brought into the Apostolic Ministry, as documented in Acts 1: 15-26. This concept is important with respect to St. Paul. We see Christ himself asking Saul “why are you persecuting me…I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting” (c.f. Acts 9:4-6) [interesting theological point, Christ links persecution of the Church as persecuting him, and thus the Church is one and the same with Christ]. Thus, St. Paul’s conversion was a work of God’s Grace through the Holy Spirit, not Ananias. Still, St. Paul went to the Church at Antioch, were he was ordained and sent on his mission as we read “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them. Then completing their fasting and praying, they laid hands on them and sent them off” (c.f. Acts 13:3-4). Please note that Barnabas was brought into the Apostolic ministry after he donated tons of money and goods, which would later be used for missionary activity (c.f. Acts 4:36-37). It would be Barnabas who would introduce St. Paul to the Apostles (c.f. Acts 9:27). Thus, one can draw the connection of Christ to the original Apostles, and now Barnabas and Paul, who later in acts would be referred to as Apostles (c.f. Acts 14:4). So the Apostles now include the original 11 Apostles, plus Matthias, who would exercise the leadership ministry and Barnabas and St. Paul, who focused on missionary apostolic efforts.

St. Paul himself identifies himself as an Apostle (c.f. Romans 1:1; 1 Cor 1:1, 2 Cor 1:1) and indicates that he received his office of Apostle from God (c.f. Gal 1:1). St. Paul also describes his ministry as priestly as he states “But I have written to you rather boldly in some respects to remind you, because of the grace given me by God, to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in performing the priestly service of the Gospel of God” (c.f. Romans 15:15-16). He also calls his Apostolic ministry as being a “ministry of reconciliation” (c.f. 2 Cor 5: 18) as we read “so we are ambassadors for Christ; it is as though God were appealing through us, and the appeal that we make in Christ’s name is be reconciled to God” (c.f. 2 Cor 5:20)

From these texts, along with the Gospels which commanded the Apostles to celebrate the Eucharist (c.f. Mt 26: 26-30; Mk 14:22-28; Luke 22: 14-20; 1 Cor 11:23-30) forgive sins [i.e. administer the sacrament, as God forgives sins] in his name (c.f. John 20: 21-23; 2 Cor 5: 18-20), anoint the sick [James 5:14-15] we can see a connection between Apostolic Ministry and Priestly ministry. The link between Apostles and Priestly ministry is documented in the NT. For example, in Acts 20: 18-35, Pope Benedict notes (p. 278) that Paul’s address is an outline of Apostolic succession as St. Paul is transferring authority and pastoral responsibility to the presbyters, who then become successors of the Apostles and as St. Paul notes, the office of presbyter is an institution of the Holy Spirit (Acts 20:28). St. Peter, in his first epistle, writes “So I exhort the presbyters among you, as a fellow presbyter and witness to the sufferings of Christ and one who has a share in the glory to be revealed. Tend the flock of God in your midst, overseeing not by constraint but willingly, as God would have it, not for shameful profit but eagerly. Do not lord over those assigned to you.” (c.f. 1 Peter 5:1-4). As Pope Benedict points out (p.279), this text calls St. Peter, who is an Apostle, a fellow presbyter, and thus the office of Apostle and presbyter are linked to each other. Thus, in a similar fashion to St. Paul in Acts 20, this text points to a transfer of theology of Apostleship to the presbyterate.

So in closing, we see in the New Testament itself a basic outline of apostolic succession, which was confirmed, and more fully developed, in the post-Apostolic Church by all the Church Fathers and Creeds of the Church. We also see that St. Paul was in fact an Apostle, who was a part of the apostolic community, i.e. the reconstituted 12 apostles noted in Acts 1.

Regards and hope this helps.


442 posted on 06/28/2009 8:03:22 PM PDT by CTrent1564
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 365 | View Replies]

To: CTrent1564

Excellent post! Very informative. Thank you.


443 posted on 06/28/2009 8:14:25 PM PDT by bdeaner (The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? (1 Cor. 10:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 442 | View Replies]

To: bdeaner

Three times I have asked you the same question...
twice asked before you asked the first question of me.

I’m not insinuating that you’re deliberately doing an end run around it, perhaps you’ve just missed it.

I’m not at enmity with you or your faith, I’d simply like to know your (the Catholic) view on this simple question:

What is it that forgives sin?


444 posted on 06/28/2009 8:15:47 PM PDT by Semper Mark (Third World trickle up poverty, will lead to cascading Third World tyranny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

Mr Rogers:

I apologize, I did not see your question till I had responded to PugetSoundSoldier [see post 442]. St. Paul does refer to St.Peter, along with James and John as pillars (c.f Gal 2:9) and of course, he corrected Peter for not engaging in community life with the gentiles, after Peter had received a vision from God that what God has made clean, do not call unclean (see Acts 10). So it was St. Peter who afer seeing that God wanted to bring the gentiles into the Church, along with the other apostles, who commissioned Paul and Barnabas as apostles to the gentiles. Of course, Peter was engaging in the sin of ethnic bigotry, and St. Paul correctly corrected him, although this was not a doctrinal dispute, but a pastoral correction. St. Paul does note that the Church is the Pillar and foundation of truth (c.f. 1 Tim 3:15 and that it is built on the foundation of the apostles (c.f. Eph 3: 19-22).

So St. Paul calling St. Peter a pillar is consistent with all the Apostles sharing in Christ mission and the Church being Apostolic.


445 posted on 06/28/2009 8:24:10 PM PDT by CTrent1564
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 396 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Amen, driftdiver.


446 posted on 06/28/2009 8:32:09 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Ottofire
From the Catechism:

"Outside the Church there is no salvation" 846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 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.336

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.337

These lines taken from the catechism of the catholic church demonstrates that the teaching of the church has not been changed since the Council of Florence, but our understanding of God's desire for the salvation of all men leaves room for him to save whom he will. and in whatever way he sees fit.

For more information, see here:

Vatican II & Ecumenism: What Did the Council Really Say

God bless.
447 posted on 06/28/2009 8:33:13 PM PDT by bdeaner (The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? (1 Cor. 10:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

They don’t believe the Bible is the only authority. Their man made traditions are.


448 posted on 06/28/2009 8:33:30 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

LOL. That’s one of his little tricks.


449 posted on 06/28/2009 8:36:16 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: bdeaner
If it wasn't for the crusades, let's face it, we would all be praising Allah today.

Actually, the Crusades did little to stop the spread of Islam into Europe.  Charles Martel in the West and Vlad Dracul in the East were far more effective.

450 posted on 06/28/2009 8:41:59 PM PDT by Celtman (It's never right to do wrong to do right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 438 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

Exactly.


451 posted on 06/28/2009 8:42:16 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary
They don't believe the Bible is the only authority.

Neither do you; the difference is we admit it.

452 posted on 06/28/2009 8:42:45 PM PDT by papertyger (A difference that makes no difference is no difference)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 448 | View Replies]

To: CTrent1564
"So St. Paul calling St. Peter a pillar is consistent with all the Apostles sharing in Christ mission and the Church being Apostolic."

EXCEPT!

That is not what St Paul says.

"6 But from those who seemed to be something—whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man—for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me. 7 But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter 8 (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), 9 and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised."

His terminology makes it very clear that while there were SOME who considered James, Peter, and John to be pillars - "who seemed to be something" - Paul, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, did NOT.

I spent 25 years in the hierarchy known as the US military. I assure you, these are NOT the words of someone who considered Peter to be first among equals, let alone superior in any way. While some were looking at these 3 as something higher or more authoritative, Paul did not.

Peter was engaging in the sin of ethnic bigotry, and St. Paul correctly corrected him, although this was not a doctrinal dispute, but a pastoral correction.

No sir. This was most decidedly a DOCTRINAL issue - one so critical that Paul uses it as an example leading up to his conclusion, "I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.”

Nor, as some have suggested, was Peter only setting a bad example. For Paul told him, "why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?" Not ask, or allow - but COMPEL.

Also, we read: "certain men came from James...he withdrew...fearing those who were of the circumcision."

Again, I'm a military man. A 4-star General does not fear a delegation from a 2-star General. The reverse is true.

453 posted on 06/28/2009 8:46:15 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 445 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

They sure do. Some constantly say our interpretation isn’t a valid one but, of course, their magesterium’s is. Arrogant.


454 posted on 06/28/2009 8:47:57 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Markos33
What is it that forgives sin?

Pardon from all sins ultimately comes from Christ's sacrifice on the cross. This pardon may be received by us through His Body, the Church. Looking to the Bible, there are two means to recieve this pardon: Baptism and Confession.

See HERE for more info.
455 posted on 06/28/2009 8:50:55 PM PDT by bdeaner (The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? (1 Cor. 10:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 444 | View Replies]

To: papertyger
Reading the mind of another Freeper is a form of "making it personal."

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

456 posted on 06/28/2009 8:51:22 PM PDT by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 452 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary
Their man made traditions are.

Protestants have your own traditions of interpreting the Bible. They just deny them, which is bad faith and false witness.
457 posted on 06/28/2009 8:52:50 PM PDT by bdeaner (The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? (1 Cor. 10:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 448 | View Replies]

To: kday

Wow. Great video.


458 posted on 06/28/2009 8:53:35 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: PugetSoundSoldier

When he doesn’t have an answer, he’ll just repeat your words back to you or some nonsense.


459 posted on 06/28/2009 8:55:59 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Celtman
Actually, the Crusades did little to stop the spread of Islam into Europe. Charles Martel in the West and Vlad Dracul in the East were far more effective.

That history may or may not be true -- I'm not a historian -- but it is certainly unconventional and for that reason, highly suspect without a heck of a lot of evidence to back it up. I am certainly not buying it.
460 posted on 06/28/2009 8:56:02 PM PDT by bdeaner (The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? (1 Cor. 10:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 450 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 421-440441-460461-480 ... 2,801-2,817 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson