Latest topics
» Rethink "Feeneyism"?
Tue Jul 25, 2017 4:34 pm by MRyan

» Brother Andre Marie MICM, the Prior at the St. Benedict Center does not correct Frs.Brian Harrison and Cekada,Bishops Sanborn,Pirvanus,Kelly and Fellay
Wed Jun 28, 2017 4:24 pm by MRyan

» Revisiting Diocese/Parish Screening Policy
Wed Jun 28, 2017 4:03 pm by MRyan

» When sedes and trads can accept that Pius XII made a mistake then popes since John XXIII are no more in heresy
Wed Jun 28, 2017 3:08 pm by MRyan

» Doctrinal talks were conducted with Fr.Gleize on 'the other side'
Mon Jun 26, 2017 9:08 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Pope Benedict permitted Fr. Jean Marie Gleize to lead in doctrinal talks since he was a liberal ?
Mon Jun 26, 2017 8:59 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Padre Pio told Fr.Gabriel Amorth," It is Satan who has been introduced into the bosom of the Church and within a very short time will come to rule a false Church" -Bishop Richard Williamson
Sun Jun 25, 2017 9:14 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Mons. Brunero Gherardini misled the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and many traditionalists
Sun Jun 25, 2017 7:18 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Official statement from SSPX awaited : Fr.Gleize and other theologians have got it wrong
Sat Jun 24, 2017 10:10 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Brother Andre Marie MICM too is teaching error : Bishop Sanborn cannot report at the Chancery office
Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:50 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Magsiterial Heresy ?
Sat Sep 26, 2015 8:36 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Magisterium should apologise to the SSPX for the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre
Sat Sep 26, 2015 8:34 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Brother Francis MICM made a mistake on Vatican Council II
Sat Sep 26, 2015 5:14 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Legion of Christ universities in Rome adapt to leftist laws
Fri May 22, 2015 7:53 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» CM, SSPX, MICM deny the Faith to please superiors
Thu May 21, 2015 4:44 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» SSPX and Church Militant are using the same liberal theology and are unaware of it
Wed May 20, 2015 9:54 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Michael Voris uses liberal theology and yet critcizes Michael Coren
Tue May 19, 2015 10:10 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Fr.John Zuhlsdorf condones Mass for suicide
Tue May 19, 2015 9:18 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Vatican Council II is traditional or liberal depending on how you interpret the Letter of the Holy Office
Mon May 18, 2015 5:57 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Church Militant unable to answer questions on extra ecclesiam nulla salus
Sun May 17, 2015 5:55 am by Lionel L. Andrades


Questions for non-Sedevacantists

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Questions for non-Sedevacantists

Post  Catholic_Truth on Wed Apr 20, 2011 5:59 pm

gara3987 wrote:
If one looks into the theology in concerns with "Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus," they would understand that, anyone unaware of Jesus or not having the proper witness to be Catholic but never the less doing what Jesus intended can enter Heaven. This includes not only figures from the Old Testament but also those of other faiths or beliefs unintentionally believing falsely. If one is open to truth and upon finding it puts it into practice and does the best he or she can to love their neighbor as themselves, they will now or eventually be in Heaven.
Pax Christi

gara, do not the Dimond brothers correctly state that the Church dogmatically declares that one must hold the faith and receive the sacrament of baptism to enter the Church and does not the Church dogmatically declare that only those within the Church can receive salvation?

gara, now can you show me the dogmatic declaration from the Church which says that those who are outside the Church can receive salvation? Can you show me any dogmatic statement from the Church which declares that invincible ignorance removes original sin?

note: please don't waste your time citing any "fallible" statements because it only takes one "infallible dogmatic" statement to trump a thousand "fallible" statements.

avatar
Catholic_Truth

Posts : 115
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2010-12-19
Location : Louisiana

http://www.PaltalkExpress.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions for non-Sedevacantists

Post  gara3987 on Wed Apr 20, 2011 8:17 pm

Catholic_Truth wrote:
gara3987 wrote:
If one looks into the theology in concerns with "Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus," they would understand that, anyone unaware of Jesus or not having the proper witness to be Catholic but never the less doing what Jesus intended can enter Heaven. This includes not only figures from the Old Testament but also those of other faiths or beliefs unintentionally believing falsely. If one is open to truth and upon finding it puts it into practice and does the best he or she can to love their neighbor as themselves, they will now or eventually be in Heaven.
Pax Christi

gara, do not the Dimond brothers correctly state that the Church dogmatically declares that one must hold the faith and receive the sacrament of baptism to enter the Church and does not the Church dogmatically declare that only those within the Church can receive salvation?

gara, now can you show me the dogmatic declaration from the Church which says that those who are outside the Church can receive salvation? Can you show me any dogmatic statement from the Church which declares that invincible ignorance removes original sin?

note: please don't waste your time citing any "fallible" statements because it only takes one "infallible dogmatic" statement to trump a thousand "fallible" statements.


The Dimond Brother believe in "Extra ecclesiam nullus omnino salvatur." "outside the Church no one at all is saved." or All outside the Church are excluded from Salvation. The Church teaches "Outside the Church there is no Salvation." But, do you notices that the term "ALL" or "NO ONE AT ALL" is not in "Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus," Why is that do you think? Because that doctrine is not just cut and dry. Outside the Church no one at all is saved, is cut and dry. That means anyone outside the Church will perish no matter what, even if it is not of their own fault. That's why there have been various Popes and Doctors of the Church who have explained what Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus really means.

That is the point that I was trying to make. It reminds me of Protestants, they always ask, why do Catholics "pray" to the Angels and Saints and to Blessed Mary (though they seem to always exclude "Blessed"). And it is funny, because they really don't know what pray really means, to them it is cut and dry "a form of worship," though anyone who studies up on it would find out the Pray is to "Humbly ask or Petition." It's not just cut and dry, same goes for worship (Cultus Latriæ, Cultus Hyperduliæ, and Cultus Duliæ), worship in reality is a very broad word. The same goes for the doctrine Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus.

Now the question comes down to, which do you believe: Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus or Extra ecclesiam nullus omnino salvatur? (They are both different) If you believe that all (i.e., everybody) outside the Church will be going to hell (no exceptions not even Baptism of Desire or Baptism of Blood) then you believe Extra ecclesiam nullus omnino salvatur which is what the Dimond brothers believe.

In 1957 Monsignor Conway answered some questions in regards to the Catholic faith and this is part of his explanation on Outside the Church there is no salvation. (note, this is a small section of his explanation)

MONSIGNOR J. D. CONWAY., | IMPRIMATUR: ♰ Ralph L. Hayes Bishop of Davenport, Iowa December 23, 1957 wrote:
The doctrine of no salvation outside the Church is understandably offensive to those who are outside the Church. Their immediate impression is that we are condemning them, personally, to hell. And then, when we start explaining that we don't really mean them, individually, they decide that we are hedging and that, in our clumsy efforts to apologize, we contradict ourselves and fail to make sense. Actually, this doctrine is full of good sound theological sense, when we understand it as the Church has always taught it; and it need not give offense to anyone who grasps its full meaning and its logical necessity.

Nearly every priest in the United States has studied Tanquerey's Dogmatic Theology either as a basic textbook in the seminary, or as a book of reference. The two following statements are found within five pages of each other in his familiar book; they are stated as unquestionable dogmatic conclusions. The translation is my own. Outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation.

They falsely expound Catholic doctrine who contend that non-Catholics, even though they be in good faith, are deprived of all hope of salvation.

At first glance these statements seem to be contradictory. If I keep shouting the first statement and you stubbornly repeat the second, we might each think the other a heretic. That we may thoroughly understand both of them, let us recall a few doctrines on which they are based:

1. Salvation is by the grace of God. Without sanctifying grace no one can enter heaven, or see God, or be united to God. Sanctifying grace is the supernatural life which makes heaven possible; it is the life of heaven.

2. Jesus Christ, true God and true man, obtained sanctifying grace for us by his death on the Cross. There is no other grace available to man than that which Christ obtained by His merits.

3. Jesus Christ, now risen and immortal and glorious in heaven, distributes by His own hand, and through the means which He has chosen and established, the graces necessary to our salvation. No man can be saved except through the merits of Jesus Christ and by the graces which the same Jesus Christ personally distributes.

4. As the earthly means for bringing grace (and salvation) to all men, Jesus Christ, while still on earth, established His Church. To it He confided His doctrine, to be guarded without loss or change, to be taught to all nations, and to be believed by all men.

5. Jesus Christ, Himself, is the living head of this living Church, which is His own Mystical Body. The circulation of sanctifying grace (a part of His own divine life) is only through the organic structure of this, His Body—the Church.

6. Our Lord Jesus Christ gave a solemn command: * 'Preach the Gospel to every creature; he who believes and is baptized will be saved; he who believes not will be condemned . . . Going therefore teach all nations, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." (Mark 16, 15; Matt. 28, 19-20).

These doctrines, and many others, lead us to the certain conclusion that outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation. It is the only way to heaven which Jesus Himself established. It is the only Mystical Body which He has. He commanded all to believe its teachings; he who believes not will be condemned.

Let us now turn our attention to another series of doctrines:

1. God is good and just and merciful.

2. He honestly desires the salvation of all men.

3. The just God will damn no man unless that man himself asks for it, by his own free will.

4. No one will go to hell except for his own sin.

From these truths we rightly conclude that a wise and merciful God would not choose a means of salvation which would make that very objective absolutely impossible for a great majority of men.

The concordance of these two conclusions has been traditional in the Church at least since the days of St. Augustine, St. Ambrose, and St. Gregory Nazianzen (who wrote of his own father, a convert from paganism: "He was one of us even before he came into our church; his morality united him to us.")

We can understand better how these two conclusions fit together if we recall the well-known teaching of the Church regarding Baptism.

Baptism is necessary to salvation; without it no one can enter heaven. But if Baptism be impossible for any particular man, he can be saved by a Baptism of desire. This implies an honest love of God, true contrition for sin, and a desire of salvation. Such implicit desire is possible even in those who have never heard the name of Baptism.

Likewise salvation is only through the Church. But if actual membership in the Church be impossible for some particular man, he can be saved by membership in desire. Baptism is the door to membership in the Church. Baptism of desire is the door to membership by desire.

And who will so limit God's mercy as to deny that some poor pagan, who never even heard the name of the Catholic Church, can be a member of that Church in desire? An honest love of God, as he knows him, a true desire for salvation, and a faithful adherence to the natural law as known in his own conscience, are the means of such membership of desire—as St. Gregory said of his own father.

Pope Pius XII, in 1943, wrote an encyclical on the Mystical Body, in which he made clear the manner of salvation through the Church. He did not treat explicitly of those outside the Church, except to indicate the difficulties and uncertainties of their salvation, in spite of their disposition towards the Mystical Body by desire and longing—clearly implying the possibility of such salvation.

Pope Pius IX spoke twice, and very clearly on the subject, first in an address which he delivered on December 9, 1854, and later in an Encyclical, Quanto Conficiamur Moerore:

"We must hold as of faith that no one can be saved outside of the Apostolic Roman church . . . Likewise, however, we must hold it as certain that those who are ignorant of the true religion . . . are not charged with any guilt on this account in the eyes of the Lord. And who will arrogate to himself the power to indicate the limits of such ignorance? Translating from Tanquerey again, these two axioms are stated as certain:

1. No one can be saved who remains outside the Catholic Church through his own fault up to the end of his life.

Those who through no fault of their own remain outside the Church can be saved through membership of desire in the church.

The above quote briefly explains Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, which is what the Church teaches.

gara3987

Posts : 5
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2011-04-17

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions for non-Sedevacantists

Post  Guest on Thu Apr 21, 2011 12:35 am

LOL "I believe in God"

But that does mean "I believe in only one God" LOL

Come on, Gara, when the Church teaches that there is no salvation outside the Church, she isn't teaching that there are other ways quite the opposite.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Questions for non-Sedevacantists

Post  Catholic_Truth on Thu Apr 21, 2011 2:26 pm

Catholic_Truth wrote:gara, do not the Dimond brothers correctly state that the Church dogmatically declares that one must hold the faith and receive the sacrament of baptism to enter the Church and does not the Church dogmatically declare that only those within the Church can receive salvation?

gara, now can you show me the dogmatic declaration from the Church which says that those who are outside the Church can receive salvation? Can you show me any dogmatic statement from the Church which declares that invincible ignorance removes original sin?

note: please don't waste your time citing any "fallible" statements because it only takes one "infallible dogmatic" statement to trump a thousand "fallible" statements.

gara3987 wrote:
In 1957 Monsignor Conway answered some questions in regards to the Catholic faith and this is part of his explanation on Outside the Church there is no salvation. (note, this is a small section of his explanation)

Monsignor Conway's statements are fallible. Gara, it was a simple task that I had assigned to you. All you had to do was give an infallible dogmatic statement which declared that those outside the Church can receive salvation and an infallible dogmatic statement that said invincible ignorance removes original sin. You failed that task.
avatar
Catholic_Truth

Posts : 115
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2010-12-19
Location : Louisiana

http://www.PaltalkExpress.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions for non-Sedevacantists

Post  Torquemada on Mon Jul 02, 2012 7:43 pm

gara3987 wrote:The Dimond Brother believe in "Extra ecclesiam nullus omnino salvatur." "outside the Church no one at all is saved." or All outside the Church are excluded from Salvation. The Church teaches "Outside the Church there is no Salvation." But, do you notices that the term "ALL" or "NO ONE AT ALL" is not in "Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus," Why is that do you think? Because that doctrine is not just cut and dry. Outside the Church no one at all is saved, is cut and dry.

No. It's because the Church teaches that outside the Church nobody at all is saved.

"Una vero est fidelium universalis Ecclesia extra quam nullus omnino salvatur." (Fourth Lateran Council, First Canon)

So the reason why the Dimonds believe there's no salvation outside the Church at all is because God and His Church teach that there is no salvation outside the church at all.

If people were honest, they would have no need trying to fool themselves by making artificial and idiotic pseudo-contradictions like "no salvation" vs "no salvation at all". They rather would see that there is no difference between "outside the church there is no salvation" and "outside the church there is no salvation at all", just as they would not claim there's a difference between the sentence "there is nobody inside the house" and "there is nobody inside the house at all".



gara3987 wrote:That's why there have been various Popes and Doctors of the Church who have explained what Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus really means.
You simply do not (want to) know what you are talking about. The popes have taught in assistance of God the Holy Spirit what Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus really means. It simply means what it says: there is no salvation outside the Church (at all). Or: all pagans, all Jews, all heretics, all schismatics go to hell if they die as such.
That's true and plain language, and what you unbelievers try to make is to pervert the words into a contrary meaning which in no way flows from the words.

Regarding the doctors there is not a single one who claimed that Jews or heretics could be saved. There were, however, those who believed that unbaptized catechumen who were murdered ("martyred" - which is a false term regarding unbaptized persons, since only true catholics can be martyred) could be saved. Augustine came to his personal conclusion that during times when there is no persecution, unbaptized catechumen could also be saved without "martyrdom" (some want to see St. Ambrose holding the same position). This by the way is the actual concept of baptism of desire: salvation only for those among the unbaptized who have true and strong desire for the sacrament of baptism. The "baptism of desire" for Jews and heretics is a pseudo-baptism of desire-concept. Even during life time St. Augustine and St. Thomas would have condemned all persons who hold that modernistic "baptism of desire" concept.

The rejection of the necessity of Christ, i.e. of the true faith and Church for every individual in order to be saved, is indeed key to the total apostasy.

Torquemada

Posts : 1
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2012-07-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions for non-Sedevacantists

Post  Jehanne on Mon Jul 02, 2012 7:54 pm

Florence also stated this:

The holy synod especially condemns and censures, in the book, the assertion which is scandalous, erroneous in the faith and offensive to the ears of the pious faithful, namely: Christ sins daily and has sinned daily from his very beginning, even though he avers that he does not understand this as of Christ our saviour, head of the church, but as referring to his members, which together with Christ the head form the one Christ, as he asserts. Also, the propositions, and ones similar to them, which the synod declares are contained in the articles condemned at the sacred council of Constance, namely the following. Not all the justified faithful are members of Christ, but only the elect, who finally will reign with Christ for ever. The members of Christ, from whom the church is constituted, are taken according to the ineffable foreknowledge of God; and the church is constituted only from those who are called according to his purpose of election. To be a member of Christ, it is not enough to be united with him in the bond of charity, some other union is needed. Also the following...
avatar
Jehanne

Posts : 926
Reputation : 1025
Join date : 2010-12-21
Age : 49
Location : Iowa

http://unamsanctamecclesiamcatholicam.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions for non-Sedevacantists

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum