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.
The concept and development of individual liberty was a whole lot more complex than "Catholics nay, Protestants yea". It has roots in Protestant ideas, and Catholic ideas, and causes some trouble with traditional ideas in both camps. There's a reason why many of the Founding Fathers weren't very orthodox Christians.
England at the height of the Reformation -- whether under Mary, Elizabeth, or James -- was not a very free country.
One word: Bartolome de las Casas
Okay that’s 4 words.
“I wonder how many Buddhists admit to worshipping statues of Buddha.”
It wouldn’t have anything to do with Catholics whatever the answer.
“Denial is a very handy psychological defense in all RELIGIONS.”
Insisting folks are doing something that they say they aren’t doing and who have no reason to lie about it is denial.
Freegards
“It disheartens me to see Catholics (1) crying about hurt feelings because someone said something “mean” to them and (2) denying the truths of their own faith to curry favor with others.”
This thread was started by some sort of Protestant. In the posted article there is mention of “millions of Catholics who worship Mary”, and this is allowed to stand as truth, which it isn’t.
“...curry favor with others.”
Curry favor with who? What form will this favor take? What happens if the favor isn’t given, folks will think even worse of Catholics? Catholics aren’t famous for fretting over what others might think of them.
Freegards
Wow! I can’t believe that you have only been Catholic for a few years. You speak with such knowledge!
You have just done an excellent job explaining our faith and how we practice it.
Well done! We need more worshipers like you!
>> You’re right: humans are inherently fallible, except when they are fulfilling their role as guardians and faithful teachers of the Faith, and doing functioning in those capacities under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This particular type of infallibility, we recognize, is highly restricted in its nature to matters of faith and morals only, and must be employed only with the explicit acknowledgment that the charism is being invoked.
I understand the concept. But, I do not believe any particular divine authority rests in the Catholic heirarchy, and certainly not in the Catholic heirarchy alone. I believe the Baptist church, and my pastor, is just as likely to be given divine guidance as is the Vatican. I believe Christian leaders of many denominations are capable of receiving divine guidance.
So — what do we make of disagreements among those who are “fulfilling their role as guardians and faithful teachers of the Faith”? However well-meaning the parties are, and however divine they think their guidance is — someone is wrong. Someone is fallible. Someone’s guidance is not as divine as they think it is. It seems to me to be more prudent to assume that all are fallible, and check for yourself ... rather than assuming that one body has a monopoly on divine guidance, and taking their word as Holy. I’ve seen no scriptural justification for assuming that God has a singular representative body on Earth which has a monopoly on his guidance.
Fundamentally, this is the point that I have been making. I believe there is a divine truth in scriptures, but that such divine truth cannot be assumed to eminate from one source alone (except the scripture itself, of course). No teacher of the scripture can claim a monopoly on its truth — and no one’s teaching is divinely guided at all times.
I have seen no cause to take the word of the Vatican simply because they are the Vatican. I have seen no reason to believe that the Vatican speaks with the voice of the Almighty. So, I read the scriptures myself, interpret the best I can, and follow the opinion that I think was divinely inspired. I’m quite sure I am wrong in my interpretation somewhere — just as I am sure my pastor is wrong, you are wrong, and the Vatican is wrong somewhere.
SnakeDoc
***Listen on Judgement Day, the Lord will not ask us if we are CATHOLIC OR PROTESTANTS.***
On judgement day He will not be asking us anything. He will do all the talking.
Either our name is written in the book of life or it isn’t.
If it is we will hear “well done.”
If not, we will hear “depart from me.”
CHRIST IS ALL, AND HE IS MINE
Why should I fear the darkest hour,
Or tremble at the tempters power;
When Jesus is my Might Tower?
Christ is all, and He is mine.
Tho’ hard the fight,
Why quit the field;
Why should I shrink, why should I yield;
When Jesus is my Mighty Shield?
Christ is all, and He is mine.
When creature comforts fade and die,
The world may weep, but why should ?
Jesus still lives, and He is nigh.
Christ is all, and He is mine.
I know not what may soon betide,
Or how my wants may be supplied;
But Jesus knows, and will provide.
Christ is all, and He is mine.
Tho’ faint my prayers, and cold my love,
My steadfast hope shall not remove;
While Jesus intercedes above.
Christ is all, and He is mine.
Against me, earth and hell combine;
But on my side, is Power Divine.
In the darkest hour, His glory shines.
Christ is all, and He is mine.
I can be religeous about a lot of things....that first cup of coffee in the morning, etc.
Jesus called the religeous leaders of His day “whitewashed sephlecurs.”
I never argue, or debate religion. I am an avid reader of church history, doctrine, and the Scripture.
All that matters is: “What think, ye, of Christ?”
When he spoke of the little girl that he revived, he referred to her as “sleeping”. This invoked laughter from those that did not understand him. Her soul was sleeping while awaiting Christs sacrifice on the cross. Once he was sacrificed those that were sleeping were able to join him in heaven. If you were referred to as “dead” that was a grave thing. Your soul had no hope for salvation. You were truly dead. Up until he sacrificed himself, many souls were sleeping and awaited his salvation.
When the follower asked Jesus if he could bury his father before leaving to follow him Jesus said “ “Allow the dead to bury their own dead; but as for you, go and proclaim everywhere the kingdom of God.”
It is a very grave thing to refer to any souls as being “dead”. Especially Mary.
You mean all those fine Protestant folks who start out their evangelism with "If you died tonight, and God asked you why you should go to heaven, what would you say?" are wrong?
[gasp]
The Kingdom of Heaven is not based on answering a theology exam, but on loving God and doing his will. High on his list of items for us is, "Love your neighbor as yourself". The devil's knowledge of correct doctrine is better than any human's. It will not save him.
I hope you agree.
As a faithful Catholic, I am placing this thread on
IGNORE
If you are Catholic, be aware that this thread contains slanders about the Catholic Church. We should not reward invincibly ignorant anti-Catholic bigots by engaging them in futile debate. Therefore, please do not respond to any of the lies about the Catholic Church contained on this thread."
Good call.
Amen.
What then, would that be??? What is it that constitutes worship to Mary which is different than what most of you do???
You twist my words in an attempt to defend your theology. I never said that her soul was “dead.” Indeed, I specified the opposite: it’s alive and not preoccupied with you, but with her Lord.
The truth is that Mary’s body is dead — there was no corporeal assumption of Mary — and she’s got better things to do than to listen to your prayers and pass them along to the Father.
Why, I wonder, do Roman Catholics pray to Mary as their intercessor, when Jesus is available as our intercessor? Is Jesus not sufficient? No need to answer; I already know what you’ll say. You’ll recount the story given by “Saint” Alphonsus Liguori, which I heard a while back and which I found explained in some blog I googled:
“In one portion of his writings, he described an imaginary scene in which a sinful man saw two ladders hanging from heaven. Mary was at top of one and Jesus on top of the other. When the sinner tried to climb the one ladder, he saw a angry face of Christ and fell defeated, but when he climbed Mary’s ladder he ascended easily and was openly welcomed by Mary who brought him into heaven and presented him to Christ! Then all was well. The story was supposed to show how much easier and more effective it is to go to Christ through Mary.
“The same writer said that the sinner who ventures to come directly to Christ may come with dread of his wrath, but if he prays to the Virgin, she will only have to ‘show’ the son ‘the breasts that gave him suck’ and his wrath will be immediately appeased!”
The Lord has a long tradition of calling out a remnant from among His people. His Church became so corrupt and heretical that He did this again some 500 years ago. I thank Him that He did bring Reformation to His Church, a beautiful bride “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone.”
No “home to Rome” for me; my home is found in Heaven. No earthly priest for me; Christ is sufficient as my great high priest. No ongoing sacrifice of Christ’s body; His death at the cross was sufficient.
See the 2nd post. He refers to himself as “Roman Catholic.”
You Roman Catholics are all playing word games. We all know that you are ROMAN Catholic. Your documents prove this.
l
I prefer
“atypical.”
LOL.
I understand that most of us know . . .
a generic class/group of folks . . . particularly without a membership list listed
is OUTSIDE that rule.
I realize that does NOT necessarily keep various . . . intensities of persuasion from wailing to the RM.
Ahhhhh . . . I must have forgotten that.
It seemed like the facts of the post fit a different postulation.
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.