Pope Francis assures sceptics: You don’t have to believe in God to go to heaven

[blue_lily]

But why say something like this? What good does it do? Why not try to share the gospel of Jesus Christ instead?

Ah, actually the Pope is living the gospel of Christ right here by writing this letter. He is sharing the gospel by being a disciple of Jesus out in the world.

And, why say something like this? Well, it gives you as an unbeliever a starting point to get on the path toward Jesus, which is the path toward God and Heaven. The Pope is saying that even if you are an atheist, God still has great mercy for you if you turn toward Him. God is open to you, you only need to come to Him.

Pope Francis: “the mercy of God has no limits if one turns to him with a sincere and contrite heart; the question for one who doesn’t believe in God lies in obeying one’s conscience.”

 

[Joe_5859]

OK so I read the Pope’s letter, and I cannot figure out how this article got to that conclusion

Here is the relevant part of the letter:

“So I come to the three questions you put to me in the article of August 7. It seems to me that, in the first two, what is in your heart is to understand the attitude of the Church to those who don’t share faith in Jesus. First of all, you ask me if the God of Christians forgives one who doesn’t believe and doesn’t seek the faith. Premise that – and it’s the fundamental thing – the mercy of God has no limits if one turns to him with a sincere and contrite heart; the question for one who doesn’t believe in God lies in obeying one’s conscience. Sin, also for those who don’t have faith, exists when one goes against one’s conscience. To listen to and to obey it means, in fact, to decide in face of what is perceived as good or evil. And on this decision pivots the goodness or malice of our action.”

He never said non-believers would go to heaven.

Help me out here…where is this stated?

Allow me to help explain.

This is a secular news story in which the author reads into the Pope’s words the conclusions he wishes to draw.

It happens all the time with comments from Catholic figures. The secular press just doesn’t get Catholic theology. They see phrases like “mercy of God has no limits” and “obeying one’s conscience” and they infer that the Pope is saying that it doesn’t matter if you’re Catholic so long as you’re a good person. Because – for the most part – that’s what they believe.

 

[kmcarl56]

This plus his “Who am I to judge gay people?” will give Protestant pastors something to talk about for the next 500 years. I really wish the Pope’s advisors would help him to understand that every word he utters matters greatly.

As a non-catholic (protestant) Christian, I really take offense at what some Catholics seem to think “protestants” in general think, believe, or do with regard to Catholicism. My goodness, I feel like I’ve been spat in the face sometimes.

I AM A CHRISTIAN WHO LOVES THE LORD WITH ALL MY HEART, SOUL AND MIND, and I DO BELIEVE in the Holy Trinity, and I DO BELIEVE Jesus died on the cross for MY sins too, and I have been baptized. As a fellow Christian, I believe that all people who believe in Jesus Christ as our Savior are going to Heaven, but that is NOT for me to judge. I would just hope so for their own sakes.

I do believe that those of the Catholic faith are my brothers and sisters in Christ. I do believe that the Church was founded upon the rock as Jesus says it is. I do take heed to what the Pope says and does, and that he speaks the Truth from our Bible. I also take heed to what others are saying… :banghead:

Please just cool your heels and don’t lump ALL Protestants in the same vat, just as you would not want me to put all Catholics in the same batch. We are all sinners, and we are both Christians.

May God bless you and keep you in His loving arms from now throughout eternity…

 

[Origen52]

But why say something like this? What good does it do? Why not try to share the gospel of Jesus Christ instead?

I guess we can look at our new pope in one of several ways.

1. He doesn’t think before he speaks ( I highly doubt that, especially since he’s a Jesuit)
2. He is slanting church teaching to appeal to those outside the church.
3. He’s losing the plot. (Again I highly doubt that, he presents as a very intelligent man.)
4. He’s far more “liberal” than anyone at first thought. (I might believe this except for the fact that he demonstrate an obvious love of traditional devotions, the rosary, the sacred heart, etc. and his genuine respect for Benedict XVI)
5. He is presenting what has always been church teaching in plain, simple language we can all understand. (I personally think this is it.)

Remember the flack caused when Benedict asserted that Limbo was an hypothesis and never part of dogma. That should have been said centuries ago, but I bless him for having finally explained it in simple language (at least for Benedict )

1. A non-Christian may reject a Christian’s presentation of the gospel of Christ. That however, does not necessarily mean that the person has truly rejected Christ and God. Rejection of Christianity may not mean the rejection of Christ. For if a given individual rejects the Christianity brought to him through the Church’s preaching, even then we are still never in any position to decide whether this rejection as it exists in the concrete signifies a grave fault or an act of faithfulness to one’s own conscience. We can never say with ultimate certainty whether a non-Christian who has rejected Christianity and who, in spite of a certain encounter with Christianity, does not become a Christian, is still following the temporary path mapped out for his own salvation which is leading him to an encounter with God, or whether he has now entered upon the way of prediction."
   Father Thomas Rosica

zenit.org/en/articles/explanatory-note-on-the-meaning-of-salvation-in-francis-daily-homily-of-may-22

 

[janeway529]

Apologies for the long post, but perhaps the words of St. Pope John Paul II from his book, ‘Crossing the Threshold of Hope’ (pp. 138-141, ‘Is Only Rome Right?’) can help our discussion.
(Emphasis his.) (Emphasis mine.)

“The one People of God is present among all nations on earth, since he takes its citizens from every race, citizens of a Kingdom that by its nature is not of this world but from heaven. In fact all of the faithful spread throughout the world are in communion with one another through the Holy Spirit, and so '‘he who is in Rome knows that those on the far side of the earth are his members.’” In the same document, one of the most important of the Second Vatican Council, we read: “In virtue of this catholicity, each individual part brings its gifts to the other parts and to the entire Church, and thus the whole world and individual parts are reinforced by communicating with each other, working together to attain fulfillment in unity” (Lumen Gentium 13).

In Christ the Church is a communion in many different ways. Its character as a communion renders the Church similar to the communion of the Divine Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Thanks to this communion, the Church is the instrument of man’s salvation. It both contains and continually draws upon the mystery of Christ’s redemptive sacrifice. Through the shedding of His own blood, Jesus Christ constantly “enters into God’s sanctuary thus obtaining eternal redemption” (cf. Heb 9:12).

Thus, Christ is the true active subject of humanity’s salvation. The Church is as well, inasmuch as it acts on behalf of Christ and in Christ. As the Council teaches: “Christ, present among us in His Body which is the Church, is the one mediator and the way to salvation. Expressly asserting the need for faith and baptism (cf. Mk 16:16; Jn 3:5), he asserted the need for the Church, which men enter through baptism as if through a door. For this reason, men cannot be saved who do not want to enter or remain in the Church, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded by God through Christ as a necessity” (Lumen Gentium 14).

Here the Council sets forth its teaching on the Church as the active subject of salvation in Christ: “Fully incorporated into the society if the Church are those who, having the Spirit of Christ, integrally accept its organization and all means of salvation instituted in it. In the Church’s visible structure they are joined with Christ – who rules the Church through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops – by the bonds of the profession of the faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and Communion. Those who do not persist in charity, even if they remain in the Church in ‘body’ by not in ‘heart,’ cannot be saved. All of the Church’s children must remember that their privileged condition is not the result of their own merits, but the result of the special grace of Christ. Therefore, if someone does not respond to this grace in thought, in word, and in deeds, not only will that person not be saved, he will be even more severely judged” (Lumen Gentium 14). I think that the Council’s words…shed light on why the Church is necessary for salvation.

The Council speaks of membership in the Church for Christians and of being related to the Church for non-Christian believers in God, for people of goodwill (cf. Lumen Gentium 15-16). Both of these dimensions are important for salvation, and each one possesses varying levels. People are saved through the Church, they are saved in the Church, but they are always saved by the grace of Christ. Besides formal membership in the Church, the sphere of salvation can also include other forms of relation to the Church. Paul VI expressed this same teaching in his first encyclical, Ecclesiam Suam, when he spoke of the various circles of the dialogue of salvation (cf. Ecclesiam Suam 101-117), which are the same as those indicated by the Council as the spheres of membership in and of relation to the Church. This is the authentic meaning of the well-known statement: "Outside the Church there is no salvation."

It would be difficult to deny that this doctrine is extremely open. It cannot be accused of an ecclesiological exclusivism. Those who rebel against claims allegedly made by the Catholic Church probably do not have an adequate understanding of this teaching. Although the Catholic Church knows that it have received the fullness of the means of salvation, it rejoices when other Christian communities join her in preaching the Gospel. This is the proper context for understanding the Council’s teaching that the Church of Christ “subsists” in the Catholic Church (cf. Lumen Gentium 8; Unitatis Redintegratio 4).

The Church, precisely because it is Catholic, is open to dialogue with all other Christians, with the followers of non-Christian religions, and also with all people of good will, as John XXIII and Paul VI frequently said. Lumen Gentium explains convincingly and in depth the meaning of “people of good will.” The Church wants to preach the Gospel together with all who believe in Christ. It wants to point out to all the path to eternal salvation, the fundamental principles of life in the Spirit and in truth.

 

[coachkfan1]

Already reading on another website about how the Pope is paving the way for a “one world religion”, that what he is preaching is philosophy and not theology etc. Again I say, it is the APPEARANCE of things that the masses cling to so I really wish that he would choose his words a little differently.

 

[captainmike]

Very unfortunate statement. In my opinion, it does not make it more likely that atheists will check us out. In fact, it may confirm their own views that they don’t need Christianity. And it definitely makes a lot of Protestants have even more negative views of Catholicism than they already have. I wonder whether the Pope made such statements before he was elected–does anyone know?

 

[Otche_Nash]

Very unfortunate statement. In my opinion, it does not make it more likely that atheists will check us out. In fact, it may confirm their own views that they don’t need Christianity. And it definitely makes a lot of Protestants have even more negative views of Catholicism than they already have. I wonder whether the Pope made such statements before he was elected–does anyone know?

Precisely. This sends the message to both atheists and Christians that it is not necessary to go to church. Heresy is not necessarily a direct lie, but the omission essential truth. And that is what we have here. The dogma of Indefectibility does not preclude the possibility of an heretical pope. Looks like we have the pope we deserve.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Very unfortunate statement. In my opinion, it does not make it more likely that atheists will check us out. In fact, it may confirm their own views that they don’t need Christianity. And it definitely makes a lot of Protestants have even more negative views of Catholicism than they already have. I wonder whether the Pope made such statements before he was elected–does anyone know?

As others have pointed out, the statements reported in the press weren’t exactly what the Pope SAID but rather the conclusion drawn by the reporter as to what the Pope MEANT. So the whole idea about the ‘statement made’ and the upset about it are a tempest in a teapot --Pope Francis NEVER said that 'you don’t have to believe in God to get to heaven". . .some REPORTER said it.

As others also pointed out, this has happened with the other Popes too (remember how supposedly Pope Benedict said that condoms were a moral choice which is NOT at ALL what he really said?)

There is really no way that Pope Francis, or any other Pope (or cardinal, bishop, priest, etc) can ‘say the right thing’ because you will always have the media out there to twist it. Pope Francis could have come out with bells ringing and excommunicated the entire media, and we’d instead get a report that he had excommunicated ‘those against gay rights’ or that he had give the media a warm welcome ‘with bells ringing joyfully’. . . honestly, there are very few in the secular media who even TRY to report anything other than what they themselves think or are TOLD to say.

 

[captainmike]

As others have pointed out, the statements reported in the press weren’t exactly what the Pope SAID but rather the conclusion drawn by the reporter as to what the Pope MEANT. So the whole idea about the ‘statement made’ and the upset about it are a tempest in a teapot --Pope Francis NEVER said that 'you don’t have to believe in God to get to heaven". . .some REPORTER said it.

As others also pointed out, this has happened with the other Popes too (remember how supposedly Pope Benedict said that condoms were a moral choice which is NOT at ALL what he really said?)

There is really no way that Pope Francis, or any other Pope (or cardinal, bishop, priest, etc) can ‘say the right thing’ because you will always have the media out there to twist it. Pope Francis could have come out with bells ringing and excommunicated the entire media, and we’d instead get a report that he had excommunicated ‘those against gay rights’ or that he had give the media a warm welcome ‘with bells ringing joyfully’. . . honestly, there are very few in the secular media who even TRY to report anything other than what they themselves think or are TOLD to say.

Maybe you are right.

I guess I just wish he’d me more attuned to the likelihood that things he says will be twisted than he seems to be.

 

[Julie_de_Sales]

I understand your feeling that way. I have only known Jesuit priests all my life, so I never felt very comfortable with the Popes in the past. The Jesuits are very different, but in my opinion they are absolutely wonderful, not better, just different. From reading many of the post on this site it often sounds like I am reading Protestant views only to find out the writer is Catholic, but not the kind of Catholic I am used to being around. Most Jesuits focus on love, forgiveness, and how to grow stronger bond with God and others. Our faith is not about judging others and deciding who will be saved. Jesuits are about finding God in everyone, everything, and every experience we have each day, even in non-believers.

You might want to read the “Spiritual Exercises” of Saint Ignatius, the founder of the Society of Jesus or the Jesuits. I can’t say it will help you feel more comfortable, but it may give a better insight to Pope Francis and the way he practices his faith.

Thank you for the advice! I understand that there are different ways of living our faith and if we ought to go to extremes, it’s healtier to be more relaxed about your salvation and trust in the mercy of God than to become obsessively preoccupied by your eternal destiny. Maybe I just need more time to adjust and get to know the personality of Pope Francis.

 

[mackguy]

Well searching Bing for some more context around this sensational news headline that was shared by a relative of mine on Facebook got me to this site and discussion. I am appalled every time I see a headline that “Pope says xxx” because invariably when you read what he actually said it has almost nothing to do with the headline.

Let me introduce myself quickly. I grew up with what I’ll call “Southern Baptist” tradition (though we did not always attend a church that was part of the denomination that is the closest doctrinal basis I have). I personally did not really know or meet many Catholics (and thus had no real opinion one way or the other) until we moved to Pennsylvania when I started high school (in 2000). The particular area we lived in gave my family a VERY negative view of Catholocism which is unfortunate as I don’t believe it represented Catholocism. For instance the pastor at our church was originally studying to be a priest in Seminary, and during his study at (Catholic) seminary discoverd that what he had been taught growing up was entirely inconsistent with the Bible and what he was being taught in Seminary. He sent a Bible with some notes to a friend of his (a girl). The girl’s parents discovered this and told her she should never talk to him again and/or she was not welcome in their family. Somewhere along the way our pastor left Catholic seminary and became “protestant” he and the aforementioned girl married, and her parents had not contacted her in years.
In another instance, my mom was leading a local Bible study, and had a Catholic in this Bible study, and her priest told her that she should not be going to this Bible study, nor reading the Bible because only a Priest was qualified to read the Bible and that normal people cannot understand it and should not read it. There were other examples but those two are sort of the theme of Catholics in that area, very sad.

Anyway, fast forward a few years, and I started dating a girl who was Catholic. As from my above experiences I was a little bit suspicious of the Catholic traditions, but discussing with her quite a bit and doing research on my own discovered much of my previous experiences were not aligned with genuine Catholic teaching, and actually almost all of the “concerning” aspects of Catholic teaching are very misrepresented and mostly have strong Scriptural support. We are now happily married. So I’ll now call myself a Cathlic “sympathizer” or perhaps “apologist” in the sense that I work to better understand Catholic teaching and help to break down some of these misconceptions among my friends and family, while I have not decided to “convert”.

All of the above is leading up to my relevant post to this thread. We live in a world controlled by our opposition (The god of this age 2 Corinthians 4:4). When the secular media takes something like this so far out of context with a headline I believe it is far deeper than simply the Press trying to twist some words or sell an extra newspaper.

What better way to weaken Christianity than to give cause for some Christians to believe other Christians aren’t really Christians? A house divided cannot stand. There is more at work here than simple media bias.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Quick question: If an atheist turns to God, in whatever sense, is he still an atheist?

 

[captainmike]

Well searching Bing for some more context around this sensational news headline that was shared by a relative of mine on Facebook got me to this site and discussion. I am appalled every time I see a headline that “Pope says xxx” because invariably when you read what he actually said it has almost nothing to do with the headline.

Let me introduce myself quickly. I grew up with what I’ll call “Southern Baptist” tradition (though we did not always attend a church that was part of the denomination that is the closest doctrinal basis I have). I personally did not really know or meet many Catholics (and thus had no real opinion one way or the other) until we moved to Pennsylvania when I started high school (in 2000). The particular area we lived in gave my family a VERY negative view of Catholocism which is unfortunate as I don’t believe it represented Catholocism. For instance the pastor at our church was originally studying to be a priest in Seminary, and during his study at (Catholic) seminary discoverd that what he had been taught growing up was entirely inconsistent with the Bible and what he was being taught in Seminary. He sent a Bible with some notes to a friend of his (a girl). The girl’s parents discovered this and told her she should never talk to him again and/or she was not welcome in their family. Somewhere along the way our pastor left Catholic seminary and became “protestant” he and the aforementioned girl married, and her parents had not contacted her in years.
In another instance, my mom was leading a local Bible study, and had a Catholic in this Bible study, and her priest told her that she should not be going to this Bible study, nor reading the Bible because only a Priest was qualified to read the Bible and that normal people cannot understand it and should not read it. There were other examples but those two are sort of the theme of Catholics in that area, very sad.

Anyway, fast forward a few years, and I started dating a girl who was Catholic. As from my above experiences I was a little bit suspicious of the Catholic traditions, but discussing with her quite a bit and doing research on my own discovered much of my previous experiences were not aligned with genuine Catholic teaching, and actually almost all of the “concerning” aspects of Catholic teaching are very misrepresented and mostly have strong Scriptural support. We are now happily married. So I’ll now call myself a Cathlic “sympathizer” or perhaps “apologist” in the sense that I work to better understand Catholic teaching and help to break down some of these misconceptions among my friends and family, while I have not decided to “convert”.

All of the above is leading up to my relevant post to this thread. We live in a world controlled by our opposition (The god of this age 2 Corinthians 4:4). When the secular media takes something like this so far out of context with a headline I believe it is far deeper than simply the Press trying to twist some words or sell an extra newspaper.

What better way to weaken Christianity than to give cause for some Christians to believe other Christians aren’t really Christians? A house divided cannot stand. There is more at work here than simple media bias.

Maybe so. We, myself included, need to be more charitable towards our earthly leader. He has a hard job and the secular press will always try to take what he says out of context.

 

[mackguy]

Maybe so. We, myself included, need to be more charitable towards our earthly leader. He has a hard job and the secular press will always try to take what he says out of context.

Per Matthew 12:30 ; Matthew 6:24. If you are not working on behalf of God then you are working against Him.

It is the very job of the “secular” media to discredit the message of God and the Gospel.

 

[McCall1981]

Maybe you are right.

I guess I just wish he’d me more attuned to the likelihood that things he says will be twisted than he seems to be.

This is what I’ve been saying/hoping/praying for a while now.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Atheists can go to Heaven? Did Pope Francis say something new?

By Carson Holloway

Some folks in the mainstream media are worked up because Pope Francis actually said that an atheist might go to heaven. His remarks, from an article in the Italian newspaper La Repubblica, are being hyped as an example of Francis’s striking out on a new path, one different from that of his papal predecessors. Here is a story from the UK Telegraph, linked from the Drudge Report. This is the relevant portion quoted in the story:

The Pope wrote: “The question for those who do not believe in God is to follow their own conscience. Sin, even for a non-believer, is when one goes against one’s conscience. To listen and to follow your conscience means that you understand the difference between good and evil.” He said that the “mercy of God has no limits” and encompassed even non-believers.

Did the pope really say something new here? Is he really opening up the Church in a way that departs from its past teaching? Not really. Here is one of the opening paragraphs from John Paul II’s encyclical, Veritatis Splendor:

The Church knows that the issue of morality is one which deeply touches every person; it involves all people, even those who do not know Christ and his Gospel or God himself. She knows that it is precisely on the path of the moral life that the way of salvation is open to all.The Second Vatican Council clearly recalled this when it stated that “those who without any fault do not know anything about Christ or his Church, yet who search for God with a sincere heart and under the influence of grace, try to put into effect the will of God as known to them through the dictate of conscience… can obtain eternal salvation”. The Council added: “Nor does divine Providence deny the helps that are necessary for salvation to those who, through no fault of their own, have not yet attained to the express recognition of God, yet who strive, not without divine grace, to lead an upright life. For whatever goodness and truth is found in them is considered by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel and bestowed by him who enlightens everyone that they may in the end have life”

The Telegraph also detects a change in the incoming Vatican Secretary of State’s remark that celibacy for the clergy is not a matter of Catholic doctrine:

In a further sign that the Church is edging towards more openness, Archbishop Pietro Parolin, a Vatican diplomat who will next month become the Pope’s deputy as secretary of state, said that the principle of celibacy among clergy was “ecclesiastical tradition” rather than “Church dogma” and therefore open to discussion.

The Church is changing, “edging towards openness,” because a Vatican official stated what every informed Catholic already knows and has known since long before Francis became pope?

Lesson: journalists are not competent to say what is new in the Church if they have never in the first place bothered to learn what the Church has traditionally taught.

 

[McCall1981]

Here are Fr. Z’s comments on this. I found them informative and comforting:

…“There is nothing in what the Pope wrote to this socialist unbeliever in his open letter that deviates from what the Church teaches. Furthermore, this letter is not likely to appear in Acta Apostolicae Sedis (nor will any of the little daily fervorini which get people all worked up… nor with the pithy and yet ambiguous one-liners the press so likes to obsess about). This letter changes not one tittle or jot of Catholic teaching. It doesn’t not advance and shift Catholic teaching. It is a grand public relations gesture simultaneously stemming from, I am sure, a sincere desire to reach out to a man with great influence over public opinion and to meet him on his own turf.”…

wdtprs.com/blog/2013/09/newspapers-are-not-where-the-church-deepens-doctrine-or-changes-disciplines/#comments

 

[mackguy]

That is a good point as well, about how these off-the-cuff remarks to the press would not be how the Pope announces a change of doctrine.

However, actually reading the full letter in light of Lumen Fedei I believe that Francis may be saying exactly the opposite of what the headline proposes.

From the Lumen Fedei reference, Francis clearly states that people centered on themselves will fail. Notice in the text from this letter there is NO CLAIM that following one’s conscience is a valid way to get to heaven, the statement is more along the lines of saying that without Faith or a relationship with Christ the only guide you have is conscience, which by reference back to Lumen Fedei is insufficient.

Here are Fr. Z’s comments on this. I found them informative and comforting:

…“There is nothing in what the Pope wrote to this socialist unbeliever in his open letter that deviates from what the Church teaches. Furthermore, this letter is not likely to appear in Acta Apostolicae Sedis (nor will any of the little daily fervorini which get people all worked up… nor with the pithy and yet ambiguous one-liners the press so likes to obsess about). This letter changes not one tittle or jot of Catholic teaching. It doesn’t not advance and shift Catholic teaching. It is a grand public relations gesture simultaneously stemming from, I am sure, a sincere desire to reach out to a man with great influence over public opinion and to meet him on his own turf.”…

wdtprs.com/blog/2013/09/newspapers-are-not-where-the-church-deepens-doctrine-or-changes-disciplines/#comments

 

[einna]

I want to understand what people are thinking. We are all children of God, so do you some of you think that good “Christ like” people that do a tremendous amount of good in the world and love and accept others, but who are not Catholic will not go to heaven? If you read other Jesuit priest thoughts on what the Pope said, they do not think the press twisted anything but clearly state what Pope Francis said.

I have worked at a Jesuit high school for twenty years and we have kids from all religions going to our school, Jews, Muslim, Protestants, Atheist, etc. They must attend the pray services, Masses, and theology classes, but they are never told the will not go to heaven because of their beliefs. They are taught about Catholic teaching, but no one tries to convert them. The focus is creating Men for Others, going out and doing good work throughout their lives. Every year we have twice as many applicants as we have spots for and the vast majority of student have a very strong loyalty to the school long after they graduate and that is student of all religions. Jesus died for all of us and he wanted us to come together even if not in Church.