Pope on Jesus' redemption for all, inc atheists

  • Thread starter Thread starter kingal86
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think Our Holy Father is trying to make a bridge to Atheists as well… He is not condemning them but encouraging them to live a good life. Perhaps if one is living life as morally as they can they will be more open to a conversion…

I was skeptical when Francis was first elected but day by day I love him more and more…
 
Yes, what he said is theologically accurate, Jesus died for the sake of sins of all (inlcuding atheists) and in doing so redeemed all, in the sense that we are all children of God. The distinction is between redemption, which has occurred for all, and salvation, which only occurrs through Christ. People will jump on this because they don’t know (or want to deliberatly obscure) the difference between redemption and salvation.
Agreed. The distinction is an important one, and unfortunately, it will likely cause confusion.
 
Can’t we as Catholics just admit that atheist have the same chance of getting into heaven as us?
Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Ludwig Ott.

20. 'The Necessity for Membership of the Church


Membership of the Church is necessary for all men for salvation. (De fide.)

In the Caput Firmiter, the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) declared: “The universal Church of the faithful is one outside of which none is saved” (extra quam nullus omnino salvatur). D 430. This was the teaching also of the Union Council of Florence (D 714), and of Popes Innocent III (0 42)) and Boniface VIII in the Bull ‘Unam sanctam’ (D 468), Clement VI (D 570 b), Benedict XIV (D 1473), Pius IX (0 1647, 1677), Leo XI1I (0 1955), Pius XII in the Encyclical Mystici Corporis" (D 2286, 2.288).

As against modern religious indifferentism, Pius IX declared: “By Faith it is to be firmly held that outside the Apostolic Roman Church none can achieve salvation. This is the only ark of salvation. He who does not enter into it, will perish in the flood. Nevertheless equally certainly it is to be held that those who suffer from invincible ignorance of the true religion, are not for this reason guilty in the eyes of the Lord" (D 1647). The last proposition holds out the possibility that people who in point of fact (actu) do not belong to the Church can achieve salvation. C£ D 1677; 796 (votum baptismi).

The necessity for belonging to the Church is not merely a necessity of precept (necessitas praccepti), but also a necessity of means (nee. medii), as the comparison with the Ark, the means of salvation from the biblical flood, plainly shows. The necessity of means is, however, not an absolute necessity, but a hypothetical one. In special circumstances, namely, in the case of invincible ignorance or of incapability, actual membership of the Church can be replaced by the desire (votum) for the same. This need not be expressly (explicite) present, but can also be included in the moral readiness faithfully to fulfill the will of God (voturn implicitum). In this manner also those who are in fact outside the Catholic Church can achieve salvation.

Christ ordained affiliation to the Church by founding the Church as an institution unto salvation for all men. He endowed the Apostles with His authority, gave them a universal mandate to teach and baptize and made eternal salvation dependent on the acceptance of His teaching and the reception of Baptism. Luke 10, 16; Mt. 10, 40; 18, 17; 29,19; Mk.16, 15 et seq. That those who, in innocent ignorance, do not know the true Church of Christ, but who are nevertheless ready to bow to the demands of the Divine Will, will not be cast out, springs from the Divine Justice, and from the doctrine of God’s general will of salvation, which is clearly proved in the Scriptures. (1 Tim. 2, 4). The Apostles teach the necessity of the Church for salvation by promulgating Faith in Christ and His Gospel as a condition for salvation. Peter confesses before the High Council: “Neither is there salvation in any other" (Acts 4, 12). Cf Gal. I, 8; Tit. 3, 10 et seq.; 2 John 10 et seq.

It is the unanimous conviction of the Fathers that salvation cannot be achieved outside the Church. This principle was extended not only to pagans but to heretics and schismatics as well. St. Irenaeus teaches that: “in the efficacy of the spirit all those have no part, who do not hasten to the Church; rather they, by their evil teaching and their evil deeds, rob themselves of life. For where the Church is, there is also the spirit of God, and where the spirit of God is, there is the Church and all grace" (Adv. haer. III 24, I). Origen formally declares: “Outside the Church nobody will be saved” (extra ecclesiam nemo salvatur; In Jesu Nave hom. 3, 5); similarly St. Cyprian: “Outside the Church there is no salvation" (salus extra ecciesiam non est; Ep. 73, 21). The Fathers, for example, St. Cyprian, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, St. Fulgentius, regard, as types of the necessity of the Church for salvation, the saving Ark of Noah and the House of Rahab OOS. 2, 18 et seq.). In the Primitive Church the conviction of her necessity for salvation found practical expression in her missionary zeal, in the readiness of her children to suffer martyrdom and in her battle against heresy.

In view of the stress laid upon the necessity of membership of the Church for salvation it is understandable that the possibility of salvation for those outside the Church is mentioned only hesitantly. St. Ambrose and St. Augustine admit that catechumens who depart this life before the reception of Baptism can win salvation on the ground of their faith, their desire for Baptism, and their internal conversion (St. Ambrose, De obitu Val. 51; St. Augustine, De hapt. IV 22,29). On the other hand, Gennadius of Marseilles denies them this possibility, except in the case of martyrdom (De eccl. Dogm. 74). St. Augustine distinguishes also, not indeed using the terminology, between material and formal heretics. Thus he does regard material heretics as heretics properly so-called (Ep. 43, I, I). He seems to estimate their possibility of salvation otherwise than he does that of heretics proper.
 
So salvation and eternal fate is less to do with what’s in your heart than it is a mind game. You have to somehow manipulate your thoughts into believing something whether or not you’ve actually been genuinely convinced of it. And before that, you have to make sure to pick the right set of religious beliefs to do this mental trick with. I’ll pick Door 3, Catholicism, for all the marbles please.

God cannot be so trivial and cruel
Yeah, I hope that God is not playing a game of eternal Russian Roulette with our souls.

I find the anger about this troubling, as we should all be praying for the souls of everyone. We shouldn’t be trying to “one up” each other in the “game of salvation.”
 
Agreed. The distinction is an important one, and unfortunately, it will likely cause confusion.
so redeemed means nothing but “allowed to be saved if you believe correctly” verses unredeemed which means “do whatever you want cuz you’re screwed anyway. blame Eve”

or “child of God” verses “not in fact created by God”

so really “redemption” just means “convincing God to let you try”
 
I think Our Holy Father is trying to make a bridge to Atheists as well… He is not condemning them but encouraging them to live a good life. Perhaps if one is living life as morally as they can they will be more open to a conversion…
Perhaps. But we are all sinners, Catholic or not, Christian or not. It is too tempting to delve down to this depth of believing he who is Catholic is “good” and he who is not isn’t. Far too many examples of wicked Catholics and righteous non-Catholics. There seems to be a prideful motivation which says, “I am Catholic, therefore, I am better than you.”
 
Yeah, I hope that God is not playing a game of eternal Russian Roulette with our souls.

I find the anger about this troubling, as we should all be praying for the souls of everyone. We shouldn’t be trying to “one up” each other in the “game of salvation.”
co-sign
 
so redeemed means nothing but “allowed to be saved if you believe correctly” verses unredeemed which means “do whatever you want cuz you’re screwed anyway. blame Eve”

or “child of God” verses “not in fact created by God”

so really “redemption” just means “convincing God to let you try”
I said this in your other thread on this subject, but youre reducing faith down to just an intellectual proposition, when its far more than that. Also, the doctrine on salvation in the Church isnt negotiable, so you can think what you want, but the Church says otherwise.
 
Perhaps. But we are all sinners, Catholic or not, Christian or not. It is too tempting to delve down to this depth of believing he who is Catholic is “good” and he who is not isn’t. Far too many examples of wicked Catholics and righteous non-Catholics. There seems to be a prideful motivation which says, “I am Catholic, therefore, I am better than you.”
Agreed.
 
Yeah, I hope that God is not playing a game of eternal Russian Roulette with our souls.

I find the anger about this troubling, as we should all be praying for the souls of everyone. We shouldn’t be trying to “one up” each other in the “game of salvation.”
👍:yup::clapping:
 
I said this in your other thread on this subject, but youre reducing faith down to just an intellectual proposition, when its far more than that. Also, the doctrine on salvation in the Church isnt negotiable, so you can think what you want, but the Church says otherwise.
i’m not reducing faith down to that, i think those who insist its all about belief are. Belief is an intellectual thing. It is what you conclude, think, assume, accept, believe about something. Also, while not teaching it as definite truth, the Church allows for the hope of Apokatastasis, which would suggest the possibility of being saved without prior correct belief.

But if you’d rather accept the idea that you have to guess right to avoid hell, then good luck i suppose
 
On the HufPo combox, upset with all the bickering, an atheist says:
it is sad that a man can say “go, do good” and so many others rush to discredit him. believe what you may, but the point remains: do. all arguments of salvation or redemption aside, isn’t the bible pretty clear that people are supposed to do well by each other? and on the other side, those without these beliefs (myself included) are not exempt from the need to do good. so what if some man says your doing good works is compatible with his religion? he’s simply acknowledging that we all, either by grace or by chemistry, are born into the world with the same duty to do good.
but, i suppose, without all this arguing life would be much less interesting.
So what the Pope said shouldn’t be that hard to understand, after all 🙂
 
Perhaps. But we are all sinners, Catholic or not, Christian or not. It is too tempting to delve down to this depth of believing he who is Catholic is “good” and he who is not isn’t. Far too many examples of wicked Catholics and righteous non-Catholics. There seems to be a prideful motivation which says, “I am Catholic, therefore, I am better than you.”
It doesnt have to do with whether we are good or bad, or think we’re better than other people or not, just whether we believe in Christ. Why all the Catholic self-hatred around here? :confused:
 
It doesnt have to do with whether we are good or bad, or think we’re better than other people or not, just whether we believe in Christ. Why all the Catholic self-hatred around here? :confused:
why is it self-hating for a Catholic or Christian to simply believe they aren’t the only ones who get to avoid hell?
 
i’m not reducing faith down to that, i think those who insist its all about belief are. Belief is an intellectual thing. It is what you conclude, think, assume, accept, believe about something. Also, while not teaching it as definite truth, the Church allows for the hope of Apokatastasis, which would suggest the possibility of being saved without prior correct belief.

But if you’d rather accept the idea that you have to guess right to avoid hell, then good luck i suppose
No, its not intellectual (or at least not primarily) I dont know why you think faith is like russian roulette, or chance. Its a choice we all make. And yes, I’d rather accept this idea since its what the Church definitively teaches, rather than base it on somrthing the Church “allows us to hope for”. What Im saying here is not controversial or even arguable, this is a basic Church teaching, you dont have to believe it, but it is what it is.
 
why is it self-hating for a Catholic or Christian to simply believe they aren’t the only ones who get to avoid hell?
The self-hatred is when people make the jump from talking about Church teaching on salvation, to how that means we think we’re better than other people. The two arent actually connected.
 
If my choice is to A: believe God is that petty and trivial or to B: believe some human somewhere along the way over the past 2000 years misinterpreted an elderly ancient’s account of something he thought he heard Jesus say decades earlier, I’m going to have to choose B unless someone can help me square the two.
This is not a respectful way to talk about God or the Bible, please respect the feelings of those of us who believe the Bible is the Word of God.

And I dont think this conversation is going anywhere, so I’ll bow out now.
 
The self-hatred is when people make the jump from talking about Church teaching on salvation, to how that means we think we’re better than other people. The two arent actually connected.
I think the poster was trying to be humble, I did not read it as a self hating Catholic statement…

A little bit of humility is a good thing, IMHO
 
The self-hatred is when people make the jump from talking about Church teaching on salvation, to how that means we think we’re better than other people. The two arent actually connected.
They aren’t connected at all. The reason we need the Church is because we are sinners, not because we are better then everyone else. Without the sacraments, we cannot receive absolution for our sins, nor the strength and grace which comes from the Eucharist. The lack of the sacraments cannot but lessen our chances of salvation.

As long as one is not triumphant about it, it is not arrogant to believe what the Church has always taught regarding her necessity for salvation. Otherwise, why bother to evangelize at all? If the sacraments have no power to help us achieve salvation and if the Church does not contain the truth necessary, then why are we wasting out time? I cannot help but wonder why Catholics who do not believe that the Church is necessary or even important for salvation bother to stay Catholic at all. Its not that I want people to leave the Church, but the two positions do not match up. The Church teaches A, B, and C when it comes to salvation. If you do not believe A, B, and C, then why be Catholic?

As for me, I think I will hold fast to the Church and do my best to live up to her teachings in the Sacred Tradition she has carried on since being commission by Christ to do so. I will continue to pray for the conversion of all non-Catholics to the Church and for the perseverance of the Church in proclaiming the Truth to the entire world.
 
No, its not intellectual (or at least not primarily) I dont know why you think faith is like russian roulette, or chance. Its a choice we all make. And yes, I’d rather accept this idea since its what the Church definitively teaches, rather than base it on somrthing the Church “allows us to hope for”. What Im saying here is not controversial or even arguable, this is a basic Church teaching, you dont have to believe it, but it is what it is.
if belief is not intellectual, are you saying it is different from what you believe in your mind to be true? so intellectually, in your thoughts, you can think God is a myth, but in some other way believe He is real, and not only that, but believe everything this particular Church says about Him, all the while not actually thinking it in your mind.

also, if the church definitively taught that only those who believe correctly while on Earth will be saved from eternal damnation, it would not be possible to allow for the possibility of apokatastasis.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top