Author Topic: What exactly does the CCC say on EENS? Does it say non-Christians can be saved?  (Read 2322 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline XavierSem

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1470
  • Reputation: +134/-232
  • Gender: Male
  • Immaculate Heart of Mary, May Your Triumph Come!
There was a question on what precisely Vatican II, as clarified by the CCC, teaches and does not teach on EENS and Ecclesiology (closely related, as the doctrine that there is no salvation outside the Church, is obviously connected to the Church's understanding of Her own nature). Let's take just 4 paras to begin with.

(1) Firstly, does Vatican II and the CCC say non-Christians (Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddists etc) can be saved? Imho, the answer is no.
(2) Secondly, does Vatican II say non-Catholics like Protestants and Orthodox, who die as such, can be saved? This we'll leave for later. 

First, CCC 161, it seems, says that nobody can be saved without belief in Jesus, conformably to the dogmatic Creed of St. Athanasius.

"161 Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation. "Since "without faith it is impossible to please [God]" and to attain to the fellowship of his sons, therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will anyone obtain eternal life 'But he who endures to the end.'" http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/161.htm

What does CCC 846-848 say? It is ambiguous. 846 says, those who are knowingly separate from the Church cannot be saved. 847 says those who do not know Christ, but seek God with a sincere heart moved by grace trying to do His Will may be saved, but 848 seems to clarify that these persons, to be saved, will have to be brought by God to faith in Christ, in ways known to Himself (e.g. before death).

"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

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a9p3.htm Thoughts on whether Vatican II and the CCC deny EENS?
Do make Acts of Consecration to the Twin Hearts, Spiritual Offerings of the Precious Blood of Jesus in Union with the Holy Mass, like in St. Gertrude's Chaplet, along with Spiritual Communions at least every hour. "Pray the Rosary every day to obtain Peace for the world." ~ Our Lady of the Rosary.

Offline Stubborn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9718
  • Reputation: +3861/-892
  • Gender: Male
"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."

There is so much wrong with the CCC, I only highlighted a few things.

1) Only in the new church are dogmas re-formulated - and reduced to a mere "affirmation" in the process. They necessarily had to reformulate it and reduce it to an affirmation, in order for it to fit the new religion of the newchurch.

2) The newchurch teaches in it's catechism that the safest route to take is ignorance. Inherent in their teachings is that "ignorance is bliss." This teaching goes back to at least the Baltimore Catechism, and is now a doctrine of sorts of newchurch.
The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man." - Fr. Hesse


Offline Last Tradhican

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3219
  • Reputation: +1743/-990
  • Gender: Male
There was a question on what precisely Vatican II, as clarified by the CCC, teaches and does not teach on EENS and Ecclesiology ....

(1) Firstly, does Vatican II and the CCC say non-Christians (Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddists etc) can be saved? Imho, the answer is no.
(2) Secondly, does Vatican II say non-Catholics like Protestants and Orthodox, who die as such, can be saved? This we'll leave for later.

First, CCC 161, it seems, says that nobody can be saved without belief in Jesus, conformably to the dogmatic Creed of St. Athanasius.

….What does CCC 846-848 say? It is ambiguous.....

…. Thoughts on whether Vatican II and the CCC deny EENS?
Rat poison is 99% nutritious food.

Dogmas are the final word, if they are not clear and needed to be clarified, they would be useless and would not be called dogmas.  "It seems", "it is ambiguous", asking for "thoughts" of anyone, says everything. It says it is rat poison, seek your knowledge elsewhere, it is written by blind guides for the blind.

The treasury agents who specialize in detecting counterfeit bills, when they are being trained are never shown a counterfeit bill, only the real thing. They are immersed in only the real thing, learning every little spec on the bills. This way, when they start to work in the field, they immediately can spot the counterfeit. Learn the real faith and you will instantly recognize a fraud. Do not lose your time studying errors, they are legion, while the truth is only one.
The Vatican II church - Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962

For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Mat 24:24

Offline DecemRationis

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 306
  • Reputation: +73/-8
  • Gender: Male
This seems to be a studied or intentional ambiguity that invites the belief that people can be saved without faith in Christ. The praxis of the popes and hierarchy of the Conciliar Church promotes the "invitation."


Quote
"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

If they really believed that faith in Christ was necessary for salvation, they could have, should have, and I maintain would have said something like, "God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel [teaching], to [faith in Christ]," and perhaps added something which Xavier mentioned about "interiorly before death" or something like that.

Another instance of studied ambiguity. It appears to me just another cloak to shield the light of a false gospel which they proceed to carry about.

DR
I believe in the Apostolic Catholic Church. I reject and denounce the malfeasant or “dysfunctional papal or episcopal Newchurch.” - Father Paul Trinchard

Offline Last Tradhican

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3219
  • Reputation: +1743/-990
  • Gender: Male
Another instance of studied ambiguity. It appears to me just another cloak to shield the light of a false gospel which they proceed to carry about. 
That is all VatII is about.
The Vatican II church - Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962

For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Mat 24:24


Offline Ladislaus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18881
  • Reputation: +10390/-4916
  • Gender: Male
(1) Firstly, does Vatican II and the CCC say non-Christians (Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddists etc) can be saved? Imho, the answer is no.

Well, +Lefebvre and +Fellay have both said that they can.  So V2 is more strict on EENS than the leaders of your Society?

Offline Ladislaus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18881
  • Reputation: +10390/-4916
  • Gender: Male
So this guy is one step shy of poche as an apologist for all things Vatican II and Pope Francis.

He's clearly a formal schismatic, since he has absolutely no problem with anything in Vatican II.

Offline XavierSem

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1470
  • Reputation: +134/-232
  • Gender: Male
  • Immaculate Heart of Mary, May Your Triumph Come!
Sigh. I forgive you for your boorishness and your taunts. I am a Traditional Roman Catholic, and by the Grace of God, I will die rather renounce the Faith, Unity, or the Church, and die a Traditional Roman Catholic, always Traditional, always Roman and always Catholic.

I advise you, in charity, to think better of your errors that tell you the Entire Hierarchy is "doubtful" (a total absurdity no theologian has ever held or taught), recant the mortal sin of schism and of 61 year svism, confess it in the confessional, and re-enter the Church. 

The OP question is about what the CCC says on EENS. Nothing else and nothing more. If you have a case to make, you would make it.

What you said about Bishop Fellay is also totally incorrect. You read what you want to, and ignore the rest. Bp. Fellay has said many times no one is saved without going through Our Lord, you can email H.E. and clarify this. You take one sentence of His Excellency that you read from the Dimond heretics and schismatics, and you misinterpret that: Bp. Fellay does not believe in salvation without Christ. 

DecemRationis, yes, I agree with you: the ambiguity is problematic. It seems to me the best way to solve the crisis this has caused would be for the Pope to issue an ex cathedra proclamation re-affirming, basically, the Athanasian Creed, "whoever wishes to be saved needs before all else to hold the Catholic Faith. And the Catholic Faith is this, that we worship God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity". 

Oops, there could be neither inter faith abominations, nor even really much of false ecumenism after that. The Jews, Muslims and pagans would themselves withdraw if such a clear dogmatic declaration on the necessity of the Catholic Faith in the Trinity was proclaimed.

Quote from: Last Tradhican
The treasury agents who specialize in detecting counterfeit bills, when they are being trained are never shown a counterfeit bill, only the real thing. They are immersed in only the real thing, learning every little spec on the bills. This way, when they start to work in the field, they immediately can spot the counterfeit. Learn the real faith and you will instantly recognize a fraud. Do not lose your time studying errors, they are legion, while the truth is only one.

This is good, true advice, and I appreciate it. Thanks. And I agree. I don't learn my Faith from modern sources, the Catechism of Trent, approved by Pope St. Pius V, is highly recommended by the Church to all Priests and Faithful. One can learn one's Faith from there. Papal Encyclicals, the Teaching of Theologians etc come next. Bp. Fellay recently said all these things related to the Council, according to many leading Cardinals and Bishops, are still "open questions". That means in these modern statements, nothing is settled definitively.
Do make Acts of Consecration to the Twin Hearts, Spiritual Offerings of the Precious Blood of Jesus in Union with the Holy Mass, like in St. Gertrude's Chaplet, along with Spiritual Communions at least every hour. "Pray the Rosary every day to obtain Peace for the world." ~ Our Lady of the Rosary.


Offline Ladislaus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18881
  • Reputation: +10390/-4916
  • Gender: Male
I have asked you repeatedly to explain what your reasons of conscience are which justify your remaining outside of full communion with the Church, i.e. justify your being with the SSPX rather than FSSP.  You have none.  Consequently, you are a schismatic.  You really don't find anything wrong with Vatican II or the New Mass, so you are not even a Traditional Catholic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18881
  • Reputation: +10390/-4916
  • Gender: Male
I am a Traditional Roman Catholic, 

You are nothing of the sort.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18881
  • Reputation: +10390/-4916
  • Gender: Male
I advise you, in charity, to think better of your errors that tell you the Entire Hierarchy is "doubtful" (a total absurdity no theologian has ever held or taught), recant the mortal sin of schism and of 61 year svism, confess it in the confessional, and re-enter the Church.

XavierFem, I advise you to stop slandering me with false positions.  I have never said that the "Entire Hierarchy" is doubtful; it's the legitimacy of the V2 Papal Claimants that is in doubt.

You're the one who needs to confess your schism, buddy.  You find no fault with V2 or the New Mass and yet you refuse to be in full communion with the V2 hierarchy.  That is the very definition of schism.

I refuse submission to the V2 Papal Claimants because I hold them to be in doubt.  Canon Lawyers teach that those who do so are not guilty of schism.

If I am wrong, then I am wrong materially.  You on the other hand are wrong formally, i.e., you're the one in schism.  You need to scurry over to the FSSP before you lose your soul.


Offline Ladislaus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18881
  • Reputation: +10390/-4916
  • Gender: Male
What you said about Bishop Fellay is also totally incorrect. You read what you want to, and ignore the rest. Bp. Fellay has said many times no one is saved without going through Our Lord, you can email H.E. and clarify this. You take one sentence of His Excellency that you read from the Dimond heretics and schismatics, and you misinterpret that: Bp. Fellay does not believe in salvation without Christ.

You're just another Modernist who does nothing but speak from both sides of your mouth.  +Fellay clearly teaches that infidels can be saved, and so did +Lefebvre for that matter.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18881
  • Reputation: +10390/-4916
  • Gender: Male
(1) Firstly, does Vatican II and the CCC say non-Christians (Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddists etc) can be saved? Imho, the answer is no.

+Fellay explicitly stated that a "Hindu in Tibet without any knowledge of the Catholic Chruch" can be saved.  So, your claim is that V2 was more Traditional than +Fellay.

You didn't formulate the question is "Did V2 say non-Christians can be saved without Christ?"

Offline Your Friend Colin

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 299
  • Reputation: +136/-59
  • Gender: Male
First, CCC 161, it seems, says that nobody can be saved without belief in Jesus, conformably to the dogmatic Creed of St. Athanasius.

John 3:36 "He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."
John 14:15 "If you love Me, keep My commandments."
Luke 10:27 "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart and with thy whole soul and with all thy strength and with all thy mind..."
Clearly we see the greatest Commandment is to love God. In order to fulfill this commandment, we must obey God. 
Non-Catholics do not obey Christ.
The Athanasian Creed goes much further than just saying belief in Jesus is necessary.
"Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith unless every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly."

WHOLE AND UNDEFILED!

My friend sent me a link to read because we were talking about this. I started to read CCC 800ish and when I got to the part about EENS, I was repulsed. They watered it down so heavily it was nauseating to read. That book is a load of Conciliar garbage.
Humble thy spirit very much: for the vengeance on the flesh of the ungodly is fire and worms. - Ecclesiasticus 7:18

Offline Ladislaus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18881
  • Reputation: +10390/-4916
  • Gender: Male
We know that it's +Fellay's out, relying on the same logic as +Lefebvre, to say that salvation cannot happen WITHOUT Christ ... but it entails a dishonest reformulation of the Church's dogma.  EENS means that there is not salvation OUTSIDE the Church, not no salvation WITHOUT the Church.  They reduce Christ to a mere instrumental cause of salvation, and theirs is none other than the Rahnerian doctrine of the "Anonymous" Catholic.

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16