Confusion about salvation

[All_Father]

Well, most mainline Catholics and Protestants I find seem to think that Christian is “just christian” and that protestants and catholics are both heaven bound.

Then I find medieval statements by popes indicating that all non-catholics are damned.

Others will tell me that if someone knows of the Catholic church but doesn’t join, they are damned.

Others will tell me that most people have a “vincible ignorance” basically meaning if you have an internet connection, you’re without excuse for not knowing.

Then, certain Eastern Orthodox will insist that I must join them as the “one true church”.

And certain Oriental Orthodox will insist that I must join them as the “one true church”.

And certain protestants will claim all of the above are pagan idol worshippers.

And certain protestants will claim all non 5-point calvinists are wrong.

etc.

Besides that, what is the probable fate of very informed non-catholics according to the the catholic church? What i mean is persons like the Ecumenical Archbishop of Constantinople(E Orthodox leader) or Archbishop of Canterbury(Anglican leader)?

and regarding sacraments of baptism being valid elsewhere(protestants):

“Anyone who receives the sacrament of baptism, whether in the Catholic Church or in a heretical or schismatic one, receives the whole sacrament; but salvation, which is the strength of the sacrament, he will not have, if he has had the sacrament outside the Catholic Church [and remains in deliberate schism]. He must therefore return to the Church, not so that he might receive again the sacrament of baptism, which no one dare repeat in any baptized person, but so that he may receive eternal life in Catholic society, for the obtaining of which no one is suited who, even with the sacrament of baptism, remains estranged from the Catholic Church” (The Rule of Faith 43 [A.D. 524]).

So is catholicism saying that^^

What the heck am i supposed to do with all these contradictory Christians?

EDIT: and, for example, my baptist cousin married a catholic girl and she now goes to his baptist church. I’ve heard certain Catholics say that if you are a “cradle catholic” and leave the church you’re in danger, but that if you are ignorant of the church you’re not. So they might say my baptist cousin is fine, but that the catholic girl is in danger as far as salvation.

 

[pablope]

Well, most mainline Catholics and Protestants I find seem to think that Christian is “just christian” and that protestants and catholics are both heaven bound.

Then I find medieval statements by popes indicating that all non-catholics are damned.

Others will tell me that if someone knows of the Catholic church but doesn’t join, they are damned.

Others will tell me that most people have a “vincible ignorance” basically meaning if you have an internet connection, you’re without excuse for not knowing.

Then, certain Eastern Orthodox will insist that I must join them as the “one true church”.

And certain Oriental Orthodox will insist that I must join them as the “one true church”.

And certain protestants will claim all of the above are pagan idol worshippers.

And certain protestants will claim all non 5-point calvinists are wrong.

etc.

Besides that, what is the probable fate of very informed non-catholics according to the the catholic church? What i mean is persons like the Ecumenical Archbishop of Constantinople(E Orthodox leader) or Archbishop of Canterbury(Anglican leader)?

and regarding sacraments of baptism being valid elsewhere(protestants):

“Anyone who receives the sacrament of baptism, whether in the Catholic Church or in a heretical or schismatic one, receives the whole sacrament; but salvation, which is the strength of the sacrament, he will not have, if he has had the sacrament outside the Catholic Church [and remains in deliberate schism]. He must therefore return to the Church, not so that he might receive again the sacrament of baptism, which no one dare repeat in any baptized person, but so that he may receive eternal life in Catholic society, for the obtaining of which no one is suited who, even with the sacrament of baptism, remains estranged from the Catholic Church” (The Rule of Faith 43 [A.D. 524]).

So is catholicism saying that^^

What the heck am i supposed to do with all these contradictory Christians?

EDIT: and, for example, my baptist cousin married a catholic girl and she now goes to his baptist church. I’ve heard certain Catholics say that if you are a “cradle catholic” and leave the church you’re in danger, but that if you are ignorant of the church you’re not. So they might say my baptist cousin is fine, but that the catholic girl is in danger as far as salvation.

I can give you the Catholic perspective:

chnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/salvation.pdf

As for protestants…it is a matter of interpretation and authority:

chnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/sola.pdf

chnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/authority.pdf

 

[Gorgias]

Then I find medieval statements by popes indicating that all non-catholics are damned.

You have to take this statement in context. If this was before the Protestant Reformation, then the only Christians whom the popes were addressing were Catholic Christians. For them, then, the statement was true: if you’re not Catholic, you aren’t going to heaven!

If it was after the Reformation, the statement is still true: if you were Catholic, but left the Church and followed a Reformation leader, then your salvation was in jeopardy!

Others will tell me that if someone knows of the Catholic church but doesn’t join, they are damned.

Others will tell me that most people have a “vincible ignorance” basically meaning if you have an internet connection, you’re without excuse for not knowing.

That’s close, but not quite what the Church teaches. In Lumen Gentium, one of the documents of the 2nd Vatican Council, the teaching is explained in this way: “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.” In other words, it’s not whether you know that the Catholic Church exists (your first statement) or whether you have access to apologetic materials (your second statement). It’s more than that: if you know that the Church is necessary for salvation, then your salvation depends on being part of it! If, on the other hand, you were raised as a Protestant (or a Muslim, or a Hindu, or as an atheist) and were never able to come to this realization, then it doesn’t follow that you’re automatically doomed.

Besides that, what is the probable fate of very informed non-catholics according to the the catholic church? What i mean is persons like the Ecumenical Archbishop of Constantinople(E Orthodox leader) or Archbishop of Canterbury(Anglican leader)?

The Church would never, ever make the statement “John Smith is probably damned”. In the case of the types of people you mentioned – highly educated, trained in theology – the same standard applies: do they know that the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation? If not, then this higher standard does not apply to them.

and regarding sacraments of baptism being valid elsewhere(protestants):

There’s a particular context to the quote you’ve provided. In that point in time, there were heretical movements springing up. When someone was baptized into one of these movements, but later decided to become Catholic, a question arose: was it necessary to ‘re-baptize’ them, or were they already a baptized Christian? The decision that the Church reached was that a valid baptism was a valid baptism, regardless of who performs it. That perspective remains in force to this day: a valid baptism (i.e., with water and the words “I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”) is valid, regardless where it happens or which denomination baptizes.

EDIT: and, for example, my baptist cousin married a catholic girl and she now goes to his baptist church. I’ve heard certain Catholics say that if you are a “cradle catholic” and leave the church you’re in danger, but that if you are ignorant of the church you’re not. So they might say my baptist cousin is fine, but that the catholic girl is in danger as far as salvation.

You got it! It’s not that she’s a ‘cradle Catholic’, it’s that she’s Catholic. (The question is, though – was this girl well catechized? Does she know her faith? Was there something beyond her control that caused her to leave the Church? These are all highly relevant questions…!)

 

[JonathonofOhio]

The key phrase is “deliberate schism”.

The sin of Satan and all the angels that followed were of rebellion against God. It is a very serious thing to know the truth and to turn your back on it.
For, speaking proud words of vanity,
they allure by the desires of fleshly riotousness,
those who for a little while escape,
such as converse in error:

Promising them liberty, whereas they
themselves are the slaves of corruption.
For by whom a man is overcome,
of the same also he is the slave.
For if, flying from the pollutions of the world,
through the knowledge of our
Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,
they be again entangled in them and overcome:
their latter state is become unto them worse than the former.

For it had been better for them not to have known
the way of justice, than after they have known it,
to turn back from that holy commandment
which was delivered to them. *

 

[John_Martin]

“Anyone who receives the sacrament of baptism, whether in the Catholic Church or in a heretical or schismatic one, receives the whole sacrament; but salvation, which is the strength of the sacrament, he will not have, if he has had the sacrament outside the Catholic Church [and remains in deliberate schism]. He must therefore return to the Church, not so that he might receive again the sacrament of baptism, which no one dare repeat in any baptized person, but so that he may receive eternal life in Catholic society, for the obtaining of which no one is suited who, even with the sacrament of baptism, remains estranged from the Catholic Church” (The Rule of Faith 43 [A.D. 524]).

First, in 524, most (if not all) who were baptized in schismatic churches understood that they were “in rebellion” from the Catholic Faith, making their own rules. Therefore they were defiantly inventing Christianity in a self-chosen way, not willing to believe it was supported by God as handed down through the Apostolic Succession (“remains in deliberate schism”).
Baptism is the ritual of “naturalization” performed upon a person by the Church, whereby the person is granted, by the Church, citizenship in the Kingdom which God established by Christ in his apostles. They become citizens, members of the People of God. That is now their heritage, their “nationality”. It is within the People that the means of Grace are given for eternal life, the Word, Sacraments, Forgiveness, etc. Those were given to the apostles to give to the People who were granted citizenship. Outside the Church there is not apostolic authority to give the gifts of God, the means of Grace. And so a citizen outside fellowship with the People, even though they are members of the People, starves to death. They do not receive the full portion of Grace that enables one to fully use the Virtues, to fully do the works of Christ, nor to fully be in the presence of Christ.
Today, those not in fellowship with the Catholic Church hardly realize that they are “protesting” Catholic authority and teaching as legitimate. You could suggest that their schism is not “deliberate” because of the hundreds of intervening years from when it deliberately happened. They do not really know where they came from, they do not know the faith they are protesting. And they do not know what they are missing. Today we are in a position of being able to win back the descendants of those who left, let them know the riches of Grace that is found here in the Church.

I am one of them who was won back. Seventy weeks of years ago Martin Luther left the Church. When I, as a Lutheran, returned to the Church, I did not feel anyone degrading my Lutheranism; instead I found so much content in the Catholic Church and legitimacy of its “being” that I craved to be united. My middle name is Luther, and for my confirmation name I chose Pope St. Martin I, for what he did, and for Martin Luther. If Martin Luther had come to know what I was finding, I concluded that he would return. So, 490 years after Martin Luther left, Martin Luther returned from protest.

Anyway, people taking stances on who is right never win anyone back. People who delight in the riches of the Catholic Church, delight in being one of the People, and radiate that in life, this wins people back.

You can be that light that your cousin and his wife might see, and want its fullness.

John Martin (Luther)

 

[Steveabrous]

Well, most mainline Catholics and Protestants I find seem to think that Christian is “just christian” and that protestants and catholics are both heaven bound.

Then I find medieval statements by popes indicating that all non-catholics are damned.

Others will tell me that if someone knows of the Catholic church but doesn’t join, they are damned.

Others will tell me that most people have a “vincible ignorance” basically meaning if you have an internet connection, you’re without excuse for not knowing.

Then, certain Eastern Orthodox will insist that I must join them as the “one true church”.

And certain Oriental Orthodox will insist that I must join them as the “one true church”.

And certain protestants will claim all of the above are pagan idol worshippers.

And certain protestants will claim all non 5-point calvinists are wrong.

etc.

Besides that, what is the probable fate of very informed non-catholics according to the the catholic church? What i mean is persons like the Ecumenical Archbishop of Constantinople(E Orthodox leader) or Archbishop of Canterbury(Anglican leader)?

and regarding sacraments of baptism being valid elsewhere(protestants):

“Anyone who receives the sacrament of baptism, whether in the Catholic Church or in a heretical or schismatic one, receives the whole sacrament; but salvation, which is the strength of the sacrament, he will not have, if he has had the sacrament outside the Catholic Church [and remains in deliberate schism]. He must therefore return to the Church, not so that he might receive again the sacrament of baptism, which no one dare repeat in any baptized person, but so that he may receive eternal life in Catholic society, for the obtaining of which no one is suited who, even with the sacrament of baptism, remains estranged from the Catholic Church” (The Rule of Faith 43 [A.D. 524]).

So is catholicism saying that^^

What the heck am i supposed to do with all these contradictory Christians?

EDIT: and, for example, my baptist cousin married a catholic girl and she now goes to his baptist church. I’ve heard certain Catholics say that if you are a “cradle catholic” and leave the church you’re in danger, but that if you are ignorant of the church you’re not. So they might say my baptist cousin is fine, but that the catholic girl is in danger as far as salvation.

Here is my simple answer. The Roman Catholic church headed currently by Pope Francis is the one true church established by Christ himself. If you know this in you mind and heart yet refuse to subordinate yourself to it’s authority and be a member of that church then you are in trouble.

If, however, you do not in your mind and heart believe that to be the case (dispite all the overwhelming evidence) then I believe it is not held against you because you are not rejecting Christ in your heart and mind, but rather obeying your conscience

 

[All_Father]

So just pick one and hope for the best. great. This “one true church” business is not what i get from most mainline protestants and i still have no idea

And my cousin and his wife are that way too; she simply sees it all as “Christian”

 

[pablope]

So just pick one and hope for the best. great. This “one true church” business is not what i get from most mainline protestants and i still have no idea

And my cousin and his wife are that way too; she simply sees it all as “Christian”

No…use reason and the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

In Matt 16,Jesus said He will build a church, not churches all with differing beliefs.

17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter,** and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[c] will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[d] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[e] loosed in heaven.”

So I guess your question is…which is that one church? Not churches…so you start from there…trace each’s churches claim, when they started…who started them…it should should point you to an apostle…for an apostolic church.

The Ancient creeds gave us four marks of the church…ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC…which one claims to meet all four marks?**

 

[John_Martin]

So just pick one and hope for the best. great. This “one true church” business is not what i get from most mainline protestants and i still have no idea

And my cousin and his wife are that way too; she simply sees it all as “Christian”

Visualize yourself with Jesus and the 12 disciples, he is talking to you, as your King, and you 13 are currently his Kingdom (plus a number of others who follow less closely). And he, your King, tells one of you (Simon), “You are Rock, and on Rock I will build my Church (my Assembly, my People). I give you (singular, not plural) the keys to my Kingdom, so what you bind on earth is bound in heaven, etc.”

You are there and hear this, so, do you think Peter has a special job in the Kingdom, in Jesus’ Church? Is there more than one Church, each apostle going and saying, “Peter does it this way, but we will do it the way I interpret Jesus”. Or, do all of you give Peter your attention as the “key-holder”, the Prime Minister of the Kingdom?

The protestant churches have said, when they began, “Peter and the rest of you apostles, we think you are doing it wrong and we know a better way. We think the gates of Hell have prevailed against you and we are going to make the Church the way it should be.”

Today’s protestants don’t realize it, but that is what their founders did when leaving the Catholic Church, saying we do not believe the Holy Spirit protected the Church and we will fix it, and they took bibles with them and removed about 11 of the books, considering themselves better judges than the Church Fathers. Today’s protestants think that Catholics added the books, not realizing that their founders actually removed them after a thousand years or more having those 11 books.

If your cousin’s wife sees them all as Christian, she is not concerned about the content of any, but only the name Christian. As for you, you list your religion as “Truth”; so why not look for truth? Get out your catechism and read it, study it, find out what the Catholic Church teaches and see if it is not very good. Go to Mass and see if it is not very good to be in the real presence of Christ, to eat his body and drink his blood and have his life in you.

John Martin

 

[All_Father]

Well that’s the thing; they don’t consider nearly as many things necessary to be Christian beyond the known common ground between protestants and catholics(belief in resurrection/trusting jesus as Lord) although i’m sure they’d be against gay marriages in episcopal churches.

As a sidenote, i find the beliefs of some that “non-Christians get a free pass” weird. What I mean is, certain fundamentalists have the idea that all non-Christians, even those who haven’t heard, automatically burn in hell. And to an extent it makes sense: if they’re excused by their ignorance, then by evangelizing you have the possibility of damning them yourself. If they get a “free pass” then it would’ve made more sense for all the apostles to guard the gospel so that noone would ever find out. I do NOT agree with universalism though, i definitely agree with the Catholic “invisible church” idea which has agnosticism and a non-answer towards the fate of non-Christians

 

[John_Martin]

As a sidenote, i find the beliefs of some that “non-Christians get a free pass” weird. What I mean is, certain fundamentalists have the idea that all non-Christians, even those who haven’t heard, automatically burn in hell. And to an extent it makes sense: if they’re excused by their ignorance, then by evangelizing you have the possibility of damning them yourself. If they get a “free pass” then it would’ve made more sense for all the apostles to guard the gospel so that noone would ever find out. I do NOT agree with universalism though, i definitely agree with the Catholic “invisible church” idea which has agnosticism and a non-answer towards the fate of non-Christians

Non Christians (all the peoples of all the nations):

• [Matthew 25:34%between%Then shall the king say to them that shall be on his right hand: Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess you the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.35 (Matthew 25:35 For I was hungry and you gave Me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave Me something to drink, I was a stranger and you took Me in,)For I was hungry, and you gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me to drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in: [36 (Matthew 25:36 I was naked and you clothed Me, I was sick and you looked after Me, I was in prison and you visited Me.')Naked, and you covered me: sick, and you visited me: I was in prison, and you came to me. [37 (Matthew 25:37 Then the righteous will answer Him, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You something to drink?)Then shall the just answer him, saying: Lord, when did we see thee hungry, and fed thee; thirsty, and gave thee drink? [38 (Matthew 25:38 When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You?)And when did we see thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and covered thee? [39 (Matthew 25:39 When did we see You sick or in prison and visit You?')Or when did we see thee sick or in prison, and came to thee? [40 (Matthew 25:40 And the King will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of Mine, you did for Me.')And the king answering, shall say to them: Amen I say to you, as long as you did it to one of these my least brethren, you did it to me.

Christians:

• [Matthew 25: (Matthew 25:35 For I was hungry and you gave Me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave Me something to drink, I was a stranger and you took Me in,)[19 (Matthew 25:19 After a long time the master of those servants returned to settle accounts with them.)But after a long time the lord of those servants came, and reckoned with them. [20 (Matthew 25:20 The servant who had received the five talents came and presented five more. 'Master,' he said, 'you entrusted me with five talents. See, I have gained five more.')And he that had received the five talents coming, brought other five talents, saying: Lord, thou didst deliver to me five talents, behold I have gained other five over and above. [21 (Matthew 25:21 His master replied, 'Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Enter into the joy of your master!')His lord said to him: Well done, good and faithful servant, because thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will place thee over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.

Non-Christians, by the love and justice for those in need of a friend, end up giving help to Jesus’ disciples, they don’t know they have helped them, and in helping them they have helped our King. Selfish people, who help no one in need, or only for show, do not inadvertently helping Jesus. It is awesome in a surprising way.

Christians, Catholics, have been given an investment to work with as a special people in the world, and it is necessary to make use of this, to be Jesus’ witnesses in the world. He placed a trust in us to be used. Our judgment will require a knowing participation in his work, and presenting to him the fruits of our participation in doing his work. It is awesome both in a delightful way and in a monumental way.

The Catholic Church is not invisible, it is perfectly visible. It is all the real people baptized in Christ, most in union with each other in fellowship with the leadership given by Jesus, while some do not agree with that leadership and try to make their own fellowship. While visible, it is a mystery, in that it is Jesus present in the world.

John Martin

 

[Jizo]

en.radiovaticana.va/news/2013/05/22/pope_at_mass:_culture_of_encounter_is_the_foundation_of_peace/en1-694445

I’m not a Catholic, but it seems like the current Pope believes in a form of universalism.