Are Protestants Saved?

[gabriel22a]

First, I didn’t call them names, I did point out the sin of pride and the fact that they are saying things that are untrue and spreading falsehoods. That is not name calling. Second, I have read the scriptures. And it is stated that we need to defend the truth. So, does our Catechism say this.

And, I am a kind person, and I do care. I have had many nice conversations with non-believers, including athiests, protestants and muslims… But to hear over and over about how we worship Mary…is not something that should be allowed to let go. It is a lie.

To allow people to believe iies is to not love them and to allow them to go on believing those lies can possibly endanger their salvation; this is a dis-service to them.

I will apologize for getting perhaps too emotional… but, to say that we disobey the First Commandment as a regular practice of our faith…was just too much for me.

I understand your frustration. My emotions ran kind of high at the phrase “prideful protestants.” Offenses do that. And I apologize if you felt I was calling you an unkind person–I believe you when you say that you are not.

And I agree that lies should be corrected–outright lies like the one you addressed with “Mary worship.” Especially when people should know better.

I finally figured out why some people here don’t believe the CCC in regards to salvation outside of the Church. I researched a lot, so in that regard, this forum has been very good for me. I don’t agree with them, but they are not my enemy, they are my brothers in Christ. So now when I am told that by not agreeing with them on this matter I am not accepting a dogma of the Church which is a precursor to going to hell, I at least know where they are coming from. Makes me feel less defensive.

Thanks for responding and God bless.

 

[Christ_Imitator]

I also know that people have many personal interpritations of what the Bible says & means. So, do you think that if someone was to interpret something incorectly, and never repented, because they didn’t interpret it to be a sin, that they would go to Hell?

 

[Janet1983]

Out of context means pulling quotes from something without giving or having a full understanding of the historical, social, etc. surroundings. It wasn’t until I read an article written by someone for EWTN that I understood. Some people take a part of Scripture out of context and make it mean something unintended. Likewise, some people take partial teachings of the Magesterium out of context and make it mean something unintended.

I think this is what bpbasilpx was referring to on another post.

And I don’t think it’s crazy to believe what the CCC teaches. Those who wrote it and approved it were well aware of all of your quotes listed.

What kind of context could ever change the meaning of “We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” as Treba quoted it? Said sentence is the last one in a bull from 1302… It was declared and the overall meaning is not changed within the context.

 

[Leonius]

I also know that people have many personal interpritations of what the Bible says & means. So, do you think that if someone was to interpret something incorectly, and never repented, because they didn’t interpret it to be a sin, that they would go to Hell?

I am a Catholic, we don’t do private interpretations of Scripture we accept Gods revelation as made known by Him through His Church, through His chosen leader of His people.

If people upon hearing the teachings of God’s Church refuse to consent to it then yes they sin.

Only those successors of the Apostles chosen by God have authority from God to teach His true doctrines. We do not have the authority to decide for ourselves what kind of God we want, we have to ACCEPT the ONE TRUE GOD as He makes Himself known.

Throughout the scriptures God sends His one chosen flock one man to lead them, He has never given every single one of his flock the same individual authority as protestants pretend to have.

First there was Adam, then Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David. Then there was Chirst Himself and since then there has been Peter and his successors.

“Father figures”, are all throughout Holy Scripture. You can readily see that GOD always provided a “Father Figure” on earth to shepherd His people. GOD is the invisible head of His people, and His “Father Figure” is the visible head.

It is no different today.

GOD is the same yesterday, today and forever. The truth never changes. Since GOD is infinite truth, how then could He possibly change, since any change would then imply a defect in the truth?

GOD always dealt with His people through one man. Protestants deny this and try to each be that man because they are to proud to submit to another.

This is one of the fundamental differences between Catholics and protestants, Catholics accept the ONE TRUE FAITH from the ONE TRUE GOD while protestants play guessing games trying to come up with a version of religion they themselves like while protesting against the True Religion.

 

[Tradycja]

Protestants cannot be saved as Protestants, they must become Catholic.

Check out this video of Vin Lewis:

youtube.com/watch?v=RC7gdDQKvwA

 

[gabriel22a]

What kind of context could ever change the meaning of “We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” as Treba quoted it? Said sentence is the last one in a bull from 1302… It was declared and the overall meaning is not changed within the context.

That was what I wondered, so I looked. I found a lot of information, but the most succinct was a short historical explanation of the quotes that are repeatedly “cut and pasted” on this thread. The article is worth reading because it does place those statements in historical context and explains how the Church understands them.

I was relieved to find out that the majority of Catholic scholars, priests, the Pope and laity do not subscribe to a literal interpretation or broad application of those “dogmas”, that they were written to address particular issues and not intended to be used as they have been. “Outside the Church” is seen more as “outside of Christ.” I was also glad to find out that those who subscribe to an extremely legalistic viewpoint on this matter are in the minority.

I mentioned it earlier, but I come from a family comprised entirely of Protestants, many of whom, including myself, are/were pastors. I resented the implication that they were all going to hell, because the first I heard of it was on this forum–certainly not the CCC, RCIA or anything else I read. Thus my desire to understand.

As I’m sure you know, in the early 1950s a Jesuit priest named Leonard Feeny (sp?) was instructed to stop teaching this, refused, was called to Rome, refused to come, and then was excommunicated for disobedience. So it is not a new issue.

You might want to take a look at the article:

ewtn.com/library/answers/extreccl.htm

God bless.

 

[gabriel22a]

Protestants cannot be saved as Protestants, they must become Catholic.

Check out this video of Vin Lewis:

youtube.com/watch?v=RC7gdDQKvwA

Again, the Church does not teach this. Your view has been rejected by the Vatican. You have the right to believe this, but it is not in line with the current teaching of the Church.

The links to St. Benedict Center, et al: This is where Feeney taught and gathered his followers.

 

[ac_claire]

I do believe in him completley, I thought I made that clear in my post.
I am not one of these fence-sitters either (also known as “lukewarm” christians).

You’re saying that now and maybe you’re even sincere, but the rest of your words here say different. You said: “Personaly, I figure, if for that small chance God isn’t there, I’ve lived my life for something that I think is important, and I worked my hardest at it.”

and “the Bible is typically my final authoirty in any situation.” Typically? Something as serious as a Final Authority either is or isn’t.

“From what I know, we can not be certain that something unseen & unheard is real. However, we have things around us that we see & hear that can tell us there’s a god. But it does not tell us that it’s the God from our Holy Bible.”

This is doubt, you’ve subscribed to Pasqual’s Wager instead of just choosing to believe in what you know is true. Because you don’t really know if it’s true or not. Maybe you imagine it’s safer that way? True faith involves a certain kind of courage and risk, which you’ve refused to take. You’re going to believe in what’s true no matter the cost. That’s why they call it a “leap of faith”.

You’re very much sitting on the fence. You need to make a commitment one way or the other or resign yourself to being lukewarm (at best).

 

[gabriel22a]

This is one of the fundamental differences between Catholics and protestants, Catholics accept the ONE TRUE FAITH from the ONE TRUE GOD while protestants play guessing games trying to come up with a version of religion they themselves like while protesting against the True Religion.

I really wish you could understand the mindset of most Protestants. Modern Protestants are not consciously rejecting the “True Religion.” They are not aware of this Catholic teaching. They were raised on “sola scriptura” and are not stubbornly refusing to come into the Church. This view of Protestants shows the same lack of knowledge that Protestants have about Catholicism. So maybe you can’t understand their mindset and believe that they are actively rejecting the Church.

I agree that it is hard to be a Protestant–not having the sacraments or a final authority creates confusion. That’s why I appreciated Pope John Paul II. His obvious love for Christ and people encouraged me to look into the Catholic faith.

 

[jam070406]

That was what I wondered, so I looked. I found a lot of information, but the most succinct was a short historical explanation of the quotes that are repeatedly “cut and pasted” on this thread. The article is worth reading because it does place those statements in historical context and explains how the Church understands them.

I was relieved to find out that the majority of Catholic scholars, priests, the Pope and laity do not subscribe to a literal interpretation or broad application of those “dogmas”, that they were written to address particular issues and not intended to be used as they have been. “Outside the Church” is seen more as “outside of Christ.” I was also glad to find out that those who subscribe to an extremely legalistic viewpoint on this matter are in the minority.

I mentioned it earlier, but I come from a family comprised entirely of Protestants, many of whom, including myself, are/were pastors. I resented the implication that they were all going to hell, because the first I heard of it was on this forum–certainly not the CCC, RCIA or anything else I read. Thus my desire to understand.

As I’m sure you know, in the early 1950s a Jesuit priest named Leonard Feeny (sp?) was instructed to stop teaching this, refused, was called to Rome, refused to come, and then was excommunicated for disobedience. So it is not a new issue.

You might want to take a look at the article:

ewtn.com/library/answers/extreccl.htm

God bless.

You have to keep in mind that the condition that someone outside the Church may be saved is through no fault of their own.

I would think that a Pastor of a denomination has heard the claims of the Catholic Church and either rejects them or refuses to enter her out of pride.

Willful rejection of Catholic Truths is grave matter.
Also, not having the sacraments would make it very very very very difficult.

 

[gabriel22a]

You have to keep in mind that the condition that someone outside the Church may be saved is through no fault of their own.

I would think that a Pastor of a denomination has heard the claims of the Catholic Church and either rejects them or refuses to enter her out of pride.

Willful rejection of Catholic Truths is grave matter.
Also, not having the sacraments would make it very very very very difficult.

As a Bible college student, we were not taught the claims of the Catholic Church. Especially not the concept that Catholics believe they belong to the one true church and everyone else was bound for hell. If I had known that some Catholics believed this or had it been presented as the current stated position of the Church, I would have found it cultish. Obviously I can’t speak for all colleges. But most denominational colleges tend to focus on teaching their own doctrine and the study of Scripture.

As a matter of fact, I didn’t know a single Catholic until I joined RCIA. When I heard there were 400,000 Catholics in our archdiocese I was surprised.

And believing what you are taught from childhood is not pride–unless it causes you to be arrogant and self-righteous. This is why the current teachings of the Church specifically address those who were raised as “separated brethren.” If you are one of the posters on this thread who does not accept the current teachings of the Church in this matter, than this discussion is moot. We have a difference of opinion on what is valid Church teaching, and so I don’t know if agreement can be found.

 

[Leonius]

I really wish you could understand the mindset of most Protestants. Modern Protestants are not consciously rejecting the “True Religion.” They are not aware of this Catholic teaching. They were raised on “sola scriptura” and are not stubbornly refusing to come into the Church. This view of Protestants shows the same lack of knowledge that Protestants have about Catholicism. So maybe you can’t understand their mindset and believe that they are actively rejecting the Church.

I agree that it is hard to be a Protestant–not having the sacraments or a final authority creates confusion. That’s why I appreciated Pope John Paul II. His obvious love for Christ and people encouraged me to look into the Catholic faith.

I have talked to lots of them, they do reject Catholic teaching, they refuse to obey “man made doctrines” as they call them. Then there are others who are culpably ignorant because they do not bother to look into Catholicism even though it is all around them nor the history of their own religious community which if they did would show them that it was not founded by God at all.

 

[gabriel22a]

I have talked to lots of them, they do reject Catholic teaching, they refuse to obey “man made doctrines” as they call them. Then there are others who are culpably ignorant because they do not bother to look into Catholicism even though it is all around them nor the history of their own religious community which if they did would show them that it was not founded by God at all.

I’m glad you talk to Protestants. I didn’t know any Catholics until I joined RCIA. (Unless you count Pope John Paul II from a distance)

 

[JustaServant]

I’m glad you talk to Protestants. I didn’t know any Catholics until I joined RCIA. (Unless you count Pope John Paul II from a distance)

We’re very good at hiding our horns and tails.

 

[gabriel22a]

We’re very good at hiding our horns and tails.

Funny picture!

 

[PJM]

Originally Posted by gabriel22a
I hope you’re right. If you’re wrong, I was lied to in RCIA, by my priest, deacon and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Protestants who are ignorant of the Catholic faith and teaching, yet live lives of faith in Jesus Christ are not going to hell, Nicole. Your quotes do not prove this. Catholics, on the other hand, who go through all the right motions–and I’m not accusing you of this–but have unbelieving hearts, just might.

***While the idea is correct, the expression of the CC Teaching on the issue is misrepresented by incompletness.

“Protestants who are” does not include all Protestants who for example believe in OSAS thelogy. God who can be described as “All and only all good perfectly” is bound by His Divine Nature to judge all humanity fairly and justly. God cannot change His already perfect Nature. So id a OSAS person dies in Mortal sin, they are not going to heaven, any more than a Catholic who dies in Mortal sin. ***

Here is the current teaching of the RCC. Please note that it has not changed, it has only been granted further insite into God’s Divine Nature.

CCC 814 From the beginning, this one Church has been marked by a great diversity which comes from both the variety of God’s gifts and the diversity of those who receive them. Within the unity of the People of God, a multiplicity of peoples and cultures is gathered together. Among the Church’s members, there are different gifts, offices, conditions, and ways of life. “Holding a rightful place in the communion of the Church there are also particular Churches that retain their own traditions.” The great richness of such diversity is not opposed to the Church’s unity. Yet sin and the burden of its consequences constantly threaten the gift of unity. And so the Apostle has to exhort Christians to "maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace."

***CCC 846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it."***

CCC 841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day."

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire." The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.

***CCC 1037 God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”: ***

 

[jam070406]

As a Bible college student, we were not taught the claims of the Catholic Church. Especially not the concept that Catholics believe they belong to the one true church and everyone else was bound for hell. If I had known that some Catholics believed this or had it been presented as the current stated position of the Church, I would have found it cultish. Obviously I can’t speak for all colleges. But most denominational colleges tend to focus on teaching their own doctrine and the study of Scripture.

As a matter of fact, I didn’t know a single Catholic until I joined RCIA. When I heard there were 400,000 Catholics in our archdiocese I was surprised.

And believing what you are taught from childhood is not pride–unless it causes you to be arrogant and self-righteous. This is why the current teachings of the Church specifically address those who were raised as “separated brethren.” If you are one of the posters on this thread who does not accept the current teachings of the Church in this matter, than this discussion is moot. We have a difference of opinion on what is valid Church teaching, and so I don’t know if agreement can be found.

Take it easy. I’m not sure why you are getting defensive. I don’t reject Catholic teaching. I merely pointed out that it is difficult. In this day and age there are many resources available about The Church and it’s teachings to access, especially for a Bible College! Perhaps you should contact that college and demand to know why the ancient Faith that was taught in the early Church and is continued to be taught is not even mentioned at their college.

I stand by what I said. The Church says may…through no fault of their own. It has taught this for a long time.
Please explain how I am, “rejecting current teaching”
To even assume that there is a current teaching is to assume that Truth changes and this is false.

Btw, I know plenty of Protestants that reject the Church and scoff at my beliefs, including Pastors. Maybe we have just had different experiences.

I apologize if I came off too harsh or offensive. But don’t assume the worst of me or accuse me of being dissident. I take offense to that.

 

[Christ_Imitator]

This is one of the fundamental differences between Catholics and protestants, Catholics accept the ONE TRUE FAITH from the ONE TRUE GOD while protestants play guessing games trying to come up with a version of religion they themselves like while protesting against the True Religion.

Please explain to me where you get this crazy idea.

What I gathered from what you said…is that Catholics know that the way they interpret the Bible, because they are Catholic. I don’t understand that logic?
Why do you think that the Protestant Churches are wrong in the way they interpret the Bible? Do you think it’s part of God’s plan that we have different ideas of what the Bible is telling us? And, there are different types of “Catholics” out there, maybe you are part of the wrong Catholic Church, and your interpritations of the Bible are wrong too.

ac claire, please explain to me how you can know 100% that the Bible is the true word of God, and that it is completley without error. This is what I was really trying to get at I guess; not so much the existance of God, because I truly believe he is out there.

 

[AnneElliot]

There is no salvation outside the Church.

Instead of quibbling about whether or not (or how) ignorance, etc. might be salvific for this or that person; pray, and bring people to the light of Truth when you are given the opportunity.

 

[gabriel22a]

PJM:

I would like to add the section on Wounds to unity:

CCC 817 In fact “in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church–for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame.” The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ’s Body–here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism–do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.

CCC 818 "However one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers…All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."

CCC 819 “Furthermore, many elements of sancitification and of truth” are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: “the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements.” Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to “Catholic unity.”

Bold and italics mine to break up and highlight the long passages.