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.
Great!
The Catholic Church is the church founded by Christ, protected by the Holy Spirit to this day. I'm Catholic and I've never been to Rome.
>>Considering the Papists around here think Proddies are all lost that is quite funny<<
I’m proud to be Papist, got the bumper sticker to prove it.
Every Catholic believes what the Vatican states.
It is possible, according to Catholic doctrine, to affirm correctly that the Church of Christ is present and operative in the churches and ecclesial Communities not yet fully in communion with the Catholic Church, on account of the elements of sanctification and truth that are present in them.[9] Nevertheless, the word “subsists” can only be attributed to the Catholic Church alone precisely because it refers to the mark of unity that we profess in the symbols of the faith (I believe... in the “one” Church); and this “one” Church subsists in the Catholic Church.
I know some believe that Catholics think that “Proddies are all lost” but we actually believe that you are Brothers and Sisters in Christ.
Wish those that were not Catholic thought the same of us. It always makes me giggle when certain posters call non-Catholics “Brother in Christ” or “Sister in Christ” but never calls a Catholic that.
Don’t make me go David Byrne on ya....
The body dies. The spirit lives on. Mary’s body died. Her spirit lives on, just as everyone’s spirit lives on.
Christ, on the other hand, was raised to life and remains alive, and He is sufficient to intercede on our behalf. Christ is sufficient.
I do not talk to dead people. I talk with the living Lord.
Do you talk to any other dead people, Hegewisch Dupa?
I wasn't aware of any competition between Christ and the capital municipality of Italy, but sure, Christ first!
Somehow I don't feel like I lost at all.... But then, I don't put my faith in Mr. Irving, nor in smug reformed theologians.
“Can Catholics be Christians?”
Of course. The Holy Catholic Church is the Church that Jesus founded.
The real question is, “Can non-Catholics be Christians?”
They're not dead.
Superbly stated. Nothing left for me to say.
Agree 100%.
No, dear.
>>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.<<
You, my FRiend are quite righteous! Lord Love you!
Hm. Then I guess I’m “Catholic.”
And I thank God for His Reformation of His Church, to correct all the heresies smuggled in during the previous centuries of biblical illiteracy.
Never said I talk to any. But at least we agree we are talking about the spirit, and not rapping with corpses.
Now you switch to the abuse, knowing you let a hint of your respect for me slip.
So sorry. LOL
The "reformation," so-called, was not "His" work.
What a gross misunderstanding of history, the bible, and the Caholic Church. I have always found the self-hating heretics to be the most disturbed of the religios fanatics.
I’m going to say “St Michael, the archangel...”
(Actually, that’s pretty cute.)
>> [...] If you are a Baptist, you owe the tenets of your denomination to John Smyth, who launched it in Amsterdam in 1605. [...] If you are a traditional Roman Catholic, you know that your Church was founded in the year 33 A.D. by Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
Most would argue that Christ founded the Christian church, not the Catholic church (a subset of Christianity). As a Baptist, I trace my church lineage to 33 A.D. just as you do. The fact that we separated from Catholicism does not necessarily mean we abandoned the church founded by Christ.
We simply disagreed with some of the fallible men that have run that church since Christ’s resurrection, and thus believe that the Catholic church departed from Christianity in some respects in the interim.
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.