2
2Chronicles
Guest
then you have to agree tht Pope John P II was a heretic because he adhered to Indifferentism
- Status
C
chypmonk
Guest
To be saved one must be part of the people of God. In the New testament it is clear= Catholic Church.
In the Old Testament there where physical manifestations that were necessary for one to became a member of the Chosen People.
read Scott Hahn
- Be of the chosen blood line Seth (not Cain)
- Abraham’s slaves and servants by circumcision
- Submitting under the legal authority of the Jewish King-- King David and Solomon
(e.g.queen of Sheba)
The thief was obviously circumcised and a Jew, 2 of the requirements to make him part of the chosen People.
When we are baptized we are grafted INTO Christ. St. Paul describes it as a new circumcision and that we become Jews because we are grafted into the Root-- the Jewish Chosen root, by being IN Christ.
Romans 6:3-11
“Brethren, all who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death. We were buried therefore with Him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.”
Romans 11:17
"17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 18 do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20 Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith do not be conceited, but fear; 21 for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. "
If just desire were enough then why isn’t Socrates a a canonized saint? Like King David?
Because he was not of the chosen people. Desire and belief were necessary but not sufficient. A physical manifestation was necessary to belong to the chosen people.
C
chypmonk
Guest
Sorry Fr. Most while I respect him, he was extremely prejudiced on this subject and inconsistent with is own principles.
In his article you linked to, he says that we are bound by ONLY the words written and not the intentions of the Magisterium:
“Before going ahead we need to notice one more principle of interpretation.
It is this:** the only things guaranteed in statements of the Magisterium,**
and protected in lesser ways in the works of the Fathers, are the things
explicitly set down on paper. We may indeed know historically that certain
thoughts, more extensive, were in the minds of the writers. Yet Divine
Providence has committed itself to protect only the explicitly written
texts, not what is merely in the mind and unexpressed.”
Then he turns around and contradicts this principle
"There are several Magisterium texts that seem quite stringent. The
Profession of Faith prescribed by Pope Innocent III in 1208 A.D. for the
Waldensians says: “We believe in our heart and confess in our mouth that
there is one Church, not of heretics, but the holy Roman Catholic
apostolic Church, outside of which we believe no one is saved.”…
…
Pope Boniface VIII in his famous “Unam sanctam” of Nov. 18, 1302 spoke
strongly: “Outside of which (the Church) there is neither salvation nor
remission of sins. . . . But we declare, state and define that to be
subject to the Roman Pontiff is altogether necessary for salvation.”[22]
The texts of Innocent III and IV Lateran do not go farther than the
patristic texts we have seen. But the second sentence from Boniface VIII
does raise a further question.** However, the difficulty is easily handled;
for the critical line is quoted from St. Thomas, “Contra Errores
Graecorum”: “Ostenditur etiam quod subesse Romano Pontifici sit de
necessitate salutis”[23] (“It is also shown that to be subject to the
Roman Pontiff is necessary for salvation.”) But in the context, shown by
the two quotes St. Thomas gives at this point,** it means merely that there
is no salvation outside the Church. In that sense one must come under the
jurisdiction of the Pope.[24]"
He quotes the “complete” intention of the Pope not just what was written. He says it raises further questions, but only if you don’t accept what is explicitly written.
There is more but that is enough for now.
He was living in a confusing time in the Church and I can understand his warped loyalty to a supposed Church teaching that doesn’t exist. He was mistaken.
C
chypmonk
Guest
As far as I know we only officially pray for those who have died who are members of the faithful departed.
**Eucharistic prayer I
**
“Remember, Lord, those who have died and have gone before us marked with the sign of faith, especially those for whom we now pray, (names deceased loved ones whom the celebrant or parishioner wishes to offer before God). May these, and all who sleep in Christ, find in your presence light, happiness, and peace. (Through Christ our Lord. Amen.)”
The Mark and Sign of faith is received in the Sacrament of Baptism ONLY.
Tertullian further writes in 203 A.D.:
Baptism has also been called since apostolic times the Seal, the Sign and the Illumination; for without this Seal, Sign or Illumination no one is forgiven of original sin or sealed as a member of Jesus Christ.
Hermas, 140 A.D.: “… before a man bears the name of the Son of God, he is dead. But when he receives the seal, he puts mortality aside and again receives life. The seal, therefore, is the water. They go down into the water dead, and come out of it alive.”
Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 1: 92.
**Eucharistic prayer I
**
“Remember, Lord, those who have died and have gone before us marked with the sign of faith, especially those for whom we now pray, (names deceased loved ones whom the celebrant or parishioner wishes to offer before God). May these, and all who sleep in Christ, find in your presence light, happiness, and peace. (Through Christ our Lord. Amen.)”
The Mark and Sign of faith is received in the Sacrament of Baptism ONLY.
Tertullian further writes in 203 A.D.:
Baptism has also been called since apostolic times the Seal, the Sign and the Illumination; for without this Seal, Sign or Illumination no one is forgiven of original sin or sealed as a member of Jesus Christ.
Hermas, 140 A.D.: “… before a man bears the name of the Son of God, he is dead. But when he receives the seal, he puts mortality aside and again receives life. The seal, therefore, is the water. They go down into the water dead, and come out of it alive.”
Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 1: 92.
C
CradleCath
Guest
Oh Lord, here we go again with the heresies of the Dimond Brothers & Holy Family Monastery.
How many CAF.threads have been used as a vehicle for this heresy?? The Catholic Church does (& always has) taught that one, because of invincible ignorance, who DESIRES to follow the true Church, who dies for the doctrines of the true Church is IN FACT a member of the true Church. Baptism of desire & Baptism of Blood are, in fact, while rare, legitimate means for entry into the Catholic Church.
You people claiming otherwise have already had one thread closed…hopefully this one will be next.
mostholyfamilymonastery.com/Short_Refutation_of_the_Theory_of_Baptism_of_Desire.html
A
AnneElliot
Guest
Once again… anyone can quote anything on their website. Even the most disgusting anti-Catholic sites can (and do!) quote both papal and conciliar documents. If the citation is correct, it doesn’t matter how many anti-Catholic sites make use of it. It doesn’t take away from it’s validity or veracity… right?
Do you have a copy of the canons and decrees from the Council of Trent, CradleCath? Or even a Catholic encyclopedia? Your concern seems to be what you’re finding when you enter the information into an internet search engine (such a reliable source!
)… but I can assure you if you look in good, authentic Catholic sources (i.e., the documents themselves) you will find the declarations quoted throughout this (and other threads). Most of the translations I’ve used in citing papal and Conciliar texts have come from Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma or Denzinger’s Sources of Catholic Dogma.
So if your problem is with the doctrine expressed, your problem is with a papal or Conciliar document, not the personal website run by schismatics.
Do you have a copy of the canons and decrees from the Council of Trent, CradleCath? Or even a Catholic encyclopedia? Your concern seems to be what you’re finding when you enter the information into an internet search engine (such a reliable source!
)… but I can assure you if you look in good, authentic Catholic sources (i.e., the documents themselves) you will find the declarations quoted throughout this (and other threads). Most of the translations I’ve used in citing papal and Conciliar texts have come from Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma or Denzinger’s Sources of Catholic Dogma.So if your problem is with the doctrine expressed, your problem is with a papal or Conciliar document, not the personal website run by schismatics.
R
Returning_Home
Guest
I totally agree, we’re not talking about the human concept of fairness and such so I need to point out that God’s will is his own business. Since the circumstances vary, he can do whatever he pleases.
Mark 16:16 doesn’t address those who believe but don’t belong to any one particular church.
S
Sirach2
Guest
Agree 100%, and so does the Church, the sole and lawful interpreter of ALL scripture.
Vatican II document "Lumen Gentium:
And the Church’s teaching reference for (14*) quoted for this document is:
Gal. 4:6; Rom. 8:15-16 and 26, quoted thus:
The Church considers baptism to be so important, that whenever another christian converts to Catholicism and has been previously baptized, that sacrament is not bestowed again, since these baptisms are valid. Now since they have been baptized, they were given the Holy Spirit, and neither you nor I can deny that they are united with Catholics, albeit not in fullness.
I would believe then, in agreement with the Church’s teaching, that lawfully baptized Protestants et al, may be saved by their very baptism and living an upright life of keeping God’s commandments. Jn. 14:21 “He who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. But he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.”
A
avus
Guest
Will someone please explain to me why there are 8 screens of debates about EENS, baptisms, Muslims, etc. and yet everyone is missing the essential element: Penance? No matter what state a soul is in after baptism, he will inevitably commit a mortal sin (remember those?). Only the sacrament of Penance can reconcile that soul with God, and unless it is reconciled, the soul cannot enter Heaven. That is why Jesus gave us the sacrament. Only Catholics have access to Penance. Ergo, most of the rest are doomed - allowing for God’s mercy to make individual exceptions and bestow His graces upon them.
S
Sirach2
Guest
Is that wishful thinking? Or a belief that since only Catholics have the sacrament of Penance, nobody else will inhabit heaven?
This is much better, for it is the truth. If you remember Catholic teaching about Penance, one need only have “imperfect contrition” to have their sins absolved. What percentage of penitents have the wonderful grace of “perfect contriton” is unknown to us. I believe that there are Christians who love the Lord so much that they truly can live a life without mortal sin. Look again at Jn. 14:21. If they chance to fall into sin, their contrition may well be of the “perfect” kind that absolves them, even without sacramental absolution. Which type in your opinion would be more pleasing to God, imperfect contrition? or perfect contrition?
We have the assurance of Jesus’ words to the penitent woman who washed his feet with her tears, “MANY sins are forgiven her, because she has LOVED much.” And the teaching of St. Peter affirming this, “Charity (love) covers a multitude of sins.” 1 Pt. 4:8.
God’s infinite mercy is his greatest attribute, although some might prefer to believe it is his justice.
A
avus
Guest
By misquoting Catholic teaching you are diminishing or even dismissing the reason Jesus established the sacrament. It is true that even if a person has unconfessed mortal sins remaining when he or she dies, they may still hope to be forgiven if before they died, they expressed true contrition (sorrow) for each of their mortal sins and if, having done so, they expressed a desire (even if not possible) to go to sacramental confession and do proper penance and restitution. This exception is based on the belief that God, in His love and mercy and in His utmost desire for all to be saved, knowing that they are sorry will allow them to formally apologize and make reparation (in some way) when they are judged. However, if they are able to make a valid sacramental confession before death, they are required to do so, as that is the ordinary way to be reconciled to God.
You need to avoid the modernist, ecumenical feeling that Penance - or any of the Catholic sacraments - is not strictly required for salvation. We all hope and pray that everyone gets to Heaven eventually, but it does a horrible disservice to non-Catholics to encourage their convictions that they inevitably will.
S
Sirach2
Guest
Today’s reading happens to be that of 1 Pt. 4:8 that I quoted. I believe God is speaking to us through his word, which is always right on time.
You may call me any name you like, including modernist, but it is the Lord alone, who judges me, and none other. Rather than be accusatory, why not first ask for clarification of what I truly believe about our sacraments? It makes for difficult discussion when I am believed to have no regard for them. And so I leave you to your own musings.
You may call me any name you like, including modernist, but it is the Lord alone, who judges me, and none other. Rather than be accusatory, why not first ask for clarification of what I truly believe about our sacraments? It makes for difficult discussion when I am believed to have no regard for them. And so I leave you to your own musings.
S
Sirach2
Guest
Catholic Encyclopedia:
CCC:
A
avus
Guest
Your own posts are contradicting the cherry-picking you are doing to try to get around the necessity for Penance. Yes, the sin can be forgiven without Penance but ONLY IF there is a firm and sincere wish to go to confession as soon as possible. In other words, the hope (not guaranteed) that God will absolve now for a sincere confession later.
1452 When it arises from a love by which God is loved above all else, contrition is called “perfect” (contrition of charity). Such contrition remits venial sins; it also obtains forgiveness of mortal sins if it includes the firm resolution to have recourse to sacramental confession as soon as possible.
This still leaves out non-Catholics from being absolved (again, speaking generically and leaving aside individual cases as He wills).
1452 When it arises from a love by which God is loved above all else, contrition is called “perfect” (contrition of charity). Such contrition remits venial sins; it also obtains forgiveness of mortal sins if it includes the firm resolution to have recourse to sacramental confession as soon as possible.
This still leaves out non-Catholics from being absolved (again, speaking generically and leaving aside individual cases as He wills).
S
Sirach2
Guest
It seems like your attitude leans more toward “wishful thinking” rather than “allowing for God’s mercy to make individual exceptions and bestow His graces upon them.”Indeed, that is our belief, since perfect contrition remits mortal sins. If one dies with that repentence and sorrow, it will bring him eternal life - not damnation. You are the cherry-picker, since you only allow this for Catholics, as if a non-catholic could not be graced with perfect contrition. And you make a judgment upon them as if they all commit mortal sins, whereas it is possible to live one’s life keeping God’s commandments through the indwelling Holy Spirit received in their baptism, and living in loving communion with God. Judge not, Jesus tells us.
Even should one of these fall into serious sin, if they have perfect sorrow for their sins with a firm resolve to sin no more, God will not damn them, though they may have a debt of purification to endure in Purgatory. I’m so sorry you have such a strong antagonism towards those outside our faith concerning their salvation. Today’s reading “Charity covers a multitude of sins” was not only for Catholics, for heaven’s sake!
John 14:21, “Whoever [this includes non-catholics] has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him.”
A
avus
Guest
OK, I see you’re stuck with the “everyone gets to Heaven” mentality so there’s no sense continuing the exchange. Suffice it for me to say that if you reread my earlier comment that “We all hope and pray that everyone gets to Heaven eventually” you’ll see that there is no wishful thinking or antagonism on my part about non-Catholics going to Hell. In fact, my own deceased mother and all of my maternal extended family were all Protestants (mostly Presbyterians) and I fervently pray for their souls every single day.
That said, yes, I do believe normal salvation (one more time: allowing God to make the final determination) is for Catholics only, else why did He bother to found His Church? I believe that Jesus gave the keys of heaven to Peter, not to Luther, Cramner, Muhammed, Buddha, Gandhi, or anyone else. He said, “I am the Way” and that way is His Church. Period. End of story. When the Lord shut the doors of Noah’s Ark we don’t know if anyone managed to hold on to a piece of driftwood and survive, but we have to assume all perished whether we consider it fair or not. The Catholic Church has been that Ark for 2,000 years. Sorry if that offends your ecumentical sensibilities.
You also accuse me of assuming everyone commits mortal sin. Yep. We are all human. If you can go through life without grave sin, congratulations. I can’t. So I thank Jesus for His sacred sacraments. Penance is real and needed for salvation. To trivialize it’s importance is no different than equating the Real Presence in the Holy Eucharist with the symbolic bread of the Protestants.
Anyway, I will permit you the last word. I’m finished with the subject. Dominus vobiscum.
That said, yes, I do believe normal salvation (one more time: allowing God to make the final determination) is for Catholics only, else why did He bother to found His Church? I believe that Jesus gave the keys of heaven to Peter, not to Luther, Cramner, Muhammed, Buddha, Gandhi, or anyone else. He said, “I am the Way” and that way is His Church. Period. End of story. When the Lord shut the doors of Noah’s Ark we don’t know if anyone managed to hold on to a piece of driftwood and survive, but we have to assume all perished whether we consider it fair or not. The Catholic Church has been that Ark for 2,000 years. Sorry if that offends your ecumentical sensibilities.
You also accuse me of assuming everyone commits mortal sin. Yep. We are all human. If you can go through life without grave sin, congratulations. I can’t. So I thank Jesus for His sacred sacraments. Penance is real and needed for salvation. To trivialize it’s importance is no different than equating the Real Presence in the Holy Eucharist with the symbolic bread of the Protestants.
Anyway, I will permit you the last word. I’m finished with the subject. Dominus vobiscum.
Z
Zatzat
Guest
What an interesting thread, as I see quite a few people differing on what the correct answer is.
I find it utterly fascinating that God wouldn`t have made it explicitly clear how a non-Christian can obtain salvation…if at all.
I find it utterly fascinating that God wouldn`t have made it explicitly clear how a non-Christian can obtain salvation…if at all.
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
Why? If a non-Christian is in contact with Christians to learn of this explicit teaching, then there would be only one way (i.e., Christ). One can hardly claim invincible ignorance if they have recourse to Christian teaching.
A
ayliana
Guest
caution: These are my personal thoughts and i do not want to teach or hurt anybody.
this is a purely hypothetical and very ridiculous thing which teaches us that only Christians would go to heaven. In my opinion a person , no matter what religion he follows, till he is following the teachings of his religion ( all religions teaches the same things, only uses different words) goes to the heaven, and we Christians are making fool of ourselves by thinking otherwise.
Used Car Parts
Used Auto Parts
this is a purely hypothetical and very ridiculous thing which teaches us that only Christians would go to heaven. In my opinion a person , no matter what religion he follows, till he is following the teachings of his religion ( all religions teaches the same things, only uses different words) goes to the heaven, and we Christians are making fool of ourselves by thinking otherwise.
Used Car Parts
Used Auto Parts
Z
Zatzat
Guest
What if the person worshiped a different God…didn’t God explicitly forbid the worshiping of false Gods and idolatry?
*Do not have any other gods before me.
You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me,*
- Status