Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Poll

Can one be Justified and not be in a state of Sanctifying Grace?

Yes
No
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 38

Author Topic: Can one be Justified and not be in a state of Sanctifying Grace?  (Read 18475 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lover of Truth

Re: Can one be Justified and not be in a state of Sanctifying Grace?
« Reply #160 on: August 25, 2017, 12:14:47 PM »
Quote from: tornpage on August 25, 2017, 12:01:50 PM
Which one?
2. Is it required by a necessity of means or of precept to believe explicitly in the mysteries of the Holy Trinity and Incarnation after the promulgation of the gospel? 

The first opinion and more common and held as more probable teaches belief is by necessity of means; Sanch. in Dec. lib. 2. c. 2. n. 8. Valent. 2. 2. d. 1. qu. 2. p. 4. Molina 1. part. qu. 1. a. 1 d. 2. Cont. Tourn. de praeceptis Decal. cap. 1. art. 1. §. 2. concl. 1. Juven. t. 6. diss. 4. a. 3. Antoine de virt. theol. cap. 1. qu. 2. Wigandt tr. 7. ex. 2. de fide n. 22. Concina t. 1. diss. 1. de fide cap. 8. n. 7. cuм Ledesma, Serra, Prado, etc. Also Salm. tr. 21. c. 2. punct. 2. n. 15. Cuniliat. tr. 4. de 1. Dec. praec. c. 1. §. 2. et Ronc. tr. 6. c. 2. But the last three say that in rare cases it may happen that one can be justified by implicit faith only…

But the second opinion that is also sufficiently probable says by necessity of precept all must explicitly believe in the mysteries. However, for necessity of means it is sufficient to implicitly believe in the mysteries. So Dominicus Soto (in 4. sentent. t. 1. d. 5. qu. un. art. 2. concl. 2.) where he says: Even though the precept of explicit faith (in the Trinity and Incarnation) absolutely obliges the whole world, yet there also are many who are invincibly ignorant [of the mysteries] from which the obligation excuses. Franciscus Sylvius (t. 3. in 2. 2. qu. 2. art. 7. and 8. concl. 6.) writes: After the promulgation of the gospel explicit faith in the Incarnation is necessary for all for salvation by a necessity of precept, and also (that it is probable) a necessity of means…

Card. Gotti (Theol. t. 2. tr. 9. qu. 2. d. 4. §. 1. n. 2.) says: In my judgment the opinion which denies that explicit faith in Christ and in the Trinity is so necessary that no one can be justified without it is very probable. And he adds that Scotus holds this opinion…

Elbel. (t. 1. conferent. 1. n. 17.) writes today that this opinion is held by notables. DD. Castropal. part. 2. tr. 4. d. 1. p. 9. Viva in Prop. 64 damn. ab Innocent. XI. n. 10, Sporer. tr. 11. cap. 11. sect. 11. §. 4. n. 9. Laym. lib. 2. tr. 1. cap. 8. n. 5. who teach this is not less probable than the first, with Richard. Medin. Vega, Sa, and Turriano. Card. de Lugo, de fide d. 12. n. 91. calls the first speculatively probable, but defends this second view at length and in absolute terms as more probable, with Javell, Zumel, and Suarez d. 12. sect. 4. n. 10. the writings of Lugo likewise seem to be the opinion of St. Thomas 3. part. qu. 69. a. 4. ad 2. where the Doctor says: Before Baptism Cornelius and others like him receive grace and virtues through their faith in Christ and their desire for Baptism, implicit or explicit. Wherefore, argues Lugo, just as Cornelius freely obtained grace by implicit faith, so even one can obtain the same in a place where the gospel is not perfectly promulgated. He will be able in such a place to obtain the same who is invincibly ignorant of the mysteries in a place where the gospel has not been sufficiently promulgated. They say it is repugnant to the divine goodness and providence to damn invincibly ignorant adults who live uprightly in accordance with the light of nature whereas Acts 10:35 says, “But in every nation he that feareth him and worketh justice is acceptable to him.”

They respond that even though all the Scriptures and Holy Fathers’ testimonies oppose this opinion, their opinion is more easily explained by necessity of precept, or because ordinarily almost none are saved without explicit faith in the mysteries, because after the promulgation of the gospel almost no one labors out of invincible ignorance. Or that, says Lugo, they can be explained by implicit faith or explained by desire… Source: Liguori, St. Alphonsus. An Exposition and Defence of All the Points of Faith Discussed and Defined by the Sacred Council of Trent, Along With the Refutation of the Errors of the Pretended Reformers. Dublin, 1846. 
Logged

Offline Lover of Truth

Re: Can one be Justified and not be in a state of Sanctifying Grace?
« Reply #161 on: August 25, 2017, 12:15:26 PM »
Not sure why some of the words came out like they did. I was not yelling just sharing the quote I was speaking of and you asked about.
Logged

Offline Lover of Truth

Re: Can one be Justified and not be in a state of Sanctifying Grace?
« Reply #162 on: August 25, 2017, 12:20:48 PM »
Quote from: tornpage on August 25, 2017, 12:14:58 PM
I already said there is a truth to the teaching, just as the teaching is absolutely true that it is possible that man not sin because God doesn't demand the impossible.
If there were such people . . .
There are none, just like there is no responsible adult who goes through his whole life without committing sin, though not committing sin is possible.
"It is possible that a man not sin because God doesn't demand the impossible."  A man sins seven times a day.  It is possible that there are good willed men not "guilty" of mortal sin.  It is possible to be in a state of sanctifying grace apart from Baptism.  If you do not deny this I'm not sure what we are debating. Justification is a process, if and when it gets to the point before being sacramentally baptized but after gaining supernatural faith and perfect charity (or perfect contrition) one can be saved that way.  One in this state will ultimately join the Church and get baptized unless he dies first.  He will have died within the Church though not as a member in a state of sanctifying grace which can only be obtained within the Church.  I'm not sure why the Feeneyites have heart attacks over this teaching.  It truly brings out the worst in them (I hope). 
Logged

Offline Lover of Truth

Re: Can one be Justified and not be in a state of Sanctifying Grace?
« Reply #163 on: August 25, 2017, 12:23:52 PM »
Quote from: tornpage on August 25, 2017, 12:20:32 PM
What does this prove, this advancing by Lugo et al of a minority opinion "even though all the Scriptures and Holy Fathers' testimonies oppose" no less?
Simply proves it had not been settled.  

Some theologians hold that view at least in regard to those who lived in pagan lands where the Gospel had not yet been preached. St. Alphonsus held it as the "more probable" and "more common" opinion that belief in the Trinity is required by all by necessity of means for salvation. However, he explains all three opinions, i.e. 1) that explicit belief in the Trinity is "necessitate medii" for all; 2) that explicit belief is "necessitate medii" for all but in some rare cases God makes exception to this; 3) that explicit belief in the Trinity is only "necessitate praecepti" and that only implicit belief in the Trinity is required "necessitate medii." He calls this third opinion (which he lists as the second) "also probable enough" and he quotes a number of eminent theologians who hold this opinion. Here is the passage in his works:
https://books.google.com/books?id=NR48AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA296

Logged

Offline Lover of Truth

Re: Can one be Justified and not be in a state of Sanctifying Grace?
« Reply #164 on: August 25, 2017, 12:39:15 PM »
Quote from: tornpage on August 25, 2017, 12:35:31 PM
Lover of Truth,
I asked you these questions:
This prompted your your query, "have you read the St. Alphonsus quote?"
The St. Alphonsus quote doesn't provide a response to my questions.
And if it is "unsettled" (your own words), the Church hasn't pronounced on it or much less "defined" it.
You are offering speculations and contending that the opposing of those speculations - in an "unsettled" matter no less - is somehow heretical, a rejection of Church teaching, etc.
This is ridiculous.
 
Nothing ridiculous.  Implicit Faith is what Cornelius had before Philip came to him.  Actual grace got him to read scripture.  Good will got him to want to understand it rightly.  Is there anything inaccurate about that?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 38
« previous next »