San Diego bishop calls for a practical ‘apology’ to L.G.B.T. Catholics

[TMC]

The teaching has always been that one must be baptized. Even Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist, so it must be important. According the the Catholic Catechism it includes forgiveness of original sin and all personal sins, and birth into the new life by which man becomes an adoptive son of the Father.

“1279 The fruit of Baptism, or baptismal grace, is a rich reality that includes forgiveness of original sin and all personal sins, birth into the new life by which man becomes an adoptive son of the Father, a member of Christ and a temple of the Holy Spirit. By this very fact the person baptized is incorporated into the Church, the Body of Christ, and made a sharer in the priesthood of Christ.”

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P3O.HTM

I cannot find any Christian Catholic source that says we can sin freely and not repent and go to heaven and still be children of God, can you? Every source I find says the opposite.

“The concern of the flesh is death, but the concern of the spirit is life and peace. For the concern of the flesh is hostility toward God; it does not submit to the law of God, nor can it; and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” **Romans 8:6-9
**

"For if you live according to the flesh, you will die, but if by the spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. "** Romans 8:13**

To me that means one’s soul cannot enter heaven if the soul becomes dead with the sins of the flesh. If that is not the case why do we believe in sin?

Well, as I said before, to me the belief that some acts are sinful and others righteous is only tangentially connected to salvation. Everyone naturally desires salvation, but we act righteously and avoid sin because that is good and proper behavior. We would hopefully try to avoid sin and be righteous regardless of whether we received reward or punishment for doing so.

As far as the Church’s teaching, the Church teaches that baptism is the normative route to salvation, but formal baptism is not always necessary. The unbaptized, including non-Christians and even atheists, can be saved despite their lack of formal connection to the Church. The Church does not profess to fully understand the mystery of how all this works, but does profess it with confidence. This has been the teaching of the Church at least since the publication of Lumen Gentium in 1964. But I (and many others) would argue that this is wholly consistent with the teaching of the Church in ancient times.

None of that means that sin does not matter, that it does not matter if one is Catholic or not, or that repenting sin is not important. But to get back to what took us down this path, I believe it is related to the fact that all of us, of any religion or no religion at all, are Children of God.

 

[JosieN]

Well, as I said before, to me the belief that some acts are sinful and others righteous is only tangentially connected to salvation. Everyone naturally desires salvation, but we act righteously and avoid sin because that is good and proper behavior. We would hopefully try to avoid sin and be righteous regardless of whether we received reward or punishment for doing so.

As far as the Church’s teaching, the Church teaches that baptism is the normative route to salvation, but formal baptism is not always necessary. The unbaptized, including non-Christians and even atheists, can be saved despite their lack of formal connection to the Church. The Church does not profess to fully understand the mystery of how all this works, but does profess it with confidence. This has been the teaching of the Church at least since the publication of Lumen Gentium in 1964. But I (and many others) would argue that this is wholly consistent with the teaching of the Church in ancient times.

None of that means that sin does not matter, that it does not matter if one is Catholic or not, or that repenting sin is not important. But to get back to what took us down this path, I believe it is related to the fact that all of us, of any religion or no religion at all, are Children of God.

I agree we are all created by God and are His creation, but I was taught that only through the Sacrament of Baptism we become adopted children of God. This is what they teach you when you convert to the Catholic Faith. Can you show me a Catholic teaching that proves this is not true? Where does it say that “the unbaptized, including non-Christians and even atheists, can be saved despite their lack of formal connection to the Church”?

"Children of God

The sacrament of Baptism not only** gives us sanctifying grace: it also makes us adopted children of God and heirs of heaven.**

We say “adopted” children because God the Father has only one begotten Son—Jesus Christ. He is God’s only Son through generation; the rest of us become God’s children by adoption.

As children of God, we receive our inheritance at the very moment of our adoption, at the very moment of Baptism. Our inheritance is eternal union with God, and we have that inheritance now, once we are baptized.

Nobody can take this inheritance away. Not even God, who has bound Himself by irrevocable promise never to take back what He has given. We ourselves can renounce our rights—as we will do if we commit mortal sin—but no one else can deprive us of our heritage."

beginningcatholic.com/baptism.html

From what I can see from the above information is that baptism is necessary to make us adopted children of God and become heirs of heaven.

 

[JosieN]

This has been the teaching of the Church at least since I was catechized, and I am a cradle Catholic and not young.

One of the things I sense in your post, although correct me if I am wrong, is the sense that the main reason to be Catholic is to get into heaven, so why be Catholic if heaven is available to others? That is not how I see religion. I think that the point of being Catholic, or any faith, is because one believes that faith has the Truth, and because one wants to live a good and proper life. If I were to learn tomorrow that everyone gets into heaven, no matter what they do in this life, I don’t think that would change my behavior or my faith. Being a Christian is not an investment that I hope will pay off in the next life. Being a Christian is what I think is the best way to live this life. I will let the next life take care of itself.

The Church teaches us that Baptism is necessary for salvation and unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God, I copied and pasted the following for you and provided the link below it.

Baptism is necessary for salvation for anyone who has heard the Gospel of Christ and has the possibility of requesting Baptism.

If a man has lived to be a hundred and had a healthy and “successful” life, it means nothing without Baptism. Once he dies, how could health or worldly success matter at all if this person has missed out on the one thing for which he was made—eternal union with God?

There is no escaping the absolute necessity of Baptism.

"Unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God," Jesus told Nicodemus (John 3:5). And His command to the Apostles was: "Go into the whole world and preach the Gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he who does not believe" (and, by inference, is not baptized) “shall be condemned” (Mark 16: 15-16).

There is no “if” or “maybe” about those two statements; no way around them.

(The Catechism’s section on Baptism also describes this requirement; see numbers 1257-1261.)

beginningcatholic.com/baptism.html

 

[Padres1969]

How would a Catholic know if another Catholic is gay?

I don’t think the reference was the specific person to person interaction.

 

[Padres1969]

Ok I was finally able to find Bishop McElroy’s full remarks from the July 9 Ecumenical Service for the Orlando Shooting victims while visiting St. Paul’s Episcopal Cathedral.

sdcatholic.org/Portals/0/content/2016-07-09-SD_Bishop_Statement_at_Latino_Service.pdf

“Our Lady of Guadalupe occupies a pivotal role in Hispanic spirituality and culture, and as we gather to mourn the Latino men and women whose precious lives were ended by cruelty, hatred and violence in Orlando, it is particularly appropriate that we point to the figure of Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe, the Mother of the Lord, who symbolizes on so many levels the sadness of this night.

 “In the Catholic tradition, Mary, as the Mother of Jesus, experienced seven profound sorrows, beginning with having to flee her homeland with her husband and son as refugees, and culminating in the profound suffering of watching as her son Jesus was tortured, crucified and buried.  Over the past four weeks, I have no doubt that our Lady of Guadalupe has wept for us all as a people, as our nation has experienced seven enormous sorrows that strike at the very heart of  our peacefulness, our security, our identity, our unity.

 “The sorrow of 49 women and men, filled with graces, talents and hope, targeted and killed in Orlando because of a vile prejudice against their sexual orientation.

  “The sorrow of their families and friends, who awoke to a horror of deep and unimaginable loss that will haunt them for the rest of their lives.

  “The sorrow of guns and violence continually pointing to our national inability to eradicate the brutal convulsions which tear at our nation’s sense of safety and its social fabric.

 “The sorrow of the Muslim community, once again targeted not because of their religious beliefs, but by the distortion of those beliefs or the political gain which that distortion can bring.

 “The sorrow of young black men and their families and young people of color who must live in a world where racial prejudice ends the lives of even those who follow every rule.

 “The sorrow of police who are murdered because they are white or because they are blue, and the terrible toll that takes upon the families of all who dedicate their lives to enforcing justice in our nation.

 “The sorrow of recognizing that these events are not random in our nation, but constitute a profound crisis of our national soul which calls us to choose between our unity and our prejudices, our hatreds and our peace.

 “This terrible time of sorrow calls us to see one another as God sees us. There are no children of a lesser god and there are no lesser children of the one God who is the father of us all. Our failure to recognize this simple reality is the greatest sorrow of all.

 “Let us pray this night in union with Mary, mother of sorrows and mother of the Lord:

Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe,
Ore para que nuestro país
That we might rebuild hope on foundations of rock
That we may come to see every life as precious and equal to our own
That we can eliminate the barriers of hatred and the terrible wounds they produce
That this cycle of violence might yield to a pathway of compassion and mutual accompaniment
Ayúdenos, Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe
Ayúdenos a todos. Amen.

 

[TMC]

I agree we are all created by God and are His creation, but I was taught that only through the Sacrament of Baptism we become adopted children of God. This is what they teach you when you convert to the Catholic Faith. Can you show me a Catholic teaching that proves this is not true? Where does it say that “the unbaptized, including non-Christians and even atheists, can be saved despite their lack of formal connection to the Church”?

"Children of God

The sacrament of Baptism not only** gives us sanctifying grace: it also makes us adopted children of God and heirs of heaven.**

We say “adopted” children because God the Father has only one begotten Son—Jesus Christ. He is God’s only Son through generation; the rest of us become God’s children by adoption.

As children of God, we receive our inheritance at the very moment of our adoption, at the very moment of Baptism. Our inheritance is eternal union with God, and we have that inheritance now, once we are baptized.

Nobody can take this inheritance away. Not even God, who has bound Himself by irrevocable promise never to take back what He has given. We ourselves can renounce our rights—as we will do if we commit mortal sin—but no one else can deprive us of our heritage."

beginningcatholic.com/baptism.html

From what I can see from the above information is that baptism is necessary to make us adopted children of God and become heirs of heaven.

I agree that the Church has at times said that, but it is not correct. As the Pope himself has said repeatedly, we are all Children of God.

 

[JosieN]

I agree that the Church has at times said that, but it is not correct. As the Pope himself has said repeatedly, we are all Children of God.

I am aware that this what the pope said, but popes come and go, the Church, the Churches teachings and the Gospel live on forever, this is how I can share the same beliefs passed down by my ancestors. I already stated the reasons I am confused by the pope’s video (see the above posting if you did not read my response.)

 

[TMC]

The Church teaches us that Baptism is necessary for salvation and unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God, I copied and pasted the following for you and provided the link below it.

Baptism is necessary for salvation for anyone who has heard the Gospel of Christ and has the possibility of requesting Baptism.

If a man has lived to be a hundred and had a healthy and “successful” life, it means nothing without Baptism. Once he dies, how could health or worldly success matter at all if this person has missed out on the one thing for which he was made—eternal union with God?

There is no escaping the absolute necessity of Baptism.

"Unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God," Jesus told Nicodemus (John 3:5). And His command to the Apostles was: "Go into the whole world and preach the Gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he who does not believe" (and, by inference, is not baptized) “shall be condemned” (Mark 16: 15-16).

There is no “if” or “maybe” about those two statements; no way around them.

(The Catechism’s section on Baptism also describes this requirement; see numbers 1257-1261.)

beginningcatholic.com/baptism.html

I’m sorry, but that is not what the Church teaches. The Church teaches that salvation is available to all of good will. Here is what the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church says (bolding is mine):

But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things,(127) and as Saviour wills that all men be saved.(128) Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.(19*) Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life.

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html

Here is what the Catechism says (bolding mine):

1260 "Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery."62 Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.

Here is what Pope Francis says:

"The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all! And we all have a duty to do good. And this commandment for everyone to do good, I think, is a beautiful path towards peace. If we, each doing our own part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently, little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: we need that so much. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: we will meet one another there.”

en.radiovaticana.va/storico/2013/05/22/pope_at_mass_culture_of_encounter_is_the_foundation_of_peace/en1-694445

 

[TMC]

I am aware that this what the pope said, but popes come and go, the Church, the Churches teachings and the Gospel live on forever, this is how I can share the same beliefs passed down by my ancestors. I already stated the reasons I am confused by the pope’s video (see the above posting if you did not read my response.) I respect Pope Francis but sometimes I need to decide for myself if I go with the Church and the Bible or with whatever is believed to be true but is not supported by the Churches teachings. I do not know why there is disagreement.

“Popes come and go”? It is odd to see such a dismissive attitude toward the teaching of the Pope. You can certainly decide to disagree with the Church on this or any point. I am only trying to point out what the Church teaches, as expressed by the Church’s documents and taught by the Pope.

 

[JimG]

“1213 Holy Baptism is the basis of the whole Christian life, the gateway to life in the Spirit (vitae spiritualis ianua),4 and the door which gives access to the other sacraments. Through Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of Christ, are incorporated into the Church and made sharers in her mission: “Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration through water in the word.”

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P3G.HTM

As the above quote from the catechism makes clear, through Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as children of God. The Church recognizes baptism of desire and baptism of blood as extraordinary forms of Baptism.

But in what sense may it be said that human beings are children of God apart from the sacrament of Baptism? As creatures, we are all created by God and sustained in existence by Him. That is a necessary link of creature to Creator. Is it in that sense that one may be called a child of God? By His salvific will, God desires that all be saved. Does that salvific will constitute a relationship to God equal to Baptism? Is the Church incorrect in its former teaching on the necessity of Baptism?

 

[JosieN]

“Popes come and go”? It is odd to see such a dismissive attitude toward the teaching of the Pope. You can certainly decide to disagree with the Church on this or any point. I am only trying to point out what the Church teaches, as expressed by the Church’s documents and taught by the Pope.

I do not think the Gospel teachings support this belief, Believe what you like.

 

[TMC]

I do not think the Gospel teachings support this belief, Believe what you like.

You are certainly entitled to reject Church teaching in this area and go with your own interpretation.

 

[JosieN]

You are certainly entitled to reject Church teaching in this area and go with your own interpretation.

Here is what I was taught, if you were taught something different then go with that.

The Church teaches us that Baptism is necessary for salvation and unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Baptism is necessary for salvation for anyone who has heard the Gospel of Christ and has the possibility of requesting Baptism.

If a man has lived to be a hundred and had a healthy and “successful” life, it means nothing without Baptism. Once he dies, how could health or worldly success matter at all if this person has missed out on the one thing for which he was made—eternal union with God?

There is no escaping the absolute necessity of Baptism.

**“Unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God,” Jesus told Nicodemus (John 3:5). And His command to the Apostles was: “Go into the whole world and preach the Gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he who does not believe” (and, by inference, is not baptized) “shall be condemned” (Mark 16: 15-16).

** There is no “if” or “maybe” about those two statements; no way around them.

(The Catechism’s section on Baptism also describes this requirement; see numbers 1257-1261.)

beginningcatholic.com/baptism.html

 

[TMC]

Here is what I was taught, if you were taught something different then go with that.

The Church teaches us that Baptism is necessary for salvation and unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Baptism is necessary for salvation for anyone who has heard the Gospel of Christ and has the possibility of requesting Baptism.

If a man has lived to be a hundred and had a healthy and “successful” life, it means nothing without Baptism. Once he dies, how could health or worldly success matter at all if this person has missed out on the one thing for which he was made—eternal union with God?

There is no escaping the absolute necessity of Baptism.

**“Unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God,” Jesus told Nicodemus (John 3:5). And His command to the Apostles was: “Go into the whole world and preach the Gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he who does not believe” (and, by inference, is not baptized) “shall be condemned” (Mark 16: 15-16).

** There is no “if” or “maybe” about those two statements; no way around them.

(The Catechism’s section on Baptism also describes this requirement; see numbers 1257-1261.)

beginningcatholic.com/baptism.html

The Catechism, the Dogmatic Constitution and the Pope are all crystal clear. The normative path to salvation is Christian baptism, but the unbaptized, and even atheists, can be saved. That is the Church’s actual teaching. Again, you are free to dissent from this teaching, but let’s not pretend that it is unclear or optional.

 

[JosieN]

The Catechism, the Dogmatic Constitution and the Pope are all crystal clear. The normative path to salvation is Christian baptism, but the unbaptized, and even atheists, can be saved. That is the Church’s actual teaching. Again, you are free to dissent from this teaching, but let’s not pretend that it is unclear or optional.

The important thing is for us to believe in Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life. " Agreed?

“We also know that the Son of God has come and has given us discernment to know the one who is true. And we are in the one who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life” ** 1 John 5:20.

**

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Here is what I was taught, if you were taught something different then go with that.

The Church teaches us that Baptism is necessary for salvation and unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Baptism is necessary for salvation for anyone who has heard the Gospel of Christ and has the possibility of requesting Baptism.

If a man has lived to be a hundred and had a healthy and “successful” life, it means nothing without Baptism. Once he dies, how could health or worldly success matter at all if this person has missed out on the one thing for which he was made—eternal union with God?

There is no escaping the absolute necessity of Baptism.

**“Unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God,” Jesus told Nicodemus (John 3:5). And His command to the Apostles was: “Go into the whole world and preach the Gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he who does not believe” (and, by inference, is not baptized) “shall be condemned” (Mark 16: 15-16).

** There is no “if” or “maybe” about those two statements; no way around them.

(The Catechism’s section on Baptism also describes this requirement; see numbers 1257-1261.)

beginningcatholic.com/baptism.html

So you are declaring yourself to break faith with the Pope and to go with your own interpretation when it is he alone and he with the college of bishops who teach what emerges from the depositum fidei…the deposit of the faith entrusted to the Church’s Magisterium.

Which, in essence, is what you have been doing anyway throughout this thread…by the way you have formulated your “questions” and also in trying to retreat to texts of past centuries – rather than submitting and embracing the authoritative and authentic expression of the faith through the contemporary ecclesiastical formulations. In this, you are not expressing your submission to the Successor of Peter today and the College of Bishops today. Individual members of the Church do not look to texts of the past of which you make yourself the arbiter…or a Tradition, the elements of which you decide, that is separated from the living Magisterium of the Church that exists in the age in which we actually live.

Again as Pope Saint John Paul II articulated:

"…an incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition. Incomplete, because it does not take sufficiently into account the living character of Tradition, which, as the Second Vatican Council clearly taught, "comes from the apostles and progresses in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. There is a growth in insight into the realities and words that are being passed on. This comes about in various ways /…/ But especially contradictory is a notion of Tradition which opposes the universal Magisterium of the Church possessed by the Bishop of Rome and the Body of Bishops. It is impossible to remain faithful to the Tradition while breaking the ecclesial bond with him to whom, in the person of the Apostle Peter, Christ himself entrusted the ministry of unity in his Church
And with that, I see no further point in my having further conversation with you. You are separating yourself from submission to the Magisterium. I hope the Lord’s grace touches you so that you may come fully embrace the person and teaching of the Vicar of Christ: our Holy Father Pope Francis.

You have wonderful bishops and priests in Canada – as well as gifted theologians from whom you could learn very very much.

 

[JosieN]

So you are declaring yourself to break faith with the Pope and to go with your own interpretation when it is he alone and he with the college of bishops who teach what emerges from the depositum fidei…the deposit of the faith entrusted to the Church’s Magisterium.

Which, in essence, is what you have been doing anyway throughout this thread…by the way you have formulated your “questions” and also in trying to retreat to texts of past centuries – rather than submitting and embracing the authoritative and authentic expression of the faith through the contemporary ecclesiastical formulations. In this, you are not expressing your submission to the Successor of Peter today and the College of Bishops today. Individual members of the Church do not look to texts of the past of which you make yourself the arbiter…or a Tradition, the elements of which you decide, that is separated from the living Magisterium of the Church that exists in the age in which we actually live.

Again as Pope Saint John Paul II articulated:

"…an incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition. Incomplete, because it does not take sufficiently into account the living character of Tradition, which, as the Second Vatican Council clearly taught, "comes from the apostles and progresses in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. There is a growth in insight into the realities and words that are being passed on. This comes about in various ways /…/ But especially contradictory is a notion of Tradition which opposes the universal Magisterium of the Church possessed by the Bishop of Rome and the Body of Bishops. It is impossible to remain faithful to the Tradition while breaking the ecclesial bond with him to whom, in the person of the Apostle Peter, Christ himself entrusted the ministry of unity in his Church
And with that, I see no further point in my having further conversation with you. You are separating yourself from submission to the Magisterium. I hope the Lord’s grace touches you so that you may come fully embrace the person and teaching of the Vicar of Christ: our Holy Father Pope Francis.

You have wonderful bishops and priests in Canada – as well as gifted theologians from whom you could learn very very much.

The thing is my faith is not just about following the pope, bishops, Magisterium, theologians, priests, the catechism, etc. My faith is based on my relationship with Jesus Christ and my love for Him. Jesus Christ gave us all we need for our salvation when He suffered and died for us. I hear so little about this on this forum. I hear so much talk about Pope John Paul II and Pope Francis, but so little about Jesus. I respect your opinion, but I love Jesus more, and feel I need to defend the truth as I see it. He died for me and for my salvation. His word is truth.

And His command to the Apostles was: “Go into the whole world and preach the Gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he who does not believe” (and, by inference, is not baptized) “shall be condemned” (Mark 16: 15-16).

I hope you can understand.

 

[Paganus]

I’m sorry, but that is not what the Church teaches. The Church teaches that salvation is available to all of good will. Here is what the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church says (bolding is mine):

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html

Here is what the Catechism says (bolding mine):

Here is what Pope Francis says:

en.radiovaticana.va/storico/2013/05/22/pope_at_mass_culture_of_encounter_is_the_foundation_of_peace/en1-694445

So we have an apparent but not necessarily actual contradiction between the Catechism of the Catholic Church and a bit of a speech by Pope Francis. If, in fact, there was an actual contradiction in this teaching, the Catechism would take precedence over an informal remark, unless of course, the Holy Father wishes to impart his new teaching ex cathedra.

However, let’s take a look at what the Holy Father actually said, somewhat more completely:

*“Instead,” the Pope continued, “the Lord has created us in His image and likeness, and has given us this commandment in the depths of our heart: do good and do not do evil”:

"The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all! And we all have a duty to do good. And this commandment for everyone to do good, I think, is a beautiful path towards peace. If we, each doing our own part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently, little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: we need that so much. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: we will meet one another there.”*

This is, of course, not a beautiful or even clear example of English rhetoric. Instead the translation is awkward and ungainly. However, based on this snip, it would appear that these words about the Blood of Christ were not intended to alter our understanding of the economy of salvation in any way, but were merely to serve to offer redemption through the Blood of Christ as an intellectually desirable consideration to non-Catholics as well as to excite the imagination of Catholics and inflame their desire to perform charitable works.

The primary thrust seems to be that if someone pursues the good, they will eventually find the ultimate good, God himself. And that is a very Catholic idea.

 

[TMC]

The important thing is for us to believe in Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life. " Agreed?

“We also know that the Son of God has come and has given us discernment to know the one who is true. And we are in the one who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life” ** 1 John 5:20.

**

That is certainly the “born again” position. I’ll say it again, you are free to believe what you want. If the question is what does the Church teach, that has been answered.

 

[TMC]

So we have an apparent but not necessarily actual contradiction between the Catechism of the Catholic Church and a bit of a speech by Pope Francis. If, in fact, there was an actual contradiction in this teaching, the Catechism would take precedence over an informal remark, unless of course, the Holy Father wishes to impart his new teaching ex cathedra.

However, let’s take a look at what the Holy Father actually said, somewhat more completely:

*“Instead,” the Pope continued, “the Lord has created us in His image and likeness, and has given us this commandment in the depths of our heart: do good and do not do evil”:

"The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all! And we all have a duty to do good. And this commandment for everyone to do good, I think, is a beautiful path towards peace. If we, each doing our own part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently, little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: we need that so much. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: we will meet one another there.”*

This is, of course, not a beautiful or even clear example of English rhetoric. Instead the translation is awkward and ungainly. However, based on this snip, it would appear that these words about the Blood of Christ were not intended to alter our understanding of the economy of salvation in any way, but were merely to serve to offer redemption through the Blood of Christ as an intellectually desirable consideration to non-Catholics as well as to excite the imagination of Catholics and inflame their desire to perform charitable works.

The primary thrust seems to be that if someone pursues the good, they will eventually find the ultimate good, God himself. And that is a very Catholic idea.

I agree that there is no conflict between what Pope Francis is saying and Catholic teaching.