Author Topic: Possible strict-EENS chapel (Read 122358 times)

Angelus · « **Reply #210 on:** December 12, 2025, 09:41:00 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn on December 12, 2025, 05:57:25 AM

The term "invincible ignorance" should be completely abandoned as it means those people who are incapable of thinking at all, such as those who are in some way brain injured.

When speaking about the salvation of souls, the term "invincible ignorance" should be replaced with the correct term used by Pope Pius IX; "those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion".

And of course, your statement that Pius IX teaching should be "completely abandoned" are fully consistent with your Old Catholic ecclesiology.

Stubborn gets to decide what is dogma or not. Stubborn gets to edit Pius IX's teaching. Hopefully others on this thread will see the connection.

And you are so sloppy in your thinking that you think Pius IX is talking about "brain injured" people. No, Stubborn, Pius IX said they people are "invincibly ignorant about our most holy religion." They are not necessarily ignorant about anything else. Nor are they "brain injured."

WorldsAway · « **Reply #211 on:** December 12, 2025, 09:42:11 AM »

I said nothing about his motive.
We have almost 200 years of hindsight now. We can look at what has happened to EENS over that time. I'm sure he never imagined this would happen
Your misinterpretation of him is the mistake.

Angelus · « **Reply #212 on:** December 12, 2025, 09:49:38 AM »

Quote from: WorldsAway on December 12, 2025, 07:09:20 AM

Yeah, and he believes this to be a "valid" "development of doctrine" regarding EENS.

This is exactly what Pope Pius IX condemned at the Vatican Council:

Angelus is saying that, regarding what "has once been declared by holy mother Church" (that there is no salvation outside of Her and the Faith), there is a "more profound understanding" of the Dogma that began in the mid-19th century..which caused the Dogma to no longer mean what it had always meant

What Pope Pius IX himself professed at the Council:
does not actually mean what it says. And, get this, the Vatican Council was after this so-called "valid" "development" of EENS is alleged to have occured

So every time the Church had declared that there is no salvation outside of Her and no salvation outside of the Faith (including at Vatican One) what She actually meant was that there is some salvation outside Her, and some salvation outside of the Faith

Yes, I certainly think it was a valid development of doctrine regarding EENS. Pius IX and his Cardinals and every Pope after Pius IX apparently thought so too because they did not condemn Pius IX for saying it.

So by what criteria do you claim to judge Pius IX's teaching as unnecessary and harmful? Do you think he was a false Pope or a heretic himself. And what about all Pius X who did not have anything negative to say about Pius IX's teaching. Do you think they were heretics for not "correcting" him?

If so, Stubborn would be happy to welcome you into his church.

Angelus · « **Reply #213 on:** December 12, 2025, 09:52:07 AM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on December 12, 2025, 08:18:38 AM

Angelus, EENS is a doctrine. Those who die ignorant of the Church will not be saved. They will not enter paradise or heaven. At best, they go to Limbo, which is part of hell. But they don’t suffer, except the loss of seeing God.

But they will be in Limbo, FOR ALL ETERNITY. Period. They will never enter heaven. If you say otherwise, you’re denying EENS and are a heretic. You also deny Trent 10 different ways.

Take it up with Pius IX. And if you think he a heretic, join up with Stubborn and the Old Catholics.

Here are all three quotes from Pius IX again:

Singulari Quadam

"Faith orders Us to hold that out of the Apostolic Roman Church no person can be saved, that it is the only ark of salvation, and that whoever will not enter therein shall perish in the waters of the deluge. On the other hand it is necessary to hold for certain that ignorance of the true religion, if that ignorance be invincible, is not a fault in the eyes of God. But who will presume to arrogate to himself the right to mark the limits of such an ignorance, holding in account the various conditions of peoples, of countries, of minds, and of the infinite multiplicity of human things? When delivered from the bonds of the body, we shall see God as He is, we will comprehend perfectly by what admirable and indissoluble bond the divine mercy and the divine justice are united; but as long as we are upon the earth, bent under the weight of this mortal mass which overloads the soul, let us hold firmly that which the Catholic doctrine teaches us, that there is only one God, one Faith, one Baptism; to seek to penetrate further is not permitted."

Singulari Quidem

"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."

Quanto Conficiamur Moerore

"Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. 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. 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.”

Angelus · « **Reply #214 on:** December 12, 2025, 09:58:27 AM »

Quote from: WorldsAway on December 12, 2025, 09:42:11 AM

I said nothing about his motive.
We have almost 200 years of hindsight now. We can look at what has happened to EENS over that time. I'm sure he never imagined this would happen
Your misinterpretation of him is the mistake.

My "misinterpretation?' Do you think Garrigou-Lagrange misinterpreted him too? Go fetch...

Were there any theological commentaries on this topic by Garrigou-Lagrange?

Yes, absolutely. The topic of salvation for the unevangelized, focusing on the concepts of invincible ignorance and implicit desire for the Church (votum Ecclesiae), was a central and continuous topic of debate among Catholic theologians, especially Thomists, in the decades leading up to the Second Vatican Council (pre-1960s).

The Dominican theologian Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange (1877–1964), being one of the foremost neo-scholastic theologians of the 20th century, was heavily involved in clarifying this issue within the strict Thomistic framework.

Garrigou-Lagrange affirmed the need to reconcile the absolute necessity of the Church for salvation with God's universal salvific will.

Necessity of the Church (EENS): He maintained the strict necessity of the Church, but interpreted the "outside" of EENS as referring to those who are outside through culpable sin (i.e., vincible ignorance or outright rejection).

Invincible Ignorance and Grace: Following Aquinas, Garrigou-Lagrange taught that a person in invincible ignorance who sincerely seeks God must be given the grace and knowledge necessary for salvation. He emphasized that God's Providence would ensure that if a person does everything within the power of the natural law, God will provide the supernatural light (either through inner inspiration or external means) to move them toward the necessary act of faith and charity.

Implicit Desire: He affirmed that such an individual has an implicit desire for the Church (votum Ecclesiae), which fulfills the requirement for salvation, even without formal, visible membership.

His views on this topic are detailed in works like Grace: Commentary on the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas, Ia IIae, Q. 109-114 and in his comprehensive dogmatic theology texts.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #215 on:** December 12, 2025, 10:21:25 AM »

Angelus, for the 4th time, please answer…how do the invincibly ignorant REMAIN ignorant AFTER God gives them divine grace and illumination?

Angelus · « **Reply #216 on:** December 12, 2025, 10:38:15 AM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on December 12, 2025, 10:21:25 AM

Angelus, for the 4th time, please answer…how do the invincibly ignorant REMAIN ignorant AFTER God gives them divine grace and illumination?

For the umpteenth time. Their ignorance referred to is ONLY their ignorance of "our most holy religion." They remain "invicibly ignorant about our most holy religion" until they die. Invincible means something that is IMPOSSIBLE to overcome.

If those people were no longer "ignorant about our most holy religion" AFTER God gives them divine grace and light, then their ignorance would NOT BE INVINCIBLE. Rather, it would be a form or VINCIBLE ignorance. That is not what Pius IX is talking about. This is simply basic logic that follows from the definitions of the words used by Pius IX.

I explained how the "divine light and grace" comes into the soul in a person who "observes the natural law." I explained it in this post:

https://www.cathinfo.com/baptism-of-desire-and-feeneyism/possible-strict-eens-chapel/msg1010254/#msg1010254

Garrigou-Lagrange explains essentially the same thing, but using other part of Aquina's Summa:

Garrigou-Lagrange affirmed the need to reconcile the absolute necessity of the Church for salvation with God's universal salvific will.

Necessity of the Church (EENS): He maintained the strict necessity of the Church, but interpreted the "outside" of EENS as referring to those who are outside through culpable sin (i.e., vincible ignorance or outright rejection).

Invincible Ignorance and Grace: Following Aquinas, Garrigou-Lagrange taught that a person in invincible ignorance who sincerely seeks God must be given the grace and knowledge necessary for salvation. He emphasized that God's Providence would ensure that if a person does everything within the power of the natural law, God will provide the supernatural light (either through inner inspiration or external means) to move them toward the necessary act of faith and charity.

Implicit Desire: He affirmed that such an individual has an implicit desire for the Church (votum Ecclesiae), which fulfills the requirement for salvation, even without formal, visible membership.

His views on this topic are detailed in works like Grace: Commentary on the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas, Ia IIae, Q. 109-114 and in his comprehensive dogmatic theology texts.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #217 on:** December 12, 2025, 11:14:09 AM »

Quote

I explained how the "divine light and grace" comes into the soul in a person who "observes the natural law."

What is the purpose of this “divine light”? These people already know the natural law (all men do). They already follow their conscience, using actual graces.

So if the the only thing they are ignorant of, is of the church, then what KNOWLEDGE does “divine light” bestow upon them?

——-
The traditional, orthodox view is that a sincere, natural-law-follower will be given “divine light” in regards to THE FAITH/CHURCH. This is what St Paul tells us. God wills all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the Truth (ie Christ/Church).

You are saying that a natural-law-follower will be given “divine light” about…?what?

You say they aren’t given knowledge about Christ or the Church, because they stay ignorant. So what is the purpose of this “divine light”?

Christ is God. All things about Him are Divine. The Church is Christ's Bride and is Divine. How does a “divine light” not contain truths about Christ or His Church?

Divine light is essentially supernatural knowledge. Christ/Church are the essential parts of supernatural knowledge. How can God give “divine light” which IGNORES the truths of Christ/Church?

Stubborn · « **Reply #218 on:** December 12, 2025, 11:26:29 AM »

Quote from: Angelus on December 12, 2025, 09:41:00 AM

And of course, your statement that Pius IX teaching should be "completely abandoned" are fully consistent with your Old Catholic ecclesiology.

Stubborn gets to decide what is dogma or not. Stubborn gets to edit Pius IX's teaching. Hopefully others on this thread will see the connection.

And you are so sloppy in your thinking that you think Pius IX is talking about "brain injured" people. No, Stubborn, Pius IX said they people are "invincibly ignorant about our most holy religion." They are not necessarily ignorant about anything else. Nor are they "brain injured."

You abandoned PPIX's teaching by posting that he was talking about people incapable of thinking.

I said to abandon the term "invincibly ignorant" and replace it with what he said - you accuse me of saying contrary to what I said, I said I want to replace that term with what he said: "those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion".

You either have a serious lack of reading comprehension, or you are deliberately guilty of calumny.

Angelus · « **Reply #219 on:** December 12, 2025, 11:29:40 AM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on December 12, 2025, 11:14:09 AM

What is the purpose of this “divine light”? These people already know the natural law (all men do). They already follow their conscience, using actual graces.

So if the the only thing they are ignorant of, is of the church, then what KNOWLEDGE does “divine light” bestow upon them?

——-
The traditional, orthodox view is that a sincere, natural-law-follower will be given “divine light” in regards to THE FAITH/CHURCH. This is what St Paul tells us. God wills all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the Truth (ie Christ/Church).

You are saying that a natural-law-follower will be given “divine light” about…?what?

You say they aren’t given knowledge about Christ or the Church, because they stay ignorant. So what is the purpose of this “divine light”?

Christ is God. All things about Him are Divine. The Church is Christ's Bride and is Divine. How does a “divine light” not contain truths about Christ or His Church?

Divine light is essentially supernatural knowledge. Christ/Church are the essential parts of supernatural knowledge. How can God give “divine light” which IGNORES the truths of Christ/Church?

Yes, all men with the use of reason are not ignorant of the natural law. But very few men follow the "natural law" properly. Here are some examples:

1. Anyone who denies that there is a God who created this world does not follow the natural law.
2. Anyone who uses body parts for sɛҳuąƖ pleasure outside of the act of procreation does not follow the natural law.
3. Anyone who kills an innocent human being, like a fetus, does not follow the natural law.

It is not limited to just those cases. But you can see that in our society almost everyone ignores the natural law.

The "divine light and grace" is the natural law itself. It is not a super BRIGHT light. It is not an OVERPOWERING grace. It is a subtle guide to those who are sincerely trying to do God's will as best they can. God gave that to all of humanity.

The Divine Law provides the BRIGHT light. The sacraments provide the OVERWHELMING grace. Those are only available to those who are in the Church. But to who much is given much more is expected. Since those who are "invincibly ignorant about our most holy religion" are given less, less is expected of them in moral matters. But they also should expect a lesser reward. The beatific vision is the highest reward. They don't receive that. But they also don't receive punishment in Hell if, through no fault of their own, they are outside the Church.

And the other corrollary to all of this is that Catholics who cannot claim to be "invincibly ignorant of our most holy religion" will be held to a much higher moral standard. They can be punished in Purgatory even for venial sins. Those "invincibly ignorant of our most holy religion" are held to a lower standared than us.

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #220 on:** December 12, 2025, 12:19:24 PM »

I just noticed that when Angelus replied to my last post on page 3, Reply #37, he wiped out the important quotes on Dogma. In case anyone is interested in reading them.

Angelus · « **Reply #221 on:** December 12, 2025, 12:24:30 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn on December 12, 2025, 11:26:29 AM

You abandoned PPIX's teaching by posting that he was talking about people incapable of thinking.

I said to abandon the term "invincibly ignorant" and replace it with what he said - you accuse me of saying contrary to what I said, I said I want to replace that term with what he said: "those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion".

You either have a serious lack of reading comprehension, or you are deliberately guilty of calumny.

Yes. I apologize. I did not read your post correctly or completely. Mea culpa.

Stubborn · « **Reply #222 on:** December 12, 2025, 12:54:59 PM »

Quote from: Angelus on December 12, 2025, 12:24:30 PM

Yes. I apologize. I did not read your post correctly or completely. Mea culpa.

Angelus · « **Reply #223 on:** December 12, 2025, 01:47:42 PM »

More on the Garrigou-Lagrange Approach

Is G-L approach significantly different from the idea that the natural law provides divine light and grace to those who seek the truth but are outside of the Church?

The two ideas are highly compatible but emphasize different parts of the salvation process.

The idea that "the natural law provides divine light and grace" is a more concise, pastoral, and descriptive summary of the spiritual reality, while Garrigou-Lagrange's (G-L's) approach is the rigorous, technical explanation of how and why that process works, safeguarding the necessity of supernatural grace.

Here is a breakdown of the relationship:

1. The Core Agreement (The "Divine Light and Grace")
Both G-L and the summarized statement agree on the fundamental outcome:

The Subject: The person is invincibly ignorant of the explicit Gospel and is seeking the truth and following the known demands of the Natural Law.
The Means: God provides the divine light and grace necessary for salvation.
The Result: The person is justified and can attain eternal life.

2. The Difference in Focus (How the Light Operates)

The difference lies in the theological precision required by the Thomistic tradition that G-L defended:

Feature	The Natural Law Statement (Descriptive)	Garrigou-Lagrange's Approach (Technical)
Source of Grace	Implies the Natural Law itself provides the light/grace.	Clearly distinguishes between Natural Law (which is merely preparation/disposition) and Supernatural Grace (which is the effective cause).
Role of Will	Focuses on the person's seeking the truth.	Focuses on God's Antecedent Will (to save all) and the need for the human will to make a supernatural act of faith (even if implicit).
Mechanism	Describes the illumination simply as "divine light."	Explains the illumination as the gift of Actual Grace that leads to the act of Implicit Faith in the Redeemer (the votum Ecclesiae).
Necessity of Christ	Grace is accessible, but the link to Christ is implicit.	Explicitly defends that this grace is the merit of Christ and is dispensed by the Holy Spirit, thus maintaining the sine qua non(necessary condition) of Christ's mediation.

Conclusion

Garrigou-Lagrange would say the natural law does not provide the divine light; rather, the sincere adherence to the natural law is the disposition that God, in His faithful promise, chooses to reward by infusing the supernatural grace and light that comes only from Christ.

Therefore, the summarized statement is a true but simplified expression of the rigorous, systematic position defended by G-L: adherence to the Natural Law triggers the application of the saving grace merited by Christ, which is necessary for salvation.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #224 on:** December 12, 2025, 01:55:45 PM »

Quote from: Angelus on December 12, 2025, 11:29:40 AM

Yes, all men with the use of reason are not ignorant of the natural law. But very few men follow the "natural law" properly. Here are some examples:

1. Anyone who denies that there is a God who created this world does not follow the natural law.
2. Anyone who uses body parts for sɛҳuąƖ pleasure outside of the act of procreation does not follow the natural law.
3. Anyone who kills an innocent human being, like a fetus, does not follow the natural law.

It is not limited to just those cases. But you can see that in our society almost everyone ignores the natural law.

The "divine light and grace" is the natural law itself. It is not a super BRIGHT light. It is not an OVERPOWERING grace. It is a subtle guide to those who are sincerely trying to do God's will as best they can. God gave that to all of humanity.

The Divine Law provides the BRIGHT light. The sacraments provide the OVERWHELMING grace. Those are only available to those who are in the Church. But to who much is given much more is expected. Since those who are "invincibly ignorant about our most holy religion" are given less, less is expected of them in moral matters. But they also should expect a lesser reward. The beatific vision is the highest reward. They don't receive that. But they also don't receive punishment in Hell if, through no fault of their own, they are outside the Church.

And the other corrollary to all of this is that Catholics who cannot claim to be "invincibly ignorant of our most holy religion" will be held to a much higher moral standard. They can be punished in Purgatory even for venial sins. Those "invincibly ignorant of our most holy religion" are held to a lower standared than us.

Divine Law = church law, but you seem to be defining it as something else. And then you distinguish between Divine Law and the sacraments, which are the same thing.

Author Topic: Possible strict-EENS chapel (Read 122358 times)

Angelus

Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel

WorldsAway

Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel

Angelus

Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel

Angelus

Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel

Angelus

Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel

Pax Vobis

Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel

Angelus

Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel

Pax Vobis

Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel

Stubborn

Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel

Angelus

Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel

Maria Auxiliadora

Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel

Angelus

Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel

Stubborn

Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel

Angelus

Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel

Pax Vobis

Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel