Catholic Cardinal says we no longer need Jesus

[Scott_Waddell]

excatholic:

Don’t be upset with me they are not my Words, the are the Words of our Savior. No one goes to heaven without Jesus, not even Mary!

And there is the tip of the hand. The implication here of course is that Catholics believe and teach that Mary did not need a savior. This betrays a fundamental lack of knowledge of Catholic teaching. It is always amazing (and entertaining if you think about it) when people come on a Catholic forum in an effort to unsell us from Catholicism and can not even correctly articulate even rudimental teachings of the faith. Of course the question is what is being sold in its place? Why do some think being esoteric is going to fly?

Scott

 

[carol_marie]

jimmy:

Maybe he did. You do not know he didn’t and it does not say in the article.

I did reread the full article - he was using them as an example of good non-Christians who he thought would go to heaven. How do I know that he didn’t share Christ with them? Well if he did and they rejected then they, by the CCC definition aren’t going to heaven and if they accepted Christ then they are no longer examples of good non Christians who ARE going to heaven.

Besides, he stated in the article that it’s no longer a good idea to proseletize (sp?) because it makes people mad - pushing our religion on them.

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

excatholic:

Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999

Potential Pope Declares Jesus Is NotThe Only Way!

Cardinal Francis Arinze, who’s considered a possible successor to Pope John Paul II, has denied Jesus is the only way to heaven. In a recent interview the pope’s spirited 66 year-old deputy for outreach to other religions was asked, “So was Jesus wrong when he said he was the way, the truth and the life?” Arinze responed, “If a person were to push what you said a little further and say that if you’re not a Christian you’re not going to heaven, we’d regard that person as a fundamentalist…and theologically wrong. I met in Pakistan a Muslim. He had a wonderful concept of the Koran. We were like two twins that had known one another from birth. And I was in admiration of this man’s wisdom. I think that man will go to heaven. There was a Buddhist in Kyoto, in Japan. This man, a good man, open, listening, humble–I was amazed. I listened to his works of wisdom and said to myself, 'The grace of God is working in this man.” The interviewer then repeated the question, “So you can still get to heaven without accepting Jesus?” “Expressly, yes [he laughs with the audience].” (Dallas Morning News, 3/20/99) Read John 14:6 and Acts 4:12

Council of Trent 1545-1564

CANON lI.-If any one saith, that, in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denieth that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood-the species Only of the bread and wine remaining-which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation; let him be anathema.

So let me get this straight, anyone can get to heaven and we don’t need Jesus to get there. I am anathema (damned or condemned) because I cant swallow transubstantiation, no pun intended.

To anyone who relies upon the RCC for salvation know this. John 14:5-6 says “5 Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, and how can we know the way? 6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me

If you read the article again you’ll see that this bishop didn’t say that we no longer need Jesus, as you’ve claimed. He was explaining Church teaching that not only Christians go to heaven. He wasn’t speaking of those who knowingly reject Jesus, but of those who don’t know him through no fault of their own. I saw that pretty clearly. It’s interesting that you had an entirely different read on it.

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[carol_marie]

Catholic4aReasn:

If you read the article again you’ll see that this bishop didn’t say that we no longer need Jesus, as you’ve claimed. He was explaining Church teaching that not only Christians go to heaven. He wasn’t speaking of those who knowingly reject Jesus, but of those who don’t know him through no fault of their own. I saw that pretty clearly. It’s interesting that you had an entirely different read on it.

In Christ,
Nancy

But why didn’t HE tell them about Jesus - that’s the part I just don’t understand. But he answers that doesn’t he… he said they were good & humble and he felt they would make it to heaven based on that. Obvously if they NEVER heard of Jesus - lived on some remote island somewhere and no one ever mentioned Jesus I agree that God is merciful. But give me a break… they are meeting with a Catholic Cardinal! Who do THEY think he represents?

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

excatholic:

My Church can trace its roots back to the Jerusalem church that was founded by Christ and the Apostles.

Hi excatholic!!

Which Church is that, specifically? Thanks!

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Originally Posted by PaulDupre
This supposed article is an urban legend started by the Seventh-Day Adventists. The real article from the Dallas Morning News is printed in the next post below. Notice that it is very different from the SDA version. Cardinal Arinze posits that everyone should be Christian. In fact he says that everyone who finds the fullnes of truth will become a Christian. Those who never have the opportunity to know Jesus but nonetheless seek God with a sincere and open heart can still be saved by means known only to God. This is right in line with the Catechism.
Paul

excatholic:

Sorry Paul it is not in line with what Jesus said in John 14:6

Sure it is, excatholic!! Those who never had the opportunity to know Jesus can still be saved BY JESUS. There is no salvation by any other name. That’s perfectly in line with John 14:6!

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[jimmy]

excatholic:

I have read it many times and the Cardinal was wrong. Funny thing is though, this seems to be the doctrine of the RCC as the pope was kisssing the quran. I am nothing more than a Christian. If you want, you may refer to me as a protestant but the only thing in this world I protest is religion. I see religion as fig leafs, a way for man to cover his nakedness. Adam tried this and it was not acceptable. God had to kill an animal for its skin to cover man. Something had to die. Jesus is the last sin offering we ever needed. My Church can trace its roots back to the Jerusalem church that was founded by Christ and the Apostles. Your state run religion can trace its roots to something called the Edict of Milan 313CE. There was a curch in Rome before the edict and it was a Christian church that was persecuted for about 300 years before Constantine. The RCC is an apostasy that Paul warned us about in Galations1:6-9
6 I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, 7 which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.
The RCC is clearly a different gospel than the one taught by the Apostles. Read all of the dogma of your church and you will see many things contrary to the bible.

You are so confused. I would like to see your church traced through history back to the church in Jerusalem. I can give you a list of all the popes going all the way back to the apostles.
kensmen.com/catholic/rock.html
Along the side of the page it shows all the popes.

I can give you quotes from Ignatius, who was a disciple of John, in about 100AD telling all christians to follow the bishops in everything they do.
catholicfirst.com/thefaith/churchfathers/volume01/ignatius02.cfm
read chapters 3 and 4 in the above.

I can give you quotes from Irenaeus, mid second century, saying that all churches should obey the church at Rome because of its pre-eminent authority.

1. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre- eminent authority,(3) that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere. Against Heresies Book 3 Chapter 3

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

carol marie:

But why didn’t HE tell them about Jesus - that’s the part I just don’t understand. But he answers that doesn’t he… he said they were good & humble and he felt they would make it to heaven based on that. Obvously if they NEVER heard of Jesus - lived on some remote island somewhere and no one ever mentioned Jesus I agree that God is merciful. But give me a break… they are meeting with a Catholic Cardinal! Who do THEY think he represents?

I guess I missed the part where he said that he didn’t share Jesus with them. He should have. In any case, knowing ABOUT Jesus isn’t the same as KNOWING Jesus. The seed can be planted but if there is no follow up it’s not likely to bloom. That’s not to say that the bishop shouldn’t have bothered planting the seed. He should have. It’s what we’re all called to do.

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[jimmy]

He also traces the first 13 bishops of Rome(popes).

1. The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having occurred among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome despatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace, renewing their faith, and declaring the tradition which it had lately received from the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent, the Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man, who brought on the deluge, and called Abraham, who led the people from the land of Egypt, spake with Moses, set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has prepared fire for the devil and his angels. From this document, whosoever chooses to do so, may learn that He, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, was preached by the Churches, and may also understand the apostolical tradition of the Church, since this Epistle is of older date than these men who are now propagating falsehood, and who conjure into existence another god beyond the Creator and the Maker of all existing things. To this Clement there succeeded Evaristus. Alexander followed Evaristus; then, sixth from the apostles, Sixtus was appointed; after him, Telephorus, who was gloriously martyred; then Hyginus; after him, Pius; then after him, Anicetus. Sorer having succeeded Anicetus, Eleutherius does now, in the twelfth place from the apostles, hold the inheritance of the episcopate. In this order, and by this succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the apostles until now, and handed down in truth. Against Heresies Book 3 Chapter 3

You say that the RCC was started in 313 with the edict of milan. The bible is an RCC book then and does not belong to your church. In 382, 393, and 397 the RCC decided on the canon of the bible. There was no bible before then. This article talks about the old testament canon.
catholic.com/library/Old_Testament_Canon.asp
Please show me your church in history.

 

[jimmy]

carol marie:

I did reread the full article - he was using them as an example of good non-Christians who he thought would go to heaven. How do I know that he didn’t share Christ with them? Well if he did and they rejected then they, by the CCC definition aren’t going to heaven and if they accepted Christ then they are no longer examples of good non Christians who ARE going to heaven.

Besides, he stated in the article that it’s no longer a good idea to proseletize (sp?) because it makes people mad - pushing our religion on them.

He stated that proseletism is bad because it is focused on forcing people to come to your religion. God gave us free will, so we should choose his church.

 

[WBB]

carol marie:

I did reread the full article - he was using them as an example of good non-Christians who he thought would go to heaven. How do I know that he didn’t share Christ with them? Well if he did and they rejected then they, by the CCC definition aren’t going to heaven and if they accepted Christ then they are no longer examples of good non Christians who ARE going to heaven.

Besides, he stated in the article that it’s no longer a good idea to proseletize (sp?) because it makes people mad - pushing our religion on them.

No, that is not what he said. You misunderstood him. He said that proselytizing in the way it is defined today is unjust. God wants us to respond to His Truth, not be coerced into it. Like he said, it is not right for us to say, “If you convert to my faith, I will feed you.” Do you understand how that is not just? Now, you being a “former” evangelical Christian can surely see this. If someone were to come to you and say, “Unless you become a Catholic you will go to hell” how would you have responded? Our job is not to shove the gospel down someone’s throat, but to live the gospel and pray that people respond to it. It is not for us to decide who goes to heaven or not. It is up to us to present the message of the gospel and let the Holy Spirit do the rest. That is all that the good Cardinal is saying. I loved how you responded that you weren’t impressed with Cardinal Arinze. That fascinated me, because he could very well be Pope one day, and then what would you do?

 

[carol_marie]

Jimmy,

Who cares what church exCatholic attends? He obvously can’t trace it far and I’m betting it’s one of those store front jobs. Who cares? Let him be… he’s only trying to engage you. I think you should be more concerned with the fact that this Cardinal, a possible Pope someday (?) thinks that rather than telling his wonderful new-found friends about Jesus, which, accoding to him can make people so testy, he’ll count on God’s mercy to accept them because they are good & humble. That is sad beyond words. And then to talk about it… what about all the Buddists or muslums listening or reading the Cardinals words - they may assume that they are just fine without Jesus also. Soon God is going to make the rocks cry out.

 

[bones_IV]

Excatholic,
Let me help you. First off, salvation is not aimed at those who are ignorant of Christ and his church. Why would God condemn someone for not having known the name of Christ. Sure heard the name yes, but not knowing what Christ really was. God therefore would never condemn them for something that’s not their fault. He’s much more forgiving than that. If that wasn’t so He would be cease to be God. Everybody is entitled to know the truth.
Is a muslim a relgious person? Yes, he is. A religious person is one who does sacrifices, rituals and that kind thing. We are religious people by our own nature of course. I really believe that the first step towards evangilizing the Gospel is dialoging with people of other faiths. Therefore establishing respect for other religions. Not everyone thinks the way we do. God bless you!

Padre Pio “Don’t worry, work and pray.”

 

[carol_marie]

ICXCNIKA:

Acutally, I think the pun was intended.

The Cardinal said that the grace of God was working on that man. No one can seek to do what is right or seek the divine unless the grace of God draw that person. It may not be sanctifying grace, but it is grace.

I may not have the facts exactly straight, but I think the Council of Trent was addressing those Christians who denied the Church’s teaching on the Eucharist.

Jesus told his disciples in Luke 10:16, “He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

St. John says, in his first epistle "We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood. " 4:6

If you want to follow Jesus, the Way, Truth and Life, follow His Church.

I think it’s almost comical that this verse was used to validate the Cardinal’s opinion that the good & humble Buddist & Muslum are going to heaven. Please notice that in the first verse quoted Jesus said “He who LISTENS to you listens to me.” See- we actually NEED TO TALK ABOUT JESUS! He was talking about us sharing the Gospel. Also, in the second verse again St. John said they must listen to us… which means, obviously, we MUST TALK ABOUT JESUS.

The Cardinal, possible next Pope didn’t say he did that. Instead, he said they were heaven bound based on their own merits.

As you stated, if you want to follow Jesus, follow his church - that may be true. Unfortunatly, according to this article, the Cardinal didn’t present that option.

 

[jimmy]

carol marie:

Jimmy,

Who cares what church exCatholic attends? He obvously can’t trace it far and I’m betting it’s one of those store front jobs. Who cares? Let him be… he’s only trying to engage you. I think you should be more concerned with the fact that this Cardinal, a possible Pope someday (?) thinks that rather than telling his wonderful new-found friends about Jesus, which, accoding to him can make people so testy, he’ll count on God’s mercy to accept them because they are good & humble. That is sad beyond words. And then to talk about it… what about all the Buddists or muslums listening or reading the Cardinals words - they may assume that they are just fine without Jesus also. Soon God is going to make the rocks cry out.

He made the statement, he should be able to back it up.

The cardinal is not saying that Jesus is not needed. He is saying that everyone will be judged according to what they know of God. God will not judge a man to hell because he heard the name Jesus once or twice. The man may not have been convinced and he may think that bhudism is the truth. It is as with the protestants. They have heard of the Catholic church but they still do not accept it. They will not all be judged straight to hell because they heard of the catholic church. They will be judged by what they know.

The cardinal is offering his opinion when he says that he thinks they may make it to heaven. He says he is “not the one who opens the door.” He knows he does not know whether the muslim or the bhudist is going to heaven. He does believe God is mercyful which is completely true with the bible and the church. The cardinal may be right and he may be wrong.

His point was not that it is fine to be outside the church. He states that everyone has an unequal opportunity. He realizes that Christianity is the way.

If someone reads the article and just assumes they are fine outside christianity that is bad. That is a blaitant rejection of the truth. They are not being honest and that will send them to hell.

I can’t respond anymore tonight but if you post I will respond tomorrow.

Have a good night. Talk to you tomorrow.

 

[carol_marie]

I honestly don’t know how to respond. I feel like I’m trapped in one of those Bush/Kerry conversations from the Political forum… I see it so clearly black & white and yet you can’t?

I get it that through no fault of their own, some non-Christians may be saved.

I get it that it’s not nice to offer food to only those who accept Christ.

What I don’t get is a Cardinal giving the example of two wonderful good humble people - Muslum and Buddist who he believes will go to heaven apart from our Savior Jesus Christ. He met with them. He talked to them. They had so much in common he felt like they were twins. And yet he didn’t lead them to Christ because people don’t like that -he said it becomes a debate and not a dialogue. He said we should find common ground? What sort of common ground do I have with someone who (possibly unknowingly) serves Satan? Jesus said if we aren’t with Him we are against Him. There are only two sides… God’s & Satan’s. I can’t imagine God is pleased with the Cardinal’s actions. And how would I feel, one poster asked if he was the next Pope? If this article is true, and it all went down just like it’s stated? I’d feel like this:

 

[WBB]

carol marie:

I honestly don’t know how to respond. I feel like I’m trapped in one of those Bush/Kerry conversations from the Political forum… I see it so clearly black & white and yet you can’t?

I get it that through no fault of their own, some non-Christians may be saved.

I get it that it’s not nice to offer food to only those who accept Christ.

What I don’t get is a Cardinal giving the example of two wonderful good humble people - Muslum and Buddist who he believes will go to heaven apart from our Savior Jesus Christ. He met with them. He talked to them. They had so much in common he felt like they were twins. And yet he didn’t lead them to Christ because people don’t like that -he said it becomes a debate and not a dialogue. He said we should find common ground? What sort of common ground do I have with someone who (possibly unknowingly) serves Satan? Jesus said if we aren’t with Him we are against Him. There are only two sides… God’s & Satan’s. I can’t imagine God is pleased with the Cardinal’s actions. And how would I feel, one poster asked if he was the next Pope? If this article is true, and it all went down just like it’s stated? I’d feel like this:

But who is to say that he didn’t discuss Christ with those people. The thing is this, the Cardinal is saying that we can plant the seed, but only the Holy Spirit can lead someone to Christ. Even Jesus says this. We have to present the gospel in our words and actions and then pray for God’s justice and mercy. It is really out of our hands after we have presented the Truth. Like the good Cardinal said, salvation depends on responding to God’s call.

 

[jeffreedy789]

‘What sort of common ground do I have with someone who (possibly unknowingly) serves Satan?’

lots, actually. we’re both human. we’re both sinful. we both need the love and acceptance of Christ. we’re both entirely unworthy of His forgiveness, and entirely dependant upon it.

the cardinal has expressed his affinity and love for these men of other faiths. these other men, according to the church, according to this CARDINAL, even, cannot go to heaven without the saving work of Jesus. they CAN, perhaps, go to heaven without understanding that saving work in this lifetime.

i can see why you’re concerned, as you think that this means that the catholic church is saying ‘everyone goes to heaven - you don’t need Jesus!’

that’s NOT what they’re saying. there may be some catholics who say this, but they’re not representing the church. the church says that there is no salvation outside of the church. this is because Jesus is in the church, and we cannot be saved without Him.

but He can save whomever He pleases. our greatest calling, contrary to a huge collective of protestant thinkers, is not to evangelize.

the greatest commandment is still to love God with all our heart, mind, soul and strength, and to love our neighbor as ourself. sometimes loving our neighbor means being their friend, seeing the world through their eyes, seeing the truth behind their beliefs, rather than insisting that they adopt our worldview. Jesus transforms and redeems people, redeeming their lives entire. i think (and pray, and hope) that this bishop is loving his neighbors, these men who represent other faiths. i think those men are more inclined to consider the claims of Christ based on the loving acceptance of this cardinal than based on the insistent, belligerant attacks that many people call ‘evangelism’.

i, for one, hope this man IS our next pope. i think he’s a good choice.

 

[excatholic]

PaulDupre:

Ex-Catholic,
We all agree with you (and the bible) that no one goes to heaven without Jesus. That is not the issue. We are talking about those who never had the chance to know Jesus.

The Catholic Church teaches that those who, through no fault of their own, never had the chance to know Jesus may, if they are sincerely seeking God, and through means known only to God, have the chance to be saved.

That salvation comes only through the merits of the blood sacrifice of Jesus. No one can be saved by any other means. Didn’t you know that that was Catholic teaching?

Of course, those who do get the chance and reject Jesus are doomed.

Tell me, Ex, what is the fate of all of the billions upon billions of God’s children born in ancient China and India who never heard of Christ? Are they all doomed to hell?
Paul

Paul read this, Romans 1:18-32
God’s Wrath on Unrighteousness
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man–and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, *unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them. I spoke with a priest recently and he told me “don’t be surprised when you see those guys who are beheading people in the name of allah in heaven” I agree with you if they have never had the chance to hear of Jesus and they worship the creator and not the creation as per the Apostle Pauls message they will be saved. But why was the pope kissing the quran. There appears to be more here than meets the eye from my pespective. I will post the pope kissing the quran and let you comment.

 

[carol_marie]

If their house was on fire would it be OK for the Cardinal to pat them on the back and say, Don’t worry… you are good & kind and you’ll be fine? NO! He needs to say, “Hey… you’re house is on fire! Get out!” or - that Muslum religion of yours… regardless of how good you are it isn’t enough… you need Jesus or you are on the road to distruction my friend. He didn’t do that because in his own mind they didn’t NEED that message… they were just fine as Muslums & Buddists. That was the entire point of the article. He was asked if there was salvation apart from Jesus and he gave two examples of fine people he thought would qualify. Unfortunatly I think he shot down the loop hole “through no fault of their own - never heard of Jesus” because obviously they met with him so NOW they have heard of Jesus. If I met those two men I would say, Forget about what that Cardinal told you… you aren’t just fine. Your house is on fire and I know who can save you! Let me tell you about my best friend Jesus… who loves you so much he died for you. If that makes me obnoxious - so be it.