Dave,
Thanks for your thoughts, I think Mr. Spencer raised some important questions for discussion and I think your answers are a welcolm contribution to the dialouge. I have a few points of disagreement with you though.
On Q. #1: I totally agree with you about respect for Protestant Pastors and i have no difficulty believing that the Holy Spirit is truly at work through many sincere, dedicated Pastors around the world. I would not be a catholic today if not for the work of a number of good Pastors who first convinced me of the truth of a number of those beliefes which catholics and protestants hold in common.
As a small aside you write that, for catholics, the ordained clergyman is a priest, actually, if you'll pardon my pedenantry, deacons are also ordained clergymen.
On a more substantial note, I have some problem saying that protestant ministers are called, at least without making some degree of equivocation. Whilst I acknowledge the many important truths which evangelical Protestants believe, the fact remains, any Proteastant ministry is going to involve some degree of teaching things which are false and it simply isn't possible that the Holy Spirit could give a calling to teach falsehood.
On Q.# 2. Well said, I wish more people would put the matter so clearly.
On Q.#3 I think you are seriously understating the case. Obviously, the church makes no judgement on those who, for no fault of their own, are unable to recognise the truth of Catholciism. However, Para # 846 of the catechism seems to me to make perfectly clear tha if someone knows Catholicism is true but refuses to convert, then they cannot be saved.
On Q. #4: Again, I think your answer is excellent.
On Q. #5: See my respinse to Q. #3
Hi Jason,
Thanks for your comment. Good food for thought and a good discussion-initiator for this combox . . . .
As a small aside you write that, for catholics, the ordained clergyman is a priest, actually, if you'll pardon my pedenantry, deacons are also ordained clergymen.
Yes, I understand that, but he is a lesser and not the "main guy" in terms of head of a local congregation. When we are comparing clergy it is pastor as a parallel (and "sociological equivalent") to priest, not pastor -- Catholic deacon.
I have some problem saying that protestant ministers are called, at least without making some degree of equivocation.
To put it simply: They are called to what they are called to. If such a person became a Catholic, he could become a deacon or a professor at a seminary. Most Protestant clergy weren't called to be a priest, since it is a foreign category to them in the first place.
The Holy Spirit works with what He has to work with. Someone may be in error on several theological points (and we are all sinners and sometimes hypocrites as well), but that doesn't render null and void callings per se. God can work on whatever false doctrines we believe, over time. But He will use for His purposes anyone who is willing and whom He has given the gifts and grace to complete their task.
Para # 846 of the catechism seems to me to make perfectly clear that if someone knows Catholicism is true but refuses to convert, then they cannot be saved.
Yes; absolutely, if it gets to that point. But only God knows when it is because only He can read hearts. I didn't get the impression that Michael was asking about "salvation outside the Church" but rather, a more pastoral slant regarding the practical relational difficulties of mixed couples, so I didn't bring this in. But I definitely believe it and have often defended it.
As to Q #5, what do you think I am understating? I said a person must follow their conscience. The headship matter is often abused, and JPII was trying to approach the issue a bit differently to offset all that historical baggage of men "lording it over" their wives. I think he was exactly right to do so. But he did not deny headship altogether. Rather, he was developing the doctrine and delving into it on a far deeper level than most people previously had.
3) "What would be the church’s view on someone who is convinced the Catholic faith is true, but who is unable or chooses not to openly convert to Catholicism at this time? Is such a person committing a sin?"
It's seems to me that if a person has doubts for whatever reason, whether it is on doctrine or for moral reasons, then they are not "convinced." JH Newman said as much in his "Discourses to Mixed Congregations" on pg. 232. JHN then goes to say though that once doubts are removed, one should convert quickly because Satan does throw up roadblocks and one may lose their salvation if they don't then convert.
Hi Dave,
I have to say I'm having a hard time understanding what you actually mean by your statement:
"God can work on whatever false doctrines we believe, over time. But He will use for His purposes anyone who is willing and whom He has given the gifts and grace to complete their task."
How can this be true since we all know that there are pastors who, in good faith, believe that they are called by God, but go on to teach error until the day they die. How do you reconcile your comment with that fact? Invincible ignorance? As my priest and advisor once told me "yes, I had a call by God, but that did not give me the right to start my own church."
In Truth,
Matthew
If a Protestant demonstrates that the church has infallibly taught Y, isn’t that the end of the discussion for the catholic?
Yes, it should be -- assuming that the Protestant has demonstrated that the Church has infallible taught Y.
What would be the church’s view on someone who is convinced the Catholic faith is true, but who is unable or chooses not to openly convert to Catholicism at this time? Is such a person committing a sin?
The best answer to that question is found in Vatican II's dogmatic constitution Lumen Gentium 14:
This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.
Hi Matthew,
Let's put it this way:
If we believe that a Protestant can be saved, according to the knowledge that he has, if he hasn't had enough exposure to Catholic doctrine to be able to accept Catholicism, then don't you think that God would call a Protestant pastor or missionary who communicates the gospel to people, even though it isn't the fullness of the faith?
God will save people in whatever way He can. Some of these may be through various branches of Protestantism. If a person makes it to heaven without the benefit of having learned the Catholic faith, then I say that whoever helped them along the way, by God's grace, was called by God to do so.
God calls no one to teach error, but He calls people to help others to be His disciples and to spread His grace and His message, insofar as what is taught is true.
Commenting by HaloScan
