Do Non-Catholics go to Heaven?

[Sir_Knight]

[sign1]Blah, Blah, Blah!
Ramble on…[/sign1]

In other words … “I can’t refute what you are saying but am too proud to admit that I am wrong.”

 

[Sir_Knight]

You are arguing points that have already been answered by Sirach, and many others, in this thread. You seem to want to defend Sir Knight’s position on Baptism, but that was not the *main *point that he was making in his post. According to him, all babies that are not Baptized go to hell. Period. The Catholic Church teaches otherwise, and states that we cannot know for sure what happens to them, but that they *may *be saved by the Grace and Mercy of God, in some way, (i.e. by ‘extraordinary means’). Sir Knight denies that those ‘extraordinary means’ even exist at all. He believes that anyone that is not Roman Catholic can never go to Heaven. He believes that everyone outside the RC Church goes to hell, no matter who they are, where they are, or what they do. He doesn’t believe that it’s possible, even though the Bible tell us that it is possible for others to be saved.

Where does the bible say this? Jesus, Himself, said that one MUST be baptized with Spirit AND water in order to enter into eternal life. He didn’t say just Spirit or just water or Spirit and/or water. He said Spirit AND water. Are you saying that Jesus didn’t mean what He said?

Go back and reread the responses that have been posted about infants being unbaptized. Sir Knight claims that the CCC’s answers to that question, as well as the possibility of salvation outside the Church, are wrong. He doesn’t believe that the doctrines that were clarified in LG are valid. He picks and chooses which of the Church’s doctrines he wants to believe, and claims that others contradict dogma, even though they do not. All of his other quotes of dogma, Papal Bulls, etc., are taken completely out of context to back up his false claims. That’s the argument that he made, and that’s what we’ve all been trying to point out to him. It’s his erroneous interpretations of those Papal Bulls, dogmas and doctrines that make him question and disagree with what the Church is teaching.

First off, I quoted from the CCC which says that Baptism is needed for salvation. Secondly, I references the Papal Bulls in the order that they were written because the earlier ones have precedent over any later ones.

The Church cannot teach error, but he would have us think, not only that it can, but it does. Unfortunately for him, he’s wrong. If he were right, then the Holy Spirit has abandoned the Roman Catholic Church, and that can never happen. Either he is really having a hard time understanding the truth, or he is stubbornly rejecting it because he thinks that he knows better than the Bishops, and even the Pope, on matters of Catholic Doctrine.

If I am so very wrong, then it should be a simple matter to explain how a non-Catholic can be saved in light of THESE declarations. Why hasn’t anyone done that? Instead they point to other writings while completely ignoring what I have presented.

That would resolve the entire matter.

 

[Julia_Mae]

First off, I quoted from the CCC which says that Baptism is needed for salvation.

And I quoted the CCC where it says that it is not.

Here’s another:

1260 “Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery.” Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.

The rules are more stringent for Catholics, you know. The more we have, the more is expected of us.

Instead they point to other writings while completely ignoring what I have presented.

As you ignored me? Perhaps you missed it in the flurry posting. Here, I’ll repeat it:

from The Catechism of the Catholic Church:

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"

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.336

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.

The Church has spoken clearly on this issue.

You’ll need to read the entire section on Sacraments to understand. God is not bound by our Sacraments, we are bound by His Law, which He enforces as He wishes, to fulfill His desire that all should be saved.

 

[Sir_Knight]

I agree with you, wholeheartedly. I was responding to the contradiction in Sir Knight’s post. He pointed out that those who were Baptized in the name of the Trinity, did in fact become members of the Catholic Church through that action, no matter who performed the action. He agrees with that. So do I. He used it to make a point about the necessity of Baptism for salvation. I also agree with that. But, at the same time, he was using that fact to back up his argument that there is no chance of salvation, for anyone else, not even other Christians. His main point has been that unless they are bona fide, practicing members of the Roman Catholic Church, in full communion with the Pope, they’re all going to hell. I strongly disagree.

Then you do not believe official church teaching. I present MIRARI VOS, the Encyclical of Pope Gregory XVI (August 15, 1832) for your consideration …

Another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained. Surely, in so clear a matter, you will drive this deadly error far from the people committed to your care. With the admonition of the apostle that “there is one God, one faith, one baptism” may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that “those who are not with Christ are against Him,” and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore “without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate.” Let them hear Jerome who, while the Church was torn into three parts by schism, tells us that whenever someone tried to persuade him to join his group he always exclaimed: “He who is for the See of Peter is for me.” A schismatic flatters himself falsely if he asserts that he, too, has been washed in the waters of regeneration. Indeed Augustine would reply to such a man: “The branch has the same form when it has been cut off from the vine; but of what profit for it is the form, if it does not live from the root?”

Let me highlight for you …

• This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained. – showing that being a good person in a different religion is not enough. If I am misunderstanding that, then kindly explain what the above statement means?
• Referring to those who broke from the Catholic faith – “The branch has the same form when it has been cut off from the vine; but of what profit for it is the form, if it does not live from the root?” – My understanding of this is that even if someone was baptized as a Catholic but does not live by the Catholic faith, they profit nothing from that baptism. If I am mistaken, then, again kindly explain what the above statement means?
• And finally, and most important, please explain what this statement means – "without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole AND inviolate."

He completely contradicted himself because both of those statements cannot be true.

According to infallible Church teaching, they both are true. Again, if I am misunderstanding what that says, kindly supply the correct interpretation. I’m most interested in knowing what other possible meaning it might have.

… Continued in NEXT Post ***

 

[Sir_Knight]

*** Continued from PREVIOUS Post …

If a valid Baptism makes someone a member of the Body of Christ (aka Catholic), then there has to be some chance that there can be salvation for those souls that have received a ‘valid Baptism’.

Not if they break away from the faith and remain broken away at the time of death. Isn’t that what this is saying …*A schismatic flatters himself falsely if he asserts that he, too, has been washed in the waters of regeneration. *-- MIRARI VOS, the Encyclical of Pope Gregory XVI (August 15, 1832)
Again, if I have an incorrect understanding of that teaching, please explain what the correct meaning of that teaching is. I’m all ears.

I was just explaining to him how I thought he had contradicted his own argument, and actually proved that people can attain salvation, even if they’re not in full communion with the Pope, because they are joined to the Body of Christ by the valid Baptism that makes them “Catholic”.

Please explain how your opinion does not contradict Pope Boniface VIII infallibly statement in 1302 A. D.
“…we declare, say, define, and proclaim to every human creature that they by necessity for salvation are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (SOURCE: D.E.S.; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 469)
… I read that to say the exact opposite of what you are saying. Again, if I misunderstand the message, please explain what that comment really means?

Does that help clear up my position a little? It’s exasperating that he uses the CCC to back up what he thinks is correct, but if anyone else uses it, it’s wrong. You can’t win with someone like that. I have a friend that’s sedevacantist and her arguments are very similar. But, you can’t tell them that their beliefs make them schismatic, if they stubbornly refuse to believe, or follow, what the Church and the Pope teaches. I have no problem with them humbly disagreeing with things that they might not like or understand, but when they promote dissent amongst other Catholics by denigrating the Church and Her leaders, then they are fighting ‘against the Church’. By their own actions, they are actively separating and excommunicating themselves from the Church. They don’t see it that way at all.

And how are you not excommunicating yourself from the Church by failing to believe the infallible Dogmas that I am quoting? Remember, a Catholic in good standing MUST accept all Church doctrines and dogmas because they are infallible teachings. The CCC, while it contains infallible teachings, is not, in and of itself an infallible document and one may disagree with parts of it and still remain a Catholic in good standing (it says so right in the CCC) as long as one does not reject the entire CCC.

I also have to wonder how someone that’s supposed to be so dedicated to the teachings of the Church can be so cold-hearted and uncharitable towards other children of God. They’ll certainly never gain any converts to their position by such a judgmental, hard-nosed, ‘fire & brimstone’ approach to evangelizing or maintaining the Faith.

Jesus didn’t mince words. He told it like it was. To sugar-coat half truths isn’t of any benefit to anyone.

And if people from any religion can be saved as long as they are good people, why should anyone convert and become a Catholic? I already covered this, but will repeat it again …“This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained.” – showing that being a good person in a different religion is not enough. If I am misunderstanding that, then kindly explain what the above statement means?

 

[Sir_Knight]

And I quoted the CCC where it says that it is not.

Here’s another:

1260 “Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery.” Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.

The rules are more stringent for Catholics, you know. The more we have, the more is expected of us.

As you ignored me? Perhaps you missed it in the flurry posting. Here, I’ll repeat it:

You’ll need to read the entire section on Sacraments to understand. God is not bound by our Sacraments, we are bound by His Law, which He enforces as He wishes, to fulfill His desire that all should be saved.

No, God is not bound by the sacraments but He is bound by His Holy Word. And when Jesus said that whatever the Church bound on Earth, it would also be bound in heaven, He meant it and I have presented several infallible Church teachings supporting what I am saying.

Oh, and I did not ignore your earlier post. Here was my reply in case you missed it originally …

… “those too MAY achieve eternal salvation” – it doesn’t say that if they seek God with a sincere heart, they WILL achieve eternal salvation. They MAY achieve eternal salvation. God MAY send a missionary to convert and baptize them. But if they remain outside of the Catholic Church, they will not be saved. The Church has spoken clearly on this issue …In 1442 A.D, Pope Eugenius IV, 1442, at the Council of Florence, reaffirmed this truth. "It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans (those who do not practice the one true religion), but also Jews, and heretics and schismatics (those who were baptized into the faith but rejected one or more aspects of the faith) cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart ‘into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels’ (SOURCE: D.E.S.; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 714)

 

[Julia_Mae]

No, God is not bound by the sacraments but He is bound by His Holy Word.

Who told you that? God is bound by nothing a human being can articulate.

I have presented several infallible Church teachings supporting what I am saying.

As far as I know, there have only been three infallible pronouncements and one of them was the doctrine of infallibility.

The Catechism you and I both quote from makes it clear that non-Catholics, even atheists, can go to heaven.

Oh, and I did not ignore your earlier post. Here was my reply in case you missed it originally …

I did. Or the software that took me to the 1st unread post did. Thank you for the link.

Now, you posed the question in the title in a way that somewhat weights the discussion. “DO” Non-Catholics go Heaven? Certainly there are many Catholics in Heaven that the Church has not declared are there. As well, multitudes of nonCatholics are as likely to be there. But we don’t put up nonCatholics for Canonization, do we? So they are undeclared, but undeclared does not make them missing. Fred Rogers couldn’t possibly be anywhere else.

I don’t know why you want to believe this, but in fact, neither we nor any other person in this discussion is qualified to give an answer. Thus, we quote sources. You want to negate what is very clearly stated by the Church in very simple terms: yes, nonCatholics can go to heaven by nitpicking the verb, afaics.

At any rate, believe as you please. Just don’t be surprised when you are hanging around in Purgatory as a bunch of Buddhists go skipping through the Gates in front of you. Or us.

Peace of Christ be with you.

 

[Jack_Bauer]

The real question might have been better said “Can non-Catholics go to Heaven?”

Taking this a bit further, are all Catholics really Catholic, which places them somewhere in limbo. In my view, aren’t properly baptized Christians all Catholic? I believe they are Catholic. Because to be fully Christian is to be Catholic.

 

[Sirach2]

Sir Knight:

In other words … “I can’t refute what you are saying but am too proud to admit that I am wrong.”

I have already refuted very specifically, yet you refuse to listen and repost the same old, same old, same old, same old - just as you have done with other posters, other threads. End of story. Ramble on…

http://bestsmileys.com/notlistening/2.gif

 

[GaryTaylor]

how am I being bias?

It seems we have a failure to communicate…According to “you:” all babies that are not Baptized go to hell. The Catholic Church doesn’t teach this as I have linked Pope Benedicts XVI 2007 address on this issue.

This is “the reason” I became involved in this Baptism issue. While you pick and chose which teachings you “prefer” to fit the point you are trying to make it ignore’s a great deal of “todays” teaching such as the 2007 address, or the other CCC teachings on Baptism which have been addressed.

I understand the issue I grew up in Vatican-I and clearly see the difference with V-II as I “lived” it. However its what we are working with “today”. As is the CCC from the late 70’s by JP-II and Lumen Gentium from the 60’s.

God Bless, Gary

 

[GaryTaylor]

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryTaylor
1281 Those who die for the faith, those who are catechumens, and all those who, without knowing of the Church but acting under the inspiration of grace, seek God sincerely and strive to fulfill his will, can be saved even if they have not been baptized.

" Baptism is necessary for salvation " I believe was the highlighted point made.

Its no different than stating “There’s No Salvation outside the CC” yet ignoring the entire context of LG.

Are both this correct statements “No Salvation outside the CC” and “Baptism is necessary for Salvation”…yes they are. However its ignoring the context. In other words its reading “Sola Scriptura”.

I don’t for a moment doubt the intentions are good of Sir Knight, on the contrary I believe he’s a very good Catholic. Nevertheless we also have an obligation to present the Doctrine correctly.

Peace

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryTaylor
Baptism of Desire

1259 -For catechumens who die before their Baptism, their explicit “desire” to receive it, together with repentance for their sins, and charity, assures them the salvation that they were not able to receive through the sacrament.

YOU STATE…

Kindly reconcile what you just said with the following infallible teaching …

“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 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.” – Pope Eugenius IV, 1442, at the Council of Florence (SOURCE: D.E.S.; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 714)

Sir Knight…

You need to reconcile this in your mind and with the church. I’m giving you LG and todays CCC and your responding with a 14th century Bull on No-Salvation? I agree it would be much easier to pick and chose No-Salvation statements prior to V-II, once again however we need to deal with todays doctrine of Lumen Gentium and todays CCC which both these teachings come from. Again LG creates a more complex issue. Relating to a different teaching from a earlier period doesn’t resolve the more complex defined teaching of today.

1259 is a response to a “question” asked by rinne about Baptism by desire/blood as was 1281 both of the CCC.

The 14th century Bull does not resolve this context of LG which furthers expands on No-Salvation.

“Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God. In the first place we must recall the people to whom the testament and the promises were given and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh. On account of their fathers this people remains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts He makes nor of the calls He issues.(126); But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Mohamedans, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things,and as Saviour wills that all men be saved.Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life.”

Follow my point?

I’m not debating as I clearly stated above…" Are both these correct statements “No Salvation outside the CC” and “Baptism is necessary for Salvation”…yes they are."

Honestly I’m hearing a conflict with the ability to resolve V-I with V-II. And there really shouldn’t be. BTW the LG text above if from wikipedia and I “think” its worded a bit differently than the original Doctrine. MOF I’m postive it is as I have debated this issue before.

God Bless, Gary

 

[rinnie]

Who told you that? God is bound by nothing a human being can articulate.

As far as I know, there have only been three infallible pronouncements and one of them was the doctrine of infallibility.

The Catechism you and I both quote from makes it clear that non-Catholics, even atheists, can go to heaven.

I did. Or the software that took me to the 1st unread post did. Thank you for the link.

Now, you posed the question in the title in a way that somewhat weights the discussion. “DO” Non-Catholics go Heaven? Certainly there are many Catholics in Heaven that the Church has not declared are there. As well, multitudes of nonCatholics are as likely to be there. But we don’t put up nonCatholics for Canonization, do we? So they are undeclared, but undeclared does not make them missing. Fred Rogers couldn’t possibly be anywhere else.

I don’t know why you want to believe this, but in fact, neither we nor any other person in this discussion is qualified to give an answer. Thus, we quote sources. You want to negate what is very clearly stated by the Church in very simple terms: yes, nonCatholics can go to heaven by nitpicking the verb, afaics.

At any rate, believe as you please. Just don’t be surprised when you are hanging around in Purgatory as a bunch of Buddhists go skipping through the Gates in front of you. Or us.

Peace of Christ be with you.

Hi Julia Mae, well for one, I have a big problem with something you said, I pretty much agree with alot of what Sir Knight says, but there are a few things I agree, I have a little problem with and will comment on.

But lets start with what you said even atheists can go to heaven I did not see that in the CCC. I am sorry but I have never heard that you can choose to reject Christ all of your life, and then at the end of you life still choose to reject him and will enter into heaven. I am sorry again I did not see that teaching, nor agree with it. The word of God states that if you reject the Holy Spirit you cannot be forgiven.

My next question to be Catholic is to accept Christ and his teachings. We are all baptised into one Body of Christ. And we are all callled to be baptised into one Body and one Faith.

Now according to the Pope we ARE all united to one another in ONE BAPTISM for forgiveness of sins. You are saying even no catholics can get to heaven, I do not see this teaching. Everyone who accepts Christ is Catholic via Christian although they may not see it at this time. Because Christ started ONE Holy Catholic Apostolic Church not many. There is only one way to be Baptised in Christ and that is the way the Catholic Church teaches and has alway taught in the name of the Trinity. cont,

 

[rinnie]

Next Sir Knight is correct when he says the Pope holds the keys to the kingdom. When Jesus left he did indeed leave him and keys and told him what he bounds on earth is bound in heaven.

Now you are saying Jesus is not bound by his teachings? What do you mean by that? If he said we are baptised in his name we are saved from Original Sin are you saying this is not true.

If he says that we are to confess our sins, hold true to the commandments we are not held to that?

When he promises the Pope he will stand by his teachings here and in heaven are you saying he won’t and he did not bound himself to Peter with that truth. I am quite confused with what you are saying here.

 

[crazzeto]

I tapped “Only God Knows”, not because I have doubts that there are non-christians in heaven. Rather, I voted as I did for no reason other than only God knows who goes to heaven, period.

 

[rinnie]

Hi Gary, Lets go somewhere else here for a moment.

To begin with lets start with the statement there is no Salvation outside of the CC. Is this true. Yes it is. There is no Salvation outside of Jesus Christ who as I stated is the CC I don;t care how you want to cut it or serve it up its the truth.

When was this statement first stated. Before we continue to attack one another we have to go back to our own Catholic History.

In the beginning of time there was ONLY ONE Church and it was the Catholic Church. We all agree on this. Christ did not start many Church’s he started ONE on the day of Pentecost. Now how could there be salvation outside of the CC when there was only one Church that you could be Baptised in at that time and date?

So to be a Christian at that time you HAD to accept Jesus Christ as your Savior. And if you believed and followed Christ and was to be a Christian you had to become part of the OHCAC.

Now today we have many who accept Jesus Christ and are in communion with us through the ONE Baptism of Jesus Christ. All Christians are united together in ONE BAPTISM of Christ.

Now for people who cannot see the truth there is hope for them that they can come to see the truth before they die. But as I stated before rather a Jew, Budda, etc can see this truth or not there is no WAY they can enter heaven without going through Jesus Christ. Its impossible. It was by the way of the cross that the entrance to heaven is possible. I don’t care who hates me for this or argues with me on this, It is the truth and I will never recant on this.

You have until you take that last breath to accept Christ as your savior. Lets say a Budda for example lived his life the best he could and used the Grace given to him by God in this world and lived a good life, can he enter heaven? That is up to God and his Grace. BUT he still must accept Christ as his savior. Even if its on his death bed that the truth is revealed to him, and then he SEES this, and he still refuses to accept Christ, I don’t see how he is getting in. ALL Salvation STILL comes from Jesus Christ.

So what I am saying WHEN this truth is revealed to someone, and they KNOW it to be the truth, but they still refuse to accept Jesus Christ I say they can’t get into heaven. I can’t see no way that it possible. I understand with the Grace and Love of God all things are possible. But it is BECAUSE of his love and grace that he sent his only son to pay for all sins that it WAS and IS made possible.

Now I have to ask anyone talken into the context into what I have just written do any of you believe that there is Salvation outsoide of the CC aka Jesus Christ?

Not can you be accepted into the CC by extra-ordinary means, I know by the grace of God it IS possible, and can be done, But the bottom line is at the moment of a persons death the truth of Christ is revealed to them and they accept him that is Baptism into Christ. Not of ordinary means I agree, but they still must ACCEPT CHRIST in order to enter heaven. Is that not what Baptism is accepting Christ and being repentive for our sins?

So again as I asked again does anyone disagree with the teachings of the Church that we must enter heaven by the means of his Son Jesus Christ? Does ANYONE believe there is another way?

 

[rinnie]

I tapped “Only God Knows”, not because I have doubts that there are non-christians in heaven. Rather, I voted as I did for no reason other than only God knows who goes to heaven, period.

See crazetto, I may go to hell myself for believing this. But I do not believe that non-christians can which is someone who rejects Christ can get to heaven without accepting him. Because how can someone be in heaven who do not accept God?

 

[crazzeto]

See crazetto, I may go to hell myself for believing this. But I do not believe that non-christians can which is someone who rejects Christ can get to heaven without accepting him. Because how can someone be in heaven who do not accept God?

I don’t think your going to go to Hell, and in fact far from being a sin your no firm theological ground. That said, we must remember

1. Savlation by grace,
2. through faith (a living, breathing working faith).
3. There is much about death we don’t understand
4. Nothing is impossible with God.

Could Christ come to someone in their last moments and offer a last chance? Well sure (I wouldn’t count on it, but sure he could). Could someone repent just before it’s too late, certainly possible. There are any number of situations which may occur, which would allow someone we, generally, would call a non-believer to make it to heaven. Given the number (which I don’t think we could count if we try) of ways this could happen, is it not prudent for us to take the stance of humility and leave it in God’s hands.

That said, I do agree that the further you are from the true doctrine of the Christ Jesus, the more you are in peril. And I beleive this peril is far greater than most of us would care to admit. So as such, it is best to evengalize all and convert as much as possible.

 

[rinnie]

It seems we have a failure to communicate…According to “you:” all babies that are not Baptized go to hell. The Catholic Church doesn’t teach this as I have linked Pope Benedicts XVI 2007 address on this issue.

This is “the reason” I became involved in this Baptism issue. While you pick and chose which teachings you “prefer” to fit the point you are trying to make it ignore’s a great deal of “todays” teaching such as the 2007 address, or the other CCC teachings on Baptism which have been addressed.

I understand the issue I grew up in Vatican-I and clearly see the difference with V-II as I “lived” it. However its what we are working with “today”. As is the CCC from the late 70’s by JP-II and Lumen Gentium from the 60’s.

God Bless, Gary

Okay Gary lets go here for a second now. You said that baby’s that are not baptised do not go to hell, Okay now let me state what I believe first.

I believe that when a baby dies if it did not have the chance to be baptised, as mine did, it was indeed baptised by baptism of desire. Father told me that this is indeed valid. He said that God knows that under normal means I would have indeed had the baby baptised in the Church. Remember I was only like 4 months there was nothing to Baptise,

Now I believe that the baby accepted Christ and was taken into heaven and instead of being baptised in normal means BY Christ THROUGH a PRIEST THROUGH the Church he did it himself by extra- ordinary means. Especially because he is a EXTRA-ORDINARY person on that I believe we can all agree

But I believe that at the moment of our death it WILL be revealed to us if we do not KNOW WHO Christ is, and when we see that we have the Choice to either accept Christ or REJECT him and if we reject him we are not gettting in. But I also believe that if we do choose to ACCEPT him and accept the TRUTH that HAS BEEN revealed we will be baptised into him at that moment in order to be Elligible to enter into the gates of heaven.

SO what I AM saying is I believe that BAPTISM is still necessary. And is we accept Christ even on the last day Baptism is POSSIBLE but by extra---------- means.

But back to my point while I agree that Christ is not bound by his sacraments like the Church and we are here on this earth, he still means what he said when he said that we must be baptised cleansed by our sin to enter heaven, it is bound and is true, but he can baptise us himeself if necessary. This in NO part disagrees or is in conflict with the teaching of the Church that all Salvation comes from the CC aka Jesus Christ.

If I am wrong, I will gladly recant if I said something wrong.

Now back to my question while we can never condemn ANYONE to hell, because that is the call of Christ, do you believe that if someone ANYONE is NOT baptised, which means they have the stain of Original SIn they can enter heaven? If you say yes you are in direct conflict with scripture.

My next question if you agree as I they HAVE to be cleansed by the blood of Christ and he can as I state do this himself, if they are not cleansed of this sin, and there is only heaven and hell where are they going according to what YOU have been taught?

At the time of judgement is there not only heaven or hell? So where do you say they will enter if not heaven?

 

[rinnie]

I don’t think your going to go to Hell, and in fact far from being a sin your no firm theological ground. That said, we must remember

1. Savlation by grace,
2. through faith (a living, breathing working faith).
3. There is much about death we don’t understand
4. Nothing is impossible with God.

Could Christ come to someone in their last moments and offer a last chance? Well sure (I wouldn’t count on it, but sure he could). Could someone repent just before it’s too late, certainly possible. There are any number of situations which may occur, which would allow someone we, generally, would call a non-believer to make it to heaven. Given the number (which I don’t think we could count if we try) of ways this could happen, is it not prudent for us to take the stance of humility and leave it in God’s hands.

That said, I do agree that the further you are from the true doctrine of the Christ Jesus, the more you are in peril. And I beleive this peril is far greater than most of us would care to admit. So as such, it is best to evengalize all and convert as much as possible.

Okay lets go another way, a simple question. Do you think anyone can enter into heaven without Jesus Christ?

 

[rinnie]

I don’t think your going to go to Hell, and in fact far from being a sin your no firm theological ground. That said, we must remember

1. Savlation by grace,
2. through faith (a living, breathing working faith).
3. There is much about death we don’t understand
4. Nothing is impossible with God.

Could Christ come to someone in their last moments and offer a last chance? Well sure (I wouldn’t count on it, but sure he could). Could someone repent just before it’s too late, certainly possible. There are any number of situations which may occur, which would allow someone we, generally, would call a non-believer to make it to heaven. Given the number (which I don’t think we could count if we try) of ways this could happen, is it not prudent for us to take the stance of humility and leave it in God’s hands.

That said, I do agree that the further you are from the true doctrine of the Christ Jesus, the more you are in peril. And I beleive this peril is far greater than most of us would care to admit. So as such, it is best to evengalize all and convert as much as possible.

Lets start Salvation through Grace. Grace is a free gfft given to us by God. Baptism is a Grace a Sacrament a outward sign instituted by Christ to give Grace. Our Baptism is the beginning of our Grace that we gain. And by it we are instituted into the Body of Christ. And by being instituted into the Body of Christ we become Clean from the stain of Original Sin. We are wiped clean by his blood as an infant and start off with a clean slate.