When are you going to take your own advice?

Post We would have to take over the formerly Catholic structures.  And re-consecrate everything.  Just to start.  If they authentically convert they can join us as laypeople but they [converts from the NO] probably should take a vow of silence and do penance for the rest of their lives refraining from all speaking and writing apart from that which is necessary, say in Confession for instance.

Post
I was born and raised in the anti-Church.

LoT,

The Syllabus of Errors came after both Singulari quadam and Quanto conficiamur moerore:

Quote

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.

In fact, the Sacred Congregation of the Propagation of the Faith, under Blessed Pius X, in 1907, in answer to a question as to whether Confucius could have been saved, wrote:

Quote

"It is not allowed to affirm that Confucius was saved. Christians, when interrogated, must answer that those who die as infidels are damned."

We must at least presume, if not assume, that all non-Catholics are damned and work under that assumption for the salvation of their souls.

No one is saying there is "good hope" that non Catholics can be saved.  That is rightly condemned.  The Church including the writer of the Syllabus merely teaches that it is possible.  But certainly there is no reason for "good hope".  

We should never affirm that non-Catholics are saved, we merely acknowledge with Pius IX that they can be.  It is not as if he erred when he wrote Singulari Quadam and Quanto conficiamur moerore and then all of a sudden got enlightened and "changed his teaching" in the Syllabus.  I'm sure you will admit that.  He wrote all of the above as Pope no?

The posters against the Catholic Church's teaching on BOB/D assert that BOB/D is not possible, that it is heretical, that it is speculative but applies to no one.  Going so far as to deny that what the Church presents as canonized Saints due to BOB/D were the result of BOB/D but were secretly baptized with water.  

Teaching against Catholic doctrine should not be tolerated here.  And the Feeneyites teach against infallible Catholic doctrine.  Speculating on individuals is not for us, we merely accept, with the Church, the possibility.  

Quote from: Lover of Truth

We should never affirm that non-Catholics are saved, we merely acknowledge with Pius IX that they can be.  It is not as if he erred when he wrote Singulari Quadam and Quanto conficiamur moerore and then all of a sudden got enlightened and "changed his teaching" in the Syllabus.  I'm sure you will admit that.  He wrote all of the above as Pope no?

The idea that non-Catholics could receive sanctifying grace predates Pope Pius IX's birth:

Quote

Q. 28.  But, in the case proposed, if a person in his last moments shall receive the light of faith from God, and embrace it with all his heart, would this suffice to make him a member of the true Church in the sight of God?

A. Most undoubtedly; the case is the same in this as in that of baptism. Though Jesus Christ expressly says, "Except a man be born of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" (Jn. 3:5), which establishes the absolute necessity of baptism for salvation; yet, suppose a heathen should be instructed in the faith of Christ, and embrace it with all his heart, but die suddenly without baptism ... in the above dispositions with sincere repentance and a desire for baptism, this person will undoubtedly receive all the fruits of baptism from God, and therefore is said to be baptized in desire. In like manner, suppose a person brought up in a false religion embraces the true faith, which God gives him in his last moments - as it is absolutely impossible for him in that state to join the external communion of the Church in the eyes of men, yet he certainly will be considered united to her in the sight of God, by means of the true faith which he embraces, and his desire of being united to the Church, were it in his power.  (Bishop George Hay, Sincere Christian, Vol. 2, pp.322-323.).

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Sincere_Christian/Volume_2/Chapter_29

Of course.  The teaching of BOD/B goes back to the first century.  I'm surprised people have such a hard time accepting it.

Who is one who labors in invincible ignorance of Catholicism but a non-Catholic:

The third and most difficult lesson of the encyclical Quanto conficiamur moerore on the subject of the Church’s necessity for salvation is to be found in its teaching on the possibility of salvation for persons invincibly ignorant of the true religion.  What the encyclical has to say on this point is contained in a single long and highly complicated sentence:

   
Quote:

It is known to Us and to you that those who labor in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion, and who, carefully observing the natural law and its precepts which God has inscribed in the hearts of all, and who, being ready to obey God, live an honest and upright life, can, through the working of the divine light and grace, attain eternal life, since God, who clearly sees, inspects and knows the minds, the intentions, the thoughts and the habits of all, will, by reason of His supreme goodness and kindness, never allow anyone who has not the guilt of willful sin to be punished by eternal sufferings.

    This sentence is tremendously rich in theological implication.  It can never be adequately understood other than against the background and in the context of the Catholic theology of grace and of sin.  Unfortunately this sentence has sometimes been explained in an inadequate manner.

    In order to have an adequate and accurate analysis of this teaching we must see clearly, first of all, what precise class of people Pope Pius IX refers to in this sentence.  They are people who are described as carefully or diligently (sedulo) obeying the natural law.  They are prepared to obey God.  They lead an honest and upright life.  And they are invincibly ignorant of the true Catholic religion.

    Now it is perfectly obvious that this description does not apply to all the individuals who are invincibly ignorant of the Catholic Church and of the Catholic faith.  Invincible ignorance is by no means a sacrament, communicating goodness of life to those who are afflicted with it.  The fact that a man is invincibly ignorant of the true religion does not in any way guarantee that he will observe the natural law zealously, that he will be ready to obey God, or that he will actually lead an upright life.  Fenton

The third and most difficult lesson of the encyclical Quanto conficiamur moerore on the subject of the Church’s necessity for salvation is to be found in its teaching on the possibility of salvation for persons invincibly ignorant of the true religion.  What the encyclical has to say on this point is contained in a single long and highly complicated sentence:

 

Quote:

It is known to Us and to you that those who labor in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion, and who, carefully observing the natural law and its precepts which God has inscribed in the hearts of all, and who, being ready to obey God, live an honest and upright life, can, through the working of the divine light and grace, attain eternal life, since God, who clearly sees, inspects and knows the minds, the intentions, the thoughts and the habits of all, will, by reason of His supreme goodness and kindness, never allow anyone who has not the guilt of willful sin to be punished by eternal sufferings.

    This sentence is tremendously rich in theological implication.  It can never be adequately understood other than against the background and in the context of the Catholic theology of grace and of sin.  Unfortunately this sentence has sometimes been explained in an inadequate manner.

    In order to have an adequate and accurate analysis of this teaching we must see clearly, first of all, what precise class of people Pope Pius IX refers to in this sentence.  They are people who are described as carefully or diligently (sedulo) obeying the natural law.  They are prepared to obey God.  They lead an honest and upright life.  And they are invincibly ignorant of the true Catholic religion.

    Now it is perfectly obvious that this description does not apply to all the individuals who are invincibly ignorant of the Catholic Church and of the Catholic faith.  Invincible ignorance is by no means a sacrament, communicating goodness of life to those who are afflicted with it.  The fact that a man is invincibly ignorant of the true religion does not in any way guarantee that he will observe the natural law zealously, that he will be ready to obey God, or that he will actually lead an upright life.  Fenton

I disobey the Holy Office as much as Pius IX above did.  Which is not at all.  The Popes do not contradict each other on the issue of salvation except in the eyes of the untrained.  

Jehanne said:
Lover of Truth said:

We should never affirm that non-Catholics are saved, we merely acknowledge with Pius IX that they can be.  It is not as if he erred when he wrote Singulari Quadam and Quanto conficiamur moerore and then all of a sudden got enlightened and "changed his teaching" in the Syllabus.  I'm sure you will admit that.  He wrote all of the above as Pope no?


The idea that non-Catholics could receive sanctifying grace predates Pope Pius IX's birth:

Quote:
Q. 28.  But, in the case proposed, if a person in his last moments shall receive the light of faith from God, and embrace it with all his heart, would this suffice to make him a member of the true Church in the sight of God?

A. Most undoubtedly; the case is the same in this as in that of baptism. Though Jesus Christ expressly says, "Except a man be born of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" (Jn. 3:5), which establishes the absolute necessity of baptism for salvation; yet, suppose a heathen should be instructed in the faith of Christ, and embrace it with all his heart, but die suddenly without baptism ... in the above dispositions with sincere repentance and a desire for baptism, this person will undoubtedly receive all the fruits of baptism from God, and therefore is said to be baptized in desire. In like manner, suppose a person brought up in a false religion embraces the true faith, which God gives him in his last moments - as it is absolutely impossible for him in that state to join the external communion of the Church in the eyes of men, yet he certainly will be considered united to her in the sight of God, by means of the true faith which he embraces, and his desire of being united to the Church, were it in his power.  (Bishop George Hay, Sincere Christian, Vol. 2, pp.322-323.).


https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Sincere_Christian/Volume_2/Chapter_29

Of course.  The teaching of BOD/B goes back to the first century.  I'm surprised people have such a hard time accepting it.