Quote from: TKGS

....edited.....It is very possible that many of these 1 billion self-professed Catholics are indeed Catholics because they have been so poorly educated about the faith that they truly believe the heretical doctrines they hold are authentic Catholic doctrines but would, if corrected, submit to the true Faith of the Catholic Church.  ...edited...

Ahh, invinsible ignornance, another modern heresy.

2 Corinthians 4:3 "And if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost, in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto them."

You misunderstand me though I am not sure whether you do so intentionally or just refuse to actually read what I wrote.  I did not, nor do I, suggest that "invincible ignorance" will save these people.  They will be condemned for their sins, for their unbelief, and for their lack of Sanctifying Grace.  Invincible ignorance does not save.

I am merely pointing out that true ignorance of doctrine does not cut the bonds of unity and an individual who is ignorant of a particular doctrine but will, nevertheless, submit to the true doctrine if and when he becomes aware of it, is still a Catholic.

Being a member of the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation--this is dogma.  But membership itself does not save.  The sole question here is, "Just who is a member of the Catholic Church?"  Knowledge of each and every doctrine of the Catholic Church is not necessary to be a member, if it did, then little children who have not been taught the Catechism would be classified as heretics.  If your parents or priest mistakenly teach you a heresy (such as, for instance, that the souls of aborted babies go to heaven), you may still be a member of the Catholic Church until such time as you learn the True doctrine.  Only if you stubornly cling to the heresy do the bonds of unity break and you become an heretic.

Invincible ignorance is not an heresy.  It is a mere statement of fact.  What is heretical is the application many Modernists make of the fact, suggesting that invincible ignorance can lead to eternal Life.

A lot of people are confused and vulnerable,etc. Most do not recognize that a schism/heresy has occured.

Most Prots, betwen sex abuse scandals and disinigration of most of human element of the CHurch, see little need nor value of becoming Catholic...I blame them far less, in most cases, then us for failing to be and live up to waht we are and claim to be. Excluding of course the Port that is antiCathoic, hard core and knows the truth and ignores it, or, fails, willingly to look for it...despite internet, most of it is antiCatholic. Conversions to the Faith have and remain, mainly through contacts with Catholics, and most are failing miserably, either taking a "your a dumb, evil prot" bashing approach or siad Catholic is so liberal and confused, the Prot wisely does nto see truth and Christ in that person.

Example-have a Baptist minster that is afriend of mine, an arminian theologically. I was the first Catholic he told me he had met that bleived in Genesis, creation, took ones faith seriously, attend Mass and showed a militancy...all he met were lukewarm, liberal, heretical (as we know it) Catholics that were lax and indifferent...

Gods will be done, granted, but who impresses said minster more toward truth? me more than most he met and defiantely, not the Catholic that treats him like dirt and has a "your a Prot, so you are stupid or purposley ignorant of the Catholic faith" approach, often these people lurk in trad circles.

You might be the only real Catholic, dear posters, that a Prot, jew,etc might meet and how you treat and approach them is key. If you take a "bash um in the head" approach and they nver convert, part of that will be on you....so too, indifferentism and universal salvation, even worse and more a stench in Gods nostrils, as we see in ch 3 of Apoc. No mamby pamby, but not eyes buging out, head spinning frothing at the mouth....

I got a lot at judgment to answer for, do not want to answer why a Prot is in Hell or looong Purgatory because I failed to properly stand for Catholic Truth....remembering well what ABL stated, that if a prot is saved, and some would be, it is in spite of there heretical beleifs, not by them....

Too often, the head spinning, bashing-have seen it turn off people, some never again will consider the Fide due to poor and uncharitable behaviors. Some of the fault lies not with the ehretic on that one....the most conversions have seen, it was by Catholics that did not sell out the truth, but approached with fimr charity and kindness...a pleasant disposition and open approach.....not the head spinning, wigging out....

agree w/Myrna, the NO will not stop the NWO, evil Satan and does not in the end appeal to too many strict Prots, men and those truly yearning for Truth...it is dessicated and vacant...for me, cannot stand to go to 95% or more of Catholic (some, so called) Churches....cannot tolerate it nor abide by it and should not....when you find a gem, no one wants granite....

Well, my next question would be in light of the topic of this thread, and the fact that Benedict XVI says this :
“Paul [St. Paul] teaches not the resurrection of physical bodies but of persons…”
Source: Joseph Ratzinger, Introduction to Christianity, (republished in 1990 with Ratzinger’s approval), p. 277

Instead of this:
The same most holy Roman Church firmly believes, and firmly declares that nevertheless on the day of judgment all men will be brought together with their bodies before the tribunal of Christ to render an account of their own deeds.” (Denz. 464)
Source: Pope Gregory X, Council of Lyons II, 1274, ex cathedra

Why would the SSPX be interested in negotiating with a man who holds errors?

Quote from: Dawn

Does that include the "Old Catholics" then or the American Catholic Church? They do call themselves Catholic and believe parts of the Truth as  the Novus Ordo Catholics believe part of the Truth.

No, you see, because they can't trace their organization back to Jesus Christ like the "mainstream" Catholic Church can. The mainstream Church is connected to Rome, for example, which has always been the headquarters of the Catholic Church.

Any schismatic groups wouldn't even have this going for them -- because they're cut off from the main body with all the "history".

Glad you brought that up.

I see, but, if you listen to Catholic Radio they would and always do say that the SSPX is schismatic and cut off from the main body as you say. So this is more of what I am meaning. Really they do fall all over themselves when the topic of the "Schismatic SSPX" comes up for discussion, they do not think well of them at all.

f you listen to Catholic Radio they would and always do say that the SSPX is schismatic and cut off from the main body as you say.

That is true.  Just a few weeks ago I heard on Catholic Answers radio show one of their "apologists" caution someone against receiving Holy Communion in an SSPX Church since, as the apologist said, that would be signifying that you are in communion with the SSPX and it would be a sin to do so.    But by all means, do go to your spouses protestant church without any qualms as I have also heard them say many times.   :rolleyes:

Such are the times in which we live.  

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: Dawn

Does that include the "Old Catholics" then or the American Catholic Church? They do call themselves Catholic and believe parts of the Truth as  the Novus Ordo Catholics believe part of the Truth.

No, you see, because they can't trace their organization back to Jesus Christ like the "mainstream" Catholic Church can. The mainstream Church is connected to Rome, for example, which has always been the headquarters of the Catholic Church.

Any schismatic groups wouldn't even have this going for them -- because they're cut off from the main body with all the "history".

Glad you brought that up.

I see, but, if you listen to Catholic Radio they would and always do say that the SSPX is schismatic and cut off from the main body as you say. So this is more of what I am meaning. Really they do fall all over themselves when the topic of the "Schismatic SSPX" comes up for discussion, they do not think well of them at all.

But the SSPX was founded as a Pious Union with the approval of Rome and the local bishop. (Did you know that?)

Plus, Catholic Answers and media offensives aside, the official Roman position is that the SSPX is not schismatic. They ardently wish for people to be under the impression that they are -- but when you ask them point blank, in an official manner, they give you the truth.

The Old Catholics and other schismatic groups ARE schismatic. And the founder of the Old Catholics (Arnold Mathew) was excommunicated and declared Vitandi (a person to be shunned by Catholics) by Pope St. Pius X.

http://www.chantcd.com/real_excomm.htm

That never happened to the SSPX founders. Archbishop Lefebvre's "excommunication" was more of a "Let it be known, these men have incurred automatic excommunication for consecrating bishops without a papal mandate." rather than actively excommunicating them by his own power.

Compare John Paul II's "excommunication" of the SSPX bishops with the above REAL excommunication of a heretic.

http://www.chantcd.com/ecclesia_dei.htm



Matthew

You misunderstand me though I am not sure whether you do so intentionally or just refuse to actually read what I wrote.  I did not, nor do I, suggest that "invincible ignorance" will save these people.  They will be condemned for their sins, for their unbelief, and for their lack of Sanctifying Grace.  Invincible ignorance does not save.

I am merely pointing out that true ignorance of doctrine does not cut the bonds of unity and an individual who is ignorant of a particular doctrine but will, nevertheless, submit to the true doctrine if and when he becomes aware of it, is still a Catholic.
Being a member of the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation--this is dogma.  But membership itself does not save.  The sole question here is, "Just who is a member of the Catholic Church?"  Knowledge of each and every doctrine of the Catholic Church is not necessary to be a member, if it did, then little children who have not been taught the Catechism would be classified as heretics.  If your parents or priest mistakenly teach you a heresy (such as, for instance, that the souls of aborted babies go to heaven), you may still be a member of the Catholic Church until such time as you learn the True doctrine. Only if you stubornly cling to the heresy do the bonds of unity break and you become an heretic.

Invincible ignorance is not an heresy.  It is a mere statement of fact.  What is heretical is the application many Modernists make of the fact, suggesting that invincible ignorance can lead to eternal Life.

Hi, I underlined the parts of your post that I would call into question.  A heretic is not inside the church.  Correct?  You said "true ignorance of doctrine does not cut the bonds of unity.."

However ignorance of the faith is not an excuse.  I say that ignorance does put one outside of the Catholic faith.  I cannot be a member of something if I don't know what membership is?

If one is attending an invalid and heretical church then how is one to assume that they have the true Catholic faith?  Not to mention the fact that it is a sin to attend a heretical Mass.

(Little children have not reached the age of reason.)

If I am misinterpreting you then please inform me.

Dawn, those priests are not infallible. They can be quite wrong, and part of the "disinformation campaign" waged by the Vatican in this matter.

The only time you get the truth is when a layman writes to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Here is an interview with Cardinal Castrillon-Hoyos:

http://www.30giorni.it/us/articolo_stampa.asp?id=9360

Your Eminence, what was the nature of the audience granted by the Pope to the Superior General of the Saint Pius X Fraternity?

DARÍOCASTRILLÓN HOYOS: The audience is part of a process that began with a very important intervention by the then Cardinal Ratzinger, who signed a protocol of agreement with Monsignor Lefebvre before the latter decided to proceed to the episcopal consecrations of 1988.

Monsignor Lefebvre did not back off…

CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: Unfortunately Monsignor Lefebvre went ahead with the consecration and hence the situation of separation came about, even if it was not a formal schism. (emphasis added)

Just like that, a highly contentious issue that’s been dividing Catholics since 1988 was settled. And it’s impossible to believe that a man in the Cardinal’s elevated position, with his closely guarded reputation for discretion, could have acted in this regard without the Pope’s foreknowledge.

But, there’s more. We’ve all grown accustomed to the neo-Catholics charging all traditionalists with “closet sedevacantism”, especially the priests and bishops of the SSPX. Cardinal Hoyos put the lie to that as well:

After the audience [between SSPX head Bishop Bernard Fellay and Pope Benedict on August 29, 2005] an authoritative cardinal suggested that the Fraternity should recognize the legitimacy of the present Pontiff…

CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: Unfortunately that is proof that within the Church, even at high levels, there is not always full knowledge of the Fraternity. The Fraternity has always recognized in John Paul II, and now in Benedict XVI, the legitimate successor of Saint Peter. That is not a problem. That then there are traditionalist groups that don’t recognize the last popes, the so-called “empty throne” people, is another question that doesn’t concern the Saint Pius X Fraternity.

Next, the coup de grace. His Eminence conceded a point that traditionalists have been contesting for 35 years—that the old Mass was abrogated and, as such, requires a special permission or “indult” for use:

It is known that the Saint Pius X Fraternity is asking the Holy See for a liberalization of the so-called Tridentine mass and a declaration affirming that this liturgy has never been abolished.

CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: The mass of Saint Pius V has never been abolished…