A
Agnus_Dei
Guest
So what does the Church teach about those who openly reject the Catholic Church, but have been baptized legitamitly and have faith in Christ Jesus?
- Status
M
mosher
Guest
This is too broad of a question. Please filter it down a little bit so that we can look a specific aspect of this such as apostacy or heresy or the like.
D
Dimmers
Guest
forums.catholic-questions.org/search.php?searchid=1807431
It has been covered a few times. Plenty of results.
If one thread doesn’t answer your question specifically you might go on to next. Always try a search, you might find your answer. If not. Then post.
It has been covered a few times. Plenty of results.
If one thread doesn’t answer your question specifically you might go on to next. Always try a search, you might find your answer. If not. Then post.
C
Catholic_Dude
Guest
Typically they will be rejecting set teachings of the CC which carry the penalty of anathema if they are rejected.
Knowingly rejecting a binding CC teaching is putting your soul in jeopardy and could require special permission to be reconciled depending on the teaching rejected.
A
Agnus_Dei
Guest
what about if the teaching rejected is not one of the ecumenical beliefs (as described by the three creeds: athanasian, nicene and apostles creed) and is something like papal infalliblity or the Roman Catholicview on Mary
D
DeFide
Guest
Infallibly-defined doctrine must be accepted by Catholics (which includes Papal Infallibility… you need to be more specific on “view of Mary”)
A quick link on identifying infallible statements:
catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0109bt.asp
(Also, you can just ask)
What about less than infallible teachings?:
In his motu proprio (an apostolic letter written “on his own initiative”), John Paul II explained that in such cases “the faithful are obliged to adhere with a sense of religious respect to that authentic magisterium of their own bishops” (AS 22).
The phrase “a sense of religious respect” (Latin, religioso animi obsequio) can be rendered different ways, including “a religious submission of mind” or “a pious inner deference.” It is a different response than that called for when the Church proposes something definitively, whether as part of revelation or not.
According to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “When the magisterium of the Church makes an infallible pronouncement and solemnly declares that a teaching is found in revelation, the assent called for is that of theological faith. . . . When the magisterium proposes ‘in a definitive way’ truths concerning faith and morals, even if not divinely revealed . . . these must be firmly accepted and held” (CDF, Donum Veritatis [1990] 23).
However, the CDF continued, “When the magisterium, not intending to act ‘definitively,’ teaches a doctrine to aid a better understanding of revelation and make explicit its contents, or to recall how some teaching is in conformity with the truths of faith, or finally to guard against ideas that are incompatible with these truths, the response called for is that of the religious submission of will and intellect. This kind of response cannot be simply exterior or disciplinary but must be understood within the logic of faith and under the impulse of obedience to the faith” (ibid.).
This means that the response called for is one that does not necessarily result in the “firm acceptance” called for by definitive teachings. Neither is it a “simply exterior or disciplinary” conformity whereby a person might simply remain silent in the face of a teaching he disagreed with but give no thought to the matter. Instead, one must seek to understand the non-definitive teaching “within the logic of faith and under the impulse of obedience to the faith.”
This amounts to saying that one must at least give it favorable consideration and seek to agree with it unless there are compelling reasons to the contrary. The basis for this favorable consideration is that even when infallibility is not invoked, the Holy Spirit continues to guide the teaching of the magisterium, though not in such a way that the result is guaranteed to be true.
One is not required to believe such declarations if one in good faith believes there are overriding reasons to the contrary. Speaking of a case where a bishop disagrees with the pronouncement of his national conference, Cardinal Dulles explains, “One may say that when the episcopal conference issues authoritative pronouncements the individual bishop is in principle bound to agree, but that he may conscientiously dissent—either internally or externally—under the same conditions that other Catholics may dissent from noninfallible teaching” (op. cit.)
source:
catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0212bt.asp
A
Agnus_Dei
Guest
I mean Protestants who believe in the basic faith (as described by the three creeds) but are not catholic in the fullest sense (adhere to the Pope, pray to saints etc. etc.) Are they saved?
D
DeFide
Guest
A
Agnus_Dei
Guest
This is a quote from the link provided:
"However, for those who knowingly and deliberately (that is, not out of innocent ignorance) commit the sins of heresy (rejecting divinely revealed doctrine) or schism (separating from the Catholic Church and/or joining a schismatic church), no salvation would be possible until they repented and returned to live in Catholic unity. "
So this means that members of the Lutheran, Baptist, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, Methodist, and all other Trinitarian Denomanations who openly reject divinely revealed doctrine (the assumption of Mary for example) will go to Hell despite being baptized, knowing Christ, and having faith in Him.
interesting. If this is what the Catholic Church really believes,
I may have to go back to ground one and restart my search for faith.
I never knew the Catholic church held a monopoly on Christ’s grace. I always thought the Catholic Church was the Pillar and Foundation of Truth, but I never knew rejecting it for let’s say openly holding to Lutheranism condemns you.
"However, for those who knowingly and deliberately (that is, not out of innocent ignorance) commit the sins of heresy (rejecting divinely revealed doctrine) or schism (separating from the Catholic Church and/or joining a schismatic church), no salvation would be possible until they repented and returned to live in Catholic unity. "
So this means that members of the Lutheran, Baptist, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, Methodist, and all other Trinitarian Denomanations who openly reject divinely revealed doctrine (the assumption of Mary for example) will go to Hell despite being baptized, knowing Christ, and having faith in Him.
interesting. If this is what the Catholic Church really believes,
I may have to go back to ground one and restart my search for faith.
I never knew the Catholic church held a monopoly on Christ’s grace. I always thought the Catholic Church was the Pillar and Foundation of Truth, but I never knew rejecting it for let’s say openly holding to Lutheranism condemns you.
D
DeFide
Guest
That’s not what it says. Read it again. If people are innocently unware that they are rejecting Christ and His Church, they won’t be held culpable for that rejection.
A
Agnus_Dei
Guest
note the quotation marks “” the quote form the link was between the marks “” the rest was my conclusion.
And what about a Baptist pastor? he is not being “ingorant” he knows all about the Catholic faith and what they believe, but is choosing to be Baptist because he does not believe that mary was assumed into heaven.
The link provided concludes that he is damned.
And if anyone has a grudge against Baptists, lets say instead of a Baptist pastor, the above scenario involved a eastern orthodox priest on the doctrine of Papal Infallibility.
D
DeFide
Guest
It was this interpretation that I disagreed with:
So this means that members of the Lutheran, Baptist, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, Methodist, and all other Trinitarian Denomanations who openly reject divinely revealed doctrine (the assumption of Mary for example) will go to Hell despite being baptized, knowing Christ, and having faith in Him.
If they innocently don’t realize that the Catholic Church is what it claims to be, they do not know what they are rejecting. They aren’t culpable.
If, however, they knew the Catholic Church is what it claims to be, then they wouldn’t have faith in Christ, her founder, if they rejected that Church, would they?
K
Klm
Guest
I’d have to answer that yes, they can go to heaven. We’re only held responsible for what we know. And that doesn’t just mean intellectual knowledge. That means understanding. Understanding to the point that we can accept. There’s also a response to God’s calling involved. God knows the life situation and denomination of every Christian on the planet. Some are not Catholic, (I’m thinking of pastors here mostly) because God has called them to be where they are. Who will reach those non-believers with a Baptist family background if all the Baptist pastors become Catholic? Who will stand up for at the very least tolerance of Catholics if there are no non-Catholic believers? To suppose that all non-Catholics, regardless of their relationship with Christ, will go to hell, means that, for example, Billy Grahm is doomed to the lake of fire. Yet he has reached more people with the gospel than any other protestant out there. Is his doctrine imperfect, yes.
If all protestants were doomed, whether they had been baptized or not, then the Catholic church would not recognize the validity of their baptism. Yet it does. One who has been baptized into a Christian faith doesn’t not get re-baptized when they come into the Catholic church. Nor are Candidates (those who have been baptized, whether Catholic or other Christians) and Catechumens (those who have not been baptized ever) seen as the same during the RCIA process.
In short, living in obedience to Christ, and accepting his sacrifice is what gets you into heaven. To the best of your ability, based on your knowledge.
If all protestants were doomed, whether they had been baptized or not, then the Catholic church would not recognize the validity of their baptism. Yet it does. One who has been baptized into a Christian faith doesn’t not get re-baptized when they come into the Catholic church. Nor are Candidates (those who have been baptized, whether Catholic or other Christians) and Catechumens (those who have not been baptized ever) seen as the same during the RCIA process.
In short, living in obedience to Christ, and accepting his sacrifice is what gets you into heaven. To the best of your ability, based on your knowledge.
A
Agnus_Dei
Guest
That is what I hoped to hear!
But a Baptist Pastor is in fact shismatic by definition…
and the quote from Catholic.com
"“However, for those who knowingly and deliberately (that is, not out of innocent ignorance) commit the sins of heresy (rejecting divinely revealed doctrine) or schism (separating from the Catholic Church and/or joining a schismatic church), no salvation would be possible until they repented and returned to live in Catholic unity. “””
Damn him…
im so depressed by this…
D
DeFide
Guest
Are you saying you know a Protestant who knows Christ founded the Catholic Church as his infallible Church, and yet he chooses to reject Christ’s church anyway?
Really?
A
Agnus_Dei
Guest
No…I mean a Protestant pastor who knows the Church inside out.
As in all its teachings.
But does not join because he does not agree with him.
But is a trinitarian Christian.
D
DeFide
Guest
1.Knowing what Catholic teaching is.
and
- Knowing that the Churh is TRUE and exactly what she claims to be.
A
Agnus_Dei
Guest
What about a Person who now believes the Church is true.
But still has doubts (no one should jump into stuff without research) and sadly dies a protestant with the knowledge that the Catholic church is true.
D
DeFide
Guest
If he has doubts, then he does not really think that the Church is what it claims to be, namely a divinely-instituted Church that teaches infallibly on matters of faith and morals.
You cannot be held accountable for what you do not know.
Doubt and belief are mutually exclusive. Difficulty and belief are not mutually exclusive. You can believe that gravity exists, and act accordingly without fully understanding what makes it work.
R
RyanL
Guest
That said…willful blindness, at least in the American legal system, can be considered knowledge.
If you doubt, search until the doubt is resolved. Do not actively disbelieve, but continue to question.
God Bless,
RyanL
- Status