Expressing the belief that it was important for Christians to engage in "a sincere and rigorous dialogue" with atheists, Francis recalled Scalfari had asked him whether God forgave those "who do not believe and do not seek to believe".
"Given – and this is the fundamental thing – that God's mercy has no limits, if He is approached with a sincere and repentant heart," the pope wrote, "the question for those who do not believe in God is to abide by their own conscience. There is sin, also for those who have no faith, in going against one's conscience. Listening to it and abiding by it means making up one's mind about what is good and evil."
So now one's "conscience" rules supreme? What a dog's breakfast! I know plenty of atheists who claim a "clean conscience". I guess they are good to go then? God's mercy will honor their conviction of conscience that there is no God? Does this apply to Catholics as well who have a clean conscience regarding supporting abortion?
See here: Pope Francis' Letter to the Founder of "La Repubblica" Italian Newspaper for the actual letter itself.
Please read the whole thing for context, but the paragraph they are talking about is here:
So I come to the three questions you put to me in the article of August 7. It seems to me that, in the first two, what is in your heart is to understand the attitude of the Church to those who don’t share faith in Jesus. First of all, you ask me if the God of Christians forgives one who doesn’t believe and doesn’t seek the faith. Premise that – and it’s the fundamental thing – the mercy of God has no limits if one turns to him with a sincere and contrite heart; the question for one who doesn’t believe in God lies in obeying one’s conscience. Sin, also for those who don’t have faith, exists when one goes against one’s conscience. To listen to and to obey it means, in fact, to decide in face of what is perceived as good or evil. And on this decision pivots the goodness or malice of our action.
Also, btw, for the record, here is what the Catechism says about it:
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." 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.
Note the word "can" versus "shall" or "will".
Also see Romans 2:
[13] For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. [14] For when the Gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature those things that are of the law; these having not the law are a law to themselves: [15] Who shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness to them, and their thoughts between themselves accusing, or also defending one another,
I was thinkng that this provides cover for Kerry and Pelosi. It is also in line with Obama’s statement that he believe sin is when “I violate my own conscience.” This belief devalues Jesus’s death on the cross, as now there is no absolute sin or sinner in need of redemption. Apostasy on display.
I knew it wouldn't be long before the backtracking began.
At least they are clarifying that they don't believe salvation is only through faith in Jesus Christ.
Based on the actions of the Risen Christ himself, I don’t see how the Church can see it otherwise. Recalling the Apostle Thomas who refused to believe that Christ had risen until he could “put his fingers in His side” (i.e. I’ll believe it when I see it). Christ did not condemn Thomas, He didn’t tell Thomas he was going to burn in hell. He chastised him and said, “Blessed are they who believe and do not see.” The Pope made the right call.
What the heck does that mean? If your conscience says its okay to kill babies, then it's a sin for you not to kill babies?
Sweet! Non-believers get to come to the party too.
Pope Francis tells atheists to ‘obey their conscience’
Alessandro Speciale - RNS - Sep 11, 2013
http://www.religionnews.com/2013/09/11/pope-francis-tells-atheists-to-obey-their-conscience/
http://biblehub.com/jeremiah/17-9.htm
http://biblehub.com/hebrews/11-6.htm
I have had a very bad feeling about this guy-— I think we are in trouble.
for later
(I’m pinging a whole bunch of you, but my response isn’t necessarily directed at one of you in particular.)
First of all, let’s put to death this pernicious and filthy claim that there is salvation outside of Jesus Christ for those who did not hear the Gospel, or that there is salvation for those who were born outside of the Jewish religion before the coming of Christ. Mrs. Don-o, on this thread, and Marshmallow, seem to be of the opinion that if someone does not outright reject Jesus Christ, that they can still be saved by their good-will, whatever that is, and then the ridiculous claim is made that this would still be “through Christ,” though they did not have faith in Christ. This is a horrific and ugly doctrine that all good Christians must stomp beneath their feet; and their doctrine directly contradicts Christ who says that “no man cam cone unto the Father, but by me.” In effect, they seem to agree with the blasphemous position of Pope Francis, while simultaneously claiming it is misunderstood. What difference does it make if the Pope thinks that salvation might elude the worst and most rabid of atheists, but save other ones who, as Mrs. Don-o seems to say, had a good excuse for their unbelief such as the example of bad Catholics? (In which case, the whole world would be saved, as when has there ever been a good example of a Pope?). In either case, they are denying the scripture and are promoting a salvation outside of God’s one true religion.
First of all, the scripture finds all men guilty before God, regardless of how much “light” they have received (Rom 3:19). As all men have received, to a certain extent, the law of God imprinted on their hearts, as well as the light of nature revealing the existence of God, therefore they are summarily rendered “without excuse,” (Rom 1:20, 2:14) and “as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law (Rom 2:12). And again, “for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God”(Rom 3:9-11). For those born before the coming of Christ, “salvation is of the Jews,” and therefore all those who were outside of God’s covenant people are damned; however, now that Christ has come, salvation is again limited to God’s peculiar people whom God has predestinated before the world began.
How can they claim ignorance when they themselves affirm that their lies are evil, that their adulteries are wrong, that their homosexual abominations and other crimes are filthy, that they have fallen short, even though they take pleasure in them? What does it matter to God if they justify and excuse themselves? Isn’t that the nature of all mankind, to justify ourselves and think of ourselves as Holy? What does He care if they sear their conscience to their sins? Is God obligated to save everyone or reason with everyone personally? Is God obligated to appear to every individual, or to save those people who He has not made a covenant with? And how can they have any good works at all, when “whatsoever is not of faith is sin” (Rom 14:23)? And again, “all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away” (Isaiah 64:6)?
God is not obligated to save everyone. He is obligated only to His own promise, and by nothing else. He will have mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth (Rom 9:18). Who are you to challenge God on why He damned all the people in the new world, or people on remote islands? Do you think that God is not the God of providence, who ordained that they should be born in those lands where they would die without ever hearing the hope of the Gospel? But if men are not guilty of anything until they hear the Gospel, or absolutely reject it, isn’t God then obligated to appear to everyone in the same flashy manner as He did to Paul on the road to Damascus? After all, can’t it be argued that everyone deserves the same EQUAL chance for salvation? “Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?”(Rom 9:20-21).
On the contrary, if God chooses to save any one, it is mercy that He does so. And if God does not save that person, it is in judgment that He does so. If God is obligated to have mercy on all people, then mercy is, in fact, justice, and judgment is injustice.
Come out of these evil errors that the RCC promotes, and surrender wholly to Jesus Christ who is the door by which all men must enter!
Prophecy of the Popesshalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiachI draw your attention to Petrus_Romanus
Conscience, in Catholic theology, does not mean what the NYT thinks it means, in fact, it's almost the opposite.