Author Topic: The Real Problem... (Read 10427 times)

Stubborn · « **Reply #45 on:** March 03, 2017, 10:32:21 AM »

Quote from: BumphreyHogart

Quote from: Stubborn
Quote from: BumphreyHogart
Quote from: saintbosco13

“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 (Aringer: by conversion to the Catholic faith). 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.”

To think that Pius IX was speaking of "conversion"! That simply and clearly mutilates the whole context and makes Pius IX look like he had a mental problem. I see the same is done with the quote from the St. Pius X catechism.

When you read Pius IX's teaching, you must place the emphasis where it belongs. If you can get yourself to accomplish this and if you can strive to put away your bias, you cannot help but see that Pius IX decrees *the first* criteria is a necessity - that is, that those who are invincibly ignorant about our most holy religion are struggling to understand it! This means they are putting forth an honest effort to find out about it, to seek the truth. Do not ignore this first and most necessary criteria.

As long as those who are invincibly ignorant of our most holy religion are honestly struggling to find out about it, we have God's promise that they *will* find out about it - "Seek and ye shall find...."

Next, we see those struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion will *also* be "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".

By ignoring the first criteria, the dogma diluters propose either one of two errors as being Church teachings......

1) Those invincibly ignorant of our most holy religion who honestly struggle to find out about it, would at the same time attain salvation even when they reject the natural laws, disobey God and live their whole life as that of a pagan infidel.

2) Or, that the invincibly ignorant who know nothing of our most holy religion, yet at the same time are able to sincerely observe the natural law, are ready to obey God, and live honest lives and attain salvation - all by virtue of their ignorance, and all without the help of God at all. Effectively negating any need whatsoever for God and our most holy religion.

Now, tell us whether you believe the docuмent, and whether you believe he is talking about visible conversion of non-Catholics to the true Faith.

Of course I believe him, he clearly speaks Catholic truth.

Pope Pius IX most assuredly is speaking about a 'visible' conversion to the true faith because no one else is able to attain eternal life "by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace". The reason for this is because those who are not of the true faith, are not of the true faith precisely because they, of their own free will, 'visibly' reject "the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace" and will most certainly be lost forever if they die in that state, i.e. if they die before their conversion.

Those who have only a mustard's seed worth of faith in the Divine Providence, know with certainty that if God can arrange for you to be in the Church, by the very same Providence He can arrange for anyone else who desires or is willing to enter it - no matter what their circuмstances are. There is absolutely no obstacle to the invincible God's achieving His designs, except the intractable wills of His children.

BumphreyHogart · « **Reply #46 on:** March 03, 2017, 12:11:00 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: BumphreyHogart
Quote from: Stubborn
Quote from: BumphreyHogart
Quote from: saintbosco13

“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 (Aringer: by conversion to the Catholic faith). 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.”

To think that Pius IX was speaking of "conversion"! That simply and clearly mutilates the whole context and makes Pius IX look like he had a mental problem. I see the same is done with the quote from the St. Pius X catechism.

When you read Pius IX's teaching, you must place the emphasis where it belongs. If you can get yourself to accomplish this and if you can strive to put away your bias, you cannot help but see that Pius IX decrees *the first* criteria is a necessity - that is, that those who are invincibly ignorant about our most holy religion are struggling to understand it! This means they are putting forth an honest effort to find out about it, to seek the truth. Do not ignore this first and most necessary criteria.

As long as those who are invincibly ignorant of our most holy religion are honestly struggling to find out about it, we have God's promise that they *will* find out about it - "Seek and ye shall find...."

Next, we see those struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion will *also* be "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".

By ignoring the first criteria, the dogma diluters propose either one of two errors as being Church teachings......

1) Those invincibly ignorant of our most holy religion who honestly struggle to find out about it, would at the same time attain salvation even when they reject the natural laws, disobey God and live their whole life as that of a pagan infidel.

2) Or, that the invincibly ignorant who know nothing of our most holy religion, yet at the same time are able to sincerely observe the natural law, are ready to obey God, and live honest lives and attain salvation - all by virtue of their ignorance, and all without the help of God at all. Effectively negating any need whatsoever for God and our most holy religion.

Now, tell us whether you believe the docuмent, and whether you believe he is talking about visible conversion of non-Catholics to the true Faith.

Of course I believe him, he clearly speaks Catholic truth.

Pope Pius IX most assuredly is speaking about a 'visible' conversion to the true faith because no one else is able to attain eternal life "by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace". The reason for this is because those who are not of the true faith, are not of the true faith precisely because they, of their own free will, 'visibly' reject "the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace" and will most certainly be lost forever if they die in that state, i.e. if they die before their conversion.

Those who have only a mustard's seed worth of faith in the Divine Providence, know with certainty that if God can arrange for you to be in the Church, by the very same Providence He can arrange for anyone else who desires or is willing to enter it - no matter what their circuмstances are. There is absolutely no obstacle to the invincible God's achieving His designs, except the intractable wills of His children.

My question about you believing the docuмent is not whether you happen to believe it because you agree with it, but whether you accept it as authoritative.

You MOST obviously failed to comprehend the docuмent.You are trying to make it say if people are invincibly ignorant of the true faith, then God can break that invincible ignorance. It is so silly because lots of men themselves can break it in others. It is nothing special. You are trying to say that ALL those words Pius IX wrote could be boiled down to a sentence, that people invincibly ignorant of the true faith, can break out of it and finaly convert. This has NEVER been questioned. The biggest proof as that this authoritative docuмent has been high profile among the clergy for about 6 generations, and you will find ZERO evidence that anyone understood it as you do now.

Arvinger · « **Reply #47 on:** March 03, 2017, 12:21:06 PM »

Bosco is actually more Pelagian than LoT. LoT at least paid lip-service to the necessity of having Supernatural Faith for salvation (although he went on to redefine what Supernatural Faith is through heretical Rewarder God theory). Bosco flat out says that people can be saved in invincible ignorance.

Stubborn · « **Reply #48 on:** March 03, 2017, 04:42:07 PM »

Quote from: BumphreyHogart

My question about you believing the docuмent is not whether you happen to believe it because you agree with it, but whether you accept it as authoritative.

You MOST obviously failed to comprehend the docuмent.You are trying to make it say if people are invincibly ignorant of the true faith, then God can break that invincible ignorance. It is so silly because lots of men themselves can break it in others. It is nothing special. You are trying to say that ALL those words Pius IX wrote could be boiled down to a sentence, that people invincibly ignorant of the true faith, can break out of it and finaly convert. This has NEVER been questioned. The biggest proof as that this authoritative docuмent has been high profile among the clergy for about 6 generations, and you will find ZERO evidence that anyone understood it as you do now.

I am saying that Pius IX is speaking only about those invincibly ignorant people "who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion". That is the part you are ignoring.

You keep talking about persons completely and totally unrelated to the persons Pius IX was speaking about.

You keep referring to those who are invincibly ignorant of the true faith, but Pius IX was speaking about, and I quote him; "those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion".

Do you understand the huge difference?

saintbosco13 · « **Reply #49 on:** March 03, 2017, 04:47:43 PM »

Quote from: Arvinger

Bosco is actually more Pelagian than LoT. LoT at least paid lip-service to the necessity of having Supernatural Faith for salvation (although he went on to redefine what Supernatural Faith is through heretical Rewarder God theory). Bosco flat out says that people can be saved in invincible ignorance.

Nowhere did I say invincible ignorance alone is enough to save someone and you know it. I've said all along, as the popes have, that perfect contrition and obeying the natural law in addition to invincible ignorance is an implicit desire for baptism, and it is through this means that someone can be saved. I'm not going to bother continuing to quote something that's been quoted so many times.

I don't make the rules, I just follow them. You last 8 or 9 Feeneyites who are barricading yourselves in this forum in protest against the world are holding to a different interpretation than the Church, plain and simple. That's why you are banned everywhere.

I was going to suggest you run the mentioned papal quotes past someone who is a scholar in English grammar so they can tell you the true meaning of the sentences as they are structured. But given you don't even trust popes when they speak, no sense in making such a recommendation.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #50 on:** March 03, 2017, 05:06:23 PM »

Quote from: saintbosco13

Nowhere did I say invincible ignorance alone is enough to save someone and you know it.

You said that the Church "teaches" invincible ignorance.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #51 on:** March 03, 2017, 05:07:29 PM »

Quote from: saintbosco13

I've said all along, as the popes have, that perfect contrition and obeying the natural law in addition to invincible ignorance is an implicit desire for baptism, and it is through this means that someone can be saved.

Nowhere do you mention supernatural faith.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #52 on:** March 03, 2017, 05:09:07 PM »

Supernatural faith is a sine qua non for salvation. Under what conditions can one have supernatural faith?

Arvinger · « **Reply #53 on:** March 03, 2017, 05:36:52 PM »

Quote from: saintbosco13

Nowhere did I say invincible ignorance alone is enough to save someone and you know it. I've said all along, as the popes have, that perfect contrition and obeying the natural law in addition to invincible ignorance is an implicit desire for baptism, and it is through this means that someone can be saved.

No, nobody can be saved without Supernatural Faith, which includes faith in the Incarnation and the Most Holy Trinity. Supernatural Faith is absolutely necessary for salvation.

"Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the Catholic Faith is this, that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity.(...) He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity. Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting Salvation, that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ." (Athanasian Creed)

Which part of "without a doubt he shall perish everlastingly" and "must thus think of the Trinity" do you not understand?

Quote from: saintbosco13

I don't make the rules, I just follow them.

You reject the infallible teaching of the Athanasian Creed about absolute necessity of faith in the Incarnation and the Trinity for salvation, you also reject the teaching of Cantate Domino that all who die as pagans go to hell. You do that, by your own admission, because you feel it would be "unjust" for God to damn these people. You never wrote a word about these infallible teachings, because they refute your heretical position and there is nothing you could say about them.

Quote from: saintbosco13

I was going to suggest you run the mentioned papal quotes past someone who is a scholar in English grammar so they can tell you the true meaning of the sentences as they are structured. But given you don't even trust popes when they speak, no sense in making such a recommendation.

How about you trust the infallible teaching of the Council of Florence that all who die as pagans go to hell (no exception made for invincible ignorance) and infallible teaching of the Athanasian Creed that without faith in Christ and the Trinity no one can be saved?

BumphreyHogart · « **Reply #54 on:** March 03, 2017, 05:39:44 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: BumphreyHogart

My question about you believing the docuмent is not whether you happen to believe it because you agree with it, but whether you accept it as authoritative.

You MOST obviously failed to comprehend the docuмent.You are trying to make it say if people are invincibly ignorant of the true faith, then God can break that invincible ignorance. It is so silly because lots of men themselves can break it in others. It is nothing special. You are trying to say that ALL those words Pius IX wrote could be boiled down to a sentence, that people invincibly ignorant of the true faith, can break out of it and finaly convert. This has NEVER been questioned. The biggest proof as that this authoritative docuмent has been high profile among the clergy for about 6 generations, and you will find ZERO evidence that anyone understood it as you do now.

I am saying that Pius IX is speaking only about those invincibly ignorant people "who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion". That is the part you are ignoring.

You keep talking about persons completely and totally unrelated to the persons Pius IX was speaking about.

You keep referring to those who are invincibly ignorant of the true faith, but Pius IX was speaking about, and I quote him; "those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion".

Do you understand the huge difference?

They are exactly the same!

Explain what the "huge difference" is.

saintbosco13 · « **Reply #55 on:** March 03, 2017, 06:25:27 PM »

I just came across these quotes and thought they would be applicable to post in this discussion.

From the Catholic Encyclopedia article on Heresy:

"Towards material heretics her (the Church's) conduct is ruled by the saying of St. Augustine: "Those are by no means to be accounted heretics who do not defend their false and perverse opinions with pertinacious zeal (animositas), especially when their error is not the fruit of audacious presumption but has been communicated to them by seduced and lapsed parents, and when they are seeking the truth with cautious solicitude and ready to be corrected" (P. L., XXXIII, ep. xliii, 160). Pius IX, in a letter to the bishops of Italy (10 Aug., 1863), restates this Catholic doctrine (on invincible ignorance)...."

This is a perfect example that would exonerate the nine-year-old boy we were speaking about.

And from the Catholic Encyclopedia article on Orthodoxy:

"The Church, likewise, in its zeal for purity of faith and teaching, has rigorously adhered to the example set by the Apostles and Early Fathers. This is manifest in its whole history, but especially in such champions of the faith as Athansius, in councils, condemnations of heresy, and its definitions of revealed truth. That orthodox faith is requisite for salvation is a defined doctrine of the Church. "Whosoever wishes to be saved", declares the Athanasian Creed, "must first of all hold integral and inviolate the Catholic faith, without which he shall surely be eternally lost". Numerous councils and papal decisions have reiterated this dogma (cf. Council of Florence, Denz., 714; Prof. of Faith of Pius IV, Denz., 1000; condemnation of Indifferentism and Latitudinarianism in the Syll. of Pius IX, Denz., 1715, 1718; Council of the Vatican, "De Fide". can. vi, Denz., 1815, condemnation of the Modernistic position regarding the nature and origin of dogma, Encyc. "Pascendi Dominici Gregis", 1907, Denz., 2079). While truth must be intolerant of error (II Cor., vi, 14, 15), the Church does not deny the possibility of salvation of those earnest and sincere persons outside her fold who live and die in invincible ignorance of the true faith (cf. Council of the Vatican, Sess. III, cp. iii, Denz.,1794; S Aug., Ep.xliii ad Galerium). (See CHURCH; FAITH; PROTESTANT CONFESSIONS OF FAITH; HERESY; INDIFFERENTISM.) "

This confirms the same interpretation that I've been saying for the Pope Pius IX quote.

BumphreyHogart · « **Reply #56 on:** March 03, 2017, 06:29:49 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Quote from: saintbosco13
Nowhere did I say invincible ignorance alone is enough to save someone and you know it.

You said that the Church "teaches" invincible ignorance.

Sure, its existence and implications are part of the Church's moral teaching.

Stubborn · « **Reply #57 on:** March 04, 2017, 03:44:24 AM »

Quote from: BumphreyHogart

Quote from: Stubborn
Quote from: BumphreyHogart

My question about you believing the docuмent is not whether you happen to believe it because you agree with it, but whether you accept it as authoritative.

You MOST obviously failed to comprehend the docuмent.You are trying to make it say if people are invincibly ignorant of the true faith, then God can break that invincible ignorance. It is so silly because lots of men themselves can break it in others. It is nothing special. You are trying to say that ALL those words Pius IX wrote could be boiled down to a sentence, that people invincibly ignorant of the true faith, can break out of it and finaly convert. This has NEVER been questioned. The biggest proof as that this authoritative docuмent has been high profile among the clergy for about 6 generations, and you will find ZERO evidence that anyone understood it as you do now.

I am saying that Pius IX is speaking only about those invincibly ignorant people "who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion". That is the part you are ignoring.

You keep talking about persons completely and totally unrelated to the persons Pius IX was speaking about.

You keep referring to those who are invincibly ignorant of the true faith, but Pius IX was speaking about, and I quote him; "those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion".

Do you understand the huge difference?

They are exactly the same!

Explain what the "huge difference" is.

They are not the same, they are two completely and totally different people.

This is not complicated, this is, literally, elementary catechism. Q. "Why did God make you?" - A. "God made me to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, so as to be happy with Him for ever in heaven."

Those who are invincibly ignorant of the true faith and die in that state, not only cannot get into heaven, they have no hope of ever getting into heaven because they are content to live in invincible ignorance about the true faith. They are those who do not even know God, as such they cannot love God, which means they cannot serve God in this world - Do you suppose God will say: "Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess you the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world" to those people, or is it not clear they can expect to be told: "I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity."

On the other hand, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about the true faith are those people who are *not* content to live in invincible ignorance of the true faith, these people are those who are struggling to find out about our most holy religion, which means they are putting forth the initial effort required to know, love and serve God in this world - this gives them the chance to be happy with Him in the next. Even this is no guarantee of salvation, but it does put them in the way of salvation.

I recommend you study the sentence immediately before and the sentence immediately after the quote in Quanto Conficiamur which mentions those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion and concentrate and incorporate those two sentences into it in order to understand it. Otherwise, you will continue to take the whole teaching completely out of context.

The sentence before is:
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.

The sentence after is:
Also well known is the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church.

BumphreyHogart · « **Reply #58 on:** March 04, 2017, 08:01:07 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: BumphreyHogart
Quote from: Stubborn
Quote from: BumphreyHogart

My question about you believing the docuмent is not whether you happen to believe it because you agree with it, but whether you accept it as authoritative.

You MOST obviously failed to comprehend the docuмent.You are trying to make it say if people are invincibly ignorant of the true faith, then God can break that invincible ignorance. It is so silly because lots of men themselves can break it in others. It is nothing special. You are trying to say that ALL those words Pius IX wrote could be boiled down to a sentence, that people invincibly ignorant of the true faith, can break out of it and finaly convert. This has NEVER been questioned. The biggest proof as that this authoritative docuмent has been high profile among the clergy for about 6 generations, and you will find ZERO evidence that anyone understood it as you do now.

I am saying that Pius IX is speaking only about those invincibly ignorant people "who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion". That is the part you are ignoring.

You keep talking about persons completely and totally unrelated to the persons Pius IX was speaking about.

You keep referring to those who are invincibly ignorant of the true faith, but Pius IX was speaking about, and I quote him; "those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion".

Do you understand the huge difference?

They are exactly the same!

Explain what the "huge difference" is.

They are not the same, they are two completely and totally different people.

This is not complicated, this is, literally, elementary catechism. Q. "Why did God make you?" - A. "God made me to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, so as to be happy with Him for ever in heaven."

Those who are invincibly ignorant of the true faith and die in that state, not only cannot get into heaven, they have no hope of ever getting into heaven because they are content to live in invincible ignorance about the true faith. They are those who do not even know God, as such they cannot love God, which means they cannot serve God in this world - Do you suppose God will say: "Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess you the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world" to those people, or is it not clear they can expect to be told: "I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity."

On the other hand, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about the true faith are those people who are *not* content to live in invincible ignorance of the true faith, these people are those who are struggling to find out about our most holy religion, which means they are putting forth the initial effort required to know, love and serve God in this world - this gives them the chance to be happy with Him in the next. Even this is no guarantee of salvation, but it does put them in the way of salvation.

I recommend you study the sentence immediately before and the sentence immediately after the quote in Quanto Conficiamur which mentions those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion and concentrate and incorporate those two sentences into it in order to understand it. Otherwise, you will continue to take the whole teaching completely out of context.

The sentence before is:
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.

The sentence after is:
Also well known is the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church.

You (and at least one person who thumbed you up so far), don't understand the meaning of "struggling" here.

It means suffering the condition of.

The condition of invincible ignorance of the true faith and religion means that one is NOT AT FAULT FOR BEING UNAWARE. You just created a contradiction that someone could be AWARE of being UNAWARE.

Stubborn · « **Reply #59 on:** March 04, 2017, 11:11:07 AM »

Quote from: BumphreyHogart

You (and at least one person who thumbed you up so far), don't understand the meaning of "struggling" here.

It means suffering the condition of.

The condition of invincible ignorance of the true faith and religion means that one is NOT AT FAULT FOR BEING UNAWARE. You just created a contradiction that someone could be AWARE of being UNAWARE.

Ah, I see - well, that's certainly a fresh one. However, although you attempt to redefine what the pope meant, we know your interpretation is false per the sentence before and the sentence after the teaching about those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion.

Not sure why you do not simply accept what he taught as he taught it - as has been thoroughly explained to you - what is it within you and bosco that drives you to strive to make God reward salvation to those who do not know God, do not love God and who will not serve God?