Did the Holocaust Jews go to hell?
So you believe that baptism is not necessary for salvation? And that the Athanasian Creed is wrong?
Reply
(05-17-2009, 03:31 PM)veritatem_dilexisti Wrote: So you believe that baptism is not necessary for salvation? And that the Athanasian Creed is wrong?

Of course not.  Now will you let the Magisterium teach us the meaning of its dogmas and doctrines, or will you usurp that authority for yourself?
Reply
::)
Reply
(05-17-2009, 12:22 PM)didishroom Wrote: Good points. However it does not guarantee infallibility in those matters. Dogma teaches that for salvation all human beings are bound to submit to the Roman Pontiff. But we also know there are times when we may disobey the pope, all the while still recognizing him as the supreme pontiff. We are commanded to assent and fully submit to the Ordinary Magisterium. Yet we know from history that the Ordinary Magisterium can err even in matters of faith or morals.

That's absolutely wrong.  For example, in this letter Cdl. Ratzinger refers to the infallibility of the Ordinary Magisterium:

http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_df95lt.htm

"Cdl. R" Wrote:In fact, as the Reply explains, the definitive nature of this assent derives from the truth of the doctrine itself, since, founded on the written Word of God, and constantly held and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary universal Magisterium (cf. Lumen Gentium, 25).

Quote:Pope John taught heresy concerning the beatific vision.

Cite it.

Quote:The Ordinary Magesterium was inconsistent on the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception.

No, it was not.  Theologians were inconsistent, and they do not partake of the Ordinary Magisterium but are witnesses to it.  The Ordinary Magisterium is reserved to the Pope and the Bishops.  It's what they teach, not what the theologians teach that is the criteria for infallibility.

Quote: The Roman Catechism(Catechism of Trent) erred on the issue of ensoulment, saying we did not have a soul till some time after conception and that we were just vegetative matter. This is contradicted by the dogma of the Immaculate Conception which states the Blessed Virgin was free from Original Sin at the "moment" of her conception, not some time after as the Catechism declares. On the issue of abortion the pontiffs, at least since then, have been consistent in declaring that there is a soul at the moment of conception.

Let's see what the Roman Catechism says exactly:

Quote:But what surpasses the order of nature and human comprehension is, that as soon as the Blessed Virgin assented to the announcement of the Angel in these words, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it done unto me according to thy word, the most sacred body of Christ was immediately formed, and to it was united a rational soul enjoying the use of reason; and thus in the same instant of time He was perfect God and perfect man. That this was the astonishing and admirable work of the Holy Ghost cannot be doubted; for according to the order of nature the rational soul is united to the body only after a certain lapse of time.

It does not say were were just vegetative matter.  In fact, not even St. Thomas or St. Augustine said that; neither did Aristotle on whose philosophy St. Thomas' comments are based.  What they say is the rational soul is united after a certain lapse of time (it could be 1ms for all we know).  The animal soul is there immediately.  And you will note the reason given for this: "according to the order of nature" - it is not a teaching of morals and dogma that the rational soul is not united to the body immediately - it is offered on the basis of philosophical supposition, however, it is a teaching of morals and dogma that Christ's rational soul was there immediately.

Further, you will see that the Ordinary Magisterium in current times has not taught definitively that the rational soul is joined to the body at the moment of conception.

From Donum Vitae:

Quote:Certainly no experimental datum can be in itself sufficient to bring us to the recognition of a spiritual soul; nevertheless, the conclusions of science regarding the human embryo provide a valuable indication for discerning by the use of reason a personal presence at the moment of the first appearance of a human life: how could a human individual not be a human person? The Magisterium has not expressly committed itself to an affirmation of a philosophical nature, but it constantly reaffirms the moral condemnation of any kind of procured abortion. This teaching has not been changed and is unchangeable

So even if you don't believe me, you have the words of the Church stating that the time of the binding of the rational soul - to anyone except Christ - has not been given by the Magisterium, and the contention in the Roman Catechism that you cite is of a philosophical nature, not one of faith and morals except in the case of Christ.
Reply
Actually, I'll save you the trouble of citing Pope John.

From CE

Quote:Pope John wrote to King Philip IV on the matter (November, 1333), and emphasized the fact that, as long as the Holy See had not given a decision, the theologians enjoyed perfect freedom in this matter. In December, 1333, the theologians at Paris, after a consultation on the question, decided in favour of the doctrine that the souls of the blessed departed saw God immediately after death or after their complete purification; at the same time they pointed out that the pope had given no decision on this question but only advanced his personal opinion, and now petitioned the pope to confirm their decision. John appointed a commission at Avignon to study the writings of the Fathers, and to discuss further the disputed question. In a consistory held on 3 January, 1334, the pope explicitly declared that he had never meant to teach aught contrary to Holy Scripture or the rule of faith and in fact had not intended to give any decision whatever. Before his death he withdrew his former opinion, and declared his belief that souls separated from their bodies enjoyed in heaven the Beatific Vision.

You are confusing personal theological opinions of the Popes, in which they can err, with the Magisterium which is infallible.  By writing that the Holy See had not given a decision, Pope John cleared up the fact that there was no Magisterial teaching on the subject.  If there is no Magisterial teaching, there is no error.

Similar to the case of Donum Vitae, you cannot take something that the Church explicitly says is not Magisterial, call it Magisterial, and then claim there is an error in the Magisterium.

Reply
First, I meant "Limbo", not "Purgatory".  My error.  The unbaptized Jews (who did not convert, even in a miraculous way) would go to hell and maybe some to Limbo.

A person dying as a Jew certainly does not desire baptism.

As far as the invincibly ignorant being saved, we have this as an example:
Quote: The most remarkable instance of Divine Providence’s use of extraordinary means in our particular case, is the amazing, thoroughly documented, story of the Venerable Mary of Agreda (d. 1665). This humble nun while praying in her convent in Spain was miraculously transported to America and preached to various tribes, some a thousand miles apart, from Texas to the Pacific before the arrival of the missionaries. 13
  So the Lord sent a preacher.  This is one of my "improbable, but not impossible" scenarios.  So the Lord could have stopped time, or transported a monk, to preach and baptize dying Jews, and you would not know it.  So we can't judge a particular Jew.  But if he died a Jew (we can't be sure), then a person did not go to heaven.

As far as those outside the Church being saved, baptized Protestants who are not in Mortal Sin, go to purgatory and then heaven.  So all baptized Protestant children before the age of reason are saved.  They are not guilty of formal heresy.  In a way, they are Catholic, though material heretics.  Please note that most Catholics are probably material heretics in some of the more esoteric theological topics.  For example, most probably believe that the wine species is the Blood only, and the bread species is the Body only.  That is material heresy.
Reply
(05-17-2009, 02:28 PM)didishroom Wrote:
(05-17-2009, 02:18 PM)Resurrexi Wrote:
(05-17-2009, 01:23 PM)veritatem_dilexisti Wrote: So you believe, Resurrexi, that the invincibly ignorant can be saved?

The Magisterium of the Church says as much.

It does not. Vatican I delcared Faith is necessary for salvatio. And I believe it was Pope Innocent XI who condemned the idea that a belief in a creator that comes from observing the natural world could suffice for Faith and Salvation.

"Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him, yet a necessity lies upon the Church, and at the same time a sacred duty, to preach the Gospel." (Ad Gentes, 7, emphasis added)
Reply
(05-17-2009, 08:14 PM)Resurrexi Wrote:
(05-17-2009, 02:28 PM)didishroom Wrote:
(05-17-2009, 02:18 PM)Resurrexi Wrote:
(05-17-2009, 01:23 PM)veritatem_dilexisti Wrote: So you believe, Resurrexi, that the invincibly ignorant can be saved?

The Magisterium of the Church says as much.

It does not. Vatican I delcared Faith is necessary for salvatio. And I believe it was Pope Innocent XI who condemned the idea that a belief in a creator that comes from observing the natural world could suffice for Faith and Salvation.

"Therefore though God in ways known to Himself can lead those inculpably ignorant of the Gospel to find that faith without which it is impossible to please Him, yet a necessity lies upon the Church, and at the same time a sacred duty, to preach the Gospel." (Ad Gentes, 7, emphasis added)

That is what St Thomas and St Alphonsus understand remote grace to be a means of, viz., direct revelation of the Faith (or, more likely, the sending of a missionary); which directly contradicts salvation by/despite invincible ignorance.
Reply
Look what St. Paul says about ignorance and salvation.

And if our Gospel be also hid, it is hid to them that are lost. In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the Gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto them.” (2 Corinthians 4:3,4)
Reply
Quis, I will get back to you later today on the Magisterium. It requires a little more time to respond on such a complex subject.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)