For Catholics - Who Is Saved?

[ElviraRio]

This is a question I would like Catholics to address for me. For centuries the Pope has adamantly insisted that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church. In recent years there have been papal statements to the effect that there is salvation outside of the Catholic Church, particularly with those churches that employ a trinitarian formula for baptism. Yet, on the other hand, I hear from the same Popes that only the Catholic Church contains the fullness of salvation.

My question then, is how are non-Catholics saved? i.e. do they spend more time in Purgatory than Catholics? Are Catholics given front-row seats in heaven reserved only for those having the fullness of salvation? What are the differences, if any, between salvation and full salvation?

Thanks.

I dunno. But I saved 15 percent on car insurance by switching to Geico.

 

[MrPolo]

Thus, according to the anathema pronounced upon him, he is frying his chestnuts in hell right now according to your church.

That is incorrect. A person is only culpable for the repentance in which he is able, such as the good thief on the Cross. An act of perfect contrition could certainly save Luther. He could have been insane and not fully culpable for his actions. The fact remains, the Catholic Church has never condemned anyone to hell, nor does anathema constitute such a condemnation, as explained earlier in this thread, in content and external links.

Again persists this fascination of a desire to see the Catholic Church condemning someone to hell....

 

[bbbbbbb]

That is incorrect. A person is only culpable for the repentance in which he is able, such as the good thief on the Cross. An act of perfect contrition could certainly save Luther. He could have been insane and not fully culpable for his actions. The fact remains, the Catholic Church has never condemned anyone to hell, nor does anathema constitute such a condemnation, as explained earlier in this thread, in content and external links.

Again persists this fascination of a desire to see the Catholic Church condemning someone to hell....

Au contraire, my friend. My fascination is, as I stated in the OP, a desire to understand the means by which the Roman Catholic Church assures salvation to those outside of its membership. We have thus established that salvation is assured to lunatics such as Luther because of their lunacy and their baptism with a trinitarian formula. We are making progress, indeed.

 

[MrPolo]

salvation is assured to lunatics

Lunacy is indeed a terrible illness that could extenuate culpability in a person's action. God knows. The Church does not "assure" us of anyone in heaven except for formally declared saints. God can show mercy in an instant, like St. Paul on the road. Or like I said, the thief on the cross. You continue to ignore these instances of contrition the Church would recognize as genuine. Whatever helps keep the stuffing in your straw man. The Church still condemns no one to hell.

 

[calluna]

Again persists this fascination of a desire to see the Catholic Church condemning someone to hell....

Why wouldn't it? The RCC 'knows' that Mary and certain others are in heaven, why does it not know about the occupants of the other place?

 

[bbbbbbb]

Why wouldn't it? The RCC 'knows' that Mary and certain others are in heaven, why does it not know about the occupants of the other place?

To play a certain individual's advocate, the reason is rather simple. In Catholic theology the saints are in active communion with folks on earth but the damned cannot communicate with folks on earth, probably because they are too occupied with rather more pressing issues at hand.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Lunacy is indeed a terrible illness that could extenuate culpability in a person's action. God knows. The Church does not "assure" us of anyone in heaven except for formally declared saints. God can show mercy in an instant, like St. Paul on the road. Or like I said, the thief on the cross. You continue to ignore these instances of contrition the Church would recognize as genuine. Whatever helps keep the stuffing in your straw man. The Church still condemns no one to hell.

You are quite correct that the RCC does not assure anyone of salvation and I regret my unfortunate use of that word. The RCC extends an offer of salvation to those who will merit it. Untl recent years that offer was limited only to those within the RCC, but has been extended to those outside of the RCC.

Please correct me if I am mistaken, but as of now, I see that offer being effectuated for the following types of indiividuals outside the official membership:

1. Lunatics, as discussed above, and simpletons, as well.
2. Infants baptized either in water with a trinitarian formula, or baptized by blood, or baptized by desire (which probably covers all infants in the world).
3. Profoundly indifferent people who were baptized as infants with a trinitarian formula but took no further thought to the matter.
4. Members of Protestant and Orthodox churches who recant their churches and embrace Roman Catholicism.

Yet excluded from this offer are the following types of individuals.

1. Members of churches other than the RCC who do not forsake their churches and embrace Roman Catholicism.
2. People who have not been baptized in water with a trinitarian formula.

As you can see, there is still a bit of fuzziness here, as individuals in the #2 category of both types might qualify for one or the other.

If this is incorrect, please provide a correct understanding.

Thank you.

 

[calluna]

To play a certain individual's advocate, the reason is rather simple. In Catholic theology the saints are in active communion with folks on earth but the damned cannot communicate with folks on earth

If one sort can, the other can.

 

[Technocrat2010]

What I meant here is the apparent belief that Orthodox and Protestants will be saved unless they knowingly reject Roman Catholic dogma. In this case ignorance is bliss. The RCC can consider all of these individuals to be members of The Church unless they actively reject Roman Catholic dogma. To do so seems to require a request for excommunication.

Again, please show me where the CC states that EO and Protestants will be saved unless they knowingly reject CC dogma.

As a secondary issue, if I, as a non-Roman Catholic knowingly reject Catholic dogma will the Pope give me a major excommunication? I rather enjoyed the description of the pomp and ceremony involved in it.

Irrelevant.

 

[Technocrat2010]

. The Church, animated by the spirit of God, does not wish the death of the sinner, but rather that he be converted and live. This explains why the most severe and terrifying formulas of excommunication, containing all the rigours of the Maranatha have, as a rule, clauses like this: Unless he becomes repentant, or gives satisfaction, or is corrected.

This is from the final paragraph of the cited article. The addition of the words "as a rule" indicates that there are exceptions to this rule. If there were no exceptions the it would have stated "invariably" or some such wording. Thus, one is led to believe that there are exceptions to this rule.

Argument from silence fallacy. You need to explicitly demonstrate the validity of your claim.

As for Luther, it is a historically verifiable fact that he did not repent prior to his death and renounce his beliefs nor did he receive the Last Rites (a.k.a. extreme unction) of the Roman Catholic Church.

Was anyone present in Luther's mind at the very last second prior to his death?

Thus, according to the anathema pronounced upon him, he is frying his chestnuts in hell right now according to your church.

See above.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Again, please show me where the CC states that EO and Protestants will be saved unless they knowingly reject CC dogma.



Irrelevant.

For once we are in complete agreement. The Orthodox and Protestants cannot be saved unless they repent and embrace the Roman Catholic Church. On this point we are in complete agreement. I also agree with your irrelevant comment.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Argument from silence fallacy. You need to explicitly demonstrate the validity of your claim.

Actually, I did not write the statement which I cited. Your very own learned theologians provided it. I believe that they understand the usage of the English language and its meanings. I also believe that there are exceptions to rules and that when something is done invariably, it is done without exception. I suggest that you contact them and request a further elucidation to their statment.

Was anyone present in Luther's mind at the very last second prior to his death?

Yep, Christ was.

See above.

I trust that this addresses your questions and look forward to your response to my post concerning who is given the offer of salvation outside of the Roman Catholic Church.

Thank you.

 

[Technocrat2010]

Actually, I did not write the statement which I cited. Your very own learned theologians provided it. I believe that they understand the usage of the English language and its meanings. I also believe that there are exceptions to rules and that when something is done invariably, it is done without exception. I suggest that you contact them and request a further elucidation to their statment.

I did not have an argument with your citation; I had an argument with your interpretation of it. Nowhere did the theologians say there were exceptions to the rule. You are assuming that "as a rule" always implies "there are exceptions" based on an English contextual definition which is by no means absolute in all cases. The onus is upon you, not me, to back up your claims. It does not logically necessitate that "as a rule" means there are exceptions. You need to demonstrate otherwise.

Yep, Christ was.

Did He happen to tell us if Luther repented or not?

 

[MrPolo]

effectuated for the following types of indiividuals outside the official membership:

1. Lunatics, as discussed above, and simpletons, as well.
2. Infants baptized either in water with a trinitarian formula, or baptized by blood, or baptized by desire (which probably covers all infants in the world).
3. Profoundly indifferent people who were baptized as infants with a trinitarian formula but took no further thought to the matter.
4. Members of Protestant and Orthodox churches who recant their churches and embrace Roman Catholicism.

Yet excluded from this offer are the following types of individuals.

1. Members of churches other than the RCC who do not forsake their churches and embrace Roman Catholicism.
2. People who have not been baptized in water with a trinitarian formula.

Lunacy is just an example of a reason why someone may innocently not recognize the Church. It is not some spelled out category. I used that as an example of how Martin Luther might have been innocent of rejecting the Church. He also may well not have been crazy. I used that as an example, along with him making an act of contrition in his final hour, as examples of why the Church would not condemn someone to hell. Remember, again, the good thief. There could be a variety of known and unknown reasons too. Who is in hell has never been revealed to the Church.

But more importantly, do not forget what I posted from the Catechism (a sure norm for Catholic teaching) in post #7, which I'll repost here, bolding pertinent phrases:

CCC#846-848 "Outside the Church there is no salvation"
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? 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.

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.

848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."​

This should once and for all show that your 1 & 2 points of "exclusion" above are not in accord with Catholic teaching.

Hope that helps. If ever you want to get a good, brief summary of a Catholic teaching, just go to the Catechism online and do a search or browse the index. The paragraphs will be cross referenced to Scripture and Tradition for further reading behind each teaching.

If you want to read some even more dramatic stuff, read the Letter of the Holy Office, Aug. 8, 1949, sent from Pope Pius XII, just prior to excommunicating Father Leonard Feeney for teaching that salvation holds no exceptions--that all the saved must be formal members of the Catholic Church. The Pope affirmed that this was a false teaching.

Also, this teaching has not changed through the centuries. For example, in the 4th century, St. Augustine said:

...in the ineffable prescience of God, many who appear to be outside are within...by wish or desire" while "many who seem to be within are without."​

 

[fcs25]

The answer according to the Bible and history is very simple.No rituals or denominations save you only one thing is required.....Complete trust in the blood of Chris for your salvation.His death on the cross and His shed blood is what brings you eternal life[A gift from God].

 

[bbbbbbb]

Lunacy is just an example of a reason why someone may innocently not recognize the Church. It is not some spelled out category. I used that as an example of how Martin Luther might have been innocent of rejecting the Church. He also may well not have been crazy. I used that as an example, along with him making an act of contrition in his final hour, as examples of why the Church would not condemn someone to hell. Remember, again, the good thief. There could be a variety of known and unknown reasons too. Who is in hell has never been revealed to the Church.

I do not understand why you object to the offer of salvation being extended to lunatics and simpletons. I did not necessarily mean that they were spelled-out categories, but were types of inidividuals who will be saved, if that is what your Church believes. If not, I don't have a problem with it. I am merely trying to focus on what types of people outside of the Roman Catholic Church can be saved according to Roman Catholic theology and I added simpletons to lunatics.

By the way, my Catholic friends on the OBOB forum informed me that the good thief did not go to heaven. He just went to Paradise, instead.

But more importantly, do not forget what I posted from the Catechism (a sure norm for Catholic teaching) in post #7, which I'll repost here, bolding pertinent phrases:

CCC#846-848 "Outside the Church there is no salvation"
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? 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.

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

By this statement are we to think that heathens of all sorts will be saved? If so, I will add another number to my list.

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.

848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."

So then, Islamic fundamentalists who murder other folks, sincerely believing they are doing God's will, and are ignorant of the gospel through no fault of their own, possess the faith without which it is impossible to please God?
​

This should once and for all show that your 1 & 2 points of "exclusion" above are not in accord with Catholic teaching.

Hope that helps. If ever you want to get a good, brief summary of a Catholic teaching, just go to the Catechism online and do a search or browse the index. The paragraphs will be cross referenced to Scripture and Tradition for further reading behind each teaching.

If you want to read some even more dramatic stuff, read the Letter of the Holy Office, Aug. 8, 1949, sent from Pope Pius XII, just prior to excommunicating Father Leonard Feeney for teaching that salvation holds no exceptions--that all the saved must be formal members of the Catholic Church. The Pope affirmed that this was a false teaching.

Also, this teaching has not changed through the centuries. For example, in the 4th century, St. Augustine said:

...in the ineffable prescience of God, many who appear to be outside are within...by wish or desire" while "many who seem to be within are without."​

"However, for those who knowingly and deliberately (that is, not out of innocent ignorance) commit the sins of heresy (rejecting divinely revealed doctrine) or schism (separating from the Catholic Church and/or joining a schismatic church), no salvation would be possible until they repented and returned to live in Catholic unity."

Please correct my misunderstanding here. As I read the above paragraph it tells me that it is impossible for those who commit the sin of heresy or schism by joining a schismatic church until they repent and return to live in Catholic unity. Am I missing something here?

 

[MrPolo]

By the way, my Catholic friends on the OBOB forum informed me that the good thief did not go to heaven. He just went to Paradise, instead.

By this statement are we to think that heathens of all sorts will be saved? If so, I will add another number to my list.
So then, Islamic fundamentalists who murder other folks, sincerely believing they are doing God's will, and are ignorant of the gospel through no fault of their own, possess the faith without which it is impossible to please God?

I don't know the context of what you were told from OBOB, but the poster may well have meant that the good thief did not go to heaven until Christ rose 3 days later. Some have argued he went to heaven immediately, before Christ did.

The Church does not know one way or the other whether any individual murderer or heathen is in hell, due to the aforementioned extenuating possibilities or unknown ones, even if they are unlikely.

 

[bbbbbbb]

The answer according to the Bible and history is very simple.No rituals or denominations save you only one thing is required.....Complete trust in the blood of Chris for your salvation.His death on the cross and His shed blood is what brings you eternal life[A gift from God].

Thank you for your explanation of the biblical view of salvation. However, this thread is about the Roman Catholic view which has historically maintained that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church. One aspect of the current discussion is whether factors that you give would be acceptable in the modern Roman Catholic interpretation of the matter.

 

[Kat8765]

Okay, so I've been reading all of this and I just have one question.
When I was in RCIA about 4 years ago we have this discussion. The instructor said that if you knowingly reject the Catholic Doctrine and join another church you would be commiting a mortal sin. What I thought he meant by this was that if you believed with all of your heart, Catholic teachings, but still decided to move away from the Church that would be were the trouble comes in. Right? This wouldn't include Protestants who don't believe in some of what the Catholic Church teaches. Just wondering.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Okay, so I've been reading all of this and I just have one question.
When I was in RCIA about 4 years ago we have this discussion. The instructor said that if you knowingly reject the Catholic Doctrine and join another church you would be commiting a mortal sin. What I thought he meant by this was that if you believed with all of your heart, Catholic teachings, but still decided to move away from the Church that would be were the trouble comes in. Right? This wouldn't include Protestants who don't believe in some of what the Catholic Church teaches. Just wondering.

This is an excellent question. If this is the case, then I, as a Protestant who knows and rejects Catholic dogma and has knowingly joined a Protestant Church, am off the hook, but my good friend, Patrick Murphy, who was raised in the Catholic Church and also rejects Catholic dogma to the same degree that I do and is a member of my church, is in deep trouble. I suppose I should be grateful that my parents weren't Catholic and sorry that his were.