Salvation for non-Christians

[bksumm]

Not judging anyone here, just troubled by something I heard. While attending RCIA, the teacher, a priest, stated that we will be judged by our conscience. He also said that non-Christians would be saved as long as they didn’t “believe” the Gospel. I think this is contrary to Church teaching. I understand that the Church teaches infallible ignorance, that those ignorant of the Gospel MIGHT be saved. The priest, a wonderful man, gave the example of Ghandi as a non-Christian who most likely be in heaven. I agree. However, I feel uncomfortable with the idea that one may know the Gospel and as long as they don’t accept it they are good to go. The CCC seems to indicate that the operative word is “know” not “believe.” I think that if someone rejects Christ, they are in danger of eternal damnation. Knowing the Gospel and not accepting it seems like rejection of said gospel. WDYT?

 

[promethius]

Not judging anyone here, just troubled by something I heard. While attending RCIA, the teacher, a priest, stated that we will be judged by our conscience. He also said that non-Christians would be saved as long as they didn’t “believe” the Gospel. I think this is contrary to Church teaching. I understand that the Church teaches infallible ignorance, that those ignorant of the Gospel MIGHT be saved. The priest, a wonderful man, gave the example of Ghandi as a non-Christian who most likely be in heaven. I agree. However, I feel uncomfortable with the idea that one may know the Gospel and as long as they don’t accept it they are good to go. The CCC seems to indicate that the operative word is “know” not “believe.” I think that if someone rejects Christ, they are in danger of eternal damnation. Knowing the Gospel and not accepting it seems like rejection of said gospel. WDYT?

Only those who are invincibly ignorant outside the church will be saved. That is to say: those who were never properly catechized and did not, through negligence or willfull act, reject valid catechesis. Further, those who have been PROPERLY catechized and reject truth will NOT be saved.

In other words, we HOPE Ghandi was saved (just as we hope ALL who have died outside the church have been saved), but just because someone does nice things does not make them worthy of salvation. If they reject God despite good and thorough catechesis, then they have sinned mortally unto damnation.

 

[uxordepp]

I think I can see where the priest was going with this, but he didn’t word it well.

I think he means (by using the term “believe the Gospel”) that they HAVE been catechized, but have not converted.

It is a dicey discussion. Ultimately we don’t know people’s salvation. I suspect that a lot of people who have heard the Gospel but have had it poorly reflected to them (in other words those who taught them were not good Christian examples) will be declared invincibly ignorant, because the Gospel message was, for them, clouded by human error.

But if someone truly believes the Gospel, they will convert. I don’t think it can logically work any other way.

 

[LifeIsAbsurd]

In other words, we HOPE Ghandi was saved (just as we hope ALL who have died outside the church have been saved), but just because someone does nice things does not make them worthy of salvation. If they reject God despite good and thorough catechesis, then they have sinned mortally unto damnation.

In other words, you’re saying there’s a silver lining to going to Hell. You may get the opportunity to meet history’s most admired and respected non-Christians like Ghandi. Although, there’s no consensus on whether that’ll happen in a literal flaming pit, on an upper level of Hell that’s only uncomfortably warm, or just some place completely separate from God.

 

[promethius]

In other words, you’re saying there’s a silver lining to going to Hell. You may get the opportunity to meet history’s most admired and respected non-Christians like Ghandi. Although, there’s no consensus on whether that’ll happen in a literal flaming pit, on an upper level of Hell that’s only uncomfortably warm, or just some place completely separate from God.

Operative word being “may”. Who knows? Maybe Ghandi WAS invincibly ignorant and was saved… I hope so. But then again, I also hope that some of the most vile people in history repented in their last moments and were saved… shrug I figure I’ve got to pull for the bad guys too, because if they get in then maybe I have some hope…

All I’m saying is that we HOPE for the salvation of everyone, though we know that is not the case, while we cannot KNOW about the salvation of anyone whom God does not find fit to make clear to us is a Saint.

 

[bksumm]

Of course I hope for the salvation of all souls. And I appreciate the teaching on invincible ignorance. But sounds like the gate is pretty wide…Christ tells us that the gate is narrow.

 

[promethius]

Of course I hope for the salvation of all souls. And I appreciate the teaching on invincible ignorance. But sounds like the gate is pretty wide…Christ tells us that the gate is narrow.

I never said it was a wide gate, merely that we have no way of knowing who did or did not make it through that gate. We should hope for the salvation of all, whether or not that is the case (which we know it is not).

And I should make note (for our atheist friend) that if a “good person” like Ghandi did ultimately reject God and end up in damnation, that if we arrived there too we would not recognize him as a “good person” or appreciate their presence. Such “good” feelings are part of our union with God, and the damned do not have such a union. As a result, Ghandi would not be a caring and loving soul if we were to encounter him in hell (not saying he’s there, just as a what if)

 

[Bookcat]

Yes it is possible for those who through not fault of their own do not know Jesus or his Church…but who still seek God…and seek to live according to his will as they see in their conscience …

It will of course still be Jesus who saves them…(and WE are to proclaim Christ…the Gospel to them!)

Whoever is saved in the end…will be saved by Jesus Christ…even if he has never heard of him or the Church …

But yes if a person has heard the Gospel…and rejected Christ…this is not a positive sign…

Having said that…

Now there can be “more to the story” they may have not heard it properly …or were beat by someone claiming to be doing so as a Christian or something…lots can go into why this question…

bottom line …we do not know and God does He wills our salvation…and knows what he person may have rejected (a fake Jesus) etc…

 

[kbwall]

The way I understand how the Catholic church teaches is that when we die, we will be given the final choice of if we accept Jesus or not. This is where the dangers of sin come from, sin is a rejection of God. If you commit mortal sins with no repentance, then there isn’t much chance of you accepting God in the afterlife. Likewise, if you knew all about the gospels, and were taught properly and still converted out of the faith, then there again isn’t much chance. If you reject Him, you will be completely seperated from Him forever. God loves everybody, but He won’t force His love on somebody if they don’t want it.

I believe non-Christians have a shot. I think some have better shots than others (for example, I imagine Hindus having an easier than, say, Satanists). It’s a matter of how closely they followed God, or what they understood of God. And again, it’s also a matter of how well they knew God. And ultimately, only they and God know how well the person knew the gospels.

Ultimately, only God can know who will make it and who will not make it. God is the one and only judge, we can only fathom at His methods of selection. It’s known that He is a merciful God though. What I said was but one of multiple theories on Hell (and if any of it is dangerous heresy, please correct me, I’m still learning).

 

[bksumm]

I appreciate the previous posts and I know that no one explicitly said the gate is wide. Yes, God is our judge and He decides who is saved. And yes, we hope for the salvation of those outside the Church. But, the point of evangelization is to spread the Gospel so that others may be saved by the blood of Christ. We should deal with our brothers and sisters of other faiths with love, respect, and humility. But I think it’s okay to humbly proclaim that Jesus is the way.

 

[Bookcat]

The way I understand how the Catholic church teaches is that when we die, we will be given the final choice of if we accept Jesus or not.

Actually such is NOT the teaching.

 

[Bookcat]

. But, the point of evangelization is to spread the Gospel so that others may be saved by the blood of Christ. We should deal with our brothers and sisters of other faiths with love, respect, and humility. But I think it’s okay to humbly proclaim that Jesus is the way.

Catechism of the Catholic Church:

CCC 905 Lay people also fulfill their prophetic mission by evangelization, “that is, the proclamation of Christ by word and the testimony of life.” For lay people, “this evangelization . . . acquires a specific property and peculiar efficacy because it is accomplished in the ordinary circumstances of the world.” This witness of life, however, is not the sole element in the apostolate; the true apostle is on the lookout for occasions of announcing Christ by word, either to unbelievers . . . or to the faithful.

Pope Benedict XVI:

“The need to proclaim Christ boldly and courageously is a continuing priority for the Church; indeed it is a solemn duty laid upon her by Christ who enjoined the Apostles to ‘go out to the whole world, proclaim the Good News to all creation.’”

• Pope Benedict XVI, Address to Japanese Bishops, December 2007

We impose nothing, yet we propose ceaselessly, as Peter recommends in one of his Letters: “In your hearts, reverence Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to make a defence to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you” (1 Pet 3:15). Pope Benedict XVI Caritas in Veritate, 78

“The Lord has risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon!” (Lk 24: 34). This is the “Good News” par excellence in the entire history of the world, it is the “Gospel” proclaimed and passed on down the centuries, from generation to generation…The Good News of Easter, therefore, requires the action of enthusiastic and courageous witnesses. Each disciple of Christ, and also each one of us, is called to be a witness. This is the precise, demanding and exalting mandate of the Risen Lord. The “news” of new life in Christ must shine out in the life of Christians, it must be alive and active in those who bring it, really capable of changing hearts and the whole of life…Therefore the Lord sends us everywhere as his witnesses. But we can only be such on the basis of and with continuous reference to the Paschal experience, the experience which Mary Magdalene expresses when she announces to the other disciples: “I have seen the Lord” (Jn 20: 18). This personal encounter with the Risen One is the steadfast foundation and central content of our faith, the fresh and inexhaustible source of our hope, the ardent dynamism of our charity. Thus our Christian life itself will fully coincide with the announcement: “Christ the Lord has risen, indeed”. Let us, therefore, allow ourselves to be won over by the fascination of Christ’s Resurrection. Gen. Audience April 7, 2010

Consequently, it is fundamental for our faith and for our Christian witness to proclaim the Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth as a real, historical event, attested by many authoritative witnesses. We assert this forcefully because, in our day too, there are plenty of people who seek to deny its historicity, reducing the Gospel narrative to a myth, to a “vision” of the Apostles, taking up and presenting old and already worn-out theories as new and scientific…

Let us welcome him with faith and adhere generously to his Gospel, as did the privileged witnesses of his Resurrection; and as, some years later, did St Paul who encountered the divine Teacher in an extraordinary manner on the Road to Damascus. We cannot keep for ourselves alone the proclamation of this Truth that changes the life of all. Aud 4-15-09

 

[Newbie2]

Actually such is NOT the teaching.

Correctomundo.

However, we do have the ability through free will to accept or reject Christ right up to the moment of our death.

So, in a sense, we are given that choice when we die, but it’s not a choice reserved for that moment of death. It’s not like a final Jeopardy question given to us at the moment of our death that will decide our fate…

 

[Bookcat]

Correctomundo.

However, we do have the ability through free will to accept or reject Christ right up to the moment of our death.

So, in a sense, we are given that choice when we die, but it’s not a choice reserved for that moment of death. It’s not like a final Jeopardy question given to us at the moment of our death that will decide our fate…

and of course one needs to die in a state of grace…(even if it comes only 1 minute prior…)

 

[kbwall]

Correctomundo.

However, we do have the ability through free will to accept or reject Christ right up to the moment of our death.

So, in a sense, we are given that choice when we die, but it’s not a choice reserved for that moment of death. It’s not like a final Jeopardy question given to us at the moment of our death that will decide our fate…

Perhaps I phrased it wrong. I didn’t mean you will be asked to choose per se, but at that moment you will either be for or against Him.

If you have chosen to be for Him and followed His teachings, then you will be for Him. If you reject Him by converting out of the faith, and you fully knew and understood the church teachings, then you will be against Him. If you haven’t repented of a mortal sin, then you will be against Him. If you openly follow Satan, you will be against Him. But if you haven’t been fully or properly taught the teachings of the church, and you follow a non-Christian religion that seeks to be good, then you have a shot.

Is that closer to what the church teaches?

 

[Newbie2]

Perhaps I phrased it wrong. I didn’t mean you will be asked to choose per se, but at that moment you will either be for or against Him.

If you have chosen to be for Him and followed His teachings, then you will be for Him. If you reject Him by converting out of the faith, and you fully knew and understood the church teachings, then you will be against Him. If you haven’t repented of a mortal sin, then you will be against Him. If you openly follow Satan, you will be against Him. But if you haven’t been fully or properly taught the teachings of the church, and you follow a non-Christian religion that seeks to be good, then you have a shot.

Is that closer to what the church teaches?

Yep, I think that’s a pretty good explanation.

It’s a fine line we walk in trying to define what will and won’t separate us from salvation, in an attempt to make God’s will explainable, while at the same time not knowing the specific relationship between any one person and the Almighty.