Posted on 11/30/2005 6:41:45 PM PST by NYer
Refers to St. Augustine's Commentary on Psalm 136(137)
VATICAN CITY, NOV. 30, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Whoever seeks peace and the good of the community with a pure conscience, and keeps alive the desire for the transcendent, will be saved even if he lacks biblical faith, says Benedict XVI.
The Pope made this affirmation today at the general audience, commenting on a meditation written by St. Augustine (354-430).
On a rainy morning in Rome, the Holy Father's meditation, addressed to more than 23,000 people gathered in St. Peter's Square, concentrated on the suffering of the Jewish people in the Babylonian exile, expressed dramatically in Psalm 136(137).
The Pontiff referred to Augustine's commentary on this composition of the Jewish people, noting that this "Father of the Church introduces a surprising element of great timeliness."
Augustine "knows that also among the inhabitants of Babylon there are people who are committed to peace and the good of the community, despite the fact that they do not share the biblical faith, that they do not know the hope of the Eternal City to which we aspire," Benedict XVI stated.
"They have a spark of desire for the unknown, for the greatest, for the transcendent, for a genuine redemption," explained the Pope, quoting Augustine.
This spark
"And he says that among the persecutors, among the nonbelievers, there are people with this spark, with a kind of faith, of hope, in the measure that is possible for them in the circumstances in which they live," the Holy Father continued.
"With this faith in an unknown reality, they are really on the way to the authentic Jerusalem, to Christ," he clarified.
Continuing with his quotes from Augustine, the Pope added that "God will not allow them to perish with Babylon, having predestined them to be citizens of Jerusalem, on the condition, however, that, living in Babylon, they do not seek pride, outdated pomp and arrogance."
The Bishop of Rome concluded by inviting those present to pray to the Lord "that he will awaken in all of us this desire, this openness to God, and that those who do not know God may also be touched by his love, so that all of us journey together toward the definitive City and that the light of this City might also shine in our time and in our world."
You're right, Jews don't often obsess with salvation. But the author is no longer a professing Jew, he is a convert. What he gets into involving the Holocaust is a prelude for the more important stuff about the future conversion and salvation of the Jews foretold by St. Paul. The first third of the book is possibly the most excellent exposition of the Jewish understanding of the Messiah, the reasons for their 1st Century rejection of Jesus, and the Jewish-based Scriptural arguments for *why* Jesus is, in fact the Messiah that I have ever seen. It's no whine-fest by any means.
"But you are not putting this in the context of THIS thread about the Pope. In it, we are told that total unbelievers are acceptable and saved."
I didn't get the impression His Holiness was saying that. Perhaps I have misunderstood him.
"Can someone seriously propose, after that, that protestants, who are surely serious believers in our Lord, are lost?"
Oh I certainly think one can say it. In fact, perhaps with far more assurance than about those who know nothing of Christ and The Church. If The Truth is there to be seen and it is nevertheless rejected, thus preventing one from being in The Church, then The Church has always taught that anathemazation is to be expected. The Fathers are quite clear, and harsh, on this.
"As for all those who pretend to confess the sound Orthodox Faith, but are in communion with people who hold a different opinion, if they are forewarned and still remain stubborn, you must not only not be in communion with them, but you must not even call them brothers." +Basil the Great
"Contentions," he means, with heretics, in which he would not have us labor to no purpose, where nothing is to be gained, for they end in nothing. For when a man is perverted and predetermined not to change his mind, whatever may happen, why shouldest thou labor in vain, sowing upon a rock, when thou shouldest spend thy honorable toil upon thy own people, in discoursing with them upon almsgiving and every other virtue?
How then does he elsewhere say, "If God peradventure will give them repentance" (2 Tim. ii.25); but here, "A man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition reject, knowing that he that is such is subverted and sinneth, being condemned of himself"? In the former passage he speaks of the correction of those of whom he had hope, and who had simply made opposition. But when he is known and manifest to all, why dost thou contend in vain? why dost thou beat the air? What means, "being condemned of himself"? Because he cannot say that no one has told him, no one admonished him; since therefore after admonition he continues the same, he is self-condemned." +John Chrysostomos
"Even if one should give away all his possessions in the world, and yet be in communion with heresy, he cannot be a friend of God, but is rather an enemy." +Theodore the Studite
It is quite another thing entirely to observe pagans who haven't even the opportunity to reject The Truth and then collectively anathemize them. I do think it is important to note that +John Chrysostomos in his Sermon on Titus, quoted above, does in fact address "...those who had simply made opposition." Is that what Protestants do? I don't know the answer to that, Padre.
I stand corrected on my use of the word "universalism". Remember, I'm just the grandson of simple Greek peasants.
Don't forget the high church Anglicans. Also, most Lutheran synods suppose that Mary remained a virgin (including in the delivery), but would hesitate to say that salvation depends on that belief (hence Dogma).
I have an old (100 year old plus) Baltimore Catechism at home. Not sure how it ended up there, but the interesting thing is that the Eastern Orthodox are not considered to be a valid Church because they "Don't have the Pope as their head". If I paraphrased that right. So the view that the Eastern Orthodox is a valid Church is not as settled in the Roman Catholic Church as some suppose. In the Catholic Answers website there was a lone thread on this issue that ended badly and had to be locked down, with the many posts going against the Orthodox being a valid Church.
The Church, then they are not part of The Church. They may well be good Christian assemblies, but they are not part of The Church.
Would a Protestant need to be rebaptized then if they wanted to join the local Orthodox church?
My 1952 Catechism pretty much says the same thing. But, practically what does it mean to willfully reject? Near as I can figure, it is a person who knows or suspects something to be true, but rejects it nonetheless. But, who would do that even with a simple truth, let alone one that salvation may depend upon? I've never fully understood how we can know who isn't saved in the aggregate, if we can't know who is saved in the particular or singular.
All of the Latins on this thread will tell you I am no fan of +Augustine, and so I'm am certainly no expert on him, but I believe the Pope is refering to Book XVI, Chap. 4 of the City of God where +Augustine is speaking of the forfathers of the Jews in Babylon.
"And thus, although it is not expressly stated, that when the wicked were building Babylon there was a godly seed remaining, this indistinctness is intended to stimulate research rather than to elude it."
"I have an old (100 year old plus) Baltimore Catechism at home. Not sure how it ended up there, but the interesting thing is that the Eastern Orthodox are not considered to be a valid Church because they "Don't have the Pope as their head"."
100 years ago, Rome certainly held to that concept, and we that they were damnable heretics. In 1967 the mutual anathemas were lifted by the Pope and the EP. Since then we've worked out many of the issues which had heretofore divided us.
"In the Catholic Answers website there was a lone thread on this issue that ended badly and had to be locked down, with the many posts going against the Orthodox being a valid Church."
I'm not surprised. We have people even in canonical Orthodoxy who still think that Rome is the Queen of heretics but they are few and far between. Many, though not all, are converts, who, and I'll likely get flammed for this, carry with them a certain degree of the anti Catholicism of their former faiths.
" Would a Protestant need to be rebaptized then if they wanted to join the local Orthodox church?"
Depends on how they were baptized in the first place. Jaroslav Pelican, for example, didn't need to be "re-baptized"! :)
Jaroslav Pelican... I know that he was/is a scholar at Yale, but was/is he Lutheran?
I've always found the idea of purgatory fascinating. As you know, Orthodoxy doesn't hold by Orthodoxy, but we do believe that for 40 days after death, the soul is tested by demons, tested to see if we choose Christ, or our own little particular idols in life. We believe we can all pray for those souls and that all the angels and saints and particularly Panagia are there with those souls to strengthen them. Some Orthodox theologians call this the "Particular Judgment" to contrast it with the Final Judgment. In any event, even at the Final Judgment, the test isn't merit or good deeds versus evil deeds or beliefs, but rather how much like Christ we have become.
"Jaroslav Pelican... I know that he was/is a scholar at Yale, but was/is he Lutheran?"
A great Lutheran Theologian, world class in fact...and now Orthodox! :)
I think I find that concept as fascinating as you think purgatory is. I would assume the saints, the Panagia above all, aren't subjected to the Final Judgement, since they are already in Heaven.
We Orthodox are quite excited, in a cautious, Orthodox sort of way, about +BXVI, far more so than we were about his predecessor. +BXVI is the greatest, certainly the most profound, patristics scholar to sit on the throne of +Peter in well over 1000 years. This bodes well for the future. As I have said before, you Latins listen to this pope! You are hearing the words of a modern Father of the Church!
"I think I find that concept as fascinating as you think purgatory is. I would assume the saints, the Panagia above all, aren't subjected to the Final Judgement, since they are already in Heaven."
Never thought of that. Its easy with Panagia. As for the saints, well, God's ways are mysterious, aren't they! I am reminded of Merton's maxim, "The fooloishness of God is greater than the wisdom of men."
As you know, Orthodoxy doesn't hold by Orthodoxy, but we do believe that for 40 days after death, the soul is tested by demons, tested to see if we choose Christ, or our own little particular idols in life."
We don't hold by "purgatory", "purgatory"! I knew I shouldn't have started that Scotch...but its MacAllans. I couldn't resist it!:)
Moreover, with respect to the Gospels, the apostles declare that they do not preach cunningly devised fables but things that were witnessed, things that were on record, things that could be checked out. Any falsehoods could easily have been identified right then and there, and relegating Christianity to the dustbin of history as merely some obscure cult (of which many were in existance at that time).
And finally, what motivation would compell each and every one of the apostles to die for would otherwise be tantamount to a lie; except for John all the apostles died violent deaths. Its one thing to die for a lie in ignorance. But something possessed these guys to all come out on fire for the LORD after a particular day. Prior to that day, they'd all been hiding, in fear and absolute dejection (their perceived Messiah, or as some thought King of Israel), had been executed.
What was it that lit these guys, and how to reconcile that with normal human psychology? It certainly doesn't square with what happened to Stephen. And most definitely Paul is a most curious animal indeed. Because just who was Paul? Certainly, something absolutely remarkable, extraordinary and transformative occure with respect to him. In his own words he stated that he was akin to a wild boar rooting up the vineyards. He persecuted the early Church beyond comprehension. What he did makes the Inquisitors of the Middle Ages envious.
Anybody know anything about the nature and character of wild boar? Paul was the Jew's Jew. I'm certain that he most likely knew verbatim the Pentatuch by heart (and that would include not just the Decalogue, but the entire Law of over 500 commandments (I forget the exact number - I'm tempted to say the entire Law amounts to about 800 commandments).
Not just the empty tomb, but Paul, also, needs a very good explanation also.
You may (or may not) be interested to read that, when they're boiled down to their essence, there really are only TWO religions. Take your pick.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.