How to Get to Heaven - Bishop Barron’s Sunday Sermon
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 вер 2024
- Friends, in today’s first reading, we hear from St. Peter that it is only through the name of the Lord that we may be saved. Whatever elements of truth there are to be found in various religions, these partial elements participate in the fullness of truth found in Jesus. In Christ and through Christ, we are made to become participants in God’s own life.
SUBSCRIBE to my UA-cam channel to watch every Sunday Sermon: bit.ly/wof-subs...
---VIDEO LINKS---
Bishop Barron on Who Jesus Truly Is: • Bishop Barron on Who J...
Bishop Barron on How Jesus Can Be Both God and Human: • How Can Jesus be Both ...
Bishop Barron on Having a "Personal Relationship" with Jesus: • Bishop Barron on Havin...
Bishop Barron on the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist (Bishop Barron at 2020 Religious Education Congress): • The Real Presence of J...
---WATCH---
Subscribe to this Channel: bit.ly/31LV1sn
Word on Fire Institute Channel: bit.ly/2voBZMD
Word on Fire en Español Channel: bit.ly/2uFowjl
---WORD ON FIRE---
Word on Fire: www.wordonfire...
FREE Daily Gospel Reflections (English or Español): dailycatholicg...
---SOCIAL MEDIA---
Bishop Barron Instagram: bit.ly/2Sn2XgD
Bishop Barron Facebook: bit.ly/2Sltef5
Bishop Barron Twitter: bit.ly/2Hkz6yQ
Word on Fire Instagram: bit.ly/39sGNyZ
Word on Fire Facebook: bit.ly/2HmpPpW
Word on Fire Twitter: bit.ly/2UKO49h
Word on Fire en Español Instagram: bit.ly/38mqofD
Word on Fire en Español Facebook: bit.ly/2SlthaL
Word on Fire en Español Twitter: bit.ly/38n3VPt
---SUPPORT WORD ON FIRE---
Donate: www.wordonfire...
Word on Fire Store: store.wordonfi...
Pray: bit.ly/2vqU7Ft
Bishop you are bringing me back to Catholicism
@Clara Campbell God bless you in your journey.
🙏🙏🙏
God bless you Clara, if I may, Jesus is bringing you back to the Universal Church but Bishop Barron and the WOF team are the tools our Lord is using.
Jesus uses many different means to call and bring us home.
I pray my siblings will have the open mind and beautiful heart as you have.
Christ be with you.
Welcome back ! And God bless you.
Welcome Home! 🙏🙏🙏
As a protestant and avid follower of Bishop Barron I must say how much I was both encouraged and challenged by this powerful message. I am now wrestling with the decision of conversion to Catholicism. In the light of this message, have you any advice? Bless you!
Be not afraid, Jesus is guiding you!
May God bless you Peter!
I hope you get a reply directly from Bishop Barron, but I'd say: listen to his (Scott's) conversion story or read Scott & Kimberley Hahn's Rome Sweet Home.
Great channel called St. Paul Center and Scott Hann
I am catholic from Poland. You can talk with me and I can share with you my reflections about Catholicism from other part of globe. God bless you!
Listen to that voice of God, thru the Holy Spirit, and you'll find peace. Do not be troubled, and just say "Yes" to His call.... I'll pray for you... God bless!
Salvation is exclusively through Christ and Christ alone. But it is an exclusivity on offer to all so it is an inclusive exclusivity.
I agree 💯! Thank you. That is exactly what I was trying to say in my post.
Fr. Mike Schmitz homily expressed that sentiment for this week too,
Conscience is not an infallible guide.
I watch the whole video and find no flaw in it. Also saw some of the critics and think they’re a little quick to judge Bishop Barron’s message. Perhaps because he’s speaking from a well informed Catholic point of view and not taking the place of God. One simple analogy to go along with this commentary that I found not to long ago follows: I died and find myself in heaven “SAVED” , there, to my surprise see my atheist friend from high school to whom I quickly ask, how in the world are you in heaven when you didn’t even believe in God? Very simple, he answers me, I didn’t believe in God but what I did to get into heaven , is taught in the Catholic Church, and that’s how salvation is all in the Church. Of course, this isn’t a justification to not being Catholic but a broad way to think about God’s mercy and how Bishop Barron’s explains it.
I knew you would get criticized for this sermon. I listened to it today with two of my daughters who both have theology degrees. The three of us found your points clear and well said, unfortunately it seems you have critics that border on Feeneyism.
Quite right. Though it was condemned by Pius XII, Feeneyism has raised its ugly head in some quarters today.
I watched a Church Militant video regarding feeneyism. It seems Fr Feeney was never excommunicated for his views on the dogma of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, but rather not responding to the summons of Rome. I wonder then if feeneyism should be viewed as an 'ugly head' as his emminence Bishop Barron describes it. I am simply asking, as a novice catholic who wants to properly understand the dogma of extra ecclessiam nulla salus. I believe that being Catholic is essential, not a privilege, for our salvation.
@@BishopBarron
YaH The Heavenly FATHER (Genesis 1) HIMSELF was Who they Crucified/Pierced for our sins and “HERE IS THE PROOF”
From the Ancient Egyptian Semitic:
"Yad He Vav He" is what Moshe (Moses) wrote, when Moses asked YaH His Name (Exodus 3)
Ancient Egyptian Semitic Direct Translation
Yad - "Behold The Hand"
He - "Behold the Breath"
Vav - "Behold The NAIL"
I loved your gentle but concise message, thank you.
That term fullness bothers me. If there is fullness then there is not fullness does this not reiterate “ you are either with me or against me.” Bishop Baron, you use the word fullness, Peter does not. Puzzling for me for sure.
Double talk. Vatican political theology.
No. It’s the teaching of the Church.
My understanding of LG 2(16) is that it only applies to individuals who have not received the gospel and do not know Jesus through no fault of their own. In this day and age it seems these would be few.
@@stevelangford9949 And you thereby blithely condemn billions of Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus to eternal damnation.
@@BishopBarron No, he doesn't. It is up to God to condemn or save.
@@JoeRansom84 it’s a sword that cuts both ways. If you object to “can” be saved in the manner that Bishop Barron describes, you are implicitly saying that those groups cannot be saved. Can vs will is a KEY distinction and I think he more than adequately addressed that point.
These particular topics always seem to lead to attacks against Church leadership, a temptation too readily given into by some. These folks also cause confusion as I'm trying to absorb the teaching of a Bishop and they're telling me he's wrong or not entirely right and not even providing a clear argument as to what is wrong or not quite right. It's devisive and simply feeds into the current obsession with questioning Church authority. If I wasn't yet a Catholic, or my in-laws for instance who are not Catholic, I'd have real trouble right now trying to discern actual conversion and not simply becoming a cafeteria Catholic, which is ironically what those arguing with Bishop Barron are advocating against! In their supposed attempts to save unity, it seems to me that sadly they are advocating division. Always questioning and placing themselves against authority... Even above authority!... Sounds familiar, isn't that what led to 80k+ non Catholic Christian denominations? Of all the crises facing the Church today, I honestly believe reactionary criticism of authority is near the top of the list. I started to see video reactions to Bishop Barron's Sunday sermon pop up on my youtube suggestions and knowing Barron's work extensively, I first felt a deep sadness 'not this again', I thought. But what of folks who don't know the Bishop's work?? Also, making the excuse 'well, the Bishop says lots of good things, don't get me wrong' doesn't deflect from the challenge to his apostolic authority and confusing the faithful and leading to exactly more of what his detractors claim to dislike about his teaching here.
Absolutely right! Thanks.
@@BishopBarron we are with you, don’t worry. It is sad to see you so wilfully misrepresented by people who want a black and white answer to everything that is actually difficult to fathom in this life and beyond . So many seem to miss the nuances of language and don’t even try to hear what is actually being said in a spirit of true charity. . I still can’t believe how many commenters go on about the ‘dare we hope’ video without ever seeming to have watched it fully, and certainly having never read your clarifications on the WOF website.
I am disappointed that a certain priest on YT posted a response video without seeming to have spoken to you privately to clarify any potential misunderstandings in theology with regards to this homily . Poor form, I say.
Perhaps a conversation between the two of you, in this case, might quieten down the worst of the squabbling anti V2 masses that spend a great amount of time accusing fellow Catholics of heresy in various Comment streams. Or maybe that is just wishful thinking and the proverbial can of worms will just get even more worked up!
You are an inspiration, Bishop Barron- how you hold up under these ongoing attacks. I pray for you.
Thank you for drawing me back to the faith through the beauty of your great intellect and use of language .
VC
“The conscious is the aboriginal vicar representative of Christ in the soul.” That just blew me away and made clear to me that when “my conscious is telling me, do this, not that; say this, not that; this is wrong, this is right,” that this is Christ speaking to me from within my soul just as he spoke audibly to Christians in the Old Testament-eye opening. Thank you Bishop!
Beautiful
And now that we have the revelation of Jesus and the guidance of the church he started, we can discern the quality of the ears with which we listen to our conscious and measure what we hear against what God has taught us through them.
FYI, that's "conscience" not "conscious." It's the instinctive sense in every human rewarding us when we do good and punishing us when we do evil.
If Christ indeed is the creator then the general revelation about God is implanted in us. These are very powerful words. Missionaries have ventured into areas of our world where the people pretty well had the out line of salvation before the missionaries arrived.
Even if every time our conscience bothered us we scolded ourselves for our sins that would not give us entrance to heaven. Our conscience helps us to see how sinful we really are and hopefully like Abraham we will turn to Christ in faith for His forgiveness and redemption. But let us not kid ourselves in believing a different gospel then that which was entrusted to the apostles. Faith in the one that justifies i.e. Jesus Christ is the only narrow path that leads to life but this broad path that is being presented here as Jesus so famously said 'broad is the path that leads to perdition and many take it'.
Do some believe that at the time of our death Someone who do not believe in Jesus may be given the chance to accept or reject the unconditional love of Jesus And be welcomed into heaven
Father Barron, please retract yourself on this "fullness of salvation" claim, Jesus is the only way to salvation, and ambiguity on this point is leading a lot of souls into perdition
Yes it is ambiguous the claim of Bishop Barron's "Fullness of Salvation."
It’s the teaching of the Church, friend. I’d urge you to end your resistance to it.
@@BishopBarron The Church is The Mystical Body of Christ(The bride of Christ) made up of all of us. Which means it is capable of imperfectons. Jesus is The Head of The Church(The Man) which is perfect, not us.
The "fullness of salvation" expression is in the CCC, point 830 ... although is a bit longer as "fullness of the means of salvation" which seems a bit clearer. The footnote for this expression references two Vatican 2 documents (that aren't LG) as well as Ephesians 1:22-23.
I heard a very similar message from the Bishops of the Episcopal Church in the mid nineties. Our culture has nothing to do with this topic. It has been in existence since Jesus of Nazareth walked the earth as fully man and fully God over 2,000 years ago. Yes, there is fullness of salvation when we accept Him as Lord of our life. And we need not worry about the culture-if we are truly His followers and following the Holy Spirit, we will love the Lord our God with all of our heart, mind and strength, and we will love our neighbor as ourselves. This is how people of other faith are drawn to Jesus as Lord. Not through our empty philosophy. If I and the Church are living that way, don’t need to worry about “imperialism” because pride won’t be a part of who we are as followers of Christ. We can bring the Church into this topic as much as we like-but when compared to what Jesus actually said, along with St. Peter, well, the Truth becomes very clear. Sorry, Bishop but I’m not able to digest this infected message.
I came here because someone I respect said Bp Barron had gone off the rails. I don’t see that at all. I see a perfect explanation of Vatican II’s orthodoxy. There is nothing controversial here.
Thank you Bp Barron.
Precisely. The real issue is in regard to the Council. There are many today, who claim the mantle of conservative Catholic but who effectively deny the teaching of an ecumenical council.
Oky
@@BishopBarron Spot on with this. Should the church allow non-Catholic Christians to receive the Eucharist since we agree that Jesus freely gives all to anyone who accepts?
Thank you Bishop Barron for the best explanation of that passage! It is always of source of difficulty when trying to rectify our belief in Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior, and our love of others in other faith traditions. That idea of them being still guided by the voice of Christ in their conscience is awesome!
Thank you so much Bishop Barron, my heart is full
@@bishoprobertbarron7169I am so taken with this teaching and learning and reinforcing my faith. Gods love, living and dying in his grace.
Looking forward to your more indepth teachings. Help keep me on the right track
with God and your wisdom. Thank you!
This is heresy. For goodness sake!! Learn from the Saints and their teachings and not from this heretic priest!
No disrespect your Excellency but Christ is explicit about only one path. There are no “reflections,” only one light. To use ‘Vatican II’ is to use a doctrine that has been disastrous to the church. This sermon basically contradicts all your other works about how simple ‘I’m ok, you’re ok’ pitfalls are insufficient.
I’m a Catholic bishop. I defend the teachings of an ecumenical council.
@@BishopBarron I appreciate your response. I would also add that your work has been especially influential in brining me back to the church after over fifteen years in self imposed exile. God bless you!
He is the one light. All light is ultimately of him.
@@BishopBarron Sad Bishop. You should defend the Faith and the Word of God, not an ecumenical council. You are charged with keeping His Word pure and teaching it w/o perversion. Defending the council's poor understanding and watered down message is an abdication of your calling.
PS. The Greek word for 'Perversion' means to invert or turn upside down'. You are doing that to this Peter passage.
No where in the Bible does it mention the "fullness of salvation". You either accept Jesus as your savior and be saved, or you are not saved at all.
Catholics don't subscribe to Sola Scriptura. And by the way, the Trinity is never mentioned in the Bible.
@@BishopBarron Matthew 28:19 Go, therefore,* and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit,
Sounds like The Trinity to me.
@@FrankRios2b this does not entail the trinity in any way other than naming its parts. It does not describe anything about its relationship with itself. It was most formally culminated in the athanasian creed centuries later.
This asks the question can you be saved without knowing you're saved.
Jesus is the ONLY way to salvation.
He doesn't say anything else.
@@ralfbettker-cuza7432 He has said before that Christianity is the "privlidged" way to salvation.......this is a clear implication that their are other ways to salvation.
Look at the 7:07 mark of the video and he says other religions can save us.
@@MaggieSullivan60 No. He says that people of other religions can be saved, that’s completely different. The focus is on the person. All people, regardless of their belief system or personal belief, can only be saved through Jesus.
@@ralfbettker-cuza7432 He says they can be saved by the "light" in those religions.
@@MaggieSullivan60Yes, because this light is light from Christ shining through in these religions. Vatican II says "The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions" - because the fulness of truth can only be found in the Church and all truth and holiness stems from her and ultimately from Christ Himself.
"We must affirm Christian distinctiveness and completeness without falling into a kind of imperialism or violence; and affirm the truth in other religions without falling into relativism or Indifference." (12:10f.)
I think you just summarised authentic Vatican 2 in one Bishop Barron sounbyte! Nice 🙂
@@Hawka23
Bishop's own words. What a great presentation☆
Thanks for being here @Adam Lucas. Stay blessed☆
too bad there are so many Catholics misunderstanding this sermon and bad mouthing the good bishop on a lesser known 'traditionalist' catholic youtube channel involving a certain skateboarding priest
Lol cope
"DOMINUS IESUS"
ON THE UNICITY AND SALVIFIC UNIVERSALITY
OF JESUS CHRIST AND THE CHURCH
“This truth of faith does not lessen the sincere respect which the Church has for the religions of the world, but at the same time, it rules out, in a radical way, that mentality of indifferentism “characterized by a religious relativism which leads to the belief that 'one religion is as good as another'”.91 If it is true that the followers of other religions can receive divine grace, it is also certain that objectively speaking they are in a gravely deficient situation in comparison with those who, in the Church, have the fullness of the means of salvation.”
Precisely.
Believe. Be Strong. I know my sheep and they know me.
I’m a bit confused. I understand that everyone has a conscience, but I thought that the Bible had made it clear that it is impossible for man to always listen to his conscience and do the right thing. How can non-believers be reconciled with the Father and be saved? Thank you anyways for the great homily!
“And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd.”John 10:16 RSV-CI
May I continue to seek....continue to be drawn into the fullness in Christ
🙏🏾🙏🏾🙏🏾
This has a most shocking inner meaning that none of us are able to hear.
Be brought in - and God bless you and me both.
Jesus was talking about the gentiles, the pagans, non Jews.
He was talking about the Gentiles, and the meaning was bring them to His Church.
@@lemmdus2119 the point is that the one flock is the catholic church and the one Shepard is God almighty
Other religions are created by the fallen angels and offer demonic false teaching...Our Lord was explicit about the requirements. ..as where Hid apostles since they lived and died for Him as we all should too..the question is.....is a statement no longer namby pamby because an authority says so???? No is the answer..Our Lord is clear on what an idol is and Whom must be worshipped and whom shall not be worshiped...Jesus shook his head at Vaticant II in this regard...He was not pleased. ..for this has lead to watering down, the bumper sticker, etc...No..the Lord Jesus said if you reject Him, you reject the Father and He will reject you. ...its that simple. .the Buddhist after being offered a lifetime of opportunities to put his faith in Jesus yet rejects is doomed..there is no room to maneuver. .Now are Christians to use violence to spread or force belief ..noooooo of course not.. we woukd just be Islamic if we were. No ..we offer information to those around us, we offer the TRUTH...we give our life if necessary but we kill no one for the TRUTH..for part of the Truth is the freedom to say no...Our Lord shook the dust of three villages off His feet because of their rejection and He withered the fig tree for it bore no fruit...No people in other religions are doomed and Our Duty is to let them know they canbe saved if the accept Jesus as their savior having died for their sins (He died for many, bot all) and or duty is to answer and guide them TO Jesus if they so choose..but the road to Hell is very wide and most of the population is on that road, not as sinners but as unbelievers. .I ask why sow confusion when the evil ones do an astoundingly great job at it already...I ask why be Lukewarm with bitter water, when we, all of us can simply speak Truth to the world...History is History and no apologies are required ever, just eye the end of the field, keep focus on the row being plowed, there is no looking back..just foward..unbelievers have a God given right to go to Hell...and if in the end He shows His infinite mercy, so be it for it must be better All His Creation worship and glorify Him in the new world then have anyone in Hell but thats up to Him..not Us..He is the Master and we are the servants...but those who rejected are in Hell for eternity. .its their choice and again so be it...we as believers have no right to impinge on their choice......if on the otherhand this has something to do with institutional guilt anout the past. .there is no room to to make the water Lukewarm...No Our calling and those the church's calling is to cull the hot and the cold water, to separate , to distinguish ourselves from the world...may His Peace be upon the Bishop, our church, our leaders and the world so that they may see His Grace. .
You are marvelous in your teaching of The Vatican ll I your your story of how you presented Christianity and participation
@Laura Hall
.
1. Good people of other faith may be saved through God's grace. God is bigger than anything else and Heaven is His domain. He can choose to let anyone in. We don't know when this will happen so we don't put our chance to it.
2. The bible, oral teachings all state that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Only Catholics can be saved from these written criteria. Anyone can put themselves to chance to see if they can be saved by God's grace depending on each individual case but I will stick to what is known - the criteria we all know - be baptised in Jesus, do good works to justify our free gift of salvation, adhere to John 6:54 etc.
3. LG 16 is often quoted independently of LG 14 which affirms the teaching there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Its biased to focus only on LG 16 but ignoring LG 14.
4. Any council teachings cannot and should not introduce new dogmas and teaching. The Church for 2000 years, CCC 845, Dominic Iesus as well as LG 14 teaches there is no salvation outside the CC.
LG 16 cannot overide all these.
LG 16 cannot be the sole interpretation and criteria whilst ignoring LG14, CCC845 and DI.
5. There is no religious imperialism in believing there is no salvation outside the CCC. No violence needed. Christ didn't preach any of these. We follow Jesus. One can exercise their free will to believe this or reject this. No problem.
6. Did martyrs died in vain ? Why dont they renounce Jesus, lead a good life and still be saved in their new religion?
7. What is the basis of the interpretation that those who participate in a lesser light can be saved ? Where is that in the bible or Sacred Tradition?
LG cannot be quoted as the ONLY authority because we all know after the era of the Sacred Tradition, there in NO more new revelation. No more new teachings.
We only can only say they may be saved depending on the infinite mercy and goodness of God but we don't know. We should leave our salvation to "chance".
Its better to stick to the rules of how to be saved as taught by by the bible, Sacred T and 2000 years of Church teachings back up by the CCC, DI and LG14. LG 16 must be read in the light of all these.
Jesus Christ is the cornerstone.
The core of Bp. Barron's argument is the quote of Cd. Newman, whereby we are led to believe that the conscience is the voice of Christ.
He is making the conscience the cornerstone of salvation, a very grave error indeed.
Not even close, friend.
@@BishopBarron As close as your sophistic equating of the Logos to the individual conscience? Or did I miss something?
@@Salparadise808 You completely missed it.
Hmmm, it's a shame that Vatican ll is misleading...given that anyone - non Catholic can be saved given their conscience/ mindset. Given that, there's no need for conversion to Cathoalism. Anyone can consciously save themself.
No! You”can” survive a fall from a building. But it’s a heck of a lot easier with net.
@@BishopBarron Following your conscience and whatever light gives way to following demons and false gospels. Doesn’t Scripture warn of demons being able to deceive us because they can transform to beings of light and give us a false Gospel. Aren’t we warned to stay away from these. Why are we not being clear in sharing The Gospel of Jesus Christ. We are called to be salt and light. Some will find The Gospel offensive yet it is truth and we should not be ashamed of Jesus Christ. Whom do you serve. Are you bringing souls to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ or some confusing wishy washy all can be saved just by following their conscience. Are you kidding me? Be a Shepard and lead people to Jesus Christ. Are you feeding the flock or sending them to wallow in the mud because hey it really doesn’t matter go and follow that false god and do whatever your conscience tells you and you’ll end up in heaven. This is not what Jesus taught remember the narrow path. Why are so ashamed of your Lord and Saviour? Whom do you follow and where are you sending the lost who cone here to hear about Jesus Christ?
Bishop Barron is a much more nuanced, intellectual, & positive messenger of the gospel than are people like Taylor Marshall, who has gone off the rails. Ralph Martin and others like him choose to focus more on the difficulties of reaching salvation, which is an important emphasis. Barron does not often shy away from this, but he does tend to emphasize more the positive, that is, the availability of salvation to all, which is also an important message. I think we can acknowledge at the same time the good of Barron’s universal call, his reaching out to the disaffected Catholics, former Catholics, etc., as well as Martin’s appeal to those of us who tend to take the good for granted, who need to be reminded more often of the dangers involved in possibly presuming too much good on the part of others, not to mention ourselves. God is, as Rudolf Ott famously wrote, mysterium fascinans et tremendum. His will is unutterable and unfathomable. Let us stand with that, as the good Bishop says.
Jesus Christ I Trust In You. Amen.
For the sake of his sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.
777uuutu7u7uu7u7uu777yuu7uyu77uu2uuuuuuuu7uu7uy72y7u3uuu7uu7y7uuuu7yu77w7yu7y77uu77u7uyy76777uu7uui7yu737y77uu2uuuuuuuu7uu7
Amen
Bring people to the truth of the Catholic Church is one of the most loving things you can do for them.
If you actually read Lumen Gentium there's no mention of "fullness of salvation" as if you can achieve half or a quarter salvation. What it says is that yes there is some measure of truth in other religions (especially the Abrahamic faiths of Judaism and Islam). But it says those truths at best provide a preparation for the reception of the gospel truth. It even says that if, through no fault of your own, you've been sheltered from the message of the gospel, but still act with good will that you may still be saved (though this is incredibly unlikely in this day and age to occur except perhaps for children in non-Christian households). The truth remains that if you are made aware, by the grace of God, of the gospel then it is your duty and salvation to repent of your sin and believe. This may be challenging and may take much time and graces, but must then be achieved in order to be saved according to us Catholics.
I believe he answered this in another comment and clarified that there is not a full or partial means, but that salvation is salvation. Participation in that salvation is either full or partial. Read CCC 830 for more reference as to the fullness of the means of salvation in the CC.
Blessed teachings on getting to heaven.Thankyou to Bishop Barron.
This is a heretical message, Bishop Barron is dead wrong. LG16 mentions zero about alternate or lesser salvation participation. This is dangerous and misleading to the faithful. Jesus Christ is the ONLY path to salvation.
Wow, making a video like this and putting online is a pretty courageous move in this day and age.
I know you’ll get some pushback from those who think you are advocating relativism or saying that you don’t need Christ to be saved, but to me your point is a good one - if Christ is the light of the world, it must by necessity be His light (or a reflection of it) which shines in every bit of truth or goodness found in any faith or philosophy.
In that sense, good and truthful people from every time and place can be accurately accused of “Jesus smuggling”, since the goodness and truth that they pass on into the world can ultimately have no other source but Him.
You lost me on "are there participation or reflections ..." Even when you tried to support your statements by quoting vatican and L G ,16. He was crucified precisely because he Jesus was not accepted. Sorry can't support your analysis it just doesn't sound right.
Thanks anyway.
Read Lumen Gentium 16 again carefully.
@@BishopBarron Read The Gospel again carefully. Souls are at stake . You are a Bishop in The Catholic Church. The Church founded by Jesus Christ. Should you not be leading souls to Jesus Christ where there is salvation or leave them on the wide path that leads to destruction.
Interesting , to say the least when in today's Gospel our Lord 🙏 reference himself as The Gate , time and time again He reference Himself as The Way ,The Bread of life,The Truth, The Shepherd, The only Way to The Father. While I love all humans created in His Image He left His Mission to His Apostles (in the Catholic church ) to go and tell the Good News. I understand that there maybe a person who never heard this Good News of Our Lord and choose a different path to God but once you hear the News that Jesus is the way how can one ignore that and start forging s reflection or a different path that is not of His.
I have charity towards all fellow human being that while not a Christian is a part of God's creation and for that my respect but truly one need to (by the nature of our Lords call ) tell this Good News that He so much repeated over and over and died for. This is not a privilege for some this is a precious gift that only Christ can give . One either accept or not. Too many persecuted Christians died and continued to died for this truth . It overwhelms me the lukewarm nees of so many people including our clergy regarding this teaching of our Lord. On Good Friday a few years back in Alepo a young Christian woman on her way to Good Friday liturgy was wearing a Cross and for that reason she was tied to a pole near the church and her throat was slit by a non christian. Because of them( martyrs who died for this truth that Jesus is the way) we need to proclaim and shout Jesus is the only way to salvation. Stop watering down the truth left by Christ in our Church by picking this and that justifications. We must preach the truth with all the consequences or else not do it at all.
I am not angry at anyone or the church but we seek the truth not a backdoor to reach heaven
This is the most egregious description of Peters passage I have ever heard. It sounds kind, inclusive, non-aggressive and this all appeals to our modern relativistic world views. This talk says right things, then retracts them; says it won't mamby pamby but then does just that.
Our conscience cannot save us! There is no partial sliver of light in other religions, that is nonsense. Each of those religions expressly denies Christ as Lord and savior! Following our conscience has no power to save us when we fail to do so.....and we all fail to do so!
All Truth excludes falsehood, and Barron wants to 'not be aggressively exclusive???' No, he does not want to proclaim the exclusivity of Jesus as the "ONLY" way to be saved.
This is a watered down Gospel, worse, a distortion of the Gospel and will falsely give hope to people who don't know Jesus and let them believe that if they have a shred of morality they will be saved.
This is pure apostacy and it is spreading seeds of the evil one amongst your own sheep!
I suggest that everyone also listen to Ralph Martin who went to Rome and got his doctorate on this particular teaching. Also Father Goring because they don’t agree with all of this. Now they do agree with most of this but in some core points is not the teaching of the Vatican ll. Ralph Martin, who again went to Rome and got his doctorate studying this particular document. Again Bishop Barron is saying don’t write him letters but go to the experts on this particular issue.
Not so! They are offering an unnecessarily harsh and ungenerous reading of the text. No one is advocating indifferentism or suggesting that we shouldn’t evangelize. But the Council fathers clearly wanted to err on the side of divine mercy to those outside the formal structures of the Church.
@@BishopBarron I think if the Council fathers CLEARLY wanted to err on the side of divine mercy, someone like Dr. Ralph Martin, who admires you and the work you've done (as do I), wouldn't seem to have a different interpretation.
I'm sorry for the flak you're taking. I don't wish that upon anyone. You were instrumental in my returning to the faith. This is a topic (salvation in general) that causes me great pain and confusion. Traditional Catholicism seems to hold that most people are damned, and more modern thinking seems to be just the opposite. I can't get a clear answer from the Church, and I'm not interested in my own poorly formed opinion, try as I might. It would be a great gift if you and Dr. Martin sat down together and worked through this. I know it can be easy to misunderstand each other, especially regarding such a sensitive and important topic.
Take care and God Bless!
@@nickk4851 I believe he offers an unnecessarily harsh interpretation of the text. Read LG16 for yourself and see which of us is closer to the intention of the authors.
@@BishopBarron Thank you Bishop. It always makes me laugh if someone implies you don't think evangelization is important - LOL thats what you and WOF do all the time - evangelize:) I know I need to be thoughtful of my own salvation even though I cannot "earn" it, but I do not understand the desire by some for hell to be chuck full of people.
@@jeannem3688 Thanks, Jeanne. I share your puzzlement on both scores.
I have been a follower of the weekly sermons of Bishop R. Barron and this is the first time that to me he sounded not so convincing. Perhaps I missed out on the notion of "the conscience as the aboriginal vicar of Christ in the soul". Vatican Council II is too close to call and so is Lumen Gentium Chapter 16. I believe in the words of our Lord Jesus Christ when He said to the world the first and great commandment ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all yoursoul and with all your mind and with all your strength. The second is this: There is no commandment greater than these.”
God out of His love for all His children desires for everyone to be saved. I love your explanation because my heart is always with the people who were never given the upbringing and gift of the fullness of the Christian faith. God wants us all. This explains how we are all capable of this and how it still all goes back to Christ. I thank God for the gift of the path of faith He chose for me and I pray that everyone can be led to His love through Christ. Jesus I trust in You! ❤️❤️❤️
Bishop Barren, your words are so constructive illuminating my path in life.
God Bless
Thank you, Bishop... As I was thinking of my boss and a few colleagues in a contemptuous way (because they talked about how they "hated" Christianity in a meeting, I work in an academic setting) I kept my silence during the meeting but I was reactive to those careless, prideful and ignorant words.... Thank you for letting me see through my contempt... and I will try my best not to judge....
I'd ask why they hate it. Did a Christian ever hurt them by acting in a Christian Way?
Its good not to judge yes, but be bold and stand up for the faith. Don't be fooled into blindly accepting other faiths. For many of them do indeed hate Christians and we have to pray for them yes, but not get pulled into their falsehood and mokery.
The first commandment talks against false gods and idols.
I agree with S Stritmatter. The best evangelists are good listeners. I have found people often say these things just to get God to respond. Remember the woman at the well who asked Jesus in a provocative way , "You Jews......" He used saw her anger, read into her heart and transformed it. Looks like God has chosen you.
My mother always said, "kill 'em with kindness". I know the use of the verb "kill" seems a bit over the top, but what Mom was getting at was to get others to be open to dialogue without you needing to engage them "head on" which leads no where. I often like to ask a nonconfrontational question that doesn't upset the other. One they can respond to comfortably. If they respond, then perhaps you have successfully started a dialogue and you can choose to take the engagement where you want to a step at a time, perhaps over many days, weeks, months or years. Rarely does a person change quickly. Consider it "subtle evangelization". Think of Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane. He controlled the entire engagement under less than favorable conditions.
It seems like academics are trying to be the new clerics but they're not.
Thank you Bishop Barron for an excellent homily! The only thing I wish you added is the necessity of the formation of one's conscience property. For if we follow the world teachings, our conscience become darkened.
Thank you, Bishop. I think you helped me clarify what my heart is seeing in our culture and the little ways I see people turning back towards God. I was having difficulty squaring my thoughts with the teaching of the church but your sermon helped. God bless!
You tackled a very difficult thought for many of us and put it into perspective. Thank you for your well researched words and letting us know where we can go to reference them. God Bless you.
@Maureen Guarino
.
1. Good people of other faith may be saved through God's grace. God is bigger than anything else and Heaven is His domain. He can choose to let anyone in. We don't know when this will happen so we don't put our chance to it.
2. The bible, oral teachings all state that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Only Catholics can be saved from these written criteria. Anyone can put themselves to chance to see if they can be saved by God's grace depending on each individual case but I will stick to what is known - the criteria we all know - be baptised in Jesus, do good works to justify our free gift of salvation, adhere to John 6:54 etc.
3. LG 16 is often quoted independently of LG 14 which affirms the teaching there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Its biased to focus only on LG 16 but ignoring LG 14.
4. Any council teachings cannot and should not introduce new dogmas and teaching. The Church for 2000 years, CCC 845, Dominic Iesus as well as LG 14 teaches there is no salvation outside the CC.
LG 16 cannot overide all these.
LG 16 cannot be the sole interpretation and criteria whilst ignoring LG14, CCC845 and DI.
5. There is no religious imperialism in believing there is no salvation outside the CCC. No violence needed. Christ didn't preach any of these. We follow Jesus. One can exercise their free will to believe this or reject this. No problem.
6. Did martyrs died in vain ? Why dont they renounce Jesus, lead a good life and still be saved in their new religion?
7. What is the basis of the interpretation that those who participate in a lesser light can be saved ? Where is that in the bible or Sacred Tradition?
LG cannot be quoted as the ONLY authority because we all know after the era of the Sacred Tradition, there in NO more new revelation. No more new teachings.
We only can only say they may be saved depending on the infinite mercy and goodness of God but we don't know. We should leave our salvation to "chance".
Its better to stick to the rules of how to be saved as taught by by the bible, Sacred T and 2000 years of Church teachings back up by the CCC, DI and LG14. LG 16 must be read in the light of all these.
Maureen Guarino,
you have expressed the exact thoughts on my mind.
*God bless Bishop Barron☆*
This is a heretical message, Bishop Barron is dead wrong. LG16 mentions zero about alternate or lesser salvation participation. This is dangerous and misleading to the faithful. Jesus Christ is the ONLY path to salvation.
@@marypinakat8594 Fr Mark Goring, Reason & Theology and Ralph Martin are not rad trads and are ardent supporters of V2 and LG. But they have come out to say that what Bishop Barron teaches error when he says
1. Lesser rays of light can participate in Christ's redemption. The V2 Council Fathers never teach this and it is not found anyway in LG
2. Following one's conscious is participating in Christ's redemption as the conscious is the aboriginal vicar of Christ. Bishop Barron quoted Cardinal Newman on this. If this true, then it is Newman's idea but not the Council Fathers'. This is also a new invention.
Non Catholics can be saved. This I agree with Bishop. However they are saved ONLY by the special grace of God who opens a green channel to let anyone He deems fit to go in. But He does not disclose the conditions so we still stick with what we know - there is no salvation outside the CC as it is still being taught in LG 16, CCC 845 and Dominus Iesus (issued by Cardinal Ratzinger, and signed off by Pope St JP2.
In Bishop Barron's earnestness to reach out to non Catholics, he has over compensate and teach errors.
@@jeremiahong248
Neither Fr. Goring or Mr. Martin has brought back as many back to Church as Bishop Barron; nor are as many non-believers and atheists helped by these two to discover truth or God as Bishop Robert Barron.
Jesus says “You are either with me or against me.” Speculating on who is saved or damned is pure speculation. It is a good idea to believe & follow Our Lord. The idea of the conscience being The Holy Spirit in my opinion is wrong. Many politicians former presidents have made the statement about sin is following my own conscience. Big mistake. Trying to say 75% of people in the world aren’t saved because they don’t have the true Catholic Truth isn’t trying to hurt anybody. We as people laymen have to be evangelist and talk about The True Catholic Faith. Everybody isn’t saved because they are following their conscience. “You are either with me or against me”. I am not sure who will be saved in the end however , we don’t want to speculate that everybody will be saved. Reality check there is a Heaven & Hell. Also Purgatory. Repent of your sins & believe in Our Lord. Start reading The New Testament
So many scriptures I could point to that contradicts this teaching on 'going to heaven' or whatever you want to call it, being saved, attaining eternal life . Here a few for you from the gospel of John. John 3:33 He who believes in the son of God has eternal life and he who does not believe the son shall not see life but the wrath of God abide on him. John 3:15 that whoever believe in Him should not perish but have eternal life. John 3:18 He who believes in Him is not condemned but he does not believe is condemned already because he does not believe in the name of the only begotten son of God. John 8:24 Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins for if you do not believe that I'm He you will die in your sins.
Are you a Protestant?
How do those passages contradict this teaching??
The only problem I find with this sermon is that Bishop Barron doesn't seem to be super-clear enough.
However, what he teaches here is in fact Church Teaching. A Muslim who follows Christ's Light within his Paradigm (as Christ's Light exists in all Paradigms, it's just a matter of degree) could be saved.
Remember even as God has chosen us, we too, in the end have to choose Him.
The Mystics say Christ gives everyone a chance at the end of life to choose Him. A Buddhist who follows His Light and sees the Fullness of that Light Revealed to him/her at the end of life could say yes to Him!
@@thekingslady1 Do not be ashamed of Jesus Christ. He is not one of many. He doesn’t coexist with other” gods” He is God come in the flesh. He is above all and one day every knee will bow. Jesus gave us the great commission to share The Gospel to all nations not some watered down version. Even the demons can appear has angels of light and give a false gospel of just follow your conscience. Do not be deceived. We are to love others but also to be salt and light. Why salt because the message of Jesus Christ may offend some but we are called to share The Gospel of Jesus Christ and Him crucified. That means there was a reason for His passion death and resurrection and you should share that boldly unless you are ashamed of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
@@thekingslady1 1) I'm a Christian for I have made Jesus Christ my lord. I'm neither a protestant nor a catholic I'm a follower of Christ. To paraphrase Paul in 1 Corinthians chapter 3: Party spirit is not of God for one says I'm of Paul another I'm of Apollos another of Peter. Let me ask you has Paul or Apollos or Peter been crucified on your behalf? No we are of Christ for it He who died for our sins. 2) You say " A Muslim who follows Christ's Light within his Paradigm (as Christ's Light exists in all Paradigms, it's just a matter of degree) could be saved." You will find no scriptures in the bible that will back that claim but will find clear biblical teachings to the contrary. 1John 5:13 I'm writing this to you so that you may know that you have eternal life YOU that BELIEVE in the son of God. Muslim do not believe that Jesus is the son of God. Simple logic here, unless they accept Him as the son of God in whom eternal life can be found they are not going to heaven. 1John 4:10-11 He who believes in the son of God has the witness in himself but he does not believe the testimony of the God has given to his son makes Him a liar and this is the testimony that God has given us, that eternal life is in His son. 3) A given Muslim may be a very nice person and very giving and loving but we are not saved on the basis of our 'goodness' but on the basis of God's provision for our salvation. That provision is Jesus the lamb of God. When Adam and Eve sinned and hid their sins with leaves, a metaphor for what men can come up to hide their sins God rejected this cover-up and slayed a lamb and covered them with the skin. Basically announcing the gospel to them; That God would Himself provide a innocent victim (Jesus) to atone for mankind's sin. As we like to say the buck stop at the top and indeed it does and God took upon Himself to remedy for our sins and became man that He may save man by dying in his place. Abel offered a lamb and it was accepted because he demonstrated his trust in God's redemptive way and goodness. That broken trust that began with Adam in Eve was in effect restored. That is to say God is good and trustworthy. On the other hand Cain offered the fruits of the field. Field is another metaphor for humanity in other words the philosophies and manmade religions and it was rejected by God. Why? It's simple if you are too proud to accept God's redemptive way then evidently this relationship is still broken, you remain separated from God. Some would rather die then accept the loving gift of God and so they will remain alone in darkness for eternity. They get what they wanted in the end; to be left alone. The bible calls this existence hell.
@@tabas9948 your comment epitomizes the ugly Pharisee-ism in Evangelical Christianty.
Firstly, you are a Protestant. You can call it "party spirit" or whatever you want while quoting The Bible - *a Catholic document* might I add - but if you are not a Catholic or Orthodox Christian, you are a PROTESTANT. Period.
Secondly, stop preaching to me. I am well aware of The Gospel.
Finally, your lack of emphasis on God's Grace is what makes your mentality Pharisaical and legalistic. God's Grace ALONE is what saves. Evangelical Christianty's hyper-focus on "faith alone" and "beeeeelllliiieevee... beeeeelllliiieevee.... beeeeelllliiieevee" at the expense of God's Grace is what has bred this ugliness that God is about to judge most vehemently! [Yes! God is bringing Judgement on Evangelical].
If a Muslim, at the moment of death is offered Divine Mercy - which our Catholic Mystics have said does happen - by Christ Himself and he accepts it, who are you to say that he won't be saved??? Such a person has been following Christ's Light within his Paradigm his entire life and at the moment of his death Christ reveals to him that He is the Fullness of the Light he had been following for a lifetime; who are you to say such a Muslim would FOR SURE reject Christ?? You don't know that!!
Catholic Teaching says he very well could accept Christ!!
You need to GET OUT of your toxic, Evangelical Paradigm - a Paradigm of gracelessness!!!
@@thekingslady1 You are totally right, I do not nor did I claim to know that a Muslim may have or have had a revelation of the son of God and accept Him as his savior on his death bed. Both thieves on the cross had to have heard of Jesus with all the miracles He was performing and one did receive Him as his Lord on his proverbial death bed and the other rejected Him. Jesus said to the one that received Him, YOU will be in paradise with me. The bible does say that repentance is a gift of God and He tells man not to harden their heart on the day of their visitation. So I believe everyone at some point in their life has a visitation of the son of God and they have to decide for themselves to accept or reject Him as their savior. You are also right that it is by the grace of God that we are saved for as Jesus said to his disciples "it is impossible for man to save himself but to God all things are possible". On your other point of 'faith alone' although technically Luther said 'gratia sola' (grace alone) which is professed, as you rightly asserted, by protestant while the Catholic's teaching is 'gratia prima' (grace first), neither one fully lines up with the scriptures at least as it is applied by each respective 'party' (insert your preferred term here, sorry for the offence English is not my mother tongue). The Catholics church emphasises good works to the point that it nullifies the grace of God as if you could earn your salvation and most protestant denominations emphasise resting in the faith alone to the point of rendering the grace of God vain. The apostle Paul warns against rendering the grace of God vain and he encourages the saints (saints is here used as the apostles use it, meaning the believers) to do good works for as the scriptures say "God is not mock". The best example I can come up to balance God's grace and man responsibility is this. Imagine a poor American kid who cannot afford to go to university let alone a prestigious one but then comes along a benefactor that offers him a scholarship to the best university in the country. He accepts it. The benefactor comes back a few years later and finds that the kid spent it on drinking and loose living. He is enraged and send the kid to jail. What we see here is that no amount of work this kid could have done would have open the door to any prestigious universities. On the other hand he had the responsibility to use the gracious gift as it was intended. Now on your last point of the word 'believe' that you seem to be so offended by, may I point out that no where do I say the word believe but every time it is the written word of God. Ask yourself why do you find the word of God so offensive. By the way the word 'believe' in the form of a noun [believer(s)] or verb is found 325 times in the bibles. Although not all 325 entry is in the context of faith It still must be important to God would you not say so? On your other point of 'gracelessness' I'll keep that in mind. I strive to be gracious but if the word of God offends you you'll have to take it up with the Lord.
I appreciate this video.... however... as profound as St JH Newman's quote is.. i still have a question. What about people who follow their conscience... but they dont have a properly formed conscience? Some have no problem with fornication... etc..? That is a problem right? So I still see it as kind of a loose relativism. Does anyone agree? Thoughts?
Yes I think that’s right. I think the conscious is something that you negotiate with and build a relationship with over time, just like any other long term relationship. I think it is a form of relativism to say that if you’re going along with your conscious then you’re by default doing the right thing. I think the conscious is something that needs to grow and develop. In other words it also needs to figure things out so it’s like a two way road / two party relationship between you and your conscious.
I think that non-Catholics are still required to follow all of God’s commandments. Without sanctifying Grace, that will be extremely difficult. Even us Catholics, unfortunately, commit mortal sin and therefore need the Sacrament of Penance.
And we have to conform our conscience to the Truth.
Wow, I genuinely like so much the Bishop says, but this is leaning towards indifferentism, this is where the luke warm starts.. The diluting of church teaching.. Danger.. Alert..
If a non Catholic follows his faith, this is the same as following the lord..
Its sad, there is no aggressive exclusivism. Dare i say lol... There is only the truth and falsehood... There is no in between...
Does is mean God can save others.. Maybe?!
Does it mean that warrants other religions lead to Christ also? NOPE!
There's a contradiction..
No, no. I was explicit in my condemnation of indifferentism in regard to evangelization. Of course we want to bring everyone to faith in Christ. But the clear teaching of the Second Vatican Council is that non-Catholics, even non-Christians "can" be saved. The Council is not saying it's automatic, easy, or even likely, but it is possible, precisely through a participation in Christ available through their tradition. This is not an either/or.
@@BishopBarron Thanks for replying Bishop, I really appreciate that.
I do see what you're trying to say, we must try to be open to truths.. I understand that approach, but I sense a danger lurking.
Firstly, wouldn't it be counter intuitive to say participation in other faiths, do lead to the truth of Christ.. Especially to our missions and missionary work over the centuries?
Work done by our beloved saints, they professed the love of God and of Christ, the Savior. They never said to continue in their own faiths and be hopeful of salvation. They preached salvation in Christ.
Secondly, also related, Christ told us to go forth and proclaim the Gospel, and make disciplines... He never gave us a secondary option, or if they don't listen, their truths in their faith, can show participation and lead to salvation also.
Furthermore, couldn't that encourage others to leave the one true faith, and seek other faiths, as maybe they will get the best of both worlds. As often catholics have left The Church, and found other religious groups, that seems more tolerating of sins but yet participating in the bigger truths of loving a god and each other..? Couldnt this then sow the seeds of disunity among the faithful.
Thus where would one draw the line?
Eventually leading to hypocrisy? Other faiths would then see catholics as not holding to our own teachings.
Finally, ambiguity is a dangerous terrain, the evil one does try to confuse, create ambiguity, find loopholes.. Distort the true teachings of Our Lord,... Very subtly, very slowly, and very cunningly,.
This would seem to be diabolical action.
All these, and yet, i haven't even uttered the reality that many times other faiths can indeed dilute the teachings of our Lord so drastically, that indeed one may doubt the one true faith, with all this confusion.
Even if our Lord decided to save others, it is not our place to say that other faiths would be His method. For like you said at the start, there is but One Name, One Truth, and the so called parallel rays, could indeed take people away, and not even bring them closer.
So, even if based on the second council, why take the risk of going against Christ own words and teachings? Would it worth it in the end, if it indeed offends the Lord?
Remember..
"I am the Lord your God, and you shall have no other gods, besides me"
Kind regards and God bless.
This is the same fellow that said that the choice on one presidential candidate over the other is not necessarily higher even though only one was against abortion. No matter how eloquent this sounds, it is hard to fully follow this fellow.
@Bishop Robert Barron False impersonation of Bishop Barron
I know that a few times in scripture it is clear that God has no problem wiping out whole nations of people who are unrepenting in their ways.....just saying....I'll stick to the words of Christ....
@@susiegreenwood8320 Good.
A couple sincere questions on what is mostly a great sermon: In this culture, using terms like “if you follow your conscience you can be saved” is dangerously naive. The culture has distorted our children’s consciences to the point of not even recognizing the true, the good and the beautiful. Without explaining that, many will latch onto this sermon as the exact opposite of what the Bishop intends. Also, using “fullness of salvation” gives the impression to those who think they can settle for ‘less fullness’ by just following Jesus’ teaching partially. I say this again not because the Bishop intends it, but because that is how those who want to rationalize their actions or unbelief will hear it this way. I guess my argument is that Bishop Barron’s intellectual approach is both wonderful and yet short of the mark-- no Christian is suggesting that we should ‘use violence’ to push Christianity. Christians aren’t excluding’ others when they point out that Jesus is the way and the life--and yet this culture teaches that even saying that is being hateful. And the Bishop is in a sense accepting of that accusation. The Bishop doesn’t explain that evangelizing is for the GOOD of the non believer. Instead this sounds somewhat more like an excuse; that ‘hey, don’t worry, follow your conscience and you can still get to heaven; you just won’t have the fullness of salvation’. Again, Bishop, you had to explain that this isnt what you mean, which means you know this is likely how it will be interpreted. Why not just point out at least after all the intellectual language that 1) Jesus saves 2) there are eternal consequences if a person rejects this and 3) Christians want everyone to know this for the sake of their eternal soul
Abusus non tollit usum.
@@BishopBarron after reading the translation, makes me wonder if your point is that people who “abuse” or misunderstand what you say, it’s sort of their problem and not an argument. Okay, although that assumes the problem is with the hearer alone and the speaker has no requirement to be clear or complete. Even so, you might want to listen to Ralph Martin’s charitable response that provides more clarity to what Vatican Documents say regarding this, and hence will be less likely that people will misunderstand; such as including the conditions needed for salvation, inculpable ignorance, seeking God, etc and also how LG speaks about how people’s consciences can be distorted explaining why evangelism is so very much needed.
@@gailpfeiffer2331 Show me where in my sermon I said evangelism isn’t needed. I argued just the opposite.
@@gailpfeiffer2331 No, I mean that just because the language of Lumen Gentium can be misinterpreted, it doesn't mean that we should reject it. Sure, someone could read the text and draw the erroneous conclusion that evangelization doesn't matter or that everyone is going to be saved anyway, but the danger of the misinterpretation shouldn't lead us to reject the good and valuable things that LG actually teaches.
Respectfully, yes, you stated that evangelism was still needed and that wasn’t my criticism. But I wouldn’t say that you “argued” the point, but you did assert it. I stated in my first post that it was “mostly a good sermon” because you did include this and made sure people didn’t think you were promoting indifference or universalism. This is a good thing. My criticism is that by omitting the conditions stated in LG related to those who ‘can’ be saved, you ‘soft sold’ the difficult passage you were asking people to reflect on. And by describing one’s following his conscience as following Christ, (without perhaps even realizing it,) the hearer needed the additional explanation by LG about how the conscience can mislead -for clarity’s sake if nothing else.
EXCELLENT Bishop Barron. Thank you. God bless you.🙏
This is so much better explained than @mike winger’s fundamentalist caricature of this teaching. Blessings
...“BUT VERY OFTEN, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, have exchanged the truth of God for a lie and served the world rather than the Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to ultimate despair. Hence to procure the glory of God and the salvation of all these, the Church, mindful of the Lord‘s command, ‘preach the Gospel to every creature’ takes zealous care to foster the missions.” (LG 16)
JESUS is THE WAY, THE TRUTH, and THE LIFE!
Come to Christ alone and be saved for eternity. Jesus is the only way. Come to Him. All your sins will be forgiven and you will receive eternal life
So basically if a person follows natural law and believes in his heart that he is doing the right thing, he can be saved, right? Why are people saying that this is new? This has been the teaching of the Church even before Vatican II.
Bishop, thanks for aiding my understanding on how one might get into heaven. Honestly, I do not know a %💯 on what to do to get into heaven, but I do know that it is Jesus who will decide my fate in the end. Therefore, in efforts to increase my chances, I try to be honest and to be kind-be the best I can be for Jesus. I look into Scriptures sometimes for answers and this video helps a lot. I pray, hope, and love like the Good Samaritan. I also look into Mary’s “yes” to God and for her humility to touch me. Maybe, she can put a good word for me in the end, when I die and that I will enter eternal life eventually.
Do you avail yourself of the Sacraments?
@@michaelmicek Not for you to judge.
Eph 2:8-9! God bless!
Jesus suffered and died on the cross so all who believe in Him will be saved and have eternal life. If there was another way He would have taken it.
The explanation given by the good bishop is not easy to follow. Probably a better image is one in which all human race are prisoners and slave of sin and were freed and saved by Jesus alone by his sacrifice in the cross regardless whether or not each prisoner knows it was Jesus who paid the ransom. Some prisoners may refuse the pardon and preferred to stay in prison. Some prisoners happily get out and never bothered to find out who it is. It does not matter because it is still Jesus who saved them as long as they lived their lives according to God's law albeit through different route. Some prisoners happily get out and found out who paid the ransom and followed him.
Don't forget about the last section of Lumen Gentium 16! The Evil One often convinces us of his lies.
Thanks Bishop. This homily depicts the meaning of the word "catholic church"...God bless you Bishop....
It really does, but it doesn’t follow the word of God where Jesus says “I am the way the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father except by Me” John 14:6
In a teological understanding of the text you just quoted is possible. Where is Abraham and Moses now? Where do you place Jesus in the Salvation of the people before the Mystery of the Incarnation of the Word...?
@@emmanueldansoabeam718
I personally will only speak what the scriptures has spoken, or these two men here are just two:
“For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.””
Romans 4:3 NKJV
“And Moses indeed was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which would be spoken afterward, but Christ as a Son over His own house, whose house we are if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm to the end.”
Hebrews 3:5-6 NKJV
Scriptures in the Old Testament prophesied about the coming of Christ,
But for them, it was by faith, in Jehovah, and not the other gods of the land of the Canaanites etc.
@@emmanueldansoabeam718
Who are the righteous, those who believe in the Som of God, and live a life that accords with the gospel, dying to self, and living to the glory of God,
“For the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God? Now “If the righteous one is scarcely saved, Where will the ungodly and the sinner appear?””
I Peter 4:17-18 NKJV
@@emmanueldansoabeam718
We have two covenants right. Scriptures point to us “Knowing The Lord”,
“For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.” In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.”
Hebrews 8:10-13 NKJV
I’ve reviewed the section in the Lumen Gentium document and find exactly what you are speaking about here Bishop. (I’m going to give a PSA now on the Laudate app, which is a wonderful reference tool). Now for an example from my own life, my husband and I are Christians, our physician is Muslim, and yet there is nothing but LOVE shared between the 3 of us. We speak of our love of God without the need to discuss the separate dogmas of our religion. I believe this is what section 16 is speaking to since Christ’s second and greatest commandment is to love your neighbor as yourself. Of course we are to love God first. If we love God first, we must love our neighbor. Blessings to you!
You are so true, Mother Theresa in her love of the poor proclaimed this in action. God Bless,
This is an homily, we are talking about dogma, arent we ? Yes indeed, we need to love our neighbor as it was tought by Yesus. We ara talking about salvation though Yesus Christ. Good bless you...
Agree, and add my voice to your recommendation of the Laudate app
@ Rita Muller Do not be ashamed of Jesus Christ. First commandment to love God with all your heart mind and soul. Jesus Christ is God who came in the flesh. He suffered and died for you. He gave the great commission to go out and share the Gospel not a waters down version. Loving your neighbor is sharing The Gospel with them.
@@jantelgrace452 exactly
this testimony is remarkable. 🙏🏻 🙏🏻
Jesus said: "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and ONLY A FEW FIND IT"
I've heard some say the grammer of the greek is more "there are few who are (present tense) finding it"
Bishop Barron you are the true messenger of God and bless you for your work on social media and in the Church!
I desperately need to get back to confesson after following the bishop it's been to many years
Wonderful ! Thank you Bishop Barron. God is Love! I love you oh Lord, my strength!
When you pray the Rosary ,the luminous mysteries show Jesus salvation
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
Got that?!
God help me release the anger in my heart towards others and the inpatience towards your plan.
With all due respect, your Excellency, you engage in eisegesis. You cite Lumen Gentium and St John Cardinal Newman so beautifully but *create* a bifurcated notion of salvation which is heterodox. What becomes eternally of those who “participate” in this fullness but do not have the “fullness” of salvation of which you speak? I respect much of your thought and intellect, but this actually turned my stomach. Kyrie eleison.
Then you’re not with the teaching of the Church. What’s your view? That those who are not Roman Catholic are simply damned?
@@BishopBarron We must assume the answer to that question is yes. That is why Holy Mother Church has always evangelized so much, to save the unbelievers. It's no wonder that most evangelization efforts have atrophied since Vatican II, along with all other participation in the Church.
@@aaronmisley8662 How does that make God look? He is either so puny that he is bound by the limits of an institution, or he is a tyrant who gives people all the brain to come up with different and rich cultures and philosophies and then plays favouritism with one sect of one tribe. If this is true, it reflects very poorly on your God. Thankfully, though I don't think it is and I agree with the Bishop. And to the Op, if this (God's compassion even to those who aren't in visible communion to him), makes your stomach turn then I'm afraid the Devil has got you by the balls with your tribalistic pride of us vs them mindset.
My parish priest have recommended your videos and I am learning so much. God is surely working through you.
He contradicts some Catholic teaching, be careful.
They know we are Christians by our loving fullness of light which is goodness and grace. We announce the Conscience of John Henry Newman which is Following the voice of Jesus Christ. God bless and peace be with you ☦️🕊
I thank you for this sermon and deepening my understanding. God's DNA is in all of his children. We are born with Him in our souls. Your distinction of "can be saved" helps clarify.
That's an awesome Comment☆
Thank you Bishop! This message deserves more views! 🙏
I listen to all your sermons...learn a lot...but Peter 1 on "the name of Jesus" I have doubts...Vatican II was not always grounded in Church teaching....you have made a proposal that Islam following their deep beliefs are right to kill unbelievers....remember many are called but few are chosen....
No, no, no. I’m not justifying whatever conscience dictates. The question regards the subjective dimension of following one’s conscience sincerely.
@@BishopBarron ...so Father Barron are we to assume that you imply properly formed consciences??
Nice sermon, Bishop. Quick question prompted by 10:39 mark. What happens when one has a poorly formed conscience? Is it still true they are following the voice of Christ if their conscience leads them to do intrinsically evil things?
Same question came to mind
@@greypilgrim1649 You are right !! Merely to base one's salvation on his / her conscious appears pretty dangerous. What happens if the conscious is poorly formed or evil ?
.
1. Good people of other faith may be saved through God's grace. God is bigger than anything else and Heaven is His domain. He can choose to let anyone in. We don't know when this will happen so we don't put our chance to it.
2. The bible, oral teachings all state that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Only Catholics can be saved from these written criteria. Anyone can put themselves to chance to see if they can be saved by God's grace depending on each individual case but I will stick to what is known - the criteria we all know - be baptised in Jesus, do good works to justify our free gift of salvation, adhere to John 6:54 etc.
3. LG 16 is often quoted independently of LG 14 which affirms the teaching there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Its biased to focus only on LG 16 but ignoring LG 14.
4. Any council teachings cannot and should not introduce new dogmas and teaching. The Church for 2000 years, CCC 845, Dominic Iesus as well as LG 14 teaches there is no salvation outside the CC.
LG 16 cannot overide all these.
LG 16 cannot be the sole interpretation and criteria whilst ignoring LG14, CCC845 and DI.
5. There is no religious imperialism in believing there is no salvation outside the CCC. No violence needed. Christ didn't preach any of these. We follow Jesus. One can exercise their free will to believe this or reject this. No problem.
6. Did martyrs died in vain ? Why dont they renounce Jesus, lead a good life and still be saved in their new religion?
7. What is the basis of the interpretation that those who participate in a lesser light can be saved ? Where is that in the bible or Sacred Tradition?
LG cannot be quoted as the ONLY authority because we all know after the era of the Sacred Tradition, there in NO more new revelation. No more new teachings.
We only can only say they may be saved depending on the infinite mercy and goodness of God but we don't know. We should leave our salvation to "chance".
Its better to stick to the rules of how to be saved as taught by by the bible, Sacred T and 2000 years of Church teachings back up by the CCC, DI and LG14. LG 16 must be read in the light of all these.
@@jeremiahong248 A lot of what you offer makes sense. I'll ponder all this in light of LG 14 &16 and Fr. Mark Goring's comments on Bishops Barron's sermon yesterday.
@@robertpoetprince7362 What were Fr. Mark Goring's comments?
Edit: Nevermind. Just found it. I think Fr. Goring really misinterpreted Bishop Barron.
Barron attributes something to Newman that he did not say. Newman said that conscience is the "echo of the voice of God", not the "voice of God". There is a subtle but important difference. No, a poorly formed conscience is not the voice of God. And the vicar of Christ, aboriginal or otherwise, is not infallible always and everywhere--our current Vicar of Christ being a good case in point.
Thanks for the sermon on Jesus Christ as the only way into heaven. You answered a question that I have had for a very long time.
It sounds nice...but Christ said the way is narrow that leads to life. He made constant claims of exclusively. I would humbly push back against Vatican 2 when it contracts what Christ himself claimed.
Supernatural grace can do what sincerity alone cannot do.
Excellent explanation of a difficult topic, Bishop. Thank you - I’ll listen again, take notes and pass this on to others. The light of Christ shines on all, to be accepted or rejected in the depth of our conscience, sometimes explicitly, sometimes implicitly. This give me great hope.
Thank you Bishop Barron for your clarity and truth. Hearing your recent critics, Fr Goring, Ralph Martin and others, has persuaded me even more, how deeply true your sermons and teachings are. Please know that there are many who hear you on the deepest level. May you never tire of doing good.
Insane, every knee shall bend
Thank you Bishop Barron. I have always appreciated your work, but struggle with some of your teaching and have a few questions. Does Vatican II somehow have superior teaching authority to sacred scripture, prior ecumenical counsels and prior Popes because it is subsequent in time? If so, this seems more a Hegalian concept contrary to scripture and the very idea of objective, mind independent truth the Church proclaims. Also, “salvation via lesser lights” as you explained it, understanding the nuance, still seems contrary to the Gospels, Romans, Hebrews Galatians, and the vast majority of church tradition prior to VII that certainly seems to teach the requirement of explicit faith in Christ, absent rare invincible ignorance in which at least a transcendent faith of some kind is required. Prior, equally valid ecumenical counsels like the Counsel of Florence and the syllabus of errors of Pope Pius IX explicitly condemns the idea that “Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true." I also don’t think the scriptures use your “fullness” and “participation” paradigm, that would seem to negate practical evangelization. This, plus your conception of development of doctrine leaves me with the basic question, can the church seemingly contradict itself? If it can, how is it what it claims to be, the Mystical body of Christ? Is God a cosmic trickster, by revealing different truths to different people in different ages? I know you are against a bland, beige, relativist church, but if the church appears to so clearly contradict itself, is that not the practical result? Does not this idea lead to a practical universalism that leads souls into danger as detailed by Ralph Martin, as Jesus clearly stated narrow is the way that leads to life and few there are that find it? “Jesus Christ is the Same yesterday, today and forever”, etc. Also, I do not see how taking the subject scripture from Peter in its fullness you discuss would lead to violence? It may lead to missionary vigor in truth and charity, i.e. “the old evangelization”. Thank you for any clarity, as I really struggle with these ideas. I do appreciate your work. God bless.
Vatican II represents a development of doctrine on this point, not a contradiction of earlier teaching. It pulls out the full implications of baptism by desire.
Thank so much for kind reply Bishop Barron. Narrowing it in a bit, I really struggle with the tensions between the idea of “developmental of doctrine” vs the idea of Christianity and specifically Catholicism as offering timeless, objective, mind independent, eternal truth. I certainly understand development of doctrine in a limited way as applied to the Marian dogmas that are in seed form in the scriptures, and developed into full fruition and clear understanding. That makes complete sense. It seems to me that the idea of the development of doctrine can become incoherent and destructive when it leads to a seeming contradiction that severs the church from its roots, doctrinally, liturgically, or aesthetically, to the point where a Catholic of a previous generation would not recognize the “developed” church or its doctrine. Was God misrepresenting himself to that previous generation if he is omnipresent and omniscient? Thank you for your time and work! Have a lovely evening and God Bless.
@@christopherpapa5134 Read Newman’s great essay on the development of doctrine for the details.
@@BishopBarron Will do. Thank you. Have a good day.
I am sorry for all the rash interpretations to your exposition here, that have appeared in social media this week. I just can't see how could you have made it any clearer!! It is a sudlety, but one that in good faith and by LISTENING carefully to your clearly outlined distinctions, brings a grace filled and enlightening answer to the question of whether or not can a non- baptized/non-believer be saved. Thank you for tackling this difficult subject, for making it so clear, and for taking the risk for the sake of truth.
Thanks so much.
I agree!
Divine Mercy comes from Jesus not condemnation.
Oh thank you so very much Bishop Barron. Thank you for always tackling these difficult topics and giving us explanation from the Holy Spirit. I am going to listen to this one again and again. God bless you always. I thank God for you and pray for you always.
When I was a kid only Catholics went to heaven.
How sad. Thank God that view was done away with.
Well, the Transfiguration episode should have disabused you of that notion, if nothing else.
@@serenahm The Catholic Church teaches infallibly, “outside the Church there is no salvation.”
@@christopherhunt6709 Still true. Look up "Feeneyism" to get the details (pre-conciliar, by the way).
I am not a scholar like you Bishop but what are you saying that just relying on our conscience can save us? You are confusing🤔😢
Then Vatican II is confusing.
Only Christ can save us,
But non believers who respond to the grace given entirely BY Christ by having a Christian conscience can be saved because they are following the light of Christ even though they are unaware of it.
However, it is much desired and willed by God that all people come to know him and love him, so we must evangelise and preach the love of God as well as hoping for the salvation of all men as the catechism states.
I agree with most of bishop Barron's explanation about salvation, but I have a problem understanding that we can be saved based on relying on our own consciousness. We are raised differently, we all have different moral values, and as a result each person's conciousness is probably framed differently. If wrong doing of one person against the other is acceptable by his or her own consciousness, the person that did wrong still has hope that will be saved even though doesn't accept Jesus and continues doing wrong against others because it is acceptable by his or her conciousness.
There is so much more to discuss. If Jesus thought that we could be saved by other religions why would he sacrifice his own life for us. He proclaimed that we can be saved only if we are baptized and believe in Him. He is the Life.
God give us wisdom and knowledge to make right decisions in life so that we might have hope of salvation and eternal life.
Read Lumen Gentium 16.
Thank you Bishop Barron, and thank you for your videos and your tireless work of evangelization. I will read it. God bless.
Magnificent Sermon by a tenderly caring Shepherd☆
This homily is making my head spin. I will have to listen to it a couple more times. Is there a written transcript of it anywhere?
Thank you for such a profound explanation, this helps us to understand how some of our dear friends who don’t believe the way we do may still have salvation .
We don't know what Jesus said about anything ..we only have writings from people who were not present saying he said so & so...very poor evidence.Would be dismissed in a court of law...amen
Expert in finding a middle ground, thank youBishop Barron. That text from St. Peter we just read has been used to justify violence for centuries. This middle ground have solved the problem to a large expert. But the problem with this middle ground is that some weak and confused Catholics have left the Catholic Church citing this as an excuse to leave.
In regards to exclusivity, the problem is with us, not Christ. The problem is our silly, tribalistic presumption that only externals matters. That's baloney. Christ can and will define who truly and internally believes in him and who does not. That's his prerogative and his alone, not ours.
Though always ignored by the proud, tribalist Christian hypocrites (cf. Ps. 50:16ff & Prov. 28:12) who refuse to repent of ALL their sins as clearly commanded by God (especially since they are representing Christ to the world), Christ frequently taught how many outside Israel would be saved because of their integrity, strong faith, and decency. Matthew 8:10-12 is just one of my favorites. One could also use I Corinthians 13. Romans 2:14-16 says, "Some people naturally obey the Law’s commands, even though they don’t have the Law. This proves that the conscience is like a law written in the human heart. And it will show whether we are forgiven or condemned, when God appoints Jesus Christ to judge everyone’s secret thoughts, just as my message says [CVE]."
Fr. Barron, the Magisterium and I are not alone in this. Pope Francis wrote extensively on this subject in his recent encyclical directed to all people of good will, 'Fratelli tutti.' Or to put it another way, God wants all men to wash themselves clean of sin. The brand of soap used is not as important as the bath. Christianity is just the best soap on the market. Or I should say, "The blood of Christ is the best soap on the market, and you can get it free of charge at your local Catholic Church."
What a deal!
John 14:6 ; John 3:15-21;
1 Corinthians 15:1-4 The Gospel
“let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead-by this name this man stands here before you in good health. He is the stone which was rejected by you, the builders, but which became the chief corner stone. And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.””
Acts 4:10-12
Yes, but what about the concept of "Baptism of desire". The idea that the righteous Muslim, Hindu, agnostic or atheist while consciously rejecting Christ ordained Christianity, lives in such a way that God still will claim them. And God very well _may_ , because He *is* God. This is apparently a teaching of the Holy Mother Church at this time. And existed before Vatican II. But I think the difference then was that it applied to humans, who through no fault of their own did not know of Jesus. Like the Mayans for example. After Vatican II it was modified to mean more like an equivalence of faiths or lack thereof. A sort of application of the "seamless garment" concept to non-Cathlolic faiths or non-belief if that applies. The many paths to heaven concept. Equivalence of faith and universal reconciliation seem to go hand in hand. And are a terrible, possibly fatal interpretation for vulnerable souls.
Having said all of this, if what you are proclaiming is in adherence to the teachings, canon and tenets of the Magisterium of the Holy Mother Church, then I am bound by my communion with the HMC to accept it as truth directly inspired by the Holy Spirit. For my own part I will love God (The Most Holy Trinity) with all my heart, all my soul, all my mind and all my strength. And I will love my neighbor as myself. I will obey the Ten Commandments and do God's will and God's works where I can, taking into account my profound wretchedness and human fallibility. Because it is by God's grace and God's grace _alone_ , that I am where I am in my life today.
So many religious both now and in the past..I Am sure god is totally confused..no wonder he slipped back to heaven and has never seen again..Amen
Acts 4:12 Jesus is the only name for salvation..
That’s why I was baptized in the name of Jesus and not father ,son , Holy Ghost.
No one was baptized in father son holy ghost in the Bible … book of acts is only in Jesus name and Matthew 28:19 is in the NAME , not names
Jesus reveals himself to those who sincerely seek truth, no matter what religion they find themselves in. He gives more light to those who seek more light. But they will find the truth, Jesus. Nobody will go to heaven because they “tried to be good” but following their conscience. People still have to know Jesus and be cleansed of their sin. We best believe the Bible.