No salvation outside the Church

StThomasMore

Christian Democrat
Feb 27, 2011
1,584
95
✟17,251.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Protestants today are not responsible for the Reformation. Those who don't understand that Catholicism is the truth are not held responsible. A person who grows up in a Protestant denomination may be unable to discern the truth in Catholicism.

I don't read anywhere where it says ignorance is a road to salvation.

The word "Protestant" is a word that specifically means that they protest against the Church.

So how can someone until the title of protestation of the Catholic Church be invisibly ignorant?

Invisible ignorance is again, a child in a pagan tribe somewhere, where the gospel is 100s of miles away from him. There are no Churches or libraries where he can search the truth on his own. Through no fault of his own

However if a person is within reach of knowledge it is totally different. Because the knowledge and the fountains of grace are there. If he has normal mental capacity and if not being kept against his will from wisdom, he cannot really be invisibly ignorant.
 
Upvote 0

StThomasMore

Christian Democrat
Feb 27, 2011
1,584
95
✟17,251.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Root of Jesse,

The view of the Universal Church is one shared by Anglo Catholics. We profess the Nicene Creek, which includes, "We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church," catholic meaning universal-in all times and all places.

In classes before my Anglican Confirmation, I was taught that the Anglican Church of one of three Catholic branches of the Church, along with Catholics in Communion with Rome and the Eastern Orthodox.

Anna

Read Apostalicae Curae.The bull was issued on 15 September 1896 and declared Anglican orders to be "absolutely null and utterly void". Ratzinger’s commentary listed Leo XIII’s declaration in Apostolicae Curae that Anglican orders are “absolutely null and utterly void” as one of the teachings to which Catholics must give “firm and definitive assent”

The Anglican community was created by King Henry VIII when he defected from the Church because he was unable to get an annulment.

They are not a apostolic catholic Church.

There are 3 that are apostolic Church's. That being the Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox.

I don't wanna sound harsh to some. But protestant groups are considered "ecclesiastical communities" and cannot be considered Churches. In order for a Church to be a Church it must be Catholic, One, Holy, and Apostolic. Protestant groups fail in all categories. They are not Catholic and One because they are divided into over 30,000 groups, and neither are they apostolic since they started in the 15th century, and most even later than that, so they have no historical connection or lineage with the apostles or their successors. Most even reject the concept of a priesthood and the bishop.

To become a "pastor" is as easy as paying 80$ and filling out an application to get your license and coming out with it on the same day or week. http://www.ordination.com/
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Anna Scott

Senior Member
May 29, 2009
997
102
Texas
✟21,987.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Read Apostalicae Curae.The bull was issued on 15 September 1896 and declared Anglican orders to be "absolutely null and utterly void". Ratzinger’s commentary listed Leo XIII’s declaration in Apostolicae Curae that Anglican orders are “absolutely null and utterly void” as one of the teachings to which Catholics must give “firm and definitive assent”

The Anglican community was created by King Henry VIII when he defected from the Church because he was unable to get an annulment.

They are not a apostolic catholic Church.

There are 3 that are apostolic Church's. That being the Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox.

I don't wanna sound harsh to some. But protestant groups are considered "ecclesiastical communities" and cannot be considered Churches. In order for a Church to be a Church it must be Catholic, One, Holy, and Apostolic. Protestant groups fail in all categories. They are not Catholic and One because they are divided into over 30,000 groups, and neither are they apostolic since they started in the 15th century, and most even later than that, so they have no historical connection or lineage with the apostles or their successors. Most even reject the concept of a priesthood and the bishop.

To become a "pastor" is as easy as paying 80$ and filling out an application to get your license and coming out with it on the same day or week. Become an Ordained minister, ordination, do weddings, start a church or ministry

StThomasMore,

I am aware of Anglican history. Since this is a Catholic forum, I cannot debate the claims you've made regarding the validity of Anglican Orders.

I am also aware of Apostolicae Curae, which is binding for all Catholics.
 
Upvote 0

St_Barnabus

Secular Carmelite OCDS
Jun 6, 2008
1,822
394
Midwest USA
✟54,616.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
I don't read anywhere where it says ignorance is a road to salvation.

It is not a royal road, as in "no bars held," but it is one that is possible. Haven't you read Lumen Gentium and the CCC regarding this?

The word "Protestant" is a word that specifically means that they protest against the Church.
Again, that was only true of the Reformation. The children far removed from that generation are not held culpable for the act of protesting and schism. This is why the Church has considered their plight as being very difficult to change from the catechesis they grew up with and learned to trust. Simply reading about Catholicism is not an automatic infusion of grace to accept it.
 
Upvote 0

Da_Funkey_Gibbon

I'm just like the others...
Jan 8, 2005
10,915
322
✟20,178.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
It's not nice to reduce other people's belief systems to mockery. Any nicer than it was for the Romans to accuse to early Christians of practicing satanic feasts. While some Christians denominations think pastorship is universal and therefore you don't need any special requirement other the the assent of the congregation - others have more sophisticated thinking on the matter.

Mutual respect, trust and honesty is the key to true ecumenicism. Misrepresenting other people's viewpoints make one as bad in one's own way as the people who just pretend there are no differences.
 
Upvote 0

Da_Funkey_Gibbon

I'm just like the others...
Jan 8, 2005
10,915
322
✟20,178.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Again, that was only true of the Reformation. The children far removed from that generation are not held culpable for the act of protesting and schism. This is why the Church has considered their plight as being very difficult to change from the catechesis they grew up with and learned to trust. Simply reading about Catholicism is not an automatic infusion of grace to accept it.
:thumbsup:

The sin of heresy or schism can only be considered a sin in the same way other sins are.

Ignorance is never an excuse but is always a mitigating factor. And again, Christ alone can judge men's hearts.
 
Upvote 0

Anna Scott

Senior Member
May 29, 2009
997
102
Texas
✟21,987.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
. . . . .Invisible ignorance is again, a child in a pagan tribe somewhere, where the gospel is 100s of miles away from him. There are no Churches or libraries where he can search the truth on his own. Through no fault of his own

However if a person is within reach of knowledge it is totally different. Because the knowledge and the fountains of grace are there. If he has normal mental capacity and if not being kept against his will from wisdom, he cannot really be invisibly ignorant.

StThomasMore,

I don't understand what you are trying to say here. Please clarify.

Are you saying that one who is Baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit will not be saved; if he/she is aware of the teachings of the Catholic Church, but is not convinced of Papal authority and does not enter into Communion with Rome?
 
Upvote 0

Anna Scott

Senior Member
May 29, 2009
997
102
Texas
✟21,987.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
. . . .Again, that was only true of the Reformation. The children far removed from that generation are not held culpable for the act of protesting and schism. This is why the Church has considered their plight as being very difficult to change from the catechesis they grew up with and learned to trust. Simply reading about Catholicism is not an automatic infusion of grace to accept it.

St_Barnabus,

Yes, and I am a example of one such person who remains unconvinced.

However, I will say that my extensive discussions with Catholics on CAF (you have mentioned my posts there) have had a profound impact on my life and my beliefs. When I joined CAF in 2009, I was still officially in the Baptist Church. If you were to read my 4,000 plus posts on CAF (I wouldn't recommend it :doh:); you would see that many of those posts read like a diary of a spiritual journey, as I noted in this CAF Post:

"As you know, I have been working through my journey very openly on these forums. Discussions here, combined with prayer and study, lead me to embrace the Sacraments, infant baptism, the Real Presence, the Communion of the Saints, the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary. I have released Sola Scriptura, salvation by faith alone, and salvation based solely on the "sinner's prayer." Considering the fact that I was a Southern Baptist when I joined this forum in May 2009; I'd say I've proven that I am willing to change long held beliefs, if I can't support them. . . ."

Same sentiment posted here.


 
Upvote 0

steve_bakr

Christian
Aug 3, 2011
5,918
240
✟22,533.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
I don't read anywhere where it says ignorance is a road to salvation.

The word "Protestant" is a word that specifically means that they protest against the Church.

So how can someone until the title of protestation of the Catholic Church be invisibly ignorant?

Invisible ignorance is again, a child in a pagan tribe somewhere, where the gospel is 100s of miles away from him. There are no Churches or libraries where he can search the truth on his own. Through no fault of his own

However if a person is within reach of knowledge it is totally different. Because the knowledge and the fountains of grace are there. If he has normal mental capacity and if not being kept against his will from wisdom, he cannot really be invisibly ignorant.

Protestants don't generally define themselves as being in protest against the Church. That was 500 years ago. The Church today recognizes Protestants as Christians if they have been baptized.
 
Upvote 0

WarriorAngel

I close my eyes and see you smile
Supporter
Apr 11, 2005
72,739
9,305
United States Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟428,486.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
StThomasMore,

I don't understand what you are trying to say here. Please clarify.

Are you saying that one who is Baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit will not be saved; if he/she is aware of the teachings of the Catholic Church, but is not convinced of Papal authority and does not enter into Communion with Rome?
It depends [tho i am not Thomas] on how much knowledge is obtained and if knowing the history - and the evidence that points to such - and denying it in spite of given such knowledge - it may become Vincible Ignorance.

The truly ignorant are those who have no idea about history and have faith as a child in what they were told to believe. This is fairly common. I wonder if the internet - and such [the power to possess said history and writings] has any bearing on one's culpability.
Certainly no one has to believe just because someone 'said so' - but if the evidence backs up and supports the claims it may change things - one former Protestant said in the light of this - 'to know history is have no choice but to be Catholic.' or perhaps it was 'To know history is to no longer be Protestant.'
Either way - the support for the Catholic Church is as old as 2000 years.

Those inspired to question - to search and seek MAY and i dont know mind you - but may be culpable of denying the Church with evidence in hand.

Remember the spirit struggles with the flesh. The best advice - pray for the Lord to show you truth...and resist using 'preference' vs grace.

No one can say who is guilty of Invincible or Vincible Ignorance - but there is a road map of sorts that touches on the differences.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

WarriorAngel

I close my eyes and see you smile
Supporter
Apr 11, 2005
72,739
9,305
United States Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟428,486.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
St_Barnabus,

Yes, and I am a example of one such person who remains unconvinced.

However, I will say that my extensive discussions with Catholics on CAF (you have mentioned my posts there) have had a profound impact on my life and my beliefs. When I joined CAF in 2009, I was still officially in the Baptist Church. If you were to read my 4,000 plus posts on CAF (I wouldn't recommend it :doh:); you would see that many of those posts read like a diary of a spiritual journey, as I noted in this CAF Post:

"As you know, I have been working through my journey very openly on these forums. Discussions here, combined with prayer and study, lead me to embrace the Sacraments, infant baptism, the Real Presence, the Communion of the Saints, the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary. I have released Sola Scriptura, salvation by faith alone, and salvation based solely on the "sinner's prayer." Considering the fact that I was a Southern Baptist when I joined this forum in May 2009; I'd say I've proven that I am willing to change long held beliefs, if I can't support them. . . ."

Same sentiment posted here.


As someone who knows that most Baptists are staunchly [not always but usually] against the sacraments and the Church - i feel you have made great strides in this break-through.

The thing i hope for you is to let go and embrace there is one Church and though man may have tried to dishonor the Pope - or rather St Peter's Chair - the Bible is key to knowing Papal Infallibility does exist. The question is really - what does it actually mean?

It does not mean he is right all the time, or is perfect - but rather it means when teaching the Church he cannot err - because the Lord promised the Church would never teach heresy as He handed him the keys and specifically to Peter whom He gave the keys in front of them all and told them - the Father chose Peter - and the evidence was the words our Father put in Peter's confession.
[Only the Lord can dispel such graces and He too can shut up the mind so we are confused]

And aside from that - Jesus also told the Jews to follow the Chair of Moses [while He was alive that is for He had not yet established His Church without fulfilling His mission] and not do as they do who sit on the Chair - but obey that Chair.

Knowing these things are important to the Lord - and how He was setting up their importance for us - we should consider the historical writings even in the beginning - some subtle - some not so subtle - regarding the Chair of Peter and it's significance to the Whole World [Church].

Like all things - not everything was written at the beginning - but inferred. As you were led to see the sacraments. Though the words sacrament, Trinity, Incarnation, Hypostatic Union and so forth werent dialogued in the Bible nor even in history until it was necessary - the same is true for the importance of the Chair of Peter. Though it was certainly inferred and in their time and language sometimes - spoken outright as well.

But going back to the Bible:
"Peter, feed My sheep." and "...Peter, feed My lambs." But also 'Confirm thy brethren...' which means 'teach' the others.
Yes, Peter was teacher of the whole Church even his 'brethren' which were the Apostles.

As teacher - and the promise given to Peter that the gates of hell would not prevail, which means - heresy would never be taught - we can fully and absolutely trust Jesus and have faith like a child in the Chair of Peter or - we can resist because the flesh may chose not to believe such a thing is possible even at the words of the Lord.

Just some things to think over.

And fwiw - i congratulate you on your journey. Good job so far. Keep up the good work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tadoflamb
Upvote 0

Rhamiel

Member of the Round Table
Nov 11, 2006
41,182
9,432
ohio
✟241,111.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
StThomasMore,

I don't understand what you are trying to say here. Please clarify.

Are you saying that one who is Baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit will not be saved; if he/she is aware of the teachings of the Catholic Church, but is not convinced of Papal authority and does not enter into Communion with Rome?
I know you did not direct this question to me, but I hope you do not mind if I give you my opinion on this?

I would say that it would be a serious concern
as others have said, the extent of the persons knowledge and other issues do factor in
but schism is a serious sin
Christ prayed that all would be as one, so continuing separation would be a type of rebellion against the Lord

it is not my place to judge the salvation of a person, especially of another Christian
only God can see a persons heart

I hope my words do not seem to harsh
 
Upvote 0

steve_bakr

Christian
Aug 3, 2011
5,918
240
✟22,533.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
It depends [tho i am not Thomas] on how much knowledge is obtained and if knowing the history - and the evidence that points to such - and denying it in spite of given such knowledge - it may become Vincible Ignorance.

The truly ignorant are those who have no idea about history and have faith as a child in what they were told to believe. This is fairly common. I wonder if the internet - and such [the power to possess said history and writings] has any bearing on one's culpability.
Certainly no one has to believe just because someone 'said so' - but if the evidence backs up and supports the claims it may change things - one former Protestant said in the light of this - 'to know history is have no choice but to be Catholic.' or perhaps it was 'To know history is to no longer be Protestant.'
Either way - the support for the Catholic Church is as old as 2000 years.

Those inspired to question - to search and seek MAY and i dont know mind you - but may be culpable of denying the Church with evidence in hand.

Remember the spirit struggles with the flesh. The best advice - pray for the Lord to show you truth...and resist using 'preference' vs grace.

No one can say who is guilty of Invincible or Vincible Ignorance - but there is a road map of sorts that touches on the differences.

There are many who, because of culture, background, education, social factors, marriage, church involvement, etc., may not be able to accept Catholicism. That is through no fault of their own. Or it might be that they could not adjust to the Mass, having been enculturated into worship music and the 50-minute sermon. There are a lot of factors involved. Plus, many persons already find truth and meaning in their current churches. Or, perhaps a Catholic presented our faith with a condescending and superior attitude which made the prospective convert decide that Catholicism was not for him. There are so many variables, I believe a more generous view is appropriate.
 
Upvote 0

St_Barnabus

Secular Carmelite OCDS
Jun 6, 2008
1,822
394
Midwest USA
✟54,616.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
St_Barnabus,

Yes, and I am a example of one such person who remains unconvinced.

However, I will say that my extensive discussions with Catholics on CAF (you have mentioned my posts there) have had a profound impact on my life and my beliefs.

There's just a little leap left after the giant steps you have already taken, and I have no doubt that one day you will be sitting at table rejoicing with us as we celebrate your espousals with the Lord of your heart.

Maybe this is from the Spirit, I don't know, but I was thinking about the origin of the bible. I don't think there's a soul alive that doesn't believe it is the true revelation and word of God. God did not dictate to his servants who held pen in hand wriiting down his words, but it was through profound inspiration from the Holy Spirit communing with men that caused the books to be committed to writing.

But who wrote? Yes .. ordinary men. Now if ordinary men can infallibly understand God speak as they wrote the sacred books, why can't men who are specifically chosen by God infallibly transmit certain truths in Councils and encyclicals? I don't see the difference, honestly. If I trust the bible is true, though coming through man, I can also believe God can convey his truth through the Pope, successors of Peter .. especially since Jesus made a solemn promise that HE would be with them when they had a matter to teach the faithful. There would be no error, just as the bible has no error.

Another thought struck me, too, with the story of Emmaus in Luke. The disciples had walked with Jesus after his resurrection, although their eyes were closed to recognizing him. As he shared the scriptures and prophecies with them on the road, it occured to me that scripture alone, as they were listening to it, was not the means of opening their eyes. They finally understood ONLY in the breaking of the bread. We read that their hearts were melting and burning with joy .. and the KNEW Him, intimately!

Not sure why I'm sharing this, but I must decrease here that the Lord may increase and speak to your spirit as only He can. May God bless you with the hunger of the Emmaus disciples and fill you with joy.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
24,939
6,053
North Carolina
✟273,664.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
What's stopping salvation outside the Church?

If it's nothing and my question is inert, then what does the Church mean by "no salvation outside of the Church"?
Biblically, the Church is the body of Christ, those in Christ by saving faith.

Therefore, there is no salvation outside the Church.

In the faith,
Clare
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Rhamiel

Member of the Round Table
Nov 11, 2006
41,182
9,432
ohio
✟241,111.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Biblically, the Church is the body of Christ, those in Christ by saving faith.

Therefore, there is no salvation outside the Church.

In the faith,
Clare

that is what I have been trying to say

the Church is the Body of Christ

those outside the Church are outside the Body of Christ

all those who are saved are united to the Church
baptism is the normal way that people enter the Church
 
Upvote 0

Irenaeus

Sub tuum praesidium confugimus!
May 16, 2004
6,574
518
USA
✟18,468.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Biblically, the Church is the body of Christ, those in Christ by saving faith.

Therefore, there is no salvation outside the Church.

In the faith,
Clare

Doesn't get more simple than that, really. :thumbsup:

The hidden question behind all this then is: is that Church visible in nature or is it only spiritual?
 
Upvote 0

StThomasMore

Christian Democrat
Feb 27, 2011
1,584
95
✟17,251.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
It is not a royal road, as in "no bars held," but it is one that is possible. Haven't you read Lumen Gentium and the CCC regarding this?


Again, that was only true of the Reformation. The children far removed from that generation are not held culpable for the act of protesting and schism. This is why the Church has considered their plight as being very difficult to change from the catechesis they grew up with and learned to trust. Simply reading about Catholicism is not an automatic infusion of grace to accept it.

Yes and I prefer to read them in the context of Unam Sanctum. Which is a bull by the way, having the highest authority.

Urged by faith, we are obliged to believe and to maintain that the Church is one, holy, catholic, and also apostolic. We believe in her firmly and we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins, as the Spouse in the Canticles [Sgs 6:8] proclaims: 'One is my dove, my perfect one. She is the only one, the chosen of her who bore her,' and she represents one sole mystical body whose Head is Christ and the head of Christ is God [1 Cor 11:3]. In her then is one Lord, one faith, one baptism [Eph 4:5]. There had been at the time of the deluge only one ark of Noah, prefiguring the one Church, which ark, having been finished to a single cubit, had only one pilot and guide, i.e., Noah, and we read that, outside of this ark, all that subsisted on the earth was destroyed.

Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.


There is a difference between ignorance and negligence.

Since salvation is offered to all, it must be made concretely available to all." And, in admitting that it is concretely impossible for many people to have access to the Gospel message, - Pope John Paul II


In order to take effect, saving grace requires acceptance, cooperation, a yes to the divine gift. This acceptance is, at least implicitly, oriented to Christ and the Church. Thus it can also be said that sine ecclesia nulla salus--"without the Church there is no salvation." Belonging to the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, however implicitly and indeed mysteriously, is an essential condition for salvation.
- Pope John Paul II

Since protestants have concrete access to the gospel they cannot be invisibly ignorant. Inivisble ignorance is only regarding for people where there is no missionaries and no gospel message within the confines of their living quarters.

So they are culpable. Since they have access to the gospel. You cannot be under a banner of protesting(heresy/schism) and not be culpable. Protestants are in willful ignorance because the doctrines they hold were created to be polar antagonists of catholic doctrine.

Invisibly ignorant people are people who through no fault of their own, meaning absolute utter inability to hear or have access to the gospel, or have mental illness that makes them unable to understand

And even in these cases I would point more to Augustine's explanation of Limbo rather than a ticket to heaven, out of fear of making ignorance a road to salvation. Because if it truly is, it essentially makes hearing the gospel do the exact opposite of what it is supposed to.

You cannot be on a plane with one foot on the plane and the other outside the plane(just baptism with no Church). Nor can one be outside Noah's Ark and survive. The Church is a figure of Noah's Ark.

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa, I-II, q. 76, a. 1, a. 3, Whether ignorance can be the cause of sin?:

“It is clear that not every kind of ignorance is the cause of a sin, but that alone which removes the knowledge which would prevent the sinful act. …This may happen on the part of the ignorance itself, because, to wit, this ignorance is voluntary, either directly, as
when a man wishes of set purpose to be ignorant of certain things that he may sin the more freely; or indirectly, as when a man, through stress of work or other occupations, neglects to acquire the knowledge which would restrain him from sin. For such like negligence renders the ignorance itself voluntary and sinful, provided it be about matters one is *bound and able to know.”

*Catholics are bound (required) to learn and know their Faith. A sin against faith (often caused by willful ignorance) is the gravest of all sins according to St. Thomas Aquinas.

“Blindness is a kind of preamble to sin. Now sin has a twofold relation--to one thing directly, viz. to the sinner's damnation--to another, by reason of God’s mercy or providence, viz. that the sinner may be healed, in so far as God permits some to fall into sin, that by acknowledging their sin, they may be humbled and converted, as Augustine states (De Nat. et Grat. xxii). Therefore blindness, of its very nature, is directed to the damnation of those who are blinded; for which reason it is accounted an effect of reprobation. But, through God's mercy, temporary blindness is directed medicinally to the spiritual welfare of those who are blinded. This mercy, however, is not vouchsafed to all those who are blinded, but only to the predestinated, to whom ‘all things work together unto good’ (Romans 8:28). Therefore as regards some, blindness is directed to their healing; but as regards others, to their damnation; as Augustine says (De Quaest. Evang. iii). Every evil that God does, or permits to be done, is directed to some good; yet not always to the good of those in whom the evil is, but sometimes to the good of others, or of the whole universe: thus He directs the sin of tyrants to the good of the martyrs, and the punishment of the lost to the glory of His justice. God does not take pleasure in the loss of man, as regards the loss itself, but by reason of His justice, or of the good that ensues from the loss.” (1, 2, 79, 4)



 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

St_Barnabus

Secular Carmelite OCDS
Jun 6, 2008
1,822
394
Midwest USA
✟54,616.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Yes and I prefer to read them in the context of Unam Sanctum. Which is a bull by the way, having the highest authority.

*Catholics are bound (required) to learn and know their Faith. A sin against faith (often caused by willful ignorance) is the gravest of all sins according to St. Thomas Aquinas.

The bull you referenced cannot be held as paramount to the teachings which the Holy Spirit called forth in later Councils. I trust you are aware that this preceded the Reformation by two centuries, and therefore does not apply to the children born in generations many years afterward it.

Your other argument from St. Thomas, who lived in the 12th century, has no bearing on this, since non-Catholics are not held to the same standard, since they don't even know about it. Why are you dismissing Vatican II's precepts? Truth be told, I remember you from awhile back here on OBOB, though you have changed your identity, but the same dogmatism prevails.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

StThomasMore

Christian Democrat
Feb 27, 2011
1,584
95
✟17,251.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
There are many who, because of culture, background, education, social factors, marriage, church involvement, etc., may not be able to accept Catholicism. That is through no fault of their own. Or it might be that they could not adjust to the Mass, having been enculturated into worship music and the 50-minute sermon. There are a lot of factors involved. Plus, many persons already find truth and meaning in their current churches. Or, perhaps a Catholic presented our faith with a condescending and superior attitude which made the prospective convert decide that Catholicism was not for him. There are so many variables, I believe a more generous view is appropriate.

Those are not factors because they are factors that are in the the persons power to change and reflect on. Not being able to break from your mold is willfull ignorance because there is a interior refusal to look beyond their own mold.

The only one from your list that might be involved might be culture. In the case where a person grows up in a small pagan tribe in the middle of nowhere and he stays within his cultural circle his whole life without never hearing the gospel. This can be a case for invisible ignorance.

But a person who has a Catholic Church down the road. And has a sound mind and resources to reflect on and study, but simply does not want to because he just cannot "adjust" to it is not invisible ignorance since he himself is putting up the barriers towards that grace.
 
Upvote 0