RCC Teachings on Salvation

NewReformation · Jul 3, 2003

More specificly, from the Catechism:
816 "The sole Church of Christ [is that] which our Savior, after his Resurrection, entrusted to Peter's pastoral care, commissioning him and the other apostles to extend and rule it. . . . This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in (subsistit in) the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in communion with him."267

The Second Vatican Council's Decree on Ecumenism explains: "For it is through Christ's Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help toward salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained. It was to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the head, that we believe that our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant, in order to establish on earth the one Body of Christ into which all those should be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the People of God."268

Wounds to unity

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

Toward unity

820 "Christ bestowed unity on his Church from the beginning. This unity, we believe, subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time."277 Christ always gives his Church the gift of unity, but the Church must always pray and work to maintain, reinforce, and perfect the unity that Christ wills for her. This is why Jesus himself prayed at the hour of his Passion, and does not cease praying to his Father, for the unity of his disciples: "That they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be one in us, . . . so that the world may know that you have sent me."278 The desire to recover the unity of all Christians is a gift of Christ and a call of the Holy Spirit.

Catholics DO NOT believe all Christians are members of Christ's Church, nor does the Church teach this. Protestestants and others "belong" to it in only one remote sense, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) explains.

QUOTE CCC 830 The word "catholic" means "universal," in the sense of "according to the totality" or "in keeping with the whole." The Church is catholic in a double sense:

WHO BELONGS TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH? (P. 222)

CCC 836 "All men are called to this catholic unity of the People of God... And to it, in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who believe in
Christ, and finally all mankind, called by God's grace to salvation."

CCC 837 "Fully incorporated into the society of the Church are those who, possessing the Spirit of Christ ACCEPT ALL THE MEANS OF SALVATION GIVEN TO THE CHURCH together with her entire organization, and who -- by the bonds constituted by the profession of faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and communion -- ARE JOINED IN THE VISIBLE STRUCTURE OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST, WHO RULES HER THROUGH THE SUPREME PONTIFF AND THE BISHOPS... (emphasis added).

CCC 838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter. But those who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church." END QUOTE (The CCC is quoting Vatican II.)

It is one thing to be in "a certain, although imperfect communion with the CC" and quite another to "belong" to it.

Maybe this will clear things up a tad bit for the other Non-Catholics on this forum.

NewReformation(still an Anabaptist)

BobRyan · Jul 4, 2003

The above rationalization is an attempt to "put a nice face" on what the RCC has actually said on this subject.

The "problem" is that the RCC "claims" to be infallable and as it turns out - it did not "just start to speak" after Vatican II.

Pope Boniface VIII taught in his Unam Sanctam decree (emphasis mine):

Therefore, this one and single Church has one head and not two heads,- for had she two heads, she would be a monster,- that is, Christ and Christ's vicar, Peter and Peter's successor. For the Lord said unto Peter, "Feed my sheep." "My," he said, speaking generally and not particularly, "these and those," by which it is to be understood that all the sheep are committed unto him. So, when the Greeks [Eastern Orthodox] and others say that they were not
committed to the care of Peter and his successors, they must confess that they are not of Christ's sheep, even as the Lord says in John, "There is one fold and one shepherd."...

Furthermore, that every human creature is subject to the Roman pontiff [the Pope],- this we declare, say, define, and pronounce to be altogether necessary to salvation.
Click to expand...

The Council of Florence taught:

[The most Holy Roman Church] firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart 'into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels' (Matthew 25:41), unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is
so strong that only to those remaining in it are the Sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church
Click to expand...

The First Vatican Council taught:

[quote
Hence we teach and declare that by the appointment of our Lord the Roman Church possesses a superiority of ordinary power over all other churches, and that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate; to which all, of whatever right and dignity, both pastors and faithful, both individually and collectively, are bound, by their duty of hierarchial subordination and true obedience, to submit not only in
matters which belong to faith and morals, but also in those which appertain to the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world, so that the Church of Christ may be one flock under one supreme pastor through the preservation of unity both of communion and of profession of the same faith with the Roman Pontiff. This is the teaching of Catholic truth, from which no one can deviate without loss of faith and salvation.
[/quote]

Now truly - from NewReformation's posts above WOULD you have "expected" THIS to be the infallible position of the RCC toward Non-RCs?

I think "not".

In Christ,

Bob

BobRyan · Jul 4, 2003

Abridged version, by Dave Armstrong, of "The Church Necessary for Salvation," chapter 10, pp.169-186 of The Spirit of Catholicism, by Karl Adam (Garden City, NY: Doubleday Image, 1924, translated by Dom Justin McCann).

This book (in the editor's opinion, anyway) is one of the very best expositions of Catholicism ever written: very eloquent, biblical, imaginative, appealing, and orthodox.

In it is found the following excellent treatment of the complex and multi-faceted question of how non-Catholic Christians are regarded by the Catholic Church, and how the Catholic Church believes itself to be the Church that Jesus Christ founded, while simultaneously acknowledging other Christians as members of the true, mystical Body of Christ as well.

[p.169]

"And if he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican" (Matthew 18:17).

The Catholic Church as the Body of Christ, as the realisation in the world of the Kingdom of God, is the Church of Humanity........the exclusive institution wherein all men shall attain salvation.....

The Church would belie her own deepest essence and her most outstanding quality, namely her inexhaustible fulness and that which guarantees and supports this fulness, her vocation to be the Body of Christ, if she were ever to recognise some collateral and antagonistic Christian church as her sister and as possessing equal rights with herself. She can recognise the historical importance of such churches, She can even designate them as Christian communions, yes, even as Christian churches, but never as the Church of Christ. One [p.170] God, one Christ, one Baptism, one Church. There can never be a second Christ, and in the same way there cannot be a second Body of Christ.......

The Catholic Church can and will appraise generously, and will countenance, all the communities of non-Catholic Christendom.......But she cannot recognise other Christian communions as churches of like order and rights with herself. To do so would be infidelity to her own nature, and would be the worst disloyalty to herself. In her own eyes the Catholic Church is nothing at all if she be not the Church, the Body of Christ, the Kingdom of God. This exclusiveness is rooted in the exclusiveness of Christ, in His claim to be the bringer of the new life, to be the way, the truth and the life........

There is "no other name under heaven given to men, whereby they must be saved" (Acts 4:12). But we can grasp Christ only through His Church. It is true that He might, had He so willed, have imparted Himself and His grace to all men directly, in personal experience. But the question is not what might have been, but what Christ in fact willed to do. And in fact He willed to give Himself to men through men, that is by the way of a community life and not by the way of isolation and in- [p.171] dividualism......

It was not His will to sanctify a countless multitude of solitary souls, but a corporate kingdom of saints, a Kingdom of God......

From the very beginning, as St. Matthew testifies (Matthew 18:17) the necessity for salvation of belonging to the one fellowship was established on the basis of an express saying of our Lord's:.....St. Cyprian [d.258] afterwards expressed this conviction of primitive Christianity......: "To have the one God for your father, you must have the Church for your mother" (Ep. 74,7). "No man can be saved except in the Church" (Ep. 4,4). "Outside the Church there is no salvation" (Ep. 73,21).

Thus was formulated that sentence which puts the Church's claim to be the only source of salvation in the most concise form: "Outside the Church no salvation" [p.172] (Extra ecclesiam nulla salus). the Fourth Lateran Council (A.D. 1215) adopted this formula verbatim........

[p.174] ......But, we may ask, does that mean that all heretics and non-Catholics are destined to hell?.......

To begin with, it is certain that the declaration that there is no salvation outside the Church is not aimed at individual non-Catholics, at any persons as persons, but at non-Catholic churches and communions, in so far as they are non-Catholic communions. Its purpose is to formulate positively the truth that there is but one Body of Christ and therefore but one Church which possesses and imparts the grace of Christ in its fulness........So that the spiritual unfruitfulness which is predicated in the doctrine is not to be affirmed of the individual non-Catholic, but primarily of non-Catholic communions as such.........

[p.176]....The Jansenists in the seventeenth century.....advocated the.....principle that "outside the Church there is no grace" (extra ecclesiam nulla conceditur gratia).

[p.179]......The Church rightly maintains and continually reiterates, in decisive and uncompromising fashion, her claim to be the sole true Body of Christ;

[p.180] From the purely theological standpoint,.......the only possible conclusion regarding all heretics and schismatics, Jews and pagans, is that judgment of condemnation which the Council of Florence [1438-1445] pronounced upon them.........[p.181].......It is thus, from this purely theological standpoint, that we are to understand the sharp anathemas pronounced by the Church against all heretics and schismatics.........In these pronouncements the Church is not deciding the good or bad faith of the individual heretic. Still less is she sitting in judgment on his ultimate fate. The immediate purport of her condemnation is that these heretics represent and proclaim ideas antagonistic to the Church. When ideas are in conflict, when truth is fighting against error, and revelation against human ingenuity, then there can be no compromise and no indulgence.......Dogmatic intolerance is therefore a moral duty, a duty to the infinite truth and to truthfulness.

But so soon as it is a question, not of the conflict between idea and idea, but of living men, of our judgment on this or that non-Catholic, then the theologian becomes a psychologist, the dogmatist a pastor of souls. He draws attention to the fact that the living man is very rarely the embodiment of an idea, that the conceptual world and mentality of the individual are so multifarious and complicated, that he cannot be reduced to a single formula. In other words the heretic, the Jew and the pagan seldom exist [p.182] in a pure state........Therefore the Church expressly distinguishes between "formal" and "material" heretics. A "formal" heretic rejects the Church and its teaching absolutely and with full deliberation; a "material" heretic rejects the Church from lack of knowledge, being influenced by false prejudice or by an anti-Catholic upbringing. St. Augustine [354-430] forbids us to blame a man for being a heretic because he was born of heretical parents, provided that he does not with obstinate self-assurance shut out all better knowledge, but seeks the truth simply and loyally (Ep. 43,1,1). Whenever the Church has such honest enquirers before her, she remembers that our Lord condemned Pharisaism but not the individual Pharisee, that He held deep and loving intercourse with Nicodemus, and allowed Himself to be invited by Simon......

It is true that heretics were tried and burnt in the (dark ages) Middle Ages.

Click to expand...

And WOULD we have concluded such "burning" from NewReformation's opending post?

I think not!

As EWTN's DR Carroll admits "Billy Graham WOULD have been burned at the stake HAD he taught THEN what he teaches today".

Fascinating!!

They would have BURNED him alive - in their efforts to "save his soul" as they pronounced the curses upon his roasting form.

And that NewReformation can find a "way" to put a "nice face on it" - is comforting to say the least!

Brother Adam · Jul 4, 2003

However we do know that there are humans in the Catholic Church. Actually, they're all human. Actually, they are all human AND fallible. Even the pope. He goes to confession daily.

Catholics have done some stupid things in their day. Really stupid. But so have Baptists.

When something isn't a teaching in its official capacity, then we can't hold them to it. Just as we ask them not to hold us to the actions of the ijiots that decide to lace their communion grape juice with some really nasty stuff and kill everyone.

When speaking in their official capacity, we must then strive to understand what it is the words mean in the correct context. If then, they are anti-biblical, let us hold them to that, and declare that there church is not infallible and is just like all of our churches- they can teach error.

BobRyan · Jul 4, 2003

Statements I quoted above from Popes and councils ARE the "official" statements of the RCC and it is THESE statements that "challenge" the modern RC spokesmen for they must state their new views of tolerance in such as way as not to step on the toes of these prior statements regarding non-Catholics.

After all - if Popes and councils are NOT speaking "for the church" in their publications - then HOW would the church member ever know (until centuries after hid death) whether what he was hearing was "official or not".

The myth that the pope or the papal councils say "And now we speak ex cathedra" prior to such a statement of "official speaking" -- has never been true at the time any statement was made.

So it is the composit teaching that the church as to "deal with" when it says "it NEVER" went into error. A huge challenge to say the least.

In Christ,

Bob

Daveth · Jul 4, 2003

Hi Bob,
I did a Google search on "EWTN's DR Carroll" and found "The Benefits of Burning Heretics at the Stake." how can people still believe like this?

I also did a Google search on “Dave Armstrong”. I can’t believe Dave said that “The Inquisition was not murder at all, but rather, an application of civil justice."

To be fair to Dave, he was not for killing of heretics, however he thought, it was the best time to live as a catholic and he would love to go back and live in those times, as he affirmed in another series of exchanges.

Also, to be fair to Catholics, other churches had these laws. (Anglican, Lutheran and Presbyterian). That’s why I believe in separation of Church and State!

I find it’s very disturbing today that some neo-catholic and others, believe that the “Inquisition was good” and it is okay to hide ones intentions today. This is a new trend I see on Christian message boards all over the net, is to hide ones intentions under a false profile.

I believe that's why having an honest Christian message board is helpful, because Jesus is in the midst of where "two or three are gathered together in His name."

[ July 04, 2003, 01:21 PM: Message edited by: Daveth ]

Carson Weber · Jul 4, 2003

Hi Daveth,

You wrote, "because Jesus is in the midst of where 'two or three are gathered together in His name'"

I don't meant to harp on you or criticize you, but I would like to point out the immediate context of the above allusion you made to Matthew's Gospel. You may find what I have to say worthwhile.

If you take this verse about "2 or 3" in its immediate context, you may discover something quite interesting that I had never noticed before I did a little Bible study on the Gospel of Matthew.

This statement is in the immediate context of Jesus giving his Apostles binding, decision-making authority.

"If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them." (in Matthew 18:17-20)

It was a part of Jewish law that in order to deliver a judgement against someone who had committed a crime, 2 or 3 witnesses were necessary to bring about the conviction and deliver the sentence against the criminal.

"On the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses he that is to die shall be put to death; a person shall not be put to death on the evidence of one witness" (Dt. 17:6).

In effect, Jesus' statement pertains to his presence in the midst of the Church's legislative authority, confirming the testimony of 2 or 3 witnesses:

"But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses." (Mt 20:16)

If one is going to treat another Christian "as a Gentile or a tax-collector", that's a pretty hefty action! That's excommunication! And, excommunication isn't really excommunication unless if such a decision has Christ confirming the excommunication as the invisible authority empowering the visible authority.

Daveth · Jul 4, 2003

Hi Carson, nice to meet you. Thank you for your reply.

I think it's real important for people to be honest on Christian message boards to the best of their ability, and that the Lord keep an eye on ever thing we do. We should post without pretence.

I will consider what you have said.
Thanks
Dave.

BobRyan · Jul 4, 2003

Davethh - all good points. I enjoyed your post.

As you point out - the idea of Christian torturing other Christians because "they believe different than me" is a horrible legacy of the RCC and some of the Christian churches that split off from the RCC in the late 16th - 18th centuries held on to some of those RC practices for a very short time. However the RC employmnet of them for centuries as the dominant force in Europe - was devastating.

In any case - the point remains - separation of church and state - in so far as it prevents the church from persecuting those who do not "share her faith" is always a "good thing".

In Christ,

Bob

Daveth · Jul 4, 2003

Hi Bob, nice to meet you also. Thanks for your reply.

Yes, I believe in separation of church and state deeply.
That’s why, Luke 6:45 so important.

Thanks
Dave

RCC Teachings on Salvation

NewReformation New Member

BobRyan Well-Known Member

BobRyan Well-Known Member

Brother Adam New Member

BobRyan Well-Known Member

Daveth New Member

Carson Weber <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

Daveth New Member

BobRyan Well-Known Member

Daveth New Member

Useful Searches

RCC Teachings on Salvation

NewReformation New Member

BobRyan Well-Known Member

BobRyan Well-Known Member

Brother Adam New Member

BobRyan Well-Known Member

Daveth New Member

Carson Weber <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

Daveth New Member

BobRyan Well-Known Member

Daveth New Member