Is an answer that some consider 'derogatory' towards a denomination grounds for deletion?
You are making reference to your answer of the question: What MUST a Catholic believe to be a Catholic?
Here is what you actually said:
Catholics use a wording here that's a bit silly. They say salvation is through the Church in this sort of case, even though the person has never heard of the Church. The basic point, however, is that these people can be saved without believing anything that Geremia lists.
The question does not deal with those who may be saved, but what a Catholic must believe to be Catholic.
I believe that the phrase, would have been flagged by someone if it were employed on another question within another denominational perspective.
Your response seems more like an open rebuttal to another’s response to an answer on this post which would make the silly phrase seems inappropriate.
There is room for misunderstanding and grey areas, but true respect must always be maintained here.
You claim that you explained your reasons behind your statement of “silly”. Yet you did not. What does the phrase “salvation is through the Church”. It is not “silly”, but needs to be understood through the eyes of the Church. Something you have not grasped or actually explained, but passed over it quickly.
The Latin phrase extra Ecclesiam nulla salus means "outside the Church there is no salvation". The 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church explained this as "all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is His Body."
This expression comes from the writings of Saint Cyprian of Carthage, a bishop of the third century. The axiom is often used as shorthand for the doctrine that the Church is necessary for salvation. It is a dogma in the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church in reference to their own communions. It is also held by many historic Protestant churches. However, Protestants, Catholics and the Orthodox each have a unique ecclesiological understanding of what constitutes the Church. For some the church is defined as "all those who will be saved", with no emphasis on the visible church.1 For others the theological basis for this doctrine is founded on the beliefs that (1) Jesus Christ personally established the one Church; and (2) the Church serves as the means by which the graces won by Christ are communicated to believers.
Kallistos Ware, a Greek Orthodox bishop, has expressed this doctrine as follows:
"Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus. All the categorical strength and point of this aphorism lies in its tautology. Outside the Church there is no salvation, because salvation is the Church" (G. Florovsky, "Sobornost: the Catholicity of the Church", in The Church of God, p. 53). Does it therefore follow that anyone who is not visibly within the Church is necessarily damned? Of course not; still less does it follow that everyone who is visibly within the Church is necessarily saved. As Augustine wisely remarked: "How many sheep there are without, how many wolves within!" (Homilies on John, 45, 12) While there is no division between a "visible" and an "invisible Church", yet there may be members of the Church who are not visibly such, but whose membership is known to God alone. If anyone is saved, he must in some sense be a member of the Church; in what sense, we cannot always say.
The Catholic Church also teaches that the doctrine does not mean that everyone who is not visibly within the Church is necessarily damned in case of inculpable ignorance. - Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus