Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => The Feeneyism Ghetto => Topic started by: Jehanne on November 26, 2014, 11:38:13 PM
-
http://www.cfnews.org/page88/files/77982a376d9f1b199810842b1f158b8e-203.html
-
I also believe and will not forget, that God Loves us to the point that we all receive actual graces, to find truth. God will see to it.
Remember, CFN is sitting on a fence. Traditional? New Order? Leaves one to guessing.
-
Is CFN unaware of something else Pius IX wrote?
"For, it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood; but, on the other hand, it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, will not be held guilty of this in the eyes of God. Now, in truth, who would arrogate so much to himself as to mark the limits of such an ignorance, because of the nature and variety of peoples, regions, innate dispositions, and of so many other things? "
For the thousand time, the person is not guilty of heresy or infidelity due to the ignorance, but only original and actual sins. This is what this says. The invincible ignorant is not saved on account of original sin, at the very least. This is because only Baptism remits Original Sin. Nobody can be saved without the Catholic Faith.
St. Thomas himself explained that those who die invincibly ignorant, who have heard nothing about the Faith through no fault of their own are still damned for their sins, including original sin, which cannot be taken away without Baptism and the Faith. Original Sin suffices for damnation.
-
Is CFN unaware of something else Pius IX wrote?
"For, it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood; but, on the other hand, it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, will not be held guilty of this in the eyes of God. Now, in truth, who would arrogate so much to himself as to mark the limits of such an ignorance, because of the nature and variety of peoples, regions, innate dispositions, and of so many other things? "
For the thousand time, the person is not guilty of heresy or infidelity due to the ignorance, but only original and actual sins. This is what this says. The invincible ignorant is not saved on account of original sin, at the very least. This is because only Baptism remits Original Sin. Nobody can be saved without the Catholic Faith.
St. Thomas himself explained that those who die invincibly ignorant, who have heard nothing about the Faith through no fault of their own are still damned for their sins, including original sin, which cannot be taken away without Baptism and the Faith. Original Sin suffices for damnation.
That is what you are claiming, but that is NOT what Pius IX is plainly saying.
You are either making Pius IX say:
.....but, on the other hand - no ignorance can prevent conversion.
OR
.....but, on the other hand - even though they will go to hell for eternity, it will not be for willfully refusing to recognize the true Church of Christ, but for other damnable reasons.
Both of those interpretations are absolutely absurd, but that is what your explanation amounts to - putting an idiotic spin to a pope's words that plainly don't fit the context.
Both of the above propositions are absolutely true.
-
It was NEVER doubted anywhere that people cannot be converted, which makes the whole statement idiotic.
Vatican I, which Pope Pius IX approved, taught that people can be converted:
14. To this witness is added the effective help of power from on high. For, the kind Lord stirs up those who go astray and helps them by his grace so that they may come to the knowledge of the truth [23] ; and also confirms by his grace those whom he has translated into his admirable light [24], so that they may persevere in this light, not abandoning them unless he is first abandoned.
-
That is "Actual Grace", stirs them up to want Truth to Baptism.
-
That is "Actual Grace", stirs them up to want Truth to Baptism.
Yes, There are two kinds of grace. Actual Grace, which comes from the Catholic Church, is given to those outside the Catholic Church (non-Catholics) to effect their conversion. Whereas Sanctifying Grace is given only to those inside the Catholic Church, (validly baptized Catholics).
-
When discussing Pope Pius IX quotes you need to understand the context!
http://www.fatherfeeney.org/other/masonry.html
I am not a feeneyite but this is a great article.
When you only look at one quote that a saint or pope said and not look at the context or all his other quotes, you are the same as a protestant.
-
When discussing Pope Pius IX quotes you need to understand the context!
http://www.fatherfeeney.org/other/masonry.html
I am not a feeneyite but this is a great article.
When you only look at one quote that a saint or pope said and not look at the context or all his other quotes, you are the same as a protestant.
Great article. Thanks
The tragedy of all tragedies, however, is that Pope Pius IX has not been allowed to rest in peace. The Catholic Liberals(friends of masons), on whom he made unrelenting war during his entire pontificate, have in our day tried to make him the father of the modern heresy!
-
This same Pope IX later on wrote the "Syllabus of Modern Errors" in which indifferentism is definitely condemned, perhaps because he was aware of how the liberals had twisted his words and allow salvation for Non-Catholics. They still do so to this day! even "traditionalist" puppets such CMRI who hold the EENS salutary Rahner style.
Take a look at these four condemned errors:
15. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true. -- Allocution "Maxima quidem," June 9, 1862; Damnatio "Multiplices inter," June 10, 1851.
16. Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation, and arrive at eternal salvation. -- Encyclical "Qui pluribus," Nov. 9, 1846.
17. Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ. -- Encyclical "Quanto conficiamur," Aug. 10, 1863, etc.
18. Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church. -- Encyclical "Noscitis," Dec. 8, 1849.
Liberals will not mention these quotes either:
"As there is, but one God the Father, one Christ his Son, one Holy Ghost, so there is also only one divinely revealed truth, only one divine faith - the beginning of man's salvation and the foundation of all justification, by which (faith) the just man lives, and without which it is impossible to please God and to be admitted to the Communion of his children; and there is but one true, holy, Catholic, Roman Church and divine teaching Authority, (cathedra) founded upon Peter by the living voice of the Lord, out of which (Church) there is neither the TRUE FAITH nor ETERNAL SALVATION, since no one, can have God for his Father, who has not the Church for his Mother." (Encycl. Letter, March 17, 1856.)
It is necessary that you inculcate this salutary teaching in the souls of those who exaggerate the power of human reason to such a point that they dare, by its power, to investigate and explain the mysteries themselves, than which nothing is more foolish, nothing more insane. Strive to call them back from such a perversity of mind, explaining indeed that nothing was granted to men by God’s Providence more excellent than the authority of the divine faith, that this faith is to us like a torch in the darkness, that it is the leader that we follow to Life, that it is absolutely necessary for salvation, since “without faith it is impossible to please God,” and “he that believeth not shall be condemned
Let us hold most firmly that our Catholic doctrine, there is ONE GOD, ONE FAITH, ONE BAPTISM. To try and inquire further in unlawful.
-
When discussing Pope Pius IX quotes you need to understand the context!
http://www.fatherfeeney.org/other/masonry.html
I am not a feeneyite but this is a great article.
When you only look at one quote that a saint or pope said and not look at the context or all his other quotes, you are the same as a protestant.
That article doesn't address this subject at all.
It does, the point of the article is that the words of Popes Pius IX about Invincible Ignorance have been purposely misinterpreted by the liberals and the freemasons who were conspiring to destroy the exclusivity of the Catholic Church for salvation in since his time. They still do it today. It ends with indifferentism and universal salvation.
-
Let the liberals and freemasons misinterpret his words. Who cares. We are now talking about what his words actually mean in the context of that docuмent. It is plainly idiotic to say he was telling the other clergy that they needed to know that conversion was possible.
What do you think that Pope Pius IX was trying to teach then?
-
When discussing Pope Pius IX quotes you need to understand the context!
http://www.fatherfeeney.org/other/masonry.html
I am not a feeneyite but this is a great article.
When you only look at one quote that a saint or pope said and not look at the context or all his other quotes, you are the same as a protestant.
That article doesn't address this subject at all.
It does, the point of the article is that the words of Popes Pius IX about Invincible Ignorance have been purposely misinterpreted by the liberals and the freemasons who were conspiring to destroy the exclusivity of the Catholic Church for salvation in since his time. They still do it today. It ends with indifferentism and universal salvation.
Let the liberals and freemasons misinterpret his words. Who cares. We are now talking about what his words actually mean in the context of that docuмent. It is plainly idiotic to say he was telling the other clergy that they needed to know that conversion was possible.
The problem is that the words are misinterpreted to this day by Nado herself along with other liberals, (among the "traditionalists", especially those associated with the CMRI). In doing this, they enlist in the same ranks of the freemason enemies of the Church.
-
Which one, or both?
Why didn't he just come out and say it clearly like I just did?
For the second time, what is your interpretation of Pope Pius IX's words, then?
-
That is what you are claiming, but that is NOT what Pius IX is plainly saying.
No, that's exactly what Pius IX is saying; he's merely reiterating what St. Thomas taught on the subject. Invincible ignorance can never be salvific, merely exculpatory.
-
Which one, or both?
Why didn't he just come out and say it clearly like I just did?
For the second time, what is your interpretation of Pope Pius IX's words, then?
Nado would have Pius IX be a Pelagian like himself.
-
Which one, or both?
Why didn't he just come out and say it clearly like I just did?
For the second time, what is your interpretation of Pope Pius IX's words, then?
Nado would have Pius IX be a Pelagian like himself.
You meant like herself. Nado is a "she".
The female version of Lover of Truth :laugh2:
-
That is what you are claiming, but that is NOT what Pius IX is plainly saying.
No, that's exactly what Pius IX is saying; he's merely reiterating what St. Thomas taught on the subject. Invincible ignorance can never be salvific, merely exculpatory.
Pius IX is speaking of ignorance positively, not as you suggest, negatively.
Such a "positive ignorance" is exceeding rare, if at all:
"All ceremonies are professions of faith, in which the interior worship of God consists. Now man can make profession of his inward faith, by deeds as well as by words: and in either profession, if he make a false declaration, he sins mortally." (Summa Theologica Ia IIae, q.103, a.4)
You can believe that Pope Pius IX was "correcting" Saint Thomas Aquinas, whom he praised elsewhere, but the text does not demand such a reading. In any case, let's assume that there are individuals who are in a state of "invincible ignorance" and in a "state of grace." Pope Pius IX also taught us:
To this witness is added the effective help of power from on high. For, the kind Lord stirs up those who go astray and helps them by his grace so that they may come to the knowledge of the truth; and also confirms by his grace those whom he has translated into his admirable light, so that they may persevere in this light, not abandoning them unless he is first abandoned.
And,
The Church clearly declares that the only hope of salvation for mankind is placed in the Christian faith, which teaches the truth, scatters the darkness of ignorance by the splendor of its light, and works through love. This hope of salvation is placed in the Catholic Church which, in preserving the true worship, is the solid home of this faith and the temple of God. Outside of the Church, nobody can hope for life or salvation unless he is excused through ignorance beyond his control. The Church teaches and proclaims that if sometimes we can use human wisdom to study the divine word, our wisdom should not for that reason proudly usurp to itself the right of master. (Singulari quadam, 7)
In conclusion, if there are any individuals who are in a state of grace while invincibly ignorant of the One True Church, the Holy Spirit is still drawing those individuals into the One True Church:
And here, beloved Sons and Venerable Brethren, it is necessary once more to mention and censure the serious error into which some Catholics have unfortunately fallen. For they are of the opinion that men who live in errors, estranged from the true faith and from Catholic unity, can attain eternal life. This is in direct opposition to Catholic teaching. We all know that those who are afflicted with invincible ignorance with regard to our holy religion, if they carefully keep the precepts of the natural law that have been written by God in the hearts of all men, if they are prepared to obey God, and if they lead a virtuous and dutiful life, can attain eternal life by the power of divine light and grace. For God, Who reads comprehensively in every detail the minds and souls, the thoughts and habits of all men, will not permit, in accordance with his infinite goodness and mercy, anyone who is not guilty of a voluntary fault to suffer eternal torments (suppliciis). However, also well-known is the Catholic dogma that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church, and that those who obstinately oppose the authority and definitions of the Church, and who stubbornly remain separated from the unity of the Church and from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff (to whom the Saviour has entrusted the care of His vineyard), cannot attain salvation. (Quanto conficiamur, 7-8)
It is, of course, this "divine light" which is drawing all men and women into the Catholic Church, so that they "may come to the knowledge of the truth." Since these "positively invincible ignorant" persons are known only to the One and Triune God, Pope Pius IX reminds us:
For, in truth, when released from these corporeal chains "we shall see God as He is" [1 John 3:2], we shall understand perfectly by how close and beautiful a bond divine mercy and justice are united; but, as long as we are on earth, weighed down by this mortal mass which blunts the soul, let us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, there is "one God, one faith, one baptism" [Eph. 4:5]; it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry.
-
There's no point wasting our time here. Nado the heretic refuses to accept anything we might write because Nado is bad willed and has already found EENS unacceptable.
-
I think that Nado, instead of seeing Pope Pius IX's statements on invincible ignorance as being "positive" or "negative", should view those statements as being neutral. As such individuals are known only to the omnipotent Triune God alone, it would be "unlawful to proceed further in inquiry." Saint Thomas himself discussed this possibility:
It is impossible for venial sin to be in anyone with original sin alone, and without mortal sin. The reason for this is because before a man comes to the age of discretion, the lack of years hinders the use of reason and excuses him from mortal sin, wherefore, much more does it excuse him from venial sin, if he does anything which is such generically. But when he begins to have the use of reason, he is not entirely excused from the guilt of venial or mortal sin. Now the first thing that occurs to a man to think about then, is to deliberate about himself. And if he then direct himself to the due end, he will, by means of grace, receive the remission of original sin: whereas if he does not then direct himself to the due end, and as far as he is capable of discretion at that particular age, he will sin mortally, for through not doing that which is in his power to do. Accordingly thenceforward there cannot be venial sin in him without mortal, until afterwards all sin shall have been remitted to him through grace. (Summa Theologica, Ia IIae, q.89, a.6)
However, Saint Thomas makes equally clear that false beliefs destroy sanctifying grace:
"For children baptized before coming to the use of reason, afterwards when they come to perfect age, might easily be persuaded by their parents to renounce what they had unknowingly embraced; and this would be detrimental to the faith." (Summa Theologica, IIa IIae, q.10, a.12)
And, of course:
"All ceremonies are professions of faith, in which the interior worship of God consists. Now man can make profession of his inward faith, by deeds as well as by words: and in either profession, if he make a false declaration, he sins mortally." (Summa Theologica, Ia IIae, q.103, a.4)
Ergo, Jews, pagans, infidels (Muslims), Protestants, Coptic Christians, all Orthodox Christians who are beyond the Age of Discretion (14) cannot be in a state of grace.
-
Pope Pius IX is saying in that quote that sanctifying grace can be obtained by an adult in ignorance (ignorance without a limit that man can mark). This automatically and logically means implicit faith.....just like an infant has, upon being baptized, sanctifying grace and no explicit knowledge. In other words, it is not explicit knowledge that is a prerequisite for the baptism of desire. Baptism of desire is called by St. Thomas "baptism of Repentance" because it is primarily an intense act of love & sorrow with cleanses the soul of original sin. Such a one has the virtue of Faith like a newly baptized infant, but a more profound virtue of Charity as an adult.
This is true, Nado. We have an example of that:
"Everyone is bound to believe something explicitly...even if someone is brought up in the forest or among wild beasts. For it pertains to Divine Providence to furnish everyone with what is necessary for salvation, provided that on his part there is no hindrance. Thus, if someone so brought up followed the direction of natural reason in seeking good and avoiding evil, we must most certainly hold that God would either reveal to him through internal inspiration what had to be believed, or he would send some preacher of the faith to him as He sent Peter to Cornelius (Acts 10:20)." (The Disputed Questions on Truth, q.14, a.11)
True implicit faith cannot contradict any false explicit faith:
"After grace had been revealed, both learned and simple folk are bound to explicit faith in the mysteries of Christ, chiefly as regards those which are observed throughout the Church, and publicly proclaimed, such as the articles which refer to the Incarnation, of which we have spoken above (Question 1, Article 8). As to other minute points in reference to the articles of the Incarnation, men have been bound to believe them more or less explicitly according to each one's state and office." (Summa Theologica, IIa IIae, q.2, a.7)
"Now a certain order is to be found in those things that are apprehended universally. For that which, before aught else, falls under apprehension, is 'being,' the notion of which is included in all things whatsoever a man apprehends. Wherefore the first indemonstrable principle is that 'the same thing cannot be affirmed and denied at the same time,' which is based on the notion of 'being' and 'notbeing': and on this principle all others are based, as is stated in Metaph. iv, text. 9." (Summa Theologica, IIa IIae, q.94, a.2)
Ver. 23. It may be asked, why they had not implicit faith, worshiping the true, though unknown, God?[5] 1st. because the worship of the true God can never exist with the worship of idols; 2nd. because an explicit faith in God is required of all; 3rd. because it is repugnant to implicit faith, to admit any thing contrary to it, as comparing this unknown God with the pagan idols; for God to be at all, must be one. Lucan towards the end of his 2nd book, hath these words: (Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary, 1859 edition)
Ergo, non-Catholic "Christians" do not possess true implicit faith, at least those who are adults. Ditto for adherents of false religions. Consider what Pope Gregory XVI, Pope Pius IX's predecessor, stated:
"You know how zealously Our predecessors taught that article of faith which these dare to deny, namely the necessity of the Catholic faith and of unity for salvation… Omitting other appropriate passages which are almost numberless in the writings of the Fathers, We shall praise St. Gregory the Great who expressly testifies that THIS IS INDEED THE TEACHING OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. He says: 'The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved.' Official acts of the Church proclaim the same dogma. Thus, in the decree on faith which Innocent III published with the synod of Lateran IV, these things are written: 'There is one universal Church of all the faithful outside of which no one is saved.' Finally the same dogma is also expressly mentioned in the profession of faith proposed by the Apostolic See, not only that which all Latin churches use, but also that which… other Eastern Catholics use. We did not mention these selected testimonies because We thought you were ignorant of that article of faith and in need of Our instruction. Far be it from Us to have such an absurd and insulting suspicion about you. But We are so concerned about this serious and well known dogma, which has been attacked with such remarkable audacity, that We could not restrain Our pen from reinforcing this truth with many testimonies." (Summo Iugiter Studio, May 27, 1832)
And, once again, it was Pope Pius IX who stated at the First Vatican Council:
14. To this witness is added the effective help of power from on high. For, the kind Lord stirs up those who go astray and helps them by his grace so that they may come to the knowledge of the truth; and also confirms by his grace those whom he has translated into his admirable light, so that they may persevere in this light, not abandoning them unless he is first abandoned.
We need to bring non-Catholics to the True Religion, Nado. If you don't agree with that, then you don't belong on this board.
-
We need to bring non-Catholics to the True Religion, Nado. If you don't agree with that, then you don't belong on this board.
I have always firmly believed the whole human race needs to be converted to the true Church, the Roman Catholic Church. The very fact that you thought you needed to say this to me, reveals that you do not understand what I have been writing, or perhaps that you haven't been reading carefully enough.
But you define this "need" as a necessity of precept.
-
There's no point wasting our time here. Nado the heretic refuses to accept anything we might write because Nado is bad willed and has already found EENS unacceptable.
We are forbidden by the Church to judge bad-will in others. But Feeneyites seem to do it all the time anyway, especially after they find they cannot argue the subject anymore.
Isn't this precisely what the sedevacantists do?
In point of fact, when clear contradictions are shown in your position and you refuse to see it, that demonstrates bad will. You are operating from a certain emotional perspective regarding the dogma EENS. You find it distasteful and unpalatable, so you are determined to explain it away at all costs. Another hallmark of bad will is that when one refutes your core argument you come up with a new one, and then yet another one ... demonstrating that you've begged the question.
Obviously no one, not even the Church, ultimately judges the soul. De internis Ecclesia non judicat. But bad will can be demonstrated in the external forum.
-
We need to bring non-Catholics to the True Religion, Nado. If you don't agree with that, then you don't belong on this board.
I have always firmly believed the whole human race needs to be converted to the true Church, the Roman Catholic Church. The very fact that you thought you needed to say this to me, reveals that you do not understand what I have been writing, or perhaps that you haven't been reading carefully enough.
This is what modernists do, though, in extending "baptism of desire" even to those who explicitly state that they have no desire to be Baptized.
-
Yes. The Modernists corrupt the doctrine to one extreme, and the Feeneyites corrupt the doctrine to the other extreme.
No, true "Feeneyism" is at the level of theological opinion:
http://www.marycoredemptrix.com/laisneyism.html
-
Yes. The Modernists corrupt the doctrine to one extreme, and the Feeneyites corrupt the doctrine to the other extreme.
No, true "Feeneyism" is at the level of theological opinion:
http://www.marycoredemptrix.com/laisneyism.html
False opinion such that the Church excommunicated Fr. Feeney for his false doctrines.
Only if you are a sede:
http://www.saintbenedict.com/index.php/theorder/history
-
Yes. The Modernists corrupt the doctrine to one extreme, and the Feeneyites corrupt the doctrine to the other extreme.
No, true "Feeneyism" is at the level of theological opinion:
http://www.marycoredemptrix.com/laisneyism.html
False opinion such that the Church excommunicated Fr. Feeney for his false doctrines.
Fr. Feeney was censored by the 1949 Holy Office Letter because his understanding of the dogma EENS directly opposed the teaching of "salvation by implicit desire" and its corollary, "salvation by justification alone." which the modernists sedevacantists are so fond of. In doing this, they share exactly the same liberal error with the conciliar popes they reject. They also share the same liberal error with the freemasons, the Jєωιѕн Left, the Vatican II Curia... and the rest of the Church's enemies.
This condemnation of Fr. Feeney's teaching has nothing to do with Baptism of Desire or Invincible Ignorance or any other doctrinal error. As a matter of fact, in 1949 when this letter was written, he had said nothing at all on the subject of the sacraments.
So if you are still bringing up this, is because of your flawed understanding of the WHOLE topic. Fr. Feeney spoke of the BOD as a concept. Something to be discussed intellectually but he rejected it as knowable de facto. The obligation to receive the Sacraments necessary for salvation still remains.
-
Yes. The Modernists corrupt the doctrine to one extreme, and the Feeneyites corrupt the doctrine to the other extreme.
No, true "Feeneyism" is at the level of theological opinion:
http://www.marycoredemptrix.com/laisneyism.html
False opinion such that the Church excommunicated Fr. Feeney for his false doctrines.
Fr. Feeney was censored by the 1949 Holy Office Letter because his understanding of the dogma EENS directly opposed the teaching of "salvation by implicit desire" and its corollary, "salvation by justification alone." which the modernists sedevacantists are so fond of. In doing this, they share exactly the same liberal error with the conciliar popes they reject. They also share the same liberal error with the freemasons, the Jєωιѕн Left, the Vatican II Curia... and the rest of the Church's enemies.
This condemnation of Fr. Feeney's teaching has nothing to do with Baptism of Desire or Invincible Ignorance or any other doctrinal error. As a matter of fact, in 1949 when this letter was written, he had said nothing at all on the subject of the sacraments.
So if you are still bringing up this, is because of your flawed understanding of the WHOLE topic. Fr. Feeney spoke of the BOD as a concept. Something to be discussed intellectually but he rejected it as knowable de facto. The obligation to receive the Sacraments necessary for salvation still remains.
You are only too glad to diverge from the subject at hand. It is about the words of Pius IX and what he meant.
The error of Fr. Feeney being excommunicated for "false doctrines" had to be addressed. It was you who brought it first.
-
In any case, back to what Pius IX wrote.
Just be sure to quote everything which he wrote and not just snippets.
-
In any case, back to what Pius IX wrote.
Just be sure to quote everything which he wrote and not just snippets.
It's been cited sufficient for context. If you feel you need more, google a literal string from it to find the whole and read more.
Here's the "problematic" passages:
And here, beloved Sons and Venerable Brethren, it is necessary once more to mention and censure the serious error into which some Catholics have unfortunately fallen. For they are of the opinion that men who live in errors, estranged from the true faith and from Catholic unity, can attain eternal life. This is in direct opposition to Catholic teaching. We all know that those who are afflicted with invincible ignorance with regard to our holy religion, if they carefully keep the precepts of the natural law that have been written by God in the hearts of all men, if they are prepared to obey God, and if they lead a virtuous and dutiful life, can attain eternal life by the power of divine light and grace. For God, Who reads comprehensively in every detail the minds and souls, the thoughts and habits of all men, will not permit, in accordance with his infinite goodness and mercy, anyone who is not guilty of a voluntary fault to suffer eternal torments (suppliciis). However, also well-known is the Catholic dogma that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church, and that those who obstinately oppose the authority and definitions of the Church, and who stubbornly remain separated from the unity of the Church and from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff (to whom the Saviour has entrusted the care of His vineyard), cannot attain salvation. (Quanto conficiamur, 7-8)
The Church clearly declares that the only hope of salvation for mankind is placed in the Christian faith, which teaches the truth, scatters the darkness of ignorance by the splendor of its light, and works through love. This hope of salvation is placed in the Catholic Church which, in preserving the true worship, is the solid home of this faith and the temple of God. Outside of the Church, nobody can hope for life or salvation unless he is excused through ignorance beyond his control. The Church teaches and proclaims that if sometimes we can use human wisdom to study the divine word, our wisdom should not for that reason proudly usurp to itself the right of master. (Singulari quadam, 7)
What is that "divine light and grace," though? Answered later on at the First Vatican Council:
To this witness is added the effective help of power from on high. For, the kind Lord stirs up those who go astray and helps them by his grace so that they may come to the knowledge of the truth; and also confirms by his grace those whom he has translated into his admirable light, so that they may persevere in this light, not abandoning them unless he is first abandoned.
With non-Catholics, we ought to presume the loss of their souls:
15. Condemned Error: Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true. -- Allocution "Maxima quidem," June 9, 1862; Damnatio "Multiplices inter," June 10, 1851.
16. Condemned Error: Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation, and arrive at eternal salvation. -- Encyclical "Qui pluribus," Nov. 9, 1846.
17. Condemned Error: Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ. -- Encyclical "Quanto conficiamur," Aug. 10, 1863, etc.
18. Condemned Error: Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church. -- Encyclical "Noscitis," Dec. 8, 1849.