Do Non-Catholics go to Heaven?

[Jack_Bauer]

What in the world was that? In what way does that have anything to do with the O.P.'s question?

Matthew

Read post #38…

 

[Christalone]

What are your thought?

Do Catholics go to Hell

Christians go to Heaven

Being catholic does not a Christian make!

 

[theyuha]

Non-Catholics are still seeking the truth, even though it might not be the complete truth. God would not condemn an earnest seeker right? “Knock and the door will be open to you, seek and you will find” no one can be saved without Christ and His infinite mercy. No one is saved outside the Church either, baptism is necessary. But the Church teaches that God grants special baptisms to those who didn’t know that importance of baptism but would have desired to be baptized if they were granted this knowledge.

Baptism existed thousands of years before Christianity came around, the first baptisms existed in a river that has long since dried up long before Judaism existed, I do believe catholics are sincere but the truth was here long before they came around. Christ tought but but much was disregarded, He will have to return to re- teach the truths so that He can save His Church from utter destruction because they have disobayed the teachings. Catholics are not some exclusive group with special knowledge, they could have been but they do not follow all of the tenants of the Savior. Are you saying for 10,000 years people had no salvation because Christ was not born yet? God certainly existed before Christ and Judaism, miracles were worked, there were great saints and sages in fact the Old testament alludes to it before the Flood-- God gave us everything we need to be spiritual and happy but we split up ans made our own languages and petty religions. What if man was actually here60, 000 years, then God left us orfans for 58,000 years with no chance for salvation? - What kind of a God is that–you mean spirituality was wrong for 10,000 years or maybe (more)-- or we have been wrong for 1600 years and the world has gotten worse as a result. Christ was an Essene, they did not eat meat and early Christians did not eat meat. this is only one example of what we have lost. I have seen early Christian texts that are vegetarian and archeologists cant find any bones in Essene trash dumps. Could it be that we have come off track-- we think Christ will come back to put the Moslem and Hindu train back on track but i see the catholic train but no tracks in sight-- we are a long ways off- how dare we even suggest the protestants or non catholics may not ‘go to heaven’ when we are a trainwreck! Someone else may beat us to heaven. We shouldnt be so sure of ourselves or God may humiliate us in front of the whole world! The first will be last amd the last will be first. I do not mean to offend you , I only seek to make you think from a different perspective. May the Holy Ghost bless you. theyuha.blogspot.com

 

[theyuha]

Vegetarian, eh?

[BIBLEDRB]Luke 24:41-43[/BIBLEDRB]

How many vegetarians eat fish in front of witnesses?

While I have heard theories of Jesus being connected to the Essene community before, this one is pretty odd.

If you go back to the original language there is a word similar to fish that refers to a treat that grows in the water that is simply a plant. If Christ was an Essene out of respect He wouldnt eat fish or meat- but he actually believed in it-- that is why he turned over the tables at the temple. There is nothing wrong with giving money at Temple but the sacrificing of animals is a sin–in fact we shouldnt eat meat—see my blog theyuha.blogspot.com and go to the page where it shows the animals at the slaughter house–we are crazy in America. We take our cat to the vet and call the police on our neighbor if the horse’s hoofs arent cut in time but then eat our steak–go watch the slaughterhouse videos and see what Christ sees all the time as He looks upon His Earth. Do you really want to live off the misery of another creature? I challenge you to watch the videos–this is why other cultures do not eat meat plus the doctors say it is bad for your health. Don’t you want to live longer so you can worship your lord longer especially since you believe you have only one life to live?The Essenes did not offer animals at the alter, they considered what the other 2 sects did as wrong. You can support vegetarianism or support meat eating with the same Bible because it was actually changed around 360 ad. There are other discrepencies in the Bible as well. Modern science will reveal even more on what really happened long ago, they also revealed things about other religions and their history–this is the same science that found Jericho and proved it did indeed exist. If you cant listen to me at least listen to your doctor-- they have found that vegetarians live longer. Would you eat your dog? If you wouldnt you shouldnt eat the peaceful cow either. May the soul of Christ bless you and keep you safe. Amen

 

[Lenas_mama]

Yes. Non-Catholics go to Heaven.

 

[504Katrin]

I once asked a priest after mass if non catholics went to heaven and he said of course they did. I must say it makes sense to me. If someone who lives somewhere on a hill in deepest Tibet as a buddhist lives a good life just like God would want us to live our lives he will go to heaven also.

 

[Erethorn]

He might be, or he might not be. The no salvation outside the Church thing gets pretty complicated and is hard to understand. This - catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0512fea3.asp - is the best that I’ve ever heard for explaning it.

From your link:

“Extra ecclesiam, nulla salus does not mean that only faithful Roman Catholics can be saved. The Church has never taught that.”

I beg to disagree. Here’s the infailible teaching of the Church:

“It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

 

[rinnie]

From your link:

“Extra ecclesiam, nulla salus does not mean that only faithful Roman Catholics can be saved. The Church has never taught that.”

I beg to disagree. Here’s the infailible teaching of the Church:

“It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

Let me ask you this, is there salvation outside of Jesus Christ Yes or No?

 

[Erethorn]

Let me ask you this, is there salvation outside of Jesus Christ Yes or No?

YES.

But… The Church used to say otherwise.

 

[Kristin234]

YES.

But… The Church used to say otherwise.

I’m confused. So you are saying that Jesus Christ isn’t the only way to salvation?

What about what the Bible says?

"Salvation is found in no one else, for there is** no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.” **

"Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”

“He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.”

“Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.”

"He who has the Son has life; **He who does not have the Son of God does not have life.”
**

How is there salvation outside of Jesus Christ when the Bible clearly tells us there isn’t?

 

[Erethorn]

The Bible tells quite clearly that one who does not believe will not be saved:

"and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life"

No if’s, no but’s, no excuses.

The Church went on to say that belief in Jesus was not enough, one had to be a Catholic in order to avoid hell:

“It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that** those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels”** [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

How is there salvation outside of Jesus Christ when the Bible clearly tells us there isn’t?

Well, don’t ask me, ask the Church, because it was the Church who, at Vatican II, went against the above mentioned teachings.

 

[nuntym]

+JMJ+

I’m confused. So you are saying that Jesus Christ isn’t the only way to salvation?

What about what the Bible says?

"Salvation is found in no one else, for there is** no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.” **

"Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”

“He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.”

“Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.”

"He who has the Son has life; **He who does not have the Son of God does not have life.”
**

How is there salvation outside of Jesus Christ when the Bible clearly tells us there isn’t?

Kristin and Erethorn, Jesus is always and forever the only way to salvation. However, the Catholic Church and Scripture has always taught many will be saved by Jesus Christ without them knowing it.

This is most clear in Matthew chapter 25:

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 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 invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

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? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Now in this passage, note that

(1) the people judged come “from all nations” and this will happen in the Last Judgement ("When the Son of Man comes in his glory…)
(2) the “cursed” and the “righteous” do not recognize who Jesus is. Remember that this will happen at the end of the world, so of course if these people were Christians they would know (a) who Jesus is and (b) the doctrine of “what you did/did not do for of the least of these, you did/did not do for me”

Now let us read what the Early Fathers have said about this:

St. Justin Martyr, 1.46 (c. 150 AD): “We have been taught that Christ is the first-begotten of God, and we have declared him to be the Logos of which all mankind partakes [John 1:9]. Those, therefore, who lived according to reason [Greek, logos] were really Christians, even though they were thought to be atheists, such as, among the Greeks, Socrates, Heraclitus, and others like them. . . . Those who lived before Christ but did not live according to reason [logos] were wicked men, and enemies of Christ, and murderers of those who did live according to reason [logos], whereas those who lived then or who live now according to reason [logos]are Christians. Such as these can be confident and unafraid”

2.10:" Christ… was and is the Logos who is in everyone, and foretold through the prophets the things that were to come, and taught these things in person after becoming like to us in feeling."

14.2 (prob. c 150 A.D. ): “The books of the prophets and the apostles [say] that the Church is not [only] now, but from the beginning. She was spiritual, like also our Jesus. She was manifested in the last days to save us.”

St. Irenaeus, 4.28.2: (c. 140-202 AD): “There is one and the same God the Father and His Logos, always assisting the human race, with varied arrangements, to be sure, and doing many things, and saving from the beginning those who are saved, for they are those who love and, according to their generation (genean) follow His Logos.” Ibid. 4.6.7: “For the Son, administering all things for the Father, completes [His work] from the beginning to the end… For the Son, assisting to His own creation from the beginning, reveals the Father to all to whom He wills.” Ibid. 4. 22. 2: “Christ came not only for those who believed from the time of Tiberius Caesar, nor did the Father provide only for those who are now, but for absolutely all men from the beginning, who, according to their ability, feared and loved God and lived justly… and desired to see Christ and to hear His voice.”

And THAT is just the tip of the iceberg. To read a deluge of evidence on the Church’s consistency in teaching on salvation among non-Christians, see matt1618.freeyellow.com/desire.html

God love you.

 

[Erethorn]

Thank you nuntym.

You see, that is what I believe also and it is the reasonable and just and charitable thing to believe.

However, I do not agree on the ideea that the Church has been consistent on this teaching.

You see, consistency is not a matter of the amount of teaching.

The Church might have said, in Council, or through the Fathers, or Scripture, the same thing, a thousand times over two thousand years. But it only takes ONE instance when it has said otherwise, for the consistency to be broken.

And, in Cantate Domino, it did say otherwise.

 

[nuntym]

+JMJ+

Thank you nuntym.

You see, that is what I believe also and it is the reasonable and just and charitable thing to believe.

However, I do not agree on the ideea that the Church has been consistent on this teaching.

You see, consistency is not a matter of the amount of teaching.

The Church might have said, in Council, or through the Fathers, or Scripture, the same thing, a thousand times over two thousand years. But it only takes ONE instance when it has said otherwise, for the consistency to be broken.

And, in Cantate Domino, it did say otherwise.

Have you read what I answered you about Cantato Domino? You read it wrong.

And yes, the Church has always been consistent. People have just misunderstood Catholic teaching.

 

[Kristin234]

+JMJ+

This is most clear in Matthew chapter 25:

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 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 invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

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? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
​

I don’t see how that chapter is saying that those who do not believe in Christ will have salvation. I see that as Jesus separating the Christians who did all of the above and those who didn’t.

Isn’t saying that those who don’t believe in Christ can be saved a contradiction to the verses that I posted?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t you essentially saying that all “good” people who help the poor and feed the hungry are going to be saved? Saying people who do not believe in Christ can attain salvation is like saying they do not need Christ. Which means that Christ is just optional and that all we need are good works to get into heaven. The whole point of Christianity is that Christ is necessary for our salvation.​

 

[nuntym]

+JMJ+

I don’t see how that chapter is saying that those who do not believe in Christ will have salvation. I see that as Jesus separating the Christians who did all of the above and those who didn’t.

OK, please show me where it said that the people being judged recognized what was happening and Who was in front of them, Kristin.

Isn’t saying that those who don’t believe in Christ can be saved a contradiction to the verses that I posted?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t you essentially saying that all “good” people who help the poor and feed the hungry are going to be saved? Saying people who do not believe in Christ can attain salvation is like saying they do not need Christ. Which means that Christ is just optional and that all we need are good works to get into heaven. The whole point of Christianity is that Christ is necessary for our salvation.

Nope, you have to interpret this ALONG WITH the other passages. Not all “good” people will be saved. Didn’t you read what I posted of St. Ireneus’ words?

“Christ came not only for those who believed from the time of Tiberius Caesar, nor did the Father provide only for those who are now, but for absolutely all men from the beginning, who, according to their ability, feared and loved God and lived justly… and desired to see Christ and to hear His voice.”

“Goodness” is not the end but a means to the end, and the end is Christ. If these people lived as if goodness is “the end,” and not a means to know Christ to the best of their abilities and resources, then that is as if they are using “goodness” to avoid Jesus Christ, and thus of course they will not be saved.

God love you.

 

[Erethorn]

+JMJ+

Have you read what I answered you about Cantato Domino?

Yes.

You read it wrong.

It was simply not convincing.

And yes, the Church has always been consistent.

As long as you are prepared to accept anything the Church teaches as true, and as long as you are prepared to accept any manner of “interpreting” an valid, then yes, for you, there is consistency in the teaching.

People have just misunderstood Catholic teaching.

Church: A can never be B.

The same Church, later on: A can be B.

Me:

You: You misunderstand.

“Goodness” is not the end but a means to the end, and the end is Christ. If these people lived as if goodness is “the end,” and not a means to know Christ to the best of their abilities and resources, then that is as if they are using “goodness” to avoid Jesus Christ, and thus of course they will not be saved.

And how exactly can, say, a chinese peasant from the fifth century be expected to “try to know Christ” ?

 

[Kristin234]

+JMJ+

OK, please show me where it said that the people being judged recognized what was happening and Who was in front of them, Kristin.

It says “When the Son of Man comes in his glory.” So it is talking about Christ’s second coming. The Bible says that when Jesus comes back again we will all know who he is.

His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter.” He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. **On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. **

“Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory."

Nope, you have to interpret this ALONG WITH the other passages. Not all “good” people will be saved. Didn’t you read what I posted of St. Ireneus’ words?

“Christ came not only for those who believed from the time of Tiberius Caesar, nor did the Father provide only for those who are now, but for absolutely all men from the beginning, who, according to their ability, feared and loved God and lived justly… and desired to see Christ and to hear His voice.”

“Goodness” is not the end but a means to the end, and the end is Christ. If these people lived as if goodness is “the end,” and not a means to know Christ to the best of their abilities and resources, then that is as if they are using “goodness” to avoid Jesus Christ, and thus of course they will not be saved.

God love you.

If they desire to know Christ and hear His voice would they not believe in Christ then? Which makes them followers of Christ?

 

[nuntym]

It says “When the Son of Man comes in his glory.” So it is talking about Christ’s second coming. The Bible says that when Jesus comes back again we will all know who he is.

His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter.” He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. **On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. **

“Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory."

And so you are saying that only those who are alive on earth by this time will be judged at the end of the world?

If they desire to know Christ and hear His voice would they not believe in Christ then? Which makes them followers of Christ?

And what of people who had not the opportunity to hear of the Gospel during their lives?

 

[Neildown]

I voted “yes”. The Catholic Church teaches that basically all you need to get to heaven is sancitifying grace. This, however, is extremely hard to keep when not a Catholic, because Catholics have the greatest and most sure-fire way of maintaining sanctifying grace. That is why we are supposed to convert others, because the Catholic Church is the best way, and the only way if you know it is the One True Church. However, it is still possible to attain salvation outside of the Catholic Church - it is just exceedingly difficult.