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

Author Topic: What is invincible ignorance?  (Read 1787 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Grieverer

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
What is invincible ignorance?
« on: January 07, 2014, 10:09:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If the whole deal on it is to be talked about, then of course a definition of the terms is of the utmost importance.

    From the Catholic Encyclopedia, "Ignorance":

    Quote
    So far as fixing human responsibility, the most important division of ignorance is that designated by the terms invincible and vincible. Ignorance is said to be invincible when a person is unable to rid himself of it notwithstanding the employment of moral diligence, that is, such as under the circuмstances is, morally speaking, possible and obligatory. This manifestly includes the states of inadvertence, forgetfulness, etc. Such ignorance is obviously involuntary and therefore not imputable. On the other hand, ignorance is termed vincible if it can be dispelled by the use of "moral diligence". This certainly does not mean all possible effort; otherwise, as Ballerini naively says, we should have to have recourse to the pope in every instance. We may say, however, that the diligence requisite must be commensurate with the importance of the affair in hand, and with the capacity of the agent, in a word such as a really sensible and prudent person would use under the circuмstances. Furthermore, it must be remembered that the obligation mentioned above is to be interpreted strictly and exclusively as the duty incuмbent on a man to do something, the precise object of which is the acquisition of the needed knowledge. In other words the mere fact that one is bound by some extrinsic title to do something the performance of which would have actually, though not necessarily, given the required information, is negligible. When ignorance is deliberately aimed at and fostered, it is said to be affected, not because it is pretended, but rather because it is sought for by the agent so that he may not have to relinquish his purpose. Ignorance which practically no effort is made to dispel is termed crass or supine.


    This being so, i recall that the article the CMRI put out "on the salvation of those outside the Church" made it seem as if invincible ignorance were simply antecedent or simple ignorance, for it included Protestants in the group of those in invincible ignorance.

    Can anybody in a civilized nation be invincibly ignorant?


    Offline bowler

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3299
    • Reputation: +15/-1
    • Gender: Male
    What is invincible ignorance?
    « Reply #1 on: January 07, 2014, 10:24:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I don't see any mention of invincible ignorance in any of these quotes by trad clergy. They simply believe that someone can be saved who has no explicit desire to be a Catholic, nor belief in Christ or the Trinity. You rarely see anyone mention invincible ignorance anymore, that's old news, they've moved on:

    Quote
     Abp. Lefebvre and Bishop Fellay[/u]

    From the book  Against the Heresies, by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre:

    1. Page 216: “Evidently, certain distinctions must be made.  Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.), but not by this religion.  There may be souls who, not knowing Our Lord, have by the grace of the good Lord, good interior dispositions, who submit to God...But some of these persons make an act of love which implicitly is equivalent to baptism of desire.  It is uniquely by this means that they are able to be saved.”

    2.Page 217: “One cannot say, then, that no one is saved in these religions…”

    Pages 217-218: “This is then what Pius IX said and what he condemned.  It is necessary to understand the formulation that was so often employed by the Fathers of the Church:  ‘Outside the Church there is no salvation.’  When we say that, it is incorrectly believed that we think that all the Protestants, all the Moslems, all the Buddhists, all those who do not publicly belong to the Catholic Church go to hell.  Now, I repeat, it is possible for someone to be saved in these religions, but they are saved by the Church, and so the formulation is true: Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.  This must be preached.”
     
    Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “We know that there are two other baptisms, that of desire and that of blood. These produce an invisible but real link with Christ but do not produce all of the effects which are received in the baptism of water… And the Church has always taught that you have people who will be in heaven, who are in the state of grace, who have been saved without knowing the Catholic Church. We know this. And yet, how is it possible if you cannot be saved outside the Church? It is absolutely true that they will be saved through the Catholic Church because they will be united to Christ, to the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Catholic Church. It will, however, remain invisible, because this visible link is impossible for them. Consider a Hindu in Tibet who has no knowledge of the Catholic Church.  He lives according to his conscience and to the laws which God has put into his heart. He can be in the state of grace, and if he dies in this state of grace, he will go to heaven.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5.)






    Offline Frances

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2660
    • Reputation: +2241/-22
    • Gender: Female
    What is invincible ignorance?
    « Reply #2 on: January 07, 2014, 10:30:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  •  :dancing-banana:
     Is a 13 year old homeschooled boy, the son of Baptist parents, a  baptised member of the Baptist "church" in which he's being raised, hearing erroneous accounts of Catholicism, worthy of eternal punishment in Hell should he die before hearing the Truth?  To be honest, I'm not sure!  But I know without doubt that God is perfectly just, that He wills all to come to salvation.  If the boy IS in Hell, then he is receiving less punishment than one who knew Truth and rejected Christ, anyway.
     St. Francis Xavier threw a Crucifix into the sea, at once calming the waves.  Upon reaching the shore, the Crucifix was returned to him by a crab with a curious cross pattern on its shell.  

    Offline Grieverer

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 3
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    • Gender: Male
    What is invincible ignorance?
    « Reply #3 on: January 07, 2014, 10:42:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: bowler
    I don't see any mention of invincible ignorance in any of these quotes by trad clergy. They simply believe that someone can be saved who has no explicit desire to be a Catholic, nor belief in Christ or the Trinity. You rarely see anyone mention invincible ignorance anymore, that's old news, they've moved on:

    Quote
     Abp. Lefebvre and Bishop Fellay[/u]

    From the book  Against the Heresies, by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre:

    1. Page 216: “Evidently, certain distinctions must be made.  Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.), but not by this religion.  There may be souls who, not knowing Our Lord, have by the grace of the good Lord, good interior dispositions, who submit to God...But some of these persons make an act of love which implicitly is equivalent to baptism of desire.  It is uniquely by this means that they are able to be saved.”

    2.Page 217: “One cannot say, then, that no one is saved in these religions…”

    Pages 217-218: “This is then what Pius IX said and what he condemned.  It is necessary to understand the formulation that was so often employed by the Fathers of the Church:  ‘Outside the Church there is no salvation.’  When we say that, it is incorrectly believed that we think that all the Protestants, all the Moslems, all the Buddhists, all those who do not publicly belong to the Catholic Church go to hell.  Now, I repeat, it is possible for someone to be saved in these religions, but they are saved by the Church, and so the formulation is true: Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.  This must be preached.”
     
    Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “We know that there are two other baptisms, that of desire and that of blood. These produce an invisible but real link with Christ but do not produce all of the effects which are received in the baptism of water… And the Church has always taught that you have people who will be in heaven, who are in the state of grace, who have been saved without knowing the Catholic Church. We know this. And yet, how is it possible if you cannot be saved outside the Church? It is absolutely true that they will be saved through the Catholic Church because they will be united to Christ, to the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Catholic Church. It will, however, remain invisible, because this visible link is impossible for them. Consider a Hindu in Tibet who has no knowledge of the Catholic Church.  He lives according to his conscience and to the laws which God has put into his heart. He can be in the state of grace, and if he dies in this state of grace, he will go to heaven.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5.)



    That's the whole point: these people are no longer sticking to the very own definitions and they have made the exception the rule.

    You know, when they say invincible ignorance, i imagine something which is utterly impossible to overcome by natural means, such as someone who is blind, deaf and mute, or someone who cannot read or write and lives in an isolated place in the middle east, whose only neighbors are either Jєωs or Muslims, or some aborigines still living in huts and using dialects, or a mentally retarded person etc.

    Will any of the adherents of I.I. stand up and define what exactly is it and who qualifies for it?

    But now they tell you any Protestant, fully aware of the existence of the Catholic Church, living in a civilized country, classifies as "invincibly ignorant" and "good willed".

    Offline Grieverer

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 3
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    • Gender: Male
    What is invincible ignorance?
    « Reply #4 on: January 07, 2014, 10:46:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Frances
    :dancing-banana:
     Is a 13 year old homeschooled boy, the son of Baptist parents, a  baptised member of the Baptist "church" in which he's being raised, hearing erroneous accounts of Catholicism, worthy of eternal punishment in Hell should he die before hearing the Truth?  To be honest, I'm not sure!  But I know without doubt that God is perfectly just, that He wills all to come to salvation.  If the boy IS in Hell, then he is receiving less punishment than one who knew Truth and rejected Christ, anyway.


    He would not be guilty of the sin of heresy for he needs to be pertinacious, so he wouldn't be damned on that account, but as soon as he commits his first mortal sin which, except he is aided exceptionally by God, he surely will, he would be damned on that account.

    People forget about Original Sin and that we are born in a state of damnation by default.


    Offline Frances

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2660
    • Reputation: +2241/-22
    • Gender: Female
    What is invincible ignorance?
    « Reply #5 on: January 07, 2014, 10:47:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  •  :dancing-banana:We do not live in a civilised country!
     St. Francis Xavier threw a Crucifix into the sea, at once calming the waves.  Upon reaching the shore, the Crucifix was returned to him by a crab with a curious cross pattern on its shell.  

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18177
    • Reputation: +8276/-692
    • Gender: Male
    What is invincible ignorance?
    « Reply #6 on: January 08, 2014, 01:13:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .

    Does anyone know why Grieverer was banned?  It seems several of his posts are missing.  What did he do?  He joined today, and was banned the same day, after about 4 or 6 posts, but only 3 remain.  What happened?


    .
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18177
    • Reputation: +8276/-692
    • Gender: Male
    What is invincible ignorance?
    « Reply #7 on: January 08, 2014, 04:38:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .

    Quote
    Will any of the adherents of I.I. stand up and define what exactly is it and who qualifies for it?


    I like to tell people who mutter "invincible ignorance" as if it's some kind of difficulty that they're proud of, "ANYONE who can pronounce the words, 'invincibly ignorant,' doesn't qualify."  Or, "If you know someone who can say, 'invincibly ignorant', you can be sure, they're not one of them."


    .
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.


    Offline bowler

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3299
    • Reputation: +15/-1
    • Gender: Male
    What is invincible ignorance?
    « Reply #8 on: January 08, 2014, 04:57:08 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Frances
    :dancing-banana:
     Is a 13 year old homeschooled boy, the son of Baptist parents, a  baptised member of the Baptist "church" in which he's being raised, hearing erroneous accounts of Catholicism, worthy of eternal punishment in Hell should he die before hearing the Truth?  To be honest, I'm not sure!  But I know without doubt that God is perfectly just, that He wills all to come to salvation.  If the boy IS in Hell, then he is receiving less punishment than one who knew Truth and rejected Christ, anyway.



    For us it looks like you describe:
    Quote
    Is a 13 year old homeschooled boy, the son of Baptist parents, a  baptised member of the Baptist "church" in which he's being raised, hearing erroneous accounts of Catholicism, worthy of eternal punishment in Hell should he die before hearing the Truth?


    However, for God it is not so for God has already put that soul through limitless histories, and God knows how he will respond. If God takes him when he is 13 and damns him, you can rest assured that God is being most merciful, for the person would have ended in a much worse hell had he lived to adulthood. There is mercy even in hell, and a pit of hell may just be like living in the Everglades without airconditioning and pesticides during the summer. Hot, humid, sweating gallons, and having to cover yourself with mud to avoid being eaten by mosquitos.... I could go on.

    Quote from: bowler
    "Before all decision to create the world, the infinite knowledge of God presents to Him all the graces, and different series of graces, which He can prepare for each soul, along with the consent or refusal which would follow in each circuмstance, and that in millions of possible combinations ... Thus, for each man in particular there are in the thought of God, limitless possible histories, some histories of virtue and salvation, others of crime and damnation; and God will be free in choosing such a world, such a series of graces, and in determining the future history and final destiny of each soul. And this is precisely what He does when among all possible worlds, by an absolutely free act, he decides to realize the actual world with all the circuмstances of its historic evolutions, with all the graces which in fact have been and will be distributed until the end of the world, and consequently with all the elect and all the reprobate who God foresaw would be in it if de facto He created it." [The Catholic Encyclopedia Appleton, 1909, on Augustine, pg 97]


    In other words before a man is conceived, God in his infinite knowledge has already put that person through the test with millions of possible combinations and possible histories, some histories of virtue and salvation, others of crime and damnation;along with the consent or refusal which would follow in each circuмstance (of millions of possible combinations!!!) and God will be free in determining which future history and final destiny He assigns each soul.


    The idea of salvation outside the Church is opposed to the Doctrine of Predestination. This Doctrine means that from all eternity God has known who were His own. It is for the salvation of these, His Elect, that Providence has directed, does direct, and will always direct, the affairs of men and the events of history. Nothing, absolutely nothing, that happens, has not been taken into account by the infinite God, and woven into that tapestry in which is written the history of the salvation of His saints. Central in this providential overlordship is the Church itself, which is the sacred implement which God devised for the rescuing of His beloved ones from the damnation decreed for those who would not. (Mt. 23:37).

    The Doctrine of Divine Election means that only certain individuals will be saved.  They will be saved primarily because, in the inscrutable omniscience of God, only certain individuals out of all the human family will respond to the grace of salvation. In essence, this doctrine refers to what in terms of human understanding and vision, is before and after, the past, the present, and the future, but what in God is certain knowledge and unpreventable fact, divine action and human response.

    Calvin and others have made the mistake of believing that these words mean that predestination excludes human choice and dispenses from true virtue. Catholic doctrine explains simply that the foreknowledge of God precedes the giving of grace. It means, further, that, since without grace there can be no merit, and without merit no salvation, those who will be saved must be foreknown as saved by God, if they are to receive the graces necessary for salvation.

    Those who say there is salvation outside the Church (no matter how they say it) do not comprehend that those who are in the Church have been brought into it by the Father, through Christ the Savior, in fulfillment of His eternal design to save them. The only reason that God does not succeed in getting others into the Church must be found in the reluctant will of those who do not enter it. 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. There is absolutely no obstacle to the invincible God's achieving His designs, except the intractable wills of His children. Nothing prevents His using the skies for his billboard, and the clouds for lettering, or the rolling thunder for the proclamation of His word. (Indeed, for believers, He does just this: "The heavens shew forth the glory of God, and the firmament declareth the work of his hands." I Ps. 18: 11. But for atheists the heavens have no message at all.) If poverty were the reason some do not believe, he could load them down with diamonds; if youth were the reason, He could make sure they grew to a hoary old age. If it were merely the want of information, put a library on their doorstep, or a dozen missionaries in their front room. Were it for a want of brains, he could give every man an I.Q. of three hundred: it would cost Him nothing.

    The idea that someone died before he was able to receive Baptism, suggests that God was unable to control events, so as to give the person time to enter the Church. If time made any difference, God could and would keep any person on earth a hundred, or a thousand, or ten thousand years.

    Thus, what is the meaning of this election? That from all eternity God has ordered the events of history, so that His Elect might have the grace of salvation. And how do they know of this election? By the fact that they are in the Church, through no deservingness of their own? They know of no reason why God should bestow this grace, the knowledge of the truth, and the willingness and power to believe it, upon them, while others, who seem more worthy, go without it. As regards His Elect, not only has God determined to bestow necessary grace, but also, all His actions in the world must be seen as part of His salvific plan. In a word, nothing that He does is unrelated to the salvation of His Beloved Sheep. Human history, apart from the glory of Holy Church, and the salvation of the Elect, and the punishment of the wicked, has little importance for almighty God. Yet, all these purposes are only a part of the manifestation of His glory.

    Those who speak of it have the problem of reconciling the mystery of Predestination with the idea of "baptism of desire." From all eternity, almighty God has known the fate of every soul. In His Providence, He has arranged for the entrance into the Church of certain millions of persons, and has seen to it that they receive the grace of faith, the Sacrament of Baptism, the grace of repentance, the forgiveness of their sins, and all the other requisites of salvation. According to The Attenuators, in the case of "non Catholic saints," and of those who died before they might receive Baptism, God was simply unable to see to these necessaries. Untoward and unforeseen circuмstances arose which prevented His providing these other millions with the means of salvation. Theirs is a story of supreme irony, that although the God of omniscience and omnipotence mastered the history of all nations and the course of every life, angelic and human, in the case of certain ones, His timing was off by just a few days, or hours, or minutes. It was His earlier intention to make sure that they received Baptism of water; He had it all planned out; but alas! on the particular day of their demise, His schedule was so full, that He simply could not get to them; for which reason, in that it was His fault, He is bound to provide an alternative instrumentality: "baptism of desire" is his substitute for the real thing!

    The Diluters of the Doctrine of Exclusive Salvation do not perceive the Pelagian tenor of their position, that some may be saved outside the Church through nothing but their good will. It is exactly because this is impossible  and, more important, offensive to God, that the notion must be
     rejected. We say impossible, because no man can save himself. The fact that every man must receive Baptism and thus enter the Church means that he is dependent upon God to make it possible for him to receive the Sacrament, and further, through this Sacrament, it is Christ Who acts to purge the sinner of his sins, and ingraft him into His Mystical Body. No individual can do this by himself. He is dependent upon another to pour the water and say the words, and he is dependent upon God to provide this minister, and to make the sacramental sign effective of grace. It is thus so that none may attribute his salvation to his own doing.
     
    Pride is the chief vice of man, as it was and is of the demons of Hell. It is pride more than any other fault that blinds men to the truth, that obstructs faith, and hardens their hearts to conversion from sin.

    The Doctrine of Predestination is that almighty God from all eternity both knew and determined who would be saved, that is, who would allow Him to save them. He would be the cause of their salvation, and, as there is no power that can even faintly obstruct or withstand Him, there is no power which can prevent His saving whom He wishes, except, of course, the man himself.


     

    Offline SJB

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5171
    • Reputation: +1932/-17
    • Gender: Male
    What is invincible ignorance?
    « Reply #9 on: January 08, 2014, 07:17:57 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Neil Obstat
    .

    Quote
    Will any of the adherents of I.I. stand up and define what exactly is it and who qualifies for it?


    I like to tell people who mutter "invincible ignorance" as if it's some kind of difficulty that they're proud of, "ANYONE who can pronounce the words, 'invincibly ignorant,' doesn't qualify."  Or, "If you know someone who can say, 'invincibly ignorant', you can be sure, they're not one of them."


    Quote from: Pope Pius IX, Singulari quadam, DZ. 1647
    For, it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood; but, on the other hand, it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, are not stained by any guilt in this matter in the eyes of God. Now, in truth, who would arrogate so much to himself as to mark the limits of such an ignorance, because of the nature and variety of peoples, regions, innate dispositions, and of so many other things? For, in truth, when released from these corporeal chains "we shall see God as He is" [ 1 John 3:2], we shall understand perfectly by how close and beautiful a bond divine mercy and justice are united; but, as long as we are on earth, weighed down by this mortal mass which blunts the soul, let us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, there is "one God, one faith, one baptism" [ Eph. 4:5 ]; it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry.


    You would, I guess.
    It would be comparatively easy for us to be holy if only we could always see the character of our neighbours either in soft shade or with the kindly deceits of moonlight upon them. Of course, we are not to grow blind to evil

    Offline Alcuin

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 269
    • Reputation: +91/-0
    • Gender: Male
    What is invincible ignorance?
    « Reply #10 on: January 08, 2014, 07:27:16 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    Those of you who defend EENS, there's probably no point in doing any more of these threads.  Those who undermine the Church's dogma like SJB, LoT, and Ambrose will not be converted.  As St. Thomas teaches, since the intellect naturally tends towards the truth, the embracing of error comes from bad will, and seeing as they're obstinate and bad willed, there's no point in continuing the discussion.  We should just in peace and tranquility profess the dogmatic truths taught by Holy Mother Church and leave them in their error.  As Our Lord taught, once they have been rebuked a sufficient number of times, it's time to just kick the dust off our feet, cease casting pearl before them, and move along.  I won't be contributing any more comments before the likes of these.  They'll know the truth at their judgment.


    Offline SJB

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5171
    • Reputation: +1932/-17
    • Gender: Male
    What is invincible ignorance?
    « Reply #11 on: January 08, 2014, 07:28:50 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Alcuin
    Quote from: Ladislaus
    Those of you who defend EENS, there's probably no point in doing any more of these threads.  Those who undermine the Church's dogma like SJB, LoT, and Ambrose will not be converted.  As St. Thomas teaches, since the intellect naturally tends towards the truth, the embracing of error comes from bad will, and seeing as they're obstinate and bad willed, there's no point in continuing the discussion.  We should just in peace and tranquility profess the dogmatic truths taught by Holy Mother Church and leave them in their error.  As Our Lord taught, once they have been rebuked a sufficient number of times, it's time to just kick the dust off our feet, cease casting pearl before them, and move along.  I won't be contributing any more comments before the likes of these.  They'll know the truth at their judgment.


    Except Ladislaus has found NO authority who has ever noticed these grave errors being taught by the Church for centuries. He has condemned others for NOT doing their own theology, like he has. Ladi believes he is more intelligent than all others who came before him, thus his judgments and theology are infallible. The truth is that Ladislaus can't even have a theological opinion, let alone dismiss those who have true theological opinions.
    It would be comparatively easy for us to be holy if only we could always see the character of our neighbours either in soft shade or with the kindly deceits of moonlight upon them. Of course, we are not to grow blind to evil

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41868
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    What is invincible ignorance?
    « Reply #12 on: January 08, 2014, 08:03:39 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Frances
    :dancing-banana:
     Is a 13 year old homeschooled boy, the son of Baptist parents, a  baptised member of the Baptist "church" in which he's being raised, hearing erroneous accounts of Catholicism, worthy of eternal punishment in Hell should he die before hearing the Truth?  To be honest, I'm not sure!  But I know without doubt that God is perfectly just, that He wills all to come to salvation.  If the boy IS in Hell, then he is receiving less punishment than one who knew Truth and rejected Christ, anyway.


    This right here IS the "theology" behind BoD that St. Augustine rejects and refers to as the "vortex of confusion".  No other theology for BoD has ever been proposed by anyone.


    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41868
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    What is invincible ignorance?
    « Reply #13 on: January 08, 2014, 08:10:25 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: SJB
    Quote from: Alcuin
    Quote from: Ladislaus
    Those of you who defend EENS, there's probably no point in doing any more of these threads.  Those who undermine the Church's dogma like SJB, LoT, and Ambrose will not be converted.  As St. Thomas teaches, since the intellect naturally tends towards the truth, the embracing of error comes from bad will, and seeing as they're obstinate and bad willed, there's no point in continuing the discussion.  We should just in peace and tranquility profess the dogmatic truths taught by Holy Mother Church and leave them in their error.  As Our Lord taught, once they have been rebuked a sufficient number of times, it's time to just kick the dust off our feet, cease casting pearl before them, and move along.  I won't be contributing any more comments before the likes of these.  They'll know the truth at their judgment.


    Except Ladislaus has found NO authority who has ever noticed these grave errors being taught by the Church for centuries. He has condemned others for NOT doing their own theology, like he has. Ladi believes he is more intelligent than all others who came before him, thus his judgments and theology are infallible. The truth is that Ladislaus can't even have a theological opinion, let alone dismiss those who have true theological opinions.


    You keep promoting this lie that "ALL OTHERS BEFORE" [me] promoted BoD and that somehow I am the SOLE rejector of BoD in all of human history.  As I've pointed out many times before, SJB, you are simply not honest and have an axe to grind on this issue.  If you were to submit an actual genuine theogical argument for BoD, I'd be all ears.  I have YET to see ANYTHING along those lines.  See my post just above.  At no point has "The Church" taught "errors" for "centuries".  For centuries the Church has allowed people to hold to the opinion rooted in speculative theology alone that BoD exists.  I have seen ZERO actual real concrete theological evidence that such a thing exists.

    I'm going to start doing the roscoe thing:


    "There's no such thing as BoD."   :smoke-pot:

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41868
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    What is invincible ignorance?
    « Reply #14 on: January 08, 2014, 08:17:14 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: SJB
    Quote from: Neil Obstat
    .

    Quote
    Will any of the adherents of I.I. stand up and define what exactly is it and who qualifies for it?


    I like to tell people who mutter "invincible ignorance" as if it's some kind of difficulty that they're proud of, "ANYONE who can pronounce the words, 'invincibly ignorant,' doesn't qualify."  Or, "If you know someone who can say, 'invincibly ignorant', you can be sure, they're not one of them."


    Quote from: Pope Pius IX, Singulari quadam, DZ. 1647
    For, it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood; but, on the other hand, it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, are not stained by any guilt in this matter in the eyes of God. Now, in truth, who would arrogate so much to himself as to mark the limits of such an ignorance, because of the nature and variety of peoples, regions, innate dispositions, and of so many other things? For, in truth, when released from these corporeal chains "we shall see God as He is" [ 1 John 3:2], we shall understand perfectly by how close and beautiful a bond divine mercy and justice are united; but, as long as we are on earth, weighed down by this mortal mass which blunts the soul, let us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, there is "one God, one faith, one baptism" [ Eph. 4:5 ]; it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry.


    You would, I guess.


    I've already explained a million times how you completely misinterpret and butcher this quote.  Invincible ignorance can never be salvific.  And if you are claiming that it would be wrong for God to condemn to hell anyone not guilty of willful sin, you're attributing heresy to Pius IX.  In other words, your interpretation of Pius IX would turn Pius IX into a heretic.

    And did you fail to notice this part?:
    "there is "one God, one faith, one baptism" [ Eph. 4:5 ]; it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry."

    You, SJB, and all the BoD theorists are engaging in "unlawful uniquiry" and thereby serving no other purpose than to undermine EENS.  If I were pope, the very first thing I would do is to ban under pain of mortal sin any discussion of or mention of "Baptism of Desire".  I am so sick of seeing reference to the "Three Baptisms" when the Creed specifically refers to believing in ONE baptism.  What an outrage.