Re: Dan andReal Catholics

[Guest guest]

all,

Question: what is the official Roman Catholic position on the

salvation of non Catholic Christians?

Does the Roman Catholic Church have an official position on what will

happen on the day of judgement to God's children who are Hindu,

Buddhist, atheists, etc.?

regards,

[Guest guest]

Calhoun wrote:

> all,

>

> Question: what is the official Roman Catholic position on the

> salvation of non Catholic Christians?

>

> Does the Roman Catholic Church have an official position on what will

> happen on the day of judgement to God's children who are Hindu,

> Buddhist, atheists, etc.?

Salvation is possible for them but less easy. God gives a leg up to his own, via

the sacraments.

http://www.traditio.com/tradlib/faq10.txt

Regards,

Dan

>

>

> regards,

>

>

>

>

> " Our highest duty as human beings is to search out a means whereby beings may

be freed from all kinds of unsatisfactory experience and suffering. "

>

> H.H. Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th. Dalai Lama

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dan,

I checked the source, credible or not though it may be, and append

the entire section.

D:Salvation is possible for them but less easy. God gives a leg up to

his own, via the sacraments.

http://www.traditio.com/tradlib/faq10.txt

This section below does not in any way suggest that salvation is

possible for non-Christians left to *merely* the 'devices' of their

own religions, or to atheism. The only possibility it offers to such

persons is that they might be be " saved by the love called charity " .

This is interesting because it expresses -simply- a very broad

universally applicable credo in nominally Catholic terms. Yet, when

you read the whole statement below, it's hard not to think that the

Catholic doctrine is: God is a Catholic and he favors his own.

Which is, of course, fine as a doctrine but is also an absurd

reduction of God. imo It's this kind of nonsense which prevents me

from taking organized religions seriously; although I recognize that

others take religion very seriously.

Why wouldn't God wish to be the Lord Master of all religions? <;-)

regards,

EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS (NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CHURCH)

This doctrinal phrase, first used by St. Cyprian (ca. 210-258) and

approved by the Council of Florence (1438-1445), and its associated

doctrine, baptism of desire (flaminis, or de voto), is a complex

subject that some misconstrue by taking the flat statement out of its

proper context within the balance of traditional Catholic teaching

since the early centuries of the Church.

The doctrinal phrase was not originally directed against non-

Catholics AS INDIVIDUALS, but against heretical sects insofar as they

are sects. Its purpose is to safeguard the truth that there is only

ONE body of Christ and, therefore, only ONE Church that which

possesses and communicates the fullness of the blessings brought to

men by Christ. (Fr. Laux, Catholic Apologetics, Book IV, p. 125)

It is easy to err on either side of the question: to believe that no

one who is not a formal, practicing Catholic can be saved; or to

believe that all men are saved, no matter what their belief and

practice may be.

It is impossible to be saved outside the Church, because the Church

is the rule or measure of faith, without which faith it is impossible

to attain heaven. Natural good will is not enough to be saved. Anyone

who dies with natural good will alone cannot be saved.

However, if God gives the grace to embrace the True Faith, and one

accepts -- that is, baptism of desire -- he is truly a member of the

Church by means of his desire of being united to the Church by

sacramental Baptism, were it in his power. He can thereby be saved

inside the Church, even though he cannot receive Sacramental baptism

of water.

In Catholic moral theology, Baptism is necessary for salvation by

necessity of means. When a thing is necessary for the attainment of

an end because it contains in itself something requisite for this

purpose, we say that it is necessary by necessity of means. In such

an event, if a person does not employ the means, even though it

involves no fault on his part, per se he cannot attain the end.

When we say that per se it is impossible to attain an end without

something that is necessary by necessity of means, we imply that by

God's ordinance another means may supply in certain cases. Thus,

baptism of desire and baptism of blood can supply the chief effects

of the baptism of water in certain cases. In such an event, we say

that the means in question is necessary by relative necessity of

means, as distinct from the case when nothing will supply for the

means (absolute necessity). A person is not necessarily " outside " the

Catholic Church merely because he is not an actual member. But, in

order to be saved, one must be united to the Catholic Church at least

by desire, either explicit or implicit. Through such a desire one

whose lack of actual membership in the Church is not due to any fault

on his own part can be " inside " the Church, and, if he joins to his

desire an act of faith and an act of divine charity, can be saved. "

(Francis J. Connell, 1958, 1964).

For the Fathers, St. Alphonsus Liguori (1696-1787) sums up the

Catholic understanding of this doctrine " extra ecclesiam nulla salus "

by saying (De Baptismo, cap. 1): " It is de fide [of the faith and

required to be believed by all Catholics] that there are some men

saved also by the baptism of the Spirit [i.e., of desire, by the

grace of the Holy Spirit]. In this he expresses the teaching of all

the Fathers, Doctors, popes, and theologians, including St. Cyprian,

St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, St. Fulgentius, St. Aquinas (Summa

Theologiae, IIIa, Q. 68, A.2), St. Canisius, St. Alphonsus de

Liguori, Pope Innocent II, Pope Innocent III, the Council of Trent,

and Pope St. Pius X.

Moreover, here are some pertinent statements from the traditional

popes of the 19th and early 20th centuries concerning invincible

ignorance of the True Faith, that is, ignorance outside the moral

responsibility of the individual. Traditional theologians that

expound this same teaching (before Vatican II) include Abarzuza,

Aertnys, Billot, Cappello, Coronata, , Herrmann, Herve, Hurter,

Iorio, Lennerz, McAuliffe, Merkelbach, Noldin, Ott, Pohl, Prummer,

Regatillo, Sabetti, Sola, Tanquerey, Zalba, and Zubizarreta.

Venerable Pope Pius IX Singulari quadam Allocution against the Errors

of Rationalism and Indifferentism December 9, 1854

It must, of course, be held as a matter of faith that outside the

apostolic Roman Church no one can be saved, that the Church is the

only ark of salvation, and that whoever does not enter it will perish

in the flood. On the other hand, it must likewise be held as certain

that those who are affected by ignorance of the true religion, if it

is invincible ignorance, are not subject to any guilt in this matter

before the eyes of the Lord. Now, then, who could presume in himself

an ability to set the boundaries of such ignorance, taking into

consideration the natural differences of peoples, lands, native

talents, and so many other factors? Only when we have been released

from the bonds of this body and see God just as He is (1 3:2)

shall we really understand how close and beautiful a bond joins

divine mercy with divine justice. But as long as we dwell on earth,

encumbered with this soul-dulling, mortal body, let us tenaciously

cling to the Catholic doctrine that there is one God, one faith, one

baptism (Eph. 4:5).

Venerable Pope Pius IX Quanto conficiamur moerore August 10, 1863

And here, beloved Sons and Venerable Brethren, it is necessary once

more to mention and censure the serious error into which some

Catholics have unfortunately fallen. For they are of the opinion that

men who live in errors, estranged from the true faith and from

Catholic unity, can attain eternal life. This is in direct opposition

to Catholic teaching.

We all know that those who are afflicted with invincible ignorance

with regard to our holy religion, if they carefully keep the precepts

of the natural law that have been written by God in the hearts of all

men, if they are prepared to obey God, and if they lead a virtuous

and dutiful life, can attain eternal life by the power of divine

light and grace. For God, Who reads comprehensively in every detail

the minds and souls, the thoughts and habits of all men, will not

permit, in accordance with His infinite goodness and mercy, anyone

who is not guilty of a voluntary fault to suffer eternal torments

(suppliciis).

However, also well-known is the Catholic dogma that no one can be

saved outside the Catholic Church, and that those who obstinately

oppose the authority and definitions of the church, and who

stubbornly remain separated form the unity of the Church and from the

successor of , the Roman Pontiff (to whom the Savior has

entrusted the care of His vineyard), cannot attain salvation.

Pope St. Pius X Catechism of Christian Doctrine, para. 132

A person outside the Church by his own fault, and who dies without

perfect contrition, will not be saved. But he who finds himself

outside without fault of his own, and who lives a good life, can be

saved by the love called charity, which unites unto God, and in a

spiritual way also to the Church, that is, to the soul of the Church.

Pope Pius XII Encyclical Letter Mystici Corporis June 29, 1943

From a heart overflowing with love, we ask each and every one of them

[non-Catholics] to correspond to the interior movements of grace, and

to seek to withdraw from that state in which they cannot be sure of

their salvation. For even though by an unconscious desire and longing

they have a certain relationship with the Mystical Body of the

Redeemer, they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and

helps which can be enjoyed only in the Catholic Church.

What practical conclusions do we draw from this doctrine? Fr. E.

Hugueney, O.P., in a 1933 article, " La opinion traditionnelle sur la

nombre des Elus " [The Traditional Opinion on the Number of the

Elect], in La Revue Thomiste [The Thomistic Review] wrote on the

practical danger of remaining outside the Church in this way:

" Of those who are members of the Church, the elect will greatly

outnumber the damned; and if we include as members of the Church all

those who are hers in spirit by baptism of desire, this immense

number of elect will be very great indeed. Yet, we must not forget

that, outside the Church, the chances of salvation are much less;

this means that many pagans will probably lose their souls, because

they are almost defenseless against the devils and their own

passions. "

To Fr. Hugueney's statement, I would add that it is a very difficult

thing to elicit perfect contrition in oneself. With the graces of the

Sacrament of Penance, Catholics may receive absolution with only

imperfect contrition. With the great assistance that Holy Mother

Church offers to her practicing Catholic children, salvation is made

so much easier for them than for those who must struggle outside her,

even if they can in truth rely on a conscience that is truly and

totally in invincible ignorance.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 8/14/2003 6:52:50 AM Central Daylight Time,

marilyn@... writes:

> Such blind obedience could be seen as sinful, unethical or

> both for anyone able to consult reason and conscience. Conscience is,

> in fact, the supreme authority for Roman Catholics-- beyond councils and

> papal decrees.

>

> That is not, of course, what is usually taught on a parish level.

Many, many years ago, when I was still struggling to be a practicing

Catholic, we had a visiting missionary come to our parish to hold a retreat.

During

one session I took my trembling self in hand and asked him, " What difference

does it make if might have had more children after the birth of Jesus? As

long as she was a virgin when He was conceived, that meets the prophecy

requirements. What happened after that was of no sigificance to the prophecy. "

or

something like that. I was really shaken at the idea of challenging such a

teaching, the one that says that remained a virgin even after the birth of

Jesus. The priest said, " You're absolutely right. " Shocked me to the core.

Here was a priest, in public, disagreeing with a dogmatic teaching of the

church. I'm not sure where the discussion went after that, I was so off on

thinking of the implications (for me) of what had just happened.

Just thought I'd throw that tidbit in for what it's worth.

Namasté

Sam in Texas §(ô¿ô)§

Minds are like parachutes; they only function when open. - Sir Dewar

A closed mind is a good thing to lose.

" Minds are like parachutes; most people use them only as a last resort. "

~Ben Ostrowsky

Some minds are like concrete, thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.

~mrantho

" Don’t bother just to be better than your contemporaries or predecessors. Try

to be better than yourself. " - Faulkner

[Guest guest]

When I did my grad work at the GTU in Berkeley, a number of my courses

were from the associated Roman Catholic schools. It became clear to me

that what Catholicism demands in terms of informed thought and behavior

is far different from kind of " blind obedience " you describe as true

Catholicism. Such blind obedience could be seen as sinful, unethical or

both for anyone able to consult reason and conscience. Conscience is,

in fact, the supreme authority for Roman Catholics-- beyond councils and

papal decrees.

That is not, of course, what is usually taught on a parish level. Large

institutions have found it easier to keep ordinary members rather dumbed

down, and the Catholic Church seems to have made it policy to do so..

You might want to do some serious reading -- there's a whole different

world out there. One in which, incidentally, we Episcopalians have

exactly the same access to salvation that you Romans do (per the

documents on Anglican-Roman Catholic unity) -- now does that shock you,

or what!?

Marilyn, who is as real as they come

[Guest guest]

Dear Dan, everyone else please do not take offense at my tone with

Dan...this is not an attack, nor ad hominem attack on Dan who knows I love

him, merely impatience with him which is part of our relationship. I am not

being mean and nasty to Dan. If I suddenly appeared as " sweetness and

light', Dan would probably worry about my sanity.We are sparing. So

Dear Dan,

No wonder your views of Catholicism is so skewered, if this is where you got

your answers. (your link)

Along with false information this is a ploy of those conservatives who were

against Vatican II.

One wrong statement :

" Charismaticism is a particularly virulent modern-day mania infecting

the Church of the New Order, which has its roots deep in heresy. "

Cardinal Suenense, now deceased was the patron of the movement and the pope

himself blessed the appearance of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal' which

had almost as many clergy and nuns, brothers as I had lay people. The bishop

of a diocese I personally know is Charismatic and belonged officially to the

movement. There are probably others who now keep their heads down since the

radical conservatives hold sway. The Charismatic renewal in the Catholic

Church is approved officially by the Church., and its members are in

communion with Rome.

so much for your source and link. ( I could give you chapter and verse, but

it would take pages and pages.

Please use a source in tune with the Catholic Church today which is

conservative enough, but not this backward.

As for a position on what happens at the last judgment. How inflated can one

get if one presumes to know G-d's mind, sometimes the gall of the Church

amazes me

..

The present teaching is still " baptism of desire " for those good people who

were never converted, which means they really wanted to know the truth, but

had no chance..The lines are less defined in the modern Church but it still

insists it is the " One True Church " . Well meaning good people who believe in

Christ do have a chance at being " saved " This is not the historical line.

The Church does not want to go public on this belief so it keeps its head

down. I guess in its wisdom, the Church decided to let G-d decide, when all

else fails.This in the modern era only, and is XXlll doing, that all

men are brothers, and those outside the fold are our " separated brethren "

This source of Dan's probably condemn everyone outside the Church to

hell.That is where it consigned Vatican ll. And still insists on the Latin

Mass.

Dan, is this the way you revert to the Middle Ages?

Toni

Original Message -----

To: <JUNG-FIRE >

Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 7:46 PM

Subject: Re: Dan and " Real " Catholics

>

>

> Calhoun wrote:

>

> > all,

> >

> > Question: what is the official Roman Catholic position on the

> > salvation of non Catholic Christians?

>

> >

> > Does the Roman Catholic Church have an official position on what will

> > happen on the day of judgement to God's children who are Hindu,

> > Buddhist, atheists, etc.?

>

> Salvation is possible for them but less easy. God gives a leg up to his

own, via the sacraments.

>

> http://www.traditio.com/tradlib/faq10.txt

>

> Regards,

>

> Dan

>

> >

> >

> > regards,

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > " Our highest duty as human beings is to search out a means whereby

beings may be freed from all kinds of unsatisfactory experience and

suffering. "

> >

> > H.H. Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th. Dalai Lama

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

I think it's Cardinal RATZINGER . He is the official Defender of the Faith n

threw out Fox.

Sigh.....

Virgo Prunefiddle

Tomorrow is The Assumption of the Virgin wh caused Jung so much

gratification wh it was made a dogma.

[Guest guest]

Dear Toni,

You wrote:

> Dear Dan,

>

> No wonder your views of Catholicism is so skewered, if this is where you got

> your answers. (your link)

My view of Catholicism is that it is largely nonsense. However, in fairness, I

must admit that " nonsensical " does not necessarily mean " worthless, "

and that what does not help me might nevertheless help other people.

>

>

> Along with false information this is a ploy of those conservatives who were

> against Vatican II.

Vatican II or no Vatican II, I assume that you do not contest the fact that the

RC Church has multiple de fide teachings that RC's are *required* to

believe. That was my original point and remains my point. There are certain

things that Vatican authorities - even Vatican II authorities - insist

that one hew to if one is to be a Catholic.

>

>

> One wrong statement :

> " Charismaticism is a particularly virulent modern-day mania infecting

> the Church of the New Order, which has its roots deep in heresy. "

>

>

>

> As for a position on what happens at the last judgment. How inflated can one

> get if one presumes to know G-d's mind, sometimes the gall of the Church

> amazes me

To say, as you say here, that the Church has a lot of gall to claim that it

knows God's mind is to say you're not a Catholic. Fair enough, one needn't

be a Catholic. But Catholics believe that God has revealed Himself and continues

to reveal Himself through His Church, the " one true Church, " the RC

Church.

>

> .

> The present teaching is still " baptism of desire " for those good people who

> were never converted, which means they really wanted to know the truth, but

> had no chance

Which is exactly what the link says. As you know, opinions vary on frequent or

how likely the successful " baptism of desire " actually is, and the

matter of frequency or likelihood is not as far as I know a matter of dogma.

>

Dear Greg,

Dark as the Dark Ages might have been, perhaps you will agree with me that the

current age is darker. As you know, CGJ has some praise for RC dogma

(and not because he believes it, either). The " good news " isn't all bad.

Dear Marilyn,

You wrote:

" When I did my grad work at the GTU in Berkeley, a number of my courses

were from the associated Roman Catholic schools. It became clear to me

that what Catholicism demands in terms of informed thought and behavior

is far different from kind of " blind obedience " you describe as true

Catholicism. Such blind obedience could be seen as sinful, unethical or

both for anyone able to consult reason and conscience. Conscience is,

in fact, the supreme authority for Roman Catholics-- beyond councils and

papal decrees. "

The Church continues to fudge this by teaching that conscience must be informed,

and that it is correctly informed by the Church, with its councils

and decrees. People who teach the primacy of the individual conscience are

called Protestants.

" That is not, of course, what is usually taught on a parish level. Large

institutions have found it easier to keep ordinary members rather dumbed

down, and the Catholic Church seems to have made it policy to do so..

I think the Church - were it blunt, which it rarely is -might say is that God

made the ordinary members " dumbed down, " and the Church is accommodating

them.

" You might want to do some serious reading -- there's a whole different

world out there. One in which, incidentally, we Episcopalians have

exactly the same access to salvation that you Romans do (per the

documents on Anglican-Roman Catholic unity)

I am not a " Roman " any more. I am in the Church's eyes an apostate. If the RC

teaching on salvation is true, I'm finished. " Salvation " in this sense

is not even an issue for me. The whole " rad-trad " vs. Vatican II conflict and

all that stuff is a matter of small interest to me. My original point

was that to be RC is ipso facto to believe certain dogmas. Yes, Toni, I know

that there are lots of priests and Vatican insiders and others who don't

believe them all - hell, there are, I'm sure, a lot of them that don't even

believe in God. What else is new? But that is not to the point.

" -- now does that shock you,

or what!? "

What shocks me is the vicious cruelty and arbitrary tyranny attributed to God by

preachers, and the way that teaching is swallowed whole by the many.

But I suppose that it shouldn't shock me.

Regards,

Dan

" This myth of Christ has been most profitable. "

Pope Leo X

[Guest guest]

Toni, Dan, all,

Toni, thanks for pointing out that Dan's source was not official.

This relief took me to a search on Catholic / salvation / doctrine.

This straight-away led to the certifiably <g> official source, The

Vatican. I found what I was looking for and I found also a boatload

of controversy.

All of it surrounds the September 5, 2000 reaffirmation of the Roman

Catholic Church's doctrine, following from various Catechisms of the

Church and other essential sources.

It caused such a storm of controversy that the Pope hisself softened

its tenor shortly thereafter, on December 6, 2000. However, and its a

big 'but', his comments do not formally change the province of the

statement of doctrine, Dominus Iesus.

I've copied here some of the materials I discovered. The actual

declaration is first, and, you who are interested should read it and

come to your own conclusions. I won't bias your own reading.

Next is the story about the Declaration from the L.A.Times.

After this are various short affirmations of the doctrine by Bishops,

writing in English.

After this is an article about the Pope's comments softening

something or another, but, not the doctrine itself.

After this is the Religious News Service's news report on the Declaration.

After this is a summary of the historical development of the Church's

doctrines on this matter by Fr. Alfred McBride.

Finally an excerpt and a link from a view on this matter pre-dating

the 9/5:2000 Declaration. This last piece is suggestive of the Pope's

softening comments, although its work-around is itself a nice piece

of sophistry.

***

Marilyn, thanks immensely for reminding me about " Conscience is, in

fact, the supreme authority for Roman Catholics-- beyond councils and

papal decrees. "

Religions are made for acting authoritatively and are purportedly

made so by, as I see it, divine justifications and human

justifications.

My own belief echoes Toni, who are we really to say what God is up to?

regards,

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_d\

oc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html

CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

DECLARATION " DOMINUS IESUS " ON THE UNICITY AND SALVIFIC UNIVERSALITY

OF JESUS CHRIST AND THE CHURCH

INTRODUCTION

1.   The Lord Jesus, before ascending into heaven, commanded his

disciples to proclaim the Gospel to the whole world and to baptize

all nations: ³Go into the whole world and proclaim the Gospel to

every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; he who

does not believe will be condemned² (Mk 16:15-16); ³All power in

heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and teach all

nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son,

and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have

commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the

world² (Mt 28:18-20; cf. Lk 24:46-48; Jn 17:18,20,21; Acts 1:8).

The Church's universal mission is born from the command of Jesus

Christ and is fulfilled in the course of the centuries in the

proclamation of the mystery of God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and

the mystery of the incarnation of the Son, as saving event for all

humanity. The fundamental contents of the profession of the Christian

faith are expressed thus: ³I believe in one God, the Father,

Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen.

I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally

begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from

true God, begotten, not made, of one being with the Father. Through

him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation, he came

down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate

of the Virgin , and became man. For our sake he was crucified

under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third

day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into

heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come

again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will

have no end. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of

life, who proceeds from the Father. With the Father and the Son he is

worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the prophets. I

believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one

baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look for the resurrection of

the dead, and the life of the world to come².1

2.   In the course of the centuries, the Church has proclaimed and

witnessed with fidelity to the Gospel of Jesus. At the close of the

second millennium, however, this mission is still far from complete.2

For that reason, Saint 's words are now more relevant than ever:

³Preaching the Gospel is not a reason for me to boast; it is a

necessity laid on me: woe to me if I do not preach the Gospel!² (1

Cor 9:16). This explains the Magisterium's particular attention to

giving reasons for and supporting the evangelizing mission of the

Church, above all in connection with the religious traditions of the

world.3

In considering the values which these religions witness to and offer

humanity, with an open and positive approach, the Second Vatican

Council's Declaration on the relation of the Church to non-Christian

religions states: ³The Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is

true and holy in these religions. She has a high regard for the

manner of life and conduct, the precepts and teachings, which,

although differing in many ways from her own teaching, nonetheless

often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men².4

Continuing in this line of thought, the Church's proclamation of

Jesus Christ, ³the way, the truth, and the life² (Jn 14:6), today

also makes use of the practice of inter-religious dialogue. Such

dialogue certainly does not replace, but rather accompanies the

missio ad gentes, directed toward that ³mystery of unity², from which

³it follows that all men and women who are saved share, though

differently, in the same mystery of salvation in Jesus Christ through

his Spirit².5 Inter-religious dialogue, which is part of the Church's

evangelizing mission,6 requires an attitude of understanding and a

relationship of mutual knowledge and reciprocal enrichment, in

obedience to the truth and with respect for freedom.7

3.   In the practice of dialogue between the Christian faith and

other religious traditions, as well as in seeking to understand its

theoretical basis more deeply, new questions arise that need to be

addressed through pursuing new paths of research, advancing

proposals, and suggesting ways of acting that call for attentive

discernment. In this task, the present Declaration seeks to recall to

Bishops, theologians, and all the Catholic faithful, certain

indispensable elements of Christian doctrine, which may help

theological reflection in developing solutions consistent with the

contents of the faith and responsive to the pressing needs of

contemporary culture.

The expository language of the Declaration corresponds to its

purpose, which is not to treat in a systematic manner the question of

the unicity and salvific universality of the mystery of Jesus Christ

and the Church, nor to propose solutions to questions that are

matters of free theological debate, but rather to set forth again the

doctrine of the Catholic faith in these areas, pointing out some

fundamental questions that remain open to further development, and

refuting specific positions that are erroneous or ambiguous. For this

reason, the Declaration takes up what has been taught in previous

Magisterial documents, in order to reiterate certain truths that are

part of the Church's faith.

4.   The Church's constant missionary proclamation is endangered

today by relativistic theories which seek to justify religious

pluralism, not only de facto but also de iure (or in principle). As a

consequence, it is held that certain truths have been superseded; for

example, the definitive and complete character of the revelation of

Jesus Christ, the nature of Christian faith as compared with that of

belief in other religions, the inspired nature of the books of Sacred

Scripture, the personal unity between the Eternal Word and Jesus of

Nazareth, the unity of the economy of the Incarnate Word and the Holy

Spirit, the unicity and salvific universality of the mystery of Jesus

Christ, the universal salvific mediation of the Church, the

inseparability ‹ while recognizing the distinction ‹ of the kingdom

of God, the kingdom of Christ, and the Church, and the subsistence of

the one Church of Christ in the Catholic Church.

The roots of these problems are to be found in certain

presuppositions of both a philosophical and theological nature, which

hinder the understanding and acceptance of the revealed truth. Some

of these can be mentioned: the conviction of the elusiveness and

inexpressibility of divine truth, even by Christian revelation;

relativistic attitudes toward truth itself, according to which what

is true for some would not be true for others; the radical opposition

posited between the logical mentality of the West and the symbolic

mentality of the East; the subjectivism which, by regarding reason as

the only source of knowledge, becomes incapable of raising its ³gaze

to the heights, not daring to rise to the truth of being²;8 the

difficulty in understanding and accepting the presence of definitive

and eschatological events in history; the metaphysical emptying of

the historical incarnation of the Eternal Logos, reduced to a mere

appearing of God in history; the eclecticism of those who, in

theological research, uncritically absorb ideas from a variety of

philosophical and theological contexts without regard for

consistency, systematic connection, or compatibility with Christian

truth; finally, the tendency to read and to interpret Sacred

Scripture outside the Tradition and Magisterium of the Church.

On the basis of such presuppositions, which may evince different

nuances, certain theological proposals are developed ‹ at times

presented as assertions, and at times as hypotheses ‹ in which

Christian revelation and the mystery of Jesus Christ and the Church

lose their character of absolute truth and salvific universality, or

at least shadows of doubt and uncertainty are cast upon them.

I. THE FULLNESS AND DEFINITIVENESS OF THE REVELATION OF JESUS CHRIST

5.   As a remedy for this relativistic mentality, which is becoming

ever more common, it is necessary above all to reassert the

definitive and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ.

In fact, it must be firmly believed that, in the mystery of Jesus

Christ, the Incarnate Son of God, who is ³the way, the truth, and the

life² (Jn 14:6), the full revelation of divine truth is given: ³No

one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father

except the Son and anyone to whom the Son wishes to reveal him² (Mt

11:27); ³No one has ever seen God; God the only Son, who is in the

bosom of the Father, has revealed him² (Jn 1:18); ³For in Christ the

whole fullness of divinity dwells in bodily form² (Col 2:9-10).

Faithful to God's word, the Second Vatican Council teaches: ³By this

revelation then, the deepest truth about God and the salvation of man

shines forth in Christ, who is at the same time the mediator and the

fullness of all revelation².9 Furthermore, ³Jesus Christ, therefore,

the Word made flesh, sent Œas a man to men', Œspeaks the words of

God' (Jn 3:34), and completes the work of salvation which his Father

gave him to do (cf. Jn 5:36; 17:4). To see Jesus is to see his Father

(cf. Jn 14:9). For this reason, Jesus perfected revelation by

fulfilling it through his whole work of making himself present and

manifesting himself: through his words and deeds, his signs and

wonders, but especially through his death and glorious resurrection

from the dead and finally with the sending of the Spirit of truth, he

completed and perfected revelation and confirmed it with divine

testimony... The Christian dispensation, therefore, as the new and

definitive covenant, will never pass away, and we now await no

further new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of

our Lord Jesus Christ (cf. 1 Tim 6:14 and Tit 2:13)².10

Thus, the Encyclical Redemptoris missio calls the Church once again

to the task of announcing the Gospel as the fullness of truth: ³In

this definitive Word of his revelation, God has made himself known in

the fullest possible way. He has revealed to mankind who he is. This

definitive self-revelation of God is the fundamental reason why the

Church is missionary by her very nature. She cannot do other than

proclaim the Gospel, that is, the fullness of the truth which God has

enabled us to know about himself².11 Only the revelation of Jesus

Christ, therefore, ³introduces into our history a universal and

ultimate truth which stirs the human mind to ceaseless effort².12

6.   Therefore, the theory of the limited, incomplete, or imperfect

character of the revelation of Jesus Christ, which would be

complementary to that found in other religions, is contrary to the

Church's faith. Such a position would claim to be based on the notion

that the truth about God cannot be grasped and manifested in its

globality and completeness by any historical religion, neither by

Christianity nor by Jesus Christ.

Such a position is in radical contradiction with the foregoing

statements of Catholic faith according to which the full and complete

revelation of the salvific mystery of God is given in Jesus Christ.

Therefore, the words, deeds, and entire historical event of Jesus,

though limited as human realities, have nevertheless the divine

Person of the Incarnate Word, ³true God and true man²13 as their

subject. For this reason, they possess in themselves the

definitiveness and completeness of the revelation of God's salvific

ways, even if the depth of the divine mystery in itself remains

transcendent and inexhaustible.  The truth about God is not abolished

or reduced because it is spoken in human language; rather, it is

unique, full, and complete, because he who speaks and acts is the

Incarnate Son of God. Thus, faith requires us to profess that the

Word made flesh, in his entire mystery, who moves from incarnation to

glorification, is the source, participated but real, as well as the

fulfilment of every salvific revelation of God to humanity,14 and

that the Holy Spirit, who is Christ's Spirit, will teach this ³entire

truth² (Jn 16:13) to the Apostles and, through them, to the whole

Church.

7.   The proper response to God's revelation is ³the obedience of

faith (Rom 16:26; cf. Rom 1:5; 2 Cor 10:5-6) by which man freely

entrusts his entire self to God, offering Œthe full submission of

intellect and will to God who reveals' and freely assenting to the

revelation given by him².15 Faith is a gift of grace: ³in order to

have faith, the grace of God must come first and give assistance;

there must also be the interior helps of the Holy Spirit, who moves

the heart and converts it to God, who opens the eyes of the mind and

gives Œto everyone joy and ease in assenting to and believing in the

truth'².16

The obedience of faith implies acceptance of the truth of Christ's

revelation, guaranteed by God, who is Truth itself:17 ³Faith is first

of all a personal adherence of man to God. At the same time, and

inseparably, it is a free assent to the whole truth that God has

revealed².18 Faith, therefore, as ³a gift of God² and as ³a

supernatural virtue infused by him²,19 involves a dual adherence: to

God who reveals and to the truth which he reveals, out of the trust

which one has in him who speaks. Thus, ³we must believe in no one but

God: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit².20

For this reason, the distinction between theological faith and belief

 in the other religions, must be firmly held. If faith is the

acceptance in grace of revealed truth, which ³makes it possible to

penetrate the mystery in a way that allows us to understand it

coherently²,21 then belief, in the other religions, is that sum of

experience and thought that constitutes the human treasury of wisdom

and religious aspiration, which man in his search for truth has

conceived and acted upon in his relationship to God and the

Absolute.22

This distinction is not always borne in mind in current theological

reflection. Thus, theological faith (the acceptance of the truth

revealed by the One and Triune God) is often identified with belief

in other religions, which is religious experience still in search of

the absolute truth and still lacking assent to God who reveals

himself. This is one of the reasons why the differences between

Christianity and the other religions tend to be reduced at times to

the point of disappearance.

8.   The hypothesis of the inspired value of the sacred writings of

other religions is also put forward. Certainly, it must be recognized

that there are some elements in these texts which may be de facto

instruments by which countless people throughout the centuries have

been and still are able today to nourish and maintain their

life-relationship with God. Thus, as noted above, the Second Vatican

Council, in considering the customs, precepts, and teachings of the

other religions, teaches that ³although differing in many ways from

her own teaching, these nevertheless often reflect a ray of that

truth which enlightens all men².23

The Church's tradition, however, reserves the designation of inspired

texts to the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments, since

these are inspired by the Holy Spirit.24  Taking up this tradition,

the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation of the Second Vatican

Council states: ³For Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the

apostolic age, accepts as sacred and canonical the books of the Old

and New Testaments, whole and entire, with all their parts, on the

grounds that, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (cf.

Jn 20:31; 2 Tim 3:16; 2 Pet 1:19-21; 3:15-16), they have God as their

author, and have been handed on as such to the Church herself².25 

These books ³firmly, faithfully, and without error, teach that truth

which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to

the Sacred Scriptures².26

Nevertheless, God, who desires to call all peoples to himself in

Christ and to communicate to them the fullness of his revelation and

love, ³does not fail to make himself present in many ways, not only

to individuals, but also to entire peoples through their spiritual

riches, of which their religions are the main and essential

expression even when they contain Œgaps, insufficiencies and

errors'².27 Therefore, the sacred books of other religions, which in

actual fact direct and nourish the existence of their followers,

receive from the mystery of Christ the elements of goodness and grace

which they contain.

II. THE INCARNATE LOGOS AND THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE WORK OF SALVATION

9.   In contemporary theological reflection there often emerges an

approach to Jesus of Nazareth that considers him a particular,

finite, historical figure, who reveals the divine not in an exclusive

way, but in a way complementary with other revelatory and salvific

figures. The Infinite, the Absolute, the Ultimate Mystery of God

would thus manifest itself to humanity in many ways and in many

historical figures: Jesus of Nazareth would be one of these. More

concretely, for some, Jesus would be one of the many faces which the

Logos has assumed in the course of time to communicate with humanity

in a salvific way.

Furthermore, to justify the universality of Christian salvation as

well as the fact of religious pluralism, it has been proposed that

there is an economy of the eternal Word that is valid also outside

the Church and is unrelated to her, in addition to an economy of the

incarnate Word. The first would have a greater universal value than

the second, which is limited to Christians, though God's presence

would be more full in the second.

10.   These theses are in profound conflict with the Christian faith.

The doctrine of faith must be firmly believed which proclaims that

Jesus of Nazareth, son of , and he alone, is the Son and the Word

of the Father. The Word, which ³was in the beginning with God² (Jn

1:2) is the same as he who ³became flesh² (Jn 1:14). In Jesus, ³the

Christ, the Son of the living God² (Mt 16:16), ³the whole fullness of

divinity dwells in bodily form² (Col 2:9). He is the ³only begotten

Son of the Father, who is in the bosom of the Father² (Jn 1:18), his

³beloved Son, in whom we have redemption... In him the fullness of

God was pleased to dwell, and through him, God was pleased to

reconcile all things to himself, on earth and in the heavens, making

peace by the blood of his Cross² (Col 1:13-14; 19-20).

Faithful to Sacred Scripture and refuting erroneous and reductive

interpretations, the First Council of Nicaea solemnly defined its

faith in: ³Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only begotten generated

from the Father, that is, from the being of the Father, God from God,

Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in

being with the Father, through whom all things were made, those in

heaven and those on earth. For us men and for our salvation, he came

down and became incarnate, was made man, suffered, and rose again on

the third day. He ascended to the heavens and shall come again to

judge the living and the dead².28 Following the teachings of the

Fathers of the Church, the Council of Chalcedon also professed: ³the

one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in

divinity and perfect in humanity, the same truly God and truly

man..., one in being with the Father according to the divinity and

one in being with us according to the humanity..., begotten of the

Father before the ages according to the divinity and, in these last

days, for us and our salvation, of , the Virgin Mother of God,

according to the humanity².29

For this reason, the Second Vatican Council states that Christ ³the

new Adam...Œimage of the invisible God' (Col 1:15) is himself the

perfect man who has restored that likeness to God in the children of

Adam which had been disfigured since the first sin... As an innocent

lamb he merited life for us by his blood which he freely shed. In him

God reconciled us to himself and to one another, freeing us from the

bondage of the devil and of sin, so that each one of us could say

with the apostle: the Son of God Œloved me and gave himself up for

me' (Gal 2:20)².30

In this regard, II has explicitly declared: ³To introduce

any sort of separation between the Word and Jesus Christ is contrary

to the Christian faith... Jesus is the Incarnate Word ‹ a single and

indivisible person... Christ is none other than Jesus of Nazareth; he

is the Word of God made man for the salvation of all... In the

process of discovering and appreciating the manifold gifts ‹

especially the spiritual treasures ‹ that God has bestowed on every

people, we cannot separate those gifts from Jesus Christ, who is at

the centre of God's plan of salvation².31

It is likewise contrary to the Catholic faith to introduce a

separation between the salvific action of the Word as such and that

of the Word made man. With the incarnation, all the salvific actions

of the Word of God are always done in unity with the human nature

that he has assumed for the salvation of all people. The one subject

which operates in the two natures, human and divine, is the single

person of the Word.32

Therefore, the theory which would attribute, after the incarnation as

well, a salvific activity to the Logos as such in his divinity,

exercised ³in addition to² or ³beyond² the humanity of Christ, is not

compatible with the Catholic faith.33

11.   Similarly, the doctrine of faith regarding the unicity of the

salvific economy willed by the One and Triune God must be firmly

believed, at the source and centre of which is the mystery of the

incarnation of the Word, mediator of divine grace on the level of

creation and redemption (cf. Col 1:15-20), he who recapitulates all

things (cf. Eph 1:10), he ³whom God has made our wisdom, our

righteousness, and sanctification and redemption² (1 Cor 1:30). In

fact, the mystery of Christ has its own intrinsic unity, which

extends from the eternal choice in God to the parousia: ³he [the

Father] chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world to be

holy and blameless before him in love² (Eph 1:4); ³In Christ we are

heirs, having been destined according to the purpose of him who

accomplishes all things according to his counsel and will² (Eph

1:11); ³For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be

conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the

firstborn among many brothers; those whom he predestined he also

called; and those whom he called he also justified; and those whom he

justified he also glorified² (Rom 8:29-30).

The Church's Magisterium, faithful to divine revelation, reasserts

that Jesus Christ is the mediator and the universal redeemer: ³The

Word of God, through whom all things were made, was made flesh, so

that as perfect man he could save all men and sum up all things in

himself. The Lord...is he whom the Father raised from the dead,

exalted and placed at his right hand, constituting him judge of the

living and the dead².34 This salvific mediation implies also the

unicity of the redemptive sacrifice of Christ, eternal high priest

(cf. Heb 6:20; 9:11; 10:12-14).

12.   There are also those who propose the hypothesis of an economy

of the Holy Spirit with a more universal breadth than that of the

Incarnate Word, crucified and risen. This position also is contrary

to the Catholic faith, which, on the contrary, considers the salvific

incarnation of the Word as a trinitarian event. In the New Testament,

the mystery of Jesus, the Incarnate Word, constitutes the place of

the Holy Spirit's presence as well as the principle of the Spirit's

effusion on humanity, not only in messianic times (cf. Acts 2:32-36;

Jn 7:39, 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), but also prior to his coming in history

(cf. 1 Cor 10:4; 1 Pet 1:10-12).

The Second Vatican Council has recalled to the consciousness of the

Church's faith this fundamental truth. In presenting the Father's

salvific plan for all humanity, the Council closely links the mystery

of Christ from its very beginnings with that of the Spirit.35 The

entire work of building the Church by Jesus Christ the Head, in the

course of the centuries, is seen as an action which he does in

communion with his Spirit.36

Furthermore, the salvific action of Jesus Christ, with and through

his Spirit, extends beyond the visible boundaries of the Church to

all humanity. Speaking of the paschal mystery, in which Christ even

now associates the believer to himself in a living manner in the

Spirit and gives him the hope of resurrection, the Council states:

³All this holds true not only for Christians but also for all men of

good will in whose hearts grace is active invisibly. For since Christ

died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the

same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit

offers to all the possibility of being made partners, in a way known

to God, in the paschal mystery².37

Hence, the connection is clear between the salvific mystery of the

Incarnate Word and that of the Spirit, who actualizes the salvific

efficacy of the Son made man in the lives of all people, called by

God to a single goal, both those who historically preceded the Word

made man, and those who live after his coming in history: the Spirit

of the Father, bestowed abundantly by the Son, is the animator of all

(cf. Jn 3:34).

Thus, the recent Magisterium of the Church has firmly and clearly

recalled the truth of a single divine economy: ³The Spirit's presence

and activity affect not only individuals but also society and

history, peoples, cultures and religions... The Risen Christ Œis now

at work in human hearts through the strength of his Spirit'... Again,

it is the Spirit who sows the Œseeds of the word' present in various

customs and cultures, preparing them for full maturity in Christ².38

While recognizing the historical-salvific function of the Spirit in

the whole universe and in the entire history of humanity,39 the

Magisterium states: ³This is the same Spirit who was at work in the

incarnation and in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus and who

is at work in the Church. He is therefore not an alternative to

Christ nor does he fill a sort of void which is sometimes suggested

as existing between Christ and the Logos. Whatever the Spirit brings

about in human hearts and in the history of peoples, in cultures and

religions, serves as a preparation for the Gospel and can only be

understood in reference to Christ, the Word who took flesh by the

power of the Spirit Œso that as perfectly human he would save all

human beings and sum up all things'².40

In conclusion, the action of the Spirit is not outside or parallel to

the action of Christ. There is only one salvific economy of the One

and Triune God, realized in the mystery of the incarnation, death,

and resurrection of the Son of God, actualized with the cooperation

of the Holy Spirit, and extended in its salvific value to all

humanity and to the entire universe: ³No one, therefore, can enter

into communion with God except through Christ, by the working of the

Holy Spirit².41

III. UNICITY AND UNIVERSALITY OF THE SALVIFIC MYSTERY OF JESUS CHRIST

13.   The thesis which denies the unicity and salvific universality

of the mystery of Jesus Christ is also put forward. Such a position

has no biblical foundation. In fact, the truth of Jesus Christ, Son

of God, Lord and only Saviour, who through the event of his

incarnation, death and resurrection has brought the history of

salvation to fulfilment, and which has in him its fullness and

centre, must be firmly believed as a constant element of the Church's

faith.

The New Testament attests to this fact with clarity: ³The Father has

sent his Son as the Saviour of the world² (1 Jn 4:14); ³Behold the

Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world² (Jn 1:29). In his

discourse before the Sanhedrin, , in order to justify the

healing of a man who was crippled from birth, which was done in the

name of Jesus (cf. Acts 3:1-8), proclaims: ³There is salvation in no

one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by

which we must be saved² (Acts 4:12). St. adds, moreover, that

Jesus Christ ³is Lord of all², ³judge of the living and the dead²,

and thus ³whoever believes in him receives forgiveness of sins

through his name² (Acts 10: 36,42,43).

, addressing himself to the community of Corinth, writes:

³Indeed, even though there may be so-called gods in heaven or on

earth ‹ as in fact there are many gods and many lords ‹ yet for us

there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom

we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and

through whom we exist² (1 Cor 8:5-6). Furthermore, the Apostle

states: ³For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so

that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal

life. God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world,

but in order that the world might be saved through him² (Jn 3:16-17).

In the New Testament, the universal salvific will of God is closely

connected to the sole mediation of Christ: ³[God] desires all men to

be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one

God; there is also one mediator between God and men, the man Jesus

Christ, who gave himself as a ransom for all² (1 Tim 2:4-6).

It was in the awareness of the one universal gift of salvation

offered by the Father through Jesus Christ in the Spirit (cf. Eph

1:3-14), that the first Christians encountered the Jewish people,

showing them the fulfilment of salvation that went beyond the Law

and, in the same awareness, they confronted the pagan world of their

time, which aspired to salvation through a plurality of saviours.

This inheritance of faith has been recalled recently by the Church's

Magisterium: ³The Church believes that Christ, who died and was

raised for the sake of all (cf. 2 Cor 5:15) can, through his Spirit,

give man the light and the strength to be able to respond to his

highest calling, nor is there any other name under heaven given among

men by which they can be saved (cf. Acts 4:12). The Church likewise

believes that the key, the centre, and the purpose of the whole of

man's history is to be found in its Lord and Master².42

14.   It must therefore be firmly believed as a truth of Catholic

faith that the universal salvific will of the One and Triune God is

offered and accomplished once for all in the mystery of the

incarnation, death, and resurrection of the Son of God.

Bearing in mind this article of faith, theology today, in its

reflection on the existence of other religious experiences and on

their meaning in God's salvific plan, is invited to explore if and in

what way the historical figures and positive elements of these

religions may fall within the divine plan of salvation. In this

undertaking, theological research has a vast field of work under the

guidance of the Church's Magisterium.  The Second Vatican Council, in

fact, has stated that: ³the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not

exclude, but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but

a participation in this one source².43 The content of this

participated mediation should be explored more deeply, but must

remain always consistent with the principle of Christ's unique

mediation: ³Although participated forms of mediation of different

kinds and degrees are not excluded, they acquire meaning and value

only from Christ's own mediation, and they cannot be understood as

parallel or complementary to his².44 Hence, those solutions that

propose a salvific action of God beyond the unique mediation of

Christ would be contrary to Christian and Catholic faith.

15.   Not infrequently it is proposed that theology should avoid the

use of terms like ³unicity², ³universality², and ³absoluteness²,

which give the impression of excessive emphasis on the significance

and value of the salvific event of Jesus Christ in relation to other

religions. In reality, however, such language is simply being

faithful to revelation, since it represents a development of the

sources of the faith themselves.  From the beginning, the community

of believers has recognized in Jesus a salvific value such that he

alone, as Son of God made man, crucified and risen, by the mission

received from the Father and in the power of the Holy Spirit, bestows

revelation (cf. Mt 11:27) and divine life (cf. Jn 1:12; 5:25-26;

17:2) to all humanity and to every person.

In this sense, one can and must say that Jesus Christ has a

significance and a value for the human race and its history, which

are unique and singular, proper to him alone, exclusive, universal,

and absolute. Jesus is, in fact, the Word of God made man for the

salvation of all. In expressing this consciousness of faith, the

Second Vatican Council teaches: ³The Word of God, through whom all

things were made, was made flesh, so that as perfect man he could

save all men and sum up all things in himself. The Lord is the goal

of human history, the focal point of the desires of history and

civilization, the centre of mankind, the joy of all hearts, and the

fulfilment of all aspirations. It is he whom the Father raised from

the dead, exalted and placed at his right hand, constituting him

judge of the living and the dead².45 ³It is precisely this uniqueness

of Christ which gives him an absolute and universal significance

whereby, while belonging to history, he remains history's centre and

goal: ŒI am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the

beginning and the end' (Rev 22:13)².46

IV. UNICITY AND UNITY OF THE CHURCH

16.   The Lord Jesus, the only Saviour, did not only establish a

simple community of disciples, but constituted the Church as a

salvific mystery: he himself is in the Church and the Church is in

him (cf. Jn 15:1ff.; Gal 3:28; Eph 4:15-16; Acts 9:5).  Therefore,

the fullness of Christ's salvific mystery belongs also to the Church,

inseparably united to her Lord. Indeed, Jesus Christ continues his

presence and his work of salvation in the Church and by means of the

Church (cf. Col 1:24-27),47 which is his body (cf. 1 Cor 12:12-13,

27; Col 1:18).48 And thus, just as the head and members of a living

body, though not identical, are inseparable, so too Christ and the

Church can neither be confused nor separated, and constitute a single

³whole Christ².49 This same inseparability is also expressed in the

New Testament by the analogy of the Church as the Bride of Christ

(cf. 2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:25-29; Rev 21:2,9).50

Therefore, in connection with the unicity and universality of the

salvific mediation of Jesus Christ, the unicity of the Church founded

by him must be firmly believed as a truth of Catholic faith. Just as

there is one Christ, so there exists a single body of Christ, a

single Bride of Christ: ³a single Catholic and apostolic Church².51

Furthermore, the promises of the Lord that he would not abandon his

Church (cf. Mt 16:18; 28:20) and that he would guide her by his

Spirit (cf. Jn 16:13) mean, according to Catholic faith, that the

unicity and the unity of the Church ‹ like everything that belongs to

the Church's integrity ‹ will never be lacking.52

The Catholic faithful are required to profess that there is an

historical continuity ‹ rooted in the apostolic succession53 ‹

between the Church founded by Christ and the Catholic Church: ³This

is the single Church of Christ... which our Saviour, after his

resurrection, entrusted to 's pastoral care (cf. Jn 21:17),

commissioning him and the other Apostles to extend and rule her (cf.

Mt 28:18ff.), erected for all ages as Œthe pillar and mainstay of the

truth' (1 Tim 3:15). This Church, constituted and organized as a

society in the present world, subsists in [subsistit in] the Catholic

Church, governed by the Successor of and by the Bishops in

communion with him².54  With the expression subsistit in, the Second

Vatican Council sought to harmonize two doctrinal statements: on the

one hand, that the Church of Christ, despite the divisions which

exist among Christians, continues to exist fully only in the Catholic

Church, and on the other hand, that ³outside of her structure, many

elements can be found of sanctification and truth²,55 that is, in

those Churches and ecclesial communities which are not yet in full

communion with the Catholic Church.56 But with respect to these, it

needs to be stated that ³they derive their efficacy from the very

fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church².57

17.   Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which

subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of

and by the Bishops in communion with him.58 The Churches which, while

not existing in perfect communion with the Catholic Church, remain

united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic

succession and a valid Eucharist, are true particular Churches.59

Therefore, the Church of Christ is present and operative also in

these Churches, even though they lack full communion with the

Catholic Church, since they do not accept the Catholic doctrine of

the Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the Bishop of Rome

objectively has and exercises over the entire Church.60

On the other hand, the ecclesial communities which have not preserved

the valid Episcopate and the genuine and integral substance of the

Eucharistic mystery,61 are not Churches in the proper sense; however,

those who are baptized in these communities are, by Baptism,

incorporated in Christ and thus are in a certain communion, albeit

imperfect, with the Church.62 Baptism in fact tends per se toward the

full development of life in Christ, through the integral profession

of faith, the Eucharist, and full communion in the Church.63

³The Christian faithful are therefore not permitted to imagine that

the Church of Christ is nothing more than a collection ‹ divided, yet

in some way one ‹ of Churches and ecclesial communities; nor are they

free to hold that today the Church of Christ nowhere really exists,

and must be considered only as a goal which all Churches and

ecclesial communities must strive to reach².64 In fact, ³the elements

of this already-given Church exist, joined together in their fullness

in the Catholic Church and, without this fullness, in the other

communities².65 ³Therefore, these separated Churches and communities

as such, though we believe they suffer from defects, have by no means

been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of

salvation. For the spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them

as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very

fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church².66

The lack of unity among Christians is certainly a wound for the

Church; not in the sense that she is deprived of her unity, but ³in

that it hinders the complete fulfilment of her universality in

history².67

V. THE CHURCH: KINGDOM OF GOD AND KINGDOM OF CHRIST

18.   The mission of the Church is ³to proclaim and establish among

all peoples the kingdom of Christ and of God, and she is on earth,

the seed and the beginning of that kingdom².68 On the one hand, the

Church is ³a sacrament ‹ that is, sign and instrument of intimate

union with God and of unity of the entire human race².69 She is

therefore the sign and instrument of the kingdom; she is called to

announce and to establish the kingdom. On the other hand, the Church

is the ³people gathered by the unity of the Father, the Son and the

Holy Spirit²;70 she is therefore ³the kingdom of Christ already

present in mystery²71 and constitutes its seed and beginning. The

kingdom of God, in fact, has an eschatological dimension: it is a

reality present in time, but its full realization will arrive only

with the completion or fulfilment of history.72

The meaning of the expressions kingdom of heaven, kingdom of God, and

kingdom of Christ in Sacred Scripture and the Fathers of the Church,

as well as in the documents of the Magisterium, is not always exactly

the same, nor is their relationship to the Church, which is a mystery

that cannot be totally contained by a human concept. Therefore, there

can be various theological explanations of these terms. However, none

of these possible explanations can deny or empty in any way the

intimate connection between Christ, the kingdom, and the Church. In

fact, the kingdom of God which we know from revelation, ³cannot be

detached either from Christ or from the Church... If the kingdom is

separated from Jesus, it is no longer the kingdom of God which he

revealed.  The result is a distortion of the meaning of the kingdom,

which runs the risk of being transformed into a purely human or

ideological goal and a distortion of the identity of Christ, who no

longer appears as the Lord to whom everything must one day be

subjected (cf. 1 Cor 15:27). Likewise, one may not separate the

kingdom from the Church. It is true that the Church is not an end

unto herself, since she is ordered toward the kingdom of God, of

which she is the seed, sign and instrument. Yet, while remaining

distinct from Christ and the kingdom, the Church is indissolubly

united to both².73

19.   To state the inseparable relationship between Christ and the

kingdom is not to overlook the fact that the kingdom of God ‹ even if

considered in its historical phase ‹ is not identified with the

Church in her visible and social reality.  In fact, ³the action of

Christ and the Spirit outside the Church's visible boundaries² must

not be excluded.74 Therefore, one must also bear in mind that ³the

kingdom is the concern of everyone: individuals, society and the

world. Working for the kingdom means acknowledging and promoting

God's activity, which is present in human history and transforms it.

Building the kingdom means working for liberation from evil in all

its forms.  In a word, the kingdom of God is the manifestation and

the realization of God's plan of salvation in all its fullness².75

In considering the relationship between the kingdom of God, the

kingdom of Christ, and the Church, it is necessary to avoid one-sided

accentuations, as is the case with those ³conceptions which

deliberately emphasize the kingdom and which describe themselves as

Œkingdom centred.' They stress the image of a Church which is not

concerned about herself, but which is totally concerned with bearing

witness to and serving the kingdom. It is a ŒChurch for others,' just

as Christ is the Œman for others'... Together with positive aspects,

these conceptions often reveal negative aspects as well. First, they

are silent about Christ: the kingdom of which they speak is

Œtheocentrically' based, since, according to them, Christ cannot be

understood by those who lack Christian faith, whereas different

peoples, cultures, and religions are capable of finding common ground

in the one divine reality, by whatever name it is called. For the

same reason, they put great stress on the mystery of creation, which

is reflected in the diversity of cultures and beliefs, but they keep

silent about the mystery of redemption. Furthermore, the kingdom, as

they understand it, ends up either leaving very little room for the

Church or undervaluing the Church in reaction to a presumed

Œecclesiocentrism' of the past and because they consider the Church

herself only a sign, for that matter a sign not without ambiguity².76

These theses are contrary to Catholic faith because they deny the

unicity of the relationship which Christ and the Church have with the

kingdom of God.

VI. THE CHURCH AND THE OTHER RELIGIONS IN RELATION TO SALVATION

20.   From what has been stated above, some points follow that are

necessary for theological reflection as it explores the relationship

of the Church and the other religions to salvation.

Above all else, it must be firmly believed that ³the 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 (cf. Mk 16:16; Jn 3:5), and thereby

affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter

through baptism as through a door².77 This doctrine must not be set

against the universal salvific will of God (cf. 1 Tim 2:4); ³it is

necessary to keep these two truths together, namely, the real

possibility of salvation in Christ for all mankind and the necessity

of the Church for this salvation².78

The Church is the ³universal sacrament of salvation²,79 since, united

always in a mysterious way to the Saviour Jesus Christ, her Head, and

subordinated to him, she has, in God's plan, an indispensable

relationship with the salvation of every human being.80  For those

who are not formally and visibly members of the Church, ³salvation in

Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a

mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally

part of the Church, but enlightens them in a way which is

accommodated to their spiritual and material situation. This grace

comes from Christ; it is the result of his sacrifice and is

communicated by the Holy Spirit²;81 it has a relationship with the

Church, which ³according to the plan of the Father, has her origin in

the mission of the Son and the Holy Spirit².82

21.   With respect to the way in which the salvific grace of God ‹

which is always given by means of Christ in the Spirit and has a

mysterious relationship to the Church ‹ comes to individual

non-Christians, the Second Vatican Council limited itself to the

statement that God bestows it ³in ways known to himself².83 

Theologians are seeking to understand this question more fully. 

Their work is to be encouraged, since it is certainly useful for

understanding better God's salvific plan and the ways in which it is

accomplished. However, from what has been stated above about the

mediation of Jesus Christ and the ³unique and special relationship²84

which the Church has with the kingdom of God among men ‹ which in

substance is the universal kingdom of Christ the Saviour ‹ it is

clear that it would be contrary to the faith to consider the Church

as one way of salvation alongside those constituted by the other

religions, seen as complementary to the Church or substantially

equivalent to her, even if these are said to be converging with the

Church toward the eschatological kingdom of God.

Certainly, the various religious traditions contain and offer

religious elements which come from God,85 and which are part of what

³the Spirit brings about in human hearts and in the history of

peoples, in cultures, and religions².86 Indeed, some prayers and

rituals of the other religions may assume a role of preparation for

the Gospel, in that they are occasions or pedagogical helps in which

the human heart is prompted to be open to the action of God.87 One

cannot attribute to these, however, a divine origin or an ex opere

operato salvific efficacy, which is proper to the Christian

sacraments.88 Furthermore, it cannot be overlooked that other

rituals, insofar as they depend on superstitions or other errors (cf.

1 Cor 10:20-21), constitute an obstacle to salvation.89

22.   With the coming of the Saviour Jesus Christ, God has willed

that the Church founded by him be the instrument for the salvation of

all humanity (cf. Acts 17:30-31).90 This truth of faith does not

lessen the sincere respect which the Church has for the religions of

the world, but at the same time, it rules out, in a radical way, that

mentality of indifferentism ³characterized by a religious relativism

which leads to the belief that Œone religion is as good as

another'².91 If it is true that the followers of other religions can

receive divine grace, it is also certain that objectively speaking

they are in a gravely deficient situation in comparison with those

who, in the Church, have the fullness of the means of salvation.92 

However, ³all the children of the Church should nevertheless remember

that their exalted condition results, not from their own merits, but

from the grace of Christ. If they fail to respond in thought, word,

and deed to that grace, not only shall they not be saved, but they

shall be more severely judged².93 One understands then that,

following the Lord's command (cf. Mt 28:19-20) and as a requirement

of her love for all people, the Church ³proclaims and is in duty

bound to proclaim without fail, Christ who is the way, the truth, and

the life (Jn 14:6). In him, in whom God reconciled all things to

himself (cf. 2 Cor 5:18-19), men find the fullness of their religious

life².94

In inter-religious dialogue as well, the mission ad gentes ³today as

always retains its full force and necessity².95  ³Indeed, God

Œdesires all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth'

(1 Tim 2:4); that is, God wills the salvation of everyone through the

knowledge of the truth. Salvation is found in the truth. Those who

obey the promptings of the Spirit of truth are already on the way of

salvation. But the Church, to whom this truth has been entrusted,

must go out to meet their desire, so as to bring them the truth.

Because she believes in God's universal plan of salvation, the Church

must be missionary².96 Inter-religious dialogue, therefore, as part

of her evangelizing mission, is just one of the actions of the Church

in her mission ad gentes.97 Equality, which is a presupposition of

inter-religious dialogue, refers to the equal personal dignity of the

parties in dialogue, not to doctrinal content, nor even less to the

position of Jesus Christ ‹ who is God himself made man ‹ in relation

to the founders of the other religions. Indeed, the Church, guided by

charity and respect for freedom,98 must be primarily committed to

proclaiming to all people the truth definitively revealed by the

Lord, and to announcing the necessity of conversion to Jesus Christ

and of adherence to the Church through Baptism and the other

sacraments, in order to participate fully in communion with God, the

Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Thus, the certainty of the universal

salvific will of God does not diminish, but rather increases the duty

and urgency of the proclamation of salvation and of conversion to the

Lord Jesus Christ.

CONCLUSION

23.   The intention of the present Declaration, in reiterating and

clarifying certain truths of the faith, has been to follow the

example of the Apostle , who wrote to the faithful of Corinth: ³I

handed on to you as of first importance what I myself received² (1

Cor 15:3). Faced with certain problematic and even erroneous

propositions, theological reflection is called to reconfirm the

Church's faith and to give reasons for her hope in a way that is

convincing and effective.

In treating the question of the true religion, the Fathers of the

Second Vatican Council taught: ³We believe that this one true

religion continues to exist in the Catholic and Apostolic Church, to

which the Lord Jesus entrusted the task of spreading it among all

people. Thus, he said to the Apostles: ŒGo therefore and make

disciples of all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and

of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that

I have commanded you' (Mt 28: 19-20). Especially in those things that

concern God and his Church, all persons are required to seek the

truth, and when they come to know it, to embrace it and hold fast to

it².99

The revelation of Christ will continue to be ³the true lodestar² 100

in history for all humanity: ³The truth, which is Christ, imposes

itself as an all-embracing authority². 101 The Christian mystery, in

fact, overcomes all barriers of time and space, and accomplishes the

unity of the human family: ³From their different locations and

traditions all are called in Christ to share in the unity of the

family of God's children... Jesus destroys the walls of division and

creates unity in a new and unsurpassed way through our sharing in his

mystery. This unity is so deep that the Church can say with Saint

: ŒYou are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are saints

and members of the household of God' (Eph 2:19)². 102

The Sovereign Pontiff II, at the Audience of June 16, 2000,

granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for

the Doctrine of the Faith, with sure knowledge and by his apostolic

authority, ratified and confirmed this Declaration, adopted in

Plenary Session and ordered its publication.

Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the

Faith, August 6, 2000, the Feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord.

ph Card. Ratzinger Prefect

Tarcisio Bertone, S.D.B. Archbishop Emeritus of Vercelli Secretary

(1) First Council of Constantinople, Symbolum Constantinopolitanum: DS 150.

(2) Cf. II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 1: AAS 83

(1991), 249-340.

(3) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Ad gentes and Declaration

Nostra aetate; cf. also VI Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii

nuntiandi: AAS 68 (1976), 5-76; II, Encyclical Letter

Redemptoris missio.

(4) Second Vatican Council, Declaration Nostra aetate, 2.

(5) Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue and the

Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, Instruction Dialogue

and Proclamation, 29: AAS 84 (1992), 424; cf. Second Vatican Council,

Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, 22.

(6) Cf. II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 55: AAS

83 (1991), 302-304.

(7) Cf. Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue and the

Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, Instruction Dialogue

and Proclamation, 9: AAS 84 (1992), 417ff.

(8)  II, Encyclical Letter Fides et ratio, 5: AAS 91 (1999), 5-88.

(9)  Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei verbum, 2.

(10) Ibid., 4.

(11) II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 5.

(12) II, Encyclical Letter Fides et ratio, 14.

(13) Council of Chalcedon, Symbolum Chalcedonense: DS 301; cf. St.

Athanasius, De Incarnatione, 54, 3: SC 199, 458.

(14) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei verbum, 4.

(15) Ibid., 5.

(16) Ibid.

(17) Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 144.

(18) Ibid., 150.

(19) Ibid., 153.

(20) Ibid., 178.

(21) II, Encyclical Letter Fides et ratio, 13.

(22) Cf. ibid., 31-32.

(23) Second Vatican Council, Declaration Nostra aetate, 2; cf. Second

Vatican Council, Decree Ad gentes, 9, where it speaks of the elements

of good present ³in the particular customs and cultures of peoples²;

Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 16, where it mentions the

elements of good and of truth present among non-Christians, which can

be considered a preparation for the reception of the Gospel.

(24) Cf. Council of Trent, Decretum de libris sacris et de

traditionibus recipiendis: DS 1501; First Vatican Council, Dogmatic

Constitution Dei Filius, cap. 2: DS 3006.

(25) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei verbum, 11.

(26) Ibid.

(27) II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 55; cf. 56

and VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii nuntiandi, 53.

(28) First Council of Nicaea, Symbolum Nicaenum: DS 125.

(29) Council of Chalcedon, Symbolum Chalcedonense: DS 301.

(30) Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, 22.

(31) II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 6.

(32) Cf. St. Leo the Great, Tomus ad Flavianum: DS 294.

(33) Cf. St. Leo the Great, Letter to the Emperor Leo I Promisisse me

memini: DS 318: ³...in tantam unitatem ab ipso conceptu Virginis

deitate et humanitate conserta, ut nec sine homine divina, nec sine

Deo agerentur humana². Cf. also ibid. DS 317.

(34) Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes,

45; cf. also Council of Trent, Decretum de peccato originali, 3: DS

1513.

(35) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 3-4.

(36) Cf. ibid., 7; cf. St. Irenaeus, who wrote that it is in the

Church ³that communion with Christ has been deposited, that is to

say: the Holy Spirit² (Adversus haereses III, 24, 1: SC 211, 472).

(37) Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, 22.

(38) II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 28. For the

³seeds of the Word² cf. also St. Martyr, Second Apology 8,

1-2; 10, 1-3; 13, 3-6: ed. E.J. Goodspeed, 84; 85; 88-89.

(39) Cf. II, Encyclical Letter, Redemptoris missio, 28-29.

(40) Ibid., 29.

(41) Ibid., 5.

(42) Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes,

10. Cf. St. Augustine, who wrote that Christ is the way, which ³has

never been lacking to mankind... and apart from this way no one has

been set free, no one is being set free, no one will be set free² De

civitate Dei 10, 32, 2: CCSL 47, 312.

(43) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 62.

(44) II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 5.

(45) Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes,

45. The necessary and absolute singularity of Christ in human history

is well expressed by St. Irenaeus in contemplating the preeminence of

Jesus as firstborn Son: ³In the heavens, as firstborn of the Father's

counsel, the perfect Word governs and legislates all things; on the

earth, as firstborn of the Virgin, a man just and holy, reverencing

God and pleasing to God, good and perfect in every way, he saves from

hell all those who follow him since he is the firstborn from the dead

and Author of the life of God² (Demonstratio apostolica, 39: SC 406,

138).

(46) II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 6.

(47) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 14.

(48) Cf. ibid., 7.

(49) Cf. St. Augustine, Enarratio in Psalmos, Ps. 90, Sermo 2,1: CCSL

39, 1266; St. the Great, Moralia in Iob, Praefatio, 6, 14: PL

75, 525; St. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, III, q. 48, a. 2 ad 1.

(50) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 6.

(51) Symbolum maius Ecclesiae Armeniacae: DS 48. Cf. Boniface VIII,

Unam sanctam: DS 870-872; Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic

Constitution Lumen gentium, 8.

(52) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 4;

II, Encyclical Letter Ut unum sint, 11: AAS 87 (1995), 927.

(53) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium,

20; cf. also St. Irenaeus, Adversus haereses, III, 3, 1-3: SC 211,

20-44; St. Cyprian, Epist. 33, 1: CCSL 3B, 164-165; St. Augustine,

Contra adver. legis et prophet., 1, 20, 39: CCSL 49, 70.

(54) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 8.

(55) Ibid.; cf. II, Encyclical Letter Ut unum sint, 13. Cf.

also Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 15

and the Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 3.

(56) The interpretation of those who would derive from the formula

subsistit in the thesis that the one Church of Christ could subsist

also in non-Catholic Churches and ecclesial communities is therefore

contrary to the authentic meaning of Lumen gentium. ³The Council

instead chose the word subsistit precisely to clarify that there

exists only one Œsubsistence' of the true Church, while outside her

visible structure there only exist elementa Ecclesiae, which ‹ being

elements of that same Church ‹ tend and lead toward the Catholic

Church² (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Notification on

the Book ³Church: Charism and Power² by Father Leonardo Boff: AAS 77

[1985], 756-762).

(57) Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 3.

(58) Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration

Mysterium Ecclesiae, 1: AAS 65 (1973), 396-398.

(59) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 14

and 15; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter

Communionis notio, 17: AAS 85 (1993), 848.

(60) Cf. First Vatican Council, Constitution Pastor aeternus: DS

3053-3064; Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen

gentium, 22.

(61) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 22.

(62) Cf. ibid., 3.

(63) Cf. ibid., 22.

(64) Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration

Mysterium Ecclesiae, 1.

(65) II, Encyclical Letter Ut unum sint, 14.

(66) Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 3.

(67) Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter Communionis

notio, 17; cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis redintegratio,

4.

(68) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 5.

(69) Ibid., 1.

(70) Ibid., 4. Cf. St. Cyprian, De Dominica oratione 23: CCSL 3A, 105.

(71) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 3.

(72) Cf. ibid., 9; cf. also the prayer addressed to God found in the

Didache 9,4: SC 248, 176: ³May the Church be gathered from the ends

of the earth into your kingdom² and ibid. 10, 5: SC 248, 180:

³Remember, Lord, your Church... and, made holy, gather her together

from the four winds into your kingdom which you have prepared for

her².

(73) II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 18; cf.

Apostolic Exhortation Ecclesia in Asia, 17: L'Osservatore Romano

(November 7, 1999). The kingdom is so inseparable from Christ that,

in a certain sense, it is identified with him (cf. Origen, In Mt.

Hom., 14, 7: PG 13, 1197; Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem, IV, 33,8:

CCSL 1, 634.

(74) II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 18.

(75) Ibid., 15.

(76) Ibid., 17.

(77) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 14;

cf. Decree Ad gentes, 7; Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 3.

(78) II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 9; cf.

Catechism of the Catholic Church, 846-847.

(79) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 48.

(80) Cf. St. Cyprian, De catholicae ecclesiae unitate, 6: CCSL 3,

253-254; St. Irenaeus, Adversus haereses, III, 24, 1: SC 211, 472-474.

(81) II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 10.

(82) Second Vatican Council, Decree Ad gentes, 2. The famous formula

extra Ecclesiam nullus omnino salvatur is to be interpreted in this

sense (cf. Fourth Lateran Council, Cap. 1. De fide catholica: DS

802). Cf. also the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of

Boston: DS 3866-3872.

(83) Second Vatican Council, Decree Ad gentes, 7.

(84) II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 18.

(85) These are the seeds of the divine Word (semina Verbi), which the

Church recognizes with joy and respect (cf. Second Vatican Council,

Decree Ad gentes, 11; Declaration Nostra aetate, 2).

(86) II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 29.

(87) Cf. ibid.; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 843.

(88) Cf. Council of Trent, Decretum de sacramentis, can. 8, de

sacramentis in genere: DS 1608.

(89) Cf. II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 55.

(90) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium,

17; II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 11.

(91) II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 36.

(92) Cf. Pius XII, Encyclical Letter Mystici corporis: DS 3821.

(93) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 14.

(94) Second Vatican Council, Declaration Nostra aetate, 2.

(95) Second Vatican Council, Decree Ad gentes, 7.

(96) Catechism of the Catholic Church, 851; cf. also 849-856.

(97) Cf. II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 55;

Apostolic Exhortation Ecclesia in Asia, 31.

(98) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Declaration Dignitatis humanae, 1.

(99)  Ibid.

(100) II, Encyclical Letter Fides et ratio, 15.

(101) Ibid., 92.

=================================

The Los Angeles Times, Wednesday, September 6, 2000 Vatican Declares

Catholicism Sole Path to Salvation By RICHARD BOUDREAUX, LARRY B.

STAMMER, Times Staff Writers

VATICAN CITY--Censuring what it called the spread of " religious

relativism, " the Vatican on Tuesday instructed Roman Catholics to

uphold the dogma that their church is the sole path to spiritual

salvation for all humanity. " This truth of faith does not lessen the

sincere respect that the [Catholic] Church has for the religions of

the world, " it said. " But it rules out, in a radical way, that

mentality of indifferentism [that] leads to the belief that one

religion is as good as another. "

The bluntly worded declaration by the Vatican office that oversees

Catholic doctrine said that followers of non-Christian faiths have

" gravely deficient " chances for salvation and that other Christian

churches have " defects, " partly because they do not recognize the

authority of the pope.

The statement broke no new theological ground, but its categorical

assertion of Catholic primacy offended some non-Catholic clerics.

Critics said it seemed to contradict Pope II's frequent

appeals to non-Christian religious leaders to find common ground in

one divinity.

Aimed mainly at Catholic theologians, the 36-page document was the

latest parry by Vatican conservatives in a test of strength with

liberals in 's deeply divided flock. The 80-year-old pope

has shown symptoms similar to Parkinson's disease, and as he weakens

with age, such battles over doctrine are read as part of the

jockeying to choose a successor after his death or retirement.

A similar fundamentalist position prevailed in June when the Vatican

ordered bishops to avoid references to " sister churches " and instead

remember that " the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church is not

sister but 'mother' of all the particular [Christian] churches. "

Msgr. Tarcisio Bertone, who signed Tuesday's document as secretary of

the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said it had

's explicit approval. But the document, titled " Dominus

Iesus, " or " Lord Jesus, " underlined a contradiction of 's

22-year-old reign: No other pope has worked harder to mend rifts

between Christian churches and promote understanding with

non-Christian religions, yet he has rigidly upheld church dogma and

traditions that antagonize other faiths.

As a result of 's efforts and those of his papal

predecessors since the mid-1960s, the Vatican has been involved in

sensitive talks with Eastern Orthodox Christians and Protestants,

along with Jews, Muslims and other non-Christians, about issues

ranging from religious tolerance and human rights to the bridging of

arcane doctrinal differences.

'Reassertion of What's Been Said in the Past'

In October, for example, the Vatican and the Lutheran World

Federation signed a landmark joint declaration saying that they

agreed on most major points of doctrine.

Bishop W. Egertson of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America

said the Vatican statement had " a bullying kind of quality to it. "

" It's a reassertion of what's been said in the past, but we haven't

heard that reasserted for a while, " said Egertson, who leads his

church's Southern California West Synod in Los Angeles. " We were

hoping that . . . the need for that kind of domineering or

magisterial kind of statement would have declined. "

The Geneva-based World Council of Churches, representing 337 church

bodies, said it would be a " tragedy " if the Vatican's assertions

about the relative authority of churches obscured 35 years of

ecumenical dialogue. " There are other voices from the Vatican that

are less strict and stern, but it's realistic to acknowledge that

this is the official Catholic position and we cannot simply wish it

away, " said the Rev. Konrad Raiser, the council's general secretary.

" Nevertheless, the dialogue will go on. " Bertone, the monsignor, told

a Vatican news conference Tuesday that the document was issued to

correct the " errors and ambiguities " of unnamed moderate Catholic

theologians that have become " widespread. "

Cardinal ph Ratzinger, the powerful German prefect of the

doctrinal congregation and chief author of the document, said that

those theologians were " manipulating and exceeding " the principle of

religious tolerance by putting all religions on an equal level, " as

if universal and objective truth no longer existed. "

The document acknowledged that individual non-Christians can achieve

spiritual salvation--but not through their own religious rituals,

which it said lack divine inspiration. " Objectively speaking, " it

said, " they are in a gravely deficient situation in comparison with

those who, in the [Catholic] Church, have the fullness of the means

of salvation. "

Instead, it asserted, their salvation can result only from a divine

grace that comes, in some mysterious way, from Jesus Christ. The

document urged theologians to seek to understand how exactly this

happens.

'The Sole Redeemer'

Meanwhile, the document said, Catholic missionaries are obliged to

preach to non-Christians that Jesus is " the sole redeemer. " The

inter-religious dialogue in which the Catholic Church has engaged

other faiths, it said, is simply " part of her evangelizing mission. "

That assertion was expected to stir unease in Asia and other places

where Catholics are a tiny minority. Some bishops told

during his visit to India in November that exclusive language about

salvation is offensive to Asia's dominant religions--Buddhism,

Hinduism and Islam--and provokes violence against Catholic

missionaries there.

Marco Politi, a papal biographer who reports on the Vatican for the

Italian newspaper La Repubblica, said Tuesday's declaration was aimed

at shutting off long-standing Catholic theological debate on such

questions as whether sacred beliefs or texts of non-Christian

religions are inspired by God. " There are signs that the Vatican is

putting on the brakes, " he said. " The document is a product of fear

of the modern world on the part of Vatican traditionalists, who want

the next pope to think more like them. " Rabbi ph Ehrenkranz,

director of the Center for Christian-Jewish Understanding at Sacred

Heart University in Fairfield, Conn., said he has met five times with

and doubted that Tuesday's statement reflects the pope's

views.

Of the statement's authors, he asked: " Who spoke directly to God to

know who's deficient? "

But the statement didn't faze a well-known Islamic leader in the U.S.

" We knew all along this is the Catholic position, " said Muzammil

Siddiqi, president of the Islamic Society of North America. " Our

position is the same thing--that the Catholic position is deficient. "

The Vatican document divided non-Catholic Christians into two

categories, neither of which recognizes the primacy of the pope. One

group, Orthodox Christians, shares with Catholics a similar Communion

ritual and a linear succession of bishops dating from the early

Christian communities.

Others Not 'Churches in the Proper Sense'

Other Christian denominations, the document said, have not preserved

these links with Catholicism and therefore are not " churches in the

proper sense. " But their members are, through baptism, " in a certain

communion, albeit imperfect, with the [Catholic] Church. "

The Vatican said that although these " separated Churches . . . suffer

from defects, " they can be used as instruments of salvation by the

" spirit of Christ " acting with " grace and truth entrusted to the

Catholic Church. "

The Anglican Communion, which is closer to Rome than most Protestant

denominations, said the statement ignored the fruits of the Vatican's

own ongoing dialogue with other churches. " The idea that Anglican and

other churches are not 'proper churches' seems to question the

considerable ecumenical gains we have made, " said the Most Rev.

L. Carey, the archbishop of Canterbury.

======================

Bishop's affirmations http://www.petersnet.net/browse/3184.htm

The Bishops Comment on Dominus Iesus -- A Compilation

Opposing Religious Relativism

Cardinal Francis of Chicago, IL September 5, 2000

Today in Rome the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued

the declaration " Dominus lesus: On the Unicity and Salvific

Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church. "

In response to questions raised in missionary work and ecumenical and

interreligious relations, the declaration presents both the principal

truths of the Catholic faith as well as the status of theological

debate in the areas of the mystery of God's kingdom, the work of

Christ as universal savior and his relationship to his church.

There is no new teaching in the declaration, but it serves very well

to clarify and summarize the teachings of the Catholic Church that

were established at the time of the Second Vatican Council in its

relations with Christians and believers of other religions. At that

time these positions were seen as positive developments in ecumenical

and interreligious dialogue, and they continue to be so.

The unique and universal mediation of Christ in the work of

salvation, the declaration states, does not exclude " participated

mediation " of various types and degrees in other religions. Theories

of a salvific action of God beyond the unique mediation of Jesus

Christ and without reference to his body the church are, however,

inconsistent with the Catholic faith.

Insofar as these clarifications of Catholic teachings enable

Catholics to better articulate their faith, their participation in

ecumenical and interreligious dialogue will be more fruitful.

Basically, the declaration opposes religious relativism, which bases

truth in personal experience rather than in God's self-revelation in

history.

I am grateful for this declaration, and I pray that it will be a

means of promoting proclamation of the Gospel and dialogue, both of

which are aspects of evangelization.

© Origins, CNS Documentary Service, Catholic News Service, 3211 4th

Street N.E., Washington,D.C. 20017-1100.

Dialogues Will Continue

Cardinal Mahony, Los Angeles, CA September 9, 2000

In the greater Los Angeles area, Roman Catholics have enjoyed a

longstanding and valued relationship with Christians of other

churches and peoples of other religious traditions. The fruits of

ecumenical and interreligious dialogue in the southland have been

rich and rewarding for people in this region, throughout the nation

and well beyond.

In light of the great progress made in ecumenical and interreligious

dialogue in the greater Los Angeles area, it is discouraging to read

the headline " Vatican Declares Catholicism Sole Path to Salvation "

(Los Angeles Times, Sept. 6, 2000). While clarifying the Roman

Catholic Church's position, the declaration does in fact affirm that

those who are not formally part of the Roman Catholic Church can

indeed be saved (Dominus lesus, 20).

I would like to take this opportunity to reassure our partners in

dialogue that our mutually beneficial conversations and joint pursuit

of the truth will continue. I pledge my unyielding support for these

efforts.

The declaration " Dominus lesus: On the Unicity and Salvific

Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church " is best understood

within the context of this ongoing dialogue. The purpose of the

declaration is to clarify the Roman Catholic Church's own position in

view of disagreements within the Roman Catholic Church, offering firm

critique of those theological views that appear to relativize the

Christian faith and the Roman Catholic Church. Nowhere in the

declaration is there criticism of the fruits of bilateral agreements

or of new initiatives taken in interreligious dialogue. Nor is there

any indication that such dialogues or initiatives are to be halted.

The actions of Pope II himself have demonstrated his own

profound respect for peoples and traditions other than Roman

Catholic. His recent visit to Israel and the Palestinian territories,

his invitation to religious leaders to join him at Assisi in praying

for world peace on Oct. 27, 1986, and his meeting on Sept. 16, 1987,

here in Los Angeles with local Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist and Hindu

leaders are just three instances of his respect for the integrity of

others and their religious traditions.

The tone of Dominus lesus may not fully reflect the deeper

understanding that has been achieved through ecumenical and

interreligious dialogues over these last 30 years or more. This

deeper understanding has been prompted in no small measure by the

initiatives of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965). The council

clearly affirmed the importance of religious freedom and called for

deep and mutual respect among people of different religious

traditions. The declaration can only be properly understood in light

of these conciliar orientations and affirmations.

It is my sincere hope that our ongoing dialogue and partnership will

proceed unabated. The Roman Catholic Church in Los Angeles remains

fully committed to ongoing dialogue and partnership. Only in this way

can we continue to move beyond the tragic estrangement which has

characterized so much of our past.

© Origins, CNS Documentary Service, Catholic News Service, 3211 4th

Street N.E., Washington,D.C. 20017-1100.

What " Dominus Iesus " Reaffirms

Cardinal Bernard Law, Boston, MA September 5, 2000

It is with gratitude to the Holy Father, Pope II, and to

the prefect and members of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the

Faith that I welcome the publication today of the declaration Dominus

Jesus. This document is the fruit of several years of labor by

pastors and theologians who responded to many requests from around

the world for clarification of the church's constant teaching in

light of some discussions and positions that have seemed to place

that teaching in doubt. In contrast to these various theories and

opinions, Dominus Jesus is a reaffirmation of that constant teaching.

What the declaration affirms is, for example, contained in the

Nicene-Contantinopolitan Creed, which is professed by every Catholic

at every Sunday Mass as the faith of the church.

What is reaffirmed is what has been proclaimed by the apostles and

believed by the faithful from the beginning. The revelation of Jesus

Christ is the complete message of God for the salvation of the whole

human race. The response of faith must be the " complete acceptance of

the truth of Christ's revelation, guaranteed by God, who is truth

itself. " This truth is found in the books of the Bible as God's one

and only inspired word as well as in the sacred tradition of the

church. The truth of this divine and Catholic faith can in no way be

reduced to merely one message among others or as a culturally

conditioned partial expression of truth among many other similar and

equally valid ones.

Jesus Christ, true God and true man, is the one and only Savior of

every human person. There can be no separation of Christ's humanity

from the divine eternal Word. Theories that add to or subtract from

this central truth deform the full truth about Jesus Christ. So also

do those theories deform the Catholic faith which claim that the

mission of the Holy Spirit is more universal than the fullness of

revelation made in Christ Jesus. The Holy Spirit " works " throughout

time so that all men and women are called and can be incorporated

into the divine life of the incarnate Word and so enter into

communion with the persons of the Blessed Trinity.

Because there is no other name than Jesus Christ by which we can be

saved, all need to learn this truth. The uniqueness and universality

of Christ's salvific action continues to be exercised in the one,

holy, catholic and apostolic church. That church is the Catholic

Church under the headship of the pope, the bishop of Rome, and the

bishops who with him share the apostolic succession from the apostles

down to the present day. The affirmations that Dominus Jesus makes

about the church correspond to what Jesus Christ himself has promised

to fulfill in her. Through the gift of the Holy Spirit, these

promises are active in the church until the end of time.

The church is deeply conscious of the fact that she received this

extraordinary truth as a gift from the Father, who has sent his Son

so that we might share in the divine life as a gift of the Holy

Spirit. Therefore with great humility but with an equal conviction of

truth, the church enters into dialogue with the baptized of other

churches and ecclesial communities as well as with adherents of other

religions. Here in Boston we are blessed by the relationships we have

with our brothers and sisters of the Orthodox Church, which maintains

apostolic succession and a valid eucharist. We are profoundly

grateful for the many ways the ecclesial communities of the

Reformation have been willing to relate to us and to work and pray

along with us. Just as we are convinced that the fullness of grace

and truth is God's gift to the Catholic Church, so do we joyfully

recognize and esteem the efficacious life of faith lived by our

brothers and sisters in other churches and ecclesial communities. The

many elements of truth and life that animate them derive from Jesus

Christ, the same source of grace and truth which subsists in its

fullness in the Catholic Church.

Because Christ has called the church to evangelize the world, we

cannot do other than announce to the world the good news of Jesus,

the one Lord and only Savior. In so doing we encounter our brothers

and sisters of other religions. Our dialogue with them is sincere and

based on a constant search to understand better God's design for all

human beings. With confidence in the revelation of Jesus Christ,

whose kingdom is one of truth and of justice, we seek only to

proclaim him, to worship him and to serve him in all peoples,

especially in the sick, the poor, the hungry, the imprisoned, the

naked, the homeless (Mt. 25:31-46). Catholics recognize that other

religious traditions search for God and have found God, though

without knowing Christ Jesus. Interreligious dialogue, as part of the

church's missionary life, represents a sincere desire to seek

understanding with the adherents of other religions so that all human

beings may come to the knowledge of the truth.

The church has issued this statement on Jesus Christ and the church

out of her inescapable commitment of fidelity: fidelity to God and

his revelation, fidelity to Jesus Christ and his message, fidelity to

the church, which is the means through which the Holy Spirit

transforms human hearts and advances God's kingdom. Dominus Jesus

does not signal a lessening of the church's commitment to ecumenical

and interreligious dialogue. Rather it is a statement of truth so

that the dialogue may proceed on a firm foundation and not be open to

misunderstandings and misinterpretations. Dominus Jesus is not a

proclamation of some human superiority in contrast to any other

person or institution. It is a reaffirmation of what the church

believes and lives with an ever abiding sense of her own unworthiness

as she welcomes all persons of good will to reflect on its meaning.

The Catholic Church is sustained in this task by the revelation made

to Abraham, Moses and the prophets that God's promises are eternal

and that his loving providence extends to every human being.

© Origins, CNS Documentary Service, Catholic News Service, 3211 4th

Street N.E., Washington,D.C. 20017-1100.

The Place of Religious Discourse in American Democracy

Archbishop Levada, San Francisco, CA September 5, 2000

The Declaration Dominus Jesus issued by the Vatican's Congregation

for the Doctrine of the Faith on Tuesday reaffirms the fundamental

teaching of Christian revelation, as handed down in the Catholic

Church, on the role of Jesus Christ and the role of the Catholic

Church in our salvation.

The declaration, which was approved and affirmed by the Holy Father,

proceeds from a theological context and presents classic truths of

the Catholic faith in contrast to relativistic theories. The

declaration is a response to several confusing or erroneous ideas

regarding what it means to call Jesus Christ the one savior of the

world and how his saving grace may be applied to persons who do not

explicitly believe in him or who have no connection with the church,

to which he entrusted the application of salvation to the whole human

race.

One example of the kind of erroneous and relativistic theories which

the declaration addresses could be summed up in an explanation of the

universality of salvation in Christ, which sets up two parallel

dispensations in which this saving work takes place: one for

Christian believers, which operates through Christ the incarnate Word

and his body, the church; and the other for followers of

non-Christian religions, which would operate through the invisible

action of the Holy Spirit.

While reaffirming the essential truth of the uniqueness of Christ as

savior and the necessity of the application of this salvation through

the work of the church, the declaration encourages theologians and

those engaged in interreligious dialogue to explore further how the

mystery of God's saving will is truly universal, both throughout

human history and among all peoples. For example, with regard to

other religions, the declaration says, " Theology today, in its

reflection on the existence of other religious experiences and on

their meaning in God's salvific plan, is invited to explore if and in

what way the historical figures and positive elements of these

religions may fall within the divine plan of salvation " (No. 14).

Moreover, with regard to common action and common purpose by people

of good will of any and all religious faiths, and of no explicit

Faith, the declaration reminds us that the kingdom of God is not

simply identified with the church in her visible and social reality,

and therefore " the action of Christ and the Spirit outside the

church's visible boundaries must not be excluded " (No. 19). The

declaration here goes on to quote Pope 's encyclical letter

" The Mission of the Redeemer " (No. 15); " Therefore, one must also

bear in mind that 'the kingdom is the concern of everyone:

individuals, society and the world. Working for the kingdom means

acknowledging and promoting God's activity, which is present in human

history and transforms it. Building the kingdom means working for

liberation from evil in all its forms. In a word, the kingdom of God

is the manifestation and the realization of God's plan of salvation

in all its fullness. " '

In this jubilee year, commemorating the 2,000th anniversary of the

birth of the incarnate Word of God in the world, the declaration

reiterates common doctrine about the unique status of Jesus Christ as

redeemer and savior in the eternal plan of God. This plan, of course,

began with the creation and is unfolding through the history of the

world and human history, making us a part of it; it will find its

fulfillment only at " the end of time. "

In a sense, then, it is a commentary on the beautiful and familiar

words of the first chapter of St. 's Letter to the Ephesians, on

the power which comes from God's revelation of ‹ and our response of

faith in ‹ Christ our Savior:

" God put this power to work in Christ when he raised him from the

dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far

above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every

name that is named, not only in this age but also in the age to come.

And he had put all things under his feet and has made him the head

over all things for the church, which is his body, the fullness of

him who fills all in all " (Eph. 1:20-23).

The declaration notes that in treating the question of the true

religion, the fathers of the Second Vatican Council taught: " We

believe that this one true religion continues to exist in the

catholic and apostolic church, to which the Lord Jesus entrusted the

task of spreading it among all people. Thus, he said to the apostles,

'Go therefore and make disciples of all nations baptizing them in the

name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching

them to observe all that I have commanded you' (Mt. 28:19-20).

Especially in those things that concern God and his church, all

persons are required to seek the truth, and when they come to know

it, to embrace it and hold fast to it " (Declaration on Religious

Liberty, 1).

This statement illustrates the essential missionary spirit which has

imbued Christianity from the beginning. At the same time, since it

introduces the council's important declaration about religious

liberty guaranteeing to each person that basic human right to

personal freedom in religious matters, it reminds us of an important

point which both religious and secular leaders failed to understand

or ignored too often in history's religious controversies and wars.

While the declaration Dominus Jesus is primarily addressed to the

Catholic and Christian theological community, the ideas contained in

it naturally have some connection with the parallel and ongoing

discussions about " civil religion, " as those discussions have taken

shape over the years in our country in regard, for example, to

religious pluralism and the place of religious discourse in American

democracy. For a certain view of religion in our American democracy,

the claim that Christ is the " one " savior will seem problematic, as

if Christians refuse to meet as " equals " on a " level playing field. "

Just as in interreligious dialogue, where all the participants must

meet as " equals " while not surrendering the truth of their respective

beliefs or traditions as the declaration notes in No. 22, so in

American society the democratic process guarantees an equality to all

religious beliefs ‹ and to the lack of religion ‹ to make their

contribution to proposals for furthering the common good.

What underlies much religious discourse today, however, as the recent

lively discussion about Sen. Joe Lieberman's remarks on faith and

morality in American politics illustrates, is that for some people

religion can only be " tolerated " if it is private. It used to be that

any public appeal to religion was considered divisive, presumptively

preferring one's own religion over another's. But in Lieberman's

case, even a generic appeal to God and morality has proved offensive

to some, since they feel left out. It is as if the old saw " One

religion is as good as another " has now got to be " No religion is as

good as another " !

But, indeed, religion has always provided the moral grounding and

social conscience for the American vision, and in my view attempts to

privatize it should be firmly rejected as undermining still further

the importance of religious faith for the pursuit of virtue in

personal and public life, the absence of which cannot but undermine

our American culture and institutions. Furthermore, such a tendency

toward privatization itself fundamentally skews and tends to violate

the First Amendment guarantees of American constitutional law.

I do not want this aside into American political discourse to

distract from the important reaffirmation of Catholic doctrine which

the declaration Dominus Jesus provides for Catholic and Christian

believers and for the future of interreligious dialogue. But I think

it does help to provide some comment in the cultural context of our

ongoing dialogue with our neighbors about our purpose and our goals

in church and society.

© Origins, CNS Documentary Service, Catholic News Service, 3211 4th

Street N.E., Washington,D.C. 20017-1100.

Ways of Misunderstanding This Document

Archbishop Theodore McCarrick, Newark, NJ September 12, 2000

Last week one of the major offices of the Holy See published a

document which triggered an immediate reaction in some sectors of the

press. It was a document that reminded Catholics what was taught by

the Second Vatican Council and by the Holy Fathers before and since.

As a matter of fact, what the document repeated was what the church

has always believed and constantly taught. It reminded Catholics all

over the world that Jesus Christ is Lord and that he is the only

savior of the human race. It reminded us also that Jesus Christ

established a church which was to serve as the channel of grace and

truth and holiness in the world. That seems straightforward for

anyone, or so it seems to me.

The reason for the promulgation of this document now is tied to the

concerns raised by some in the church that we ought to be open to

other ways of salvation ‹ for example, through the teachings of

Buddha or the other deep Oriental mystics ‹ or to accept the validity

of other ecclesial communities besides the Catholic Church. The

secular press had a heyday with this document. The headlines

trumpeted that Catholics think they are the only ones who can be

saved, that the pope called other religions inferior and that the

Catholic Church was returning to what the media so glibly inferred to

have been a past of intolerance and intransigence. What nonsense,

especially in the light of our Holy Father's constant outreach to

other faiths and other religious leaders.

Let met try to make some things clear. First, we do not claim that

only Catholics can be saved or that only Catholics can be holy.

We have too great a personal experience of our own sinfulness and too

deep an admiration for the goodness and holiness of other peoples.

Second, we do not deny the beauty and the significance of other

religious teachings. Indeed, we believe that in some way the Holy

Spirit speaks to all men and women, in many ways calling them to

virtue and inspiring them to seek the truth of the presence of the

one living God. The dialogue of true ecumenism does not infer the

denial of what we believe, but the desire to understand and

appreciate what our neighbor believes.

What we do believe is that we have received in Jesus Christ the

perfect revelation of the Father and that in the Catholic Church we

can find all the necessary helps toward achieving holiness in this

life and obtaining the rewards of heaven that are in the life to

come. We believe that this is true. Therefore the denial of this has

to be untrue. Wouldn't it be bizarre for a Catholic to proclaim that

the Catholic Church did not have the truth or that salvation won for

us by Jesus was merely one of many such accomplishments in the

history of the world? Shouldn't a Catholic rejoice in his or her

faith and be proud of his or her church ‹ even as they know that the

human elements of the church can and must be constantly purified and

renewed?

Why would anyone want to be a Catholic, with all the challenges to

holiness that are part of our lives, if another religion was " just as

good " ? The media should be a little ashamed of the blatant put-down

of Catholics that is present in the way it looks at us. Why would

anyone ‹ Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Hindu or of whatever faith ‹

want to remain in that faith community if they thought that it was

not true. When next we pray the Creed at Sunday Mass, let us recite

it with enthusiasm. It is for us the guideline to everlasting life. I

wanted to reach as many of our Catholic people as possible on this

subject so that you would know what I was thinking when I am thinking

of you.

© Origins, CNS Documentary Service, Catholic News Service, 3211 4th

Street N.E., Washington,D.C. 20017-1100.

Understanding This Document's Context and Intent

Archbishop Brunett Seattle, WA September 13, 2000

In recent days, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued

a Declaration titled Dominus lesus. It is subtitled " On the Unicity

and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church. "

Although this declaration may seem at first reading to be proposing

some values and truths that haven't been stated before, in reality it

reiterates much of what has already been said, particularly in the

documents of the Second Vatican Council. The main concern of the

declaration was to state again the importance in the life of a

Catholic believer of Jesus Christ as the focal point of our faith

and, through him alone, salvation is possible. The declaration does

not cover any new ground or provide any new theological insights.

Instead, it is calling attention to the fact that in dialogue and in

conversations Catholics need to be wary of taking positions that

could prove to be problematic and even erroneous.

From the perspective of one who has been involved in ecumenical

discussions for many years, the declaration itself does not seem to

be needed by those who have been engaged in official dialogues.

Dialogue partners usually understand that there is much give and take

and that one should come to the table with a clear understanding of

their own religious convictions and ecclesial identity. From that

perspective, this declaration does not add much to the process nor

does it further the cause of mutual understanding and respect.

There are several other Vatican documents of greater significance for

the church, particularly the encyclical Ut Unum Sint, issued by Pope

II in 1996. In that document there is a much clearer

understanding of the need to look deeply into our own lives and to

ask forgiveness for the times that we have offended others. The pope

also calls for dialogue and input regarding the role and nature of

primacy as it functions in the church. In general, those who know

well the Vatican documents and the thinking of Pope II and

his leadership role in the quest for Christian unity and religious

understanding will recognize that this declaration does not add to

the dialogical process. Some perhaps will wonder why it does not

reflect the ecumenical sensitivity achieved through 30 years of

dialogue and cooperation.

This declaration will serve as a good reminder of the commitment we

each have to Jesus Christ and his universal will for the salvation of

all people. It will be a good corrective against exaggerated forms of

religious pluralism. Ecumenists will be encouraged to continue a

dialogue that does not wallow in the controversies of the past but

will seek to find ways in which together we can express a common

faith in Jesus Christ.

I encourage everyone to read the full text of the declaration so that

the true emphasis and meaning can be understood in the context and

intention of those who framed it.

© Origins, CNS Documentary Service, Catholic News Service, 3211 4th

Street N.E., Washington,D.C. 20017-1100.

Commentary from Archbishop Weakland

Archbishop Rembert G. Weakland, O.S.B., Milwaukee, WI September 14, 2000

After reading a newspaper article, what we remember most is the

headline. This past week " The Journal Sentinel, " reporting on the

document " Dominus Iesus " from the Roman Congregation for the Doctrine

of the Faith, carried the headline: " Vatican insists only faithful

Catholics can attain salvation. " After reading carefully the full

document, I can tell you this statement never occurs in the text. It

does say that the Catholic Church believes it has all the means that

are necessary for salvation. We Catholics are convinced of this

truth. Otherwise, why would we be Catholic? (I know that members of

other churches believe the same about their particular churches.)

The Asian bishops in particular, I am told, wanted a statement from

Rome asserting this truth because Evangelical Christians were

invading their countries in droves, preaching and disseminating

literature that states that Catholics cannot be saved. I, too, am

bombarded by such literature.

The first half of the document of the Congregation for the Doctrine

of the Faith is directed toward those scholars engaged in theological

dialogues with other great religions, especially Buddhism and

Hinduism. It takes exception to those Catholic and Protestant

theologians who minimize the salvific role of Jesus Christ and try to

find manifestations of the presence of the second person of the

Trinity (the Logos) or the salvific workings of the Holy Spirit in

those other religions, while diminishing or eliminating the unique

role of Jesus Christ.

Concerning members of the other great religions of the world,

however, the document quotes the statement of the bishops of Vatican

Council II that God can bestow salvific grace to adherents to these

religions " in ways known to himself. " It is impossible to reconcile

that statement with the interpretation that God only grants this

grace to faithful Catholics.

The second half of the document deals with the uniqueness of the

Catholic Church as we Catholics understand it. The document repeats

the teaching of Vatican Council II that the church founded and willed

by Jesus Christ " subsists in " the Catholic Church. The bishops at

that council debated at length over the right phrase to use -

" subsists in, " or " is the same as, " or " is identified with " - and

chose the first in order to acknowledge the existence of true

ecclesial elements in other churches. The document admits that the

bishops at Vatican Council II did not want to teach a doctrine of

exclusivity, but to accept the fact that outside the structure of the

Catholic Church " many elements can be found of sanctification and

truth. "

In examining what must characterize a true church, the new document

cites " apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist. " Without these two

qualities the document does not call a Christian denomination a

church. In my opinion the documents of Vatican Council II made the

role of baptism much more significant as entrance into the Body of

Christ and thus into the church: " All who have been justified by

faith in baptism are members of Christ's body and have a right to be

called Christians, and so are deservedly recognized as sisters and

brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church ( " Lumen

gentium, " No. 3). " The documents of Vatican Council II do not

hesitate to use the word " churches " to characterize these communities

of the Reformation ( " Unitatis redintegratio, " No. 19). Unfortunately,

" Dominus Jesus " does not take into account the enormous progress made

after Vatican Council II in the mutual recognition of each other's

baptisms and the ecclesial significance of such recognition.

What is disappointing about this document is that so many of our

partners in ecumenical dialogues will find its tone heavy, almost

arrogant and condescending. To them it is bound to seem out of

keeping with the elevated and open tone of the documents of Vatican

Council II. It ignores all of the ecumenical dialogues of the last 35

years, as if they did not exist. None of the agreed statements are

cited. Has no progress in working toward convergence of theological

thought occurred in these 35 years? Our partners have every reason to

believe we may not be sincere in such dialogues. We seem to be

talking out of both sides of the mouth, for example, making

agreements with the Lutherans on Monday and then calling into

question the validity of their ecclesial nature on Tuesday. To those

involved in the ecumenical dialogues this document will be seen as

pessimistic and disheartening. It will be a burr in the side of all

involved in the ecumenical movement for decades to come and will

continue to promote the conviction that we Catholic are simply not

sincere.

But we Catholics can all hold, without apology, as stating our

position what the bishops gathered at Vatican Council II declared:

" Some, and even most, of the significant elements and endowments

which together go to build up and give life to the church itself, can

exist outside the visible boundaries 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, and visible

elements too. All of these, coming from Christ and leading back to

Christ, properly belong to the one church of Christ ( " Unitatis

redintegratio, " No. 3). "

© The Catholic Herald, Sept. 14, 2000

Bishop Loverde Welcomes New Vatican Document

Bishop S. Loverde, Arlington, VA September 7, 2000

" In the practice of dialogue between the Christian faith and other

religious traditions, as well as in seeking to understand its

theoretical basis more deeply, new questions arise that need to be

addressed through pursuing new paths of research, advancing proposals

and suggesting ways of acting that call for attentive discernment. In

this task, the present Declaration seeks to recall to Bishops,

theologians, and all the Catholic faithful, certain indispensable

elements of Christian doctrine, which may help theological reflection

in developing solutions consistent with the contents of the faith and

responsive to the pressing needs of contemporary culture " (Dominus

Jesus, 3). " The intention of the present Declaration, in reiterating

and clarifying certain truths of the faith, has been to follow the

example of the Apostle , who wrote to the faithful of Corinth: " I

handed on to you as of first importance what I myself received " (1

Cor 15:3). Faced with certain problematic and even erroneous

propositions, theological reflection is called to reconfirm the

Church¹s faith and to give reasons for her hope in a way that is

convincing and effective " (Dominus Jesus, 23).

Bishop Loverde said he " welcomes the publication of this Declaration.

My experience over the last thirty years is that a number of

Catholics have often, through no fault of their own, acquired an

understanding of the Church (Ecclesiology) and of Christ

(Christology) that is inaccurate and therefore misleading. Obviously

such misinterpretations have significant implications for the living

out of faith within the Church. This Declaration will assist us all

in understanding more fully and more accurately the role of Jesus

Christ and of His Church in the salvation of the human family. "

==========================

softened three months later:

Pope: Unbelievers Saved if They Live a Just Life 's

statement is seen as an attempt to soften the impact of the recent

'Dominus Iesus' declaration.

http://about.beliefnet.com/story/57/story_5704.html By Peggy Polk and

Nowell   VATICAN CITY, Dec. 6 (RNS)--Tempering a

controversial Vatican declaration on salvation, Pope II

said Wednesday that all who live a just life will be saved even if

they do not believe in Jesus Christ and the Roman Catholic Church.

The pontiff, addressing some 30,000 pilgrims gathered in St. 's

Square for his weekly general audience, strongly reasserted the

liberal interpretation of the Bible's teaching on salvation that

emerged from the Second Vatican Council.

" The gospel teaches us that those who live in accordance with the

Beatitudes--the poor in spirit, the pure of heart, those who bear

lovingly the sufferings of life--will enter God's kingdom, "

said.

" All who seek God with a sincere heart, including those who do not

know Christ and his church, contribute under the influence of grace

to the building of this kingdom, " he said.

The pope appeared to take a far more inclusive approach to salvation

than the declaration " Dominus Iesus " issued Sept. 5 by the

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which serves as the

Vatican's guardian of doctrinal orthodoxy.

" Dominus Ieusus " caused dismay among non-Catholics involved in

ecumenical and interfaith dialogue by asserting that their rituals,

" insofar as they depend on superstitions or other errors, constitute

an obstacle to salvation. "

" If it is true that the followers of other religions can receive

divine grace, it is also certain that objectively speaking, they are

in a gravely deficient situation in comparison with those who, in the

church, have the fullness of the means of salvation, " the document

said.

While giving his full support to the declaration, has been

at pains since it was issued to reiterate his commitment to dialogue

and his respect for members of other religions.

Meanwhile, in an official response to " Dominus Iesus, " the (Anglican)

Church of Ireland said that, though it might be " strictly correct " to

say the new statement changes nothing in the Roman Catholic Church's

official stance, it does nevertheless raise the question of " the

adequacy of the use of doctrinal statements as effective tools for

ecumenical relations. "

The Anglican statement said churches with confessional statements and

historical formularies dating from the Reformation often find the

terminology and the tone of their own statements " unhelpful " to

modern theological dialogue.

Thus, the Anglicans said, it should be asked whether the documents of

Vatican II, framed in the " very early days " of the Roman Catholic

entry into the modern ecumenical movement, really provide an adequate

basis for dialogue 30 years later " in the light of the way that the

Roman Catholic Church has moved in its relationships with all major

Christian traditions, especially at the local level. "

It said another disturbing element was the way in which the term

" church " was denied to some Christian communions and given to others.

" Ecumenical study in ecclesiology [church structure] involving all

our churches approaches ecclesiology from an understanding of the

whole people of God rather than with definitions of hierarchy, " the

Irish statement said.

" The basis for this work is the sacrament of baptism rather than the

validity of ordained ministry, " it added. " 'Dominus Iesus' reverses

this process by its negative conclusions based entirely on issues of

holy orders and the eucharistic theology of one tradition. "

In conclusion, the Irish statement said the tone of " Dominus Iesus "

reflected little of the journey on which Anglicans believe God is

bringing the two churches together. " Though we can understand it from

a merely academic point of view, we would wonder what it will achieve

for the healing of the divisions of the church, " it said.

Copyright 2000 Religion News Service. All rights reserved. No part of

this transmission may be reproduced without written permission.

=======================================

http://www.wfn.org/2000/09/msg00061.html

7- September-2000 00321

Vatican declares only the Roman Catholic Church brings salvation

ŒInfallible teaching' decries relativism, calls all other churches Œdefective'

by Peggy Polk Religion News Service

Vatican City -- In a declaration carrying the full authority of an

infallible teaching, the Vatican said Sept. 5 the Roman Catholic

Church is the only " instrument for the salvation of all humanity. "

The 36-page Declaration Dominus Iesus ( " On the Unicity and Salvific

Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church " ) expressed " sincere

respect " for other religions but attacked " religious relativism which

leads to the belief that one religion is as good as another. "

" If it is true that the followers of other religions can receive

divine grace, it is also certain that objectively speaking they are

in a gravely deficient situation in comparison with those who, in the

church, have the fullness of the means of salvation, " the Vatican

said of non-Christian religions.

It called non-Catholic Christian bodies " defective. " Cardinal ph

Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,

issued the document at a Vatican news conference as part of what

appeared to be an ongoing but urgent effort by the Vatican to

reassert traditional Catholic doctrine.

Ratzinger said in a recent letter to bishops' conferences throughout

the world that the Catholic Church is the " mother " of all Christian

churches, and told them to stop referring to the Orthodox, Anglican

and Protestant churches as " sister " churches.

The declaration raised concern among other churches. In London,

Archbishop of Canterbury Carey, spiritual leader of the

worldwide Anglican Communion, called Ratzinger's statements

" unjustified " and said they did " not reflect the deep comprehension

that has been reached (by Catholics and Anglicans) through ecumenical

dialogue and cooperation during the past 30 years. "

" Of course, " Carey added, " the Church of England and the worldwide

Anglican Communion does not for one moment accept that its orders of

ministry and Eucharist are deficient in any way. It believes itself

to be a part of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church of

Christ, in whose name it serves and bears witness, here and round the

world. "

In Geneva, the World Council of Churches warned that the growth of

ecumenical dialogue could be " hindered -- or even damaged " by what it

called " language which precludes further discussion of the issues. "

But Cardinal Keeler of Baltimore, a leader in the Catholic

Church's dialogue with both the Orthodox churches and the Jews, said

Ratzinger's pronouncement is " in full accord with what Vatican II

has said. "

Keeler, who attended the Vatican news conference, said he did not

expect the new declaration to have a negative effect on ecumenical

and interfaith dialogue.

In England, in an exercise in damage control, Archbishop Cormac

-O'Connor of Westminster, chairman of the department of mission

and unity of the Catholic bishops' conference of England and Wales,

said the new document " does not attempt to change the teaching of the

Catholic Church regarding ecumenism. "

He said its main purpose was to warn against a tendency to regard all

religions as equivalent and it was written principally for Catholic

bishops and theologians.

" Certainly no slight is intended by its comments regarding other

Christian communities, " he said. " As Christians we share a common

baptism, and the Catholic Church believes this brings us all into a

real, if imperfect, communion. This was made clear in the documents

of the Second Vatican Council, where it said that other Christians

Œwith good reason are accepted as our brothers and sisters.' "

Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, secretary of Ratzinger's congregation,

said the document carried the full authority of infallibility because

it was " explicitly approved and confirmed by the pope. " He said the

pope had indicated it was " his will that what it contains be believed

by all the church. "

Like Ratzinger's previous letter, the declaration has been sent to

all bishops' conferences for distribution throughout Catholic

dioceses worldwide.

" With the coming of the Savior Jesus Christ, God has willed that the

church founded by him be the instrument for the salvation of all

humanity, " the declaration said.

" This truth of faith does not lessen the sincere respect which the

church has for the religions of the world, but at the same time, it

rules out, in a radical way, that mentality of indifferentism

characterized by a religious relativism which leads to the belief

that one religion is as good as another, " it said.

At the same time, the declaration gave a special status to the

Orthodox churches, saying that " the church of Christ is present and

operative also " in them although they are not in full communion with

the Catholic Church and do not accept the doctrine of papal primacy.

Referring to the Anglican and Protestant churches, the document said,

" The ecclesial communities which have not preserved valid episcopate

and the genuine and integral substance of the eucharistic mystery are

not churches in the proper sense. "

But, it said, " those who are baptized in these communities are, by

baptism, incorporated in Christ and thus are in a certain communion,

albeit imperfect, with the church. "

While accusing religious relativists of manipulating religious

tolerance, Ratzinger denied the declaration was intended to impinge

on freedom of religion.

" The principle of tolerance as an expression of the respect for

freedom of conscience, thought and religion, defended and promoted by

the Second Vatican Council and put forward again by this declaration,

is a fundamental ethical position present in the essence of the

Christian credo, " he said.

=========================================

http://www.trincomm.org/research/retrieve.cfm?RecNum=674

Is There Salvation Outside the Church?

By Fr. Alfred McBride, O. Praem.

Some years ago, a popular Jesuit writer named Father Leonard Feeney

charmed readers with his humorous essays and books, such as " Fish on

Friday. " A lighthearted apologist and defender of the Church, his

insistence on doctrine delivered with a sense of humor prompted the

comment that he was " as Catholic as St. Aquinas and as

American as Mark Twain. "

In 1943, Father Feeney became the popular chaplain for the students

at St. Benedict's Center, which served Catholics from Harvard and

Radcliffe.

And then something happened, He began to preach that the axiom of

Pope Boniface VIII (1294-1303) ‹ " Outside the Church, no salvation "

‹ meant that formal membership in the Catholic Church was necessary

for salvation. The Vatican's Holy Office rejected his restrictive

view by distinguishing between those who really belong to the Church

(in re) and those who belong by desire (in voto). The desire would be

explicit in those who were catechumens and implicit in those people

of goodwill who would join the Church if they knew it to be the one,

true Church of Christ.

Father Feeney refused an order from his Jesuit superiors to leave St.

Benedict's Center. The following year he was dismissed from the

Society of Jesus. In the meantime, he established a religious

community for men and women for his followers at Still River, Mass.

In 1972, through the efforts of Bishop Bernard Flanagan of Worcester,

Father Feeney and some of his followers were reconciled to the

Church. He died in 1978.

The Fathers of the Church often taught that " outside the Church there

is no salvation " (e.g., St. Augustine, Sermon 96, 7, 9). Stated

positively, this means that all salvation comes from Christ, the

Head, through the Church, which is His Body.

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Second Vatican Council

teaches that the Church is necessary for salvation. Christ is the

mediator and way of salvation. He is present to us in His body, which

is the Church. He explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and

baptism. By doing so, He affirmed at the same time the necessity of

the Church, which people enter through baptism. Because of that,

there are people who 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 remain in it (cf. Catechism of the

Catholic Church, no. 846).

Vatican II teaches that the Church is the " Sacrament of Salvation. "

(Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, no. 1; Catechism, no. 780).

Christ intended that the Church be a sacrament of the inner union of

all people with God. This means that the Church is an effective sign

of salvation for all who will be saved. Not just a signpost ‹ like

" exit 34 " on a freeway ‹ but an actual instrument of salvation.

Jesus accomplishes His saving work in and through the Church.

But what about the billions of people who do not know Christ or the 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 attain eternal salvation " (Catechism, no. 847). Sincere

non-Christians can be moved by grace to seek God and know and do His

will. When they do so according to the dictates of their conscience

they can be saved, for by God's will they are associated with the

paschal mystery of Christ.

What about those outside the Church who belong to other Christian

faiths or world religions? I do not have enough space here to give an

adequate answer to this question. I strongly recommend studying the

Catechism's coverage of this matter in nos. 836-845. The opening

statement is instructive: " All men are called to this catholic unity

of the People of God. . . . And to it, in different ways, belong or

are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who believe in Christ, and

finally all mankind, called by grace to salvation " (no. 836).

Members of other Christian churches who believe in Christ and have

been properly baptized are in a certain, though imperfect, union with

the Catholic Church. With the Orthodox churches, this union is so

close that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a

common celebration of the Eucharist.

The Church maintains a special relationship with the Jewish people.

As the People of God in the New Covenant, the Church has a deep link

with the Jewish people, who were the first to hear God's Word.

" Unlike other non-Christian religions, the Jewish faith is already a

response to God's revelation in the Old Covenant. "

Regarding the Messiah, Jews and Catholics have similar goals about

the future. Catholics await the return of the Messiah, who died and

rose from the dead and is recognized as Lord and Son of God. Jews

await the coming of a messiah whose features remain hidden until the

end of time. Their expectation, therefore, is accompanied by the

mystery of their not knowing or misunderstanding Jesus Christ when He

comes again.

The Catechism proceeds to discuss the Church's positive relationships

with the Muslims and other non-Christian religions that developed

quite independently of Judaism and Christianity. " The Catholic Church

rejects nothing which is true and holy in these religions " which

" often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men "

(Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian

Religions, no. 2). The commitment of the Church to ecumenical and

interfaith dialogue with other believers is a major effort to fulfill

the Father's will that all people be gathered together into His Son's

Church.

" The Church is the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and

salvation, " St. Augustine wrote (Sermon 96, 7). " The Church is the

world reconciled. She is the bark which in the full sail of the

Lord's Gross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in

this world. "

===========================

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH'S VIEW OF NON-CATHOLIC CHRISTIANS

by Karl Adam http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ106.HTM " So that the

non-Catholic of good will is already fundamentally united to the

Church. It is only that he sees her not. Yet she is there, invisible

and mysterious. And the more he grows in faith and in love, the more

plainly will she become actually visible to him.....And it is because

we believe that very many non-Catholics are already thus invisibly

united with the Church, that we do not abandon [p.186] our conviction

that this invisible union will one day be made visible in all its

beauty. The more consciously and completely we all of us exhibit the

spirit of Christ, the more certainly will that hour of grace

approach, when the veils will fall from all eyes, when we shall put

away all prejudice and misunderstanding and bitterness, when we shall

once again as of old extend to one another the hand of brotherhood,

when there shall be one God, one Christ, one shepherd and one flock. "

[Guest guest]

Dear Dan,

you wrote:

" People who teach the primacy of the individual conscience are called

Protestants. "

You are dead wrong unless Aquinas was a protestant. Any student,

earnest student of Thomistic theology would tell you that.( I learned mine

at a seminary for Dominican monks,in Ohio and at St of the Pines

College in Columbus Ohio where the faculty were nuns, with Ph. D's).I also

read Thomistic theology in " approved " books of those days.( left a

weasel word in there to protect the Church " informed " consent.)

Leo 10 didn't say anything that Jung , hasn't said. A Myth is true,

remember, just not in its outer clothing.Furthermore as you said, the belief

of the individual has nothing to do with the teachings of the

Church.(neither do most of the other occupations of the Vatican population

which spin its wheels today.

The Church no longer teaches that it is the only way to salvation. that was

my whole point. And I should know I taught it. I object, although I am no

longer a Catholic and we have been here before, to revisiting outlandish

sites for current events in the Church is unjust.

If you must, at least find " official sites " The old catechism has been

revised 3 times lately and that is just in the last 50 years. When the

present crop of hierarchy is gone no one will even talk about those outdated

doctrine.The Church wants to remain relevant, you know.We just still have

some of the old guard hanging on.( JP2 for one.)

The Anglican Communion discarded the 39 articles, to quote them now as

matters of face would be wrong too.It is the same thing.

As with the matter of informed conscience, over dogma, its time you realized

that this is not a black and white deal. The maturity of the believer has a

lot to do with it.So does the passage of time. The people at the Vatican may

be foolish but they are not stupid. They do change under pressure.They

re-phrase, they reinterpret . The necessary assent for salvation within the

church are nowhere as strict and as detailed as they were in your time...the

Middle Ages. It really boils down to : " Christ has died, Christ is risen,

Christ will come again....which was inserted into the liturgy. All else is

commentary.

I think somewhere in your devious mind, Dan ,you are still revisiting the

old nun who taught you in grade1-4.I know there is something that still is

stuck in your craw, so to speak. Those were the strict old days of Irish

catholic missionaries to the US.That is not the American catholic Church of

the present moment.Even in those days, European (continent) teachings were

much more liberal than what you were exposed to, or the then American

Church..As a matter of fact they always were, as long as they stayed out of

the many superstitions the common folk wanted to insert.It was historically

Latin vs. Irish.

Different cultures even today are given leeway, just look at African

Catholicism or Japanese.

You are fighting a straw man as the expression goes.

If you must discuss, read the documents of Vatican 2 please.At least you

will closer to what the believer now believes.Sure there are reactionaries

in the Church, but they will die out in time.

Leave it, Dan, or use fresh quotes

Why not allow those members who are catholic to answer any questions that

may arise. You are not a good spokesman for the Church. I personally yield

to them, and so should you.

Good for you. You provided your own correction when you said:

" But Catholics believe that God has revealed Himself and continues to

reveal Himself through His Church, the " one true Church, " the RC

> Church. " " Continues to reveal himself " not once and for all at the Council

of Nicea., in 325. Now think about what that means for change in the

doctrine and dogma. By the way, the church is now referred to in toto as

" the people of G-d " , nothing separates them from their brethren. It is 2003,

the Inquisition is gone, so is the Holy office., even Galileo has been

allowed back in.We are not fighting one other as Christians now that we are

separated brethren and not heretics.

revisit if you must,but update yourself. Just don';t dig up more

separateness and strife. and made up, so can all Christians. and

then maybe all the world's " people of G-d " can concentrate on likenesses not

differences.

Toni

Re: Dan and " Real " Catholics

> Dear Toni,

>

> You wrote:

>

> > Dear Dan,

> >

> > No wonder your views of Catholicism is so skewered, if this is where you

got

> > your answers. (your link)

>

> My view of Catholicism is that it is largely nonsense. However, in

fairness, I must admit that " nonsensical " does not necessarily mean

" worthless, "

> and that what does not help me might nevertheless help other people.

>

> >

> >

> > Along with false information this is a ploy of those conservatives who

were

> > against Vatican II.

>

> Vatican II or no Vatican II, I assume that you do not contest the fact

that the RC Church has multiple de fide teachings that RC's are *required*

to

> believe. That was my original point and remains my point. There are

certain things that Vatican authorities - even Vatican II authorities -

insist

> that one hew to if one is to be a Catholic.

>

> >

> >

> > One wrong statement :

> > " Charismaticism is a particularly virulent modern-day mania infecting

> > the Church of the New Order, which has its roots deep in heresy. "

> >

> >

> >

> > As for a position on what happens at the last judgment. How inflated can

one

> > get if one presumes to know G-d's mind, sometimes the gall of the Church

> > amazes me

>

> To say, as you say here, that the Church has a lot of gall to claim that

it knows God's mind is to say you're not a Catholic. Fair enough, one

needn't

> be a Catholic. But Catholics believe that God has revealed Himself and

continues to reveal Himself through His Church, the " one true Church, " the

RC

> Church.

>

> >

> > .

> > The present teaching is still " baptism of desire " for those good people

who

> > were never converted, which means they really wanted to know the truth,

but

> > had no chance

>

> Which is exactly what the link says. As you know, opinions vary on

frequent or how likely the successful " baptism of desire " actually is, and

the

> matter of frequency or likelihood is not as far as I know a matter of

dogma.

>

> >

>

> Dear Greg,

>

> Dark as the Dark Ages might have been, perhaps you will agree with me that

the current age is darker. As you know, CGJ has some praise for RC dogma

> (and not because he believes it, either). The " good news " isn't all bad.

>

> Dear Marilyn,

>

> You wrote:

>

> " When I did my grad work at the GTU in Berkeley, a number of my courses

> were from the associated Roman Catholic schools. It became clear to me

> that what Catholicism demands in terms of informed thought and behavior

> is far different from kind of " blind obedience " you describe as true

> Catholicism. Such blind obedience could be seen as sinful, unethical or

> both for anyone able to consult reason and conscience. Conscience is,

> in fact, the supreme authority for Roman Catholics-- beyond councils and

> papal decrees. "

>

> The Church continues to fudge this by teaching that conscience must be

informed, and that it is correctly informed by the Church, with its councils

> and decrees. People who teach the primacy of the individual conscience are

called Protestants.

>

> " That is not, of course, what is usually taught on a parish level. Large

> institutions have found it easier to keep ordinary members rather dumbed

> down, and the Catholic Church seems to have made it policy to do so..

>

> I think the Church - were it blunt, which it rarely is -might say is that

God made the ordinary members " dumbed down, " and the Church is accommodating

> them.

>

> " You might want to do some serious reading -- there's a whole different

> world out there. One in which, incidentally, we Episcopalians have

> exactly the same access to salvation that you Romans do (per the

> documents on Anglican-Roman Catholic unity)

>

> I am not a " Roman " any more. I am in the Church's eyes an apostate. If the

RC teaching on salvation is true, I'm finished. " Salvation " in this sense

> is not even an issue for me. The whole " rad-trad " vs. Vatican II conflict

and all that stuff is a matter of small interest to me. My original point

> was that to be RC is ipso facto to believe certain dogmas. Yes, Toni, I

know that there are lots of priests and Vatican insiders and others who

don't

> believe them all - hell, there are, I'm sure, a lot of them that don't

even believe in God. What else is new? But that is not to the point.

>

>

>

> " -- now does that shock you,

> or what!? "

>

> What shocks me is the vicious cruelty and arbitrary tyranny attributed to

God by preachers, and the way that teaching is swallowed whole by the many.

> But I suppose that it shouldn't shock me.

>

> Regards,

>

> Dan

>

> " This myth of Christ has been most profitable. "

>

> Pope Leo X

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Toni,

You wrote:

> Dear Dan,

> you wrote:

> " People who teach the primacy of the individual conscience are called

> Protestants. "

> You are dead wrong unless Aquinas was a protestant. Any student,

> earnest student of Thomistic theology would tell you that.( I learned mine

> at a seminary for Dominican monks,in Ohio and at St of the Pines

> College in Columbus Ohio where the faculty were nuns, with Ph. D's).

Nuns with Ph.D.'s - God help us. The worst of both worlds.

> I also

> read Thomistic theology in " approved " books of those days.( left a

> weasel word in there to protect the Church " informed " consent.)

Isn't that precisely what I said?

This is my understanding of the RCC regarding this " individual conscience "

business: the RCC teaches what is absolutely right and absolutely wrong,

but it is up to the individual informed (informed by the RCC, that is) to apply

the teaching to individual circumstances. In this respect, individual

conscience is something like Aristotle's prudence, the art of practical wisdom.

For example: the RCC teaches that it is a sin to steal. The RCC also

teaches, however, that charity is a commandment, not a suggestion, and that the

" haves " have a positive duty to give to the (genuine) have-nots. That

is, to oversimplify somewhat, the rich own the poor a living. From that it

follows that the poor person who is genuinely in need has a right to take

what he needs - if his children are starving and nobody will give him bread, for

example, he has a right to " steal " the bread; properly speaking, he

is not stealing since he is in fact owed the bread under the duty of charity.

The " individual conscience " aspect of it comes in in determining whether

or not he is in fact in need to the manner and degree that what would otherwise

be stealing is justified.

As one can well imagine, the RCC is a bit queasy about this sort of thing

because the ordinary conscience and judgment, like the ordinary nous, is

unlikely to be that great. Therefore ordinary Catholics are advised to seek

advice about what to do (generally from a priest) when unusual dilemmas or

unclear situations come up.

>

>

> Leo 10 didn't say anything that Jung , hasn't said. A Myth is true,

> remember, just not in its outer clothing.Furthermore as you said, the belief

> of the individual has nothing to do with the teachings of the

> Church.(neither do most of the other occupations of the Vatican population

> which spin its wheels today.

> The Church no longer teaches that it is the only way to salvation. that was

> my whole point. And I should know I taught it.

All the documents kindly supplied by , as well as the one I cited, say

that it does. Nothing has changed.

> I object, although I am no

> longer a Catholic and we have been here before, to revisiting outlandish

> sites for current events in the Church is unjust.

> If you must, at least find " official sites " The old catechism has been

> revised 3 times lately and that is just in the last 50 years. When the

> present crop of hierarchy is gone no one will even talk about those outdated

> doctrine.The Church wants to remain relevant, you know.

Not unless it is suicidal, it doesn't, lol. And I don't believe it is suicidal.

Was it Napoleon who said that nations come and go, only the Church is

constant, or something like that?

> We just still have

> some of the old guard hanging on.( JP2 for one.)

>

> The Anglican Communion discarded the 39 articles, to quote them now as

> matters of face would be wrong too.It is the same thing.

>

> As with the matter of informed conscience, over dogma, its time you realized

> that this is not a black and white deal. The maturity of the believer has a

> lot to do with it.So does the passage of time. The people at the Vatican may

> be foolish but they are not stupid. They do change under pressure.

Well, they temporize - and they wait.

> They

> re-phrase, they reinterpret . The necessary assent for salvation within the

> church are nowhere as strict and as detailed as they were in your time...the

> Middle Ages.

As I said before, opinions vary about *how likely* salvation outside formal

membership in the RCC is. As far as I know, it's not a matter of dogma;

some think it's fairly easy, some not so much (not that I am saying that it

matters).

> It really boils down to : " Christ has died, Christ is risen,

> Christ will come again....which was inserted into the liturgy. All else is

> commentary.

>

> I think somewhere in your devious mind, Dan ,you are still revisiting the

> old nun who taught you in grade1-4.

The nuns taught the catechism. Has the catechism fundamentally changed?

> I know there is something that still is

> stuck in your craw, so to speak. Those were the strict old days of Irish

> catholic missionaries to the US.That is not the American catholic Church of

> the present moment.Even in those days, European (continent) teachings were

> much more liberal than what you were exposed to, or the then American

> Church..As a matter of fact they always were, as long as they stayed out of

> the many superstitions the common folk wanted to insert.It was historically

> Latin vs. Irish.

>

> Different cultures even today are given leeway, just look at African

> Catholicism or Japanese.

> You are fighting a straw man as the expression goes.

> If you must discuss, read the documents of Vatican 2 please.At least you

> will closer to what the believer now believes.Sure there are reactionaries

> in the Church, but they will die out in time.

Vatican II is a blip. The reactionaries will prevail, or the RCC will die out. I

believe, fwiw, that the former is more likely, just as a political

matter. The Vatican is plenty worried about the inroads that evangelical

protestant Christians are making into the RC populations of the third world,

and it will not just sit back and do nothing about it, imo.

>

>

> Leave it, Dan, or use fresh quotes

>

> Why not allow those members who are catholic to answer any questions that

> may arise. You are not a good spokesman for the Church. I personally yield

> to them, and so should you.

>

> Good for you. You provided your own correction when you said:

> " But Catholics believe that God has revealed Himself and continues to

> reveal Himself through His Church, the " one true Church, " the RC

> > Church. " " Continues to reveal himself " not once and for all at the Council

> of Nicea., in 325.

Well, yes, but it also does not mean " and He changes His mind. " Latter day

revelations are additive - they don't overturn previous revelations.

> Now think about what that means for change in the

> doctrine and dogma. By the way, the church is now referred to in toto as

> " the people of G-d " , nothing separates them from their brethren. It is 2003,

> the Inquisition is gone, so is the Holy office., even Galileo has been

> allowed back in.We are not fighting one other as Christians now that we are

> separated brethren and not heretics.

What you are saying is that the RCC is just about finished. You may be right,

but as I say above, I am inclined to doubt it.

>

>

> revisit if you must,but update yourself. Just don';t dig up more

> separateness and strife.

Why not? The threat of permanent peace regarding the most serious issues is

perhaps the greatest that humanity faces (and I'm not just jerking your

chain, I mean it).

Regards,

Dan

> and made up, so can all Christians. and

> then maybe all the world's " people of G-d " can concentrate on likenesses not

> differences.

> Toni

>

> Re: Dan and " Real " Catholics

>

> > Dear Toni,

> >

> > You wrote:

> >

> > > Dear Dan,

> > >

> > > No wonder your views of Catholicism is so skewered, if this is where you

> got

> > > your answers. (your link)

> >

> > My view of Catholicism is that it is largely nonsense. However, in

> fairness, I must admit that " nonsensical " does not necessarily mean

> " worthless, "

> > and that what does not help me might nevertheless help other people.

> >

> > >

> > >

> > > Along with false information this is a ploy of those conservatives who

> were

> > > against Vatican II.

> >

> > Vatican II or no Vatican II, I assume that you do not contest the fact

> that the RC Church has multiple de fide teachings that RC's are *required*

> to

> > believe. That was my original point and remains my point. There are

> certain things that Vatican authorities - even Vatican II authorities -

> insist

> > that one hew to if one is to be a Catholic.

> >

> > >

> > >

> > > One wrong statement :

> > > " Charismaticism is a particularly virulent modern-day mania infecting

> > > the Church of the New Order, which has its roots deep in heresy. "

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > As for a position on what happens at the last judgment. How inflated can

> one

> > > get if one presumes to know G-d's mind, sometimes the gall of the Church

> > > amazes me

> >

> > To say, as you say here, that the Church has a lot of gall to claim that

> it knows God's mind is to say you're not a Catholic. Fair enough, one

> needn't

> > be a Catholic. But Catholics believe that God has revealed Himself and

> continues to reveal Himself through His Church, the " one true Church, " the

> RC

> > Church.

> >

> > >

> > > .

> > > The present teaching is still " baptism of desire " for those good people

> who

> > > were never converted, which means they really wanted to know the truth,

> but

> > > had no chance

> >

> > Which is exactly what the link says. As you know, opinions vary on

> frequent or how likely the successful " baptism of desire " actually is, and

> the

> > matter of frequency or likelihood is not as far as I know a matter of

> dogma.

> >

> > >

> >

> > Dear Greg,

> >

> > Dark as the Dark Ages might have been, perhaps you will agree with me that

> the current age is darker. As you know, CGJ has some praise for RC dogma

> > (and not because he believes it, either). The " good news " isn't all bad.

> >

> > Dear Marilyn,

> >

> > You wrote:

> >

> > " When I did my grad work at the GTU in Berkeley, a number of my courses

> > were from the associated Roman Catholic schools. It became clear to me

> > that what Catholicism demands in terms of informed thought and behavior

> > is far different from kind of " blind obedience " you describe as true

> > Catholicism. Such blind obedience could be seen as sinful, unethical or

> > both for anyone able to consult reason and conscience. Conscience is,

> > in fact, the supreme authority for Roman Catholics-- beyond councils and

> > papal decrees. "

> >

> > The Church continues to fudge this by teaching that conscience must be

> informed, and that it is correctly informed by the Church, with its councils

> > and decrees. People who teach the primacy of the individual conscience are

> called Protestants.

> >

> > " That is not, of course, what is usually taught on a parish level. Large

> > institutions have found it easier to keep ordinary members rather dumbed

> > down, and the Catholic Church seems to have made it policy to do so..

> >

> > I think the Church - were it blunt, which it rarely is -might say is that

> God made the ordinary members " dumbed down, " and the Church is accommodating

> > them.

> >

> > " You might want to do some serious reading -- there's a whole different

> > world out there. One in which, incidentally, we Episcopalians have

> > exactly the same access to salvation that you Romans do (per the

> > documents on Anglican-Roman Catholic unity)

> >

> > I am not a " Roman " any more. I am in the Church's eyes an apostate. If the

> RC teaching on salvation is true, I'm finished. " Salvation " in this sense

> > is not even an issue for me. The whole " rad-trad " vs. Vatican II conflict

> and all that stuff is a matter of small interest to me. My original point

> > was that to be RC is ipso facto to believe certain dogmas. Yes, Toni, I

> know that there are lots of priests and Vatican insiders and others who

> don't

> > believe them all - hell, there are, I'm sure, a lot of them that don't

> even believe in God. What else is new? But that is not to the point.

> >

> >

> >

> > " -- now does that shock you,

> > or what!? "

> >

> > What shocks me is the vicious cruelty and arbitrary tyranny attributed to

> God by preachers, and the way that teaching is swallowed whole by the many.

> > But I suppose that it shouldn't shock me.

> >

> > Regards,

> >

> > Dan

> >

> > " This myth of Christ has been most profitable. "

> >

> > Pope Leo X

> >

>

>

> " Our highest duty as human beings is to search out a means whereby beings may

be freed from all kinds of unsatisfactory experience and suffering. "

>

> H.H. Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th. Dalai Lama

>

>

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 8/14/2003 4:05:46 PM Central Daylight Time,

IonaDove@... writes:

> I think it's Cardinal RATZINGER

Yeah, but " Ratslinger " is such a great pun! LOL

[Guest guest]

Dear Dan, Anyone else who thinks this is all foolishness.

I am personally so far away from dogmatic anything that I always smile when

someone is so certain about something they have absolutely no way of

knowing...what happens when we die for example. How the All reacts to human

beings now or then. How nice it was for me, and now all the other faithful

to think that we knew the truth, and exactly how to get from here to

there.Certitude relieves anxiety.

Nowadays I don't have to get angry because someone in the hierarchy is

making some silly statement as if they knew something the rest of mankind is

not privy to.I no longer have to watch my church make a fool of itself, or

get angry when , in my estimation it does not follow what it preaches. I

wish it all the luck in the world, but I will go where I will go.

The humility of XX111 will win in the long run, he was just too much in

the future for the earthbound conservatives. Until then, the Church will

have to

suffer from the inflation of the few. It ought not to make us mad, angry,

full of scorn or any other negative reaction.Leave them in peace until they

get it fixed.

Many, many barely conscious, or some conscious human beings need

certainty and authority, so it is right for them to be where they are.I

speak of the people. The hierarchy will insist on the survival of its

institutions. As

long as there is demand, it will be supplied. People who need reassurance,

who want rules and regulations, who want no responsibility to do the heavy

decision making, have a right to have those needs met. It leads them to

peace and is their meaning.For those who fear , the antidote is

promised security.

I don't understand why the separated brethren get so upset when the

Catholics refuse to play. Just because one arm of a religion does not

recognize the other, is no reason to get defensive. I just don't see the

problem.Nor did I think it is right to meddle with other people's beliefs.

(Just because someone( the Church) does not admire you and thinks they are

better

than you doesn't mean you have to accept their evaluation.) For some reason,

non Catholics are continually upset with the Church. As long as you yourself

know or

feel on the right path, what difference does it make how others( the Church)

think of

you? .

Why would the Baptists fight the Pentecostals or the Lutherans the

Church of G-d.? Or all of them against others,.Or any of them the Catholics

of all kinds.They are not

enemies. They just serve different populations of people with different

needs.

I think it is time for us all to grow up. Leave the shouting to the extreme

right of all religious persuasions and just go our own way, in community or

alone. I guess I have lost my urge to convert the world, or the urge to play

g-d.Let people find what they think they need, in all the different faiths

on earth without beating a drum to tell everyone how right they are, or how

wrong.

So, I resign from trying to explain what this not too divided Catholic

Church preaches or does.I wish everyone not part of it would too.I will try

not to feel the punches even though I am

no longer a member of a church I once loved.. But why are even discussing

this? Why am I trying to convince you? I really don't know. Maybe about

delayed loyalty which did so much for me? It is a wonder that the Church

seems always enveloped in controversy, the Christian churches I mean?. Sure,

the Jews do it too and so do the different sects of Muslims. isn't it that

we must convince ourselves that we indeed have the truth so we can feel

safe, and even maybe superior to others?

The irony is , of course that the religious traditions involved all preach

humility, peace and love.Why can we just leave it all alone. Is it really a

search for the TRUTH? or for security, community, and that warm feeling

inside that we've got IT, whatever IT is. I guess we have to wait for the

call to consciousness before the fear lessens enough for us to think it

possible that we could make the right decision about our meaning and our

path. No institution will give us all we crave, no institution has a

monopoly on goodness or truth. The problem is, it is so lonely outside.We

need people for comfort, for security and for safety, and to share our

responsibility for right choices which weighs on us so heavily.

I guess there is no definitive answer. It depends on how strong one is in

oneself, how able to stand outside watching the warms within and to make our

own fires.

I doubt that we were chosen to set everything straight or to rescue others

from their choices.

All the energy spent on annoyance or worse,of what others teach or believe

could be better spent on loving them.

That may change all of us faster.

Toni

Re: Dan and " Real " Catholics

> Dear Toni,

>

>

> You wrote:

>

> > Dear Dan,

> > you wrote:

> > " People who teach the primacy of the individual conscience are called

> > Protestants. "

> > You are dead wrong unless Aquinas was a protestant. Any student,

> > earnest student of Thomistic theology would tell you that.( I learned

mine

> > at a seminary for Dominican monks,in Ohio and at St of the Pines

> > College in Columbus Ohio where the faculty were nuns, with Ph. D's).

>

> Nuns with Ph.D.'s - God help us. The worst of both worlds.

>

>

> > I also

> > read Thomistic theology in " approved " books of those days.( left

a

> > weasel word in there to protect the Church " informed " consent.)

>

> Isn't that precisely what I said?

>

> This is my understanding of the RCC regarding this " individual conscience "

business: the RCC teaches what is absolutely right and absolutely wrong,

> but it is up to the individual informed (informed by the RCC, that is) to

apply the teaching to individual circumstances. In this respect, individual

> conscience is something like Aristotle's prudence, the art of practical

wisdom. For example: the RCC teaches that it is a sin to steal. The RCC also

> teaches, however, that charity is a commandment, not a suggestion, and

that the " haves " have a positive duty to give to the (genuine) have-nots.

That

> is, to oversimplify somewhat, the rich own the poor a living. From that it

follows that the poor person who is genuinely in need has a right to take

> what he needs - if his children are starving and nobody will give him

bread, for example, he has a right to " steal " the bread; properly speaking,

he

> is not stealing since he is in fact owed the bread under the duty of

charity. The " individual conscience " aspect of it comes in in determining

whether

> or not he is in fact in need to the manner and degree that what would

otherwise be stealing is justified.

>

> As one can well imagine, the RCC is a bit queasy about this sort of thing

because the ordinary conscience and judgment, like the ordinary nous, is

> unlikely to be that great. Therefore ordinary Catholics are advised to

seek advice about what to do (generally from a priest) when unusual dilemmas

or

> unclear situations come up.

>

>

>

> >

> >

> > Leo 10 didn't say anything that Jung , hasn't said. A Myth is

true,

> > remember, just not in its outer clothing.Furthermore as you said, the

belief

> > of the individual has nothing to do with the teachings of the

> > Church.(neither do most of the other occupations of the Vatican

population

> > which spin its wheels today.

> > The Church no longer teaches that it is the only way to salvation. that

was

> > my whole point. And I should know I taught it.

>

> All the documents kindly supplied by , as well as the one I cited,

say that it does. Nothing has changed.

>

>

>

> > I object, although I am no

> > longer a Catholic and we have been here before, to revisiting outlandish

> > sites for current events in the Church is unjust.

> > If you must, at least find " official sites " The old catechism has been

> > revised 3 times lately and that is just in the last 50 years. When the

> > present crop of hierarchy is gone no one will even talk about those

outdated

> > doctrine.The Church wants to remain relevant, you know.

>

> Not unless it is suicidal, it doesn't, lol. And I don't believe it is

suicidal. Was it Napoleon who said that nations come and go, only the Church

is

> constant, or something like that?

>

> > We just still have

> > some of the old guard hanging on.( JP2 for one.)

> >

> > The Anglican Communion discarded the 39 articles, to quote them now as

> > matters of face would be wrong too.It is the same thing.

> >

> > As with the matter of informed conscience, over dogma, its time you

realized

> > that this is not a black and white deal. The maturity of the believer

has a

> > lot to do with it.So does the passage of time. The people at the Vatican

may

> > be foolish but they are not stupid. They do change under pressure.

>

> Well, they temporize - and they wait.

>

>

> > They

> > re-phrase, they reinterpret . The necessary assent for salvation within

the

> > church are nowhere as strict and as detailed as they were in your

time...the

> > Middle Ages.

>

> As I said before, opinions vary about *how likely* salvation outside

formal membership in the RCC is. As far as I know, it's not a matter of

dogma;

> some think it's fairly easy, some not so much (not that I am saying that

it matters).

>

> > It really boils down to : " Christ has died, Christ is risen,

> > Christ will come again....which was inserted into the liturgy. All else

is

> > commentary.

> >

> > I think somewhere in your devious mind, Dan ,you are still revisiting

the

> > old nun who taught you in grade1-4.

>

> The nuns taught the catechism. Has the catechism fundamentally changed?

>

>

>

> > I know there is something that still is

> > stuck in your craw, so to speak. Those were the strict old days of Irish

> > catholic missionaries to the US.That is not the American catholic Church

of

> > the present moment.Even in those days, European (continent) teachings

were

> > much more liberal than what you were exposed to, or the then American

> > Church..As a matter of fact they always were, as long as they stayed out

of

> > the many superstitions the common folk wanted to insert.It was

historically

> > Latin vs. Irish.

> >

> > Different cultures even today are given leeway, just look at African

> > Catholicism or Japanese.

> > You are fighting a straw man as the expression goes.

> > If you must discuss, read the documents of Vatican 2 please.At least you

> > will closer to what the believer now believes.Sure there are

reactionaries

> > in the Church, but they will die out in time.

>

> Vatican II is a blip. The reactionaries will prevail, or the RCC will die

out. I believe, fwiw, that the former is more likely, just as a political

> matter. The Vatican is plenty worried about the inroads that evangelical

protestant Christians are making into the RC populations of the third world,

> and it will not just sit back and do nothing about it, imo.

>

> >

> >

> > Leave it, Dan, or use fresh quotes

> >

> > Why not allow those members who are catholic to answer any questions

that

> > may arise. You are not a good spokesman for the Church. I personally

yield

> > to them, and so should you.

> >

> > Good for you. You provided your own correction when you said:

> > " But Catholics believe that God has revealed Himself and continues to

> > reveal Himself through His Church, the " one true Church, " the RC

> > > Church. " " Continues to reveal himself " not once and for all at the

Council

> > of Nicea., in 325.

>

> Well, yes, but it also does not mean " and He changes His mind. " Latter day

revelations are additive - they don't overturn previous revelations.

>

>

> > Now think about what that means for change in the

> > doctrine and dogma. By the way, the church is now referred to in toto as

> > " the people of G-d " , nothing separates them from their brethren. It is

2003,

> > the Inquisition is gone, so is the Holy office., even Galileo has been

> > allowed back in.We are not fighting one other as Christians now that we

are

> > separated brethren and not heretics.

>

> What you are saying is that the RCC is just about finished. You may be

right, but as I say above, I am inclined to doubt it.

>

> >

> >

> > revisit if you must,but update yourself. Just don';t dig up more

> > separateness and strife.

>