Which of the points of the Syllabus of Errors are defunct because of Vatican II?
#11
I wasn't being precise when I compared Ecumenism, as it is practiced currently, with the notion of Religious Indifferentism. What I meant was that the post-Vatican II Church has on many occasions by its actions implied that it is not necessary to be a member of the one church established by Christ in order to be saved. And I'm not talking about exceptions covered under invincible ignorance.
Reply
#12
(05-16-2017, 09:24 AM)Pacman Wrote: I wasn't being precise when I compared Ecumenism, as it is practiced currently, with the notion of Religious Indifferentism. What I meant was that the post-Vatican II Church has on many occasions by its actions implied that it is not necessary to be a member of the one church established by Christ in order to be saved. And I'm not talking about exceptions covered under invincible ignorance.

You'll get no argument from me on this point. Members of the Church (at all levels) don't always show forth a good example of the Church's public doctrine (the temptation to seek human respect can be hard to resist....).
Reply
#13
(05-16-2017, 08:53 AM)In His Love Wrote:
(05-16-2017, 08:49 AM)BC Wrote: It also implies that as long as one does not know, then he can be saved.
It depends, and I'm sure it's in pretty rare circumstances, but invincible ignorance does apply. But that's for like...the hypothetical yogi out in India somewhere with no internet or missionaries nearby, etc.

Not to derail this into an EENS thread, but I don't accept that Hindus who die as Hindus, or those of any other religion or paganism, can be saved, or else I would have to believe that people can be saved without the Catholic Faith. (Athanasian Creed (circa A.D. 420): "Whoever wishes to be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic faith)

Yes I am aware of Pius IX's Singulari Quadem and  Quanto Conficiamur which states one can be on the way of salvation if continuing to follow natural law written on one's heart God will not allow them to be lost.  However, if they do, God will enlighten them with what needs to be believed and send someone to convert that person. 

The whole of Church teaching asserts this.

St. Augustine: "Everyone God teaches, He teaches out of pity; but whomever He does not teach, He does not teach them out of justice ... The saving grace of this religion, the only true one, through which alone true salvation is truly promised, has never been refused anyone who was worthy of it; and whoever did lack it was unworthy of it. Consequently, those who have not heard the Gospel, and those who, having heard it, have refused to come to Christ, that is, to believe in Him ... all of these have perished in death; they all go in one lump into condemnation." (Predestination of the Saints; Admonition and Grace)

2 Corinthians 4:3-4:  “And if our gospel be 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.”

Why? Because

“… God foreknew that if they had lived and the gospel had been preached to them, they would have heard it without belief.” (St. Augustine (+428) The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 3: 1997)

The Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, under Pope Saint Pius X, in 1907, in answer to a question as to whether Confucius could have been saved, wrote: "It is not allowed to affirm that Confucius was saved.  Christians, when interrogated, must answer that those who die as infidels are damned."

St. Alphonsus Liguori, Sermons (c. +1760): “How many are born among the pagans, among the Jews, among the Mohometans and heretics, and all are lost.  (on the Council of Trent.)

St. Thomas Aquinas, De Veritate, 14, A. 11, ad 1: Objection- “It is possible that someone may be brought up in the forest, or among wolves; such a man cannot explicitly know anything about the faith.  St. Thomas replies- It is the characteristic of Divine Providence to provide every man with what is necessary for salvation… provided on his part there is no hindrance.  In the case of a man who seeks good and shuns evil, by the leading of natural reason, God would either reveal to him through internal inspiration what had to be believed, or would send some preacher of the faith to him as He sent Peter to Cornelius (Acts 10:20).” …”

St. Thomas Aquinas, Sent. II, 28, Q. 1, A. 4, ad 4: “If a man born among barbarian nations, does what he can, God Himself will show him what is necessary for salvation, either by inspiration or sending a teacher to him.”

St. Thomas Aquinas, Sent. III, 25, Q. 2, A. 2, solute. 2: “If a man should have no one to instruct him, God will show him, unless he culpably wishes to remain where he is.”

“…If, however, we take it by way of pure negation, as we find it in those who have heard nothing about the faith, it bears the character, not of sin, but of punishment, because such like ignorance of Divine things is a result of the sin of our first parent. If such like unbelievers are damned it is on account of other sins, which cannot be taken away without faith, but not on account of their sin of unbelief. Hence Our Lord said (Jo. 15:22): ‘If I had not come, and spoken to them, they would not have sin; which Augustine expounds (Tract. 89 in Joan.) as ‘referring to the sin whereby they believed not in Christ.'” Summa Theologica , II-II, Q. 10, a. 3.

“Unbelief has a double sense.  First, it can be taken purely negatively; thus a man is called an unbeliever solely because he does not possess faith.  Secondly, by way of opposition to faith; thus when a man refuses to hear of the faith or even contemns it, according to Isaiah, “Who has believed our report?”  This is where the full nature of unbelief, properly speaking is found, and where the sin lies.

“If, however, unbelief be taken just negatively, as in those who have heard nothing about the faith, it bears the character, not of fault, but of penalty, because their ignorance of divine things is the result of the sin of our first parents.  Those who are unbelievers in this sense are condemned on account of other sins, which cannot be forgiven without faith; they are not condemned for the sin of unbelief.” (2, 2, 10, 1)

So St. Thomas teaches that Ignorance can be exculpatory, but never the means of salvation. And if one dies in that state, he will be damned because of other sins.

Fr. Francisco de Vitoria, O.P., a famous 16th century Dominican theologian, summed up the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church on this topic very well. Here is how he put it: “When we postulate invincible ignorance on the subject of baptism or of the Christian faith, it does [i]not follow that a person can be saved without baptism or the Christian faith.[/i] For the aborigines to whom no preaching of the faith or Christian religion has come will be damned for mortal sins or for idolatry, but not for the sin of unbelief. As St. Thomas says, however, if they do what in them lies [in their power], accompanied by a good life according to the law of nature, it is consistent with God’s providence that he will illuminate them regarding the name of Christ.”

Fr. Michael Muller, C.SS.R., The Catholic Dogma, pp. 217-218, 1888: “Inculpable or invincible ignorance has never been and will never be a means of salvation.  To be saved, it is necessary to be justified, or to be in the state of grace.  In order to obtain sanctifying grace, it is necessary to have the proper dispositions for justification; that is, true divine faith in at least the necessary truths of salvation, confident hope in the divine Savior, sincere sorrow for sin, together with the firm purpose of doing all that God has commanded, etc.  Now, these supernatural acts of faith, hope, charity, contrition, etc., which prepare the soul for receiving sanctifying grace, can never be supplied by invincible ignorance; and if invincible ignorance cannot supply the preparation for receiving sanctifying grace, much less can it bestow sanctifying grace itself.  ‘Invincible ignorance,’ says St. Thomas, ‘is a punishment for sin.’ (De, Infid. Q. x., art. 1).

Familiar Explanation of Christian Doctrine by Rev. Michael Müller, C.SS.R. said: Q. What are we to think of the salvation of those who are out of the pale of the Church without any fault of theirs, and who never had any opportunity of knowing better? A. Their inculpable ignorance will not save them; but if they fear God and live up to their conscience, God, in His infinite mercy, will furnish them with the necessary means of salvation, even so as to send, if needed, an angel to instruct them in the Catholic Faith, rather than let them perish through inculpable ignorance. (Imprimatur:Archbishop J. Roosevelt Bayley, Baltimore, 24 Sept., 1874)
Reply
#14
(05-16-2017, 10:00 AM)BC Wrote: hrist.”
In order to obtain sanctifying grace, it is necessary to have the proper dispositions for justification; that is, true divine faith in at least the necessary truths of salvation...

I keep running into this - what exatly are these "necessary truths" that you have to know?

Also, it sounds like the point being made is that God could catechize someone through miraculous means if they have already cooperated with the impulses of grace. Does this mean the random aboriginee begins to believe in Jesus and then asks a fellow native to baptize him? How does any of this possibly work on a practical level? Also, what happens if the aboriginee cooperates with grace and never commits mortal sin, but never arrives at knowledge of the faith? Where does he end up? Perhaps Limbo, with the innocent unbaptized infants?
Reply
#15
(05-16-2017, 01:11 PM)NemoClericus Wrote:
(05-16-2017, 10:00 AM)BC Wrote: hrist.”
In order to obtain sanctifying grace, it is necessary to have the proper dispositions for justification; that is, true divine faith in at least the necessary truths of salvation...

I keep running into this - what exatly are these "necessary truths" that you have to know?

The mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation at the very least. 

[St. Thomas said:] As the mystery of the Incarnation was believed from the beginning, so, also, was it necessary to believe the mystery of the Most Holy Trinity; for the mystery of the Incarnation cannot be explicitly believed without faith in the Most Holy Trinity, because the mystery of the Incarnation teaches that the Son of God took to himself a human body and soul by the power of the Holy Ghost. Hence, as the mystery of the Incarnation was explicitly believed by the teachers of religion, and implicitly by the rest of the people, so, also, was the mystery of the Most Holy Trinity explicitly believed by the teachers of religion and implicitly by the rest of the people. But in the New Law it must be explicitly believed by all." (De Fide, Q ii., art. vii. et viii.)  http://eens123.blogspot.com/2009/07/st-t...ty-of.html

"Some theologians," says St. Alphonsus, "hold that the belief of the two other articles - the Incarnation of the Son of God, and the Trinity of Persons - is strictly commanded but not necessary, as a means without which salvation is impossible; so that a person inculpably ignorant of them may be saved. But according to the more common and truer opinion, the explicit belief of these articles is necessary as a means without which no adult can be saved." (First Command. No. 8.)

Pope Clement XI (A.D. 1700-1721).  Response of the Holy Office: (D. 1349a): "the mysteries of faith which are necessary by a necessity of means (not just Church precept) ... are especially the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation."

There was some speculation by a few theologians pre Vatican I that belief in a God exists and that “is a rewarder to them that seek him” could be sufficient, but Vatican I put an end to that when it declared Faith must have a divine object. It is not necessary to have Divine faith in order to come to the conclusion there is a God and that he rewards the good as that can be concluded from reason alone.

(05-16-2017, 01:11 PM)NemoClericus Wrote: Also, it sounds like the point being made is that God could catechize someone through miraculous means if they have already cooperated with the impulses of grace. Does this mean the random aboriginee begins to believe in Jesus and then asks a fellow native to baptize him? How does any of this possibly work on a practical level? Also, what happens if the aboriginee cooperates with grace and never commits mortal sin, but never arrives at knowledge of the faith? Where does he end up? Perhaps Limbo, with the innocent unbaptized infants?

God will get someone to him before he dies.

“Still we answer the Semipelagians, and say, that infidels who arrive at the use of reason, and are not converted to the Faith, cannot be excused, because though they do not receive sufficient proximate grace, still they are not deprived of remote grace, as a means of becoming converted. But what is this remote grace? St. Thomas explains it, when he says, that if anyone was brought up in the wilds, or even among brute beasts, and if he followed the law of natural reason, to desire what is good, and to avoid what is wicked, we should certainly believe either that God, by an internal inspiration, would reveal to him what he should believe, or would send someone to preach the Faith to him, as he sent Peter to Cornelius. Thus, then, according to the Angelic Doctor [St. Thomas], God, at least remotely, gives to infidels, who have the use of reason, sufficient grace to obtain salvation, and this grace consists in a certain instruction of the mind, and in a movement of the will, to observe the natural law; and if the infidel cooperates with this movement, observing the precepts of the law of nature, and abstaining from grievous sins, he will certainly receive, through the merits of Jesus Christ, the grace proximately sufficient to embrace the Faith, and save his soul.” (St. Alphonsus Liguori : The History of Heresies, Refutation 6, #11)

It works on a practical level like this.  From the examples of missionaries and saints testimonies:

Irish missionary St. Columbanus (A.D. 543-615)

Rev. Canon Howe, The Catechist: "[St. Columbanus said]: ‘My sons, today you will see an ancient Pictish chief, who has faithfully kept the precepts of the Natural Law all his life, arrive on this island; he comes to be baptized and to die.’ Immediately, a boat was seen to approach with a feeble old man seated in the prow who was recognized as chief of one of the neighboring tribes. Two of his companions brought him before the missionary, to whose words he listened attentively. The old man asked to be baptized, and immediately thereafter breathed out his last breath and was buried on the very spot."

St. Francis Xavier, May, 1546: "Here (Ambon Island of Indonesia) there are altogether seven towns of Christians, all of which I went through and baptized all the newborn infants and the children not yet baptized. A great many of them died soon after their baptism, so that it was clear enough that their life had only been preserved by God until the entrance to eternal life should be opened to them." Coleridge, Henry. The Life and Letters of St. Francis Xavier. (1872) pg. 375

Fr. De Smet, Dec. 9, 1845: “I have often remarked that many of the children seem to await baptism before winging their flight to heaven, for they die almost immediately after receiving the sacrament.” Laveille, Eugene. The Life of Father de Smet, S. J. (1915) pg. 93 "… over a hundred children and eleven old people were baptized. Many of the latter [the old people], who were carried on buffalo hides, seemed only to await this grace before going to rest in the bosom of God." Laveille, Eugene. The Life of Father de Smet, S. J. (1915) pg. 172

The Life of St. Isaac Jogues, p. 92: "The Huron sorcerers...claimed... the Blackrobes caused people to die by pouring water on their heads; practically everyone they baptized died soon after." Talbot, Francis. Saint Among Savages: The Life of Saint Isaac Jogues

" Among these people was a little child about one year old....It was happily baptized. God preserved its life only by a miracle, it would seem, so that it might be washed in the blood of Jesus Christ and might bless His mercies forever." The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents, pg. 51 Fr. Lalemant wrote: "...it has happened very often, and has been remarked more than a hundred times, that where we were most welcome, where we baptized most people, there it was in fact where they died the most ; and, on the contrary, in the cabins to which we were denied entrance, although they were sometimes sick to extremity, at the end of a few days one saw every person prosperously cured. We shall see in heaven the secret, but ever adorable, judgments of God therein. Meanwhile, it is one of our most usual astonishments and one of our most solid pleasures, to consider, in the midst of all those things, the gracious bounties of God in the case of those whom he wishes for himself; and to see oftener than every day his sacred and efficacious acts of providence, which so arrange matters that it comes about that not one of the elect is lost, though hell and earth oppose." The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents, pg. 93
Reply
#16
Regardless of whether one believes receiving the actual sacrament is absolutely necessary or whether one must explicitly believe certain truths, everyone agrees that for those who are otherwise properly disposed to be saved, God will not leave them without the necessary means (whatever those means are and even if He brings them in ways known only to Himself).

Personally, I agree with BC on the necessary faith, since without faith it is impossible to please God, and faith is believing the revelation of God (and the Incarnation is the most basic revelation of Himself there is).  I don't think the Church has ever contradicted that either (a line from Redemptoris Missio can be read that way--although to do so is technically incorrect from a grammatical standpoint--but JPII in a later audience explicitly said it shouldn't be read that way and that salvation cannot be found apart from faith in Jesus).
Reply
#17
Thanks for the replies. Another question...

What if someone is converted by either Protestants or the Orthodox, believing explicitly in the Trinity and the Incarnation and being validly baptized? For simplicity's sake, let's assume they die right after baptism so we don't have to deal with the question of obedience or mortal sin. What does this mean for EENS assuming they are invincibly ignorant of where Christ's Church is in actuality? Are they in reality members of the Catholic Church by baptism, though they are at least materially outside the True Church?

Also, should I assume that the aboriginee innocent of actual sin and properly disposed will in ALL cases recieve the means necessary to receive sanctifying grace? So it is essentially impossible for their disposition to go without the requisite offer of God's sanctifying grace. This would mean they would at some point have to reject or accept the impulses of grace, which would seem to indicate that no one could die without committing actual sin in any case.
Reply
#18
(05-16-2017, 03:10 PM)NemoClericus Wrote: Thanks for the replies. Another question...

What if someone is converted by either Protestants or the Orthodox, believing explicitly in the Trinity and the Incarnation and being validly baptized? For simplicity's sake, let's assume they die right after baptism so we don't have to deal with the question of obedience or mortal sin. What does this mean for EENS assuming they are invincibly ignorant of where Christ's Church is in actuality? Are they in reality members of the Catholic Church by baptism, though they are at least materially outside the True Church?
The sins of separation, heresy and schism, like any other sins, require an a culpable act of will so they wouldn't destroy the grace in a baptized person's soul otherwise.  That being said, they would be said to "belong to the Church" rather than be members, since membership has a strict definition related to nature of the Church as a visible (St. Robert Bellarmine, who really synthesized the Church's doctrine on membership, also introduced this distinction--those who are actual members, and versus those who belong "in voto.").

Quote:Also, should I assume that the aboriginee innocent of actual sin and properly disposed will in ALL cases recieve the means necessary to receive sanctifying grace? So it is essentially impossible for their disposition to go without the requisite offer of God's sanctifying grace. This would mean they would at some point have to reject or accept the impulses of grace, which would seem to indicate that no one could die without committing actual sin in any case.

This seems right.  The 2nd Part of St. Alphonsus Liguori's book on prayer as a means of salvation is a great review of the Church's teaching on the universal salvific will of God and how the means of salvation are offered to all men.  After proving that God antecedently wills all men to be saved (and consequently wills to be damned those that reject salvation of their own free will) he asserts that all therefore receive the means to be saved:

St. Alphonsus Liguori Wrote:If then God wills all to be saved, it follows that He gives to all that grace and those aids which are necessary for the attainment of salvation, otherwise it could never be said that He has a true will to save all. "The effect of the antecedent will," says St. Thomas, "by which God wills the salvation of all men, is that order of nature the purpose of which is our salvation, and likewise those things which conduce to that end, and which are offered to all in common, whether by nature or by grace." [In 1 Sent. d. 46, q. 1, a. 1]

St. Alphonsus provides many more citations to the Fathers, etc. on this in the whole chapter excerpted above:
http://www.catholictreasury.info/books/prayer/pr19.php

The whole relevant part of the book:
http://www.catholictreasury.info/books/p...tents2.php
Reply
#19
(05-16-2017, 03:10 PM)NemoClericus Wrote: Thanks for the replies. Another question...

What if someone is converted by either Protestants or the Orthodox, believing explicitly in the Trinity and the Incarnation and being validly baptized? For simplicity's sake, let's assume they die right after baptism so we don't have to deal with the question of obedience or mortal sin. What does this mean for EENS assuming they are invincibly ignorant of where Christ's Church is in actuality? Are they in reality members of the Catholic Church by baptism, though they are at least materially outside the True Church?

Also, should I assume that the aboriginee innocent of actual sin and properly disposed will in ALL cases recieve the means necessary to receive sanctifying grace? So it is essentially impossible for their disposition to go without the requisite offer of God's sanctifying grace. This would mean they would at some point have to reject or accept the impulses of grace, which would seem to indicate that no one could die without committing actual sin in any case.

I don't meant to give offense, but your questions remind me of the Sadducees who tried to undermine the dogma of the resurrection by coming up with the question of what would happen to the woman who had seven husbands. One should not invent hypothetical cases to undermine the dogma no salvation outside the Church. EENS has been infallibly defined in very clear wording at least three times.
'If you succeed in bringing a single soul to heaven, what charity! what a gain! what glory to God!'

St. Paul of the Cross
Reply
#20
(05-16-2017, 03:44 PM)St. Camillus Wrote: I don't meant to give offense, but your questions remind me of the Sadducees who tried to undermine the dogma of the resurrection by coming up with the question of what would happen to the woman who had seven husbands. One should not invent hypothetical cases to undermine the dogma no salvation outside the Church. EENS has been infallibly defined in very clear wording at least three times.

But in the Gospel, the Lord gives the question a straight answer (that the question is irrelevant because there is no marriage after the resurrection). There's no implication that it's a bad question or shouldn't be asked. He just tells them they're ignorant and explains.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)