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

Author Topic: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?  (Read 55934 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #475 on: May 31, 2023, 04:16:59 PM »
I just thought of an interesting example to prove my point. Do you believe that an atheist can be in a state of grace?

Offline OABrownson1876

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #476 on: May 31, 2023, 04:20:55 PM »
 "What is the means by which grace is forfeited?"  We have only known one means by which grace is forfeited, and this is the will.  Heresy is not in the intellect, which knows, but in the will, which moves the intellect to assent.  It seems that those who are infatuated with invincible ignorance place salvation in the intellect, where it cannot be, rather than in the will, where it must be. 

When Sean speaks about the "six-year-old schismatic in the state of grace," the question must asked, is he able to exercise his reason, and assent to, or reject a truth of faith?  If he is able to reason, and rejects a truth, then he is a schismatic; if he is not able to reason, he cannot reject a truth nor affirm it, and therefore is fully Catholic, as fully Catholic as the boy brought up in a traditional chapel.  

St. Therese the Little Flower tells us herself that she "denied Our Lord nothing from the age of three."  If it is true that the Little Flower had the use of reason at this age, then she was capable of being a formal heretic at this age.


Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #477 on: May 31, 2023, 04:23:10 PM »
I reject the notion that one has to commit an active sin against the faith to lose supernatural faith.  When an infant is baptized, that's a special case where the supernatural virtue of faith is merely infused.  There can be no merely-infused supernatural virtue of faith in adults, i.e. those who have the use of reason.  Consequently, when a child reaches the use of reason, if the supernatural faith isn't confirmed with actual acts of faith, the virtue is lost, and without supernatural faith there can be no supernatural charity.  To think that someone can grow up, reach the age of reason, and then be an atheist, say having been raised as such, and the stay in a state of persevering in supernatural faith.

Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #478 on: May 31, 2023, 04:26:01 PM »
I reject the notion that one has to commit an active sin against the faith to lose supernatural faith.  When an infant is baptized, that's a special case where the supernatural virtue of faith is merely infused.  There can be no merely-infused supernatural virtue of faith in adults, i.e. those who have the use of reason.  Consequently, when a child reaches the use of reason, if the supernatural faith isn't confirmed with actual acts of faith, the virtue is lost, and without supernatural faith there can be no supernatural charity.  To think that someone can grow up, reach the age of reason, and then be an atheist, say having been raised as such, and the stay in a state of persevering in supernatural faith.
So we return yet again to the question:

If one is invincibly ignorant, by what means is grace forfeited (since full knowledge is necessary for the grave sin by which the grace is lost)?

Conversely, if the grace is not forfeited, how would such a one be damned?

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #479 on: May 31, 2023, 04:51:39 PM »

Quote
So we return yet again to the question:
:laugh2:  You mean question #5, since you've modified it multiple times...


Quote
If one is invincibly ignorant, by what means is grace forfeited (since full knowledge is necessary for the grave sin by which the grace is lost)?

Conversely, if the grace is not forfeited, how would such a one be damned?
Typically, one who is invincibly ignorant of the Faith forfeits grace through sins against the natural law.  But they can repent and still find the Truth, if they are of good will.


Also, one who is invincibly ignorant of the Faith still has Original Sin on his soul, so unless baptized (by the sacrament of water) he cannot gain heaven.  Because Trent tells us it is impossible to please God without supernatural faith, which can only be gotten by the sacrament of baptism.

If one is unbaptized, yet still keeps the 10 commandments (as some american indians did), if they die before baptism, they would go to Limbo (not be damned).