Posted on 08/20/2016 7:45:03 AM PDT by Salvation
Msgr. Charles Pope Catholic, August 28, 2016
Question: How will God judge non-Catholics at the time of their death? — William Bandle, Manchester, Missouri
Answer: Scripture says, “God does not see as a mortal ... The Lord looks into the heart” (1 Sam 16:7). Thus, God, who knows our hearts, will judge us based on what is there. Not all have had the same opportunity to come to know the Lord, his Church and the help of the sacraments. God is just; he knows this and will judge accordingly.
Jesus says, “That servant who knew his master’s will but did not make preparations or act in accord with his will shall be beaten severely and the servant who was ignorant of his master’s will but acted in a way deserving of a severe beating, shall be beaten only lightly” (Lk 12:47-48).
In terms of non-Catholics who lacked some knowledge or sacraments of the Church, God will look into their hearts and judge them based on what they reasonably could have known and their actions based on that.
Therefore, to say that God looks into the heart does not mean that he merely looks to a person’s feelings or disposition. Rather, as Scripture says, we will be judged by our deeds (see Rom 2:6-11). Did our actions correspond to what we knew was expected of us or not?
|
|
Thus, the degree of a person’s knowledge of God’s will and his obedience to that knowledge in deeds will be key on the Day of Judgment. This does not mean all non-Catholics and other nonbelievers simply get a pass. Their ignorance of full Catholic teaching must be what is called “invincible ignorance,” meaning a lack of knowledge that they could not reasonably overcome. Thus, if one is lazy or makes excuses when seeking the truth, God will take it into account.
Since the Lord alone sees into our heart, he alone will be our just judge.
And consistent with what i said, if one has their part with the lost then it obviously does not mean that all the examples used in this teaching that follows were saved. And nowhere is it said that the others were saved either, while what it show is that they belong to the class of unfaithful servants. And even admitting that at least one was lost case refutes the argument that the use of "flock" means the other two were saved, and let alone saved by becoming fit enough in purgatory.
Your comment : “And, apparently, a well-populated sect.”
Perhaps we know more about God than you do.
You realize that Scripture was just the written down verbal traditions of Jesus and His followers.
I trust and believe those sacred traditions and teachings have been passed down by the Catholic Church (and their holy persons and scholars) with the assurance of Jesus as compared to man made religions that don’t agree with all the teachings of Jesus.
The priest does God’s will as told to us by Jesus.
The Eucharist is a true sacrifice, not just a commemorative meal, as “Bible Christians” insist. The first Christians knew that it was a sacrifice and proclaimed this in their writings. They recognized the sacrificial character of Jesus’ instruction, “Do this in remembrance of me” (Touto poieite tan eman anamnasin; Luke 22:19, 1 Cor. 11:24–25) which is better translated “Offer this as my memorial offering.”
Thus, Protestant early Church historian J. N. D. Kelly writes that in the early Church “the Eucharist was regarded as the distinctively Christian sacrifice. . . . Malachi’s prediction (1:10–11) that the Lord would reject Jewish sacrifices and instead would have “a pure offering” made to him by the Gentiles in every place was seized upon by Christians as a prophecy of the Eucharist. TheDidache indeed actually applies the term thusia, or sacrifice, to the Eucharist. . . .
“It was natural for early Christians to think of the Eucharist as a sacrifice. The fulfillment of prophecy demanded a solemn Christian offering, and the rite itself was wrapped in the sacrificial atmosphere with which our Lord invested the Last Supper.
Because this is the promise Jesus Christ made to Saint Peter, the first Pope!
Show us the words, exactly, where Jesus said to Peter, *You’re the first pope and I will protect you from error in all matters pertaining to faith and morals.
And Paul had to rebuke Peter for what again?????
If you’re looking for an argument or urinary contest, I have no interest. Got it???
Since I presume you can read, many teachings of the RC Church are articulated in the Catechism of any first grader.
Additionally they are detailed in the various Creeds.
As well the Britannica has voluminous information on the subject.
In plain and simple English, all Religion is ‘other worldly’ in focus; hence Faith is a prerequisite. One accepts and adheres to the teachings of one’s faith, all of them, or one doesn’t. As such, lists are absurd.
Care to answer post 535?
Give us a list of all the infallible statements made by popes that are binding on Catholics.
And the rest is up for grabs?
If it’s not ex cathedra, then they don’t have to believe it?
Jesus doesn’t contradict Himself. He doesn’t need to be resacrificed over and over again.
Ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!
Even from you ADSUM, I've rarely seen anything so funny and so false.
I Corinthians 23-25 - For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”
Clean up on Aisle 3!
Oh I see what you mean now like in post 552?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3461281/posts?page=552#552
Speculation will avail you nothing. Since you invoked this text as proof or in support of purgatory you need to show that those suffering stripes were saved, which is not said but all are classed as unfaithful unprepared sinners, and that these souls where in in purgatory awaiting entrance into Heaven, yet the only location that is mentioned is that of with the lost, and the only experience mentioned is that of suffering.
And you need to show that this postmortem suffering was due to sins for which they has not been punished enough for while on earth, while others did so while still on earth (according to purgatorial doctrine), but instead there are no exceptions in the warnings, even inferred, and all the unfaithful, unprepared souls will be punished.
In short, what you need to show in order for this to support purgatory and overcome alternative explanations is what cannot be shown. Again, give it up, as your attempts are an argument against purgatory being Scriptural.
Yet not one of the major translations offers 1 Cor 11:24-25 in this manner.
Even DR renders it as
And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me.
The Aramaic Bible in plain English renders it at:
And he blessed and he broke and he said, “Take eat; this is my body, which is broken for your persons; thus you shall do for my Memorial.
So no answer?
I didn’t think so.......
Is that a doctrinal stand by Catholics that someone is wishing to *muzzle*?
Or is it just plain violating the RF posting guidelines?
Are you able to tell the difference?
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.