The finer point of Faith and Unity

[2WhomShallWeGo]

This started from a thread with a much more contentious title. But it seemed to evolve into a more civil discussion around the question of unity and universalism.
but people wanted a lesscontentious title that wouldn't bring out the scary in all of us.

Why for instance do catholics not believe the other churches are in perfect unity with them?

what is the extent of this unity or lack ther of?

what does the word catholic mean to Catholics?

what do we mean universal?

 

[Basil the Great]

(1) The RCC teaches that Jesus gave the keys of the kingdom to Peter and that these keys were passed on to the succeeding Bishops of Rome. The Church therefore believes that only the RCC and those non-Latin Rite Churches in communion with the RCC are in perfect union together. Only by being in obedience to the Bishop of Rome can one be in union with the Church founded by Jesus for the salvation of mankind. As a non-Catholic, this is the best way I can answer your question. How did I do?

(2) The Church acknowledges that the EO have a valid Eucharist and Apostolic succession and have commonly been referred to as schismatics, at least until recently. They are now referred to as a "particular church". Please do not ask me to define said term, as I have never really seen it defined, but I would imagine that it basically means that they have valid sacraments and Apostolic succession, but are still not a visible member of the Church Christ founded. Pope Benedict recently praised the Orthodox, but stated that they are "wounded", because they are not in union with Peter. For a short time the EO and the RCC were kicking around the term "sister churches", but this has now been officially rejected by Rome in the last teaching document issued on the subject and seems to have been commonly rejected by the EO as well.

All Protestants are considered as "ecclesiastical communities" and not churches, as it is deemed that they do not have a valid Eucharist or Apostolic succession. However, since it is felt that most all Protestants have a valid baptism, they are now referred to as "separated Brethren" and are no longer commonly referred to as heretics, even though technically speaking they are heretics, though not in the same sense as the heretics who were originally Catholic at the time of the Protestant Revolt and then left the Church. Again, as one who has never been Catholic, how did I do in my answer?

I have said enough for now. It is time for someone else to talk, as I tend to talk too much.

 

[2WhomShallWeGo]

how did I do in my answer?

That seems pretty accurate. which is my cagey way of saying I can't find an error.

 

[Basil the Great]

Thank you. I have studied much through the years. Research is a passion of mine, rearch into many topics, but religion is one of them.

 

[tadoflamb]

Again, as one who has never been Catholic, how did I do in my answer?

When are you starting RCIA?

 

[Basil the Great]

That is not likely to happen anytime soon, tadoflamb.

 

[Basil the Great]

I forgot to add that the essence of the imperfect unity that exists comes from a valid Baptism and faith in Christ.

 

[MoreCoffee]

So we're all clear now that some (many or most?) members of non-Catholic christian groups are likely to be received into heaven by God? ... ;-)

 

[KeenanParkerII]

So we're all clear now that some (many or most?) members of non-Catholic christian groups are likely to be received into heaven by God? ... ;-)

I'm pretty sure that was condemned by Pope Pius IX (the many or most). As soon as we think that way we lose impetus to convert them right. But some most definitely are!

While I feel a lot of aggressiveness from most protestants, we need to continue loving them. Because that's what will separate and identify us. They will know us by our love. What won over my family was that most protestants they knew were always hating on people. Meanwhile, at the few Masses they attended with me they heard us praying for all Christians. We should take that mentality from Mass and apply it to daily life, even here on CF (And me too obviously lol).

/blurb

 

[MoreCoffee]

One of the things that helped me decide to become a Catholic Christian was the absence of polemics against Protestants. IN the Presbyterian church I used to attend pastors and members alike disrespected Catholics in all sorts of little ways. But most of all in assuming that Catholics couldn't really be Christians because Catholics didn't believe the core doctrines of Presbyterianism TULIP and such like things.

 

[JoabAnias]

Review this study guide study guide highlighting themes about “The Unity of the Human Family and Global Solidarity” from Pope Benedict XVI’s encyclical Caritas in Veritate and consider convening a family or parish group to discuss what our faith teaches us about welcoming the stranger and becoming one human family.

htt...p://www.usccb.org/jphd/caritasinveritate/caritas_in_veritate-study-guide-4.pdf

 

[QuantaCura]

I'm pretty sure that was condemned by Pope Pius IX (the many or most).

/blurb

This was listed in the Syllabus of Errors (which is basically an index to other works, which contained the authoritative teaching listed or summarized in the Syllabus):

"Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ."

The condemnation of this error is simply aimed at those who do not consider belonging to the Church to be a necessity of means but rather only a necessity of precept (and therefore excusable). The key phrase is "not at all" which is a phrase used during that time period to exclude both "in re" and "in voto" membership.

Check out Part II Chapter 2 of this article by Fr. Hardon. It explains the teaching in the schema of the First Vatican Council on this issue. Point being the phrases "not at all" or "in no way" were used in a very precise way in that time period through the middle of the 20th century.

Fr. Hardon Archives - A Comparative Study of Bellarmine's Doctrine on the Relation of Sincere Non-Catholics to the Catholic Church

That whole article is a very good look at the development of this doctrine up until the middle 20th century. He even briefly mentions the idea of communion in certain elements but not others and how that relates to actual membership in the Church (the idea of partial communion would of course be later adopted by the Second Vatican Council).

But anyway, it's probably not prudent to be presumptuous about any open grave sin and deviation from the truth (which we cannot judge as mortal or not). Our Lord didn't tell us to presume anyone is saved as they are (including ourselves), but to teach all nations to observe everything He taught (which includes the Sacraments, unity with Peter and his successors, etc. besides just belief in the Trinity and the corporal works of mercy.) Of course, we also shouldn't despair of anyone. It's a balance I guess.