Is it easier to get to heaven as a Catholic than a Protestant?

[PJM]

I just wanted to comment on the quoted part, as I do not believe it is correct. God is always the initiator in providing grace or in efficacious works. This initiation can actually be completely efficacious and move us. However, it can also just be sufficient, in which God then waits for our free response to this movement, and we can either cooperate or not. But to say that we must initiate is itself wrong, so far as I understand it. We respond to God’s first action.

You’re right of COURSE, the point I was TRYING to make is that WE {us} have to initiate OUR participation n the Sacraments, AND it is this effort on our part frequency & worthiness} that causes God to grant these Sacramental graces to flow, to be offered to us. Amen

Thank you

Patrick

 

[PJM]

The Catholic Church is the one true Church, outside of which there is no salvation or sanctifying grace, without which one cannot enter heaven. The Catholic Church is only way to get to heaven. If a protestant is truly ignorant about the Church, then maybe he might go to purgatory to languish for a long time. If he knows about the Church and still rejects it, he is most likely damned.

Not completely accurate my friend

From our Catechism

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

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.
**

**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.

**848 **“Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men.”

God Bless you and WELCOME TO CAF:thumbsup:

 

[WT1]

I believe that the bolded is in error. The Catholic Church teaches that validly baptized Protestants do marry sacramentally. A bishop or priest is not absolutely required for a sacramental marriage.

See:

canonlawmadeeasy.com/2009/02/19/can-non-catholics-receive-the-catholic-sacrament-of-matrimony/

ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage_print.asp?number=411900&language=en

I concur. When my wife and converted the Church recognized our marriage with no additional conditions.

 

[Wannabe_Monk_16]

The Catholic Church is the one true Church, outside of which there is no salvation or sanctifying grace, without which one cannot enter heaven. The Catholic Church is only way to get to heaven. If a protestant is truly ignorant about the Church, then maybe he might go to purgatory to languish for a long time. If he knows about the Church and still rejects it, he is most likely damned.

What if this Protestant’s understanding of some of the Church’s teaching is severely flawed? Could this individual merely be rejecting their perception of the Catholic Church?

 

[slh3016]

What if this Protestant’s understanding of some of the Church’s teaching is severely flawed? Could this individual merely be rejecting their perception of the Catholic Church?

^^^^^THIS is, in my opinion, the biggest question.

On one hand, I believe it is everyone’s duty to pursue truth and I believe that if one does so in an intellectually honest way, they will become Catholic. However, most Protestants see no need to explore any of the Catholic Church’s teachings because, in their eyes, it would be like asking them to explore the claims of Islam, Buddhism, Mormanism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, etc. Not many have time for all that, myself included

99% of Protestants are either ignorant of history or believe it has no relevance to current Christian faith or doctrine. Most that I know simply believe that the modern school of theology is far more enlightened than the pre-Reformation theology that was suppressed by the Big Bad Catholic Church

 

[steve_b]

^^^^^THIS is, in my opinion, the biggest question.

On one hand, I believe it is everyone’s duty to pursue truth and I believe that if one does so in an intellectually honest way, they will become Catholic.

And I don’t doubt Jesus gives sufficient grace to make that possible ***if ***they take finding truth, seriously.
slh:

However, most Protestants see no need to explore any of the Catholic Church’s teachings because, in their eyes, it would be like asking them to explore the claims of Islam, Buddhism, Mormanism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, etc. Not many have time for all that, myself included

Isn’t that because they are a product of who taught them to think that way? Their pastors and teachers have a whole lot of splaynin to do some day.

But it can’t ALL be dismissed on account of such teachers. Each individual has the responsibility to seek truth diligently. One’s ignorance of truth isn’t always innocent 1791
slh:

99% of Protestants are either ignorant of history or believe it has no relevance to current Christian faith or doctrine.

isn’t that because of how they were taught?
slh:

Most that I know simply believe that the modern school of theology is far more enlightened than the pre-Reformation theology that was suppressed by the Big Bad Catholic Church

Just thinking out loud,

Maybe instead of Catholics just giving immediate answers to anyone’s objections, we need to ask the objector more substantive questions about what and why they believe what they do. And stay on that theme like a dog on a bone, till they start opening up, about what they actually know, and examining where they have been deficient in their own training and why.

 

[ThundersnowIV]

The Orthodox don’t deny Transubstantiation. They simply say, “Why try to explain what happens? First there’s bread and wine. Then there’s the Body/Blood/Soul and Divinity of Christ. Who know how it occurred?”

Yes they do…

blogs.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxyandheterodoxy/2013/08/14/the-doctrine-of-transubstantiation-in-the-orthodox-church/

 

[steve_b]

Yes they do…

blogs.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxyandheterodoxy/2013/08/14/the-doctrine-of-transubstantiation-in-the-orthodox-church/

That article is well stated IMV.

He showed with references, how some in Orthodoxy believe in transubstantiation and some don’t. Some believe exactly when the elements change into the Eucharist, some don’t. I’m thinking…really? They are not on the same page with this?

What this magnifies IMV, is that Orthodoxy in general lacks authority. No ONE speaks for Orthodoxy, nor can any ONE speak for Orthodoxy.

It gets back to a statement Card Kasper made back in 2002. Kasper was then the president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity,

Kasper said
“We are increasingly conscious of the fact that an Orthodox Church does not really exist,” he contends. “At the present stage, it does not seem that Constantinople is yet capable of integrating the different autocephalous Orthodox Churches; there are doubts about its primacy of honor, especially in Moscow.”
from zenit.org/articles/the-crisi…rdinal-kasper/

IOW, Orthodoxy not only has an authority problem, there is also no “Orthodox Church”. Because “Orthodox Church” would presume they are one united Church, which they aren’t. Akin I think says it well Why I Am Not Eastern Orthodox

here is a response by the Orthodox to that statement of Card Kasper
orthodoxengland.org.uk/cardinal.htm

In that response to Kasper’s statement, the following jumps out at me

• they contradict the very office Our Lord established in Peter.
• they contradict Our Lord’s prayer that we be perfectly one as He and His Father are one
• they show how E Orthodoxy is what’s hard to defend.
  
  my ongoing question is, what date do we first see in history, in writing, the name “Orthodox Church” with references, properly referenced? To date, in 12 years on CA asking that question in various ways, no one has answered that question, ……yet

As for Protestantism, they are divisions on steroids. And scripture condemns all division(s) from the Church

References to Paul’s warnings and consequences to division #[197 (http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=14165126&postcount=197)

**therefore, as Paul warns, (not me) if one divides from the Church, and/or remains divided from the Church, and once they see their error, won’t reunite with the Church, then at death they won’t inherit heaven.

And there is no expiration date to that warning and consequence
**

 

[slh3016]

And I don’t doubt Jesus gives sufficient grace to make that possible ***if ***they take finding truth, seriously.

Yes, of course, the pursuit of truth MUST be seriously undertaken. Sadly, however, the mindset is in Protestantism, “I’m good, you’re good, we’re all good. Well, except for maybe those crazy Catholics who worship Mary, Muslims, Mormons, etc. I’m not so sure about them.”

Isn’t that because they are a product of who taught them to think that way? Their pastors and teachers have a whole lot of splaynin to do some day.

But it can’t ALL be dismissed on account of such teachers. Each individual has the responsibility to seek truth diligently. One’s ignorance of truth isn’t always innocent 1791

isn’t that because of how they were taught?

Yes, indeed it is in large part because of how they were taught, but even these same pastors and teachers are by and large, ignorant of authentic Catholic Church teaching. I don’t believe there are many who would deliberately deceive their followers in regards to what the Church teaches. IOW, I don’t believe that most are wolves in sheep’s clothing leading people astray. It is very much more akin to the blind leading the blind. I think Tim Staples, Scott Hahn, etc. would concur with this assessment. We are so far removed in history from the Reformation, and the Reformation is SO inadequately presented in school that today’s Protestants don’t even refer to themselves as Protestants because, in their mind, they aren’t really protesting against anything. They are simply Christians trying to live by the Bible and the precepts of their denominational tradition. They much prefer to just accept what they have always been taught because the mental effort required to thoroughly research Catholicism is too great and too intimidating.

I remember that when we were beginning to study Catholicism that my nightly prayer was that the Lord protect me from the deceptions of Satan because Catholicism made TOO MUCH sense. It would so counter-intuitive to everything I had ever heard or known about Christianity that I knew it must be a trap. I say this as a fairly level headed, smart individual who has the mental ability to thoroughly research and draw conclusions. Many Protestant Christians that I know just don’t feel that confident in their abilities to separate fact from fiction and just stay where they are. It takes something pretty profound to convince them to even give the Catholic Church more than a passing glance. This is why the New Evangelization is sooooo important!

Just thinking out loud,

Maybe instead of Catholics just giving immediate answers to anyone’s objections, we need to ask the objector more substantive questions about what and why they believe what they do. And stay on that theme like a dog on a bone, till they start opening up, about what they actually know, and examining where they have been deficient in their own training and why.

YES! EXACTLY! We have one very devout Calvinist friend who has tried to debate/argue with us over our conversion numerous times over the last two years. Every time we try to follow through his objections with the socratic method of discussion/debate, we eventually get to a point where he just shuts the conversation down and/or tries to change the subject. It’s all a house of cards waiting to collapse but the key is figuring out exactly which card needs to be plucked for each individual for their house to fall in on them

 

[slh3016]

therefore, as Paul warns, (not me) if one divides from the Church, and/or remains divided from the Church, and once they see their error, won’t reunite with the Church, then at death they won’t inherit heaven.

And there is no expiration date to that warning and consequence

The dilemma we face as Catholics wanting and desiring for the Church to be ONE is that:

a) We have a hard time convincing Protestants of their errors (and the condemnation seems to apply to those who realize their errors and persist in them);
b) There is no “standard” among Protestantism as to what “being one” actually means.

For Protestants, particularly, the saying, “unity on essentials” is a really big theme. However, there is no governing body to even decide what the essentials are That doesn’t seem to raise too many eyebrows or cause too much head scratching, though.

All of this leads us back to a key question: If condemnation is for those that SEE their error AND persist in it, what is the advantage of even reaching out to non-Catholics? Are we doing them more harm than good by exposing them to their error(s) if they are otherwise leading an exemplary life of Christian love and charity where they are?