… in a letter to Eugenio Scalfari, founder of La Repubblica newspaper, Pope Francis said that non-believers are not excluded from heaven as long as they listen to their consciences.
Responding to a list of questions published in the paper by Mr. Scalfari, who is not a Roman Catholic, Francis wrote: “You ask me if the God of the Christians forgives those who don’t believe and who don’t seek the faith. I start by saying – and this is the fundamental thing – that God’s mercy has no limits if you go to him with a sincere and contrite heart. The issue for those who do not believe in God is to obey their conscience.
“Sin, even for those who have no faith, exists when people disobey their conscience.”
This is something that Francis has said before that seems to go against long-standing Catholic belief that atheism is a sin.
For those who are atheists, this statement does not matter in the least. But we should not be too quick to pour scorn on it and discount its importance. Those who take the idea of god and heaven seriously often worry about their loved ones’ who do not share their faith, that they will not enter heaven. The sentiment expressed by Francis may well come as a relief to them and serve to ease their anxiety and stop their efforts at conversion. For example, Charles Darwin’s wife Emma worried a lot about the fact that he was a non-believer and that therefore he would not be able to be with her in heaven. Darwin was aware of her anguish and it pained him greatly that he could do nothing about it.
But the orthodox are not going to be at all happy with this further sign of Francis’s capitulation to inclusivity and are likely to attack him for it. After all, such people like certainty while consciences are variable. What does one do when the consciences of people differ as to what is right?
Maybe it will assuage some. He definitely is not speaking ex cathedra.
The Necessity of Baptism
Pope Francis said that non-believers are not excluded from heaven as long as they listen to their consciences
As long as their consciences don’t lead them to disagree with the church, of course. I mean, following your conscience by using a condom is probably not on. In spite of the fact that a majority of 1st world catholics more or less do exactly that…
It amazes me that anyone manages to give even a little tiny rabbit pellet-sized poop about what the pope things, anyway.
Pope Jiminy Cricket the First?
How does he know? He’s just making up ‘feel good’ shit. Religion evolving to meet the needs of the times.
Easy! Point to the completely unchanging and inerrant word of god for all moral guidance, and ignore / wave away the counterpoint that christian morality has been far from unchanging and has frequently been found to err.
This pope is quite good and patting people on the head without changing anything. Tellingly, the conservatives within the church balk at even these minimal niceties, fearing I suppose that they may eventually lead to genuine change. Combat income inequality? Curb capitalistic excess and high money croneyism?? PINKO HIPPIE!
That, from the guy who excommunicates rape victims and those who help them (e.g. doctors who perform abortions on rape victims, those who report priests to the police), but those who perpetrated the rapes can stay in the club.
Excuse me for laughing at him judging our moral compasses when he doesn’t have one.
Pascal will have a hissy fit.
This is really quite a shocking departure from established doctrine. The basic statement of Church doctrine is the Catechism[1] which clearly says[2],
What the Pope said is, it seems to me, just flatly in contradiction to the Catechism that is taught to every Catholic child the world over before they are confirmed. I mean, what part of The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism does he not understand?
[1] http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM
[2] http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P3M.HTM
Just an Organic Regular Expression, ahem. I made a similar point @1, but the Pope was actually being Jesuitical rather than contradictory. The Sacrament itself is not needful according to the Catechism.
“[1258] those who suffer death for the sake of the faith without having received Baptism are baptized by their death for and with Christ”
He understands more than you do.
What you quote is also known as the baptism of blood or baptism of desire, where you get a free pass — in effect a virtual retroactive baptism — if you die wanting baptism but are prevented from getting it by circumstances.
But he seems to be talking about people who merely “obey their conscience” but who don’t believe in, or do not want the sacrament of baptism in any way.
JaORE, well, yes. Thus the casuistry.
(In the Catholic view, there is a Moral [Natural] Law to which conscience is beholden, and so supposedly anyone who holds to their conscience holds to it [http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c3a1.htm])
BTW, I once played a High Priest in a MMORG — there’s a knack to misleading without actually lying. And one doesn’t get to be High Priest [Pope] without that knack.
This is sort of bad news. I don’t want to go to Heaven at all, as in the end I don’t see much difference with Hell. Now if the pope had said that we atheists will return to nothingness I would be on board.