Are non-Christian religions acceptable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Eddie18
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There are many aspects of non Christian religions that are compatible with Christianity. The morality of the non Christian religions for the most part are based on natural law. Those things which are compatible with Christianity can be used as building blocks in our workof evangelization.
 
Firstly, Limbo is St. Thomas Aquinas’ Hypothesis. But the issue is whether all the Latin Fathers from the time of Augustine until 1054 positively denied whether unbaptized infants get to heaven. The answer to THAT question is a resounding yes, and it is the constant teaching of the Latin Fathers and Latin Scholastics down to the present day.

The question of Limbo is one of detail- how are they punished, not IF they are punished. And the very council that accepted such a notion was ratified by Trullo and accepted by the Orthodox. Something that would put Fr. Romanides in convulsions if he dared think it through.
 
Last edited:
StAugustine said:
But the issue is whether all the Latin Fathers from the time of Augustine until 1054 positively denied whether unbaptized infants get to heaven. The answer to THAT question is a resounding yes, and it is the constant teaching of the Latin Fathers and Latin Scholastics down to the present day.
Click to expand...
In light of what the CCC says, I don’t see how you can say that is the teaching down to the present day. The teaching of the present day has been changed from what you say it was previously and the present day teaching is now given by CCC 1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: “Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,” allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism.
 
Last edited:
I posted this in another thread >>>>>
deMontfort said:
From The Holy See’s website >>>>>

“It is clear that the traditional teaching on this topic has concentrated on the theory of limbo, understood as a state which includes the souls of infants who die subject to original sin and without baptism, and who, therefore, neither merit the beatific vision, nor yet are subjected to any punishment, because they are not guilty of any personal sin. This theory, elaborated by theologians beginning in the Middle Ages, never entered into the dogmatic definitions of the Magisterium, even if that same Magisterium did at times mention the theory in its ordinary teaching up until the Second Vatican Council. It remains therefore a possible theological hypothesis. However, in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992), the theory of limbo is not mentioned. Rather, the Catechism teaches that infants who die without baptism are entrusted by the Church to the mercy of God, as is shown in the specific funeral rite for such children. The principle that God desires the salvation of all people gives rise to the hope that there is a path to salvation for infants who die without baptism (cf. CCC, 1261), and therefore also to the theological desire to find a coherent and logical connection between the diverse affirmations of the Catholic faith: the universal salvific will of God; the unicity of the mediation of Christ; the necessity of baptism for salvation; the universal action of grace in relation to the sacraments; the link between original sin and the deprivation of the beatific vision; the creation of man “in Christ”.
The conclusion of this study is that there are theological and liturgical reasons to hope that infants who die without baptism may be saved and brought into eternal happiness, even if there is not an explicit teaching on this question found in Revelation. However, none of the considerations proposed in this text to motivate a new approach to the question may be used to negate the necessity of baptism, nor to delay the conferral of the sacrament. Rather, there are reasons to hope that God will save these infants precisely because it was not possible to do for them that what would have been most desirable— to baptize them in the faith of the Church and incorporate them visibly into the Body of Christ.”
Click to expand...
 
For being born in original sin. It is the dogmatic teaching of the Catholic Church that “those who die in Original sin ONLY descend to hell where they are punished, but differently than those who die in mortal sin.” From the Ecumenical councils of Lyons and Florence, binding the conscience of every Catholic.

Name me the types of people who die in original sin alone. Children without the use of reason and mentally handicapped people.

The ordinary magisterial teaching of the Popes (which was Living magisterium at the time it was given, for those who are convinced it’s all that matters…) has also clearly taught that abortionists are guilty not only of murdering bodies, but killing souls and depriving them of heaven. Pope Sixtus V in Effraenatum. No commitee can change that.
 
In others words we have another Sed claiming the Magisterium is currently teaching heresy. Gotcha.
 
A commitees opinion without magisterial authority. And it’s based on a heretical understanding of God’s salvific will.

God does NOT absolutely will to grant each individual salvation. And at the same time he IS disposed to save everyone.

How does that work?

In the distinction made by St. John of Damascus and St. Thomas Aquinas. Antecedent vs. consequent.

Antecedently, abstractly, before any other consideration, God wills the salvation of humanity in general.

But consequently, in light of his foreknowledge of sin, there are some to whom he chooses NOT to give the grace of perseverance. These fail to persevere not because of Gods not giving them grace, but because of their own sin.

Consider a judge- he wills the good of society and does not want to see anybody killed. But in light of capital crimes, he does will the death penalty for those justly convicted.

We are conceived and born with the death penalty. God’s choice to save some and not others does not fall into the realm of injustice because we all deserve it.

And no, there is no person who wants to be saved that God rejects for not being chosen. Such hypothetical people do not, have not, and will not exist.
 
Last edited:
In others words we have another Sed claiming the Magisterium is currently teaching heresy. Gotcha.

And for anyone reading this thread, bear in mind Thomistic theology is one of a number of theological schools of thought permissible within the Catholic church, it is NOT, however, the official teaching of the Church. For example, the Catechism’s teaching on salvation leans heavily on Molinist theology rather than Thomism.
 
Why are you so quick to judge? Who said I was a sed? Your complete disregard for the Catholic faith is personally offensive.
 
Your accusations of heresy directed at the Magisterium are personally offensive.
 
So, to be clear, you are saying that children who have not attained the age of reason (including even unborn babies) actually descend to hell and are punished for original sin alone but not mortal sin, and that this is official Catholic teaching? No heaven, no purgatory, but rather limbo. And the latter is also official Catholic teaching? Last question: is this representative of Catholicism’s view of a just and merciful G-d?
 
That’s exactly why so many Catholics consider Medjugorje a false apparition!

Bottom line: Scripture condemns non-Catholic religions, and so have previous popes. As we all know, the Deposit of Faith cannot be changed.
 
drac16 said:
I believe that catholics are christians, I just don’t believe they’re Biblical.
Click to expand...
You…you do realize that the Bible you read and believe in was put together by the Catholic Church, right? (Except for the books that Luther took out, because he decided he’d like to pretend at being the Holy Spirit.)
 
Catholic new dogma has started since Pope John Paul.

Pope Francis also said God created other religions.
but then I recalled Vatican announced another different statement. 😁

I would think that
In other non-Christian religions, some have loyalty and obey God and do great goodness.
Unless God send Holy Cherub angels to forgive their sins. No other way is known acceptable for some but not all of them.

“Behold this has touched your lips; your iniquity and guilt are taken away and your sin is completely forgiven’” (Isaiah 6:2, 3 & 6 about Holy Cherub angel)
 
Last edited:
toddy said:
I would think that
In other religions, some have loyalty and obey God and do great goodness.
Unless God send Holy Cherub angels to forgive their sins. No other way is known acceptable for some but not all of them.
Click to expand...
Christian religions allow for repentance.
 
Raxus said:
I believe that catholics are christians, I just don’t believe they’re Biblical.
Click to expand...
Most Catholic churches have bible class. One of my church friends can memorize the whole bible. I made the cross at foreheads of hundreds people every Ash Wednesday and said
“Believe in the Gospel” Mark 1:15

For this very reason make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge, Pet 1:5

We learn bible is to go to heaven. 😁
 
Last edited:
Pray for those who persecute you, Mathew 5:44

In many countries, Christians are being persecuted. Preacher must find place to hide after preaching and ready to die for that day! Bible printing is not allowed, everybody must memorize the bible. Pray for these persecutors too.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top