I guess us gays are still in line for Hell, no matter how much good we do. Oh, well.
Well, if it helps to clear anything, the Catholic Church does not consider the homosexual orientation itself a sin.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Obviously atheists, or members of non-Catholic religions, don't really care what the Pope decrees. It's still important though. It may have an effect on how Catholics treat atheists, especially in majority Catholic countries.My Facebook comment on this story:
"Though im happy to see the chruch show any signs if progressive thinking, as a gay atheist I don't really care what the pope says. Telling me I'm going to hell is like me telling a Christian they're going to Mordor. "
I'm always happy when someone tells me "We might not see eye to eye on some things, but you're a good guy and that's what matters."
Obviously atheists, or members of non-Catholic religions, don't really care what the Pope decrees. It's still important though. It may have an effect on how Catholics treat atheists, especially in majority Catholic countries.My Facebook comment on this story:
"Though im happy to see the chruch show any signs of progressive thinking, as a gay atheist I don't really care what the pope says. Telling me I'm going to hell is like me telling a Christian they're going to Mordor. "
I understand that.
I'm always happy when someone tells me "We might not see eye to eye on some things, but you're a good guy and that's what matters."Obviously atheists, or members of non-Catholic religions, don't really care what the Pope decrees. It's still important though. It may have an effect on how Catholics treat atheists, especially in majority Catholic countries.My Facebook comment on this story:
"Though im happy to see the chruch show any signs if progressive thinking, as a gay atheist I don't really care what the pope says. Telling me I'm going to hell is like me telling a Christian they're going to Mordor. "
Exactly. :-)
I'm a Christian and I don't care what the pope says. So I'd imagine it'd be even more so for atheists, or any other non-Christian.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am an atheist and i think what the pope says is very important, it effects the lives of millions who are of his faith directly and millions who don't indirectly.
If the Pope just said yes to condoms for catholics, Millions of lives would be saved, through disease prevention and the limiting of over population.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a christian myself, it makes me very happy to see some more tolerance and love from any church. I don't happen to be catholic, but that kind of loving embrace from one of such prominent authority in any religion is a good thing. I do feel the title of this post is somewhat skewed; it seems the pope said all CAN be redeemed and CAN do good, not that the two go hand in hand.
Redemption and salvation is a gift from God, given through the sacrifice of his son Jesus Christ. All who believe may be redeemed, not just the catholics, the baptists, the lutherans, etc. Doing good works, doesn't get you to Heaven, it's way easier than that. You just have to accept the freely given gift of God. I simply want to express my beliefs on the subject to clear up what I think the intent is and not allow incorrect interpretation to perhaps mislead anyone who might be interested in being saved.
I know this seems like a mini-sermon, but believe me, I simply portray my beliefs because I care about everyone here on the boards. I'm in here almost every day and thoroughly enjoy reading posts, thoughts, opinions, etc. Jesus preached one thing far and above as more important than anything else in this world; LOVE. I may not agree with everyone's thoughts, opinions, or beliefs, but I can still accept you and care about you.
I know I have no real authority in any of your lives here, but let me say as a christian, I apologize. I apologize for anyone, who under the guise of spirituality, has belittled you, made you feel like you are garbage, looked down on you, hated you, treated you as less important, harmed you (physically, mentally, emotionally, spiritually, etc), or anything else I may have neglected to mention.
I feel these boards (and this hobby) are filled with talented, intelligent, creative, and amazing people. My sincere hope is that all of you at least entertain the possibility that there is a God who loves you and cares for you. God wants you no matter what. We are all sinners with regard to some aspect of our lives. It's not about being good enough, it's about being forgiven.
::end emotional dissertation
Thank you and as an atheist I also have respect and admiration for the Paizo community as well.
I am an atheist and i think what the pope says is very important, it effects the lives of millions who are of his faith directly and millions who don't indirectly.
If the Pope just said yes to condoms for catholics, Millions of lives would be saved, through disease prevention and the limiting of over population.
I see your point.
However, I know a lot more Catholics than not that have used condoms.
I guess us gays are still in line for Hell, no matter how much good we do. Oh, well.Well, if it helps to clear anything, the Catholic Church does not consider the homosexual orientation itself a sin.
It considers any homosexual act to be a sin. And right there, as an atheist and a humanist, I respectfully but strongly disagree.
I do think the current Pope's words mean progress in some arenas. He has said some very condemning things about gays.
That's odd. Does Islam prohibit condoms?
Pope Frances earns +1 respect.
Interesting question, One of my family members is on the board of ICASO. Asside from Australia his primary focus is AIDS prevention in SE Asia, primarily in Indonesia, Vietnam, Laos, Thailand and Cambodia.
Indonesia is primarily Muslim I will ask him.
To clear up some things for the commenters that are not religious or just don't know very much about Christian theology:
Catholicism has generally held that doing "good works" (caring for the poor, being humble, etc.) is more important than belief alone since the early days. Saying you believe but not doing good was not going you (most believed both were necessary, apparently this Pope feels doing good is enough in and of itself).
Some Protestants/Fundamentalist Christian groups have held that belief in Christ is more important than good works. Honestly, I don't understand this view:
It was explained to me with the metaphor of a blanket: You are baptized in Christ and profess your belief, your sins are covered by it, and you are saved. A true believer would do good, but that isn't actually a requirement for salvation. When I asked if it then mattered if someone was baptized and believe and then went on to lie, cheat, and steal his way through life, I was told that such a person probably wasn't a true believer to begin with.
Naturally I wasn't satisfied with this persons argument. If someone out there can explain it more clearly, I am all ears. Ultimately one is entitled to one's own beliefs, but I want to understand if possible.
Redemption and salvation is a gift from God, given through the sacrifice of his son Jesus Christ. All who believe may be redeemed, not just the catholics, the baptists, the lutherans, etc. Doing good works, doesn't get you to Heaven, it's way easier than that. You just have to accept the freely given gift of God. I simply want to express my beliefs on the subject to clear up what I think the intent is and not allow incorrect interpretation to perhaps mislead anyone who might be interested in being saved.
Well, obviously your beliefs are your own, and the Pope's are his own, and mine are my own,... and obviously we're all capable of misinterpreting each other.
But my reading of the Pope's remarks are specifically, that, no, you do not have to accept the freely given gift of God. You don't have to do anything. (Isn't that what "freely given" means?) And that even atheists who don't even believe in the gift of God can benefit from it.
Personally, I have never been fond of the idea that God is a cosmic dick who doesn't care how nice you are if you don't mouth the appropriate platitudes and ask Him for His Grace. As you yourself put it below, "God wants you no matter what." I don't think you really want to emend that to say "God wants you no matter what as long as you know the password.."
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Big Lemon,
It's been a while since I've studied my church's theology (There's a reason I refer to myself as a Henothesitic Lutheran Heretic) But as I recall the ELCA's teachings on faith vs deeds, is boils down to that a person can do good works for non-good reasons, but a person of faith will naturally do good works. i.e. if you believe in the teachings of Christ, you will do good works as he teaches.*
Amusingly this belief has always fueled my arguments on good vs evil in Pathfinder. (If a good character does an evil act, even for what he feels is a good reason, he falls away from good, but an evil character can do a good act, and not rise to good, because he's doing it for his own benefit, not for a 'good' reason)
*
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
My Facebook comment on this story:
"Though im happy to see the chruch show any signs if progressive thinking, as a gay atheist I don't really care what the pope says. Telling me I'm going to hell is like me telling a Christian they're going to Mordor. "
This I understand. Jonah Goldberg once wrote in reply to a comment that the only reason Christians support Israel is because of the second coming. His reply basically boiled down to "Who cares why? I'm Jewish, I don't lose sleep about how they believe there's a second coming that I don't believe in."
|
|
@Big Lemon
The beliefs I've always held regarding salvation were as follows:
The act of accepting Christ and being saved is a three-fold decision.
1) You accept that you are an imperfect creature, in need of God's saving grace through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross to get to Heaven, as no human is "good enough" through word or deed to get there alone. You are truly sorry for the wrong's you've committed in the past.
2) You believe that Jesus, as the perfect Son of God, came to Earth, lived an infallible life and paid the price for our imperfections. He died on the cross and raised from the dead three days later. You accept the gift he offers through this sacrifice and believe in his godhood.
3) You commit to giving God your life, changing your ways from self-centered and immoral pursuits, instead living your life to uphold and proclaim God's values on a daily basis. You repent, literally "turning away from" past, present, and future wrong-doing, to the best of your ability.
It's this third principle that I see as the major argument against simply "getting your ticket punched" to get into Heaven. I use that phrase specifically, because I like that analogy. Jesus bought the train ticket for you, because you can't ever afford it yourself. You do have to understand that you can't afford it, you have to willingly accept it, and then you have to get on the train. You can do the first two, but if you never get on the train (living your life in a way consistent with God's plan), have you really accepted the gift?
A lot of people struggle with the idea of "not being good enough" even after salvation. We're all imperfect and continue to be, but God's grace is sufficient. It's not that you'll never do wrong ever again, it's more the fact that you recognize this wrong-doing and genuinely are sorry about it.
I hope this helps explain what you were asking about. Again, this is how I view God's salvation. I am not a theologian, but I think the Bible gives many examples that this is the way it works, the strongest being Luke 9:23 ~Then he said to them all: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me." In my opinion, this pretty clearly says that any who truly follow continue to do good works after salvation.
[Salvation by faith] was explained to me with the metaphor of a blanket: You are baptized in Christ and profess your belief, your sins are covered by it, and you are saved. A true believer would do good, but that isn't actually a requirement for salvation. When I asked if it then mattered if someone was baptized and believe and then went on to lie, cheat, and steal his way through life, I was told that such a person probably wasn't a true believer to begin with.
Well, you're not necessarily expected to understand God's thought pattern; by definition, He is both smarter than you and has a longer-term view. God also has access to information that you don't; he knows everyone's innermost thoughts, while you just have to infer them (probably wrongly) from behavior.
But the bigger problem is that the No True Scotsman isn't really applicable here. We know that there are some people who pretend to believe; I've met some myself. If you truly think that belief shapes behavior, then it's logical to reason that if someone doesn't have a shaped-behavior, he doesn't really have the belief either.
The blanket metaphor isn't a bad one. It's just unsatisfactory to a lot of people who want to believe in a God of Justice instead of a God of Love. A God of Love, by definition, loves everyone, even liars and sociopaths. A God of Justice, by contrasts, loves people who follow the rules, for whatever reason. A more sophisticated God of Being Confusing isn't bound by simple rules that will fit onto a bumper sticker.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am not a Christian in any normal/traditional sense (Jesus's teachings form an important part of my faith, but I incorporate teachings from other paths into my faith journey as well. I don't believe he was resurrected after he died and, like all Quakers of my particular sect, I am not baptized; my concern with the afterlife and "being saved" is pretty minimal, I ascribe more to the idea that heaven and hell is something that exists in life, not death, and is something we create for ourselves based on the lives we lead), but I think what the pope says is very important. He is a world leader, and has a fair amount of influence. It may not affect any one person individually right now, but if it alters how the church treats others in general, that's a big deal, as the church is quite large.
Reasserting the Catholic church's belief in the importance of good works is particularly of note, I think.
It's a nice bit of news, I think. I've been quite intrigued and inspired by Pope Francis.
|
|
@Orfamay
Upon rereading the pope's comments, I think you (and the others who mentioned above) may be correct about his interpretation. It does definitely come across as it not mattering if you accept it or not.
I do disagree with his outlook if this is indeed his interpretation and here's the one thing I will say about accepting the gift, according to my beliefs. If I offer you a birthday present, but you never accept it and take it from me, do you have it? Again, I'm not trying to be snarky, that's just always the way I've looked at it (I like simple illustrations).
Believe me, good people not accepting the gift and therefore not making it into Heaven is one of the hardest things I deal with as a believer. I've always struggled with the concept of God letting his creations follow their own path away from him. I'm not sure it's something I'll ever completely comprehend.
That's where I have to rely on my faith. I have to accept he's bigger, smarter, and more powerful than I'll ever comprehend and sort of be okay with that.
I know it's probably not the most theological answer in the world, just giving you my take on it.
Also, thank you all for the great discussion and especially for the respectful manner in which it's being handled.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do disagree with his outlook if this is indeed his interpretation and here's the one thing I will say about accepting the gift, according to my beliefs. If I offer you a birthday present, but you never accept it and take it from me, do you have it? Again, I'm not trying to be snarky, that's just always the way I've looked at it (I like simple illustrations).
That's a reasonable metaphor, but not appropriate in the circumstance. A birthday gift is typically a physical object that you have the opportunity to accept or reject. If, as a birthday gift, I come and mow your lawn for you (or pay off your credit card debt), you don't have that option. Your lawn is mown, whether your wanted it or not (and, frankly, whether you even know that you have a lawn or not).
That's not as trivial a distinction as it sounds. In my town, the city fathers will cite you if your lawn is over a certain legal length, and you have to go to court, get yelled at by a judge, and pay a fine (with increasingly strident consequences if you ignore the summons). If I happen to know that June 1 is the day that the inspector plans to visit your neighborhood, so I come out while you're at work on the 31st of May and clean up your yard, and thereby save you time, trouble, and money,.... have I given you a gift? Did you have to accept it? What are you going to do, go down to city hall and complain about vandals keeping you out of housing court?
Believe me, good people not accepting the gift and therefore not making it into Heaven is one of the hardest things I deal with as a believer. I've always struggled with the concept of God letting his creations follow their own path away from him. I'm not sure it's something I'll ever completely comprehend.
Let me suggest that what you don't comprehend includes the phrase "follow their own path away from him." As any teacher can tell you, sometimes students will break the rules you lay in front of them. Sometimes it's because they're too stupid to understand the rules, sometimes it's because they're smart enough to understand that the rules don't cover all cases.
If you want to get all Biblical, think about Matthew 22. Jesus gave us two commandments : Love the Lord God with all thy heart//love thy neighbor as thyself. The first question any lawyer or computer scientist would ask is simply "what's the conjunction supposed to mean?" What happens if I do the first, but not the second? What happens if I do the second, but not the first? Do I need to do both to get into heaven, or either, or does one of them not really count?
I personally hold that the God of Love would be satisfied if you did either of them. He'd of course prefer that you did both, but on this particular exam, a loving God would in fact offer partial credit. If someone, through legitimate application of his own reason, decides that the best way to love his neighbor is to do something other than the specific rules laid down in Exodus,... well, Jesus himself acknowledged that there were "other sheep, not of this fold."
I still the argument that was presented to me last year (the blanket guy) was flawed.
If it is possible for someone to fervently believe that Jesus Christ is his savior and still do atrocious things (some of which he may believe he is doing in God's name), and it is and has been done, is he still in the clear? list as concisely as possible:
1. Everyone who believes still sins
2. Some people commit more serious sins than others
3. (According to this belief) A man is saved by believing alone, since all of his sins are "covered" automatically. Circumstance does not matter
4. So a man who believes is saved regardless of how severely he sins.
To say a man who commits serious sin regularly must not be a true believer and must be "only pretending" is exactly what No True Scotsman points out.
Now, to get back to mine, and apparently the Pope's feelings on the issue, there are at least as many lines from Scripture that emphasize the necessity of good works in addition to faith at the very least (both are clearly important). I don't feel like digging through my e-Bible or scouring the net and listing line upon line, but to use just one:
1 Timothy 5:8
"If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever."
Well, you're not necessarily expected to understand God's thought pattern; by definition, He is both smarter than you and has a longer-term view. God also has access to information that you don't; he knows everyone's innermost thoughts, while you just have to infer them (probably wrongly) from behavior.
That has nothing to do with this.
I do not pretend to understand the pattern of the universe. I don't understand an interpretation of Scripture that employs a logical fallacy that assumes everyone that isn't "good enough" must not be a true believer, because that's the only way the idea that faith is the only thing that matters can be reconciled with the plethora of people in the past and today that have been fervent believers and still committed atrocious acts.
God created logic, which I employ to see a hole in this interpretation of Scripture. I employ my God-given thought pattern to study scripture and figure out how to best apply it to my life, and I choose to interpret it in a way that makes sense to me.
I do not pretend to understand the pattern of the universe. I don't understand an interpretation of Scripture that employs a logical fallacy that assumes everyone that isn't "good enough" must not be a true believer, because that's the only way the idea that faith is the only thing that matters can be reconciled with the plethora of people in the past and today that have been fervent believers and still committed atrocious acts.
But that's simply wrong. There is no logical fallacy employed.
Premise 1: All X's are Y's.
Premise 2: No Y's will Z.
Therefore, if something Zs, then it's not an X. (I believe that particular syllogism was known to the ancients under the name "Cesaro")
You simply refuse to accept the possibility that God has a different understanding and definition of "true believer" than you do. Which, given that He by assumption knows what people actually believe, and you do not, seems somewhat presumptuous.
I'm no Christian, but I think the theory goes that we are all sinners and thus none of us can be saved without the grace the comes through Christ. Any of your sins can be forgiven, but you must actually repent them and attempt to sin no more. Since you're flawed, you will fail, but as long as you repent and continue to try and to have faith you will be forgiven.
Well, that's certainly A theory, and a commonly-held one. But there are others out there. Some deny the possibility that a true believer is prevented from sinning at all (by the power of Grace), while others believe that repentance is not necessary.
The Catholics historically hold to the "repentance is necessary" school of thought but accept that mortals will fail to uphold the standards (but can simply re-repent, in articulo mortis if necessary). Strict Calvinists hold that Grace prevents one from sin, and therefore if you sin, you never had Grace in the first place.
The interesting part of the Pope's statement is that he appears to be backing away from the "repentance is necessary" and moving to a pure "salvation by works."
I am an atheist and i think what the pope says is very important, it effects the lives of millions who are of his faith directly and millions who don't indirectly.
If the Pope just said yes to condoms for catholics, Millions of lives would be saved, through disease prevention and the limiting of over population.
I see your point.
However, I know a lot more Catholics than not that have used condoms.
We would prefer a Papal erratum where the Catholic rules RAW are amended to the RAI reality of Catholics and others.
I do not pretend to understand the pattern of the universe. I don't understand an interpretation of Scripture that employs a logical fallacy that assumes everyone that isn't "good enough" must not be a true believer, because that's the only way the idea that faith is the only thing that matters can be reconciled with the plethora of people in the past and today that have been fervent believers and still committed atrocious acts.But that's simply wrong. There is no logical fallacy employed.
Premise 1: All X's are Y's.
Premise 2: No Y's will Z.Therefore, if something Zs, then it's not an X. (I believe that particular syllogism was known to the ancients under the name "Cesaro")
You simply refuse to accept the possibility that God has a different understanding and definition of "true believer" than you do. Which, given that He by assumption knows what people actually believe, and you do not, seems somewhat presumptuous.
I think there's a miscommunication here.
Are you in this instance defining a true believer as someone who say they believe AND does good works, not simply believing? Because that's not faith alone, that is faith and works.
I don't understand where you're getting that I presume to know what God's definition of a "true believer" is. I'm talking about what the Catholic and some Non-Cahtolic definitions are. I'm still confused, because we seem to hae gone from "Having faith is the only thing necessary for salvation" to "Having faith and acting like you have faith are the only things necessary for salvation", the latter of which I'm much more inclined to believe, even if I don't hold it as being so strict.
I do not assume to know what people actually believe versus what they say. I am merely bringing up the fact that there are people who fervently believe in God and the divinity of Jesus Christ that continue to do horrible things, just as there are people who believe and do good thing, people who say they believe and don't, etc.
We would prefer a Papal erratum where the Catholic rules RAW are amended to the RAI reality of Catholics and others.I am an atheist and i think what the pope says is very important, it effects the lives of millions who are of his faith directly and millions who don't indirectly.
If the Pope just said yes to condoms for catholics, Millions of lives would be saved, through disease prevention and the limiting of over population.
I see your point.
However, I know a lot more Catholics than not that have used condoms.
I remember hearing awhile back that the Catholic church decided use of condoms to prevent the spread of deadly disease was acceptable (assuming one holds such decision as important).
Ummm No. He didn't say that. He said atheist can be good not that they are saved. Salvation comes from grace not works. Being good has nothing to do with being saved. Doing good my be a fruit of being saved and atheist may go to heaven, but an atheist who does good or is good does not necessarily go to heaven."The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! "Father, the atheists?" Even the atheists. Everyone!"I'm not sure how else to take that. But then you seem to agree, when you say that "atheist may go to heaven".
It definitely seems a change to Church theology that has long required faith and often the intermediary of the Church itself.
That has nothing to do with an atheist getting into heaven because he is good. I never said atheist couldn't get into heaven, but they won't be up there for doing good. No one is save through their own works of good.
That has nothing to do with an atheist getting into heaven because he is good. I never said atheist couldn't get into heaven, but they won't be up there for doing good. No one is save through their own works of good.Ummm No. He didn't say that. He said atheist can be good not that they are saved. Salvation comes from grace not works. Being good has nothing to do with being saved. Doing good my be a fruit of being saved and atheist may go to heaven, but an atheist who does good or is good does not necessarily go to heaven."The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! "Father, the atheists?" Even the atheists. Everyone!"I'm not sure how else to take that. But then you seem to agree, when you say that "atheist may go to heaven".
It definitely seems a change to Church theology that has long required faith and often the intermediary of the Church itself.
Please explain, then, exactly what you believe the Pope meant in this statement, taken in the context of the whole speech.
EDIT: I mean the Pope literally says "Do good, we will meet one another there".
I hate that people get angry about statements like this. He's just trying to be an accepting, decent leader in a condescending, misogynistic, domineering religion that's always used exclusion and fear to control an uneducated populace.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Probably a reference to Ephesians 2:8-9.
I think there's a miscommunication here.
Are you in this instance defining a true believer as someone who say they believe AND does good works, not simply believing? Because that's not faith alone, that is faith and works.
No, I'm defining a true believer as one who truly believes. As a consequence of that belief (according to Calvinist doctrine among others) that person will do good works,
A -> B, not A ^ B.
I do not assume to know what people actually believe versus what they say. I am merely bringing up the fact that there are people who fervently believe in God and the divinity of Jesus Christ that continue to do horrible things,
Assumes something not in evidence. Since you don't know what those people actually believe, you don't know that they "fervently believe." From a Calvinist perspective, the fact that they continue to do horrible things is proof that they do not, in fact, fervently believe, and are simply lying about their beliefs. Certainly to you, possibly to themselves.
That has nothing to do with an atheist getting into heaven because he is good. I never said atheist couldn't get into heaven, but they won't be up there for doing good. No one is save through their own works of good.Ummm No. He didn't say that. He said atheist can be good not that they are saved. Salvation comes from grace not works. Being good has nothing to do with being saved. Doing good my be a fruit of being saved and atheist may go to heaven, but an atheist who does good or is good does not necessarily go to heaven."The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! "Father, the atheists?" Even the atheists. Everyone!"I'm not sure how else to take that. But then you seem to agree, when you say that "atheist may go to heaven".
It definitely seems a change to Church theology that has long required faith and often the intermediary of the Church itself.Please explain, then, exactly what you believe the Pope meant in this statement, taken in the context of the whole speech.
EDIT: I mean the Pope literally says "Do good, we will meet one another there".
Yes doing good is good, but has nothing to do with salvation. Advocating doing good, does not mean that he is saying doing good leads to salvation.
Please explain, then, exactly what you believe the Pope meant in this statement, taken in the context of the whole speech.
EDIT: I mean the Pope literally says "Do good, we will meet one another there".
I think it's fairly simple.
No one is saved by works alone. You need grace as well.
Traditionally, grace is available to everyone, but reserved for the correct believers. Essentially, it is something that anyone can ask for, but everyone who asks receives.
Francis appears to be suggesting that you don't need to ask for it; it's simply given to you. But a thoughtful theist would still recognize the need for grace and be suitably appreciative of the gift.
If you would like an analogy, under US law, you need to ask for the right to vote (via the process of registration), and if you fail to do this, you will not be able to vote However, US citizenship is given to you automatically if you are born in the right place or to the correct set of parents.
That has nothing to do with an atheist getting into heaven because he is good. I never said atheist couldn't get into heaven, but they won't be up there for doing good. No one is save through their own works of good.Ummm No. He didn't say that. He said atheist can be good not that they are saved. Salvation comes from grace not works. Being good has nothing to do with being saved. Doing good my be a fruit of being saved and atheist may go to heaven, but an atheist who does good or is good does not necessarily go to heaven."The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! "Father, the atheists?" Even the atheists. Everyone!"I'm not sure how else to take that. But then you seem to agree, when you say that "atheist may go to heaven".
It definitely seems a change to Church theology that has long required faith and often the intermediary of the Church itself.1) Are you interpreting his words? Or offering your own interpretation?
2) How does the atheist become saved then? Without giving up his atheism.
2) Various biblical interpretations. My conversations with Catholics would make me think that they do not believe that atheist are saved. But, if we take this at face value. One could possess salvation before doing wrong OR atheism is not a "mortal sin" so an atheist is redeemed but must still accept salvation. "Mortal sin" is a concept one of my catholic friends told me about, where some sins are worse than others and can damn you unless you do X.
2) Various biblical interpretations. My conversations with Catholics would make me think that they do not believe that atheist are saved. But, if we take this at face value. One could possess salvation before doing wrong OR atheism is not a "mortal sin" so an atheist is redeemed but must still accept salvation. "Mortal sin" is a concept one of my catholic friends told me about, where some sins are worse than others and can damn you unless you do X.
Well, I think that's the significance of Francis' remarks. As far as I can tell, he's suggesting that the people with whom you have conversed are wrong.
But, if we take this at face value. One could possess salvation before doing wrongWell, I think that's the significance of Francis' remarks. As far as I can tell, he's suggesting that the people with whom you have conversed are wrong.
Hence what I said. He may be saying that being atheist in of itself is not a sin.
That does not include anti-theist though...
For atheists and anti-theists this changes nothing. Thanks for the peace out, Pope Francis. How about something really relevant like acknowledging women in the clergy, allowing condoms or even gay marriage?
What you pathetic mortals do not realise is that most of you will be spending eternity in the infernal flames of Teddy Hell. I have a nice burning place of punishment for all of you!
Because, just like me, none of these things are Catholic. Other religions allow female clergy and gay marriage. If a person wants to be ministered by a woman and marry their same-sex partner, join another religion.
Another data point, from Catholic Online, which seems to argue that what's new is simply the emphasis that even atheism is a sin that need not, keep you from heaven provided you do good—and through doing good, subsequently turn to God:
The Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World (Gaudium et Spes) contains an important explanation of the phenomena referred to as 'Atheism' (See, GS #17-22). It is a very large term and we have to first examine what is meant when it is embraced by an individual to best understand the effect of the claim.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains that "Since it rejects or denies the existence of God, atheism is a sin against the virtue of religion but the imputability of the offense can be significantly diminished in virtue of the intentions and the circumstances" (CCC#2125).
The Holy Father was not teaching anything new. In fact, this hope that all who do not yet know God are not only capable of doing good - but will progress toward that knowledge of God by doing good - is ancient.
Because, just like me, none of these things are Catholic. Other religions allow female clergy and gay marriage. If a person wants to be ministered by a woman and marry their same-sex partner, join another religion.
The problem, of course, is that while I have free choice in the person that I am ministered by, I don't have free choice in the person that I marry. Marriage is a three-way cooperation between myself, my partner, and my government. And the Catholic Church spends a lot of effort trying to make sure that that the government won't allow gay partners to marry.
It also has historically spent a lot of effort making sure that the government repressed atheists, too.
I really wish religion were a private decision. Until it is -- as long as the Catholics consider my behavior their business -- then the Catholics are mine.