Aaaand the cafe is open for business!
Posted on 12/08/2009 11:41:52 AM PST by Gamecock
I just came from a funeral service for an aunt of mine who was a staunch Catholic. I came out of that religion about 25 years ago after reading for myself what the Bible had to say. My question surrounds the actuality of salvation for all the millions who still practice Mary worship and so forth. Knowing that one cannot serve two masters, I wonder at how it is possible that the aforementioned can really experience Christ in a saving way, while they continue to believe that the church of Rome is solely responsible for their eternal welfare.
Answer:
Greetings in Christ Jesus our Lord and only Savior. Thank you for your question.
Unless a person is clearly outside the pale of the Christian faith, I do not believe that you can judge the "actuality" or "reality" of someone's salvation. You may judge the "credibility" of their faith; or you may question the "probability" of someone's salvation. You may also ask, as you have done, "how it is possible that the aforementioned can really experience Christ in a saving way."
None of us, however, can truly say that we are perfect in knowledge or practice. We are always growing both in wisdom and in the grace of God. Is it possible for someone who prays to Mary to be a true Christian? In other words, can someone who is truly saved be in error on such an issue?
Conscious compromise of God's truth can be serious and deadly, but we also see from Scripture that in his mercy God may (and does) choose to accept less than perfect understanding and obedience, even of his own people. (Indeed, isn't the salvation and the perseverance of the saints dependent upon that fact?) There will be growth in understanding and holiness, but perfection must await our going to be with Jesus or His return to take us unto himself (see 1 John 3:2).
In the Old Testament, consider Asa in 1 Kings 15. He removed the idols from the land, but he allowed the high places to remain. The high places were clearly unacceptable. But the text states that Asa was loyal to the Lord his entire life. How could this be? Had he not seriously compromised?
What about the New Testament? Consider the Corinthians. Was the church at Corinth an exemplary church? Did they not have many doctrinal problems, e.g., concerning the Lord's Supper and the doctrine of the resurrection? (See 1 Cor. 11 and 1 Cor. 15.) Did even the apostles fully understand? Even though what they wrote was protected from error, did they not grow and mature in their own understanding and obedience? Wasn't it necessary at one point, for instance, for Paul to rebuke Peter for his inconsistency? (See Gal. 2.)
My point is not to defend the doctrinal aberrations of Rome. I do not believe such is possible. I think, however, that people generally follow their leaders. They learn from them; they consider their arguments rational and coherent.
For example, consider devotion to Mary. I read Jarislov Pellikan's Mary Through the Centuries and I cannot get past page 10 before I am wondering why the author is so blind to the fallacies of his arguments. However, if I were not being so critical and I were already predisposed to the position, then his arguments would perhaps seem irrefutable. So then, we should boldly, patiently, and compassionately discuss these matters with our loved ones, praying that the Holy Spirit will grant them more understanding.
Whatever we may judge in terms of the "actuality" or "probability" or "possibility" of a person's salvation at the end of life is, in the end, academic, for God is the one who can look at the heart and only he can truly judge. (He is the One, in fact, who has chosen his elect.) "It is appointed to man once to die, and after that comes judgment" (Heb. 9:27), but "Today is the day of salvation" (Heb. 3:13). We should work, therefore, the works of him who sent us while it is light and point our neighbors and loved ones to Christ.
For myself, I too was a Roman Catholic. In the past six months, I have attended the funeral of two uncles and one aunt whom I loved very much. I had opportunity at each funeral to speak a word of testimony regarding the Savior. I stood in the pulpit of the church in which I had served mass as a young boy and in my eulogies spoke of my faith in Christ.
Was it as detailed as I wish it could have been? No, but I am thankful for the opportunity God gave. Do I believe that my family members went to heaven? For one I have hope; for the others, I have little hope. Upon what is my hope based? It is always and only grounded in Christ and the Gospel.
We may define Christianity broadly by including as Christians all who confess the Apostles' Creed. We may define Christianity narrowly by including as Christians only those who confess our particular denominational creed. We need to exercise care, because, if we are too narrow, we may find ourselves excluding someone like Augustine. On the other hand, if we are too broad, we may find ourselves including many who should be excluded.
Personally, therefore, I do not judge. I have either greater or lesser hope. For example, I have greater hope for my Roman Catholic family members who ignorantly follow their leaders without thinking. Many times I find these to be at least open to discussion regarding the Gospel. However, I have lesser hope for people who are self-consciously Roman Catholic; that is, they understand the issues yet continue in the way of the Papacy.
I recommend that you read the book Come out from among Them by John Calvin. I found it very helpful and it addresses somewhat the question that you have raised.
I hope that my answer helps. You are free to write for clarification. May our Lord bless you.
Sorry about that.
Aaaand the cafe is open for business!
Even having read the article from my decidedly confessional Lutheran point of view, your comment may be overly polite.
I see our taglines are similar.
We atheists have been around a lot longer than that.
Sounds like the first bishops, to me.
So what radio stations do they they get in heaven?
You have described the Catholic Church.
No problem.
Aw, that’s so cute. You’ve kept a dossier on me.
Glad to know I’m that effective.
Interesting term. I've always used "Churchanity" (the worship of the denomination or the politics of the church over Christ).
Bulls don’t use potties.
Which on the one hand means that it was not taught as part of the RCIA education classes; but also, I'm not sure that it even attempts to elevate Mary to the same level as Jesus.
Without question, Mary is among the dearest and most celebrated people in the church.
But I understood the OP to mean that Catholics consider some humans (i.e. Mary, the Pope) to be on the same level as Jesus. I have not been taught that in the church; I see no evidence of it during mass; and I have not seen anything that is written to give me that idea.
Maybe I'm just not paying attention like some people here. When I was a Protestant, I never felt ill will towards Catholics; and as a Catholic, I find no quarrel with any of the other Christian denominations.
Perhaps, it's true as they say, "the devil is in the details", because in general, I find no ill will amongst the different ways of practicing Christianity.
Irving's Law, First Clause has been invoked. r9etb forfeits all points. Gamecock wins the round by default.
Yes, she is. Christ was raised from the dead, but not His mother.
“...all the millions who still practice Mary worship...”
Huh? Catholics don’t worship Mary. You can tell by the lack of Catholics saying they worship Mary and by all the Catholics who say they don’t worship Mary. It really is pretty simple.
Freegards
No, the biblical term is “Christian,” not “Catholic.” “Christian” is found three times in Scripture; “Catholic” is found not once.
If you define “Catholic” as the Church Universal, then, yes, I have to agree with you. But if you define “Catholic” as the body of believers who find their “home in Rome,” then, no.
May Rome decrease and Christ increase.
so to you, salvation means eternal death?
You know, Gamecock, considering our common enemies, the sectarian disrespect is a poor sideshow. Doing the devil’s work for him is not going to get you to heaven.
Christianity has a series of essential doctrines (virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection, salvation, etc.), and a LOT of debatable doctrines (i.e. doctrines where healthy, honest disagreement among Christians absolutely does not threaten Salvation). Rapture (pre-trib, post-trib, mid-trib, none, blah, blah), confession, the divine authority of the papacy, the specifics of the prophecies of Revelation, etc. all seem to me to fall into the category of debatable doctrines — there can be honest disagreement among faithful Christians.
So long as a person hits the big stuff, I don’t think it matters much where they fall on the small stuff. His Grace will no doubt cleanse us of the doctrinal errors that I’m sure we’ve each made.
SnakeDoc
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.