What is a Non-Catholic?

[zange]

MrS:

Yes, you are right…but the question is What is a non-Catholic. And all of [3] qualify.

Q?? Are there non-Catholics or non-catholics in Heaven?http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon6.gif

MrS

yes, all of [3] qualify as non-Catholic. Good. So, baptism is really not the issue. Why are people in this link so concerned about who is a Catholic and who is not? At least your three part system allows for less than perfect people (2) to “be” Catholic.
I wonder who can actually follow (not just accept) ALL the teachings of the Church. God knows I try to follow all the teachings, and I accept them all, but I always fall short.
Am I constantly moving in and out of the Catholic church? I guess this gets close to your question about non-Catholics, non-catholics in Heaven. When I sin, do I cease being Catholic/catholic? Really.

 

[MrS]

zange:

yes, all of [3] qualify as non-Catholic. Good. So, baptism is really not the issue. Why are people in this link so concerned about who is a Catholic and who is not? At least your three part system allows for less than perfect people (2) to “be” Catholic.
I wonder who can actually follow (not just accept) ALL the teachings of the Church. God knows I try to follow all the teachings, and I accept them all, but I always fall short.
Am I constantly moving in and out of the Catholic church? I guess this gets close to your question about non-Catholics, non-catholics in Heaven. When I sin, do I cease being Catholic/catholic? Really.

Only one Lady I can think of.http://forums.catholic-questions.or...atholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon14.gif

Pat Madrid was talking to an audience which included lots of Protestants. As I remember, he said things that prompted the question “Gee, Mr Madrid, do you think there is anyone in heaven who is not Catholic?”

His answer was that he believed that everyone in Heaven was Catholic. At death, we see the beatific vision, and are presented with the deposit of Faith. We understand One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism and become full members of the only Church Jesus planned for all mankind. Yes, everyone in heaven is Catholic.
But…
Everyone in hell is Catholic too. They too, at death, saw the beatific vision, were presented with the whole deposit of Faith, and finally understood One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism. Alas, for whatever reason, they rejected their inheiritance and are eternally damned, but Catholic just the same.

So all those detractors of our Faith, as well as the greatest saints, are or will be Catholic.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon10.gif

MrShttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon14.gif

 

[MariaG]

This discussion reminds of Saint and saint. In the Catholic church although we are all saints, in the biblical meaning (and according to the Catechism as well), Saint has become reserved for a special kind of believer. Custom has dictated word usage.

In the same manner Catholic and catholic have become used. Catholic being reserved for those who practice the Catholic religion and look to the pope as the Vicar of Christ. To try to differentiate between those who are practicing Catholic Christians and those who are Christian but not Catholic, catholic has become a way of referring to this group of Christians in some cases. Custom and media have come together to make the distinction in this manner.

 

[RobedWithLight]

Wildgraywolf:

A non-Catholic is anyone who is not baptized. All validly baptized Protestants are Catholics too, but to varying degrees are not in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church.

Your first sentence would have been correct. but your second statement may be debatable, since I don’t think Evangelical Protestants and Fundamentalists would agree with you that they are likewise “Catholic”. Some of them regard Catholicism per se as akin to paganism.

Gerry

 

[Beaver]

zange:

yes, all of [3] qualify as non-Catholic. Good. So, baptism is really not the issue.

Baptism is an issue because of orginal sin.

zange:

Why are people in this link so concerned about who is a Catholic and who is not? At least your three part system allows for less than perfect people (2) to “be” Catholic.
I wonder who can actually follow (not just accept) ALL the teachings of the Church. God knows I try to follow all the teachings, and I accept them all, but I always fall short.
Am I constantly moving in and out of the Catholic church? I guess this gets close to your question about non-Catholics, non-catholics in Heaven. When I sin, do I cease being Catholic/catholic? Really.

An unrepented mortal sin does cause one to cease being catholic. I suggest an instant act of contrition to show repentance and then go to confession as soon as possible.

I do not believe most of us would commit a mortal sin without repenting at once. Humility would cause us to understand our error, recognize our condition, and repent. Less we think we are God.

 

[zange]

Beaver:

Baptism is an issue because of orginal sin.

An unrepented mortal sin does cause one to cease being catholic. I suggest an instant act of contrition to show repentance and then go to confession as soon as possible.

I do not believe most of us would commit a mortal sin without repenting at once. Humility would cause us to understand our error, recognize our condition, and repent. Less we think we are God.

What I meant was that baptism is not an issue in defining a non-Catholic, since other Christians who have a valid (recognized by the Catholic Church) baptism would not be considered by themselves or most people as “Catholic”. If they want to become members of the Catholic Church, they need not get re-baptised.
That’s what I mean by “not an issue” (in defining a non-Catholic)
Did you suggest an instant act of contrition for me, because you thought I was asking what I should do because I was in a state of mortal sin? If so, LOL. (I have been, but not now). My point (I don’t think I was limiting it to mortal sin) was that one could be a Catholic and be in error about the Church’s teachings, either in practice or in understanding. That FOLLOWING the Church’s teachings was not the litmus test (even with baptism) for determining whether one was a Catholic or not. The question posed was the difference between Catholic and non-Catholic. And again, mortal sin ipso facto doesn’t define the difference. (there are non-Catholics in a state of mortal sin and non-Catholics not in a state of mortal sin). Here we are skating around the old doctrine of “no salvation outside the Church”. But this is a tricky dogma to understand correctly. Certainly, it doesn’t mean that all Catholics are in a state of grace, and all non-Catholics are in a state of mortal sin. I think Mr. S (?) pointed this out correctly above in his distinction between “Catholics in a state of grace” and “Catholics not in a state of grace”.

 

[larryo]

Per the Catholic Encyclopedia, a member of the Catholic Church has been understood in every period of her history as a living community, many members united by one Faith, professing one doctrine, sharing the same seven sacraments, and governed by the Vicar of Christ–the pope–on earth and the successors of the apostles–the bishops.

Therefore, a non-Catholic is one who professes a different doctrine, does not share the same seven sacraments, and does not submit to the authority of the pope and the bishops.

 

[Evan]

Wildgraywolf:

A non-Catholic is anyone who is not baptized. All validly baptized Protestants are Catholics too, but to varying degrees are not in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church.

Quite Right (please recall the three forms of baptism). For there is no salvation outside the Church and yet many of our Protestant friends are saved. Ask a Baptist or Evangelical if they are saved and they will answer in the affirmative.

At the Easter Vigil, when new members are joining the Church, no-one from another faith that has a valid baptism are brought into the Church. They are already in it.

The only sacraments they recieve are Confession, Conformation and Communion. NOT the Sacrament which brings one into the church.

A heretic that is excommunicated, does not cease to be a member. They are simply not in full communion, only needing to go to Confession to be back in full standing.

Knowledge of membership does not make one a member nor does lack of knowledge exclude one.

A Catholic is a member of the Body of Christ. A non-Catholic is one who is not a member.

 

[wisdom_3_5]

dhgray:

Ok, go tell the Baptists that they are catholic and watch their reaction:bigyikes:

I don’t think the Baptists use the Trinitarian formula.

 

[SedesDomi]

wisdom 3:5:

I don’t think the Baptists use the Trinitarian formula.

Baptists don’t use the Trinitarian formula???:ehh: They most certainly do.

 

[Beaver]

zange:

What I meant was that baptism is not an issue in defining a non-Catholic, since other Christians who have a valid (recognized by the Catholic Church) baptism would not be considered by themselves or most people as “Catholic”. If they want to become members of the Catholic Church, they need not get re-baptised.
That’s what I mean by “not an issue” (in defining a non-Catholic)
Did you suggest an instant act of contrition for me, because you thought I was asking what I should do because I was in a state of mortal sin? If so, LOL. (I have been, but not now). My point (I don’t think I was limiting it to mortal sin) was that one could be a Catholic and be in error about the Church’s teachings, either in practice or in understanding. That FOLLOWING the Church’s teachings was not the litmus test (even with baptism) for determining whether one was a Catholic or not. The question posed was the difference between Catholic and non-Catholic. And again, mortal sin ipso facto doesn’t define the difference. (there are non-Catholics in a state of mortal sin and non-Catholics not in a state of mortal sin). Here we are skating around the old doctrine of “no salvation outside the Church”. But this is a tricky dogma to understand correctly. Certainly, it doesn’t mean that all Catholics are in a state of grace, and all non-Catholics are in a state of mortal sin. I think Mr. S (?) pointed this out correctly above in his distinction between “Catholics in a state of grace” and “Catholics not in a state of grace”.

A father is in the house looking out the picture window, observes his son kicking the dog. He call his son into the house and asks the son what is it the son has done. Do you really believe the son can lie to the father. God the Father looks at us throught the picture window of life, but it appears you believe you can lie to Him and get away with it.

 

[zange]

Beaver:

A father is in the house looking out the picture window, observes his son kicking the dog. He call his son into the house and asks the son what is it the son has done. Do you really believe the son can lie to the father. God the Father looks at us throught the picture window of life, but it appears you believe you can lie to Him and get away with it.

Beaver, that’s a terrible thing to accuse me (someone you don’t even know) of. I don’t know where you got this idea that I am trying to lie to God, my Father, and even think I can “get away with it.” I denounce that idea in the strongest terms. Please explain yourself.

I am saying that my understanding, from studying the Catechism and the use of my own (limited) God-given reason, is that sin does not prevent one from “being” Catholic. Nor does one’s failure to follow ALL of the Church’s teachings constitute mortal sin. For example, the Church teaches us that detraction and calumny are sins (Catechism #2479). I accept that as true. I also admit I have a particular problem with it. But I don’t think I cease being Catholic every time I commit this sin. If so, then (as Mr. S I think it was, pointed out earlier) the only “Catholic” may have been the Blessed Virgin. We might have an interesting discussion if we limited this “sin” of failing to follow the Church’s teachings to those failures that are “mortal sins”, but I don’t believe I have.

Second, I do resist this strange effort on the part of some here to define non-Catholic Christians as “Catholic” mainly because of our belief that we are members of Jesus’s one, true Church, and that we recognize their baptism in the name of the Trinity. I’m starting to see what the agenda is, but I think it is misguided. NOT sinful, NOT lying, etc. Perhaps we disagree on that philosophical matter.

But how do YOU conclude that I’m consciously lying to God and “trying to get away with it”? You presumably know what is in my conscience better than I do. Please tell me, because if you are right I’ll be in confession asap.

 

[larryo]

Evan:

Quite Right (please recall the three forms of baptism). For there is no salvation outside the Church and yet many of our Protestant friends are saved. Ask a Baptist or Evangelical if they are saved and they will answer in the affirmative.

At the Easter Vigil, when new members are joining the Church, no-one from another faith that has a valid baptism are brought into the Church. They are already in it.

The only sacraments they recieve are Confession, Conformation and Communion. NOT the Sacrament which brings one into the church.

A heretic that is excommunicated, does not cease to be a member. They are simply not in full communion, only needing to go to Confession to be back in full standing.

Knowledge of membership does not make one a member nor does lack of knowledge exclude one.

A Catholic is a member of the Body of Christ. A non-Catholic is one who is not a member.

Quite wrong. Baptized non-Catholics may be Christian but they are not Catholic. Words have meaning and the meaning of Catholic is one who shares the same doctrine, the same 7 sacraments, and is united with all other members of the Catholic Church under the pope. All Catholics are Christian but not all Christians are Catholic.

 

[Brendan]

Wildgraywolf:

A non-Catholic is anyone who is not baptized. All validly baptized Protestants are Catholics too, but to varying degrees are not in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church.

Not quite true.

A person baptized after the age of reason outside of the Catholic Church recieves a valid Baptism, in that the idelible character of the Sacrament is now writted on their soul, but it is Church teaching that this Sacrament is without Grace.

They do not enter the Church, there is no Salvic Grace present. It does, however, allow the person to avail themselves of the Sacrement of Reconcilliation, thereby gaining the Salvic Grace that was missing when they were Baptised.

 

[Beaver]

zange:

Beaver, that’s a terrible thing to accuse me (someone you don’t even know) of. I don’t know where you got this idea that I am trying to lie to God, my Father, and even think I can “get away with it.” I denounce that idea in the strongest terms. Please explain yourself.

I am saying that my understanding, from studying the Catechism and the use of my own (limited) God-given reason, is that sin does not prevent one from “being” Catholic. Nor does one’s failure to follow ALL of the Church’s teachings constitute mortal sin. For example, the Church teaches us that detraction and calumny are sins (Catechism #2479). I accept that as true. I also admit I have a particular problem with it. But I don’t think I cease being Catholic every time I commit this sin. If so, then (as Mr. S I think it was, pointed out earlier) the only “Catholic” may have been the Blessed Virgin. We might have an interesting discussion if we limited this “sin” of failing to follow the Church’s teachings to those failures that are “mortal sins”, but I don’t believe I have.

Second, I do resist this strange effort on the part of some here to define non-Catholic Christians as “Catholic” mainly because of our belief that we are members of Jesus’s one, true Church, and that we recognize their baptism in the name of the Trinity. I’m starting to see what the agenda is, but I think it is misguided. NOT sinful, NOT lying, etc. Perhaps we disagree on that philosophical matter.

But how do YOU conclude that I’m consciously lying to God and “trying to get away with it”? You presumably know what is in my conscience better than I do. Please tell me, because if you are right I’ll be in confession asap.

CCC#1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it cause exclusion from God’s kingdom and eternal death of hell, for all freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge the act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgement of persons to jutice and mercy of God.

CCC#1863 Venial sin weakens charity: it manifests a disordered affection for created goods; it impedes the soul’s progress in the exercise of virtues and the pratice of mortal good; it merits temporal punishment. Deliberate and unrepented venial sin disposes us little by little to commit mortal sin. However venial sin does not breal covenant with God. With God’s grace it is humanly reparable. “Venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, freindship with God, charity, and consequently enternal happiness.”

 

[zange]

Beaver, What gives? You merely cite the Catechism on the difference between mortal and venial sin, in response to my reply to your accusation that I’m in danger of mortal sin. I know, and accept, what the Catechism says here on the difference. My question to you was why you felt I was somehow responsible for sin.

Would you please answer my question? If you think somehow I’ve placed myself in danger of sin, perhaps mortal sin, tell me how. Don’t just quote the Catechism at me on the difference between mortal and venial sin. I understand the difference.

You’ve really gone out on a limb in an accusation against me.
I deserve an answer. If you are the kind of Catholic friend you claim to be, you owe me an explanation for the allegation you’ve made against me. Where do you think I am sinfully wrong?
What sinful act is it that you see here, that you accuse me of?

 

[Beaver]

zange:

Beaver, What gives? You merely cite the Catechism on the difference between mortal and venial sin, in response to my reply to your accusation that I’m in danger of mortal sin. I know, and accept, what the Catechism says here on the difference. My question to you was why you felt I was somehow responsible for sin.

Would you please answer my question? If you think somehow I’ve placed myself in danger of sin, perhaps mortal sin, tell me how. Don’t just quote the Catechism at me on the difference between mortal and venial sin. I understand the difference.

You’ve really gone out on a limb in an accusation against me.
I deserve an answer. If you are the kind of Catholic friend you claim to be, you owe me an explanation for the allegation you’ve made against me. Where do you think I am sinfully wrong?
What sinful act is it that you see here, that you accuse me of?

CCC#1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it cause exclusion from God’s kingdom and eternal death of hell, for all freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge the act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgement of persons to jutice and mercy of God.

My friend when one is a catholic, he is in God’s kingdom. So to say one is excluded from God’s kingdom is to say he is no longer a catholic. Mortal sin is very serious, that is why we have the sacraments. Baptism makes us members of this kingdom and confession restores the lost graces of baptism, after such a greavious sin has been commited. So when you said mortal sin has nothing to do with be catholic, I responded. I know the seriousness of this sin, and** it appeared to me that you did not.**

 

[LoneWolf]

“A Non-Catholic is anyone who has not been baptisted in the Name of The Father, and The Son, and The Holy Spirit.”
snickers wow, I’m Mormon and thats how I was baptized. Does that make me Catholic too? lol

 

[zange]

Beaver:

My friend when one is a catholic, he is in God’s kingdom. So to say one is excluded from God’s kingdom is to say he is no longer a catholic. Mortal sin is very serious, that is why we have the sacraments. Baptism makes us members of this kingdom and confession restores the lost graces of baptism, after such a greavious sin has been commited. So when you said mortal sin has nothing to do with be catholic, I responded. I know the seriousness of this sin, and** it appeared to me that you did not.**

My point is that Catholics commit mortal sin (you would say they cease being Catholic at that point, and then are Catholic again after confession, I think? More on this below), and non-Catholics commit mortal sin. Hence, I concluded that mortal sin is not what defines the difference between Catholics and non-Catholics.

Beaver, can we agree on this much? Debating ideas in good faith (meaning, trying to maintain faith with the Church while using our fallible human reason) is not a sin, let alone a mortal one.

Now, the difference between our interpretations may come down to this: I don’t think “being” Catholic means one is (necessarily) in God’s kingdom. We Catholics HOPE we will be saved, but there is no way to know that until after this life is over. I do think being a faithful, active Catholic is the best, most reliable method of reaching Heaven. But the Church does not teach that Jews, for example, must be baptised to be saved (“The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God’s revelation in the Old Covenant.” #839) We cannot say, for example, that ALL Jews are in a state of mortal sin.

You seem to say that being saved and being Catholic are one and the same thing. Even the Church doesn’t teach this, as I understand the CC. So, it appears you are setting up your own subjective definition of what a Catholic is (“one who is saved/in God’s kingdom”). I believe the Church allows the possibility that some will be saved who never were members of the Catholic Church #847,848, but also #1259, #1261), never even were baptized, and some (many?) who are baptised, receive the sacraments, attend Mass regularly may not be saved.

Note my language, “may”, “possibility”. Only God can determine who will be saved, and He can save whomever (baptised or not) He wishes. Most of us would be much wiser to take the surer route through the Church. I’m certainly not recommending leading a sinful life, outside the Church, and then testing my theory to see what God does with you!

But I don’t believe anything I’ve said or done here constitutes a sin, mortal or venial, on my part. Unless I have spoken to you without due respect, and thus been guilt of a venial sin. If so, I do apologize. And I may be mistaken in my interpretation and understandings of these teachings. But that is not a sin, certainly not a mortal sin.