Posted on 02/09/2005 6:15:55 AM PST by sinkspur
"So your view"
By the way, it has nothing to with "MY" personal view. It has to do with the authoritative teaching of the Church. It matters little that you were not given an authentic Catholic education. That happens a lot nowadays. I quoted you from authoritative Church documents. It has nothing to do with MY preferences or views.
Nonesense.
In the first place, I was never taught, nor do I believe that "everyone is saved".
Secondly, at 38 years of age, having lived in about 10 states, as many parishes, and having gone to three different Catholic Schools (and CCD) I was exposed to many different types of Catholic Priests, Sisters, and laity - certainly NOT all liberal.
There is hope for everyone up until the point of their death, to convert their hearts to God, ask for forgiveness of their sins, and correspond to the grace He gives them. If they are NOT saved, it will be their fault, not God's.
"Outside the Church, there is no salvation" does not equate to "all non-Catholics are condemned to hell."
Oh goody. That gels nicely with what I was taught and what i believe. It also gels nicely with what I said - which I believe someone here corrected me on, hence my confusion. I was not accusing you of condemning all Non-Cathyolics to hell. I WAS looking for a clarification from you on your views as that is the way I saw them being explained. Thanks.
In your eyes. You know nothing about me or my education. You are not qualified to comment derisively on it. If you wish to answer my honest questions civilly, fine, otherwise don't bother.
The authoritative documents you used - are there any more recent "authortiative" documents or statements from JPII on this topic?
Dominus Iesus absolutely indicates that salvation can be found outside the Roman Catholic Church. It goes into great detail how and why this is so.
I encourage everyone to read it and then compare it to the precise statements of the many Popes. Clearly...the two cannot be considered of the same mind.
Dominus Iesus = New Rome. It was written by a man (Cardinal Ratzinger) who publicly doubts the historicity of the Resurrection. Draw your own conclusions.
If you believe he does, you have to prove it to those of us who know otherwise.
"The authoritative documents you used - are there any more recent "authortiative" documents or statements from JPII on this topic?"
Anything that Vatican II or JPII has written on this (most recently Cardinal Ratzinger's Dominus Jesus), is only a reflection on the original defined DOGMAS themselves. In the hierarchical importance of "definitions," the first three I cited cannot be understood as to conflict with anything that follows. They are true for all eternity.
Here are two or three others.
First, the council professes its belief that God Himself has made known to mankind the way in which men are to serve Him, and thus be saved in Christ and come to blessedness. We believe that this one true religion subsists in the Catholic and Apostolic Church, to which the Lord Jesus committed the duty of spreading it abroad among all men. Thus He spoke to the Apostles: "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have enjoined upon you" (Matt. 28: 19-20). On their part, all men are bound to seek the truth, especially in what concerns God and His Church, and to embrace the truth they come to know, and to hold fast to it. Dignitatis Humanae, 1965, Second Vatican Council
The Church, then, is God's only flock; it is like a standard lifted high
for the nations to see it:[16] for it serves all mankind through the
Gospel of peace[17] as it makes its pilgrim way in hope toward the goal
of the fatherland above.[18] Decree on Ecumenism, 1965, Second Vatican Council
For it is only through Christ's Catholic Church, which is "the
all-embracing means of salvation," that they can benefit fully from the
means of salvation. We believe that Our Lord entrusted all the blessings
of the New Covenant to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the
head, in order to establish the one Body of Christ on earth to which all
should be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the people of God.
This people of God, though still in its members liable to sin, is ever
growing in Christ during its pilgrimage on earth, and is guided by God's
gentle wisdom, according to His hidden designs, until it shall happily
arrive at the fullness of eternal glory in the heavenly Jerusalem. Decree on Ecumenism, 1965, Second Vatican Council
4. The Church's constant missionary proclamation is endangered today by relativistic theories which seek to justify religious pluralism, not only de facto but also de iure (or in principle). As a consequence, it is held that certain truths have been superseded; for example, the definitive and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ, the nature of Christian faith as compared with that of belief in other religions, the inspired nature of the books of Sacred Scripture, the personal unity between the Eternal Word and Jesus of Nazareth, the unity of the economy of the Incarnate Word and the Holy Spirit, the unicity and salvific universality of the mystery of Jesus Christ, the universal salvific mediation of the Church, the inseparability — while recognizing the distinction — of the kingdom of God, the kingdom of Christ, and the Church, and the subsistence of the one Church of Christ in the Catholic Church.
In treating the question of the true religion, the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council taught: “We believe that this one true religion continues to exist in the Catholic and Apostolic Church, to which the Lord Jesus entrusted the task of spreading it among all people. Thus, he said to the Apostles: ‘Go therefore and make disciples of all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you' (Mt 28: 19-20). Especially in those things that concern God and his Church, all persons are required to seek the truth, and when they come to know it, to embrace it and hold fast to it”.99
22. With the coming of the Saviour Jesus Christ, God has willed that the Church founded by him be the instrument for the salvation of all humanity (cf. Acts 17:30-31).90 This truth of faith does not lessen the sincere respect which the Church has for the religions of the world, but at the same time, it rules out, in a radical way, that mentality of indifferentism “characterized by a religious relativism which leads to the belief that ‘one religion is as good as another'”.91 If it is true that the followers of other religions can receive divine grace, it is also certain that objectively speaking they are in a gravely deficient situation in comparison with those who, in the Church, have the fullness of the means of salvation.92 However, “all the children of the Church should nevertheless remember that their exalted condition results, not from their own merits, but from the grace of Christ. If they fail to respond in thought, word, and deed to that grace, not only shall they not be saved, but they shall be more severely judged”.93
Dominus Jesus, Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, 2000
The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the Audience of June 16, 2000, granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, with sure knowledge and by his apostolic authority, ratified and confirmed this Declaration, adopted in Plenary Session and ordered its publication.
Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, August 6, 2000, the Feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord.
Certainly all suscribed to the ideas set forth Dominus Iesus....they were all certainly on track. Now compare what you were taught with the statements from 1600 years ago, which you clearly rejected as foreign, as strange, as not matching understanding of Roman Catholicism.
Your candor and instant recognition of the difference is 100% spot on. I'm telling you that I agree with you. The old stuff from 1600 years ago no longer applies, there's no threat from New Rome, they love ya where you are at. Did you scan Dominus Iesus?
Therefore, these separated Churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church".66 Section IV Dominus Ieusus August 6, 2000
These two paragraphs are saying quite different things (obviously.)
I can understand how a non-Catholic can be rattled by #1 and mollified by #2. Both however cannot be true. One is wrong.
Therefore, these separated Churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church".66 Section IV Dominus Ieusus August 6, 2000
These two paragraphs are saying quite different things.
I can understand how a non-Catholic can be rattled by #1 and mollified by #2. Both however cannot be true.
But their close, Pio.
For the spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church".66 Section IV Dominus Ieusus August 6, 2000
That statement could be read to mean that there is no salvation without the Church.
Their = They are. Uuuuurgh!
For the spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church".66 Section IV Dominus Ieusus August 6, 2000
That statement could be read to mean that there is no salvation without the Church.
True..this is written in classic modernist style...it's got a little bit in there for everyone..so when you make a point about the document the defender of the document can cry foul and say, "but you're taking it out of context."
It is written so the Protestant can walk away mollified, the liberal can be quietly triumphant, the neo-Catholic can be assured and the traditionalist walks away furious.
Good thing it was only written by a Cardinal.
Well, he's the Pope now.
The 5th Modernist Pope in a row...more of the same, I guess.
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.