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

Author Topic: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?  (Read 10972 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ByzCat3000

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1889
  • Reputation: +500/-141
  • Gender: Male
Also, to be clear, I realize that ignorance DOES NOT SAVE.  I realize that anyone who thinks it does is practically just being Protestant in that case.  Salvation by faith alone, if you're ignorant enough.

I just believe that a soul who is invincibly ignorant *may* be able to find himself united to the Church, in a way known to God alone, IF other conditions are met (belief at least in what natural law tells us about God, no mortal sins, or perfect contrition for mortal sins committed, cooperation with any graces one was in fact given).

I don't think that happens all the time, indeed it might happen never, but I think you could speculate that perhaps sometimes it happens without being a heretic or denying EENS (if you say that the soul who is saved is not "inside" the Church, that's a denial of EENS)


Online Quo vadis Domine

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 4189
  • Reputation: +2432/-557
  • Gender: Male
Also, to be clear, I realize that ignorance DOES NOT SAVE.  I realize that anyone who thinks it does is practically just being Protestant in that case.  Salvation by faith alone, if you're ignorant enough.

I just believe that a soul who is invincibly ignorant *may* be able to find himself united to the Church, in a way known to God alone, IF other conditions are met (belief at least in what natural law tells us about God, no mortal sins, or perfect contrition for mortal sins committed, cooperation with any graces one was in fact given).

I don't think that happens all the time, indeed it might happen never, but I think you could speculate that perhaps sometimes it happens without being a heretic or denying EENS (if you say that the soul who is saved is not "inside" the Church, that's a denial of EENS)
What traditional organizations reject what you just said? Also, I would add that knowledge of the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Redemption are also necessary. 
For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?


Offline forlorn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2449
  • Reputation: +964/-1098
  • Gender: Male
The Council of Trent teaches how men in the state of original sin can reach the state of grace, and the Council of Trent forbids to teach, preach, or believe anything different from what the Council of Trent teaches on justification. Since the promulgation of the gospel there is no way without the sacrament of baptism.
Trent says no such thing, we've been through this already in the thread. 

Offline forlorn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2449
  • Reputation: +964/-1098
  • Gender: Male
What traditional organizations reject what you just said? Also, I would add that knowledge of the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Redemption are also necessary.
None of them reject invincible ignorance, the issue is what they accept beyond that. Invincible ignorance is not necessary for salvation as a non-Catholic according to +Lefebvre et al. I don't know how you think you're defending them by saying what you would add, because that's what they they add at all. 

Offline Struthio

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1650
  • Reputation: +453/-366
  • Gender: Male
Quote from: Decree on Justification, Council of Trent
[...] the sacred and holy, oecuмenical and general Synod of Trent [...] most strictly forbidding that any henceforth presume to believe, preach, or teach, otherwise than as by this present decree is defined and declared.

https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/trent/sixth-session.htm
Men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple ... Jerome points this out. (St. Robert Bellarmine)


Online Quo vadis Domine

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 4189
  • Reputation: +2432/-557
  • Gender: Male
Trent says no such thing, we've been through this already in the thread.
I really don’t want to get into a long discussion on this topic but, please explain your interpretation (backed by authorities that support you) of what the Council of Trent means by this: 
"By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a translation, from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace, and of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God" Council of Trent, Sixth Session, Fourth Chapter, A description is introduced of the Justification of the impious, and of the Manner thereof under the law of grace.
For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

Offline forlorn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2449
  • Reputation: +964/-1098
  • Gender: Male
I really don’t want to get into a long discussion on this topic but, please explain your interpretation (backed by authorities that support you) of what the Council of Trent means by this:
"By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a translation, from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace, and of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God" Council of Trent, Sixth Session, Fourth Chapter, A description is introduced of the Justification of the impious, and of the Manner thereof under the law of grace.
What is your point here? That simply says he may achieve the state of grace through baptism. No one's contesting that. In fact, it says that is the ONLY way he may do so, which Struthio denies.

EDIT: Oh, excuse me. I thought Struthio was defending their view when he was quoting +Williamson. I'm actually in agreement with him, my bad. 

Offline Struthio

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1650
  • Reputation: +453/-366
  • Gender: Male
What is your point here? That simply says he may achieve the state of grace through baptism. No one's contesting that. In fact, it says that is the ONLY way he may do so, which Struthio denies.

I don't deny that.

How come you say that I deny that?
Men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple ... Jerome points this out. (St. Robert Bellarmine)


Online Quo vadis Domine

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 4189
  • Reputation: +2432/-557
  • Gender: Male
Sorry to all,  I thought ByzCat was the OP and his post was the first on the thread.
For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

Offline forlorn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2449
  • Reputation: +964/-1098
  • Gender: Male
I don't deny that.

How come you say that I deny that?
I misread one of your posts earlier and thought you were referring to Trent's description of the non-baptised person corresponding to God's graces that Mithrandylan quoted earlier, as a defense of the implicit BOD position. My apologies. 

Online Quo vadis Domine

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 4189
  • Reputation: +2432/-557
  • Gender: Male
What is your point here? That simply says he may achieve the state of grace through baptism. No one's contesting that. In fact, it says that is the ONLY way he may do so, which Struthio denies.

EDIT: Oh, excuse me. I thought Struthio was defending their view when he was quoting +Williamson. I'm actually in agreement with him, my bad.
Aren’t you completely ignoring the words: “or the desire thereof”?
For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?


Offline forlorn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2449
  • Reputation: +964/-1098
  • Gender: Male
Aren’t you completely ignoring the words: “or the desire thereof”?
I'm not arguing against the proposition that a catechumen who actually desires baptism can be saved. But rather the so-called "implicit" baptism of desire where a Muslim or whatever who doesn't desire baptism or conversion at all can be saved. 

Offline Struthio

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1650
  • Reputation: +453/-366
  • Gender: Male
I misread one of your posts earlier [...] My apologies.

Accepted.
Men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple ... Jerome points this out. (St. Robert Bellarmine)

Offline ByzCat3000

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1889
  • Reputation: +500/-141
  • Gender: Male
None of them reject invincible ignorance, the issue is what they accept beyond that. Invincible ignorance is not necessary for salvation as a non-Catholic according to +Lefebvre et al. I don't know how you think you're defending them by saying what you would add, because that's what they they add at all.
Where does lefebvre say invincible ignorance isn’t necessary?
I don’t think the trad organizations would reject what I said for the most part.  But forlorn was criticizing them for it.

Offline forlorn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2449
  • Reputation: +964/-1098
  • Gender: Male
Where does lefebvre say invincible ignorance isn’t necessary?
I don’t think the trad organizations would reject what I said for the most part.  But forlorn was criticizing them for it.
I didn't criticise anyone for teachings on invincible ignorance, but you're incredibly naive if you think +Lefebvre was only referring to the 2 Muslims total who haven't heard of Catholicism. He was a 20th century man, not a 15th century one. It's further proven by him referring to Protestants, if you think there's a single Protestant out there who has never heard of Catholicism you're frankly delusional. If he was really referring to the one Protestant in the world who was raised chained up in his basement and had no contact with the outside world whatsoever, I'm sure he would have specified that.

The article he's quoted from(here) earlier in this thread is purely about ecuмenism in the modern world, it's not discussing how random uncontacted tribesmen may be saved. The phrase "invincible ignorance" is not mentioned once, not even "ignorance" is mentioned. It's wishful thinking and twisting the truth to try and suggest he was referring to invincible ignorance when he never even mentioned it.

Quote
The doctrine of the Church also recognizes implicit baptism of desire. This consists in doing the will of God. God knows all men and He knows that amongst Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists and in the whole of humanity there are men of good will. They receive the grace of baptism without knowing it, but in an effective way. In this way they become part of the Church.

Does he imply at all that it's their ignorance saving them from being damned for disbelief? Quite clearly not, he says it's their good will saving them despite it. Their good will baptises them despite, as he admits, them not even wanting to be baptised.