R
ReformedCatholic
Guest
Well paint me mistaken, I thought Christ provided what was necessary for salvation. ???
- Status
T
thistle
Guest
Christ provided the Church through which we can come to him to be saved. Catholics dying in a state of grace are assured of salvation. Good people outside the Church might (not will) be saved.
R
ReformedCatholic
Guest
So all our professed Protestant Christian friends are hellbound? Or are you referring to the Church in the sense of a “spiritual body” to which all Christians belong? Can we not “come to Him” without the institution of the Church?
L
Liberian
Guest
Anonymous 1,
My father’s path to salvation was through quantum mechanics; he was a physicist and suddenly realized that there might be something to these miracle stories after all.
Bernard Nathanson’s path to salvation was through his fear of dying. He wrote a book about it called The Hand of God.
My path to salvation was through the Shroud of Turin and the Big Bang theory.
St. Augustine’s path to salvation wsa through seeing a Bible and hearing God say “Pick this up and read it.”
We all have had different ways in which we found Jesus. There is no “relativism” here, but still there are many “paths to salvation”–which all lead to Jesus.
- Liberian
H
hurst
Guest
Put it this way: if it were up to their theology, then they would be.
But the fact is, many protestants often choose their church without holding the doctrine. I recently heard about a Calvinist pastor accepting a position in a Lutheran congregation. What he needed was a job, and had no problem crossing over.
Many protestants were born into it, and are not guilty for leaving the true Church. Many have a generic trust in Jesus as God, and it may well be that if they knew the Catholic truth, they would readily accept it.
But those who rail against the Catholic Church, who spread the erroneous doctrines of the various branches of protestantism etc., are the ones who will receive the harsher judgment.
That is why it can be said that if protestants are saved, it is not because of their official doctrine, because it is false.
It is wrong to assume they are going to heaven. They do not hold the truth. They do typically have valid baptisms and marriages - but only because the Catholic Church accepts them as such. And the Church has called us to welcome them into full communion so that they may not be lost. But they must be converted from their errors, even as many Catholics must be converted from their erroneous views of the Faith.
Christ is the head of the Church, and He has come directly to people in the past (e.g. Saul / St. Paul). But Paul was sent to build up the Church, to establish local Churches in communion with the same Gospel.
The Church is the Kingdom of Heaven on earth. How can you come to Him without entering His Kingdom? If there were no institution of the Church, then there would be no government, no shepherd to feed us, no fulfillment of the prophecy from Daniel 2 about the Kingdom enduring forever, nor from places in the NT referring to obedience and judgment.
However, since the Soul of the Mystical Body of Christ is the Holy Spirit, then one is clearly able to be a member of the Church without needing to actually first become a visible member. But you can’t be grafted onto the tree of life if there is no actual tree of life to become a part of. For the Spirit is in the Church of Christ, in the hierarchy of bishops and priests on whom Christ breathed His Spirit, and who pass it on by the laying on of hands in ordination, confirmation, and other Sacraments. Therefore the institutional Church is necessary; why else would Christ have established it?
Even so, it is possible for a visible member to be a hypocrite and not actually have the Spirit due to unrepented sins, despite being able to go through the motions. But this should not be used as a basis to discredit the value and need for the visible Church…
hurst
P
petra
Guest
We cannot earn our way to heaven by being a good or devout person. If that were the case, Christ died needlessly. Jesus made it clear that no one comes to the Father but through Him.
God does not condemn anyone. By default, we are already condemned (separated from God) in our fallen state. God has gone to incredible lengths to remedy that problem. Salvation is available to all who receive Christ on the basis of His finished work–not on the basis of our worthiness.
The reason we do not presume that anyone will definitely be lost is because we cannot see inside people’s hearts. We don’t know to what extent they have privately or imperfectly responded to Christ’s invitation. But we do know what the fulness of the Gospel is and what God intends for normative responses to be. This fulness should be our message in evangelism.
We can only produce good works that are pleasing to God if He gives us the grace to perform those works–just as He gives us the faith to believe. We can take no credit for it. We are saved by grace through faith as expressed by works. We are not saved by being a good person, apart from Christ.
D
dcdurel
Guest
But once we have received the grace of salvation, through faith, at baptism, we can certainly lose this grace, through away this salvation by deliberate unrepentant mortal sin. So we must strive for holiness, with the understanding that this holiness can only be obtained through God’s grace.
Thus, if we don’t strive for holiness, by means of God’s grace, we can certainly through away our salvation.
Jesus’s death and resurrection made salvation possible, He did not make salvation automatic.
Now, those who never heard of Jesus and His Gospel can receive salvation after they die if they have lived according to their conscience. It is not something they earned. It is a free gift Jesus gives to those who lived according to the law written in their hearts.
The problem is that they can never attain the holiness of life during their stay on earth, that would have been possible had they become Catholic. It is much harder for a non-Catholic to do what is right, because he doesn’t have full access to all of God’s grace. Broken homes, abortion, hatred, greed, etc. all seem normal to those who don’t know the teachings of the Church and who do not have the grace to overcome these problems. .
The saints were saints only because they had access to the grace Jesus makes available only through His Church. We don’t see people with the holiness of the saints in other religions because they simply don’t have the grace available to them to grow properly in holiness.
Catholics who have access to God’s grace and don’t seek it (through the sacraments, esp the Eucharist, and prayer) are no better off than athiests or pagans.
U
undeserving
Guest
Posted by DC Durel-
"Now, those who never heard of Jesus and His Gospel can receive salvation after they die if they have lived according to their conscience. It is not something they earned. It is a free gift Jesus gives to those who lived according to the law written in their hearts.
The problem is that they can never attain the holiness of life during their stay on earth, that would have been possible had they become Catholic. It is much harder for a non-Catholic to do what is right, because he doesn’t have full access to all of God’s grace. Broken homes, abortion, hatred, greed, etc. all seem normal to those who don’t know the teachings of the Church and who do not have the grace to overcome these problems. .
The saints were saints only because they had access to the grace Jesus makes available only through His Church. We don’t see people with the holiness of the saints in other religions because they simply don’t have the grace available to them to grow properly in holiness. "
I have to agree here.Holy and good people of other religions have this strange atitude that what other people do, what society around them endorses is none of their business. Everything is seen through the lens of relativism. Whats good for him is ok for him kind of thinking. The goodness, the holy lives, the purity in their living is only for them not to be emulated by anyone else. I am actually talking about Hindus and Muslims. Muslims ofcourse follow their community norms, but they care little for example if a clinic next door to them carries out abortions on women (of other religions) who don’t want a baby girl for example.
"Now, those who never heard of Jesus and His Gospel can receive salvation after they die if they have lived according to their conscience. It is not something they earned. It is a free gift Jesus gives to those who lived according to the law written in their hearts.
The problem is that they can never attain the holiness of life during their stay on earth, that would have been possible had they become Catholic. It is much harder for a non-Catholic to do what is right, because he doesn’t have full access to all of God’s grace. Broken homes, abortion, hatred, greed, etc. all seem normal to those who don’t know the teachings of the Church and who do not have the grace to overcome these problems. .
The saints were saints only because they had access to the grace Jesus makes available only through His Church. We don’t see people with the holiness of the saints in other religions because they simply don’t have the grace available to them to grow properly in holiness. "
I have to agree here.Holy and good people of other religions have this strange atitude that what other people do, what society around them endorses is none of their business. Everything is seen through the lens of relativism. Whats good for him is ok for him kind of thinking. The goodness, the holy lives, the purity in their living is only for them not to be emulated by anyone else. I am actually talking about Hindus and Muslims. Muslims ofcourse follow their community norms, but they care little for example if a clinic next door to them carries out abortions on women (of other religions) who don’t want a baby girl for example.
A
Anonymous_1
Guest
…
Hinduism speaks of there being many paths to moksha, release from the endless cycle of birth and rebirth, Monotheism is one acceptable path, still other hindus believe and worship many gods.
Janists follow sever asceticism, and believe that there possibly is a god but that he is not really relevent to humans. sort of deistic so to speak. Janists are ntor equired to believe in god. Rather htey work out their salvation so to speak through sever asceticism.
from what i understand, Buddhists believe there is no truth, but rather that everything is illusory
But these religions ARE false. Even though there very well could be some truth in them. From what I understand(correct me if Im wrong), we can take from these religions what is edifying and constructive to our own faith, so long as it is in concordance with that which is held by the Church. But we must remit that which is in discord with the Faith.
God is loving and merciful and desires all men to come to Him. It is the ends for which we were created.
From what I understood it is the teaching of the Church that those, who through no fault of their own are ignorant of the truth that God has revealed to the world through the Person of Jesus Christ and through His Church, but who do seek to do what is right, love mercy, and walk with God by cooperating with the Grace He does provide for them, will be judged accordingly. God is merciful and loving and just, certainly capable of this task.
What im trying to say is that all religions are not equal. They can not all be correct. Even though there may be some truth within each particular religion(for example a variation of the Golden Rule is found in the scripture of almost every major religion).
I’m not sure where I am going with this, just sharing my thoughts
Hinduism speaks of there being many paths to moksha, release from the endless cycle of birth and rebirth, Monotheism is one acceptable path, still other hindus believe and worship many gods.
Janists follow sever asceticism, and believe that there possibly is a god but that he is not really relevent to humans. sort of deistic so to speak. Janists are ntor equired to believe in god. Rather htey work out their salvation so to speak through sever asceticism.
from what i understand, Buddhists believe there is no truth, but rather that everything is illusory
But these religions ARE false. Even though there very well could be some truth in them. From what I understand(correct me if Im wrong), we can take from these religions what is edifying and constructive to our own faith, so long as it is in concordance with that which is held by the Church. But we must remit that which is in discord with the Faith.
God is loving and merciful and desires all men to come to Him. It is the ends for which we were created.
From what I understood it is the teaching of the Church that those, who through no fault of their own are ignorant of the truth that God has revealed to the world through the Person of Jesus Christ and through His Church, but who do seek to do what is right, love mercy, and walk with God by cooperating with the Grace He does provide for them, will be judged accordingly. God is merciful and loving and just, certainly capable of this task.
What im trying to say is that all religions are not equal. They can not all be correct. Even though there may be some truth within each particular religion(for example a variation of the Golden Rule is found in the scripture of almost every major religion).
I’m not sure where I am going with this, just sharing my thoughts
R
ReformedCatholic
Guest
It is interesting that there are so many religions. I think it is human nature for us to believe we are right in what we believe. It is necessary for our psychological stability. I guess if all of the information was indisputable and the “right” religion were clear to all, then it wouldn’t be as much a matter of faith as it would be more a matter of following a rulebook.
A
Anonymous_1
Guest
After examining the claims and foundations of various religions I find the most palatable and reasonable to be Christianity. That is not to say there is not truth in other religions. In addition to this intellectual examination, I have experiential reasons to believe that Jesus is Christ and Lord. Try telling the leper that Jesus didn’t heal him.
You see we have been imbued by this idea of relativism. For millenia Man has debated, speculated, theorized and philosophized about the existence and nature and precepts of God and gods. We are free and would be justified in believing whatever we wanted about Him if this generic God had not revealed Himself to us. So I say that God has revealed Himself to mankind through Creation, through Inspiration and Revelation found in Sacred Scripture, His Church, and ultimatley in the Person of Jesus Christ. I believe this is the truth.
I do not believe Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Zoroastronism, Islam, or any one from the plethora of religions to be as close to the reality of things as Christianity. I have reasons to believe this. But you cry “intolerance! Who are you to make a claim on truth!” And I reply, I did not invent Catholocism, I merley subscribe to it because I believe it to be true.
That is not to say that I do not accept or respect the religions of others, and God forbid I should not love another for his disbelief. But I do not believe these other religions to be true. If I did I would not be Catholic but rather the other religion which I believed to be true.
not sure if any of this makes sense…
R
ReformedCatholic
Guest
It makes perfect sense. I think you came to a good conclusion based on sound reasoning and experience.
P
petra
Guest
I completely agree.
We must be very, very careful here. Most non-Christian people feel that they “know what is right.” For example, their conscience may tell them that sexual intimacy is right as long as the partners are committed to each other—whether or not they are married and even if they may be of the same gender. It is incorrect to say that people will be saved if they live according to their conscience. This is moral and theological relativism.
We do initially have very basic moral law written in our hearts. “That which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.” (Rom. 1:19) The next verse describes a very primitive gospel and the means and the means through which that gospel is conveyed: through what has been made. So efficacious is this gospel message that people are “without excuse” if they do not honor God or give Him thanks. This passage explains why there will be no unfairness on God’s part that some people will be lost eternally.
But there is an implict other side to this coin. It seems that there is some possibility that people may respond to the self-evident reality that God exists. This response, in the absence of any knowledge of Christiantity or the Catholic Church, may be considered to be a baptism of desire. Baptism, whether it be the normative sacrament of water baptism or whether it be baptism of desire or blood, is necessary to remove original sin and impart sanctifying grace. There can be no salvation without the removal of original sin and the imparting of sanctifyting grace. This comes from Christ, not as a result of “being a good person.” However, once sanctified, good works become a cooperative effort with the work of the Holy Spirit in our life. This is true of Catholics and it is true of other people who may have found Christ ('though they may not know His name) by responding to the primitive gospel.
I agree!
I personally believe that such salvations [those outside of the Christian community] are extremely rare. Consider the differences in the availability of graces between Catholics and Protestants. If a Protestant sins mortally, he or she can be restored only through perfect contrition, whereas we have the gift of the sacrament of reconciliation. Now consider the vast difference between the graces we have and that which those who are in a non-Christian religion or live in a unevangelized pagan culture have. The obstacles to finding the one true eternal God are many for those with access to so few graces.
We should always be passionate about evangelism for this reason. While we cannot presume anyone to definitely be destined for hell, we should assume that most people are lost and in need of Christ because He tells us that the road to destruction is broad.
P
petra
Guest
Some people think there is significance in the fact that there are many religions (with the implication that there are many paths to God and not a single true religion.)
I find more significance in the fact that people of all religions are interested in following a religion that they think is right. I see this as evidence that God has written in our hearts that there is Truth. Not everyone finds the truth, but most people intrinsically know that the concept is real, and they attempt to align their lives with what they believe it to be. Rather than settle with the premature conclusion that all religions are equal, we should recognize the deeper insight here that Truth exists as a concept. And we should continually seek Truth and realign ourselves when we find our worldview to be incorrect.
I did this when I became a Catholic after 22 years of my adult life as an Evangelical Protestant.
A
Anonymous_1
Guest
amen
and this concludes the point I was hoping to make with this thread…
- Status