|
0 members (),
395
guests, and
109
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,525
Posts417,643
Members6,178
| |
Most Online4,112
Mar 25th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936 |
I am taking the Administrator's idea and starting a new thread on an issue raised elsewhere - not for purposes of hurling accusations, but for clarification on what John Paul II taught as Universal Father of the Church. I suggest, as a starting place, "Dominus Jesus" issued in June of 2000: 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 �whole Christ�.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: �a single Catholic and apostolic Church�.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: �This is the single Church of Christ... which our Saviour, after his resurrection, entrusted to Peter'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 �the 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 Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him�.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 �outside of her structure, many elements can be found of sanctification and truth�,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 �they derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church�.57
17. Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter 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....
The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul 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.
Joseph Card. Ratzinger
Prefect The entire document may be found here: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...faith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
I think that is a very fair statement of what the Catholic position must be. I would say that I can agree with it entirely, just replace Catholic with Orthodox and regard the Church of Rome and the eastern Churches united with her as true particular Churches that lack only full communion with the Orthodox Church  Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505 |
"Extra Ecclessia Non Salus!"
Stephanos I
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
"Extra Ecclessia Non Salus!"
Stephanos I Father bless, So this would mean no salvation outside the Catholic and Orthodox Churches? Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505 |
There is no slavation outside the One Holy Catholic and Apostolc Church! But then again you must be careful on what you mean by that. This is the teaching of the Fathers and the Church. There is one sense where this doctrine is sound and orthodox, and another sense in which it becomes heretical. (I dont know if you remember Fr Leonard Feeney and his followers. They were condemned by the Holy See for heretical teaching.)
All salvation comes to us mediated through the Church in the Sacraments. There is but One Church founded by the Lord Jesus.
Hence all salvation comes to us through this One Church.
You however need to be mindful of the teaching of Vatican II
Gaudium et Spes #16 "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 to may achieve eternal salvation.
Stephanos I
PS Since the Orthodox Church is a true Church and a part of the One true Church then yes salvation is found there.
Last edited by Stephanos I; 04/25/07 12:32 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411 |
I would say that I can agree with it entirely, just replace Catholic with Orthodox and regard the Church of Rome I would not see things that way for a couple of reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264 |
PS Since the Orthodox Church is a true Church and a part of the One true Church then yes salvation is found there. Amen, Father Stephanos! Radical Trads are fond of quoting certain aspects of Catholic magisterial teaching that fit into their own ecclesiastical worldview while completely neglecting others that would either balance, contradict or nuance their views. Very clearly Orthodox Christians are members of the one true Church of Christ according to official Catholic teaching. Unfortunately the reciprocal view regarding Catholics cannot always be found among Orthodox Christians or even official Orthodox teaching. Gordo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38 |
Dear Friends,
If the Orthodox Church is the True Church, then how does an EC's status change at all when he or she becomes formally Orthodox?
If the Orthodox Church is the True Church, does this not make the position of all EC's or "Orthodox in communion with Rome" precarious?
If the Orthodox Church (and I don't mean to make this sound like a litany) is the True Church, then why remain EC?
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555 |
There is no slavation outside the One Holy Catholic and Apostolc Church! But then again you must be careful on what you mean by that. This is the teaching of the Fathers and the Church. There is one sense where this doctrine is sound and orthodox, and another sense in which it becomes heretical. (I dont know if you remember Fr Leonard Feeney and his followers. They were condemned by the Holy See for heretical teaching.)
All salvation comes to us mediated through the Church in the Sacraments. There is but One Church founded by the Lord Jesus.
Hence all salvation comes to us through this One Church. Another way of expressing this in English is to translate "extra" in the sense of "without" rather than "outside." At that point then the real meaning becomes most evident. It really is a non-dicsussion that has lasted two thousand years. Boggles the mind actually. Mary
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264 |
Dear Friends,
If the Orthodox Church is the True Church, then how does an EC's status change at all when he or she becomes formally Orthodox?
If the Orthodox Church is the True Church, does this not make the position of all EC's or "Orthodox in communion with Rome" precarious?
If the Orthodox Church (and I don't mean to make this sound like a litany) is the True Church, then why remain EC?
Alex This is an interesting question, and I may not be the one to fully answer it. Insofar as entry into Orthodoxy is an affirmation of things Catholic, I believe it changes nothing. But insofar as it implies (or effects) a rejection of things Catholic, that is where it would seem to me to be problematic. This seems to be the crux of then Cardinal Ratzinger's point when he talks about how at a bare minimum for communion to be restored the Orthodox would have to stop rejecting as heretical the teachings which developed within the Catholic communion during the time of separation. Now - does an EC's or RC's entry into an OC constitute a rejection of Catholic teaching or Catholic communion? The Catholic Church's Canon Law seems to say yes. So is this simply a matter of misalignment (temporal canon law and doctrinal teaching?) Or is there something deeper? As I said, I am not the one to answer it, but it is an interesting question. Gordo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
I would say that I can agree with it entirely, just replace Catholic with Orthodox and regard the Church of Rome I would not see things that way for a couple of reasons. I don't think I said what I meant to say very well. I'll try again. Basically, what the Roman Catholic Church says about the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, I agree with, just reverse the order of the Churches. In other words, I am saying that the fullness of Christ's Catholic Church "subsists" in the Orthodox Church, yet is also present in the Roman Church and the churches in communion with Rome and, to a lesser extent, imperfectly in the various protestant communions. In other words, the Church of Rome and those Churches in communion with her are also true particular Churches. The protestant communions aren't true particular Churches, but they have elements of the Church within them in virtue of baptism. Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936 |
If the Orthodox Church (and I don't mean to make this sound like a litany) is the True Church, then why remain EC? It seems to me the answer to this question is in Dominus Jesus above: This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in [subsistit in] the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him Many have been, in the last 50 years or so, and are struggling now, as is evident from issues raised on this forum, with the question, "What does it mean to be in communion with the Successor of Peter?" This issue is as important for Bishops ("Catholic" as well as Orthodox) as it is for laymen. Just carrying a "card" stating, "I am a Catholic, please call a priest in case of an emergency", doesn't cut it. In the end, the communion of the Trinity, will probably be that by which we are judged. That communion is one of being, truth and goodness.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411 |
Joe I don't think I said what I meant to say very well. I'll try again. Basically, what the Roman Catholic Church says about the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, I agree with, just reverse the order of the Churches. In other words, I am saying that the fullness of Christ's Catholic Church "subsists" in the Orthodox Church, yet is also present in the Roman Church and the churches in communion with Rome and, to a lesser extent, imperfectly in the various protestant communions. In other words, the Church of Rome and those Churches in communion with her are also true particular Churches. The protestant communions aren't true particular Churches, but they have elements of the Church within them in virtue of baptism. I see what your saying, but fundamentally I personally don't subscribe to the ecclesiology the original statement is based on. The truth of the church is not found in the structure of the church per se, though the church is built around it. The foundational basis of the church is the truth of Christ, which is present first and foremost in the Eucharist. Where the Eucharist is, there Christ himself, and thus so is the truth and the church in all its fullness. So statements such as these This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in [subsistit in] the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him But with respect to these, it needs to be stated that "they derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church" Would not work form me in terms of reversing the Orthodox and Catholic parts of the equation. The foundational truth and the fullness of faith found in Christ is not a subsidiary dependency as it is in both those quotes, either from derived efficacy or from truth manifested through the organization of the temporal church. Also, in terms of salvation, we cannot say with assurance who is not saved; be they in or out of the church.
Last edited by AMM; 04/25/07 11:27 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38 |
Dear lm,
Thank you!
I'm wondering about if the Orthodox Church is the True Church, then . . . what does that really mean?
Does it mean it does NOT matter which one belongs to ultimately?
Does it mean that communion with Rome is a secondary matter?
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264 |
I see what your saying, but fundamentally I personally don't subscribe to the ecclesiology the original statement is based on. The truth of the church is not found in the structure of the church per se, though the church is built around it. The foundational basis of the church is the truth of Christ, which is present first and foremost in the Eucharist. Where the Eucharist is, there Christ himself, and thus so is the truth and the church in all its fullness. Andrew, A very interesting point. A few things in response. I'm troubled by the image of the structure of the Church being "wrapped around" the revelation of Christ. Partly because I see the Church as the temporal (and eternal) extension of Christ's Incarnation and His salvific (divine-human) mission. The revelation of Christ which you mentioned was as much in his visible form as man as it was in his invisible nature as God. The body of Christ (visible in Jesus, the Church and the Eucharist) is revelation as well. I think your view appears to run the risk of dualism - as if the Church is somehow an historical accident (which would be the extreme Protestant view...not that I think you are advocating this at all) rather than seeing the Church - both in its visible and invisible nature - as part of the revelation of Christ. I'm curious also how you are defining "Eucharist". If you mean simultaneously the assembly, the action and sacramental mystery, I believe that structure is intrinsic to all of those. The problem from what I have seen is opposite tendencies in East and West to diminsh or divide the communion between spirit and matter, substance and form, grace and nature, eschatology and history, etc etc. Perhaps this is oversimplying things, but to me these realities inhere perfectly in a sacramental vision of ecclesiology. Unless I am misunderstanding your point... Gordo
|
|
|
|
|
