What are the consequences of not subscribing to doctrine of RCC

Zombrex

This question was inspired by the discussion on the Christianphobia thread about catholics and Catholics.

I often encounter Christians on this forum saying that while the different branches of Christianity disagree over exact details, they agree on core principles that lead to a relationship with Jesus and salvation and heaven. But then arguments do seem to get very heated between Catholics and non-Catholics.

I was just wondering, what do the Roman Catholics on this forum believe are the consequences of a Christian not following the RCC or not subscribing to the Pope as the head of the Church.

Is it like really bad, for example threatening salvation, or is it simply a theological matter that has limited real world consequences. Or some where in between.

I know we aren't allowed X Only Threads, but this is a genuine question so I would ask posters (Christian and non-Christian) to try not to derail the thread with arguments as to what is true or not.

Thanks

Keylem

Here's one I can think of!

Outside the Church there is no salvation!

http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/outside_the_church.htm

Soul Winner

Light the fuse and see what happens ey? Cheeky Isn't that called trolling? Only messing. I think it is a very good idea.

A lot of non catholic Christians don't seem to have a problem with Catholics being saved outside their remit, but it appears that Catholics seem to be of the view that nobody can be saved outside their remit. I want to know how many Roman Catholics would subscribe to this view, why and what authority they have for it?

Zombrex

Keylem wrote: »

Here's one I can think of!

Outside the Church there is no salvation!

http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/outside_the_church.htm

So just to clarify, you believe that those Christians who are not Roman Catholics are risking their salvation?

Soul Winner

Keylem wrote: »

Here's one I can think of!

Outside the Church there is no salvation!

http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/outside_the_church.htm

So if you leave the Catholic church for instance then you are doomed? How many Catholics here agree with this?

Keylem

What it actually means is 'without' the Church there is no salvation.

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0043.html

Donatello

Well, the Second Vatican Council had this to say about the salvation of Catholic faithful:

14. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.

They are fully incorporated in the society of the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ accept her entire system and all the means of salvation given to her, and are united with her as part of her visible bodily structure and through her with Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. The bonds which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a "bodily" manner and not "in his heart."(12*) All the Church's children should remember that their exalted status is to be attributed not to their own merits but to the special grace of Christ. If they fail moreover to respond to that grace in thought, word and deed, not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged.(13*)

Catholics will be held to a higher standard than non-Catholics on the last day. We had everything - did we use it? Or did we squander it?

Note also that a person who is certain that the CC is the true CHurch made necessary by Christ but refuses to enter it or chooses to depart from it, then that person cannot be saved.

Now as for non-Catholics, the Catechism has this to say:

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."

1271 Baptism constitutes the foundation of communion among all Christians, including those who are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church: "For men who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in some, though imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church. Justified by faith in Baptism, [they] are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church." "Baptism therefore constitutes the sacramental bond of unity existing among all who through it are reborn."

The main issue, as I see it, for non-Catholics, is how they can preserve their souls in a state of grace, deprived, as they are, of two particular Sacraments: Holy Communion, and Penance. Holy Communion was deemed necessary by Christ Who said,

Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.

Without penance, the non-Catholic has not got the certainty that his sins have been forgiven. In the absence of sacramental confession to a priest, only perfect contrition is sufficient to obtain forgiveness, whereas with sacrament of penance, even imperfect contrition is adequate for validity. Perfect contrition doesn't grow on trees - it is a special grace and you can't presume you will receive it when you need it.

One other problem for the non-Catholic is the uncertainty and disagreement about what sin is. If you are not sure what a sin is, how can you avoid it? Also, if you don't accept something as a sin, you have no reason to avoid it. If you commit sins but you do not repent of them (as you don't consider them sins), then these are, I suppose, unforgivable sins, since only sins you repent of can be forgiven. if you refuse to accept something is a sin, you won't confess it to God, you won't be sorry for it, and you won't be forgiven. If your sins are not forgiven, and you die, then you cannot be saved.

You have to take all these doubts seriously. Study the faith, pray and God will guide you to the truth. He did not leave us orphans. He gave us a Church - a visible Church so that we can easily find it. This Church is an expert in humanity. She is also an expert in salvation. She can tell us with authority what sin is and how to avoid it. She nourishes our souls with Her sacraments.

If somebody avoids this task and avoids the truth, then they will find themselves out on the rough, open ocean. Can they be saved? God knows. It will certainly be very, very difficult indeed. Can they remain pure in a corrupt world, with an imperfect guide, and poor instructions? Can they keep their pure white baptismal garment clean 'til the end of their life?

Seaneh

I don't particularly care what any vatican council or the catechism says, I base my faith on the bible.

According to the bible, I am saved, therefore I am saved.

No man on earth can tell me otherwise.

Keylem

Seaneh wrote: »

I don't particularly care what any vatican council or the catechism says, I base my faith on the bible.

According to the bible, I am saved, therefore I am saved.

No man on earth can tell me otherwise.

http://www.catholicbible101.com/faithandworks.htm

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/protestantism/wbible.htm

AhSureTisGrand

Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.

I can't imagine any sane person would hold that view and reject the Catholic Church.

Seaneh

Keylem wrote: »

http://www.catholicbible101.com/faithandworks.htm

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/protestantism/wbible.htm

Catholic doctrine and dogmatic nonsense.

Zombrex

Seaneh wrote: »

Catholic doctrine and dogmatic nonsense.

Everyone thinks everyone else religion is nuts and as an atheist I think all your religions are nuts Its not really the purpose of the thread, I'm simply interested in what Catholics actually think of other Christians in terms of what they think are the consequences of being Christian but not Catholic.

Keylem

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lD7LGjDUhbw&feature=related

Donatello

Soul Winner wrote: »

Light the fuse and see what happens ey? Cheeky Isn't that called trolling? Only messing. I think it is a very good idea.

A lot of non catholic Christians don't seem to have a problem with Catholics being saved outside their remit, but it appears that Catholics seem to be of the view that nobody can be saved outside their remit. I want to know how many Roman Catholics would subscribe to this view, why and what authority they have for it?

Many Protestants think that Catholics are spiritually dead idol worshippers.

Soul Winner wrote: »

So if you leave the Catholic church for instance then you are doomed? How many Catholics here agree with this?

If you leave the Catholic Church, whilst believing that it is the true Church and necessary for salvation all the same, you cannot be saved.

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

I can't imagine any sane person would hold that view and reject the Catholic Church.

If a person thought the Catholic Church was not the true Church, then it would be understandable that they might reject it. But you are right - anybody who does accept the Catholic Church as necessary for salvation but rejects it anyway is foolish. But such is human freedom. A radical choice can be made to reject Christ and His Church. Hardness of heart would be one reason to do so.

Seaneh wrote: »

Catholic doctrine and dogmatic nonsense.

If you disagree with the Catholic teaching, at least have the courtesy of respecting our Church and our beliefs.

strobe

Donatello wrote: »

If you leave the Catholic Church, whilst believing that it is the true Church and necessary for salvation all the same, you cannot be saved.



If a person thought the Catholic Church was not the true Church, then it would be understandable that they might reject it. But you are right - anybody who does accept the Catholic Church as necessary for salvation but rejects it anyway is foolish. But such is human freedom. A radical choice can be made to reject Christ and His Church. Hardness of heart would be one reason to do so.

So Donatello (after this guy or this guy btw ?) is it your opinion that if someone rejects the Catholic Church because they genuinely don't think it is the true Church then they still are saved? Or am I misunderstanding?

Donatello

strobe wrote: »

So Donatello (after the mutant turtle or the Italian sculptor btw ?) is it your opinion that if someone rejects the Catholic Church because they don't think it is the true Church then they still are saved? Or am I misunderstanding?

Both.

I would say that non-Catholic Christians convinced that the CC is not necessary for salvation can be saved. But it's difficult for them to remain in a state of grace 'til the day they die, without the grace of the Eucharist and the sacrament of penance, and all the other graces available through the Catholic Church, especially through Her teaching on faith and morals - everything Christ wanted us to know as necessary for our salvation, including what sin is, how to do spiritual battle so as to avoid it etc... Without that help, it will be more difficult for them to be saved, even as the Catholic, formed in the faith, will be judged at a higher standard than non-Catholic Christians who did not realise the CC was necessary for salvation and did not have all the benefits.

The short video Keylem posted is a good explanation of what it means to be part of the Church, outside of which there is no salvation for anyone, Catholic or non-Catholic:

Soul Winner

If the Roman Catholic Church really is the one true Church then why did the apostle John spend a whole two chapters (chapter 2 and 3) in the book of Revelation writing to the seven different churches which were around in his day? Where these all false Churches?

hinault

This thread posed a question to Roman Catholics on this site, as far as I can tell.

hinault

Donatello wrote: »

The short video Keylem posted is a good explanation of what it means to be part of the Church, outside of which there is no salvation for anyone, Catholic or non-Catholic:

I have a difficulty with this and I am Roman Catholic.

The Vatican Council statement on this very issue suggests that those who know of the RCC but decide to reject it's teachings are beyond redemption.

What about the person in a far flung province of China who has never heard of the RCC or Jesus Christ for that matter?
If that person has lived an honest and sincere life surely he is worthy of redemption?
Through no fault of his own he has not heard of Jesus Christ or the RCC.

Soul Winner

hinault wrote: »

I have a difficulty with this and I am Roman Catholic.

The Vatican Council statement on this very issue suggests that those who know of the RCC but decide to reject it's teachings are beyond redemption.

What about the person in a far flung province of China who has never heard of the RCC or Jesus Christ for that matter?
If that person has lived an honest and sincere life surely he is worthy of redemption?
Through no fault of his own he has not heard of Jesus Christ or the RCC.

Nobody was/is/or ever will be worthy of redemption. We are made worthy by the blood of Christ. It is a gift from God to all sinners for faith and no matter what race/religion or color you are God will honor faith in Him regardless. That is the good news i.e. Gospel of God to the world and the RCC is not preaching it, they preach that one must jump through this and that hoop in order to be saved, which means they are preaching a false gospel (which is no Gospel at all as the apostle Paul says) for which Paul states in Galatians that whoever does such a thing let them be an anathema i.e God damned.

Anyway, my question about the seven churches in the book of revelation has not been answered yet. Any takers? If there was seven true churches in the apostle John's time then why is there only one now? Poster's own views only not links to websites and Youtube videos. I don't want official church standing answers just from the heart answers from ye RCC posters if that's alright with Wicknight.

hinault

Soul Winner wrote: »

Nobody was/is/or ever will be worthy of redemption. We are made worthy by the blood of Christ. It is a gift from God to all sinners for faith and no matter what race/religion or color you are God will honor faith in Him regardless. That is the good news i.e. Gospel of God to the world and the RCC is not preaching it, they preach that one must jump through this and that hoop in order to be saved, which means they are preaching a false gospel (which is no Gospel at all as the apostle Paul says) for which Paul states in Galatians that whoever does such a thing let them be an anathema i.e God damned.

Anyway, my question about the seven churches in the book of revelation has not been answered yet. Any takers? If there was seven true churches in the apostle John's time then why is there only one now? Poster's own views only not links to websites and Youtube videos. I don't want official church standing answers just from the heart answers from ye RCC posters if that's alright with Wicknight.

Are you a Roman Catholic?
I thought not.



Why do non-Roman Catholics insist on answering a question specifically posed to Roman Catholics on this thread?
Message 18.

homer911

Wicknight wrote: »

I was just wondering, what do the Roman Catholics on this forum believe...

..and therein the problem lies...

Keylem

Soul Winner wrote: »

Nobody was/is/or ever will be worthy of redemption. We are made worthy by the blood of Christ. It is a gift from God to all sinners for faith and no matter what race/religion or color you are God will honor faith in Him regardless. That is the good news i.e. Gospel of God to the world and the RCC is not preaching it, they preach that one must jump through this and that hoop in order to be saved, which means they are preaching a false gospel (which is no Gospel at all as the apostle Paul says) for which Paul states in Galatians that whoever does such a thing let them be an anathema i.e God damned.

Anyway, my question about the seven churches in the book of revelation has not been answered yet. Any takers? If there was seven true churches in the apostle John's time then why is there only one now? Poster's own views only not links to websites and Youtube videos. I don't want official church standing answers just from the heart answers from ye RCC posters if that's alright with Wicknight.

The seven churches were part of the True Chruch. The early Church grew and began to spread to other cities/dioscese, and so they were part of a hierarchy, which continues to this day.

PDN

hinault wrote: »

Are you a Roman Catholic?
I thought not.



Why do non-Roman Catholics insist on answering a question specifically posed to Roman Catholics on this thread?
Message 18.

Because we are no longer allowed to post Christian-only threads or Catholic-only threads. Also, it is a bit rich to expect that some of the Catholic posters here can make inflammatory remarks and then hide behind a 'Catholic-only' flag to prevent anyone responding.

The Brigadier

Soul Winner wrote: »

If there was seven true churches in the apostle John's time then why is there only one now? Poster's own views only not links to websites and Youtube videos. I don't want official church standing answers just from the heart answers from ye RCC posters if that's alright with Wicknight.

My view on this is that the seven churches were simply the seven churches in existence. I take a fairly literal view on it and view these as "physical" churches rather than different sects. Now we have many more churches (little c) within the Church (big c).

You can attend mass in a church in Dublin and find differences between that and attending mass in Paris. Neither is doing anything wrong but there will be differences.

As the Church evolved through the centuries things became more ordered. Any church can be a "true church" as long as they believe in the authority of Peter and his successors.

Propellerhead

Donatello wrote: »

Both.

I would say that non-Catholic Christians convinced that the CC is not necessary for salvation can be saved. But it's difficult for them to remain in a state of grace 'til the day they die, without the grace of the Eucharist and the sacrament of penance, and all the other graces available through the Catholic Church, especially through Her teaching on faith and morals - everything Christ wanted us to know as necessary for our salvation, including what sin is, how to do spiritual battle so as to avoid it etc... Without that help, it will be more difficult for them to be saved, even as the Catholic, formed in the faith, will be judged at a higher standard than non-Catholic Christians who did not realise the CC was necessary for salvation and did not have all the benefits.

The short video Keylem posted is a good explanation of what it means to be part of the Church, outside of which there is no salvation for anyone, Catholic or non-Catholic:

Where does Orthodoxy fit into this? Anglicans, Lutherans and other Protestant Christians who preach and believe in the Real Presence in the Blessed Sacrament?

This is far too pat. Besides, pretty much any so-called "non-Catholic" knows that is a polite word for "Heretic" and finds it equally offensive. The Nicene Creed is said by Anglicans and Lutherans and is held as normative by Methodists and Presbyterians, who believe themselves to be part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

You are defending the Roman Catholic Church's perspective without even the remotest understanding of the perspective of other Christians. The Reformation wasn't about disobedience of authority. Without any understanding of why the Christian Church is visibly disunited, you will only ever persuade those who would have fundamentally agreed with you in the first place.

PDN

The Brigadier wrote: »

As the Church evolved through the centuries things became more ordered. Any church can be a "true church" as long as they believe in the authority of Peter and his successors.

Translation: "Any church can be a true church so long as it's one of ours"

hinault

PDN wrote: »

Because we are no longer allowed to post Christian-only threads or Catholic-only threads. Also, it is a bit rich to expect that some of the Catholic posters here can make inflammatory remarks and then hide behind a 'Catholic-only' flag to prevent anyone responding.

I think we had this discussion before.

It really is a pity that this section cannot have a Roman Catholic section where Roman Catholic members can discuss issues solely.

A RC-only subsection would also counteract accusations of "inflammatory remarks" being made to non-RC's.

antiskeptic

hinault wrote: »

It really is a pity that this section cannot have a Roman Catholic section where Roman Catholic members can discuss issues solely.

Here, here..

The Brigadier

PDN wrote: »

Translation: "Any church can be a true church so long as it's one of ours"

That is hardly the sort of response I would expect from a moderator.

AhSureTisGrand

The Brigadier wrote: »

That is hardly the sort of response I would expect from a moderator.

What mods have you been dealing with?

Soul Winner

Keylem wrote: »

The seven churches were part of the True Chruch. The early Church grew and began to spread to other cities/dioscese, and so they were part of a hierarchy, which continues to this day.

There were seven distinct churches in Asia during the time that John penned the book of revelation. And yes these were all part of the one true Church i.e. the body of believers on the earth. Just like today there is also a body of believers on the earth. But like then the body of believers don't necessarily belong to the same group but they are all still His body through faith. Now from whence came the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church being the one true church? That institution grew from these historical roots to what it is today but other churches also grew from these roots. What I would like to know is what makes the RCC think that only it is the one true church? And those outside her cannot be saved unless they too believe that she is the one true church?

It is a blatantly damnible doctrine, totally and completely diametrically apposed to all the teaching of Jesus, Paul and Peter in the New Testament. The single slender scripture it supposedly hangs from is the phrase that Jesus gave the keys of the Kingdom to Peter by stating that upon this Rock I will build my church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. But that is a very loose interpretation of the text. Are there any others to back it up? I can find loads that backup the concept that anyone can be saved by faith and those sources never suggest that you have to belong to any particular group. Paul wrote to Christians all over the place. Galatia, Ephesus, Philippi, Rome (yes even Rome) and also to his Hebrew brethren. They were all Christians long before the Church at Rome became dominant through worldly power. How on earth were Christians in these other churches saved when they did not fall under the RCC umbrella?

The good news of the Gospel is that anyone can be part of His body of believers, they just got to have faith in Him. And even that faith is a gift from God. They don't have to jump through any set of hoops that Johnny come lately sects decide they want to latch onto it. What annoys me most about RCCs is their inability to understand this very very very simple concept. It has to be spelled out to them in tiny little pieces bit by bit and even then they cannot understand it. The reason they can't understand it is because thy have been completely brainwashed into the damnible doctrine that if your outside the RCC then you cannot be saved and all this on one very very slender piece of text.

Is your God so small that he cannot save anyone without the express help from the RCC? That is an insult to God. I am of the opinion that there are a lot of RCCs who are members of the one true church but unlike them I don't think that they are the only ones. It’s their arrogance and stupidity in this regard that just drives me mad. Other than that they are quite nice people.

P.S. I too agree that there should be a separate forum for RCC topics. If the rest of us are fecked anyway then they should have own love in forum in which to wallow in their delusions and let the rest of us dogs get on with the serious business of what being a real Christians really is. Trusting God.

P.P.S I'm sorry if this offends RCCs but I get offended when they tell me that I cannot be saved unless I become one of them. Tit for tat.

hinault

Soul Winner : if you're certain that one does not have to be a RC to be saved, why do ask (RC's?) here if non-RC's will be saved?

If you're 100% certain, then the teaching of the RCC on this matter should be of no consequence surely?

Soul Winner

The Brigadier wrote: »

Any church can be a "true church" as long as they believe in the authority of Peter and his successors.

This is what I'm talking about. IT IS BY JESUS THAT ANYONE SHALL ENTER IN NOT BLOOMING PETER!!! The concept that Peter will be standing at the gate weighing up your good deeds with your bad and if you good outweigh the bad then you can get in is a heathen (Babylonian) concept. It is but one of many others that the RCC has absorbed over the centuries. You're saved by faith is the dominant message throughout the New Testament. Only when the church returns to this lost message does it thrive spiritually. The doctrine of dead works is as dead today as it was when Paul first preached against it. Honestly read the whole book folks not just the verse that support your world view.

Soul Winner

hinault wrote: »

Soul Winner : if you're certain that one does not have to be a RC to be saved, why do ask (RC's?) here if non-RC's will be saved?

If you're 100% certain, then the teaching of the RCC on this matter should be of no consequence surely?

I know the RRC's official position on it, I just wanted to know how many RCCs in here actually agree with it, that's all. I know that it is a false doctrine but it baffles me that they cannot see it once it is pointed out to them. All one needs do is read the New Testament to clearly see the differences in what the RCC teaches and what Jesus and Paul taught.

hinault

Soul Winner wrote: »

I know the RRC's official position on it, I just wanted to know how many RCCs in here actually agree with it, that's all. I know that it is a false doctrine but it baffles me that they cannot see it once it is pointed out to them. All one needs do is read the New Testament to clearly see the differences in what the RCC teaches and what Jesus and Paul taught.

OK.

It still avoids the question that I asked. The RCC teaching applies to RCC adherents. Whether this teaching complements/contradicts your non-RCC viewpoint is immaterial I would have thought.

Soul Winner

hinault wrote: »

OK.

It still avoids the question that I asked. The RCC teaching applies to RCC adherents. Whether this teaching complements/contradicts your non-RCC viewpoint is immaterial I would have thought.

You're right. Which means what I'm really asking is, do all RCC adherents agree with all the aspects of RCC teaching? To which you might retort: “Well they wouldn't be true RCC adherents if they didn't!” And in a sense that would also be right, which means that I will just have to continue to delight in the surety that I know their teaching is false as it is not in accord with true New Testament teaching. But be that as it may, just because the RCC is of the opinion that nobody outside her remit can be saved that does not mean that I believe that anyone who is a RC cannot be saved. I don’t, God will honor faith wherever He finds it. That is abundantly clear in His Word, and thank God for it too. Had it been left up to the RCC the masses would never have read or been able to read the Bible because they totally apposed that it be spoken in any other language other than Latin when it was originally penned in what they regarded as heathen tongues like Hebrew and Greek.

hotmail.com

OP - the answer is hell.

Soul Winner

hotmail.com wrote: »

OP - the answer is hell.

Thank God it's not.