Pope proclaims all redeemed, even atheists.

Tar.Aldarion

"Pope proclaims all redeemed, even atheists. "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!"

http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2013/05/22/pope_at_mass:_culture_of_encounter_is_the_foundation_of_peace/en1-694445

(Vatican Radio) “Doing good” is a principle that unites all humanity, beyond the diversity of ideologies and religions, and creates the “culture of encounter” that is the foundation of peace: this is what Pope said at Mass this morning at the Domus Santae Martae, in the presence of employees of the Governorate of Vatican City. Cardinal Bechara Boutros Rai, Patriarch of Antioch of the Maronites, concelebrated at the Mass.

Wednesday’s Gospel speaks to us about the disciples who prevented a person from outside their group from doing good. “They complain,” the Pope said in his homily, because they say, “If he is not one of us, he cannot do good. If he is not of our party, he cannot do good.” And Jesus corrects them: “Do not hinder him, he says, let him do good.” The disciples, Pope Francis explains, “were a little intolerant,” closed off by the idea of ​​possessing the truth, convinced that “those who do not have the truth, cannot do good.” “This was wrong . . . Jesus broadens the horizon.” Pope Francis said, “The root of this possibility of doing good – that we all have – is in creation”:

"The Lord created us in His image and likeness, and we are the image of the Lord, and He does good and all of us have this commandment at heart: do good and do not do evil. All of us. ‘But, Father, this is not Catholic! He cannot do good.’ Yes, he can. He must. Not can: must! Because he has this commandment within him. Instead, this ‘closing off’ that imagines that those outside, everyone, cannot do good is a wall that leads to war and also to what some people throughout history have conceived of: killing in the name of God. That we can kill in the name of God. And that, simply, is blasphemy. To say that you can kill in the name of God is blasphemy.”

“Instead,” the Pope continued, “the Lord has created us in His image and likeness, and has given us this commandment in the depths of our heart: do good and do not do evil”:

"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! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all! And we all have a duty to do good. And this commandment for everyone to do good, I think, is a beautiful path towards peace. If we, each doing our own part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently, little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: we need that so much. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: we will meet one another there.”

“Doing good” the Pope explained, is not a matter of faith: “It is a duty, it is an identity card that our Father has given to all of us, because He has made us in His image and likeness. And He does good, always.”

This was the final prayer of Pope Francis:

"Today is [the feast of] Santa Rita, Patron Saint of impossible things – but this seems impossible: let us ask of her this grace, this grace that all, all, all people would do good and that we would encounter one another in this work, which is a work of creation, like the creation of the Father. A work of the family, because we are all children of God, all of us, all of us! And God loves us, all of us! May Santa Rita grant us this grace, which seems almost impossible. Amen.”


Text from page http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2013/05/22/pope_at_mass:_culture_of_encounter_is_the_foundation_of_peace/en1-694445
of the Vatican Radio website

It was my understanding that you had to be baptised, accept christ/god to go to heaven, what is the actual stance of the church on this? Luckily we're all saved lads! Is it their stance that we can be..."the good pagan"?

Tar.Aldarion

I realise there is nothing new here and that other popes have said similar. But I thought if you died with certain sins, not being baptised, or didnt believe in god when you died that they said you couldnt go to heaven etc? Is it now/always the case that you can accept christ after death and so on. It's taught in very contradictory ways. FOr instance I was once told by a priest that the unbaptised did not go to heaven and thats why it was done as a baby.

Also Wikipedia seems to be under the impression that, if one has been exposed to the teachings of Christ but still rejects them, then you can't be saved. There is a Vatican doctrine -> Lumen Gentium. So is it a case that people who never heard of god stand a better chance




Edit: they deleted their reply, I'm not having a monologue.

Popular Hardback

I'd fancy the chances of any genuine atheist who harmed no one and always went out of their way to help others as opposed to any self pronounced 'Christian' who merely proclaims "Lord Lord".

True and False Disciples

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

The Final Judgment

31 “When the Son of Man comes as King and all the angels with him, he will sit on his royal throne, 32 and the people of all the nations will be gathered before him. Then he will divide them into two groups, just as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the righteous people at his right and the others at his left. 34 Then the King will say to the people on his right, ‘Come, you that are blessed by my Father! Come and possess the kingdom which has been prepared for you ever since the creation of the world. 35 I was hungry and you fed me, thirsty and you gave me a drink; I was a stranger and you received me in your homes, 36 naked and you clothed me; I was sick and you took care of me, in prison and you visited me.’ 37 The righteous will then answer him, ‘When, Lord, did we ever see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you a drink? 38 When did we ever see you a stranger and welcome you in our homes, or naked and clothe you? 39 When did we ever see you sick or in prison, and visit you?’ 40 The King will reply, ‘I tell you, whenever you did this for one of the least important of these followers of mine, you did it for me!’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Away from me, you that are under God's curse! Away to the eternal fire which has been prepared for the Devil and his angels! 42 I was hungry but you would not feed me, thirsty but you would not give me a drink; 43 I was a stranger but you would not welcome me in your homes, naked but you would not clothe me; I was sick and in prison but you would not take care of me.’ 44 Then they will answer him, ‘When, Lord, did we ever see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and we would not help you?’ 45 The King will reply, ‘I tell you, whenever you refused to help one of these least important ones, you refused to help me.’ 46 These, then, will be sent off to eternal punishment, but the righteous will go to eternal life.”

joseph brand

Ah sure, didn't the last pope close limbo. Or he did the limbo.

Popular Hardback

joseph brand wrote: »

Ah sure, didn't the last pope close limbo. Or he did the limbo.

Incorrect. Limbo is not, and never was Catholic doctrine. It was, and still is, mere speculation among theologians. Nothing more, nothing less. Benedict merely restated this position, again selective reporting put a different spin on it, as they do with everything a Pope says.

Brian Shanahan

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Is it their stance that we can be..."the good pagan"?

At least that way we have a job waiting for us in the afterlife, assisting Virgil with his tours of Hades.

magicbastarder

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

It was my understanding that you had to be baptised, accept christ/god to go to heaven, what is the actual stance of the church on this? Luckily we're all saved lads! Is it their stance that we can be..."the good pagan"?

nah, the church always accepted that someone who lived a good life but was not christian were good people. otherwise they'd be claiming that a significant majority of the world's population were hellbound.

Kivaro

I'm not redeemable dammit.

endacl

I declare all atheists 'righteous in the eyes (actually eye, but eyes sounds more impressive and official) of Odin.

Ye're good for Valhalla too lads and ladies. Just be sure to die in battle.

Thats the norse stuff taken care of. El popio has us good with the catholic holygod. Anybody want to pick this up with the greek pantheon and we can press on from there?

seamus

So if everyone has been redeemed, why do we need a pope anymore. Or a church for that matter.

lazygal

Awesome. We get all of the potential benefits, without doing any of the work, like going to mass and all that jazz. We just have to keep doing what we were already doing, that is not being assholes, and the job is done.


I'd be pissed if I'd been paying indulgences and whatnot all along though. Maybe looking for a refund.

Tar.Aldarion

magicbastarder wrote: »

nah, the church always accepted that someone who lived a good life but was not christian were good people. otherwise they'd be claiming that a significant majority of the world's population were hellbound.

That's exactly what they claimed when I was growing up, and why we all had to be preached to and saved. Also if you heard the word of god and rejected it you go to hell. That still seems to be the case.

magicbastarder

i went to a catholic secondary school, and a lot of times the priests seemed more liberal than some of the lay teachers. the priests were better informed about church policy, obviously.

Penn

Can't wait til the next Pope comes in and says we're not redeemed. Because nothing screams "making it up as we go along" like successive Popes disagreeing with each other

Dades

Some churches definitely teach that if you don't believe - you're not going to be saved regardless. Not sure about the official catholic stance.

Though I agree with seamus; if you don't have to believe - what's the bloody point?

Tar.Aldarion

Indeed, if that is the case, what is the point?

However from this it seems that if you never heard of god you are ok, but if you knowingly reject him you can not be saved still, according to the Lumen Gentium from the second vatican council, which his speech would not overrule. So why is he saying this? Then there is the case that you have never heard it properly, and only heard it wrongly due to it being second hand information and so on.

kylith

This is going to turn out to be one of those 'To believe in God is to live a good life, and to live a good life is to believe in God' things, isn't it?

Dades

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

However from this it seems that if you never heard of god you are ok, but if you knowingly reject him you can not be saved...

Fittingly, I think this was posted here recently:

Geomy

Dades wrote: »

Fittingly, I think this was posted here recently:

He reminds me of that sheep farmer in the specsavers advert lol

seamus

Of course, that just brings up more theological/ecumenical issues.

If people who have not heard the word of God are by default admitted to heaven, then the best way to ensure you save the most souls is to tell no-one about it.

Since evangelicalism is a core tenat of Christianity is stands to reason then that the christian God's intention is to maximise the about of people he sends to hell by maximising the amount of people who may possibly reject christian doctrine.

Yet more evidence that the christian god is in fact a sadist psychopath who takes much pleasure in punishing and torturing people.

Or more evidence that the whole thing is a poor philosophy written by narrow-viewed farmers and that attempting to compensate for the holes in their philosophy by explaining them away just creates even bigger holes.

robindch

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

It was my understanding that you had to be baptised, accept christ/god to go to heaven, what is the actual stance of the church on this?

Depends on religion concerned and as with all things, you have to be real careful about the terminology here.

Most protestant variations of christianity claim that you can gain "salvation" (ie, win a chance to get into heaven), by "accepting Jesus as Lord/Saviour" for whatever specific meaning you, or the local protestant religious service provider, wants to allocate to that phrase.

Most catholic variations claim that you can gain salvation by (a) doing good works and (b) believing what the church tells you to believe (which typically is either the same as the protestant belief, or a minor variation of it; plus accepting catholic dogma on a range of topics). Traditionally, and for obvious reasons, good works were not considered sufficient for salvation.

Of course, both catholic and protestant variations are at pains to explain that salvation is a requirement for entry into heaven, but salvation doesn't guarantee entry since that's at the once and final discretion of the deity who hands out that particular bauble at the Last Judgement.

BTW, and you'll think I'm splitting hairs here -- but hell, that's what religion is all about, innit -- Frances was talking about redemption, not about salvation. Redemption is the christian-defined religious state you've to be in before you can even start thinking about salvation. Here's how it works:

Redemption (by virtue of Jesus' death) -> Saved (by believing what you're told + good works (catholic only)) -> Heaven (if the deity wants you to)

Frances is just restating the church's position. You can all go back to sleep now.

Tar.Aldarion

Well I wouldn't say it is by default Seamus, it must be that the person lives a good life and follows the values/rules set out by god? So either the church think a lot of people do that and don't need to exist or they think most people are going to hell and need to preach, which means they are not all "redeemed". Or perhaps they think they must preach to convert the 'few' that are not good?

Very whimsical, sure the priests used to say all sorts of things got you into hell, would have to accept god on your deathbed, and confess before you die and have to be baptised and so on bla bla. I have always heard that you specifically needed to follow the dogma, and join the clube, which you can't do really if you never heard of it.

Sarky

Kivaro wrote: »

I'm not redeemable dammit.

Agreed. We shall have to try harder.

the culture of deference

magicbastarder wrote: »

i went to a catholic secondary school, and a lot of times the priests seemed more liberal than some of the lay teachers. the priests were better informed about church policy, obviously.

in my secondary school (Co. kildare) many moons ago, one of the priests and a male lay teacher seemed very liberal with each other.

Beruthiel

Sarky wrote: »

Agreed. We shall have to try harder.

I'm pretty sure I've already worked hard enough.

fisgon

Popular Hardback wrote: »

It was, and still is, mere speculation among theologians. .

You've just described pretty much the whole of Catholicism.

Sarky

Beruthiel wrote: »

I'm pretty sure I've already worked hard enough.

No room for even a little more unrighteousness?

Popular Hardback

fisgon wrote: »

You've just described pretty much the whole of Catholicism.

No the doctrines of Catholicism are fixed and unchangeable e.g. the trinity, etc. etc. Disciplines, such as celibacy, fast days, and theological speculative terms used for unknowns such as 'limbo' are not fixed. Granted, this is often the cause of confusion, inaccuracy and misinformation.

robindch

Popular Hardback wrote: »

No the doctrines of Catholicism are fixed and unchangeable [...]

You might want to have a word with the shade of Pius XII who added the Assumption of Mary as a dogmatic doctrine on November 1st, 1950:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assumption_of_Mary

All popes have the power to add, delete or change whatever dogmas they wish.

Popular Hardback wrote: »

[...] this is often the cause of confusion, inaccuracy and misinformation.

Here to help!

magicbastarder

robindch wrote: »

You might want to have a word with the shade of Pius XII who added the Assumption of Mary as a dogmatic doctrine on November 1st, 1950:

previous to that, it had just been a presumption.

Popular Hardback

robindch wrote: »

You might want to have a word with the shade of Pius XII who added the Assumption of Mary as a dogmatic doctrine on November 1st, 1950:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assumption_of_Mary

All popes have the power to add, delete or change whatever dogmas they wish.Here to help!

Add yes, and very rarely. Not remove, delete or change.

The Assumption of Mary was almost unanimously accepted by all Popes, Bishops and theologians for 1900 years, but it was not docterine. Pius made it official doctrine and gave it the final 'rubber stamp' in 1950, the last time it was done in fact.

Undergod

So I guess Catholics can't really use Pascal's Wager as an argument anymore.

Sarky

It won't stop them. Almost no Catholics in Ireland listen to anything the pope says :pac:

robindch

Popular Hardback wrote: »

No the doctrines of Catholicism are fixed and unchangeable [...]

Popular Hardback wrote: »

The Assumption of Mary [...] was not doctrine. Pius made it official doctrine [...]

Fixed doctrines, but changeable too -- an elegant solution!

mitosis

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

"Pope proclaims all redeemed, even atheists. "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!"

http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2013/05/22/pope_at_mass:_culture_of_encounter_is_the_foundation_of_peace/en1-694445



It was my understanding that you had to be baptised, accept christ/god to go to heaven, what is the actual stance of the church on this? Luckily we're all saved lads! Is it their stance that we can be..."the good pagan"?

This was the secret to success for the original Christianity. They made a religion that included slaves and women when religion was selectively accessible. Anyone could belong.

Oh, a Pagan is not an Atheist.

Tar.Aldarion

robindch wrote: »

Fixed doctrines, but changeable too -- an elegant solution!

Apparently adding is not changing, inform the presses.

mitosis wrote: »

This was the secret to success for the original Christianity. They made a religion that included slaves and women when religion was selectively accessible. Anyone could belong.

Oh, a Pagan is not an Atheist.

I know, it is a term.

Sometimes people wonder about the "good pagan." He is the guy who has no outward practice of religion, but who appears to be a better "Christian" than those who call themselves Christians. In spite of not having an apparent belief in God, the good pagan seems more compassionate, fair and loving than those who engage in religious practices.

Sofaspud

Can Catholics just quit the church now?

If they're saved anyway, they can surely now do all the things that were forbidden, like pre-marital sex, using contraception and eating bacon.

They must be delighted they can do all the things they've been missing out on.

Benny_Cake

Sofaspud wrote: »

Can Catholics just quit the church now?

If they're saved anyway, they can surely now do all the things that were forbidden, like pre-marital sex, using contraception and eating bacon.

They must be delighted they can do all the things they've been missing out on.

Catholics can't eat bacon?! Wait till I tell my folks...

Sofaspud

Deuteronomy 14:8 And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcase.

kylith

Sofaspud wrote: »

Deuteronomy 14:8 And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcase.

Ah, but you know, imperfect knowledge of food safety and that. It was a different time, we're not bound by those old rules. Apart from the one about the gays, obviously, that's totally relevant.

Benny_Cake

Sofaspud wrote: »

Deuteronomy 14:8 And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcase.

Christians don't believe that the law of Moses applies to gentiles. There are a small minority of Christians who follow some of the Old Testament laws but the vast majority, including Catholics, don't. Something that the Clonakilty black pudding people must be very grateful for.

Sofaspud

kylith wrote: »

Ah, but you know, imperfect knowledge of food safety and that. It was a different time, we're not bound by those old rules. Apart from the one about the gays, obviously, that's totally relevant.

Of course, so the god chap just told them not to eat it, instead of telling them a couple of nice recipes.
"And ye shalt preheat thine oven to 375, and score thee thine fat, into which thou shalt rub not one, nor two, but three piches of salt. And thine crackling shall be good."

Back on topic, and speaking of the gays, will they be forgiven too?

Benny_Cake

kylith wrote: »

Ah, but you know, imperfect knowledge of food safety and that. It was a different time, we're not bound by those old rules. Apart from the one about the gays, obviously, that's totally relevant.

If people are using Leviticus as a reason for opposing homosexuality, then they aren't being consistent and it would be worthwhile asking them about what fabrics they are wearing, shellfish, and all the rest of it.

kylith

Sofaspud wrote: »

Of course, so the god chap just told them not to eat it, instead of telling them a couple of nice recipes.
"And ye shalt preheat thine oven to 375, and score thee thine fat, into which thou shalt rub not one, nor two, but three piches of salt. And thine crackling shall be good."

"And be thou careful that the meat be thoroughly cooked all the way through, and that no pink bits remaineth within. Woe be unto the man who undercooketh his chops, for the demons of Gastroenteritis wilt fly out of his bottom."

smellslikeshoes

I think what he said has been seriously misunderstood here and elsewhere, redeemed is not the same as going to heaven or anything like it. We are still going to hell :pac:

Popular Hardback

Sofaspud wrote: »

Deuteronomy 14:8 And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcase.

Christians are not Jews, Read the rest of the book. Bacon . . .mmmmm

Sarky

Nobody's beyond saving from f*cking daft superstition, even the pope can be saved from his own cognitive bias!

Hmm. Probably wouldn't fly in the other forum.

Popular Hardback

Sarky wrote: »

Nobody's beyond saving from f*cking daft superstition, even the pope can be saved from his own cognitive bias!

Hmm. Probably wouldn't fly in the other forum.

C'mon over, it's quiet over there and mostly non Christians anyway and not much moderation.

Cork boy 55

Take your magic elsewhere, holy man!

Sarky

Popular Hardback wrote: »

C'mon over, it's quiet over there and mostly non Christians anyway and not much moderation.

Thanks but I'll just wait for another of Actor's re-reg accounts to slip up and obsess over sodomy far too much for any straight man over here.

Popular Hardback

Sarky wrote: »

Thanks but I'll just wait for another of Actor's re-reg accounts to slip up and obsess over sodomy far too much for any straight man over here.

You should pop over and check out the gay mega thread then, again mostly populated by non Christians.
C'mon, you know you'll like it.