What if I've lead them all astray?

[BukiRob]

I don't know where else to place this thread. If I place it in the Lutheran forum, by people are going to tell me that I'm correct by default; if I place it in the Catholic forum, people are going to tell me that I'm incorrect by default. I'm also not sure of what advice, exactly, that I'm looking for, but nevertheless...

My wife was raised in a strict Catholic family. Ideally, she was to marry a Catholic and have a Catholic family. But then she met me, an atheist at the time. After awhile, she gave up her faith because she followed my lead and (poor) logic on how religion is stupid, fake, and irrational. But then several years ago, at random, out of the blue, with no warning or rational explanation, Jesus came to me in the most vivid dream I have ever had, and he told me, "Michael, forgiveness is yours; just believe and ask." I immediately woke up in sweat and tears and gave my life to him right then and there. I soon became a Lutheran, and my wife followed my lead, abandoning her Catholic upbringing and fully embracing Lutheranism. Throughout these years I have become exceptionally educated on Scripture and Theology, and my faith is radical, for better or worse, as is her faith. I plan to go to Concordia Seminary soon.

A couple of years ago, my mother-in-law began attending our church. It was a slow process for her, but she abandoned Catholicism and was confirmed as a Lutheran of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod a few weeks ago. She is now working on her own mother and showing her own life long Catholic mother the errors and additions of the Catholic Church.

Lutheranism feels so 'right'. I don't believe that Jesus would personally come to me, a militant atheist not far from being Saul himself in regards to my hatred of Christians and Christ, and save me, in the process saving my family, and then let us go astray and worship him in a false way, in a false faith. We must be right where he wants us. To me this is logical - at least that is my belief.

My wife and I now have 4 children, who are all Lutherans as well. Here's what keeps me up at night sometimes: What if - just what if - Catholicism is correct (I don't believe that it is), that it is the One True Church, and I, being the head of my family, have lead these people who were once part of Christ's Church (assuming now that the Catholic Church is his One True Church) astray? What if I intruded into their lives, and I lead a complete family away from Christ? It's very, very unlikely that they would have ceased to be Catholics without having met me. It would have been better for me to have never been born, or to have had a millstone fastened around my neck and been cast into the sea, if that's the case.

Final Note: No anti-Catholicism. That does nothing for us here. We are not anti-Catholic. We respect their faith and traditions. We simply believe, like Luther, that they are completely and utterly wrong about some things, and we can't accept that. I don't need piles of Scripture proving the Church is some beast, that it's wrong, or pagan references. Thank you.

'Happy those hungering and thirsting for righteousness -- because they shall be filled.

If I can give one piece of advice to you...... get your eyes off man and his doctrines and get plugged into the word.

Do some word studies. Yeshua declared that he would send the Holy Spirit (ruach hakodesh) and that it would lead them into all truth..... start there.... what exactly is TRUTH? What is Holy? What is Life? What is the WAY in which a man should go?

Be teachable by the Ruach. Really be willing to lay down mans doctrine. I will warn you though, it will take you places you are not expecting to go....

 

[FireDragon76]

To me, James is very thorough about all which Jesus means by His Gospel. So, then, I admit, I do not see how people could think James does not give us much in the way of the Gospel. But possibly I do not know what you mean.

Lutherans use the word Gospel in a more reductive way at times, to refer to God's promise of the forgiveness of sins. We have a Law-Gospel dialectic to understand the Scriptures. If its more helpful, we thinks some parts of the Bible (Law) refer to God's demands as a holy and all-good God. And we think of other parts (what we call Gospel) as referring to God's promises of the forgiveness of sins, eternal life, and of the present and not yet completed fulfillment of the Kingdom of God.

Some evangelicals call this distinction Law and Grace. I think all of them are a bit unhelpful at times (since the Mosaic Law itself was and is part of God's gracious initiative towards humankind). For the purposes of theology we have to choose a label, and this helps us to think about how we should approach the practical matters of doing theology.

Now, James does not say anything about the death and burial and resurrection of Jesus; so in this way it does not say the Gospel. But the purpose of the death and burial and resurrection of Jesus, I would say, is thoroughly given . . . so we can get and live Jesus Christ's love meaning and not only doctrinal precision and correct practices.

You misunderstand Lutheran attitudes towards doctrine and practices. Lutherans consider the details of worship relatively non-essential, though for the purposes of good order and good taste we like being traditional generally, and it is proper to call our service "The Mass", in fact, just as Catholics do. But we generally think of the heart of traditional Christian worship as what God does for us in Word and Sacrament, this is why we traditionally referred to it as "the Divine Service" as well. Because the center of our worship is God coming down to us and serving us. The heart of our worship is not a human work. It is literally a miracle from God that happens every sunday in every true church in the world.

Likewise, we are not saved by having correct doctrines. We are saved by faith in Jesus Christ which is ordinarily and normatively operative in the sacramental life of the Church. Doctrines are part of the good order and spiritual health of the Church, but I for one would be reluctant to say somebody with an incorrect doctrine is not saved by the grace and mercy of God. They just have the potential to create a great deal of harm to believers and themselves.

James confronts many wrong things, but with his confrontations he gives encouragement to so much so better to have

Law can easily be abused to push legalism and to crush sensitive consciences. That is why Luther called James "an epistle of straw", because it's not as foundational to a healthy faith as we understand it. Being straw is not bad, but it's the stuff you don't build a house on top of, you put it on the roof. Law is the stuff that confronts us with our sinfulness and our need for Christ, but beyond that it is something handled only with great care, Christian maturity, and pastoral discernment.

 

[com7fy8]

We have a Law-Gospel dialectic to understand the Scriptures. If its more helpful, we thinks some parts of the Bible (Law) refer to God's demands as a holy and all-good God.

That seems to go beyond what the Bible means by the Law of Moses. It seems to mean what the New Testament says God requires, which is so more and better than what seems to show in the law of Moses.

But the epistle of James does not only tell us things which God requires. With each confrontation of what is wrong, James also gives strong encouragement for us to have what is so better, with God; he is calling for what God's grace can produce . . . now . . . in our character and personality and behavior and how we are relating with God in His peace (Colossians 3:15) and with one another > Ephesians 4:2.

So, I advise that it is good to feed on what James actually does say, and trust God in His grace to have us change to do all He means by every thing in the epistle of James

 

[FireDragon76]

That seems to go beyond what the Bible means by the Law of Moses.

Absolutely. Jesus even intensifies the Law in the Sermon on the Mount, by giving a fuller exposition of its implications. Some Lutherans like Gerhard Forde even see Law as anything that is existentially threatening, though most Lutherans would probably see Law as more an expression of God's general will.

It seems to mean what the New Testament says God requires, which is so more and better than what seems to show in the law of Moses.

No. God doesn't require us to fulfill the Law to be justified, to be acceptable to him. Jesus alone did that for us. That was God's gift to us. In union with Jesus through faith, we become the righteousness of God, certainly. But it is not something we do, it is something God does for us.

But the epistle of James does not only tell us things which God requires. With each confrontation of what is wrong, James also gives strong encouragement for us to have what is so better, with God; he is calling for what God's grace can produce . . . now . . . in our character and personality and behavior and how we are relating with God in His peace (Colossians 3:15) and with one another > Ephesians 4:2.

But encouragement doesn't deliver us due to our fallen natures. All encouragement does is ultimately expose our sinfulness. The Christian life is a process of continuous repentance and turning back to Jesus as our Savior. There is progress here and maturity and growth in being transformed into the likeness of Christ, but it is not something legalistically managed, it's a product of God's grace.

 

[Jan001]

I don't know where else to place this thread. If I place it in the Lutheran forum, by people are going to tell me that I'm correct by default; if I place it in the Catholic forum, people are going to tell me that I'm incorrect by default. I'm also not sure of what advice, exactly, that I'm looking for, but nevertheless...

My wife was raised in a strict Catholic family. Ideally, she was to marry a Catholic and have a Catholic family. But then she met me, an atheist at the time. After awhile, she gave up her faith because she followed my lead and (poor) logic on how religion is stupid, fake, and irrational. But then several years ago, at random, out of the blue, with no warning or rational explanation, Jesus came to me in the most vivid dream I have ever had, and he told me, "Michael, forgiveness is yours; just believe and ask." I immediately woke up in sweat and tears and gave my life to him right then and there. I soon became a Lutheran, and my wife followed my lead, abandoning her Catholic upbringing and fully embracing Lutheranism. Throughout these years I have become exceptionally educated on Scripture and Theology, and my faith is radical, for better or worse, as is her faith. I plan to go to Concordia Seminary soon.

A couple of years ago, my mother-in-law began attending our church. It was a slow process for her, but she abandoned Catholicism and was confirmed as a Lutheran of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod a few weeks ago. She is now working on her own mother and showing her own life long Catholic mother the errors and additions of the Catholic Church.

Lutheranism feels so 'right'. I don't believe that Jesus would personally come to me, a militant atheist not far from being Saul himself in regards to my hatred of Christians and Christ, and save me, in the process saving my family, and then let us go astray and worship him in a false way, in a false faith. We must be right where he wants us. To me this is logical - at least that is my belief.

My wife and I now have 4 children, who are all Lutherans as well. Here's what keeps me up at night sometimes: What if - just what if - Catholicism is correct (I don't believe that it is), that it is the One True Church, and I, being the head of my family, have lead these people who were once part of Christ's Church (assuming now that the Catholic Church is his One True Church) astray? What if I intruded into their lives, and I lead a complete family away from Christ? It's very, very unlikely that they would have ceased to be Catholics without having met me. It would have been better for me to have never been born, or to have had a millstone fastened around my neck and been cast into the sea, if that's the case.

Final Note: No anti-Catholicism. That does nothing for us here. We are not anti-Catholic. We respect their faith and traditions. We simply believe, like Luther, that they are completely and utterly wrong about some things, and we can't accept that. I don't need piles of Scripture proving the Church is some beast, that it's wrong, or pagan references. Thank you.

First of all, you repented of your sins and embraced Jesus Christ as your Savior. That makes you a child of God. God meets each one of us where He finds us. His Son Jesus came to save us sinners. You did not know what you were doing against God when you were an atheist. God has forgiven you!!! There will be no millstone around your neck because you have repented and have been forgiven.

However, after we are saved we should go on a faith journey and have this journey last until we die. It is during this faith journey that we can learn more about Jesus' gospel and perhaps we can better understand which doctrines are from Jesus and which doctrines are man-made.

So, which doctrines do you believe Luther was correct about (that conflict with Catholicism)? Please show the scriptural references that you believe defend your doctrinal beliefs.

 

[sdowney717]

It's their belief that they are the One True Church and there is no salvation outside of it. I don't believe that, personally. But what bothers me is, what if they're right and I led people from the only faith that saves? I don't believe I did, but since I literally led people from the ancient church that teaches this, my mind naturally wanders.

Study the scripture and you will find your concern is erroneous.

John 5
20 For the Father loveth the Son and showeth Him all things that He Himself doeth; and He will show Him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead and quickeneth them, even so the Son quickeneth whom He will.

22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son,

23 that all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father who hath sent Him.

24 Verily, verily I say unto you, he that heareth My Word and believeth in Him that sent Me, hath everlasting life and shall not come into condemnation, but is passed from death unto life.

 

[LutheranGuy123]

Imma drop this here:

 

[com7fy8]

we are not saved by having correct doctrines.

I think this is a very good and important point. But what we have the character to accept can be why we believe what we do. Whose spirit has us believing what we do, and why, and how?

There is "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience," our Apostle Paul does say in Ephesians 2:2.

@Sword of the Lord Therefore we need to pray about what we believe . . . and how we are about what we believe. Because it is possible to get right ideas but then be looking down on others, instead of caring in love and prayer for any and all people. People can get into doctrinal in-crowds which can get pretty big.

We are saved by faith in Jesus Christ which is ordinarily and normatively operative in the sacramental life of the Church.

Now, Paul says we "first trusted in Christ", in Ephesians 1:12. And I understand that one Lutheran sacrament is baptism which can be done while someone is an almost newborn baby. So, if you believe there can be baptizing an almost newborn baby, as part of the process of salvation, and if a person needs to "first" trust in Jesus, I'm not sure a newborn baby can consciously trust in Jesus. So, what do you understand, about this, please?

most Lutherans

Well, if I were in a Lutheran church, I would not be assuming what any and all others believe.

@Sword of the Lord I think it is good to let each person in a group speak for oneself, and get to know each one, so you know from the person's life what the person really means by what he or she believes.

God doesn't require us to fulfill the Law to be justified, to be acceptable to him.

yes

Jesus alone did that for us.

yes

That was God's gift to us.

and yes

And, again, thank you for making the effort to make yourself very clear.

In union with Jesus through faith, we become the righteousness of God, certainly. But it is not something we do, it is something God does for us.

"But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him." (1 Corinthians 6:17)

Our Apostle Paul says a child of God is "one spirit with Him." (in 1 Corinthians 6:17)

To me, this means a person is in actual spirit-with-Holy-Spirit union with God Himself, in God's own love being shared with the person > "in our hearts" (Romans 5:5), Paul does say. And in this spiritual union we are effected in us by God Himself, so we become "as He is" "in this world" (in 1 John 4:17) . . . because of how God in us actually effects how we are, in union with us.

Is this what you mean by being in union with Christ? Does Martin spell it out, like this, more or less?

@Sword of the Lord In any case, Sword, I think 1 Corinthians 6:17 shows that we need to make sure we have become "one spirit with Him" (1 Corinthians 6:17), so God in union with us is changing us to become the way He is in love.

We are not only getting ourselves to change and to do things. But in union with Jesus, we are being changed by God Himself, and He is succeeding!

And the Bible has plenty which means this. His commands are meant to be done the way His love has us doing them while we are becoming more and more like Jesus. And we do well to share with people who are helping us with this.

The label of a church and things they claim is not the main thing, then, to go by.

But encouragement doesn't deliver us due to our fallen natures. All encouragement does is ultimately expose our sinfulness.

Well, by "encouragement" I would mean ministering the strength of God's love making us more and more successful against sinful things. It would include ministering God's grace > of how God in us proves Himself.

And this would be so encouraging . . . how He succeeds in changing me to be more His way in love so I have His almighty immunity against my sin-sick stuff.

So, grace, for me, means not only God favoring me from a distance on Heaven's throne, by forgiving me and clearing my record, but in us grace is God acting to change our nature so we more and more do all He means by His word > Philippians 2:13.

@Sword of the Lord 1 Peter 4:9-10 tells all Christians to minister God's grace to one another. So, all of us can help each other to grow in grace which changes us to be and love like Jesus. So, it is good to be with a church in which you have various people you know personally, and who are ministering God's own grace to you.

The Christian life is a process of continuous repentance and turning back to Jesus as our Savior.

Hebrews 12:4-11 gives what results from our Father correcting us. And I understand this scripture means every child of God will always need more correction . . . going by verse 8. God in us personally corrects each of us who is His child. And how He succeeds is very encouraging

There is progress here and maturity and growth in being transformed into the likeness of Christ, but it is not something legalistically managed, it's a product of God's grace.

And, by "grace", you mean how God actually changes how we are?

@Sword of the Lord I personally do experience God changing me to become more and more pure and perfectly satisfied in love, and more and more gentle and humble, getting better and better correction against lusts and looking down on others >

"He can have compassion on those who are ignorant and going astray, since he himself is also subject to weakness." (Hebrews 5:2)

I think it is good to feed on the Scriptures and evaluate how we really are becoming . . . if God is having us more and more succeed in all the Bible says, for how we become and learn how to relate in His love . . . and more and more do everything in Jesus Christ's "rest for your souls" (Matthew 11:28-30). And keep trusting Him to correct us deeply. I think Hebrews 12:4-11 means we need to always actively seek our Father for how He is able to correct us, and not be failing and struggling in our own do-it-ourselves "trying"

And with this you will find who you belong with. I think an example leader (1 Peter 5:3) will include making oneself an example of how God is correcting him or her . . . so we can feed on this and be encouraged to also be honest with God and seek the correction which our leaders are gaining

Lutherans generally have an open canon, meaning it is not strictly defined.

For me, this is a surprise. I thought all Christian denominations believe the Bible is God's word . . . all Canon. And since, if I understand you correctly, there is still ongoing discussion about what is and what is not Canon Scripture in the Bible, I would think Lutherans among themselves would have even very different ideas about this.

And I think people would have varying viewpoints, especially about the epistle of James.

@Sword of the Lord There are people who believe all of the Bible is God's word, without error. And there are people who do not consider the epistle of James to be Canon Scripture. But I personally experience, even, that the epistle of James is fully Canon, very thorough about how God's word means for us to love, how the Gospel means for us to become in our nature and love. So, I would say we could have a discussion about the epistle of James . . . here or starting another thread maybe in "Theology", about this.

I mean > read the epistle of James for what it means the way God's love has us apply it. People's interpretation could be different than what James really means, and that could be why they do not consider the Epistle of James to be Canon Scripture!

Possibly, I have not understood what you mean, Fire Dragon. So, thank you for whatever you please to share about this.

 

[FireDragon76]

By faith, Lutherans do not exclusively mean an intellectual assent or notional faith. Obviously, a baby cannot have that type of faith. But that doesn't exclude other meanings of faith, such a trust (which babies can have, because they are capable of psychologically bonding with others). And there is also faith operative in the entire community praying for and supporting the child as he or she grows up.

The Lutheran consensus on which books are canonical is stable, even if we have no strictly defined canon. Many Christian churches have this type of canon, including most Orthodox and eastern Christians.

 

[Roseonathorn]

I don't know how far Lutherans have gone in the States but in Finland the Lutheran church allows gay marriage. The arch bishop has spoken positively about it and they can get married in the Lutheran church if they belong to the church. But if a couple a woman and a man wants to get married that does not belong to the Lutheran church but lets say to pentecostal church then I doubt that they can get married in the Lutheran church. Now the church is a bit torn, some want to follow the bible and don't think gay couples should get wed in church but go to registrer partnership instead and some think it is their rights as churchmembers. I know of one person that says He is gay but He does not like one church so much but other than being gay he is a nice person. Still I would never encourage Him to get married with a man because I feel it is wrong, but I can not rule His life either and If He makes mistakes in life then He is not the only person that does so. Today both gay and straight people get married and divorce and kids are sometimes trapped in between.
Sometimes when my opinion is new testamental I am considered too oldfashioned. Still I think Chatolicist celibate is no good idea. I have hard to understand why the priest can not have a wife. Today the way of preventing pregnancies are different too. Celibate does set the priest up to all sorts of unbiblical temptations. I think it is better to be gay and dare to discuss it rather than be gay and be so ashamed of oneself that one kills oneself. It is however sound to consider where is the religion and denomination going because it changes ever so often. When my mom was young trousers on pentecostal women were forbidden even in snowy winter, they were allowed thin knitted pants under the skirts. That human rule is now out in the trash.

 

[FireDragon76]

I don't know how far Lutherans have gone in the States but in Finland the Lutheran church allows gay marriage. The arch bishop has spoken positively about it and they can get married in the Lutheran church if they belong to the church.

There are many different Lutheran denominations and churches just as there are different Reformed churches, each with a different way of being Lutheran or Reformed. The state church of Finland was historically partly an extension of the state, since it was an established church for most of its history, so it's found being broad and liberal generally works better for them as a nation. Other Lutheran churches, particularly the ones being discussed here, can be quite different.

But if a couple a woman and a man wants to get married that does not belong to the Lutheran church but lets say to pentecostal church then I doubt that they can get married in the Lutheran church

Sure they can, at the pastor's discretion. In the US it is not too rare to be married at a church in which one does not belong, and I suspect the same is possible in Finland.

 

[Roseonathorn]

If one is a Lutheran it is usually fine, I suppose.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I don't know where else to place this thread. If I place it in the Lutheran forum, by people are going to tell me that I'm correct by default; if I place it in the Catholic forum, people are going to tell me that I'm incorrect by default. I'm also not sure of what advice, exactly, that I'm looking for, but nevertheless...

My wife was raised in a strict Catholic family. Ideally, she was to marry a Catholic and have a Catholic family. But then she met me, an atheist at the time. After awhile, she gave up her faith because she followed my lead and (poor) logic on how religion is stupid, fake, and irrational. But then several years ago, at random, out of the blue, with no warning or rational explanation, Jesus came to me in the most vivid dream I have ever had, and he told me, "Michael, forgiveness is yours; just believe and ask." I immediately woke up in sweat and tears and gave my life to him right then and there. I soon became a Lutheran, and my wife followed my lead, abandoning her Catholic upbringing and fully embracing Lutheranism. Throughout these years I have become exceptionally educated on Scripture and Theology, and my faith is radical, for better or worse, as is her faith. I plan to go to Concordia Seminary soon.

A couple of years ago, my mother-in-law began attending our church. It was a slow process for her, but she abandoned Catholicism and was confirmed as a Lutheran of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod a few weeks ago. She is now working on her own mother and showing her own life long Catholic mother the errors and additions of the Catholic Church.

Lutheranism feels so 'right'. I don't believe that Jesus would personally come to me, a militant atheist not far from being Saul himself in regards to my hatred of Christians and Christ, and save me, in the process saving my family, and then let us go astray and worship him in a false way, in a false faith. We must be right where he wants us. To me this is logical - at least that is my belief.

My wife and I now have 4 children, who are all Lutherans as well. Here's what keeps me up at night sometimes: What if - just what if - Catholicism is correct (I don't believe that it is), that it is the One True Church, and I, being the head of my family, have lead these people who were once part of Christ's Church (assuming now that the Catholic Church is his One True Church) astray? What if I intruded into their lives, and I lead a complete family away from Christ? It's very, very unlikely that they would have ceased to be Catholics without having met me. It would have been better for me to have never been born, or to have had a millstone fastened around my neck and been cast into the sea, if that's the case.

Final Note: No anti-Catholicism. That does nothing for us here. We are not anti-Catholic. We respect their faith and traditions. We simply believe, like Luther, that they are completely and utterly wrong about some things, and we can't accept that. I don't need piles of Scripture proving the Church is some beast, that it's wrong, or pagan references. Thank you.

God wants you to worship Him in Truth. Most of the Christian denominations are agreed upon the Niceness Creed which is mostly about Christ. Christ brings us all under one umbrella of Truth, although
One denomination may have more truth if you are under Christ and saved then you cannot go wrong in that way.

 

[aus22]

As catholic I find tis discussion interesting a bit strange. Catholics have not believed that salvation is impossible outside the church since Vatican 2.
Many Catholics accept Luther doctrines. It is important to note that the doctrines of his followers went much further than him. For Example Luther did not reject the Real presence in the Eucharist but stated that it was achieved by the faith of the receiver of the communion, not the words of the priest. (Martin Luther by Tomas Lindsay) Most of Luther other doctrines like not buying indulgence, having the service in the native language ,That faith comes first, washing the feet of the disciples, are accepted by the Catholic Church.. Some like the marriage of priests and rejection of the Pope right to rule the church have not being accepted

But most have and Catholics will celebrate the 500 anniversary of Martin Luther this year.

 

[FireDragon76]

Pentecostals should be allowed to be married in the state church in Finland, since the state church serves everyone. However, I suspect few Pentecostals there would want to do so, because those groups usually separate from state churches and regard them as compromised.

 

[FireDragon76]

For Example Luther did not reject the Real presence in the Eucharist but stated that it was achieved by the faith of the receiver of the communion, not the words of the priest. (Martin Luther by Tomas Lindsay)

Lutherans believe that the words of Jesus Christ himself make his presence in the sacrament real, because he says it is his body and his blood, and we take Jesus at his plain word. It is not dependent on the faith of the communicant, it's dependent on the words of Christ, which the pastor speaks standing in place of him. It's very similar to the Catholic belief, otherwise.

 

[aus22]

Fir Dragon 76 , You belief is similar to Catholics. However the Catholic Church does not recognise pastors outside the Catholic and Orthodox church as having the power as ordain ministers, Luther twist would overcome this problem. People in Lutheran and Anglican churches would still receive Christ through their and the ministers faith..

 

[miknik5]

You misunderstand. I am sure. I do not believe the Catholic faith or desire to be Catholic. I have done my studying. This is an informed decision.

My problem is with what the Church teaches about being the true Church and the destination of those who aren't in it. If the Church is what She claims, I screwed up. Not that I believe it, but I would feel so awful.

Does your wife believe you screwed up?

 

[Jan001]

As catholic I find tis discussion interesting a bit strange. Catholics have not believed that salvation is impossible outside the church since Vatican 2.
Many Catholics accept Luther doctrines. It is important to note that the doctrines of his followers went much further than him. For Example Luther did not reject the Real presence in the Eucharist but stated that it was achieved by the faith of the receiver of the communion, not the words of the priest. (Martin Luther by Tomas Lindsay) Most of Luther other doctrines like not buying indulgence, having the service in the native language ,That faith comes first, washing the feet of the disciples, are accepted by the Catholic Church.. Some like the marriage of priests and rejection of the Pope right to rule the church have not being accepted

But most have and Catholics will celebrate the 500 anniversary of Martin Luther this year.

"Outside the Church there is no salvation." This doctrine has never changed.

"Concerning this doctrine the Pope of Vatican I, Pius IX, spoke on two different occasions. In an allocution (address to an audience) on December 9th, 1854 he said:

'We must hold as of the faith, that out of the Apostolic Roman Church there is no salvation; that she is the only ark of safety, and whosoever is not in her perishes in the deluge; we must also, on the other hand, recognize with certainty that those who are invincible in ignorance of the true religion are not guilty for this in the eyes of the Lord. And who would presume to mark out the limits of this ignorance according to the character and diversity of peoples, countries, minds and the rest?'

Again, in his encyclical Quanto conficiamur moerore of 10 August, 1863 addressed to the Italian bishops, he said:

'It is known to us and to you that those who are in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion, but who observe carefully the natural law, and the precepts graven by God upon the hearts of all men, and who being disposed to obey God lead an honest and upright life, may, aided by the light of divine grace, attain to eternal life; for God who sees clearly, searches and knows the heart, the disposition, the thoughts and intentions of each, in His supreme mercy and goodness by no means permits that anyone suffer eternal punishment, who has not of his own free will fallen into sin.'" Outside The Church There Is No Salvation


​

Non-Catholics can be saved. However, if non-Catholics "know" for sure that the Catholic Church is the true Church of Jesus Christ and still refuse to join with the Catholic Church, they cannot be saved. By refusing to join His Church, they are rejecting Him and His authority which He gave to His apostles and their successors.

Luke 10:16
“He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” rsv.​

 

[Sword of the Lord]

Does your wife believe you screwed up?

No, she willingly left the RCC and is what would be considered anti-Catholic. I believe they are in error, but not anymore so than other churches. She was an active member most of her life and holds a lot against them and their "false" beliefs.