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

[mackguy]

This is a little off topic because it deals with other religions instead of Atheism but then again Buddhism is certainly an atheistic religion and is included in the catechism as one of the religions that can bring salvation to people.

Many people have their security built on being saved while others are not-- this false security and exclusivism becomes an insulation from humanity.
When the pope comes out and is less rigid and more open to humanity and with a bigger Jesus and bigger salvific plan than they have plugged into, it becomes necessary to edit what he said to avoid feeling threatened. This very simply is the dark side of religion-- that while intending to help us grow in love of God and love of neighbor it secretly walls us off from whole sections of humanity, poisoning our hearts and minds.

In the 1994 new edition of the catechism on page 386 fifth paragraph the position of the church regarding non Christians is stated with perfect clarity. There can be no mistaking the fact that the church teaches that Christ is involved in all other religions and that one can find salvation in them without acknowledging Christ. This includes Buddhism which in most forms is absolutely atheistic- they do not believe in God. This is so far from what many practicing Catholics believe and teach.

Now you’ve really lost me, I just did a text search of the catechism and Buddhism is not in there… ?

Can you give a section/paragraph number reference for those of us that don’t have a printed 1994 edition sitting in front of us?

 

[franklinstower]

This type of thinking makes me wonder

Why bother being Catholic?

Wouldn’t it be easier to do a little yoga and live a “moral” life by Buddhist standards?

Why do missions?

Shouldn’t we just close the churches and say, “follow your conscience”

I am going to answer this a different way than you intended.

The fact is many yogis and buddhists are working far harder on a day to day basis than you are (possibly) or the average Christian is. To assume that people choose those paths over Christianity is profoundly arrogant and ignorant of the serious degree of devotion and discipline expounded by these ancient traditions.

 

[Jon_S_1]

I am going to answer this a different way than you intended.

The fact is many yogis and buddhists are working far harder on a day to day basis than you are (possibly) or the average Christian is. To assume that people choose those paths over Christianity is profoundly arrogant and ignorant of the serious degree of devotion and discipline expounded by these ancient traditions.

I didn’t know the church taught that you can work your way into heaven.

Oh wait

The church doesn’t teach that.

At the end of the day we are ALL sinners and we ALL fail to meet up to God’s standard.

This Is OUR choice not Gods.

To say otherwise is to say Christ came for nothing, died for nothing, and redeemed nothing.

After all we could save ourselves all along.

 

[franklinstower]

Now you’ve really lost me, I just did a text search of the catechism and Buddhism is not in there… ?

Can you give a section/paragraph number reference for those of us that don’t have a printed 1994 edition sitting in front of us?

Ill just quote the first sentence of the paragraph I cited. “All religions are related somehow to the Christian economy of salvation… yet there adherents can find salvation even though their religions are not on equal footing with Christianity.”

All religions presumably means all religions and in any case if a massive and ancient system such as buddhism were an exception in the mind of the church it seems it would be duly noted.

Buddhism and hinduism are mentioned in other places but I cannot find the exact pages at the moment.

I am not a Catholic but often when I am on this site it seems I know more about that the Catholic Church actually teaches than many people who are. I think this is because very few people actually read the Catechism. I have read it twice through and it is more liberal by far than the general sentiment of this website.

 

[franklinstower]

I didn’t know the church taught that you can work your way into heaven.

Oh wait

The church doesn’t teach that.

At the end of the day we are ALL sinners and we ALL fail to meet up to God’s standard.

This Is OUR choice not Gods.

To say otherwise is to say Christ came for nothing, died for nothing, and redeemed nothing.

After all we could save ourselves all along.

You were the one who alluded to work by derisively referring to just doing a little yoga. I was just pointing out that fact. Now you are just changing up the argument to hide that. This is called dishonestly. My point is that many people choose other religions for reasons other than just wanting to get away with sin and I think you knew that.

 

[McCall1981]

I am going to answer this a different way than you intended.

The fact is many yogis and buddhists are working far harder on a day to day basis than you are (possibly) or the average Christian is. To assume that people choose those paths over Christianity is profoundly arrogant and ignorant of the serious degree of devotion and discipline expounded by these ancient traditions.

So what do you make of this:
"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).

I imagine you would say that the Buddhist in question does not “know the Church was founded by God” because they weren’t raised Chirstian etc, that this Buddhist falls into the invincible ignorance catagory. My question would be, in your opinion, who does NOT fall into the invincible ignorance catagory? In other words, who, in your opinion, is NOT saved?

The Church has always made it clear that faith in Christ leads to salvation. For those, “who through no fault of their own” (the invincilby ignorant) do not know Christ may (not will) be saved through God’s mercy.

I’m sure there are some invincibly ignorant people in the world somwhere, but do you honestly believe that the Buddhist you know down the street is completley ignorant of Jesus, and completely ignorant of the Church?

 

[Jon_S_1]

You were the one who alluded to work by derisively referring to just doing a little yoga. I was just pointing out that fact. Now you are just changing up the argument to hide that. This is called dishonestly. My point is that many people choose other religions for reasons other than just wanting to get away with sin and I think you knew that.

You are unbelievably arrogant.

You still cannot provide the Catechism reference. Who know what you are referencing.

I too have read the Catechism in its entirety and do not recall any passage like the one you are quoting. In fact a look through the sections it may be in I found this, and am not sure how it meshes with what you are claiming.

It s found in paragraph 843

(see how easy that is)
843

The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."332

 

[McCall1981]

Ill just quote the first sentence of the paragraph I cited. "All religions are related somehow to the Christian economy of salvation… yet there adherents can find salvation even though their religions are not on equal footing with Christianity."

All religions presumably means all religions and in any case if a massive and ancient system such as buddhism were an exception in the mind of the church it seems it would be duly noted.

Buddhism and hinduism are mentioned in other places but I cannot find the exact pages at the moment.

I am not a Catholic but often when I am on this site it seems I know more about that the Catholic Church actually teaches than many people who are. I think this is because very few people actually read the Catechism. I have read it twice through and it is more liberal by far than the general sentiment of this website.

I think you’re paraphrasing here, because I don’t think the Catechism would say “even though their religions are not on equal footing with Christianity”. Please cite your quote.

Also, in context, the part you are citing is describing how adherents of other religons are capable of achieving salvation due to invincible ignorance etc. It’s not saying Buddhists are saved because of Buddhism. It’s saying it’s possible for a Buddhist to be saved, despite the fact that they are Buddhist, because they could potentially be invincibly ignorant etc.

Again, faith in Christ is necessary for salvation. If someone is, through no fault of their own, invincibly ignorant of Christ, it is possible for God to save them anyway.

 

[Veridical16]

This is a little off topic because it deals with other religions instead of Atheism but then again Buddhism is certainly an atheistic religion and is included in the catechism as one of the religions that can bring salvation to people.

Many people have their security built on being saved while others are not-- this false security and exclusivism becomes an insulation from humanity.
When the pope comes out and is less rigid and more open to humanity and

Buddhism may have some natural truths in it that can point back to the truth in the midst of its stark errors and that’s all the Catholic Church has stated and will state, if one is being honest when they read what is stated through Catechical documents concerning the other religions.

Anyway, Forgive me for being forthright, A lot of what you are espousing is rooted in sentimentality… Hence the words , “Dark side of religion — Exclusivism…”
And what stems from your objections is the desire to feel comfortable.

…IF we are too believe in the truth of what we believe then if we truly believe that this is a transcendent truth and not just what 'works for myself" we have to alert what we know as revealed to us, whether or not that may affect the feelings of those.
This is how it is to be , there is no exclusivity about the Catholic Faith.

The very fact that the enemies of the Catholic Faith, deal in Esoterism (freemasons, gnostics) is a testament to the fact that one with Faith is anything but comfortable in being exclusive or fearful of the idea that God’s mercy extends to individuals who may not be totally at fault.

An example of that true conviction, I remember when St. Francis challenged the Muslims, his conviction was real, there’s was not, and while his efforts to get them to come along, he did achieve a starting point, and it impressed the individuals he met with so much.

He did not go there to make them feel good about themselves in their ways, he was reaching out and wanted to show that he knew the truth to the point of giving up his life. Though not successful he wanted to bring it to them.

 

[Veridical16]

The Lumen Fedei which I referenced is the work of Pope(s) Benedict and Francis and has nothing to do with Southern Baptistism.

Re: Pnewton, I perhaps misphrased what I said, I think you got it better in your statement that you cannot knowingly reject Christ. However, in my defense, I was just referencing this in a letter to a relative of mine regarding this headline.

“Romans 1:20-21
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not [a]honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.”

Which in my reading indicates you cannot be TRULY ignorant of Christ, even if you don’t quite know all the details (having never heard the Gospel).

While the Gospel does allude to those who will not be punished due to their ignorance,

And I believe that until the second coming, that there will be still those stray individuals who are invincibly ignorant (until the fullness of the gentiles)

I do not believe temporarily as most lands are discovered now and Christianity has spread beyond the Middle East and Europe, that this “invincible ignorance”

pertains to any individual living in the age of the Internet.

It for one, deters those with the faith from doing as Christ commanded, just to feel better about souls.
And secondly, falsely comforts those with a poorly formed rebellious conscience that it’s okay not to learn more about this Christ figure who I vaguely know about.

It’s something that should never be assumed and has been (or can be) abused by apologists.

That atheists are CONCERNED or amused about the question of salvation or the possibility of getting heaven while being atheist, proves that there are RARELY if ever true atheists. It’s absurd.

And those who promote militant atheism as a philosophy are usually ones who were also baptized therefore were never true atheists, but always antitheist, and one cannot be invincibly ignorant if he is an anti-theist.

 

[franklinstower]

I have to go to work so I wont be able to post till this evening. I cannot be any more specific than this paragraph already cited. Anyone refuting it must first actually own the catechism and have read this whole section which says in many ways that a completely new attitude towards other religions must be had by the Church. There is no way around it.

In the 1994 new edition of the catechism on page 386 fifth paragraph the position of the church regarding non Christians is stated with perfect clarity.

There can be no mistaking the fact that the church teaches that Christ is involved in all other religions and that one can find salvation in them without acknowledging Christ. This includes Buddhism which in most forms is absolutely atheistic- they do not believe in God. This is so far from what many practicing Catholics believe and teach.

Aurthor listed on cover is Richard P. McBrien

 

[billcu1]

But doesn’t that presume a properly formed conscience? Why can’t an abortophile claim that her “conscience” allows her to kill her child?

I didn’t know man was capable of knowing what was right or wrong without being told by God. But as His Holiness said God’s mercy is limitless.

 

[pnewton]

To me it sounds like you think you are God himself.!

??? The words were that of God. It is He that said Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven in this world or the next.

 

[coachkfan1]

From the tone of the last page or so, I think that we as believers need to ask ourselves if our consciences have been as built up as some of the non believers who Pope Francis said could forgiven too. I am uneasy about what the pope said, but I love my Church and my Christian brothers and sisters throughout the world, so I will continue to be obediant and respectful to the Holy Father and will try to show that same respect to my brothers and sisters, even the ones with whom I may vehemently disagree.

 

[billcu1]

I have to go to work so I wont be able to post till this evening. I cannot be any more specific than this paragraph already cited. Anyone refuting it must first actually own the catechism and have read this whole section which says in many ways that a completely new attitude towards other religions must be had by the Church. There is no way around it.

In the 1994 new edition of the catechism on page 386 fifth paragraph the position of the church regarding non Christians is stated with perfect clarity.

There can be no mistaking the fact that the church teaches that Christ is involved in all other religions and that one can find salvation in them without acknowledging Christ. This includes Buddhism which in most forms is absolutely atheistic- they do not believe in God. This is so far from what many practicing Catholics believe and teach.

Aurthor listed on cover is Richard P. McBrien

Whoa! Now I am well familiar with buddhism. Buddhism doesn’t teach there’s no God. Buddhism is non-theistic. Atheist says there’s no God. non-theistic the question does not arise. The idea of a creator God simply doesn’t come up. Where Are you getting this? Just trying to assert dominance by having the only way without understanding the details?

 

[McCall1981]

Below is the relevant passage in it’s entirety from the CCC on “no salvation outside the Church” and on the Church and other religions. I quote it so that we are all on the same page here.

The Church and non-Christians

839 "Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways."325

The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People,326 "the first to hear the Word of God."327 The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God’s revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews “belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ”,328 "for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable."329

840 And when one considers the future, God’s People of the Old Covenant and the new People of God tend towards similar goals: expectation of the coming (or the return) of the Messiah. But one awaits the return of the Messiah who died and rose from the dead and is recognized as Lord and Son of God; the other awaits the coming of a Messiah, whose features remain hidden till the end of time; and the latter waiting is accompanied by the drama of not knowing or of misunderstanding Christ Jesus.

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."330

842 The Church’s bond with non-Christian religions is in the first place the common origin and end of the human race:

All nations form but one community. This is so because all stem from the one stock which God created to people the entire earth, and also because all share a common destiny, namely God. His providence, evident goodness, and saving designs extend to all against the day when the elect are gathered together in the holy city. . .331

843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."332

844 In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them:

Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and served the creature rather than the Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to ultimate despair.333

845 To reunite all his children, scattered and led astray by sin, the Father willed to call the whole of humanity together into his Son’s Church. The Church is the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and salvation. The Church is “the world reconciled.” She is that bark which “in the full sail of the Lord’s cross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in this world.” According to another image dear to the Church Fathers, she is prefigured by Noah’s ark, which alone saves from the flood.334

**“Outside the Church there is no salvation”

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

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, 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

848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338**

 

[Veridical16]

I am not singling you out Einna, but what you are suggesting brings up relevant objection we see a lot. There is a common thread I’ve noticed with this accusation that *"Those who believe that Catholicism is the one true faith cannot possibly believe in it and therefore should apologize because it suggests something that makes an individual uncomfortable " *

is a deceptive accusation, because it speaks of fear of guilt on the one doing the accusing which is illogical,

and supposes that we Catholics are the ones doing the condemning by merely accepting the faith? When there is not necessarily a condemnation when Christ said “I am the Way, the Truth and the Light, no one comes to the Father accept through me” the very question is only troubling, because even the pagan acknowledges the fear of the true God…

“For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.”

With the other flawed notions of God or creator whether deistic or not, there’s nothing to trouble a non-believer when it comes to them because there is no reminder of man’s nature being prone to sin and the need for the redemption.

einna:

What about the Jews who have proven to follow God?

The jews have no more proven to follow God today, as they did back in the Old Testament,
because of the hardness of the hearts they abandoned him a lot then, and there is a reason for the diaspora after Christ as many did not follow God as he came for them incarnate.
Nevertheless, there have been many Jews (not including the apostles, mary) who have been converting since the start of the Church to the middle ages to today and there are many Jews who chose to remain in rejection of the 2nd person, with atheistic coldness of hearts as evidence of chosen people.

This idea that a race of people is elevated is false and Christ mentions it when he says, “I can raise up stones to be children of Abraham”
God has a plan for those who adhere to Judaism as exists today, and St. Paul talks about them as we are children of Abraham, but just as the Muslims are in the same boat, the Jews deny the Son of God too… and that is the situation today.
It is illustrated in Pope Benedicts book. As it is today both the Jews and The Muslims accept the idea of the Father but believe he was too “Great to be a man”
All men are called to salvation, it is not up to Christians or NON-Christians to decide who gets preference or not, we are all in the same boat.

This is the reality. This is the consequence of Garden of Eden. Man wasn’t meant to be okay where he is in life. He’s meant to move from that rejection of Christ he was born with in original sin, to acceptance of him.
I do not see why it’s so troubling for people who aren’t Christian to deal with, the question of salvation and have anxiety over it? If they were firmly convicted of their worldview ?

Only to THEN accuse Christians of being cruel, when it ultimately rests with the words of Christ himself. Words that may not be so easy to hear for both the pharisaic Catholics and the ones who preach the dictatorship of relativism.
Go forth and spread the Gospel to all the ends of the Earth. It is Very SIMPLE.
If one doesn’t believe in what the Christians preach, then it shouldn’t bother them if we believe many souls may be lost whether they are IN or outside of the Church.

I still have a very hard time believing that God put so many of His children here on earth only to reject them into heaven because they are not Christians

He founded his Church for a reason, to reach them.Also if one understands the nature of man, and the gravity of the offensiveness of the sins we commit we would question less the idea that souls may be lost.
God alone knows the heart of every individual who has come and has yet to come into existence.
If we are to believe that Jesus is perfect in his mercy,
then we also are to believe that Jesus is PERFECT IN HIS JUSTICE.
All this hand-wringing over how can a God allow this, is due a lack of faith or understanding who GOD IS…

I believe if a soul is lost, he probably understands when the Truth is revealed to him on judgment day what he did to merit condemnation, ala the penitent Thief St. Dismas and the impenitent Thief.
It is something to ponder but this crying out for an easy answer is probably an example of how far we are from God’s ways.

How many of you out there would become Buddhist if someone tried to convert you?

Many can if they don’t have the supernatural virtue of faith, just as many Buddhists and non-Christians have started by reason, and then beyond to embrace the sacramental life of the church and the person of Jesus Christ.

Maybe it means that God** allows different ways** to grow towards Him.

If Christ meant for his plan of salvation to be achieved in a kumbaya way, WE wouldn’t have killed him when he walked on this Earth.

 

[McCall1981]

I am not singling you out Einna, but what you are suggesting brings up relevant objection we see a lot. There is a common thread I’ve noticed with this accusation that *"Those who believe that Catholicism is the one true faith cannot possibly believe in it and therefore should apologize because it suggests something that makes an individual uncomfortable " *

is a deceptive accusation, because it speaks of fear of guilt on the one doing the accusing which is illogical,

and supposes that we Catholics are the ones doing the condemning by merely accepting the faith? When there is not necessarily a condemnation when Christ said “I am the Way, the Truth and the Light, no one comes to the Father accept through me” the very question is only troubling, because even the pagan acknowledges the fear of the true God…

“For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.”

With the other flawed notions of God or creator whether deistic or not, there’s nothing to trouble a non-believer when it comes to them because there is no reminder of man’s nature being prone to sin and the need for the redemption.

The jews have no more proven to follow God today, as they did back in the Old Testament,
because of the hardness of the hearts they abandoned him a lot then, and there is a reason for the diaspora after Christ as many did not follow God as he came for them incarnate.
Nevertheless, there have been many Jews (not including the apostles, mary) who have been converting since the start of the Church to the middle ages to today and there are many Jews who chose to remain in rejection of the 2nd person, with atheistic coldness of hearts as evidence of chosen people.

This idea that a race of people is elevated is false and Christ mentions it when he says, “I can raise up stones to be children of Abraham”
God has a plan for those who adhere to Judaism as exists today, and St. Paul talks about them as we are children of Abraham, but just as the Muslims are in the same boat, the Jews deny the Son of God too… and that is the situation today.
It is illustrated in Pope Benedicts book. As it is today both the Jews and The Muslims accept the idea of the Father but believe he was too “Great to be a man”
All men are called to salvation, it is not up to Christians or NON-Christians to decide who gets preference or not, we are all in the same boat.

This is a reality. This is the consequence of Garden of Eden. Man wasn’t meant to be okay where he is in life. He’s meant to move from that rejection of Christ he was born with in original sin, to acceptance of him.
I do not see why it’s so troubling for people who aren’t Christian to deal with, the question of salvation and have anxiety over it? If they were firmly convicted of their worldview ?

Only to THEN accuse Christians of being cruel, when it ultimately rests with the words of Christ himself. Words that may not be so easy to hear for both the pharisaic Catholics and the ones who preach the dictatorship of relativism.
Go forth and spread the Gospel to all the ends of the Earth. It is Very SIMPLE.
If one doesn’t believe in what the Christians preach, then it shouldn’t bother them if we believe many souls may be lost whether they are IN or outside of the Church.

He founded his Church for a reason, to reach them.Also if one understands the nature of man, and the gravity of the offensiveness of the sins we commit we would question less the idea that souls may be lost.
God alone knows the heart of every individual who has come and has yet to come into existence.
If we are to believe that Jesus is perfect in his mercy,
then we also are to believe that Jesus is PERFECT IN HIS JUSTICE.
All this hand-wringing over how can a God allow this, is due a lack of faith or understanding who GOD IS…

I believe if a soul is lost, he probably understands when the Truth is revealed to him on judgment day what he did to merit condemnation, ala the penitent Thief St. Dismas and the impenitent Thief.
It is something to ponder but this crying out for an easy answer is probably an example of how far we are from God’s ways.

Many can if they don’t have the supernatural virtue of faith, just as many Buddhists and non-Christians have started by reason, and then beyond to embrace the sacramental life of the church and the person of Jesus Christ.

If Christ meant for his plan of salvation to be achieved in a kumbaya way, WE wouldn’t have killed him when he walked on this Earth.

This is a great post, thank you.

The bolded part at the end of your post is what worries me. The same “world” that hated and killed Christ is very happy right now. Makes me afraid

 

[einna]

Veridical16,

I never said any Catholic should apologize for their beliefs. I post questions or my opinion, but I claim to know nothing. Others however seem to “know” all there is know about God and what will and will not happen, which frankly shocks me. Whoever claims that they really understand God is simply someone I have no interest in talking to; that to me is unbelievably arrogant, verging on insane.

There are people who post here that I can easily see getting to the gates of heaven just to argue with God when they find out that every single doctrine in the Catholic Church is not accurate. They are the ones that will argue that He shouldn’t be letting in so and so, instead of embracing God’s love and forgiveness.

When someone has an answer for everything and “knows” they are right, I don’t see that has faith. I believe that Pope Francis has a deeper faith than any Pope in my lifetime. Only my opinion. All I know right now is I am not worthy.

 

[KEP1983]

You still cannot provide the Catechism reference. Who know what you are referencing.

Uhh, he’s quoting Lumen Gentium-- an infallible document from Vatican II.

Lumen Gentium is infallible, the Catechism is not.

I know modernists and liberals try their hardest to say no one is in hell. But Jesus, the Bible, and the Saints and Doctors of the Church say otherwise. This whole idea that no one or barely anyone is in hell started within the past 40 years. But the Church was founded 2,000 years ago, not in 1962.