[bornacatholic]

The Catholic Church officially teaches that non-catholics can be saved. The teachings are in the Universal Catechism, the Second Vatican Council, the decisions of thee Holy Office, the Encyclicals of the Popes etc etc

There are those who insist on a restrictive view of EENS (extra ecclesia non salus, no salvation outside the church. They can, and should, be ignored. They have no authority. Their ideas about EENS have, for a LONG time, been condemned by the Living Magisterium.

[bornacatholic]

The tragic irony is that those who hold heterodox ideas about EENS are usually the very same ones who have severed the Bonds on Unity in Worship, Doctrine and Authority, thereby placing themselves outside of the Church.

The consequence of that is obvious. They are outside the church and are, according to their own understanding of EENS, condemned to Hell

They never seem to realize it though.

[He Rides A White Horse]

the papal bull Unam Sanctam (1302) of Pope Boniface VIII which states the necessity of submission to the Pope for salvation

Dream on........

[exnavy]

Neither the Pope or the Cathalic Church "save" anyone. Only our Lord Jesus Christ does that.

[Kolokotronis]

Ping for discussion; I'd suggest reading Unam Sanctam before commenting.

[NYer]

Great find, albeit a tad heavy reading so early in the morning. Makes perfect sense to me :-)

[Unam Sanctam]

I didn't realize I was a problem...

[Piers-the-Ploughman]

you wrote: The Catholic Church officially teaches that non-catholics can be saved.

So then SSPXers can be in Heaven too? So then why all the polemic against them?

[ShihanRob]

Wouldn't a teaching by a Pope that came along some time after a teaching from a previous Pope take precident? So, if Pope Bonaface says one must be Roman Catholic and submit to the Roman Pontiff's authority and JPII comes along some centruies later and says via his imprimatur on the Catechism, that people of good will who of no fault of their own are ignorant of the gospel can be saved, wouldn't JPII's statement take precedent according to Catholic Tradition?

In principle, isn't it like the rule on fasting on Fridays? That was the rule for ages until Pope Paul changed it via Vatican II.

Rob

[Hermann the Cherusker]

The literal teaching of Unam Sanctum is explicitly confirmed in the Liturgy of the Church:

"... it is impossible to obtain salvation except in union with the sucessor of Peter." (Raccolta, 1928 edition, Prayer for Reunion, no. 306)

In the Decree on Ecumenism of the Second Vatican Council:

Nevertheless, our separated brethren, whether considered as individuals or as communities and Churches, are not blessed with that unity which Jesus Christ wished to bestow on all those to whom He has given new birth into one body, and whom He has quickened to newness of life - that unity which the Holy Scriptures and the ancient Tradition of the Church proclaim. For it is through Christ's Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help towards 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 must be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the people of God ... (Second Vatican Council, Unitatis Redintegratio, Decree on Ecumenism, 3, November 21, 1964)

By the great Fathers:

Our forefathers gave the name "Chair" to this feast so that we might remember that the Prince of the Apostles was entrusted with the "Chair" of the episcopate ... Blessed be God, who deigned to exalt the apostle Peter over the whole Church. It is most fitting that this foundation be honored since it is the means by which we may ascend to Heaven. (St. Augustine of Hippo, Sermon 15 on the Saints, on the Feast of the Chair of Peter)

It is easy to multiply these sort of authorities, but it serves little purpose if three such basic ones will not suffice to convince.

Do words not mean what they literally say? Perhaps the Arians could have been accomodated after all, had the Fathers not been so insistent on a literal reading of "consubstantial".

[Hebrews 11:6]

It is threads such as yours here on Free Republic which do more than anything else to remind me why I left the Roman Catholic Church thirty-five years ago. I praise God that He led me to a saving knowledge of him eight years later, and that He continues to lead and bless me.

I have no doubt that He is doing the same for you. Whether or not you might be missing out on some joy He could provide you if you weren't Catholic (as I suspect), it is certain that we both shall serve and enjoy Him eternally.

Therefore, my wish for you is that you will experience all the abundance of His temporal blessings.

[BnBlFlag]

So every deceased past U.S. President including Ronald Reagen and George Washington, except John Kennedy, is burning in Hell and even Billy Graham will shortly join them.
And yet you claim any criticism of such a disgusting Doctrine is "Catholic bashing".

[nickcarraway]

Does this mean Pope Benedict is automatically excommunicated because he is friend with a Feenyite monk?

[sitetest]

I think we're right, you and me.

[murphE]

There are those who insist on a restrictive view of EENS (extra ecclesia non salus, no salvation outside the church. They can, and should, be ignored. They have no authority. Their ideas about EENS have, for a LONG time, been condemned by the Living Magisterium.

Like Fr. Echert from the EWTN expert forum?

HERE

HERE

HERE

and

HERE