No Salvation Outside the Church

Catholic Answers ^ | 12/05 | Fr. Ray Ryland

[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.

[cva66snipe]

No. Purgatory and, after satisfying his debt of temporal punishment, finally Heaven.

If the debt could be paid by man then Christ needed not had gone to the cross for our sins. NOTHING in works or punishment we can do will ever pay our debt of sin or even a small fraction of it. Burning 10,000 years for one sin would not accomplish it. For if you break even one Commandment you break them all.

It is GOD's plan of salvation with Christ being the Sacrificial Lamb whose blood cleanses our sin that does it. There is no purgatory. There is heaven, there is hell, there is a choice between which place one goes to eternal. When you die your body sleeps but your spirit being is with The Lord that very hour you die if you receive Him as Lord and Savior if not then hell begins for all eternity.

Moses body is dead but Moses lives as well as Elijah. Christ showed this to His Disciples. Being beside someone who is a believer and passing into their death can be very peaceful. They sometimes describe what they are seeing in the transition the beauty and the peace. Being with an unbeliever who is dying can be horrid as they yell and scream in torment for they see such horrors they can't describe them.

My wife is a medically retired nurses aide and her job dealt with death and sitting with those making the passage. She held the hands of quite a few patients who were dying and sat with them till they did. She herself has been so close to death that she was describing it to me and the peace she was feeling and wonders she was seeing. But it wasn't her time. Many persons have been witness experiencing to the beyond and returning including the late Marty Robbins.

Now I do believe that we do pay on earth for what our sins have wrought us. We are forgiven but while on earth in the flesh must live with what problems and woes our sin has caused us. This is an earth cause and affect though.

[Mr Rogers]

You’ve been reading your Bible!

“21 I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.”

[Alex Murphy]

The Kingdom of Heaven is the Millennial Reign of Jesus on this earth...It has nothing to do with Christians...It's strictly Jewish...

Ping for later

[MarkBsnr]

***AMEN! Astounding how some can read the printed words and not see or hear the truth. Almost as if they had been blinded.

The over-arching point the RCC misses (intentionally, after all these centuries) is that we are meant to be conceptual beings, above the coarse “feelings” and “instincts” of animals. This very reason is why God determined to speak to man through His written word. Concepts. Not just sight and sound and emotion. Reasoning and conceptualizations. Smells and bells don’t cut it.***

Once again, the Calvinist omits the ‘us only’ phrase.

What is the literal translation of hell in Luke 16 here? It is Hades - the place of departed souls. Once again the Calvinist misinterprets Scripture. The Gospels are dangerous for the Calvinist, Dr. E. The Reformed Titanic founders each time that the Gospels are opened and read.

[cva66snipe]

“21 I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.”

If you look in the Bible man has a real bad problem about wanting to be under burdensome laws and have kings {judges}. Christ fulfilled all laws and all righteousness was accomplished for all time. Not even Moses could live right under the laws. Moses died {physically} because of it.

Christ made salvation simple and easy and Paul teaches this as well. Even in the time following Christ crucifixion when the Disciples were finally beginning to understand even THEY had a problem with wanting to return to being under the law and legalism rather than under Grace. This went on for several decades. This is why we can not rely on church leaders but rather the Holy Spirit. The nature of man is to place burdens upon burdens and conditions on conditions for freedoms given us. It's true in our government in this secular world government and it's true in our church leaderships in some cases as well.

I keep hearing that the church has preserved the Bible and kept it alive by tradition for 2000 years. GOD's Word is just that and it does not rely on man's doings to keep record or keep it alive and known. All Bibles and all records could be gone tomorrow yet GOD's Word would live. It lives not because of what man has done or accounts man has written in text. It lives because GOD via The Holy Spirit has written into our very heart and soul like He said He would. All earthly things including text will pass away yet GOD's Word will live forever.

This goes all the way back to writings in Psalms and Psalms 119 stands out in my mind. A long but very warning chapter possibly written by Ezra. It is a good prayer too IMO and shows well the struggle of trying to achieve salvation through the law as it was during his time. .

[cva66snipe]

A long but very warning chapter

Should read WARMING. But in the OT Psalma 119 is my favorite passage to read. In the NT it is John 3:16-17 that this passage is answered.

[Marysecretary]

Nope, he’s saved and going to spend eternity with Jesus without the fairy tales, LOL.

[Iscool]

You have some novel ideas, sir. Can you back them up with Scripture?

I can back up everything I say with scripture but what's the point...You don't believe scripture...

The scripture just told you the rich man was in Hell...Do you believe it??? No...Because your common sense or your magisterium tells you there is no compassion in Hell...Well, God just told you otherwise...

[Iscool]

Amen to #1639...

[Iscool]

What is the literal translation of hell in Luke 16 here? It is Hades - the place of departed souls.

So the rich man was having a conversation while he was in his grave, eh??? And in that 4x8 hole was a great gulf and he could see Lazarath on the other side??? And he was in great torment in the grave???

And when Jesus went into the earth to take captivity captive, he went into a grave???

I'd say you ought to lighten up on those private interpretations...

You guys can quote some scripture, or it's all copy and paste from one of the millions of Catholic web sites but still, after reading all that scripture even if you read some just by accident, how do you not understand what happens to people when they die???

Sure, the rich man's body was and is in the grave...But his soul was and is in Hell...His body will come out of the grave just as Christians' bodies comes out of the grave at redemption...

[Iscool]

Posted to Dr.Eckleburg by mistake...

^^^^^What is the literal translation of hell in Luke 16 here? It is Hades - the place of departed souls.^^^^^

So the rich man was having a conversation while he was in his grave, eh??? And in that 4x8 hole was a great gulf and he could see Lazarus on the other side??? And he was in great torment in the grave???

And when Jesus went into the earth to take captivity captive, he went into a grave???

I’d say you ought to lighten up on those private interpretations...

You guys can quote some scripture, or it’s all copy and paste from one of the millions of Catholic web sites but still, after reading all that scripture even if you read some just by accident, how do you not understand what happens to people when they die???

Sure, the rich man’s body was and is in the grave...But his soul was and is in Hell...His body will come out of the grave just as Christians’ bodies comes out of the grave at redemption.

[stfassisi]

What a strange religion it is that denies the direct work of God in your heart and mind.

Do you think it's the direct work of God to approve of ANY abortion or to refuse medical treatment to the dying elderly as an act of mercy because it might cause financial difficulty?

Do you believe that God approves of any abortion or euthanasia for any reasons at all?

[Mr Rogers]

I told you this would take a while...and I'm only partway through. Regarding your "dump" on Purgatory:

I’ll go to Scripture Catholic for a dump of Scripture that supports Purgatory: Matt. 5:26,18:34; Luke 12:58-59 – Jesus teaches us, “Come to terms with your opponent or you will be handed over to the judge and thrown into prison. You will not get out until you have paid the last penny.” The word “opponent” (antidiko) is likely a reference to the devil (see the same word for devil in 1 Pet. 5:8) who is an accuser against man (c.f. Job 1.6-12; Zech. 3.1; Rev. 12.10), and God is the judge. If we have not adequately dealt with satan and sin in this life, we will be held in a temporary state called a prison, and we won’t get out until we have satisfied our entire debt to God. This “prison” is purgatory where we will not get out until the last penny is paid.

Discussed in multiple other posts. I find your idea that we an reach an agreement with Satan concerning our sin, so that we won't need to be judged for it...novel.

Jesus is using earthly terms to show that we cannot merit salvation. This is the first of 6 sections rejecting the teachings of the Pharisees.

For immediately prior, we read, “20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. [Jesus continues] 21 “You have heard that it was said...”

Matt. 5:48 - Jesus says, “be perfect, even as your heavenly Father is perfect.” We are only made perfect through purification, and in Catholic teaching, this purification, if not completed on earth, is continued in a transitional state we call purgatory.

No, we have been made perfect already, justified.

Hebrews 10: “12 But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. 13 Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, 14 because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.”

Romans 5: “1 Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ...”

Ephesians 2: “4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7 in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.”

Please notice all the past tense verbs used in these. We HAVE BEEN made perfect. We HAVE BEEN justified. MADE us alive. RAISED us up. HAVE BEEN saved.

Matt. 12:32 – Jesus says, “And anyone who says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but no one who speaks against the Holy Spirit will be forgiven either in this world or in the next.” Jesus thus clearly provides that there is forgiveness after death. The phrase “in the next” (from the Greek “en to mellonti”) generally refers to the afterlife (see, for example, Mark 10.30; Luke 18.30; 20.34-35; Eph. 1.21 for similar language). Forgiveness is not necessary in heaven, and there is no forgiveness in hell. This proves that there is another state after death, and the Church for 2,000 years has called this state purgatory.

I believe John Gill said it best. He explains how the Jewish listeners would have understood it:

"...neither in this world, nor in the world to come; that is; they shall never be forgiven, see Mark 3:29. The distinction here used, does not refer to a common one among the Jews, of the Jewish state and the times of the Messiah; but to the present state of life, and that which will be after, or upon death: and it does not suppose there may be forgiveness of other sins, though not of this, in the other world; but strikes at a notion the Jews had, that there are some sins, which repentance and the day of atonement expiate in this life; but there are others, which repentance and the day of atonement do not expiate; and these a man's death expiates, or makes atonement for {a}. The form of confession used by sick persons is the following {b}; "I confess before thee, O Lord our God, and the God of our fathers, that my cure is in thy hands, and my death is in thy hands; if it be thy good pleasure, heal me with a perfect healing: but if I die, hxylo yttym aht, "let my death be for the pardon," forgiveness, and atonement of all the sins, iniquities, and transgressions, which I have sinned, acted perversely in, and transgressed before thee; and give me my portion in paradise, and justify me "in the world to come," which is hidden for the righteous." But the sin against the Holy Ghost is such, as is not forgiven, neither before, nor at, nor after death, nor by it: all sins that are forgiven, are forgiven in this world, and that perfectly and at once; and all that are forgiven in this world, there will be a manifestation and declaration of the pardon of them in another; but such sins as are not forgiven here, there will be no declaration of the pardon of them hereafter. In short, the sense is, that the sin against the Holy Ghost never has forgiveness; it is not pardoned now, and consequently there will be no declaration of the pardon of it hereafter. The Jews use the phrase in the same sense {c}; a certain sick man said to his son, "give me water, and such certain food; but if not, I will not 'forgive thee, neither in this world, nor in the world to come.'" That is, I will never forgive thee. {a} T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 86. 1. {b} Seder Tephillot, fol. 333. 2. Ed. Basil. Vid. T. Bab. Beracot, fol. 60. 1. {c} Sepher Chasidim: num. 234.

In interpreting scripture, it is better to learn how the listeners would have understood it, than to use a concept developed hundreds of years later and impose it.

Luke 16:19-31 - in this story, we see that the dead rich man is suffering but still feels compassion for his brothers and wants to warn them of his place of suffering. But there is no suffering in heaven or compassion in hell because compassion is a grace from God and those in hell are deprived from God’s graces for all eternity. So where is the rich man? He is in purgatory.

First, see here for a Jewish definition of sheol: http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=614&letter=S&search=sheol

Now, consider this passage from a commentary, cited at the end:

First, we must once again emphasize the importance of the principle of progressive revelation. The New Testament picks up where the Old Testament left off by progressively developing the concept of what happens to the soul of man after death. In Luke 16:19-31... the rich man was directly said to be 'in Hades' (v. 23), the phrase 'Abraham's bosom' to which the angels carried Lazarus (vv. 22,23) must be interpreted as the section of Hades reserved for the righteous.

During the intertestamental period, the Jewish concept of Sheol had progressed to the stage where it was believed that Sheol had two distinct compartments, or sections. One section was a place of torment to which the wicked went while the other was a place of conscious bliss, often called 'Abraham's bosom' or 'paradise,' to which the righteous were carried by angels.

Compare our Lord's account of Lazarus and the rich man in Hades which testifies to the accuracy of the rabbinic understanding of Sheol: [Abraham's bosom was an expression which referred to the paradise compartment in Hades, the place where those who had the faith of Abraham dwelled until they were to occupy the kingdom of heaven]

19"There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20 At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21 and longing to eat what fell from the rich man's table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores. 22 The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side.

[Notice that our Lord is indicating here in this account that there is a fully functioning consciousness after death, a bliss for those who are declared righteous and torment for those who are not. And the rest of the passages confirms this]:

24So he called to him, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.' 25 But Abraham replied, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.' 27 He answered, 'Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father's house, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.'

29 "Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.' 30 " 'No, father Abraham,' he said, 'but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.' 31 "He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "

Although Old Testament saints did not have as much information about the afterlife as the New Testament revelation provided later on, it does not follow that the word Sheol, the Hebrew O.T. word for the place one resides in the afterlife, referred to something different or less than what the word Hades referred to in the N.T., any more than it does when one refers to one's car at one time as a sedan and a '99 Ford Taurus at another. They both refer to the same thing, one reference being more specific than the other.

Although this passage in Luke shows a characteristic of an O.T. historical account, for the beggar's name was specifically given as a proper name - not a symbolic one: "a certain poor man named Lazarus". And since, the passage refers to yet another O. T. historical individual: "Father Abraham". And since all attempts to treat this as a completely symbolic parable that teaches anything but death or the afterlife end up in far fetched interpretations that violate clear doctrinal passages on these subjects; consider another option which best fits the rest of Scripture and has precedent in the rabbinical literary form of Jesus' day: [Morey op. cit., pp. 85-87]: "The rabbinic literature before, during, and after the time of Christ is filled with parables which built imaginative stories around real historical characters. There are multiple examples in the Talmud and Midrash of parables in which Abraham had dialogs with people such as Nimrod, with whom he could never have spoken literally. Everyone understood that these parables and dialogs did not literally take place.

[Yet what was being taught by the fictitious account was indeed literal] It was understood that the rabbis used imaginative stories and dialogs as a teaching method. It was understood by all that these dialogs never took place...

Christ used a rabbinic story and dialog in Luke 16:19-31 which was not 'true' or 'real' in the sense of being literal [in a historical sense, but literal indeed in what it is teaching]. It is obvious that Lazarus did not literally sit in Abraham's literal bosom. The rich man did not have literal lips which literal water could quench. What is important for us to grasp is that Christ used the mental images conjured up by this rabbinic parable to teach that, in the hereafter, the wicked experience torment and the righteous bliss. This is clear from the rabbinic sources from which he drew this parable.

Since the dialog between the rich man and Abraham was a teaching tool used by the rabbis before Christ, it is obvious that Christ was not trying to teach that we will talk with the wicked in the hereafter. He was merely using the dialog method to get across the concept that there is no escape from torment, no second chance, and we must believe the Scriptures in this life unto salvation."

See http://www.biblestudymanuals.net/sheol_hades.htm for a very long discussion.

1 Cor. 15:29-30 - Paul mentions people being baptized on behalf of the dead, in the context of atoning for their sins (people are baptized on the dead’s behalf so the dead can be raised). These people cannot be in heaven because they are still with sin, but they also cannot be in hell because their sins can no longer be atoned for. They are in purgatory. These verses directly correspond to 2 Macc. 12:44-45 which also shows specific prayers for the dead, so that they may be forgiven of their sin.

Here is the actual passage: “29 Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them? 30 And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour?”

A great deal has been written about this, but the succinct answer is he uses “those” for the ones doing baptism for the dead, not “why do WE baptize for the dead”. In verse 30, he contrasts, switching from 'those' to 'us'. That someone practiced baptism for the dead is true. That Paul participated, or expected his readers to, is not.

Phil. 2:10 - every knee bends to Jesus, in heaven, on earth, and “under the earth” which is the realm of the righteous dead, or purgatory.

Alternative interpretation – that the angels of Heaven, men on earth, and the devils in the pit will have to bow in subservience to Jesus Christ.

2 Tim. 1:16-18 - Onesiphorus is dead but Paul asks for mercy on him “on that day.” Paul’s use of “that day” demonstrates its eschatological usage (see, for example, Rom. 2.5,16; 1 Cor. 1.8; 3.13; 5.5; 2 Cor. 1.14; Phil. 1.6,10; 2.16; 1 Thess. 5.2,4,5,8; 2 Thess. 2.2,3; 2 Tim. 4.8). Of course, there is no need for mercy in heaven, and there is no mercy given in hell. Where is Onesiphorus? He is in purgatory.

Why do you assume Onesiphorus is dead? And I will cheerfully pray that you may receive mercy on that day...

Heb. 12:14 - without holiness no one will see the Lord. We need final sanctification to attain true holiness before God, and this process occurs during our lives and, if not completed during our lives, in the transitional state of purgatory.

Heb. 12:23 - the spirits of just men who died in godliness are “made” perfect. They do not necessarily arrive perfect. They are made perfect after their death. But those in heaven are already perfect, and those in hell can no longer be made perfect. These spirits are in purgatory.

Romans 8: “9 You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you...23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. ”

Sanctification. When our mortal bodies are given life through his Spirit – when our earthly body crumbles and it is replaced by a heavenly body – sanctification is complete.

More to follow when time permits.

[CTrent1564]

MarkBsnr and bdeaner

Pope Benedict in his wonderful book, Spirit of The Liturgy (p.31) stated that theological systems that suggest only highly qualified minds are capable of the way to salvation and thus knowledge is the key to salvation distort the Gospel. The Pope states “That is why conceptual and religious systems of this kind-individually, they are very different—are called Gnosticism.”

Some statements expressed in say the last 50 or 60 posts have many elements that are in fact, an implicit heresy with respect to failing to completely grasp the implications of the Incarnation. The Incarnation in readers digest language is the orthodox doctrine that the eternal son of God assumed a complete human nature and was born of the Virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, as Our Sunday’s Visitors Catholic Encyclopedia (p. 530) states “The union of the divine and human natures in Christ is a permanent and abiding one. In addition, a fundamental soteriological conviction is at stake in the doctrine: Whatever is not assumed is not saved. According to the scriptures, the Incarnation has the salvific purpose that embraces both the restoration of the image of God in us through the cross of Christ and the foretaste of the perfect union with God that is our destiny in Christ.”

While Protestants accept the doctrine of the Incarnation, the implication for Protestants with respect to the Incarnation creates problems for their doctrines of justification. Lets take the mere fact that Christ loved our bodies (i.e. Human nature) enough to take a body himself). Since all the Creeds confess the orthodox doctrine of the “resurrection of the body” (Apostles Creed) and “We look for resurrection of the dead” (Nicene Creed), the Doctrine of the Incarnation is important and related to these statements as we will continue to have our bodies in heaven.

Incarnational Theology is missing in the Reformed doctrine of Justification, and thus this is where Protestants are implicitly embracing Gnosticism as many Protestant confessions have an anti-physical bias. Thus, the anti sacramental bias, i.e. God giving us his Grace by acting in and through matter {Bread, Wine, Water, Oil, etc,}, also does not fit the Protestant doctrines about justification, which most say that God imputes his Grace, which amounts to a covering of the human person. This is in opposition of the Catholic position with as I noted earlier, “God’s Grace restores us unto God’s image and is a foretaste of the perfect union with the Trinity.”

Thus, a legitimate question is How one can be in communion with God, if God is always external to me under the Protestant imputed/forensic doctrine. Again, the failure to contemplate the full implications of the Incarnation impacts how most Protestants view the Sacraments, as the Protestant understanding of Sacraments has the anti-physical bias which thus prevents them from understanding the orthodox understanding of the Eucharist and Baptism as they are taught in Scripture and by the Fathers and Councils.

While early Church Fathers all incorporated Incarnational theology in their writings [Ignatius of Antioch, Justin Martyr], it is clear that Incarnational theology was a key component of St. Irenaeus of Lyons (AD 170-175), who I might add, was writing against “The Gnostics”, hmmm, hmmm. A beautiful quote from St. Irenaeus expressing this point states “The glory of God is the living man, but the life of man is the vision of God” (cf. Against Heresies, 4, 20, 7). Fr. Richard Hogan in Dissent from the Creed (p. 49) summarized Gnosticism nicely as follows: “This Heresy posited two gods: one who is good and created the spiritual world and one who is evil and created the material world. Christ was the good God, but He did not have a body because human bodies belong to the evil material world. Denying Incarnation, Gnosticism was obviously at variance with Orthodox Christianity.”

Now I know Confessional Protestantism rejects Gnosticism and accepts Incarnation, however, the Reformed view of Justification has elements of Gnostic doctrine in that God’s Grace only covers sinful man in justice, but man is still inherently sinful, his nature remains the same.

As I noted earlier, Catholic soteriology is grounded in the orthodox doctrine of Christ’s Incarnation and his Passion, Death, Resurrection and Ascension. Thomas Howard, in Evangelical is Not Enough (p. 36) writes: “The Incarnation took all that properly belongs to our humanity and delivered it back to us, redeemed. All of our inclinations and appetites and capacities and yearnings and proclivities are purified and gathered up and glorified by Christ.”

Thus, a doctrine of justification that only views God coming help us be “conceptual beings” and “save our soul” is implicitly destroying the beauty of the Incarnation, i.e., that the eternal Word [Christ] really took on human flesh to reveal the face of God to us, and wants to reconcile the man, the entire human person, back to God.

So Incarnation then leads to Cross/Crucifixion, followed by Resurrection. Christian worship, as all worship, is ultimately about sacrifice. As Pope Benedict points out [Spirit of the Liturgy, p. 28] the common notion of sacrifice has something to do with destruction…and as Pope Benedict continues, he poses the question: What pleasure does God take in destruction? Is anything really surrendered to God through destruction? Can such a mechanical act really serve God’s Glory? The Pope Answers, obviously not! Belonging to God has nothing to do with destruction or non-being: it is rather a way of being. It means emerging from the state of separation, of apparent autonomy, of existing only for oneself and in oneself. It means losing oneself as the only possible way of finding oneself (cf. Mk 8:35; Mt 10:39) which is why St .Augustine could say that true “sacrifice” is love-transformed mankind, divinized creation, and the surrender of all things to God: God all in all (cf. 1 Cor 15:28)…that is the purpose of the world, the essence of true sacrifice and worship.”

Thus, Christ’s as Redeemer is seen in the context of sacrifice, while painful, as ultimately an act of Love to redeem humanity. Pope Benedict discusses how the Church Fathers saw the parable of the Lost Sheep [cf. Mt 18: 10-14] in this context. Pope Benedict writes [Spirit of the Liturgy, p. 33] “For them [The Church Fathers], the sheep caught in the thorn bush and unable to find its way home is a metaphor for man in general. He cannot get out of the thicket and find his way back to God. The shepherd who rescues him and takes him home is the Logos himself, the eternal Word, the eternal Meaning of the universe dwelling in the Son. He it is who makes his way to us and takes the sheep onto his shoulders, that is, he assumes human nature, and as God-Man, he carries man the creature home to God….Man is given a homecoming, but now sacrifice takes the form of Christ on the Cross, of the love that in dying makes a gift of itself. Such sacrifice has nothing to do with destruction. It is an act of new creation, the restoration of creation to its true identity…All worship is now a participation in this “Pasch” of Christ, in his “passing over” from divine to human, from death to life, to the unity of God and man. Thus, Christian worship is the practical application and fulfillment of the words Jesus proclaimed on the first day of Holy Week, Palm Sunday, in the Temple in Jerusalem: “I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself” (John 12:32).”

Thus, redemption that only changes us outwardly, and “conceptually” distorts the Gospels and more importantly, Christ incarnation, and Crucifixion on the Cross as being seen as an act to “appease God” is a total distortion of the Gospels and makes God a “Tyrant and a Monster”, and is more related to the pagan rituals of offering sacrifice to appease the Gods.

No, the Eternal Word [Christ] becoming incarnate and offering himself on the Cross was an act of Love, for that reflects the essence of God Himself, for as St. John writes “God is Love, and whoever remains in love remains in God and God in him…there is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear because fear has to do with punishment, and so one who fears is not yet perfect in love. We love because he loved us first. [cf. 1 John 5:16-19]. The Gospel of John expresses the notion of Love, “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son…” (cf. John 3:16)… “I give you a new commandment; love one another as I have loved you, so you should also love one another. This is how all will know you are my disciples.” (cf. John 13:34-35)…”Whoever has my commandments and observes them is the one who loves me. And whoever loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and reveal myself to him.” (cf. John 14:20-21)…”As the Father loves me, so I also love you. Remain in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and remain in his love.” (cf. John 15:9-10).

Moving along, we get to the expression the “why” of Christ dying on the Cross as we read “This is my commandment: love one another as I love you. No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.” (cf. John 15:12-13).

In closing, a notion of Justification that only externally covers humanity and gives them conceptual knowledge of salvation is implicitly Gnostic and the notion that Christ dying on the Cross is an act to appease a “vengeful God” distorts the Sacred Scriptures of there true meaning and is not in conformity with the orthodox Apostolic Tradition.

pax et bonum

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for sharing your insights, dear brother in Christ!

[CTrent1564]

Mr. Rogers:

Will reply back tommorrow, the Wife is yelling at me and telling me to shut it down.

Regards

[Mr Rogers]

“Now I know Confessional Protestantism rejects Gnosticism and accepts Incarnation, however, the Reformed view of Justification has elements of Gnostic doctrine in that God’s Grace only covers sinful man in justice, but man is still inherently sinful, his nature remains the same...Thus, redemption that only changes us outwardly, and “conceptually” distorts the Gospels and more importantly, Christ incarnation, and Crucifixion on the Cross as being seen as an act to “appease God” is a total distortion of the Gospels and makes God a “Tyrant and a Monster”, and is more related to the pagan rituals of offering sacrifice to appease the Gods.”

Actually, what Baptists (and most Protestants, I believe) teach and I have referred to many times is being born again - a new creation - “created in Christ Jesus to do good works”. Grace is not something that covers us as a shield, but results in our dying, and being born again - not of water, a physical birth, but of spirit.

The analogy is not a prisoner whose fine is paid, but a son adopted into the family.

And while I do not fully understand it, what I can accept is that “we have been justified through faith” - the divine words of scripture, not mine. “Made perfect forever” in Hebrews. “God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus...”

At the same time, there is an ongoing process conducted by God, on “those who are being made holy”.

I’m a retired Electronic Warfare Officer, not a philosopher or theologian. I don’t understand justification or sanctification, but I can accept both, for both are taught in scripture.

[Mr Rogers]

Hmmm...is your wife related to mine? She isn’t a Filipina, is she?

;>)

[bdeaner]

Oh golly. There I go quoting Paul, when I ought to be reading Augustine...

I'm not precisely sure what bronxville meant, but I took her to be saying that the GOSPELS should have a certain hermeneutic priority over PAUL'S LETTERS. The actual words of Christ, recorded and communicate by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John should be the ground upon which Paul's letters should be understood. But often -- it seems to me too, and I have heard this said before by different people on numerous occasions -- it seems Protestants start with Paul and then read the Gospels through that hermeneutic lense. However, it seems to make more sense to begin with the Gospels, and only then go to Paul for clarification. Going from Christ (in the Gospels) to Paul is the hermeneutic approach of the Catholics, and seems to lead to a more Catholic soteriology. But starting with Paul and reading the Gospels with a certain understanding of Paul leads one to have a different soteriology. These two views seem to be mutually exclusive, and so they both cannot be right.

But more on this later...it is late here.

[bdeaner]

Hmmm...is your wife related to mine? She isn’t a Filipina, is she?

Why wife is basically a WASP convert to Catholicism, and she does the same thing to me. LOL. I think it's a wife thing.