www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology No salvation outside the church

Hi guys,

For those who wrote with concern about a somewhat flippant move from Rome to Orthodoxy, you need not worry. I made my comment off the top of my head and have no intention of persuing the issue further. But thanks for your concern.

I have written something about this in another thread: I am trying to dialogue with someone who is more or less a Feeneyite. He's not rabid but he truly believes the rigorist position of "no salvation outside the church". I don't know how he does it but when I talk to him he seems to have an infinite supply of quotes on hand to rebutt anything I might say. It's terribly frustrating. This fellow has told me that he really believes his father is damned becase he is Orthdox. To me this is beyond my ability to grasp. All I can do is shake my head and wonder. Can any of you point me to a website or book that has the information I need to talk with this guy?

I know, some of you will say just quit talking to him. On the one hand I could do that but if I did I would always have a nagging feeling that he just might have been right. So I guess im saying I need clear proof for myself as well.

Knowing what one "wants" to believe is one thing, but being subjectivly certain is quite another; at this point I do not have that certainty.

Jason B.

Oh and btw, I really am a redneck. Just imagine for a moment the Divine Liturgy or the Mass in vernacular for us southerners. lol

RR -

Can't point out books or websites at this point. I would recommend however the Vatican II document Nostra aetate(http://www.papalencyclicals.net/vatican2.htm). I also do not know the person you're refering to in particular, but would make a few points about this kind of thinking, based on my admittedly low understanding of the subject.

Faith dictates that the Church, meaning in the body of the Bishops in general (and for Catholics the Pope of Rome as the head of the Church) is infallible and will never err. This is the key to this subject.

Someone can come up with millions of quotations and attempt to use them as proof texts, be they from the Bible (Protestants) or from the Bible, Patrology, the works/lives of saints or the Magisterium ("Traditionalist" groups with a Catholic background - I would characterize many culturally Orthodox groups in the same way, though they don't misuse Catholic Magisterial documents).

I have seen similar lists of quotes which advocate Sedevecantism, Feeneyism, or several other such ideas. The quotes DO NOT validate the thesis because:

a. their use contradicts the policy of the body of bishops and the Church (led and represented by the Pope of Rome if you're Catholic), which are infallible.

b. the quotes are frequently used without a greater understanding of the broader document or its purposes.

For instance, one can quote various Pian Popes to state that the kind of democracy practiced in the US and Western world is an un-Catholic form of government, but nevertheless all the quotes one would find are taken from documents formulated to specifically condemn a movement by which democracy and "liberalism" were used to bring about a secular society divorced from the Church and to undermine the infallibility of the Church. [as an aside, I think this context is an important part of the First Vatican Council's definition of Papal Infallibility] The documents target the fruits of the Enlightenment and the French revolution, not necessarily the ideas behind the United States or several other modern democracies.

Moreover, a democratic system of government is certainly compatible with and maybe even preferable according to the relevant teachings the Bishops, the Pope, and the Vatican II document Gaudium et Spes.

Thus, all the hypothetical quotes from various documents do not prove the case. The proof is in the Bishops and the Pope representing the Church, especially when the Pope speaks on matters of faith and morals. I also feel that on less grave ecclesiastical doctrine such as this the Bishops and Pope should be followed.

I think this is the best context in the fight against Feeneyism; remember that the Church rejects this sort of thinking for given reasons. Find out what the background behind the Church's opinion is, and demonstrate that the quotes are taken out of context.

Unfortunately, this kind of thinking is much easier to understand than the truth and those who are wedded to it are frequently unconvertable by reason and long arguments. But, with God, anything is possible.

Those who are more knowledgable, please expand on or correct anything I said above.

I think the example of the Macedonian Orthodox does not conflict with my statements, nor does it indicate that the Holy Father is in mortal sin on this matter. I am talking of someone leaving the Catholic Church, not someone wanting to join, and being asked to hold off. You could very easily say that they are "united to Rome" in their heart, if their intention is to unite, but they are being ask to hold off on doing so by Rome.

However, what you say does make a good point. I don't claim to know what "Catholic teaching" is on this matter, as it seems to me to be fluid and open to various interpretations. I think it is pretty clear-cut to me for Protestants - they need to join a apostolic, sacramental church. But the Orthodox? I'm not sure. I definitely don't believe that they are damned, or that the grace they receive from their sacraments is in any way lesser than Catholic sacraments (and therefore their ability to gain salvation is equivalent to Catholics'). But I'm still troubled by the idea of someone leaving the Catholic Church and union with Rome, for any reason, or for any church.

Frankly, I personally would love to believe that all members of the Catholic and Orthodox churches are on an "even keel", and that movement between the two does not effect in any way one's salvation (if done for the purpose of drawing closer to Jesus, of course). But I'm just not sure if I can believe that and be consistent with Catholic doctrine and belief. Needless to say, I can be hopelessly muddled at times.

My point was to address RomanRedneck's seemingly flippant remark about leaving for Orthodoxy (which he has since cleared up). An action like that should never be done without serious prayer and consideration, and looking at all the ramifications - like the point I brought up about leaving union with Rome. As a convert myself (from Methodism), I know it should involve a tremendous "pause" to jump to another church.

(BTW, can you put up a reference to the Macedonian Orthodox wanting to reunite with Rome and being rebuffed? I've never heard that before).

LatinVisitor,

You did a good job with addressing this issue. I have found that many Roman "traditionalists" (using their term) that believe in a strict understanding of "outside the church..." use the same hermineutical methods that my Protestant fundamentalist friends use when intepreting the Bible. They take one or two lines from some document long ago and base their entire theology on it. To their minds, every sentence of every encyclical is infallible by itself - there is no need to read it in context. Yet they don't think you should do this with the Bible for some reason. With the Bible, they agree that one must look at context and interpret accordingly. If the inspired Word of God must be interpreted according to context, surely even infallible church documents must be as well.

Ultimately, it is the duty of today's college of bishops united to Rome to provide the valid interpretation of these past documents. And they have clearly and overwhelmingly not supported the position of the Feeneyites, which should be the end of the story.

Dear Jason,

The Roman Catholic Church has gone from there is no salvation outside of the Church predicated on union with the see of Peter to anybody and everybody can be saved no matter what they believe. This sort of inconsistency of teaching is the result of the Roman Catholic Churches departure from Orthodoxy and it Patristic reliance and produces detrimental self inflicted positions and tumultuous considerations.

The fellow that has told you that he really believes his father is damned because he is Orthodox is articulating the teachings conveyed by the Roman Catholic church for quite some time. For the Orthodox are considered schismatics. However, nowadays the Latin's are readjusting their thinking and statements depending on who you speak with. The fellow is uttering blasphemy against the Orthodox Church and here Saints. Such statements proceed from demonic influences and your troubled disposition by his words is shared. Dismiss it and consider for what it is, the barking of a wild vomiting dog. As for this fellow print this out or email to him and tell him that I'm sure the Orthodox Saints want and pray for his salvation whether it is of any avail is contingent upon his disposition and attire and the adjustments he can make while he has time. Tell this fellow the way it works in hell is the more the demons torment the less they are tormented, for a while anyway, but the blasphemous flames they fuel always catch up to them rather fast. The suffering is indescribable I'm sure. It's best for the soul of any man not to play with hell fire or spit it with the demons now or latter. Can a tear be shed then to quench the flames or do they evaporate to quickly to pour into a hand to drink them? Tell this man for the sake of his soul and the effects he has on others, the sooner he drinks them the better.

The Rich Man and Lazarus

19"There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich man's table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.
The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. So he called to him, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.'
But Abraham replied, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.'
He answered, 'Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father's house, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.'
Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.'
'No, father Abraham,' he said, 'but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.'
He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "


I remain an Orthodox Christian in Christ with a few tears in my eyes.

Matthew Panchisin, the son of an Orthodox Priest of thrice blessed memory.

Have this fellow email me, for I would very much like to speak with him.

MatthewPanchisin@yahoo.com

Dear Orthodox Catholic,

Your right! "This is a touchy subject, to be sure".

Most of the Orthodox churches in my neck of the woods do not require a Catholic convert to reject anything of the Catholic Church. Reasons for that I will not get into. Subjects such as the Primacy of the Patriarch of Rome are simply - left alone. The Patriarch of Rome is also a Patriarch equal to other Patriarchates and that is explained and described. No rejection of the Catholic Church or Catholic doctrines or theology is necessary. The only thing necessary is the desire to join oneself to the Orthodox church and learn its ways. It is a conversion of �the Orthodox do it - this way � � and that is about it. No rejection of RC or accusations of heresy or anything like that.

Do all Orthodox priest do it this way (no rejection of RC necessary)? No. And guidelines among Orthodox churches vary on the �conversion� process. In many cases the local Orthodox priest is allowed to apply the guidelines in a reasonable and fitting way. So there is much personal discussion between the priest and the one coming from the RC to the Orthodox - it is a step by step process according to what the priest sees as fitting and required. A very personal thing.

Also - most Catholics are entirely unaware that the RC does not ban a change of rites and churches within the universal Church. One may - in concert with permission from his RC bishop - transfer to any of the Eastern churches - Orthodox included - as well as to any (Copt, Byzantine, etc..). The bishop would like to see that the transfer or �conversion� is not one of rejecting the Latin church - but rather one of attraction to the other church. Do all RC bishops understand this? No. Any RC who wished to change churches should first speak with his own priest to find out what the proper way to do it is.

Things are changing. If not from the top down - from the bottom up. For example, I am a RC and I have full permission from my own RC Church to have any Orthodox priest as my spiritual director. All I had to do was explain my love for Eastern theology - and ask - and permission was given. No problem no hassles.

-ray

Um, could you please provide some proof for this assertion about what the "Roman" Catholic Church teaches? And also some proof that this is a teaching that has changed? I believe the Church has taught about the "Baptism of Desire" since the Council of Trent - perhaps that's what you were thinking of?

Right. I agree. There is no 'across the board' answer one way or the other. There are many conditions which must be considered. And so it is a case by case basis.

-ray

Dear Rayk,

Here is a question that I've often agonized over.

Is it better to remain in a liberal Catholic parish where one's traditional faith is assailed and otherwise in danger, when one could easily join a traditional Orthodox parish, all other things being equal (no other Catholic parish nearby etc.)?

Over to you, O New Aquinas!

Alex

What you have expereinced is members of the Catholic church - perhaps charged with teaching or perhaps not - and non-members of the Catholic church - giving you thier own misunderstandings as if it were - church teaching.

Cheers.
-ray

Dear Rayk,

Yes, Matthew forgets that Orthodoxy has its liberals too!

A friend who is now an OCA priest and I were driving to attend a conference together.

We drove by an Antiochian Orthodox Church.

The priest then turned to me and remarked, "There, but for the Grace of God, goeth I!"

But what do people want from those poor Antiochians?

Alex

Dear Dolly,

And there are Orthodox who believe that many Orthodox won't be saved . . .

There's always another Orthodox jurisdiction that is more Orthodox than the - you know!

And there is the saying someone once said: "Orthodox or death - as long as it isn't the Antiochian Church!"

Alex

Dear Friends,

One precipitating factor in the decision of EC's to return to their Mother Orthodox Church has to do with their view that the FULLNESS of their Eastern tradition is to be had only in the Mother Church, sans Latinizations.

Theirs is a desire to no longer be in "schism" from the majority of their co-religionists of their national church.

We often understand the division of East and West along terms of faith only.

But there is another aspect of the painful sense of division that only EC's really know.

That is when Ukrainian Catholics or Armenian Catholics feel alienated from the majority of their fellow countrymen who share an identical tradition (ideally unLatinized) but yet are cut off from communion with each other over union with the Pope etc.

And, over time, there are those who come to the conclusion that being in union with the Pope just isn't worth that alienation.

How they come to that conclusion is a separate discussion, but we in the UGCC have had priests leave to join the Orthodox, and we still do for those and other reasons.

I would also suggest, and in this I certainly do agree with Matthew Panchisin, that Rome's perceived watering down of certain dogmatics and rapprochement with the Orthodox actually helps kick-start the process for EC's to begin considering the move to Orthodoxy.

Ultimately, we EC's can see that, as we've discussed on this forum many times before, we've everything in common with the Orthodox.

Even those doctrines papally proclaimed are already part of our Orthodox heritage, in pith and substance, as we've also discussed.

So when we come to view the question, "What does Rome give us by way of faith that we don't already have?" the answer is simply, "Rome itself as a source of unity."

And yet, if that is all that communion with Rome gives us, then for many EC's it is not "unity" at all, but an historical and contemporary experience of division within our national Churches and communities (as the New Catholic Encylopedia also says about the Union of Brest).

For many of us EC's, union with Rome has meant the enduring pain of separation and alienation from our brothers and sisters who are Orthodox - an alienation that also reaches into our very families and is something that our RC brothers and sisters really are at a loss to truly understand.

Many EC's stay in communion with Rome because of habit, convenience or because in their districts EC membership is more "culturally relevant" than Orthodox membership - as is the case among Ukrainians especially.

But it wouldn't take much to tip the scales if push came to shove and for the above reasons.

Union with the Pope just isn't something that many EC's would consider a "defining point" of their overall religious/cultural identity that extends to their entire community.

And if union with the Pope means the peace of "unity" - then our experience with it has been something totally different.

Alex

Alex,
A profound post. You have summed it up quite well. Thank you.

Rayk,
Two posts ago, I really identified with what you wrote as well. Well put.

Francis,
I understand what you are saying. Thanks for taking the time to try and explain. I hope I've been equally clear in what I'm saying.

Trusting in Christ's Resurrection,
Wm. Ghazar Der-Ghazarian
Looys Kreesdosee
www.geocities.com/derghazar [geocities.com]

A few months back I assisted an RC - to begin attending the Orthodox church. We did a lot of talking (she had false guilt surrounded her feelings of leaving the RC). You would be surprised at what we found out about transferring to be under another Patriarch. There is no ban in the RC about transferring to be under any Eastern Patriarch. After easing her mind - she now attends Orthodox Liturgy and bible studies - while receiving the sacraments in the RC. She is under no pressure to decide if she will �convert� - or not. And there is no rejection of the Papacy nor any requirement to declare anything of RC doctrine or theology as heretical. Providence has opened a door for her - if she wishes to transfer. It is His church and Providence can do anything it wants to do. For many months now she has been enjoying the family of the Orthodox church and spirituality - while remaining a Catholic. Her local Catholic parish was also not a good experience. She can convert or not - no problems for anyone involved.

Now as to your question above� believe it or not � much of this depended upon the conscience of the individual you are speaking about. There are many questions to ask and they all revolve around - conscience.

Right now we have some plants growing inside in boxes. They are growing well in this protected environment. It is not yet time to move them to the garden. So what we do is take them outside for direct sun and let the wind buffet them a bit. That makes them grow stronger. What is strong inside where nothing troubles it - is weak outside when faced with natures ways. So what we do to strengthen them is place them where they are blown around a bit and get dried out and then watered - and feel the extremes of the outdoors. I would guess this is uncomfortable to them. That makes them stronger so that when they are later put out into all the rain, wind, and cycles of temperature - they will do fine.

I am not really sure that the man or lady you are speaking of - is in any real danger of losing his or her faith. It may be uncomfortable for him/her but my little plants are uncomfortable when I take them outside too. I wonder too - if that person�s faith might be even better now because of the situation that God has placed him/her in?? I wonder what God intends to do with these plants?

I would advise nothing - without first trying to determine what God may be doing with that person. If I could. Other than that primary determination - if he or she be in the Orthodox or RC - it matters not. One church must not be rejected for the other - but from your description that is not what this person would be doing. What is happening to him/her in the Catholic parish - just might also happen in the Orthodox parish too.

In summation - it is a personal case and I have no across-the-board recommendation. Perhaps it would be best for that person to try attending Orthodox Liturgy and services regularly - while maintaining the sacrament flow through the RC?? Take things slow and easy. But does that really matter? And why not just jump into the Orthodox church?? He/she could do that too.

My personal senses is that God would not mind one way or the other - which church. And that this person�s personal providence would - follow him/her. Most people go to church and are very content no matter what the ceremony is like or what the priest is saying. The person you describe has an inner - love - and interest - in God. And that - in itself - sets up a bit of an irritation for others who SHOULD be interested in God but are instead content with feeling 'saved' by having the �proper membership card�. If I were a spiritual advisor I would tell this person �Do what you will - and let me know in a few months how you are.� But, I am not a spiritual director.

-ray