Non-Christians and Heaven

[IntegraCatholic]

Actually, there is no proof that they were not formally baptized before being martyred. As a matter of fact, St. Ambrose tells us that catuchemens were actually baptized right away.

I don’t know that they were baptized right away. Perhaps they were baptized without an entire understanding of the faith, but they received the necessary parts of the faith during Lent. Take this passage from the Roman Catechism (of the Council of Trent):

Ordinarily They Are Not Baptised At Once

On adults, however, the Church has not been accustomed to confer the Sacrament of Baptism at once, but has ordained that it be deferred for a certain time. The delay is not attended with the same danger as in the case of infants, which we have already mentioned; should any unforeseen accident make it impossible for adults to be washed in the salutary waters, their intention and determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness [emphasis added].

Nay, this delay seems to be attended with some advantages. And first, since the Church must take particular care that none approach this Sacrament through hypocrisy and dissimulation, the intentions of such as seek Baptism, are better examined and ascertained. Hence it is that we read in the decrees of ancient Councils that Jewish converts to the Catholic faith, before admission to Baptism, should spend some months in the ranks of the catechumens.

Furthermore, the candidate for Baptism is thus better instructed in the doctrine of the faith which he is to profess, and in the practices of the Christian life. Finally, when Baptism is administered to adults with solemn ceremonies on the appointed days of Easter and Pentecost only greater religious reverence is shown to the Sacrament.

 

[SGT_ROCK_33]

I don’t know that they were baptized right away. Perhaps they were baptized without an entire understanding of the faith, but they received the necessary parts of the faith during Lent. Take this passage from the Roman Catechism (of the Council of Trent):

Let’s not forget that over 1000 years separates the Council of Trent from St. Ambrose…

My quotes from St. Ambrose were from the 4th century…

God Bless

 

[PJM]

=Arafea;6647577]Greetings!

I need some Bible verses to give my teacher to explain that Christians are not the only ones going to Heaven.

Thank you!

Be careful how you use this.

2Mac.11: 31 “for the Jews to enjoy their own food and laws, just as formerly, and none of them shall be molested in any way for what he may have done in ignorance”

Heb.9: 12 “he entered once for all into the Holy Place, taking not the blood of goats and calves but his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.

Acts.17: 30 “The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all men everywhere to repent“,

John 1: 16 “And from his fullness have we all received, grace upon grace. “

Acts.15: 11 “But we believe that we shall be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will."

**Rom. 3: 30 **“since God is one; and he will justify the circumcised on the ground of their faith and the uncircumcised through their faith.”

**Rom.11: 5 **“So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace.”

**Rom.3: 24 **“they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus,

**Luke.3: 6 **“and all flesh shall see the salvation of God."

**Tit.2: 11 **“For the grace of God has appeared for the salvation of all men“,

**2Cor.4: 15 **“For it is all for your sake, so that as grace extends to more and more people it may increase thanksgiving, to the glory of God”

Eph.4: 7 “But grace was given to each of us according to the measure of Christ’s gift.”

Rev.19: 1 “After this I heard what seemed to be the loud voice of a great multitude in heaven, crying, "Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God,”

From the Catechism

55 This revelation was not broken off by our first parents’ sin. “After the fall, [God] buoyed them up with the hope of salvation, by promising redemption; and he has never ceased to show his solicitude for the human race. For he wishes to give eternal life to all those who seek salvation by patience in well-doing.”

169 Salvation comes from God alone; but because we receive the life of faith through the Church, she is our mother: “We believe the Church as the mother of our new birth, and not in the Church as if she were the author of our salvation.” Because she is our mother, she is also our teacher in the faith

**620 **Our salvation flows from God’s initiative of love for us, because “he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins” (1 Jn 4:10). “God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself” (2 Cor 5:19).

2283 We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives.

841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

 

[SGT_ROCK_33]

841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

Very difficult to reconcile the above statement with these:
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Basel, Session 19, Sept. 7, 1434: “Moreover, we trust that with God’s help another benefit will accrue to the Christian commonwealth; because from this union, once it is established, there is hope that very many from the abominable sect of Mahomet will be converted to the Catholic faith.”

Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, 1311-1312: “It is an insult to the holy name and a disgrace to the Christian faith that in certain parts of the world subject to Christian princes where Saracens (i.e., The followers of Islam, also called Muslims) live, sometimes apart, sometimes intermingled with Christians, the Saracen priests, commonly called Zabazala, in their temples or mosques, in which the Saracens meet to adore the infidel Mahomet, loudly invoke and extol his name each day at certain hours from a high place… This brings disrepute on our faith and gives great scandal to the faithful. These practices cannot be tolerated without displeasing the divine majesty. We therefore, with the sacred council’s approval, strictly forbid such practices henceforth in Christian lands. We enjoin on Catholic princes, one and all… They are to forbid expressly the public invocation of the sacrilegious name of Mahomet… Those who presume to act otherwise are to be so chastised by the princes for their irreverence, that others may be deterred from such boldness.”

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Pt. II, Q. 12, A. 1, Obj. 2: “… if anyone were to… worship at the tomb of Mahomet, he would be deemed an apostate.”

Matthew 10:33- “But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny before my Father who is in heaven.”

Pope Pius IX, *Qui Pluribus *(# 15), Nov. 9, 1846: “Also perverse is that shocking theory that it makes no difference to which religion one belongs, a theory greatly at variance even with reason. By means of this theory, those crafty men remove all distinction between virtue and vice, truth and error, honorable and vile action. They pretend that men can gain eternal salvation by the practice of any religion, as if there could ever be any sharing between justice and iniquity, any collaboration between light and darkness, or any agreement between Christ and Belial.”

It is difficult for me to grasp this concept with the quotations above, especially the passage from Matthew, as Muslims deny the Trinity and the incarnation of Jesus Christ. Very difficult to reconcile your post with the prior teachings of the Church…

God Bless

 

[PJM]

=SGT ROCK 33;6658347]But the Catechism is not an infallible document. We will have to agree to disagree… There has never been an infallible teaching on the BOB and BOD, or a dogma that teaches this.

I will agree that there is some speculation though…

God Bless

Infallibility is usually limited to specificly defined Dogma or Doctrine. Infallibility is NOT the only Grave Moral obligation imposed by the Ppe an Magistrium - Teachings of the Church.

From the current Code of Canon Law; which by the way, like the Catehcism is too “a Level One” [absolutely binding] Authority document.

Can. 747 §1 It is the obligation and inherent right of the Church, independent of any human authority, to preach the Gospel to all peoples, using for this purpose even its own means of social communication, for it is to the Church that Christ the Lord entrusted the deposit of faith, so that by the assistance of the Holy Spirit, it might conscientiously guard revealed truth, more intimately penetrate it, and faithfully proclaim and expound it.

**§2 **The Church has the right always and everywhere to proclaim moral principles, even in respect of the social order, and to make judgements about any human matter in so far as this is required by fundamental human rights or the salvation of souls.

Can. 748 §1 All are bound to seek the truth in the matters which concern God and his Church; when they have found it, then by divine law they are bound, and they have the right, to embrace and keep it.

**§2 **It is never lawful for anyone to force others to embrace the catholic faith against their conscience.

Can. 749 §1 In virtue of his office the Supreme Pontiff is infallible in his teaching when, as chief Shepherd and Teacher of all Christ’s faithful, with the duty of strengthening his brethren in the faith,** he proclaims by definitive act a doctrine to be held concerning faith or morals. **

**§2 **The College of Bishops also possesses infallibility in its teaching when the Bishops, gathered together in an Ecumenical Council and exercising their magisterium as teachers and judges of faith and morals, definitively declare for the universal Church a doctrine to be held concerning faith or morals; likewise, when the Bishops, dispersed throughout the world but maintaining the bond of union among themselves and with the successor of Peter, together with the same Roman Pontiff authentically teach matters of faith or morals, and are agreed that a particular teaching is definitively to be held.

**§3 **No doctrine is understood to be infallibly defined unless this is manifestly demonstrated.

Can. 750 Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal magisterium, which is manifested by the common adherence of Christ’s faithful under the guidance of the sacred magisterium. All are therefore bound to shun any contrary doctrines.

**Can. 751 **Heresy is the obstinate denial or doubt, after baptism, of a truth which must be believed by divine and catholic faith. Apostasy is the total repudiation of the christian faith. Schism is the withdrawal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or from communion with the members of the Church subject to him.

Can. 752 **While the assent of faith is not required, a religious submission of intellect and will is to be given to any doctrine which either the Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising their authentic magisterium, declare upon a matter of faith or morals, even though they do not intend to proclaim that doctrine by definitive act. Christ’s faithful are therefore to ensure that they avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine. ** This applies to the Catechism

**Can. 753 **Whether they teach individually, or in Episcopal Conferences, or gathered together in particular councils, Bishops in communion with the head and the members of the College, while not infallible in their teaching, are the authentic instructors and teachers of the faith for Christ’s faithful entrusted to their care. The faithful are bound to adhere, with a religious submission of mind, to this authentic magisterium of their Bishops. [This includes th Catechism]

Can. 754 All Christ’s faithful are obliged to observe the constitutions and decrees which lawful ecclesiastical authority issues for the purpose of proposing doctrine or of proscribing erroneous opinions; this is particularly the case of those published by the Roman Pontiff or by the College of Bishops.

 

[SGT_ROCK_33]

Can. 750 Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal magisterium, which is manifested by the common adherence of Christ’s faithful under the guidance of the sacred magisterium. All are therefore bound to shun any contrary doctrines.

How is this:
841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

Not contrary to this:
Pope Pius IX, *Qui Pluribus *(# 15), Nov. 9, 1846: “Also perverse is that shocking theory that it makes no difference to which religion one belongs, a theory greatly at variance even with reason. By means of this theory, those crafty men remove all distinction between virtue and vice, truth and error, honorable and vile action. They pretend that men can gain eternal salvation by the practice of any religion, as if there could ever be any sharing between justice and iniquity, any collaboration between light and darkness, or any agreement between Christ and Belial.”

Or this:
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Basel, Session 19, Sept. 7, 1434: “Moreover, we trust that with God’s help another benefit will accrue to the Christian commonwealth; because from this union, once it is established, there is hope that very many from the abominable sect of Mahomet will be converted to the Catholic faith.”

Please reconcile…

Can. 752 While the assent of faith is not required

, a religious submission of intellect and will is to be given to any doctrine which either the Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising their authentic magisterium, declare upon a matter of faith or morals, even though they do not intend to proclaim that doctrine by definitive act. Christ’s faithful are therefore to ensure that they avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine. This applies to the Catechism.
Precisely my point…

God Bless

 

[PJM]

=SGT ROCK 33How is this:
841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

Not contrary to this:
Pope Pius IX, *Qui Pluribus *(# 15), Nov. 9, 1846: “Also perverse is that shocking theory that it makes no difference to which religion one belongs, a theory greatly at variance even with reason. By means of this theory, those crafty men remove all distinction between virtue and vice, truth and error, honorable and vile action. They pretend that men can gain eternal salvation by the practice of any religion, as if there could ever be any sharing between justice and iniquity, any collaboration between light and darkness, or any agreement between Christ and Belial.”

Or this:
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Basel, Session 19, Sept. 7, 1434: “Moreover, we trust that with God’s help another benefit will accrue to the Christian commonwealth; because from this union, once it is established, there is hope that very many from the abominable sect of Mahomet will be converted to the Catholic faith.”

Please reconcile…

Precisely my point…

God Bless

Sarge, you ask tough questons

I’ve responed already on teachings prior to the PR…

The CC has always held the position that God’s desire is for One Church, One Faith is FACT. That hs not changed.

It is within the authority GRANTED BY GOD, for the Pope and Magisterium to grant additional understandings that do NOT at the core; alter the Doctrine.

Your point is well made, and I’m not a theologian. But sometine in the “recent” past; our Pope and the Mgagisteriums who’s authority is assured by Christ Himself [Jn.14:16-17 and Jn.17: 14-19 especially v. 19], have come to understand that like our Brethern the Jews, Muslims and Christinaty have a common God an even a common history to a point suficient in the mind of the Fathers to include them in THE POSSIBILITY OF SALVATION, which flows through th CC.

Of NOTE: In each of these cases there are common behavior expetiations tied to his possibility.

Love and prayers, and THANKS for what your doing for us!

 

[AnneElliot]

It is within the authority GRANTED BY GOD, for the Pope and Magisterium to grant additional understandings that do NOT at the core; alter the Doctrine.

How do they not alter the doctrine?

Doesn’t this idea of “additional understandings” go against Vatican I’s Dei Filius?

“The faith which God has revealed has not been proposed like a theory of philosophy, to be elaborated upon by human understanding, but as a divine deposit to be faithfully guarded and infallibly declared. Therefore, that sense of sacred dogmas is to **be kept forever **which Holy Mother Church has once declared, and it must never be deviated from on the specious pretext of a more profound understanding. Let intelligence, and science, and wisdom increase, but only according to the **same **dogma, the **same **sense, the **same **meaning. If anyone shall have said that there may ever be attributed to the doctrines proposed by the Church a sense which is different from the sense which the Church has once understood and now understands: let him be anathema.” I Vatican Council, Dei Filius

 

[PJM]

How do they not alter the doctrine?

Doesn’t this idea of “additional understandings” go against Vatican I’s Dei Filius?

“The faith which God has revealed has not been proposed like a theory of philosophy, to be elaborated upon by human understanding, but as a divine deposit to be faithfully guarded and infallibly declared. Therefore, that sense of sacred dogmas is to **be kept forever **which Holy Mother Church has once declared, and it must never be deviated from on the specious pretext of a more profound understanding. Let intelligence, and science, and wisdom increase, but ]only according to the **same **dogma, the **same **sense, the **same **meaning. If anyone shall have said that there may ever be attributed to the doctrines proposed by the Church a sense which is different from the sense which the Church has once understood and now understands: let him be anathema.” I Vatican Council, Dei Filius

]

The meaning is not changed, its added on to, supporting the same thesis.

 

[AnneElliot]

The meaning is not changed, its added on to, supporting the same thesis.

If you add on to something, doesn’t it change it? It’s not the same as it was before, if you’ve added something to it.

 

[JMJ_coder]

If you add on to something, doesn’t it change it? It’s not the same as it was before, if you’ve added something to it.

Our understanding of just about every doctrine has grown since the end of public revelation (i.e., the death of Saint John the Apostle). Christology, the Immaculate Conception, the Beatific Vision, the nature of the Papacy, the Assumption of Mary, etc., etc., etc.

 

[SGT_ROCK_33]

If you add on to something, doesn’t it change it? It’s not the same as it was before, if you’ve added something to it.

I agree…

 

[Tradycja]

The view that dogmas can change is condemned as modernism in “PASCENDI DOMINICI GREGIS, ON THE DOCTRINE OF THE MODERNISTS” which was written by Pope Pius X.

Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi dominic gregis (#13), Sept. 8, 1907:
"Dogma is not only able, but ought to evolve and to be changed. This is strongly affirmed by the Modernists, and clearly flows from their principles."
papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10pasce.htm

 

[SGT_ROCK_33]

The view that dogmas can change is condemned as modernism in “PASCENDI DOMINICI GREGIS, ON THE DOCTRINE OF THE MODERNISTS” which was written by Pope Pius X.

Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi dominic gregis (#13), Sept. 8, 1907:
"Dogma is not only able, but ought to evolve and to be changed. This is strongly affirmed by the Modernists, and clearly flows from their principles."
papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10pasce.htm

 

[AnneElliot]

Our understanding of just about every doctrine has grown since the end of public revelation (i.e., the death of Saint John the Apostle). Christology, the Immaculate Conception, the Beatific Vision, the nature of the Papacy, the Assumption of Mary, etc., etc., etc.

The church fathers, Councils, and Popes never added onto defined Dogma. The nature of Dogma is such that it is definitive.

It’s not like when Pope Pius IX declared the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception in 1854, it had not already been believed by the entire Church beforehand-- it had! It was on the liturgical calendar at least several hundred years before Pope Pius IX’s declaration in “Ineffabilis Deus”.

 

[JMJ_coder]

The view that dogmas can change is condemned as modernism in “PASCENDI DOMINICI GREGIS, ON THE DOCTRINE OF THE MODERNISTS” which was written by Pope Pius X.

Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi dominic gregis (#13), Sept. 8, 1907:
"Dogma is not only able, but ought to evolve and to be changed. This is strongly affirmed by the Modernists, and clearly flows from their principles."
papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10pasce.htm

The doctrines of the Catholic Church have not changed one iota since the death of the last Apostle, Saint John – not even in the last 40+ years following the Second Vatican Council as some so-called traditionalists erroneously charge – but our level and depth of understanding of those doctrines is continuously increasing.

 

[JMJ_coder]

The church fathers, Councils, and Popes never added onto defined Dogma. The nature of Dogma is such that it is definitive.

It’s not like when Pope Pius IX declared the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception in 1854, it had not already been believed by the entire Church beforehand-- it had! It was on the liturgical calendar at least several hundred years before Pope Pius IX’s declaration in “Ineffabilis Deus”.

It was in the Deposit of Faith, but the Church didn’t understand well enough to definitively declare that the Immaculate Conception was indeed truth. That’s, in essence, what an ex cathedra statement or a Conciliar decree is – a proclamation that now we now with infallible certainty that such and such a doctrine is part of the Deposit of Faith.

 

[Sirach2]

Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi dominic gregis (#13), Sept. 8, 1907:
“Dogma is not only able, but ought to evolve and to be changed. This is strongly affirmed by the Modernists, and clearly flows from their principles.”

Pius X was right to oppose this. Note the key words in blue. The Church does not change the deposit of faith handed down; but She does teach according to Dei Verbum 8, promulgated in the V-II Council, that …

This tradition which comes from the Apostles develops in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed down. This happens through the contemplation and study made by believers, who treasure these things in their hearts (see Luke, 2:19, 51) through a penetrating understanding of the spiritual realities which they experience, and through the preaching of those who have received through Episcopal succession the sure gift of truth. For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.

Further understanding of teachings will develop regarding social justice and communication, especially with the advent of the internet and increasing technological advancement in medicine. Issues dealing with cloning and embryonic stem cells never had to be addressed in previous ages, but as society advances, so will the Church address these with the aid of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Sirach2]

Sgt Rock 33:

Originally Posted by PJM
841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

Very difficult to reconcile the above statement with these:
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Basel, Session 19, Sept. 7, 1434: “Moreover, we trust that with God’s help another benefit will accrue to the Christian commonwealth; because from this union, once it is established, there is hope that very many from the abominable sect of Mahomet will be converted to the Catholic faith.”

It would be difficult only if someone like yourself relied solely upon his Denzinger search engine, typed in a few phrases, and did not correlate it with the universal teaching of the Magisterium. Many are quite adept at doing this with scripture also, including Satan himself who quoted scripture to tempt Jesus. The problem in pontificating one’s personal opinion by isolating particular “proof” texts is that it places the person above the authority of the Church, who ALONE has the charism of interpreting their meaning.

Let’s read the quote from Pope Eugene in context:

For what happier and more glorious thing could ever happen to the catholic church than that so many eastern peoples, who seem to be about equal in number to those of our faith, should be joined with us in the unity of faith? What could be more useful and fruitful to the christian people, since the beginning of the church, than for an inveterate and destructive schism to be completely eradicated? Moreover, we trust that with God’s help another benefit will accrue to the christian commonwealth; because from this union, once it is established, there is hope that very many from the abominable sect of Mahomet will be converted to the catholic faith. What, then, should not be attempted and done by Christ’s faithful for so holy and salutary an objective? What Catholic is not in duty bound to risk not only the passing substance of this world but even his body and soul for such an advance of the christian name and the orthodox faith?

Catechism #841 in teaching that “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims” is saying the same thing that Pope Eugene did, that God includes Mahomet in the plan of salvation, and expresses the hope that they would convert.

I wonder if you are only seeing, “abominable sect” as though God excluded them from His plan, and as if there is never any hope for them of attaining it?

 

[SGT_ROCK_33]

It would be difficult only if someone like yourself relied solely upon his Denzinger search engine,?

I am unaware of a Denzinger search engine… If you know of such a thing, I would be in your debt if you could point me in the right direction.

Catechism #841 in teaching that “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims” is saying the same thing that Pope Eugene did, that God includes Mahomet in the plan of salvation, and expresses the hope that they would convert.

I wonder if you are only seeing, “abominable sect” as though God excluded them from His plan, and as if there is never any hope for them of attaining it?

ONLY, if they convert to the Catholic Faith… If they were to continue with their errors in denying the Incarnation and the Holy Trinity, wouldn’t they still be outside the Church?

God Bless