Please, Catholics, tell me you disagree with the Pope on this!

[smelton]

I do want to say to all the Catholics on this thread that I am very pleased to see some here disagreeing. Not because you are on my side of this issue but because it shows a guinuine reflection of how serious you are about your faith, both sides. Well done.

 

[MonicaC]

Melchior:

So basically most of you are saying the road is wide that leads to salvation and there are many (most) who find it?

Hmmmm. Seems to contradict the very words of Jesus.

Mel

I think that maybe you should just let God decided on who is going to heaven for no one knows but him.

In your theory only those who believe in Christ can get to heaven, the Church believes that Jesus came to save all. This means that all have an equal chance to get to heaven. There are more non Christians then there are Christians. There are people out there who have no clue who Jesus is. But do wonderful work here on earth.

Here is an example please let me know who in your Supreme opinion will go to heaven:

There are two men a Muslim who lives very faithfully to the Koran and loves God with all his heart. He spent his whole life in a faithful Muslim village and has only heard of Jesus as a fable. During his lifetime he has spent most of his time serving the poor and caring for the sick. Although he rarely had money for himself he made it a point to take any extra food to those who lived on the street.

There is another man who is a Christian who believes he lives he life just a Jesus wanted him to. He loves Jesus with all his heart. He believes with all his heart that he along with all Christians who love Jesus will be saved but everyone else is can’t possible go to heaven. He lived most of his life helping out other Christians in his church, but rarely ever gave a second glance at anyone who saw the world through a different pair of eyes. His reasoning for this was that they did love Jesus, so they weren’t saved.

So now Mel and those others who think that anyone who has not had the chance to know and love our Lord cannot possible saved.
Who do you think is saved.

I have always thought being presumptuous was a sin.

Also what about all those young children who die before they have a chance to know and love Jesus. In your theory they can’t make it to heaven either.

Just my thoughts.

Monica

 

[Gerrygarvin]

If you were blind you would not have sinned.

Mel, it seems to me you are the one we should be incredulous towards. Taking us to task for not believing that God dooms people to hell simply for not knowing the Bible. You’d have us believe that aborted and unbaptized babies are all being eternally punished, for having unloving parents. And that everyone born in primitive Amazon Rainforest tribes will be damned simply because they were born in the wrong place. it seems to me like you are the one who needs a better understanding of the Biblical Jesus. Here’s a good starting point:

He was against being cruelly arbitrary.

This has nothing to do with “Salvation by Works.” Of course we beleive that it is God’s grace that saves those that Benedict described.

 

[Melchior]

tradcatmel:

Have you heard of the Catholic Nose?

A catholic should have a catholic nose. When he/she hears of a new doctrine (something the church has never taught before) - they should use the catholic nose to smell that something is very fishy.

Take the father of a family. He is a drunkard ok. While the Father is drunk and he tells the family to do something, the children and mother are not obliged to follow him, while he is drunk. He still remains the Father of the family, even though he is drunk.

Can you see the similarity? When the Pope teaches new doctrine, something that the church has never taught before, we are in a position to ascertain whether that statement is true or not. We do not have to follow him blindly in his error.

Whatever happened to the Catholic Church being the only Rock through which salvation is possible?

Popes in history, have not always been good. I am not judging our Pope, may the Holy Ghost give him the inspiration to teach the truth. But, this statement is aligned with the modernist way of thinking which is going to in the end destroy the church. Many people will question themselves, Why should I be Catholic if it is ok to save my soul through the other religions of the world?

Study the Church Fathers. See what they agreed upon and familiarise yourself with the teachings of the recent Popes.

Remember, the Pope is the Pope, we cannot deny him his office which is given to him from God above. We must only pray for him for it is not for the inferior to judge the Superior. That is where the Sedavacantism error happens.

Pray for the Pope so that he may be enlightened to see what he is teaching is not the Catholic teaching.

Thank you for showing me that there are still critical thinkers in the Catholic Church. Honestly, I see no reason to ever become catholic if the teaching on the most foundational element of Christianity is so nebulous.

May the next Pope believ in the power of th Gospel to reach those who have not heard instead of excuse everyone with 1000 qualifications.

Mel

 

[smelton]

Lillith:

I think that every word the Pope is speaking in his new role is being totally over analized…as if people are trying to prove that he was not chosen correctly…and to prove that the Holy Spirit had nothing to do with the Churchs’ decision… ultimately to prove the Church wrong.

Just yesterday my eleven year old came home and told me that the Pope’s glasses were to expensive…that PopeJohn Paul never had expensive things and the new Pope is materialistic. She got this from school in this protestant area I live in apparently this is the topic of discussion :banghead:

I am tired of hearing the Pope was a Nazi…all this mud slinging is getting old to me…but I am not overly bothered by it…it is a little amuzing to me actually.

I have no idea if he was a Nazi, but if people start throwing those things around its ususally because they have nothing good to say. Don’t be offended by their ignorance. PS - I’m a protestant.

 

[Lillith]

Melchior:

This is not my intent at all. It simply true that teachers are held to greater accountability and I would thing the suprme teacher on earth would take greater care to be clear about the gospel and not be so ambiguous. Statements liek this will give people false hope.

He needs to Preach Christ clearly not be politically corrrect.

Mel

Mel…you have not proven sufficently that this is not a correct teaching…and not in line with the Church!

Statements like this are not false hope…they are truth. Do you think people who have not heard the Gospel…including Mentally handicapped…Young Children who die prematurely…Muslims…Folks born into athiest nations…Hindus…indiginous tribes in the Amazon…and countless other groups that I might fail to mention…are going to Hell automatically…because that is exactly what your stance implies.

The Pope was addressing a faithful audience…23,000 in St. Peter’s square. You make it sound like he went to an athiest convention and told them all was well…do not worry!

 

[Gerrygarvin]

i’m pretty sure this pope is about 968796876856895576587 better at “critical thinking” than any of us on this board.

 

[Matt16_18]

yet another Feeneyite thread … :yawn:

**Catechism of the Catholic Church

847** …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 without God’s 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. 337

dulcissima:

The pope, to me, sounds consistent with the Gospel and with the teachings of the Catholic Church.

I agree – this is much ado about nothing. Footnote 337 to CCC 847 references these two documents:Lumen Gentium 16

Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston: DS 3866-3872. From the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston:Toward the end of this same encyclical letter, when most affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions those who “are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire,” and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but on the other hand states that they are in a condition “in which they cannot be sure of their salvation” since “they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church” (AAS, 1. c., p. 243). **With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire, and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally well in every religion (cf. Pope Pius IX, Allocution, Singulari quadam, in Denzinger, n. 1641 ff.; also Pope Pius IX in the encyclical letter, Quanto conficiamur moerore, in Denzinger, n. 1677). DS 3866-3872 references in the encyclical letter of Pope Pius IX, Quanto conficiamur moerore which says this: It is known to us and to you that those who are in invincible ignorance ** of our most holy religion, but who observe carefully the natural law, and the precepts graven by God upon the hearts of all men, and who being disposed to obey God lead an honest and upright life, may, aided by the light of divine grace, attain to eternal life; for God who sees clearly, searches and knows the heart, the disposition, the thoughts and intentions of each, in His supreme mercy and goodness by no means permits that anyone suffer eternal punishment, who has not of his own free will fallen into sin. Pope Pius IX was one of the most conservative popes the church has ever had. (See The Syllabus Of Errors Condemned By Pius IX a document that condemns the errors of “Modernism”.)

If the Feeneyites can’t accept even the teachings of Pope Pius IX, whose teachings will they accept?*

 

[smelton]

Gerrygarvin:

If you were blind you would not have sinned.

Mel, it seems to me you are the one we should be incredulous towards. Taking us to task for not believing that God dooms people to hell simply for not knowing the Bible. You’d have us believe that aborted and unbaptized babies are all being eternally punished, for having unloving parents. And that everyone born in primitive Amazon Rainforest tribes will be damned simply because they were born in the wrong place. it seems to me like you are the one who needs a better understanding of the Biblical Jesus. Here’s a good starting point:

He was against being cruelly arbitrary.

This has nothing to do with “Salvation by Works.” Of course we beleive that it is God’s grace that saves those that Benedict described.

I know at times it seems us protestants condem people to Hell for God. Some seem to even revel in this idea. I can assure you that I for one will let God determine who makes it to heaven. I think protestants are mis-read and sometimes mis-guided. I truely believe in the scriptures and believe they are truth. I think if anyone who says anything against truth then it should be analyzed. I’m not saying that is the case here but I just wanted to say I for one am heartbroken that there will be people in Hell.

 

[Redbandito]

Della:

So, how is Sandusky wrong? It seems to go along perfectly with what Peter said when he saw the faith of Cornelius–that God honors those who honor him no matter who they are. This in no way negates our need of the Savior, rather it says that the Savior will save whom he pleases while many a self-satisfied “Christian” (not talking about you dear Redbandito) will find himself out in the dark.

Della, you lost me here. I don’t think I ever said he was wrong. However, posting verses without making a point from them does no good to further the conversation. We can all throw Bible verses around to make our points. To further the conversation we need to take one at a time and come to an understanding of how each side sees that verse.

 

[Melchior]

Son of our lady,

One man claims “I believe in Jesus Christ and He is my Savior”, the man then proceeds to kill black people because he is also a violent racist

We shall know them by their fruits.

A different man in another part of the world does not know anything about Christ, sees a random child fall into a fast moving river, the man jumps in, saves the child, but cannot get himself out of the water and dies

Can a man’s good works save him? Not according to scripture and tradition. Faith without works is certainly dead. Works without faith is also dead.

A woman in a non christian country has been raised her whole life that Christianity is the religion of the devil and that Jesus is evil. The woman hates Jesus (in ignorance) but otherwise lives a pious life and prays feverently to God out of love and awe.

The woman is praying to a false god. And false piety is not true love of God it is blind ritual. If she hates Jesus it is because she is a sinner. Ignorance does not excuse sin. It never has.

All of the above people must stand before God in judgment.
All people must go through Jesus to get to the Father.
Jesus will decide who went through Him based on their faith while on earth. People’s actions reflect what thier faith is made of.

That is why there are degrees of reward in Heaven and punishment in Hell. Not all sinners are as bad as other. But all sinners desrerve Hell. That God saves any is pure mercy.

Our actions cannot save us from eternal punishment, Jesus’s actions saved us from that. But our actions (or lack thereof) can cause us to lose paradise.

Okay but your first sentence contradicts your implications in scenario #2.

God does not want anyone to go to hell, and He does not send anyone to hell, people choose hell and go there on their own based on thier actions on earth.

It is true that God does not want anyone to go to Hell. It is also true that everyone deserved to go to Hell. He does send people to Hell. he is the judge. They deserve Hell who end up there, but it is the judge who sends them there. After all Hell is not so much the absence of God (God cannot be absent from anywhere) so much as is the wrath of God.

The Pope is only stating the position of the Church:
The Church will not claim anyone is condemned to hell for any reason. Only God knows what is in our soul and anything is possible through Him (yes, even allowing unbaptised babies and athiests into heaven)

We don’t know but God does. And we also know what scripture, thre fathers and previous popes have said. And it is certainly true that we know what it takes to end up in Hell and therefore people need to be warned (the churches mission) not comforted into damnation.

This is serious business.

Mel

 

[MonicaC]

Melchior:

Yeah but if it is hard for those who believe the Gospel to be saved why does it seem to be easy for those who haven’t? Who without the teachings of scripture, could ever truly live up to that standard anyway? Who has a pure heart? It seems so misleading to give hope to unbelievers and it sends a message to every Buddhist and Muslim that they are okay if they are really really good people. This is not the Gospel message!

Mel

OH this is the part I really wanted to comment on. The part in red just reminds that to those who have much, much is expected. Those of us who know Our Lord, it has always been taught to me that we will be expect more. So with that said those who have not been told about God will not be expected as much. But with that said that doesn’t mean that they can now go through life acting the fool. If they have been told of Jesus, then it is their choice to either open that gift or refuse it.

I told this to my husband once who was raised with no religion, and really had no clue who Jesus was. But when he and I got married I did share with him what I knew. It was hard for him at first, but you know ten years into our marriage he decided that he wanted to open that gift. I asked him one day why he was going to RCIA and his response was that he kept thinking of when I told him about “to those who know, much will be expected.” He said he could not go on pretending he didn’t know.

Just another thought.

 

[Redbandito]

Melchior:

Now it just seems like well Christ atoned for everyone and anyone can come to Christ by being really really nice to people. It seems as if the focus has shifted from “Gte the message out” to “I’m okay your okay”.

That’s not what the Church teaches, and you know this very well. Your argument comes from emotion, not rational thought. The point has been made that there is a difference between those who have explicitly rejected the Gospel and those who are ignorant of it. Your arguing against a strawman.

 

[YinYangMom]

Melchior:

It seems as if the invincible ignorance thing keeps getting broader and broader. I mean how is this not simply salvation by works alone? Statements like these make me wonder when universalism will start to be okay in Rome.

I find this greatly troubling. I thought Benedict would balance out some of these JPII ideas. Whatever happened to faith in and following Christ as the only way (or normal means) of Salvation, except for the possibility of certain exceptions known only to God?

When did the possible exception become the rule?

Mel

God is imprinted in every human being.
It is within His discretion how to bring that soul home to Him, not ours.

 

[bookgirl]

Melchior:

So basically most of you are saying the road is wide that leads to salvation and there are many (most) who find it?

Hmmmm. Seems to contradict the very words of Jesus.

Mel

I don’t think anyone is saying the road is wide. Jesus’ death and resurrection redeemed us, God’s grace saves us, we accept it or we don’t. That’s what the Bible says. It does NOT however say exactly how every human in history will or will not hear this message. To me, a lot of you are sure sounding like you’re trying to make sure that there are some people who definitely will not hear it and will not get there. I know that’s true, there will be some. But I, for one, truly believe far less people go to hell than don’t. I truly believe that God wants every single one of his children in heaven with Him, and gets them in every way possible.

 

[Melchior]

Sherlock:

No, Jesus was speaking to those who already had the benefit of divine revelation. The road IS narrow, which is why I am thankful for the Church. I do fear for those who have rejected the Church that Jesus founded, as they do not have all the tools they need, yet have the increased responsibility that comes from having heard the Gospel.

Um no. He was speaking to an audience about mankind.

Mel

 

[Redbandito]

smelton:

The entire bible is dealing with salvation. I don’t mean to sound condesending but that is the truth. If one does not need to know Jesus, as a matter of belief and faith, then why did he come. To say that there are other ways to God is to say that Jesus was not necessary. To those who used the Roman’s verse the entire book has to be looked at. To select a few verses and say that’s it, is not an honest look. Chapter 1 - Gentiles (those who don’t know God) are guilty of sin. Chapter 2 -Jews are guilty of sin. Chapter 3 - All are sinners. Chapter 4 - Abraham was not justified by works but by faith. Chapter 5 - My favorite chapter. 5:1 - Therefore(that means because of what was in chpts 1-4), since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,2 through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand.
Jesus grants us access to God.

Do you believe Moses and Elijah are in Heaven? If so, did they have to believe in Jesus Christ in this life? If not, how do you explain the Transfiguration?

 

[YinYangMom]

Melchior:

He is saying all that is required for salvation is a commitment to peace and the good of the community. How is that even Christian? Thank God it is only and opinion and not ex cathedra. But it’s the pope for crying out loud!

Mel

He did **not **say “all that is required for salvation”…
he’s saying God can work through those who are responding to His call in their heart to bring them salvation. Basically, he’s saying good people have the opportunity for salvation…he did not specify how this would happen. Church teaching has alwasy acknowledged the Church herself cannot determine how God will dispense His mercy. She has been told and has taught that God’s mercy is unfathomable and is entirely His to dispense according to His will.

 

[YinYangMom]

Edgar Davie:

In First Corinthians 12:5-6 St.Paul says he cannot judge “those without”(Non Christians) because, for them, “God will judge”. How does the Pope’s statement square with that?
Edgar Davie

The pope is reaffirming that the Church is not God and thus cannot judge who will be saved.

 

[Melchior]

MonicaC:

I think that maybe you should just let God decided on who is going to heaven for no one knows but him.

In your theory only those who believe in Christ can get to heaven, the Church believes that Jesus came to save all. This means that all have an equal chance to get to heaven. There are more non Christians then there are Christians. There are people out there who have no clue who Jesus is. But do wonderful work here on earth.

Here is an example please let me know who in your Supreme opinion will go to heaven:

There are two men a Muslim who lives very faithfully to the Koran and loves God with all his heart. He spent his whole life in a faithful Muslim village and has only heard of Jesus as a fable. During his lifetime he has spent most of his time serving the poor and caring for the sick. Although he rarely had money for himself he made it a point to take any extra food to those who lived on the street.

There is another man who is a Christian who believes he lives he life just a Jesus wanted him to. He loves Jesus with all his heart. He believes with all his heart that he along with all Christians who love Jesus will be saved but everyone else is can’t possible go to heaven. He lived most of his life helping out other Christians in his church, but rarely ever gave a second glance at anyone who saw the world through a different pair of eyes. His reasoning for this was that they did love Jesus, so they weren’t saved.

So now Mel and those others who think that anyone who has not had the chance to know and love our Lord cannot possible saved.
Who do you think is saved.

I have always thought being presumptuous was a sin.

Also what about all those young children who die before they have a chance to know and love Jesus. In your theory they can’t make it to heaven either.

Just my thoughts.

Monica

Well, Monica, it is clear who you, in your Supreme opinion (to use your condescending words) believe is saved in your scenario. So who is playing judge now?

I point our Jesus teaching and it is my opinion and I am judging. You give specific scenarios with an obvious judgement of your own and accuse me of judging?

BTW, everything I am saying you seem to support in with the three verses in your tag line.

Mel