Author Topic: Pius IX repented for his teaching of Invincible Ignorance (Read 7296 times)

tdrev123 · « **on:** September 19, 2014, 09:20:44 PM »

The first person of authority in the Church to profess the belief in Invincible Ignorance was Pope Pius IX. Before this happened baptism of desire was understood to only mean catechumens can be saved without water baptism, after this happened the false teaching of I.I. was incorporated into baptism of desire (for catechumens).
I'm sure most people know that at the beginning of Pius IX's pontificate he was liberal and his actions and teachings, not necessarily sinful, but were un-traditional.

He first propagated I.I. in Singulari Quadam in1854, then Singulari Quidem in 1856, and Quanto Conficiamur Moerore in 1863. This was during the same time when he was doing many liberal things.
Pius IX's theological outlook became very different in 1864 and onwards, read http://fatherfeeney.org/other/masonry.html to understand that.

In Vatican 1, seesion 2, 1870, Pius IX took a profession of Faith, at the end of this he states,

"This true catholic faith, outside of which none can be saved, which I NOW freely profess and truly hold, is what I shall steadfastly maintain and confess, by the help of God, in all its completeness and purity until my dying breath, and I shall do my best to ensure [2] that all others do the same. This is what I, the same Pius, promise, vow and swear. So help me God and these holy gospels of God."

Pius IX is specifically repenting for his belief in I.I., why else would he be saying "Now"...The definition of now is- at the present time or moment...that clearly means he did not formerly believe "outside of which none can be saved" before. I read the entire session 2 of Vatican 1 and no where else is "Now" used when talking about a procession of belief or codification of dogma. After 1863, Pius IX does not ever speak of I.I. nor is it mentioned at all in Vatican 1.

Also in the procession of faith, Pius IX says, "I confess one baptism for the remission of Sins."
Also, "I profess also that there are seven sacraments of the new law, truly and properly so called, instituted by our lord Jesus Christ and necessary for salvation, though each person need not receive them all.

I think it is clear that Pius IX does not believe in I.I. after 1863 and he repudiates it in his Procession of Faith.

I look forward to what spam LoT puts on this thread.

Cantarella · « **Reply #1 on:** September 19, 2014, 09:31:09 PM »

Yes, also this same Pope IX was who later on wrote the "Syllabus of Modern Errors" in which indifferentism is definitely condemned, perhaps because he was already aware of how the liberals had twisted his words by making it possible for Non-Catholics to be saved. He DID make attempts to correct the error of "invincible ignorance".

Quote

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.

songbird · « **Reply #2 on:** September 20, 2014, 07:52:28 AM »

Thank you very much for this post!

Jehanne · « **Reply #3 on:** September 20, 2014, 08:20:43 AM »

Pope Pius IX also taught the following at the First Vatican Council:

Quote

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.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #4 on:** September 20, 2014, 11:11:37 AM »

There wasn't anything wrong with what he said about invincible ignorance; at no point did he ever say that it was salvific. Problem was the timing. It was INCREDIBLY inopportune given the climate of the times and with his knowing that religious indifferentism was on the rise (cf. Syllabus of Errors). Most of the modern Pelagian Cushingite BoDers distort what Pius IX said about invincible ignorance, and the religious indifferentists IMMEDIATELY pounced on the idea and began exploiting it to their own ends.

Cantarella · « **Reply #5 on:** September 21, 2014, 08:29:48 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

There wasn't anything wrong with what he said about invincible ignorance; at no point did he ever say that it was salvific. Problem was the timing. It was INCREDIBLY inopportune given the climate of the times and with his knowing that religious indifferentism was on the rise (cf. Syllabus of Errors). Most of the modern Pelagian Cushingite BoDers distort what Pius IX said about invincible ignorance, and the religious indifferentists IMMEDIATELY pounced on the idea and began exploiting it to their own ends.

The liberals always quote the paragraph that may be misunderstood in their favor and leave the rest of the paragraph out, which is this one:

Quote

There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments.

But then he continues:

Quote

Also well known is the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. Eternal salvation cannot be obtained by those who oppose the authority and statements of the same Church and are stubbornly separated from the unity of the Church and also from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff, to whom "the custody of the vineyard has been committed by the Savior."[4] The words of Christ are clear enough: "If he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you a Gentile and a tax collector;"[5] "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me;"[6] "He who does not believe will be condemned;"[7] "He who does not believe is already condemned;"[8] "He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters."[9] The Apostle Paul says that such persons are "perverted and self-condemned;"[10] the Prince of the Apostles calls them "false teachers . . . who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master. . . bringing upon themselves swift destruction."

Cantarella · « **Reply #6 on:** September 21, 2014, 08:33:39 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Most of the modern Pelagian Cushingite BoDers distort what Pius IX said about invincible ignorance, and the religious indifferentists IMMEDIATELY pounced on the idea and began exploiting it to their own ends.

The following exactly describes the Modernist error of invincible ignorance the way is broadly taught nowadays. Ironically most "traditionalist" in name only (those solely preoccupied with liturgy, veils, and nostalgic fiftieism) hold and promote.

This is the doctrine which Modern
Catholics are being taught:

In the words of Fr. Feeney addressed to Pius XII,

Quote

The way to be saved is by being sincere to your convictions and leading a good life. If one of your convictions happens to be that the Roman Catholic Church is the true Church of Christ, then you are obliged to join it. If you do not sincerely think it is the one way to salvation, then you are invincibly ignorant and God will save you, apart from the Church. You are then said to belong to the soul of the Church, and whatever you desire for yourself in the way of salvation, Catholic theologians are prepared to call ‘Baptism of Desire.’ Were you to sincerely think that the Roman Catholic Church is not the true Church of Christ, it would be a sin for you to join it."

songbird · « **Reply #7 on:** September 21, 2014, 11:18:55 PM »

Is Invisible Ignorance defined by Holy Mother Church? First of all, is there really invisible ignorance, when God has Actual Grace, which is given to everyone. One does not have to be baptized to have actual grace. How can one think things through and then claim invisible ignorance.

Nothing is impossible with God. If someone dies and we are not sure of a saved soul, that is between God and soul. We can not know everything, that is for God. But in order to bury the dead, to bury in a Catholic Cemetery or to have Requiem Mass, then we need to know, and that is as far as we can take it. If we don't know, then we don't know and there would be no Mass or Catholic burial. That does not mean that they are not saved, we just don't know everything.

Stubborn · « **Reply #8 on:** September 22, 2014, 03:35:20 AM »

Quote from: songbird

Is Invisible Ignorance defined by Holy Mother Church? First of all, is there really invisible ignorance, when God has Actual Grace, which is given to everyone. One does not have to be baptized to have actual grace. How can one think things through and then claim invisible ignorance.

Nothing is impossible with God. If someone dies and we are not sure of a saved soul, that is between God and soul. We can not know everything, that is for God. But in order to bury the dead, to bury in a Catholic Cemetery or to have Requiem Mass, then we need to know, and that is as far as we can take it. If we don't know, then we don't know and there would be no Mass or Catholic burial. That does not mean that they are not saved, we just don't know everything.

Fr. Wathen states it this way:

Quote

This [EENS] dogma rules out the possibility of simple invincible
ignorance concerning the matter of salvation; those who die in
ignorance of the Church as the only course of salvific grace must be
adjudged to have been culpably so. In a word, they did not know
because they did not want to know.

Disputaciones · « **Reply #9 on:** September 27, 2014, 12:47:20 AM »

Quote from: tdrev123

The first person of authority in the Church to profess the belief in Invincible Ignorance was Pope Pius IX. Before this happened baptism of desire was understood to only mean catechumens can be saved without water baptism, after this happened the false teaching of I.I. was incorporated into baptism of desire (for catechumens).
I'm sure most people know that at the beginning of Pius IX's pontificate he was liberal and his actions and teachings, not necessarily sinful, but were un-traditional.

He first propagated I.I. in Singulari Quadam in1854, then Singulari Quidem in 1856, and Quanto Conficiamur Moerore in 1863. This was during the same time when he was doing many liberal things.
Pius IX's theological outlook became very different in 1864 and onwards, read http://fatherfeeney.org/other/masonry.html to understand that.

In Vatican 1, seesion 2, 1870, Pius IX took a profession of Faith, at the end of this he states,

"This true catholic faith, outside of which none can be saved, which I NOW freely profess and truly hold, is what I shall steadfastly maintain and confess, by the help of God, in all its completeness and purity until my dying breath, and I shall do my best to ensure [2] that all others do the same. This is what I, the same Pius, promise, vow and swear. So help me God and these holy gospels of God."

Pius IX is specifically repenting for his belief in I.I., why else would he be saying "Now"...The definition of now is- at the present time or moment...that clearly means he did not formerly believe "outside of which none can be saved" before. I read the entire session 2 of Vatican 1 and no where else is "Now" used when talking about a procession of belief or codification of dogma. After 1863, Pius IX does not ever speak of I.I. nor is it mentioned at all in Vatican 1.

Also in the procession of faith, Pius IX says, "I confess one baptism for the remission of Sins."
Also, "I profess also that there are seven sacraments of the new law, truly and properly so called, instituted by our lord Jesus Christ and necessary for salvation, though each person need not receive them all.

I think it is clear that Pius IX does not believe in I.I. after 1863 and he repudiates it in his Procession of Faith.

I look forward to what spam LoT puts on this thread.

Pope Pius IX didn't speak of I.I. as if it was his mere opinion or his invention, he spoke of it as of something well-known and not new, which it wasn't, since it's a fact it exists.

Your whole post is hilarious.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #10 on:** September 27, 2014, 06:18:51 AM »

Again, for the ignorant among us, Invincible Ignorance is NOT SALVIFIC, merely exculpatory; Pius IX simply taught that those who labor in invincible ignorance will not be punished for the actual sin of infidelity (echoing St. Thomas on this subject). Pius IX then added that those who, in a state of invincible ignorance, are following the lights of actual grace being given to them will EVENTUALLY be brought to salvation, not that they would be saved if they died in that state without having embraced the Catholic Faith. St. Thomas taught that God would send an angel if necessary to enlighten such as these about the Faith. Pius IX was doing NOTHING more than echoing St. Thomas on this subject.

Cantarella · « **Reply #11 on:** September 27, 2014, 10:25:20 AM »

The Invincibly Ignorant is damned at least for the guilt of Original Sin but not for the ignorance itself. He is justly deprived of the only means of salvation, which is membership in the Holy Catholic Church (visibly, explicitly,....). He has neither innocence nor excuse in this matter. His ignorance of the Divine Faith is a punishment for the original sin which all of us are born with.

Faith is a grace from God. We all are conceived damned for the original sin and will go to hell unless we die a Catholic in state of grace. Nobody is worthy of the Gospel or has any claim to receive it. Outside the Catholic Church, all humanity is cursed, to this day, with both physical and spiritual death, decay and corruption.

Cantarella · « **Reply #12 on:** September 27, 2014, 11:05:38 PM »

Cantarella · « **Reply #13 on:** September 27, 2014, 11:09:00 PM »

Quote from: GJC

So true. Original sin is not even thought about anymore. This was the error of the Pelagians who denied original sin and incorrectly concluded

A) That infants who died without the sacrament of baptism would not go to hell because God who is infinite in mercy, would never let someone go to hell who has not committed a sin of their own.

B) Invincibly ignorant people could be saved because it was not their fault that the Gospel had not reached them. Therefore, sanctity and holiness were results of natural qualities in a person.

The Roman Catholic Church infallibly defined at the ecuмenical councils of Lyons and Florence, that the guilt of original sin suffices for damnation in Hell.

Quote from: Florence

The souls of those who die in mortal sin or with original sin only, however, immediately descend to hell, to be punished moreover with disparate punishments.
They will go into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

Inculpable ignorance of the true religion excuses a person from the sin of infidelity or heresy. But such ignorance has never been the means of salvation.

Cantarella · « **Reply #14 on:** September 27, 2014, 11:12:04 PM »

Quote from: GJC

1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them, allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.

Haven't we been warned about truths mixed with lies?

Unbaptized infants and little children who die are still in the state of original sin. Since no one can enter Heaven in state of original sin, these pour souls cannot be there. They are in Limbo. They do not suffer eternal fire and torment in Hell (only those beyond the age of reason, guilty of actual sins do). Their suffering consists only in the loss of the Beatific Vision.

The Church has already spoken about this:

Quote

Infallible Magisterium

Pope St. Zosimus:
"No one of our children is held not guilty until he is freed through Baptism".

Council of Lyons:
"The souls of those who die in mortal sin or with original sin only, however, immediately descend to Hell, yet to be punished with different punishments"

Council of Florence:
" It is likewise defined that the souls of those who depart in actual mortal sin or in original sin only, descend immediately into Hell but to undergo punishments of different kinds".

Pope Innocent III:
" The punishment of original sin is the loss of the vision of God; the punishment for actual sin is the torments of everlasting Hell".