www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Salvation

I hope no one minds my asking something that has probably been asked a lot before, though my search did not yield an answer. This is something that has been bothering me lately and forgive me if I get some terminology wrong.

Ok. In my understanding, the Catholic Church teaches that it is the fullness of Truth outside of which there is no salvation. But, according to the CC, the Orthodox church has valid sacraments, which means Jesus is present in the Eucharist in the Orthodox church. So that would mean salvation then depends on being subject to the Pope. But to me that puts the human person of the Pope above Our Lord in the Eucharist, which doesn't seem right.

Now, I'm sure I'm just all befuddled in my logic, and probably thinking about salvation in terms of the Protestant I once was. Please, I mean no offense with my question! If someone could help clarify things for me and maybe offer the Orthodox view I would appreciate it!

Andrea

It goes something like this:

The Church is Jesus Christ and all who are united with Him.

We know where the Church is.

We don't know everywhere the Church is not. In other words, we know of some kinds of conduct and attitudes of heart which clearly oppose Christ. On the other hand, we don't know everyone's individual state of grace. Only God knows that. So . . .

Christ commanded us not to judge but to pray and to live lives of righteousness and compassion (for ourselves, for others, and to serve by example).

Lord have mercy !

-- John

Andrea,

Your description of traditional RC ecclesiology is correct: "Indeed we declare, say, pronounce, and define that it is altogether necessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff."(Unam Sanctum) That and many other papal statements plainly exclude the Orthodox. The Orthodox (according to Scholastic theology) like any other schismatic or heretical group possess valid sacraments because the sacrament of ordination leaves an "indelible mark." I believe that is the plain truth of the matter, but I believe that the teachings of the Eastern Fathers are capable of providing us with a fuller perspective, but to accept that one must put more weight upon them than one does upon the ex cathedra statements of medieval popes, and that is a personal matter.

"The Holy Spirit is not absent from any created being, especially not from the one which in any participates in intelligence. For being God and God's Spirit, He embraces in unity the spiritual knowledge of all created things, providentially permeating all thing with their nature. In this way He makes men aware of things done sinfully against the law of nature, and renders them capable of choosing principles which are true and in comformity with nature. Thus we find many barbarians and nomadic peoples turning to a civilized way of life and setting aside the savage laws which they had kept among themselves from time immemorial." (Maximus the Confessor)

Andrea,

To try to clarify, the Catholic Church teaches that the Church that Christ founded can only be one (many reasons, many from Scripture). It also teaches that besides being a fact, the Church is also a great mystery (sometimes rendered, following the Latin, "sacrament"). A mystery/sacrament, in this sense, is a visible reality that signifies (or points to) another, invisible reality.

The invisible reality here is the Universal Church, as conceived by Christ before the Creation of the world, constituted on Pentecost with the sending of the Holy Spirit to be not just with the Apostles, but with the 120 gathered in the Upper Room, the sanctification of souls and the world in time from that moment until the Second Coming of Jesus in judgement, and the Triumphant Church in Heaven, etc. Although long, this depiction itself doesn't capture the fullness of the various aspects of the Mystery of the Church, which the Catholic Church attempted to delineate in the Vatican II Constitution Lumen Gentium, which I encourage you to read.

The Catholic Church has always taught that "outside the Church there is no salvation" (extra Ecclesiam, nulla salus). The Church does not understand this expression to mean: "as long as you are a member of the Catholic Church, you are saved", but rather something more like: "It is Christ who has instituted His Church to be an instrument in the salvation of all men". Christ is certainly above the Church, He is the Lord and God of the Church. So he has not tied His hands by instituting the Church, and he can bring others to salvation outside of their visible union with His Church. But the Church is the visible means that Christ wants to accomplish the salvation of the world. Since the office of Roman Pontiff exists to serve the Church, the Pope is not "above" Christ, anymore than the priest at Holy Mass is above Christ.

The Pope is the servant of Holy Tradition, he does not make Holy Tradition, his hands are tied by it, and according to it. That is an integral part of the Catholic Church's teaching on infallibility.

The Catholic Church teaches that the Orthodox Churches not in full communion with the Catholic Church, possess all the marks of the Church of Christ minus one: they are not in full communion with the Bishop of Rome. Although it is the same Christ who gives efficacy via his sacraments to both the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches, it is not the Will of Christ that human beings cannot speak of a single, united, instrument of Salvation at the visible level.

The Catholic Church is implying that its understanding of the Primacy of the Pope is a part of the Orthodox Faith. The Orthodox Churches imply that they deny that.

The Catholic Church teaches that this lack of mutual full, visible communion produces wounds or defects on both sides, and so, cannot be according to the Will of Christ. I think both sides say that any "ultimate resolution" is in the hands of the Holy Spirit.

Perhaps the Catholic Church's emphasis at times on the visible nature of the Church, and that there is only one Church of Christ, is the biggest difference with the view of most Protestants who seem to hold that the Church is essentially invisible, if not amorphous.

Best regards,
Michael

I really appreciate you all taking the time to repond to my post. You have given me much to think about and I am going to follow up by reading the recommended documents.

Thank you!