Hell... How Easy Is It?

[KnightofChrist]

This is not to say that grace is not given outside the Church. Grace is given to all men.

[KnightofChrist]

[url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02033b.htm"]The Athanasian Creed[/url]


Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the Catholic Faith is this, that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity. Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is all One, the Glory Equal, the Majesty Co-Eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father Uncreate, the Son Uncreate, and the Holy Ghost Uncreate. The Father Incomprehensible, the Son Incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost Incomprehensible. The Father Eternal, the Son Eternal, and the Holy Ghost Etneral and yet they are not Three Eternals but One Eternal. As also there are not Three Uncreated, nor Three Incomprehensibles, but One Uncreated, and One Uncomprehensible. So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not Three Almighties but One Almighty.

So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not Three Gods, but One God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not Three Lords but One Lord. For, like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be God and Lord, so are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion to say, there be Three Gods or Three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father, and of the Son neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

So there is One Father, not Three Fathers; one Son, not Three Sons; One Holy Ghost, not Three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is afore or after Other, None is greater or less than Another, but the whole Three Persons are Co-eternal together, and Co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity isTrinity, and the Trinity is Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting Salvation, that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man.

God, of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the substance of His mother, born into the world. Perfect God and Perfect Man, of a reasonable Soul and human Flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His Manhood. Who, although He be God and Man, yet He is not two, but One Christ. One, not by conversion of the Godhead into Flesh, but by taking of the Manhood into God. One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by Unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one Man, so God and Man is one Christ. Who suffered for our salvation, descended into Hell, rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into Heaven, He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies, and shall give account for their own works. And they that have donegood shall go into life everlasting, and they that have done evil into everlasting fire. This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.

[XIX]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1434128' date='Dec 13 2007, 11:13 PM']The Church has taught that by the Mercy of God someone [b]maybe[/b] be saved outside the Church, however there is no promise, there is nothing close to a guarantee. This is a shred of hope. But those within the Church with the light of Christ have the promises from Christ that if we remain in Him until the end we can be saved. Again those outside in the darkness do not have this promise, and as long as they remain outside in the darkness they will never have this promise.

Again, God alone knows, but there is more evidence (ie from Holy Scripture, popes and saints throughout time) that persons outside the church go to hell than go to heaven. And it is God that has revealed it.

I believe whatever the Church believes. I would challenge you to an actual debate with facts than judgmental attacks on my person which are nothing less than hypocrisy.[/quote]
"Maybe" is a shred of hope? I never said that there was any guarantee, I said that we don't know. You seem to think that we have a pretty good idea of who is saved and who isn't. I'm saying we have practically none.

I could challenge you to a debate if I wanted to, and I just might take you up on that, but my aim is not to prove that we should be optimistic. I'm not trying to argue that there are more souls in heaven than in Hell. I'm only arguing that you have no more than an iota of evidence about the destination of non-Catholics. Frankly, if we were to hold such a debate, my only aim would be to prove to you that there is plenty of doubt as to whom goes where.

Of course, you seem so certain that non-Catholics only have a shred of hope. Pretty odd words coming from a guy who says that "only God knows." The Catholic Church has never, ever asserted that there is more evidence that persons outside the Church go to Hell. That's something to keep in mind if you "believe what the Church believes." Granted, the Church has asserted and re-asserted the importance of the Catholic Church and its role in salvation. My point is not to de-emphasize the Church. Yet, if you believe that the point of this teaching is to beaver dam Protestants or what-have-you, then I'm afraid you are misreading these documents.

And I don't think I attacked you--I attacked your comments and told you how you sound, but that is not a personal attack. I never said that you are a Calvinist, for example, I said that you sounded like one and that you were acting like one.

[KnightofChrist]

Heres something that would be fun to debate.

The Church recognizes most all Christian Trinitarian Baptisms, even those performed by heretics. The point? The point is since the Church recognizes these baptisms to be true, and real, these people are indeed baptised Catholic, yes thats right. Because baptism is the way into the Church.

Now that is something to think about.

[XIX]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1434157' date='Dec 13 2007, 11:55 PM'][url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02033b.htm"]The Athanasian Creed[/url]
Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the Catholic Faith is this, that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity. Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is all One, the Glory Equal, the Majesty Co-Eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father Uncreate, the Son Uncreate, and the Holy Ghost Uncreate. The Father Incomprehensible, the Son Incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost Incomprehensible. The Father Eternal, the Son Eternal, and the Holy Ghost Etneral and yet they are not Three Eternals but One Eternal. As also there are not Three Uncreated, nor Three Incomprehensibles, but One Uncreated, and One Uncomprehensible. So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not Three Almighties but One Almighty.

So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not Three Gods, but One God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not Three Lords but One Lord. For, like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be God and Lord, so are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion to say, there be Three Gods or Three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father, and of the Son neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

So there is One Father, not Three Fathers; one Son, not Three Sons; One Holy Ghost, not Three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is afore or after Other, None is greater or less than Another, but the whole Three Persons are Co-eternal together, and Co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity isTrinity, and the Trinity is Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting Salvation, that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man.

God, of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the substance of His mother, born into the world. Perfect God and Perfect Man, of a reasonable Soul and human Flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His Manhood. Who, although He be God and Man, yet He is not two, but One Christ. One, not by conversion of the Godhead into Flesh, but by taking of the Manhood into God. One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by Unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one Man, so God and Man is one Christ. Who suffered for our salvation, descended into Hell, rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into Heaven, He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies, and shall give account for their own works. And they that have donegood shall go into life everlasting, and they that have done evil into everlasting fire. This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.[/quote]
You act like this is news to me. Tell me, where does your "only a shred of hope" stipulation get defined in this Creed? As far as I can tell it doesn't even address invincible ignorance, etc. And like it or not, that is a teaching of the Church.

You are listing the normative requirements for slavation in a debate that completely centers on the extraordinary requirements for salvation.

Again, my aim is not to make a case for Universalism or for optimism. My aim is to simply point out that there is enough uncertainty regarding the salvation of non-Catholics so as to render any speculation regarding the topic, useless. Of course, such uncertainty is reason enough to stay in the Church anyways.

[XIX]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1434172' date='Dec 14 2007, 12:10 AM']Heres something that would be fun to debate.

The Church recognizes most all Christian Trinitarian Baptisms, even those performed by heretics. The point? The point is since the Church recognizes these baptisms to be true, and real, these people are indeed baptised Catholic, yes thats right. Because baptism is the way into the Church.

Now that is something to think about.[/quote]
Your point being? That there are ways to obtain grace from outside the Church? Yes, I know. There are also such things as baptism by desire and by blood? Baptism by blood is one thing, but how do we know how many people are truly baptized by desire? I can narrow it down to anywhere between 0% and 100% of non-Catholics may be baptized by desire.

Again, Baptism by Desire is a mystery. We just don't know. Period.

[XIX]

Honestly, from what I know about science, a very large percentage of the world's population does not even make it out of the womb. Furthermore, a lot of people die before the age of seven, and some of those were probably not baptized in water. All told, I would not be surprised if 50% of the world's population dies before the age of reason.

So if I can prove that there is hope for the unbaptized infants, then I can essentially prove that there is hope that a large portion of the non-Catholic population will end up in Heaven. I don't have to prove that they are in Heaven, I only have to prove that they have more than a shred of hope.

Ah-ha!

[quote]1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,"63 allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.[/quote]

Of course if you want to argue that baptism makes you a member of the Catholic Church, then that creates even more befuddlement because now we don't even know who dies Catholic and who doesn't.

I think I should call it a night now. I've said most everything I wanted to say.

Edited December 14, 2007 by XIX

[Ash Wednesday]

Knight of Christ I'm a bit confused by your usage of the term of a solemn proclamation "Ex Cathedra" -- when I think of the usage of the term, I think of the Papal Infallability term first defined in 1870 (Vatican I) and its singular usage in history so far -- Pius XII when proclaiming the Assumption of Mary. Just confused by the terminology -- could you or someone explain? Thanks.

Edited December 14, 2007 by Ash Wednesday

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='XIX' post='1434169' date='Dec 14 2007, 12:05 AM']"Maybe" is a shred of hope? I never said that there was any guarantee, I said that we don't know. You seem to think that we have a pretty good idea of who is saved and who isn't. I'm saying we have practically none.

I could challenge you to a debate if I wanted to, and I just might take you up on that, but my aim is not to prove that we should be optimistic. I'm not trying to argue that there are more souls in heaven than in Hell. I'm only arguing that you have no more than an iota of evidence about the destination of non-Catholics. Frankly, if we were to hold such a debate, my only aim would be to prove to you that there is plenty of doubt as to whom goes where.[/quote]

The Mercy of God with no promise from God is a shred of hope. The Church alone has the light of Christ and the fullness of truth and His promises, which those outside the Church do not have. We can have some ideas of the types of souls that can be, not will be saved, note the difference. The souls within the Church can be saved because they are part of the body of Christ, and if, note if, they remain until the end they can be, note can be saved. However those outside, maybe saved, note maybe, by the Mercy of God, but they do not have the light as we do and do not have the promises as we do. They are in a greater danger of going to hell than souls in the Church. This is why the Church goes out to all nations and preaches the word of God which is salvation. So there is not as much doubt and there is some idea of what kinds of groups are in greater danger of hell. Or there would be no need to preach salvation or want to stay with the Church. If there was penalty of doubt as to salvation in the church there would be little want to stay in the church. If there was penalty of doubt as to salvation outside it there would little want to preach salvation.

[quote name='XIX' post='1434169' date='Dec 14 2007, 12:05 AM']Of course, you seem so certain that non-Catholics only have a shred of hope. Pretty odd words coming from a guy who says that "only God knows."[/quote]

Souls outside the Church only have the mercy of God and no promises. The mercy of God is hope but without a promise, as souls within the Church have, it is a much smaller hope, a shred, which we can not be sure of, which again is why we MUST preach the salvation of Christ to them.

[quote name='XIX' post='1434169' date='Dec 14 2007, 12:05 AM']The Catholic Church has never, ever asserted that there is more evidence that persons outside the Church go to Hell. That's something to keep in mind if you "believe what the Church believes." Granted, the Church has asserted and re-asserted the importance of the Catholic Church and its role in salvation. My point is not to de-emphasize the Church. Yet, if you believe that the point of this teaching is to beaver dam Protestants or what-have-you, then I'm afraid you are misreading these documents.[/quote]

The Church has taught that the souls outside the Church are in great danger of hell, or otherwise there would be little to no need to preach salvation to them. The Church has taught this and it is partly in post 26.

Here are some of the promises we have from Our Lord that if we obey we can be saved.

You must endure to the end. Matthew 10:22, Matthew 24:13, Mark 13:13.
You must accept the Cross (suffering). Matthew 10:38, Matthew 16:24-25, Mark 8:34, Luke 9:23, Luke 14:27.
You must be baptized with water. Mark 16:16, John 3:3-5 Titus 3:5, I Peter 3:20-21.
You must be a member in God's true church. Acts 2:47.
You must confess your sins. James 5:16, I John 1:9
You must keep the Commandments of God. Matthew 5:19-20, Matthew 7:21
You must heed the words of St. Peter, the first Pope. Acts 11:13-14, Acts 15:7.
You must eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus Christ. John 6:51-58, I Corinthians 10:16, I Corinthians 11:23-29

Those outside when it comes down to it rely on the mercy of God, which is good, but no promise.

[quote name='XIX' post='1434169' date='Dec 14 2007, 12:05 AM']And I don't think I attacked you--I attacked your comments and told you how you sound, but that is not a personal attack. I never said that you are a Calvinist, for example, I said that you sounded like one and that you were acting like one.[/quote]

That is not at all the way you put it forth, and if you are honest with yourself you will see it.

[quote]You come across as a Calvinistic fundamentalist--and I am not joking when I say that. I know you *profess* to be Catholic; maybe you should start acting like one.[/quote]

Note you said "[b]You[/b] come across as [b]a Calvinistic fundamentalist
'[/b], referring to me directly, not what I sound like. Then state you are not joking, which means your serious. Second you state I am not "acting" catholic. That is a personal attack.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Ash Wednesday' post='1434185' date='Dec 14 2007, 12:47 AM']Knight of Christ I'm a bit confused by your usage of the term of a solemn proclamation "Ex Cathedra" -- when I think of the usage of the term, I think of the Papal Infallability term first defined in 1870 (Vatican I) and its singular usage in history so far -- Pius XII when proclaiming the Assumption of Mary. Just confused by the terminology -- could you or someone explain? Thanks. [/quote]

As I'm sure you know while Papal Infallibility may have been "defined" at Vatican I, this does not mean it did not exist since the beginning of the church and taught by her.

Here is a wonderful definition of Ex Cathedra

[url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05677a.htm"]Ex Cathedra[/url]

Literally "from the chair", a theological term which signifies authoritative teaching and is more particularly applied to the definitions given by the Roman pontiff. Originally the name of the seat occupied by a professor or a bishop, cathedra was used later on to denote the magisterium, or teaching authority. The phrase ex cathedra occurs in the writings of the medieval theologians, and more frequently in the discussions which arose after the Reformation in regard to the papal prerogatives. But its present meaning was formally determined by the Vatican Council, Sess. IV, Const. de Ecclesiâ Christi, c. iv: "We teach and define that it is a dogma Divinely revealed that the Roman pontiff when he speaks ex cathedra, that is when in discharge of the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, by the Divine assistance promised to him in Blessed Peter, is possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed that his Church should be endowed in defining doctrine regarding faith or morals, and that therefore such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves and not from the consent of the Church irreformable."

Edited December 14, 2007 by KnightofChrist

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='XIX' post='1434173' date='Dec 14 2007, 12:12 AM']You act like this is news to me. Tell me, where does your "only a shred of hope" stipulation get defined in this Creed? As far as I can tell it doesn't even address invincible ignorance, etc. And like it or not, that is a teaching of the Church.[/quote]

I did not make [b]any [/b]argument when I posted the creed. I just posted it. And yes I do believe Church teaching about invincible ignorance.

[url="http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9907chap.asp"]Jimmy Akin[/url] backs what I've been trying to say.

"[i]Unfortunately, there are a number of erroneous views regarding salvation and invincible ignorance that need to be pointed out. First, the fact that someone is invincibly ignorant of the true faith [b]is not a ticket to heaven.[/b] [b]A person who is not culpable for sins against faith may still be culpable for other mortal sins-the same ones people of faith can commit-and may be damned on that account.[/b]

Second, the fact that someone is invincibly ignorant does not mean that they should not be evangelized.[b] The farther from the center of God's truth a person is the more spiritual jeopardy they are in. Even if they are not culpable for sins against faith, the fact they are ignorant of the true religion and do not have access to the sacraments means that they are more likely to commit mortal sin and thus more likely to be damned.[/b] Christ did not leave us the option of only evangelizing some peoples (Mark 16:15) or of only teaching them some doctrines (Matt. 28:20). Consequently, it is a false understanding of evangelism or a false spirit of ecumenism that would suggest that classes of people can be left in total or partial ignorance of the true faith on the pretext that they are invincibly ignorant and should not be disturbed.[/i]"

[quote name='XIX' post='1434173' date='Dec 14 2007, 12:12 AM']You are listing the normative requirements for salvation in a debate that completely centers on the extraordinary requirements for salvation.

Again, my aim is not to make a case for Universalism or for optimism. My aim is to simply point out that there is enough uncertainty regarding the salvation of non-Catholics so as to render any speculation regarding the topic, useless. Of course, such uncertainty is reason enough to stay in the Church anyways. [/quote]

If there was so much uncertainty regarding the salvation of souls outside the church as to render any speculation regarding the topic useless, there'd be no need to preach salvation. Unless souls outside the church are in a greater danger of going to hell, there's no need to worry about their souls.


[quote name='XIX' post='1434176' date='Dec 14 2007, 12:17 AM']Your point being? That there are ways to obtain grace from outside the Church? Yes, I know. There are also such things as baptism by desire and by blood? Baptism by blood is one thing, but how do we know how many people are truly baptized by desire? I can narrow it down to anywhere between 0% and 100% of non-Catholics may be baptized by desire.

Again, Baptism by Desire is a mystery. We just don't know. Period.[/quote]

My point being I'm trying to agree with you on something, instead of us making enemies out of one another. Your right we don't know how many person outside the church have desire for baptism or would if they knew about Mother Church. Which is why these souls are in a more of a danger of hell than us, because if we cant say for sure knowing Christ, and in His light, how can they know outside in the dark away from His Light, His Church, His Truth, and His Holy Sacraments?


[quote name='XIX' post='1434183' date='Dec 14 2007, 12:35 AM']Honestly, from what I know about science, a very large percentage of the world's population does not even make it out of the womb. Furthermore, a lot of people die before the age of seven, and some of those were probably not baptized in water. All told, I would not be surprised if 50% of the world's population dies before the age of reason.

So if I can prove that there is hope for the unbaptized infants, then I can essentially prove that there is hope that a large portion of the non-Catholic population will end up in Heaven. I don't have to prove that they are in Heaven, I only have to prove that they have more than a shred of hope.

Ah-ha!

[quote]QUOTE
1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,"63 allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.[/quote]

Of course if you want to argue that baptism makes you a member of the Catholic Church, then that creates even more befuddlement because now we don't even know who dies Catholic and who doesn't.

I think I should call it a night now. I've said most everything I wanted to say.
[/quote]

CC 1261 states what I have said the whole time. "the Church [u]can only[/u] entrust them to the mercy of God." We can only hope in the Mercy of God, because their is no promise they will be saved. That hope compared to the hope and promises for those in the Church is small, tiny in comparison, a shred. Yes Christ wants all to be saved, but that does not mean all are saved. This will upset you but God could remain a perfectly just and merciful God, and send every one of them to hell, as well as everyone in the Church. The difference, Christ gives us His word that those are part of His Body, His Church, and remain until the end can be saved. I am sorry to say again others do not have this fullness of Truth.

Edited December 14, 2007 by KnightofChrist

[XIX]

Well we can argue until we are blue in the face but it's obviously going in circles. The facts of the matter are this:

1) You believe the Church's teachings on salvation are to be interpreted, in part, as evidence that non-Catholics are most likely going to lose their souls.
2) I believe they are to be interpreted as what we should to assure our own salvation, and to help others.
3) I think it is imperative to preach the Gospel, regardless of whether the subjects have a shred of hope or two shreds or an entire IHOP pancake of hope. I do agree completely that being Catholic gives you a much much better shot than whatever shred/double shred/pancake/loaf of bread that they Protestants have.
4) You think that if there was so much uncertainty regarding the salvation of souls outside the church as to render any speculation regarding the topic useless, there'd be no need to preach salvation.
5) We both agree that it is imperative to preach the Truth of the Catholic Church.
6) We both agree that the Catholics have a much better shot than non-Catholics.
7) I promise I didn't mean to call you a Calvinist. I don't think you are one and I'm sorry if it sounded like I was making a judgment on your person. I should also apologize for the tone of this thread, because I was *definitely* imprudent in choosing some of my words.

I'm also not sure we agree on the definition of the term "shred," but that's more a debate on etymology, not theology. Either way, I think this sums it up rather nicely.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='XIX' post='1434328' date='Dec 14 2007, 02:08 PM']Well we can argue until we are blue in the face but it's obviously going in circles. The facts of the matter are this:

1) You believe the Church's teachings on salvation are to be interpreted, in part, as evidence that non-Catholics are most likely going to lose their souls.
2) I believe they are to be interpreted as what we should to assure our own salvation, and to help others.
3) I think it is imperative to preach the Gospel, regardless of whether the subjects have a shred of hope or two shreds or an entire IHOP pancake of hope. I do agree completely that being Catholic gives you a much much better shot than whatever shred/double shred/pancake/loaf of bread that they Protestants have.
4) You think that if there was so much uncertainty regarding the salvation of souls outside the church as to render any speculation regarding the topic useless, there'd be no need to preach salvation.
5) We both agree that it is imperative to preach the Truth of the Catholic Church.
6) We both agree that the Catholics have a much better shot than non-Catholics.
7) I promise I didn't mean to call you a Calvinist. I don't think you are one and I'm sorry if it sounded like I was making a judgment on your person. I should also apologize for the tone of this thread, because I was *definitely* imprudent in choosing some of my words.

I'm also not sure we agree on the definition of the term "shred," but that's more a debate on etymology, not theology. Either way, I think this sums it up rather nicely.[/quote]



I humbly accept your apology. Respectfully I do not agree with what you say I believe. Because the wording is changed and when the wording is changed the meaning is changed. I believe what I have said I believe.

Shred simply means a small chance, a very small chance without the promises of Christ. Mother Church is the cradle of salvation, She and Christ are one, and Christ is salvation. Those outside in the dark, who are not part of His body are in a greater danger of hell. Because they are lost, they do not have His salvation.
Christ saves us from sin, Christ saves us from the fires of hell, [u]this is[/u] His salvation, His is why He came, this is why He died, so that we could be saved from sin and death, which is hell. Christ wants all to be saved, this is why He gave us our holy duty to preach His salvation, so lost souls will be saved from sin, death, and hell. Lost souls by the very nature of being lost are in a much greater danger of hell, than those who have come home into loving arms of Mother Church.

Jesus Christ son of the Living God, [u]gave us His word[/u] that if we trust in and follow Him and obey His commandments, and remain with Him until the end, we can be saved. "As the Bible says, I am already saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5–8), but I’m also being saved (1 Cor. 1:8, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:9–10, 1 Cor. 3:12–15). Like the apostle Paul I am working out my salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), with hopeful confidence in the promises of Christ (Rom. 5:2, 2 Tim. 2:11–13)."

As long as lost souls remain lost outside the Church, all they have to stand is the [u]hope[/u] of the mercy of God. Which is good no doubt. But without any word or promise such as we have, they are in a greater danger of being lost forever.

Edited December 14, 2007 by KnightofChrist

[carrdero]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1434378' date='Dec 14 2007, 05:32 PM']As long as lost souls remain lost outside the Church, all they have to stand is the [u]hope[/u] of the mercy of God. Which is good no doubt.[/quote]
No doubt.

[quote]KnightofChrist writes: But without any word or promise such as we have, they are in a greater danger of being lost forever.[/quote]

Of course, I think.

[KnightofChrist]

From the Doctrinal Note on some Aspects of Evangelization

I. Introduction

1. Jesus Christ was sent by the Father to proclaim the Gospel, calling all people to conversion and faith (cf. Mk 1:14-15). After his resurrection, he entrusted the continuation of his mission of evangelization to the Apostles (cf. Mt 28:19-20; Mk 16:15; Lk 24:4-7; Acts 1:3): "As the Father has sent me, so I send you" (Jn 20:21, cf. 17:18). By means of the Church, Christ wants to be present in every historical epoch, every place on earth and every sector of society, in order to reach every person, so that there may be one flock and one shepherd (cf. Jn 10:16): "Go out into the whole world and preach the Gospel to every creature. [b]He who believes and is baptized will be saved, but he who does not believe will be condemned"[/b] (Mk 16:15-16).

The Apostles, therefore, "prompted by the Spirit, invited all to change their lives, to be converted and to be baptized", because the "[b]pilgrim Church is necessary for salvation"[/b]. It is the same Lord Jesus Christ who, present in his Church, goes before the work of evangelizers, accompanies it, follows it, and makes their labours bear fruit: what took place at the origins of Christian history continues throughout its entire course.