Is there salvation outside the Catholic Church?

[BreadOfLife]

No use arguing with BoL...nothing seems to sink in.

Only truth . . .

 

[aspen]

So do you guys have anything else to add? Because right now, you guys are just attacking each other.
I think this thread is talked out.

 

[GodsGrace]

Only truth . . .

You can't converse with humans.
You don't LISTEN to what people say.
You don't respond with respect.
You just like to argue and belittle.
You sin every time you do this.

Colossians 3:13-23

 

[GodsGrace]

So do you guys have anything else to add? Because right now, you guys are just attacking each other.
I think this thread is talked out.

I was watching a serious movie about a true story that took place in the late 1800's.
A priest told a parishoner that there is no salvation outside of the church.
It reminded me of your thread.

This was true, as you know.

NOW, it's not true anymore. (as per the CCC and what the CC actually is teaching)
Would you consider this a change in doctrine?

 

[epostle]

Could you give me some verses?

I've always learned (from the CC) that purgatory came about hundreds of years after the church.

Gen. 50:10; Num. 20:29; Deut. 34:8 – here are some examples of ritual prayer and penitent mourning for the dead for specific periods of time. The Jewish understanding of these practices was that the prayers freed the souls from their painful state of purification, and expedited their journey to God.

Baruch 3:4 – Baruch asks the Lord to hear the prayers of the dead of Israel. Prayers for the dead are unnecessary in heaven and unnecessary in hell. These dead are in purgatory.

Zech. 9:11 – God, through the blood of His covenant, will set those free from the waterless pit, a spiritual abode of suffering which the Church calls purgatory.

2 Macc. 12:43-45 – the prayers for the dead help free them from sin and help them to the reward of heaven. Those in heaven have no sin, and those in hell can no longer be freed from sin. They are in purgatory. Luther was particularly troubled with these verses because he rejected the age-old teaching of purgatory. As a result, he removed Maccabees from the canon of the Bible.

CCC 1030-1032

 

[BreadOfLife]

I was watching a serious movie about a true story that took place in the late 1800's.
A priest told a parishoner that there is no salvation outside of the church.
It reminded me of your thread.

This was true, as you know.

NOW, it's not true anymore. (as per the CCC and what the CC actually is teaching)
Would you consider this a change in doctrine?

This is absolute nonsense and yet another one of your anti-Catholic lies that has been exposed . . .

Paragraphs 846 - 848 of the Catechism destroy your nonsense:

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 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.336
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.337
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."338

Why do you even bother posting the lie??

 

[epostle]

I was watching a serious movie about a true story that took place in the late 1800's.
A priest told a parishoner that there is no salvation outside of the church.
It reminded me of your thread.

This was true, as you know.

NOW, it's not true anymore. (as per the CCC and what the CC actually is teaching)
Would you consider this a change in doctrine?

No. There is no salvation outside the church because that is what the Apostles taught. The phrase was coined before the reformation. Vatican II reformulated Trent with a milder tone, but taught the same thing.

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.279
CCC - PART 1 SECTION 2 CHAPTER 3 ARTICLE 9 PARAGRAPH 3
In other words, there is no salvation outside the church. It's another grossly misunderstood phrase.

This teaching of Christ and His Church is not meant to allow indifferentism or exclusivism. Baptism and unity with the Catholic Church provide the only assurance of salvation, but not the only means. "God has bound salvation to the Sacrament of Baptism, but He Himself is not bound by His sacraments" (Catechism, no. 1257, original emphasis).

 

[aspen]

So are our “separated brethren” part of the body of Christ? Or are they headed to Hell?
I just don’t believe nonCatholics are unable to receive the saving Blood of Christ. Also, I was a Christian for twenty years or so, before I joined the Catholic Church.

Christianity is about a loving relationship with Christ. God so loved the world that He gave His only son to be killed on a Cross! I think God has got this.....He is not going to lose. Arrogance on all sides keeps Orthodox, Catholics, and Protestants separated - I have faith the God will heal this arrogance. I think the real problem is that Satan has convinced the majority of Christians out there that any move towards unity - government, churches, etc, is a bad thing and against God.

I am not sure why we are make this so complicated - all we are supposed to be doing is loving outwardly; not doubling down and trying to keep the status quo and then, pretending we are watching for Christ. It seems possible, many Christians out there are going to set themselves in the place of rebels and end up fighting against God because their doctrine doesn’t match perfectly with reality.

 

[Giuliano]

Could you give me some verses?

I've always learned (from the CC) that purgatory came about hundreds of years after the church.

If I may intrude, the Jewish word for it is gehinnom; and when Jesus uses the word gehenna, that's how I understand it. He was a Jew speaking to other Jews, using words they used. Jesus depiction of "hell" with Lazarus and the rich man coincides nicely with the Jewish gehinnom.

As you know, antisemitism entered the church quite early. They wanted to abandon almost anything that suggested their Jewish roots. They had the practice of praying for the dead but lacked scripture to back it up unless they conceded the Jewish idea of Gehinnom was correct. Add to that, there was the belief that "hellfire" was eternal and they often equated gehinnom with this "eternal hellfire."

It left both Catholic and Orthodox in a quandary. The Catholics started using the word "purgatory" and the Orthodox said they didn't know much about it but they'd always prayed for the dead.

 

[Giuliano]

Apples and oranges . . .

God commanded Moses to create golden images of Cherubim.
Solomon was NOT commanded by God to do so – but God APPROVED of them.
BIG difference.

You just fell into the logical fallacy known as argumentum ad ignorantiam, basing a conclusion on a lack of evidence. If the Bible doesn't say Solomon was commanded, then it means he was not commanded. So far as I know, it doesn't say either way.

As for images used for educating the masses throughout history – I have proven my point repeatedly. I said that the EARLY CHURCH used them to educate people. I NEVER said that this was a practice from day ONE.

More word games. Now we can argue what "early church" means. The point is that the early church did just fine without them.

Nobody

like to be proven wrong – and you’re no different . . .

As for the Eucharist – it is not a mere “reminder” of Christ – it is Christ Himself (Matt. 26:26, Mark 14:22-25, Luke 22:18-20,1 Corinthians 11:23-25).

I did not say "mere" reminder, and you should not mangle my words so. People are to remember him so they know what they're doing. One should not partake like an ignorant animal, not discerning the Body. Looking at the physical bread and wine isn't enough -- it doesn't teach anyone to pay attention to the spiritual reality.

Luke 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

 

[Giuliano]

Sure it basically agrees with me!
I believe you also know your stuff.
And, as my mother used to tell me:
The smarter one stops first.
No use arguing with BoL...nothing seems to sink in.

I don't know. We may be seeing some progress. After all, he admitted you were right about something. It was done grudgingly, but he admitted it.

Give the thread another 40 or 50 pages or so, and maybe he'll be able to say you're right about something without adding a disparaging remark; and who knows, by the time we get to 200 pages, he may thank you for posting some things.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You just fell into the logical fallacy known as argumentum ad ignorantiam, basing a conclusion on a lack of evidence. If the Bible doesn't say Solomon was commanded, then it means he was not commanded. So far as I know, it doesn't say either way.

More word games. Now we can argue what "early church" means. The point is that the early church did just fine without them.

I did not say "mere" reminder, and you should not mangle my words so. People are to remember him so they know what they're doing. One should not partake like an ignorant animal, not discerning the Body. Looking at the physical bread and wine isn't enough -- it doesn't teach anyone to pay attention to the spiritual reality.

Luke 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

Ummmmm, that’s a stretch.

Solomon wasn’t commanded to have carved Cherubim placed in the Temple. It’s not even implied in Scripture. Nice try . . .

As for the “Early Church” era being up for argument - the ”Early Church” Fathers are considered so as late as John of Damascus in AD 749. This is according to PROTESTANT as well as Catholic scholarship. It has been PROVEN that paintings were used to educate and remind as far back as the SECOND Century.

It has ALSO been proven that carvings and etchings go back as far as the THIRD century. Statues were placed in churches after the FOURTH century – which is the MIDDLE of the Early Church era.

You’re running out of excuses . . .

 

[Giuliano]

Ummmmm, that’s a stretch.

Solomon wasn’t commanded to have carved Cherubim placed in the Temple. It’s not even implied in Scripture. Nice try . . .

Either way, it's not stated. Your statement that Solomon "wasn't commanded" is pure fabrication. You don't know.

As for the “Early Church” era being up for argument - the ”Early Church” Fathers are considered so as late as John of Damascus in AD 749. This is according to PROTESTANT as well as Catholic scholarship. It has been PROVEN that paintings were used to educate and remind as far back as the SECOND Century.

It has ALSO been proven that carvings and etchings go back as far as the THIRD century. Statues were placed in churches after the FOURTH century – which is the MIDDLE of the Early Church era.

You’re running out of excuses . . .

And you're repeating yourself. Some things I agree with too; but when I want to know about the "early church," I want to know how people in the First Century did things. What people did later doesn't say much to me. They often had differing opinions and fought over them.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Either way, it's not stated. Your statement that Solomon "wasn't commanded" is pure fabrication. You don't know.

And you're repeating yourself. Some things I agree with too; but when I want to know about the "early church," I want to know how people in the First Century did things. What people did later doesn't say much to me. They often had differing opinions and fought over them.

YOU don’t get to define history or what the “Early Church” is. It IS what it is – regardless of YOUR denials. And the fact of the matter is that the Early Church is defined as those first 9 centuries of the Church.

As for Solomon’s carved statues – IF he was commanded by God to do so – it would have been written. Or at least alluded to.

Name ONE instance in ALL of Scripture where somebody was commanded by God to do something and it was not even implied in the text.

Happy hunting . . .

 

[Giuliano]

YOU don’t get to define history or what the “Early Church” is. It IS what it is – regardless of YOUR denials. And the fact of the matter is that the Early Church is defined as those first 9 centuries of the Church.

If a church wants to claim it's Apostolic and nothing's changed -- then I find it odd when some traditions start a few centuries after the Apostles. It undermines the credibility of the claim.

As for Solomon’s carved statues – IF he was commanded by God to do so – it would have been written. Or at least alluded to.

Name ONE instance in ALL of Scripture where somebody was commanded by God to do something and it was not even implied in the text.

Happy hunting . . .

A lack of evidence is a lack of evidence, not proof of something. Try to be rational.

2 Timothy 1:7 For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.

 

[Giuliano]

Statues can pose a danger. Consider the case in Korea some years ago where a woman claimed a statue of Mother Mary had wept. It seems she then tried to set up her own cult of followers in competition to the Catholic Church.

archbishop declares excommunication against julia youn and followers - ucanews.com

The archbishop of Kwangju has declared that a woman and her followers who have insisted on so-called divine miracles centering around her have incurred latae sententiae excommunication.

Archbishop Andreas Choi Chang-mou issued the decree on Jan. 21, saying "for Christians´ healthy faith life, and the unity and communion of the Church, I declare as such, though my heart grieves."

Latae sententiae means the excommunication is not imposed by judgment but automatically results from an action that places one outside the community of faith.

The archbishop explained that he met Youn, 60, and her husband in person in Naju in 2003 and later gave a final warning in 2005, but they have not modified their actions. "Rather, they speak as if the Holy Father approves them," the bishop said. "They libel me, the Korean bishops and the Korean Church through their publications and the Internet."

These actions prove "Julia Youn and her followers have no will to reconcile with the Catholic Church," he said.

"Therefore those clergy, Religious and laity who preside at or participate in sacraments and liturgical ceremonies in their ´arbitrarily-called chapel´ and ´Marian shrine´ in Naju, which I have banned, incur automatic excommunication," he declared, based on canons 1336 and 1364 of the Code of Canon Law.

According to the website created by Youn´s followers (www.najumary.or.kr), Youn has received Marian "revelations" since her statue of the Blessed Mother "started weeping" in 1985. After that, Youn and her followers established "Blessed Mothers Mountain" in Naju, 285 kilometers south of Seoul.

However, the archdiocese issued directives in 1998, 2003 and 2005 banning Catholics from visiting and participating in ceremonies there. The Catholic Bishops´ Conference of Korea has explicitly supported the archdiocese.

Father John Chrysostomus Kim Kye-hong, chancellor of Kwangju archdiocese, sent the decree of excommunication to all dioceses in the country as well as to secular and Church media on Jan. 23.

 

[Giuliano]

Then there was the bizarre statue of St Martin de Porres put in an Australian Catholic school. That was two years ago. It was so outrageous, the school covered it up. I won't post the photo of it here since some might consider it obscene. I guess it just shows what can happen when you let sculptors try to educate children. . . .

Catholic school forced to hide new statue because of unfortunate design

An Australian Catholic school has covered up a statue of a saint and a child over fears it was suggestive.

Blackfriars Priory School in Adelaide took delivery of the artwork only recently but bosses said it should be covered up and altered after a loaf of bread the saint is holding was deemed potentially embarrassing.

Black curtains now surround the statue of St Martin de Porres, of Spain, ahead of its planned alteration by a local sculptor.

Blackfriars principal Simon Cobiac said: "The sculpture is a famous depiction of the tireless work of St Martin de Porres, a Dominican brother, for the poor and downtrodden of the 16th century.

"The two-dimensional concept plans for the statue were viewed and approved by the executive team in May but upon arrival the three-dimensional statue was deemed by the executive to be potentially suggestive.

"As a consequence, the statue was immediately covered and a local sculptor has been commissioned to re-design it."

The statue provoked confusion and ridicule on social media.

One Twitter user said: "Omg. WHO APPROVED THAT DESIGN?!" And another wrote: "Wasted their money.. Buy books..pay teachers more."

 

[BreadOfLife]

If a church wants to claim it's Apostolic and nothing's changed -- then I find it odd when some traditions start a few centuries after the Apostles. It undermines the credibility of the claim.

A lack of evidence is a lack of evidence, not proof of something. Try to be rational.

2 Timothy 1:7 For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.

WHO said that the tradition od images started AFTER the Apostolic age??

All we have left are examples from the early 2nd century and beyond. That doesn’t mean it all started “after” the Apostles. It simply means that they didn’t survive.

The same goes for any other Catholic Tradition/tradition. Simply because it was written about after the Apostles doesn’t mean that it wasn’t in practice since then. A perfect example of Infant Baptism. This is unanimously claimed by the Early church as an “Apostolic” practice handed down to them – but we don’t see the first extant writings about it until the 2nd century.

Tradition/tradition isn‘t always written down.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Then there was the bizarre statue of St Martin de Porres put in an Australian Catholic school. That was two years ago. It was so outrageous, the school covered it up. I won't post the photo of it here since some might consider it obscene. I guess it just shows what can happen when you let sculptors try to educate children. . . .

Catholic school forced to hide new statue because of unfortunate design

An Australian Catholic school has covered up a statue of a saint and a child over fears it was suggestive.

Blackfriars Priory School in Adelaide took delivery of the artwork only recently but bosses said it should be covered up and altered after a loaf of bread the saint is holding was deemed potentially embarrassing.

Black curtains now surround the statue of St Martin de Porres, of Spain, ahead of its planned alteration by a local sculptor.

Blackfriars principal Simon Cobiac said: "The sculpture is a famous depiction of the tireless work of St Martin de Porres, a Dominican brother, for the poor and downtrodden of the 16th century.

"The two-dimensional concept plans for the statue were viewed and approved by the executive team in May but upon arrival the three-dimensional statue was deemed by the executive to be potentially suggestive.

"As a consequence, the statue was immediately covered and a local sculptor has been commissioned to re-design it."

The statue provoked confusion and ridicule on social media.

One Twitter user said: "Omg. WHO APPROVED THAT DESIGN?!" And another wrote: "Wasted their money.. Buy books..pay teachers more."

RUBBISH.

This isn't a problem with statues. It's a problem with the FAITH of some.
You can't blame an inanimate object for the nonsense that some people attribute to it.

That is as silly as blaming a bowl of spaghetti because somebody claimed that the Blessed Mother appeared in it . . .

 

[Giuliano]

WHO said that the tradition od images started AFTER the Apostolic age??

I thought we'd settled that question.

All we have left are examples from the early 2nd century and beyond. That doesn’t mean it all started “after” the Apostles. It simply means that they didn’t survive.

No evidence at all. What we do know is that pagans had statues then and long before.

The same goes for any other Catholic Tradition/tradition. Simply because it was written about after the Apostles doesn’t mean that it wasn’t in practice since then. A perfect example of Infant Baptism. This is unanimously claimed by the Early church as an “Apostolic” practice handed down to them – but we don’t see the first extant writings about it until the 2nd century.

Tradition/tradition isn‘t always written down.

The Bible mentions a whole household being baptized. That's good enough for me; and baptizing was never a pagan thing.