www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Pope Eugene IV

At the Council of Florence when the Eastern Churches "united" with the Roman Church. The following decree is of interest and seems to be lost today in doctrinal circles.

That was, which the Jacobites and others signed was:

Pope Eugene IV (1431-1447 A.D.) invoking the Holy Ghost defines Ex-Cathedra:

“The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches, that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire, "which was prepared for the devil and his angels, (Matt. 25:41)' unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit from the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and that they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgiving, their other works of Christian piety, and duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church”

(The Papal Bull Cantate Domino, 1441 A.D. See also: Enchiridion symbolorum, definitionum et declarationum de rebus fidei et morum. 30th ed., B. Herder Book Co., London, 1954, Article: 714, p. 230).


I am curious what others on this site have to say about this "doctrine" of the Catholic Church?

With this I remain,

VladCatholic

Dear VladCatholic,

The doctrine of Papal Infallibility was not defined until the 19th century and then afterwards only two doctrines were so infallibly defined, that is, the two Marian doctrines.

Even so, there is nothing in what the Pope said that the united Church of Christ of the first thousands years did not believe and teach.

But this teaching is not what the Catholic Church teaches today - so that statement was clearly not "infallible."

Are you yourself Catholic or Orthodox, if I may ask?

Alex

Alex,

Actually, this is what the Latin Church continues to teach. However, She has conditioned the expression "existing outside the Catholic Church" and what this means. The current teaching is that, since even heretics can validly baptize, all who are bsaptized with the intention to do what the Church does are connected to the Church. Further, those who are invincibly ignorant of the need to be part of the Church in order to be saved may be saved.

In short, although this teaching remains in force (usually expressed as "Outside the Church no salvation") the precise understanding of the teaching is not as blunt as Pope Eugene seems to make it.

Edward, deacon and sinner

Actually, (personally) I would like to express it in this way: WITHOUT THE CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION! As sacrament, the Church is Christ�s instrument. She is taken up by Him also as the instrument for the salvation of all, the universal sacrament of salvation, by which Christ is at once manifesting and actualizing the mystery of God�s love for men. The Church is the visible plan of God�s love for humanity, because God desires that the whole human race may become one People of God, form one Body of Christ, and be built up into one Temple of the Holy Spirit.

There are two principal errors when it comes to the Church�s teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus...(it's an old Latin phrase). Some reject this teaching as both incorrect and arrogant. Others interpret this statement to condemn all those who are not visibly united to the Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church. To properly understand this teaching, we probably should examine it within the context of divine Revelation and Church history. This examination will reveal that the phrase was not formulated to express who would go to heaven and who would go to hell, for only God will judge that. Rather, the phrase expresses an understanding of the Church in relation to her role in the salvation of the world.
Translation or Interpretation?

Many people translate the Latin phrase extra ecclesiam nulla salus as �Outside the Church there is no salvation.� This translation does not seem entirely faithful to the Latin meaning, and contributes to the misunderstanding of the phrase.

The Latin word �extra� is both an adverb and preposition. Depending on its use in a sentence, the word has different meanings. When used to describe spatial relations between objects, the word is translated as �beyond� or �outside of� (e.g., Beyond the creek is a tree; or, James is outside of the room). When used to describe abstract relations between concepts or intangible things, the word is commonly translated �without� (e.g., Without a method, it is difficult to teach). Within the phrase in question, extra is a preposition describing the abstract relationship of the Church to salvation. Considering the Latin nuances of the word, a proper translation would be, �Without the Church there is no salvation.� This translation more accurately reflects the doctrinal meaning of the phrase.

In His Holy Name,
+Father Archimandrite Gregory

Do you believe, as I do, that a serious ecumenical reexamination of the authority of the Bishop of Rome must be made before any serious recommunion talks will ever be held?

Dan L

Dear Professor Dan,

We Ukrainian Catholics promoting our Patriarchate have been seriously reexamining that authority for some time now . . .

Alex

Bless, Father Deacon Ed!

Yes, not having any formal theological training, my expression was weak.

The question is, and I've seen different responses to it, can the millions of people today who are not members of Christ's Church be saved?

If so, what is the Church's role in that, if any?

Alex

Dear Alex,

The Latin Church is becoming more like the Orthodox every day. In the instant case, the Church teaches that we have a revealed method by which salvation is made available to the people, and the expected ways by which the people are able to take part in that offer of salvation. For those who "don't get the word" or who are otherwise unable to see the Church as necessary we trust in God's mercy. In short, we know where grace is, but we do not know, nor can we limit, what other ways God may use to bring salvation to His people.

BTW, Fr. Gregory's statement is absolutely correct: without the Church there is no salvation. And, in fact, this is also a valid translation of the Latin used by Pope Eugene -- the Latin word extra normally means "outside of" but it can also mean "without." God's salvation is brought to the world through the Church -- "tool," if you will, that Jesus established to carry out His salvific mission here on earth.

Edward, deacon and sinner

Bless, Father Deacon Ed!

Well, that is great news, I mean about the Catholic Church becoming more like the Orthodox Church!

And I'm sure VladCatholic would be overjoyed to know that too!

In fact, the Grace of Christ indeed comes to us only through His Body, the Church.

And this should help us also understand how Grace comes to us through the Mother of God, the Mother of that Church as well.

I'm having such a wonderful time here today!

Aren't you?

Alex

While I admit that I find Pope Eugene IV's ruling, quite disturbing in 2003, I think it fair that it should be viewed in the context of the times. In 1441, the only religious groups that had existed outside the Catholic Church (in the West that is) were Albigensians, Cathars, Bogomils and Waldesians. To say in the 15th century that the Eucharist was not the true body of Our Lord, or that Jesus was not true man as well as true God, was far more shocking then, then it is today. It was inconceivable for the average person in the West to even imagine another church.

Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Sallus is still the teaching of the Catholic Church, but it does not mean (as Father Leonard Feeney of Boston found out when he was excommunicated in 1953) that all those who are not members of the visible Catholic Church will be damned to hell without exception.

I would have to disagree with you my friend. It seems quite clear what Pope Eugene IV had defined and also at the time the Eastern churches that were not in union with the Roman Church at the time of the Council of Florence like that of Mark of Epehsus etc. Were clearly outside the visible Church of Christ (Catholic).

Also,

The dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus is not not about Fr. Feeney. He only pointed out what was not being preached in his day.

Also,

There is a letter that was sent from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith to the Bishop of Worcester that concerns Fr. Feeney and the doctrine "extra ecclesiam nulla salus" as follows:

"In our dicussions with the Congregation it seemed rather clear that proponents of a strict interpetation of the doctrine should be given the same latitude for teaching and discussion as those who would hold a more liberal view."


This letter was dated: May 4, 1988 and signed at the Diocese of Worcester.

For a full account and the full letter, see the book called: Catholic Replies by James Drummey who has a column in the Wanderer Newspaper.

With this I remain,

VladCatholic

PS

St. John Chrysostom (347-407 A.D.) teaches:

“One should not think that ignorance excuses the non-believer…When you are ignorant of what can easily be known, you have to suffer the penalty…When we do all that is in our power, in matters where we lack knowledge, God will give us his hand; but if we do not do what we can, we do not enjoy God's help either…So do not say: "How is it that God has neglected that sincere and honest pagan?' You will find that he has not really been diligent in seeking the truth, since what concerns the truth is now clearer than the sun. How shall they obtain pardon who, when they see the doctrine of truth spread before them, make no effort to come to know it? For now the name of God is proclaimed to all, what the prophets predicted has come true, and the religion of the pagans has been proven false…It is impossible that anyone who is vigilant in seeking the truth should be contemned [scorned] by God”

(In Epsit. Ad Rom. Hom. 26:3-4; PG 60:641-42).

I would have to disagree with you my friend. It seems quite clear what Pope Eugene IV had defined and also at the time the Eastern churches that were not in union with the Roman Church at the time of the Council of Florence like that of Mark of Epehsus etc. Were clearly outside the visible Church of Christ (Catholic).

Also,

The dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus is not not about Fr. Feeney. He only pointed out what was not being preached in his day.

Also,

There is a letter that was sent from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith to the Bishop of Worcester that concerns Fr. Feeney and the doctrine "extra ecclesiam nulla salus" as follows:

"In our dicussions with the Congregation it seemed rather clear that proponents of a strict interpetation of the doctrine should be given the same latitude for teaching and discussion as those who would hold a more liberal view."


This letter was dated: May 4, 1988 and signed at the Diocese of Worcester.

For a full account and the full letter, see the book called: Catholic Replies by James Drummey who has a column in the Wanderer Newspaper.

With this I remain,

VladCatholic

PS

St. John Chrysostom (347-407 A.D.) teaches:

“One should not think that ignorance excuses the non-believer…When you are ignorant of what can easily be known, you have to suffer the penalty…When we do all that is in our power, in matters where we lack knowledge, God will give us his hand; but if we do not do what we can, we do not enjoy God's help either…So do not say: "How is it that God has neglected that sincere and honest pagan?' You will find that he has not really been diligent in seeking the truth, since what concerns the truth is now clearer than the sun. How shall they obtain pardon who, when they see the doctrine of truth spread before them, make no effort to come to know it? For now the name of God is proclaimed to all, what the prophets predicted has come true, and the religion of the pagans has been proven false…It is impossible that anyone who is vigilant in seeking the truth should be contemned [scorned] by God”

(In Epsit. Ad Rom. Hom. 26:3-4; PG 60:641-42).

Dear Vlad,

Do you think Chrysostom would be closer, today, to the Catholics or the Orthodox?

Alex

Vlad,

Actually, the letter you cite is not from the Congregation, but from an official in the Worcester Diocese to another in the Boston Archdiocese. It is in regard to the regularization of the St. Benedict's Center community at Still River, MA.

The full text of that letter appears at the following website of a very conservative Catholic group:

Worcester Diocese to Boston Archdiocese [allroadsministry.com]

The actual text of the letter of the Congregation makes clear that the position which you are setting forth is not the Church's teaching on the matter, as it was not when Feeney propounded it 50 years ago.

"Acta Apostolicae Sedis xxxxv, 100

Decree

The Priest Leonard Feeney is Declared Excommunicated

Since the priest Leonard Feeney, a resident of Boston (Saint Benedict Center), who for a long time has been suspended a divinis for grave disobedience toward church authority, has not, despite repeated warnings and threats of incurring excommunication ipso facto, come to his senses, the Most Eminent and Reverend Fathers, charged with safeguarding matters of faith and morals, have, in a Plenary Session held on Wednesday 4 February 1953, declared him excommunicated with all the effects of the law.

On Thursday, 12 February 1953, our Most Holy Lord Pius XII, by Divine Providence Pope, approved and confirmed the decree of the Most Eminent Fathers, and ordered that it be made a matter of public law.

Given at Rome, at the headquarters of the Holy Office, 13 February 1953.

Marius Crovini, Notary"

"Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter to the Archbishop of Boston
8 August 1949: DS 3866-72

THE SUPREME SACRED CONGREGATION OF THE HOLY OFFICE

From the Headquarters of the Holy Office

August 8, 1949

Protocol Number 122/49.

Your Excellency:

This Supreme Sacred Congregation has followed very attentively the rise and the course of the grave controversy stirred up by certain associates of "St. Benedict Center" and "Boston College" in regard to the interpretation of that axiom: "Outside Church there is no salvation."

After having examined all the documents that are necessary or useful in this matter, among them information from your Chancery, as well as appeals and reports in which the associates of "St. Benedict Center" explain their Opinions and complaints and also many other documents pertinent to the controversy, officially collected, same Sacred Congregation is convinced that the unfortunate controversy arose from, the fact that the axiom: "outside the Church there is no salvation," was not correctly understood and weighed, and that the same controversy was rendered more bitter by serious disturbance of discipline arising from the fact that some of the associates of the institutions mentioned above refused reverence and obedience to legitimate authorities.

Accordingly, the Most Eminent and Most Reverend Cardinals of this Supreme Congregation, in a plenary session, held on Wednesday, July 27, 1949, decreed, and the August Pontiff in an audience on the following Thursday, July 28, '949, deigned to give his approval, that the following explanations pertinent to the doctrine, and also that invitations and exhortations relevant to discipline be given:

We are bound by divine and Catholic faith to believe all those things which are contained in the word of God, whether it be Scripture or Tradition, and are propose by the Church to be believed as divinely revealed, not only through solemn judgment but also through the ordinary and universal teaching office (Denzinger, n. 1792). Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.

However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority' of the Church.

Now, in the first place, the Church teaches that in this matter there is question of a most strict command of Jesus Christ. For He explicitly enjoined on His apostles to teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever He Himself had commanded (Matt., 28:19-20).

Now, among the commandments of Christ, that one holds not the least place, by we are commanded to be incorporated by Baptism into the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, and to remain united to Christ and to His Vicar, through whom He Himself in a visible manner governs the Church on earth.

Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth. Not only did the Savior command that all nations should enter the Church, but also decreed the Church to he a means of salvation, without which no one can enter the kingdom of eternal glory.

In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the Sacrament of Regeneration and in reference to the Sacrament of Penance.

The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.

However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when person is involved in invincible ignorance, God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes will to be conformed to the will of God. (emphasis added)

These things are clearly taught in that dogmatic letter which was issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943, "On the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ" (AAS, Vol. 35, an. '943, p. i93ff.). For in this letter the Sovereign Pontiff clearly distinguishes between those who are actually incorporated into the Church as albers, and those who are united to the Church only by desire.

Discussing the members of which the Mystical Body is composed here on earth, the same August Pontiff says: "Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed."

Toward the end of this same Encyclical Letter, when most affectionately inviting unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions who "are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire," and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but the other hand states that they are in a condition "in which they cannot be sure their salvation" since "they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church" AAS, loc. cit., 243).

With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal salvation united to the Church only by implicit desire, and those who falsely assert that men be saved equally well in every religion (cf. Pope Pius IX, Allocution "Singulari quadam," in Denzinger, nn. 1641, ff. also Pope Pius IX in the Encyclical Letter Quanto conficiamur moerore" in Denzinger, n. 1677).

But it must not be thought that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated by perfect charity. Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person has supernatural faith: "For he who comes to God must believe that God exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him" (Hebrew 11:6). The Council of Trent declares (Session VI, chap 8): Faith is the beginning of a man's salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and attain to the fellowship of His children" (Denzinger, n. 80l).

From what has been said it is evident that those things which are proposed in the periodical "From the Housetops," fascicle 3, as the genuine teaching of the Catholic Church are far from being such and are very harmful both to those within the Church and those without.(emphasis added)

From these declarations which pertain to doctrine certain conclusions follow which regard discipline and conduct, and which cannot be unknown to those who vigorously defend the necessity by which all are bound of belonging to the true Church and of submitting to the authority of the Roman Pontiff and of the Bishops "whom the Holy Ghost has placed . . . to rule the Church" (Acts, 20:28).

Hence, one cannot understand how the St. Benedict Center can consistently claim to be a Catholic school and wish to be accounted such, and yet not conform to the prescriptions of Canons 1381 and 1382 of the Code of Canon Law, and continue to exist as a source of discord and rebellion against ecclesiastical authority and as a source of the disturbance of many consciences.

Furthermore, it is beyond understanding how a member of a religious institute, namely Father Feeney, presents himself as a "Defender of the faith," and at the same time does not hesitate to attack the catechetical instruction proposed by lawful authorities, and has not even feared to incur grave sanctions threatened by the sacred canons because of his serious violations of his duties as a religions, a priest and an ordinary member of the Church.

Finally, it is in no wise to be tolerated that certain Catholics shall claim for themselves the right to publish a periodical, for the purpose of spreading theological doctrines, without the permission of competent Church Authority; called the "imprimatur," which is prescribed by the sacred canons.

Therefore, let them who in grave peril are ranged against the Church seriously bear in mind that after "Rome has spoken" they cannot be excused even by reasons of good faith. Certainly, their bond and duty of obedience toward the Church is much graver than that of those who as yet are related to the Church "only by an unconscious desire." Let them realize that they are children of the Church, lovingly nourished by her with the milk of doctrine and the sacraments, and hence, having heard the clear voice of their Mother, they cannot be excused from culpable ignorance, and therefore to them applies without any restriction that principle: submission to the Catholic Church and to the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.

In sending this letter, I declare my profound esteem, and remain Your Excellency's most devoted

E Cardinal Marchetti-Selvaggiani

A. Ottaviani Assessor

To His Excellency
Most Reverend Richard James Cushing
Archbishop of Boston"

Many years,

Neil

Irish Melkite,

I really appreciate the fact that it seems I can have a conversation with you--thanks!

First,

When I said the doctrine of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus is "not" about Fr. Feeney is simply because Fr. Feeney "never" defined it. It is the teaching of Chirst and His Church as I am sure you are well aware.

Also,

If you notice and according to Church (Canon Law) a document animatiting from Rome must be:

1. In Latin

2. Expressly Clear

3. Signed by the Pope himself in order to have the "weight" of Law.


Without these qualifications the document is "invalid."

The Document that you cited was signed not by Pope Pius XII but by a Cardinal in the Vatican that actually "died" the day after this was written.

Also,

What was Fr. Feeney charged with? The letter never "condemned" him or called a "heretic."


If you ever go to Still River, Harvard, Mass. you will take note that the bishop there has allowed them to hold to a strict interpetation of the dogma in question. Also, the priests ordained at St. Benedict's Abbey Hold to this teaching as well.

There Website is:

http://www.abbey.org/abbey-2.html


Please check it out.

Also,

I have a question:

Can one be Catholic and hold to a strict interpetation to: Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus?


With this I remain,

ValdCatholic