The Identity of God.

[robrecht]

I will give you a break and cite this from the document:

Source: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_20120308_ladaria_en.html

It is precisely this universality that constitutes the Church as a universal sacrament of salvation (nn. 62-79). The question arises whether the church has significance only for its members or for everyone. Given the fact that the second answer is more relevant, the need of the Church for salvation is understood in two ways: the need to belong to her and the need of ministry of the Church at the service of the coming of the kingdom of God. Enlightened by the new perspectives offered by the Second Vatican Council, the old statement of , it is efficacious for all men, it makes present the representation of Christ who "was made sin" for us (2 Cor 5:21) (n.77). In her diakonia of service of the neighbour she gives witness to the benevolent gift of God to men. It is clear that highlighting these aspects of the Church's function as a universal sacrament of salvation does not attempt to exhaust the complexity of this subject.

© Copyright Original Source

Actually this probably not the only citation of this, but these documents tend to long and wordy. More to come.

Give me a break? I have been trying to get you to read the actual documents of the church and not interpretations by those who reject the progress that has been made. Read what you yourself cited. Do you really see your opinion cited there?

[shunyadragon]

[QUOTE=robrecht;36890]Give me a break? I have been trying to get you to read the actual documents of the church and not interpretations by those who reject the progress that has been made. Read what you yourself cited. Do you really see your opinion cited there?[/QUOTE

Sorry, your combative negative attitude does not deserve a break. Your own reference confirms the doctrine, and my reference is a 2012 reference that considers it a doctrine valid in today's church.

[robrecht]

Some of my citations refer to current thinking of the Roman Church.

Yes, finally. Now let's see if they really say what you think they do. But before we do that, have you abandoned your claim that this is actually "an accepted infallible document of the Roman Church today"?

EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS (No Salvation Outside the Church)
https://www.olrl.org/doctrine/eens2.shtml

[shunyadragon]

The Church's understanding of the significance of the phrase: "Outside the Church there is no salvation" is expressed in its Catechism of the Catholic Church as follows:

[robrecht]

[QUOTE=shunyadragon;36891]

Give me a break? I have been trying to get you to read the actual documents of the church and not interpretations by those who reject the progress that has been made. Read what you yourself cited. Do you really see your opinion cited there?[/QUOTE

Sorry, your combative negative attitude does not deserve a break. Your own reference confirms the doctrine, and my reference is a 2012 reference that considers it a doctrine valid in today's church.

I am neither combative nor negative. Merely trying to help you understand what the current church teaches, contrary to your derogatory interpretations. Your references and mine certainly do not confirm your opinion of the current interpretation of the doctrine.

[shunyadragon]

[QUOTE=robrecht;36894]

I am neither combative nor negative. Merely trying to help you understand what the current church teaches, contrary to your derogatory interpretations. Your references and mine certainly do not confirm your opinion of the current interpretation of the doctrine.

I referenced the current Catechism and Vatican II, and came back with your reference. Your ignoring the current references.

[robrecht]

I have no problem with this as still enforsing EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALLUS. It just gives some explanation of interpretation details. No fundamental changes in the basic doctrine. Note my citation from Vatican II.

67. Vatican Council II makes its own the expression extra ecclesiam nulla salus. But in using it the council explicitly directs itself to Catholics and limits its validity to those who know the necessity of the Church for salvation. The council holds that the affirmation is based on the necessity of faith and of baptism affirmed by Christ (LG 14). In this way the council aligned itself in continuity with the teaching of Pius XII, but emphasized more clearly the original parenthentical character of this expression.

68. In contrast to Pius XII, the council refused to speak of a votum implicitum (implicit desire) and applied the concept of the votum only to the explicit desire of catechumens to belong to the Church (LG 14). With regard to non-Christians, it said that they are ordered in diverse ways to the people of God. In accord with the different ways with which the salvific will of God embraces non-Christians, the council distinguished four groups: first, Jews; second, Muslims; third, those who without fault are ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and do not know the Church but who search for God with a sincere heart and try to fulfill his will as known through conscience; fourth, those who without fault have not yet reached an express knowledge of God but who nonetheless try to lead a good life (LG 16).
69. The gifts which God offers all men for directing themselves to salvation are rooted, according to the council, in his universal salvific will (LG 2, 3, 26; AG 7). The fact that even non-Christians are ordered to the people of God is rooted in the fact that the universal call to salvation includes the vocation of all men to the catholic unity of the people of God (LG 13). The council holds that the close relationship of both vocations is rooted in the unique mediation of Christ, who in his body that is the Church makes himself present in our midst (LG 14).
70. Thus the original meaning is restored to the expression extra ecclesiam nulla salus, namely, that of exhorting the members of the Church to be faithful.31 Once this expression is integrated into the more universal extra Christum nulla salus, it is no longer in contradiction to the universal call of all men to salvation.

As far as this goes the doctrine remains intact. The concept of the Universal call of all men to the One True Church is obviously not in contradiction with the doctrine.

You are not really understanding. You say that the doctrine remains intact. Did you miss the part about restoring the original meaning?

Here's a link to the actual document, where you can actually look at the footnotes:

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/co...igioni_en.html

Note how the anti-Protestant interpretation of the phrase is reinterpreted not only with respect to it's meaning in Cyprian, where it is meant to encourage those already in the church, but it is traced to it's original source in Origen, where the church outside of which there is no salvation is the spiritual church, essentially the Ark of Heaven that precedes all creation, which eventually saves all.

[shunyadragon]

Yes, finally. Now let's see if they really say what you think they do. But before we do that, have you abandoned your claim that this is actually "an accepted infallible document of the Roman Church today"?

EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS (No Salvation Outside the Church)
https://www.olrl.org/doctrine/eens2.shtml

Yes, by my current references it the standard of the church for the day.

[shunyadragon]

You are not really understanding. You say that the doctrine remains intact. Did you miss the part about restoring the original meaning?

Here's a link to the actual document, where you can actually look at the footnotes:

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/co...igioni_en.html

Note how the anti-Protestant interpretation of the phrase is reinterpreted not only with respect to it's meaning in Cyprian, where it is meant to encourage those already in the church, but it is traced to it's original source in Origen, where the church outside of which there is no salvation is the spiritual church, essentially the Ark of Heaven that precedes all creation, which eventually saves all.

My references still stand in the Catechism and the current documents of the church. I responded this reference that the universal call for salvation is not in conflict with the doctrine, and the doctrine still stands as described in the current Catechism.

[robrecht]

The Church's understanding of the significance of the phrase: "Outside the Church there is no salvation" is expressed in its Catechism of the Catholic Church as follows:

Where does it say that Protestants must convert to Catholicism to be saved? Where does it interpret "those who, through no fault of their own" in terms of those below the age of consent, those unable to comprehend God and the One True Church, ie, the mentally ill or incapacitated? No where, Frank. You should acknowledge that you were misrepresenting the current teaching of the Catholic church.

[robrecht]

My references still stand in the Catechim and the current documents of the church.

It does not seem as if you understand these current documents if you stand by your initial derogatory interpretations.

[robrecht]

Yes, by my current references it the standard of the church for the day.

It seems like you are dodging my question. I did not ask you about your current references, which I pointed you to, by the way. I am asking if you have you abandoned your claim that this is actually "an accepted infallible document of the Roman Church today"?

This:
EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS (No Salvation Outside the Church)
https://www.olrl.org/doctrine/eens2.shtml

[shunyadragon]

Where does it say that Protestants must convert to Catholicism to be saved? Where does it interpret "those who, through no fault of their own" in terms of those below the age of consent, those unable to comprehend God and the One True Church, ie, the mentally ill or incapacitated? No where, Frank. You should acknowledge that you were misrepresenting the current teaching of the Catholic church.

All the references refer to 'No salvation outside the Church' without discrimination for anyone in particular outside the One True Church.

I gave you a reference concerning the mentally ill and so far you have ignored it.




[cite/Source: http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P6C.HTM] 1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God's law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart133 do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.

1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. the promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest. [/cite]

You my friend are the one misrepresenting the Roman Church. Your ignoring also the current catechism.

[robrecht]

All the references refer to 'No salvation outside the Church' without discrimination for anyone in particular outside the One True Church.

I gave you a reference concerning the mentally ill and so far you have ignored it.

I did not ignore your reference to a pathological condition making mortal sin impossible. See my response here: here and here.

All the modern references refer to 'no salvation outside the church' with a changed meaning, a restored meaning, ie, not the same meaning as you want to apply to it, as no longer addressing people outside the church and within documents that explicitly do not require Protestants to convert to Catholicism in order to be saved. And the doctrine is not discussed with the exceptions that you outlined, namely, those below the age of consent, those unable to comprehend God and the One True Church, ie, the mentally ill or incapacitated. Why can't you see that?

[shunyadragon]

It seems like you are dodging my question. I did not ask you about your current references, which I pointed you to, by the way. I am asking if you have you abandoned your claim that this is actually "an accepted infallible document of the Roman Church today"?

This:
EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS (No Salvation Outside the Church)
https://www.olrl.org/doctrine/eens2.shtml

Most definitely not abandoned the fact that EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS (No Salvation Outside the Church) is the current document of the Roman Church. When they stop teaching the doctrine in all the Catechisms around the world, you may have some basis for your claim.