Pope: Atheists Are Saved

Pope Francis said,

The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, what about the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us first class children of God! 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, with everyone doing his 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 meeting: 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 shall meet there.

Here's an attempt by Catholics to defend his remarks. Do you agree? I'd love to hear from my Catholic friends on this. 

Comments

[DJ Jenkins]

Steve, I was confused on this the other day too. But a PCA friend of mine told me the Catholic doctrine is not "redeemed" as in justified in protestant doctrine. He explained it is more like a doctrine of common grace, or our doctrine of Imago Dei. The Pope apparently is saying they believe Jesus Christ began the "renewal of all things" (ie Col 1:20), and thus in light of the cross Atheists are capable of doing good too. This is what he means by redeemed.

This to me sounds like what we would affirm based on the Imago Dei, that Atheists (and all) are capable of great good because we are all made in the image of God, and because of common grace given by the Lord.

But apparently this does not mean the Pope is a universalist and doesn't mean he believes every person was forgiven of all sin through the cross.

Looking forward to what others say on here too!

[Clark Dunlap]

"The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: "

Doesn't sound like he's appealing to the Imago Dei, to me. I understand that protestants and catholics use terms that mean different things, but this sounds like universalism due to the appeal to the sacrificial work of Christ.

[DJ Jenkins]

No I agree Clark, sounds like that to us. I'm not saying he's appealing to the Imago Dei, I'm saying it's LIKE that for us. Again, I could be wrong, but a friend who knows Catholic doctrine better than I is telling me they are NOT saying all are forgiven of sin.

[Christiane]

Pope Francis is Catholic . . . he is referring to the deepest meaning of the Incarnation, which is also held by the Eastern Orthodox Christians

this view of the Incarnation is the MOST orthodox view in Christianity, in the ancient sense of traditional Catholic/Orthodox teaching,

and without understanding this meaning, any commentary from a person who doesn't share it or believe in it, may be incomplete and/or possibly a misunderstanding

go explore the Incarnation as a part of the Christ Event, through the eyes of the Catholic/Orthodox world, and you will understand the basis for Pope Francis' remarks

I do know enough about the truncated understanding of Incarnation held by some Christian people to see how it can be that Pope Francis' words could be taken through that smaller lens in a way that misunderstands how Incarnation is seen through the larger lens here:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02055a.htm

take a look at the reference, and remember that Pope Francis is a part of teachings that go back to the earliest beginning of understanding the Atonement as expressed in the Nicene Creed of the Councils . . . the Pope's meaning is very clear to me, and it is not some 'new' teaching. Far from it, his reference to the Incarnation does go back to include it in one of the first complete understandings of the Church in how Our Lord's Incarnation is an important part of the great mystery of the Atonement

the Southern Baptist that understands this the best, is someone called 'Jim G.' . . . if he shows up here, you can get an explanation of Pope Francis' comment in words that you would most clearly comprehend from your own theological point of views.
Jim G. is familiar with a more ancient Christian understanding of the Incarnation as a necessary part of the Atonement . . . perhaps he will come and join the conversation.

[Steve McCoy]

DJ, I don't think Catholics or the Pope are universalists. But the fact that they can't use biblical language to communicate clearly is a bad, bad thing. And the article I posted shows that this isn't the first Pope to not put together a biblical and coherent sentence on the issue.

[DJ Jenkins]

Yikes that 1981 one by Pope John Paul II is all kinds of trouble. Yeah, this stuff seems to be the stuff of the Reformation. Totally agree to not have clear and coherent soteriology is bad news.

[Alan]

I think Catholic soteriology is highly developed, but something which a Baptist (Sandy Creek or Charleston-style) like me would disagree.

The Catholic Church is itself a saving institution. Cyprian is full of these type of quotes to illustrate the Catholic teaching through the centuries, "'He that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved,' whatever has been before the end is a step by which we ascend to the summit of salvation, not a terminus wherein the full result of the ascent is already gained." On the Unity of the Church 21. And, "no remission of sins can be given outside the Church." Cyprian Epistle LXXII To Jubaianus, Concerning the Baptism of Heretics 24. One more, "He can no longer have God for his Father, who has not the Church for his mother." Cyprian On the Unity of the Church 6.

The key teachings here are that salvation is a journey rather than a final, judicial act as most Protestants would assert. The sacrifice of Christ is but one part of salvation and the sacraments provide additional elements in the soteriological scheme. This is one of the reasons Catholics engage in paedobaptism.

Now, the historian and political science student in me wants to point toward the powerful social and political controls that arise out of this type of scheme. The church historian in me sees within this the corrupting influence on theology of government interference on the church---something that afflicted both Rome and Geneva.