Are non-Christian religions acceptable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Eddie18
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I did not neglect original sin (which Judaism does not believe in). That is why I was careful to say that infants have no PERSONAL sin. And what can one say about aborted infants? How can they have been baptized? It makes no sense (to me) to punish someone who was not even born. Isn’t being aborted punishment enough?
 
In a sense you’re right, death is one of the punishments we deserve for original sin. But the physical death is itself an image of our spiritual death in which we are conceived. And as there is nothing that happens that can CHANGE that but baptism, the condition remains as long as one is unbaptized before the age of reason.

Actually you just reminded me of the document Effraenatum by Pope Sixtus V.

Can you guess one of his arguments about why abortion is bad? Because it robs souls of heaven!

“We who are placed by the Lord in the supreme throne of justice, being counseled by a most just reason, are in part renewing old laws and in part extending them in order to restrain with just punishment the monstrous and atrocious brutality of those who have no fear to kill most cruelly fetuses still hiding in the maternal viscera. Who will not detest such an abhorrent and evil act, by which are lost not only the bodies but also the souls? Who will not condemn to a most grave punishment the impiety of him who will exclude a soul created in the image of God and for which Our Lord Jesus Christ has shed His precious Blood, and which is capable of eternal happiness and is destined to be in the company of angels, from the blessed vision of God, and who has impeded as much as he could the filling up of heavenly mansions (left vacant by the fallen angels), and has taken away the service to God by His creature?”

https://web.archive.org/web/20170202081730/http://iteadjmj.com/aborto/eng-prn.html

This is a Papal Bull and is therefore Magisterium.

FYI, I don’t like rejoice in this fact, it’s sad. But I defend it because it’s true and the Church has always believed it.
 
Last edited:
So you’re telling me the Church believes that even though an aborted infant has no possibility of being baptized, the Sacrament of Baptism for the purpose of salvation cannot be forgone in this singular case according to G-d’s mercy?
 
Last edited:
StAugustine said:
…Literally. It’s worthless. Those are all the reasons to reject it. No authority has promulgated the “findings”
Click to expand...
Pope Benedict approved and authorized the publication of the document. Actually, he was president of the commission when it began studying the question. I am not sure i understand why the Holy Father would approve and authorize a document that you say is literally worthless and should be rejected.
 
Last edited:
RyanBlack said:
My reference to infants concerned those who die without baptism.
Click to expand...
Which is why I said “the grace of Baptism (whether received ordinarily or extraordinarily)” rather than saying the sacrament of Baptism, which is the ordinary way. Those unbaptized infants that may be saved would be granted the grace of baptism extraordinarily apart from the actual sacrament.
 
Last edited:
StAugustine said:
And really, why is it difficult to say if we believe in what we have and work with sincerity, God will provide that faith without which we cannot be saved?
Click to expand...
It’s not, but I was under the impression that God offers the faith, but man has to accept it.
 
TheOldColonel said:
Many contain truths also shared by Catholics. So, you decide. Is truth good enough?
Click to expand...
It would be a heresy beyond all heresies, a blasphemy beyond all blasphemies, for anyone to presume that they can decide. Only God can decide, and on what basis He does so is beyond our mortal comprehension.

The most we can do is hope, pray and work for the best, for ourselves and for all men. I take this as assuming that every man, even the “least of my brothers”, is Jesus Christ revealing himself to me in the flesh. And assume that they will be in Heaven sooner than I, regardless of their beliefs. And I hope and fervently pray that God will someday let me into heaven to be with them.

I’ve always found strange the perverse glee that some Christians get from their belief that others are going to Hell. As if Heaven won’t be worth the trouble if Jews or Muslims or Hindus, Gay people or even atheists are going to be there, too. Shouldn’t that be what we, as Christians, are hoping for?
 
Last edited:
meltzerboy2 said:
I did not neglect original sin (which Judaism does not believe in). That is why I was careful to say that infants have no PERSONAL sin. And what can one say about aborted infants? How can they have been baptized? It makes no sense (to me) to punish someone who was not even born. Isn’t being aborted punishment enough?
Click to expand...
I am not a theologian of any kind, just a common lay believer of Christianity. I am interested in knowing more about Judaism not believing in original sin. Is it to be understood that the Jewish faith Jesus was raised in would have seen God as a loving Father who would welcome innocent children into Heaven without question if they died before the age of reason?
 
StAugustine said:
Remember this is all future conditional, “They CAN be saved…”

Not “They exist in a state of salvation.”
Click to expand...
This applies to anyone including baptized Catholics. We are not OSAS. Baptism is not an inoculation.
Anyone can attain salvation. The Church extends the hope of salvation to all people.
Christ has accomplished salvation, our acceptance is a work in progress. Baptism is grace, the grace must be accepted and responded to.

But the issue is whether someone ignorant of the Gospel can be saved, and the clear teaching of the Church is yes, a person who is ignorant of the Gospel can be saved.
We are not speaking of willful ignorance as in one who understands the teaching of the Church and rejects it. We are talking about invincible ignorance…“through no fault of their own”.

It is at our own peril that we reject this hope for all people and these teachings. To whom much is given much is expected. I try to keep in mind what it means to be Catholic. Catholics have no excuse to ignorance. And no excuse for misrepresenting the faith, because the Church clearly expresses it, and it is usually expressed in fairly simple words. Not easy words, but clearly.

The other misconception that needs to be clarified is: ignorance of the Gospel is not a result of or an indicator of mortal sin. The Church does not teach this, and it presents an erroneous condemnation of people who are guilty of nothing. That determination belongs to no one.
For example a person born Bhuddist is guilty of nothing per se. All human beings are born with the common burden of original sin, but that is not personal sin.

Observe the tone with which the Church sees other religions. The Church looks for the good in those where they exist, and sees those goods as preparation for the Gospel.
 
Last edited:
Loving thy neighbor (and even thine enemy, as Jesus taught) should not stop after they die. As Hillel the Elder also stated prior to Jesus, love of G-d and others are the two great commandments of the Law, and all the rest is commentary.
 
meltzerboy2 said:
As Hillel the Elder also stated prior to Jesus, love of G-d and others are the two great commandments of the Law, and all the rest is commentary.
Click to expand...
Indeed. And a fact that I point out often myself is that if anything about your faith or your understanding is not in alignment with those two verses, then there is something deficient in your faith or understanding. Those two verses are the ultimate test of what it means to be a Christian, or, as you rightly point out, a Jew, as well.
 
meltzerboy2 said:
Loving thy neighbor (and even thine enemy, as Jesus taught)
Click to expand...
Also, it is not insignificant that, in the Gospel, immediately after Jesus states the two commandments, he illustrates this with the parable of the Good Samaritan, a hated enemy of the Jews at the time, because tthe Samaritans were, in Christian parlance, heretics. Replace the word “Samaritan” with “Muslim”, “Atheist” or “Gay person”, and the meaning of this parable is much easier to understand in today’s world.
 
Good question. I too am no theologian, and I don’t know if there are any Jewish writings that far back on the issue. Maybe you can take the question to the thread “Answers from an Orthodox Jew” and Moses613 might have some information. I was just speaking from my own viewpoint, not necessarily from a Jewish perspective.
 
This thread has gone off in many different directions. I will try to quickly summarize where we left off .

Quotes from Scripture (Divine Law) along with quotes from the Catholic Church afterward have been posted in this discussion confirming the continuous belief of the Church on certain doctrines. Yet today we are seeing the exact opposite being taught in many areas. For example:
  • Quotes from Scripture condemn those who do not believe in Jesus or the Gospels. Quotes from subsequent popes concur. Yet people today are openly saying this is not true or is optional
  • Quotes from Scripture and the Church condemn praying or worshiping in common with non-Catholics, using the strongest words and penalties. Yet today it is praiseworthy!
  • The main mission of the Catholic Church has always been to convert others to the Catholic faith. How many dedicated (and lost) their lives doing so over the centuries! Now Catholics are going around saying there is no need to convert people and everyone goes to heaven!
  • Quotes from past popes condemn the evolution of doctrine and evolution of it’s meaning. Yet Catholics today fully approve of evolution of doctrine as though the condemnation was never given!
People are losing their sense of what Catholicism is. Divine Law cannot be changed, and the Catholic Church has always guarded it century to century. Truth does not change, and this is why the Church is called “the pillar and ground of truth”. Yet many Catholics today still ignore the fact that the opposite of many of the doctrines mentioned are being promoted. How did this happen is the question. Two opposing doctrines cannot be true at the same time so it’s not like Catholics can be indifferent about this.
 
Eddie18 said:
This thread has gone off in many different directions. I will try to quickly summarize where we left off .

Quotes from Scripture (Divine Law) along with quotes from the Catholic Church afterward have been posted in this discussion confirming the continuous belief of the Church on certain doctrines. Yet today we are seeing the exact opposite being taught in many areas. For example:
  • Quotes from Scripture condemn those who do not believe in Jesus or the Gospels. Quotes from subsequent popes concur. Yet people today are openly saying this is not true or is optional
  • Quotes from Scripture and the Church condemn praying or worshiping in common with non-Catholics, using the strongest words and penalties. Yet today it is praiseworthy!
  • The main mission of the Catholic Church has always been to convert others to the Catholic faith. How many dedicated (and lost) their lives doing so over the centuries! Now Catholics are going around saying there is no need to convert people and everyone goes to heaven!
  • Quotes from past popes condemn the evolution of doctrine and evolution of it’s meaning. Yet Catholics today fully approve of evolution of doctrine as though the condemnation was never given!
People are losing their sense of what Catholicism is. Divine Law cannot be changed, and the Catholic Church has always guarded it century to century. Truth does not change, and this is why the Church is called “the pillar and ground of truth”. Yet many Catholics today still ignore the fact that the opposite of many of the doctrines mentioned are being promoted. How did this happen is the question. Two opposing doctrines cannot be true at the same time so it’s not like Catholics can be indifferent about this.
Click to expand...
If you want to say that you think the Magisterium and Catechism are teaching heresy why don’t you just come out and say it? The coyness gets really annoying after a while. Just come out and say what you think and be done with it.
 
Eddie18 said:
People are losing their sense of what Catholicism is.
Click to expand...
Actually, I don’t think so. Quite the opposite. People are coming to a fuller appreciation of what Catholicism is. Pope Francis has been a great leader in this regard.

Pope Francis is recently reported to have said to a Gay man that it doesn’t matter whether he is Gay or not, God loves him all the same. Many conservative Catholics went apeshit over this comment, but Cardinal Dolan, who is far from liberal, pointed out that the Pope’s comment was actually conservative orthodox Catholic teaching, and was something beautiful that he could imagine Jesus himself saying it.

https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-u...onservative-orthodox-with-gay-abuse-survivor/

The problem lies with your understanding of what the Church is and how it works in this world. Many of the contradictions you see are precisely that, a discrepancy between what you imagine what Scriptures and Church teaching are, and what they really are. This is because you lack the training to even begin exploring them on your own. Which is why I keep referring you to your pastor or spiritual advisor.

Yes, it’s possible to be an eighty year old cradle Catholic and have entirely missed the point of our faith. Trust me, you are far from the first, and far from the only one.
 
Last edited:
Of course Cardinal Dolan has also been criticized by traditional Catholics, unjustly in my view.
 
meltzerboy2 said:
Of course Cardinal Dolan has also been criticized by traditional Catholics, unjustly in my view.
Click to expand...
Which kind of goes to the point of deMonfort’s question in post #540 above. Can someone who believes the Church is teaching heresy be considered a Catholic in the first place, or is it rather them who have fallen into heresy?
 
“Eddie18 said:
People are losing their sense of what Catholicism is.
/quote]

True. Modernism has led many people to individualist fundamentalism. This cuts across all political subdivisions: trad to progressive.

leads to several errors:
It leads to proof texting of scripture and Church documents.

Denial of the living Magisterium. The Church is a living Body.

Denial of the Church as a community, or, as the Mystical Body of Christ. This leads to the arrogance of individualist interpretations that stray from the community. Not much different than Protestantism ironically.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top