-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
As an apostate, am I damned to hell?
- Thread starter lovernotafighter
- Start date
I think you're seeing ignorance as a means of salvation. No one goes to heaven because of ignorance--they go to Heaven with the help of God's grace by repenting of their sins and submitting themselves unconditionally to Him by faith. We are saved by grace through faith, hope, and charity, not by perfect knowledge (as some Gnostics claimed).
Again, the person who doesn't want to know has a disregard for truth that will exclude him from salvation. Knowledge of the Gospel cannot damn someone who would otherwise be saved, it fulfills the desires of one who would otherwise be saved--it is a great blessing because it promises the fulfillment of of the hope they had and therefore strengthens them to remain on the true path, now brightly illuminated before them, and against the temptation to give themselves up to sin. Those who would be otherwise damned--since they are irrepentant of their sins and do not love God (but rather adore creatures, for which there is no excuse for that) or do not unconditionally desire to conform themselves to His way and truth (ie His Logos)--are confronted sensibly by the Word of God in word and action which may inspire and re-open their hearts to the movements of grace.
There is no situation where knowledge of the Gospel would cause one to go from the state of grace to the state of damnation because an ignorant person with the state of mind and will that would suffice for salvation would strive to conform themselves to the truth when known--one who would not conform himself unconditionally to the truth when known would not be disposed to salvation in the first place. However, those not disposed to salvation may, upon hearing the Gospel and experiencing the charity of others, be inspired to amend their ways by receiving the graces and promptings they had hardened their hearts to. Knowledge of the Gospel can never make an just man unjust, but it can make an unjust man just.
Furthermore, the problem with saying only some people are offered the grace necessary for salvation is that it is contrary to the universal salvific will of God.
As St. Alphonsus Liguori said,
St. Alphonsus further explains that Baptism of Desire is de fide (the decrees he cites, from Trent and Pope Innocent III--he is not named but the Canon Apostolicam is from him--came after St. Augustine):
Implicit desire is one where the person is ignorant of the thing to be desired, but would desire if it were known.
These truths above, that God offers all men the means of salvation and that perfect knowledge is not absolutely necessary for salvation have been made explicit and repeated by the ordinary Magisterium of Popes, a General Council, and various Roman Congregations often, especially in the last few centuries, not to mention being held morally unanimously--and probably actually unanimously--among the college of bishops (it is also commonly held by theologians, including Doctors of the Church and various other Saints). These pronouncements require at the very least the religious submission of mind and will, which itself requires a presumption of truth and a very, very good reason to suspend assent (not just preferring a counter-opinion). One can speculate as to what St. Augustine's response would be to such consistent direction from Rome and the entire college of bishops given his actions in other matters in his own time.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
CreedIsChrist
Well-Known Member
also, you are not really an apostate. An apostate is someone who explicitly rejects God and Christ, atheists would essentially be apostates.
This is more related to whether you would be a schismatic(going to a sect the breaks away from the Church) or a heretic(an obstinate denial or perverting the dogmas of the Church).
Upvote
0
If you persist in apostasy, it's almost certain. One can't fool God, He knows even the most subtle thoughts and self-deceptions, etc..
If you truly want to avoid the damnation of hell, then pray about it and try. Your motives do not have to be perfect by any means.. You may feel no love at all for God or even His Church, or simply want to know if there is only one true Church of God, One true religion. Your primary reason and drive may only be to avoid hell and that reason alone - but this is Ok also, God understands this - this is why Christ instituted the Sacraments, to make up for what we lack in love or true sorrow borne of love.
If anyone wishes to avoid hell and go to heaven, even if he's unsure there really are such places, then he imposes upon himself an obligation to try as much as he can, according to his state in life, to this end, to truth.
And don't give up on praying honestly, for Faith, Hope and Charity.. For truth and even for love of God (if there be one in your uncertainty)... God wants to answer this prayer most of all! And the longer you pray for this, all the more great will be God's answer.
Christ would tell you; "Never do I weary of repentant sinners nor cease hoping for their return. And the greater your distress, the greater My welcome".
+++
Upvote
0
CreedIsChrist
Well-Known Member
Invisible ignorance does not equal a ticket to heaven! it may not be imputed against the person, but it does not mean one enters heaven because of it..
"Their inculpable (invincible) ignorance will not save them; but if they fear God and live up to their conscience, God, in His infinite mercy, will furnish them with the necessary means of salvation, even so as to send, if needed, an angel to instruct them in the Catholic Faith, rather than let them perish through inculpable ignorance." (St. Thomas Aquinas)
Inculpable or invincible ignorance has never been and will never be a means of salvation. To be saved, it is necessary to be justified, or to be in the state of sanctifying grace. In order to obtain sanctifying grace, it is necessary to have the proper dispositions for justification; that is, true divine faith in at least the necessary truths of salvation, confident hope in the divine Savior, sincere sorrow for sin, together with the firm purpose of doing all that God has commanded
The teaching of the Church, as recorded in the Catechism, section 1261, is
... "As regards children who have died without baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them"
Now based on my understanding of theology, I believe Limbo is the best theological conclusion for invisible ignorance. Because it does not condemn the person, but neither does it reward them for something that is only possible by justification and sanctification in Christ.
I prefer the Baltimore Catechism.
What about when Rome spoke Unam Sanctum??
"Invincible ignorance," says St. Thomas Aquinas, "is a punishment for sin." (De Infid. q. x., art. 1.)
In his Allocution on Dec. 9, 1854: Pope Pius IX. says: -
"It is not without sorrow that we have learned another not less pernicious error, which has been spread in several parts of Catholic countries, and has been imbibed by many Catholics, who are of opinion that all those who are not at all members of the true Church of Christ, can be saved: Hence they often discuss the question concerning the future fate and condition of those who die without having professed the Catholic faith, and give the most frivolous reasons in support of their wicked opinion . . . . .
"We must mention and condemn again that most pernicious error, which has been imbibed by certain Catholics, who are of the opinion that those people who live in error and have not the true faith, and are separated from Catholic unity, may obtain life everlasting. Now this opinion is most contrary to Catholic faith, as is evident from the plain words of our Lord, (Matt. xviii. 17 ; Mark xvi. 16; Luke x. 16; John iii. 18) as also from the words of St. Paul, (II. Tim. Iii. 11) and of St. Peter (II. Peter. ii. 1). To entertain opinions contrary to this Catholic faith is to be an impious wretch.
"We therefore again reprobate, proscribe, and condemn all and every one of these perverse opinions and doctrines, and it is our absolute will and command that all sons of the Catholic Church shall hold them as reprobated, proscribed, and condemned. It belongs to our Apostolic office to rouse your Episcopal zeal and watchfulness to do all in your power to banish from the minds of the people such impious and pernicious opinions, which lead to indifference of religion, which we behold spreading more and more, to the ruin of souls. Oppose all your energy and zeal to these errors and employ zealous priests to impugn and annihilate them, and to impress very deeply upon the minds and hearts of the faithful the great dogma of our most holy religion, that salvation can be had only in the Catholic faith. Often exhort the clergy and the faithful to give thanks to God for the great gift of the Catholic faith."
St. Augustine says. (Lib. de correptione et gratia, c. 5 et 6; Sum. 22. q. ii art. v.) "And the ignorance of these things of salvation, the knowledge of which men did not care to have, is, without doubt, a sin for them; but for those who were not able to acquire such knowledge, the want of it is a punishment for their sins", says St. Augustine; hence both are justly condemned, and neither the one nor the other has a just excuse for being lost." (Epist. ad Sixtum, Edit. Maur. 194, cap. vi., n. 27.)
Upvote
0
I do not believe I ever said invincible ignorance is a free ticket.
What I said is, it is valid and only God can judge it. I can't look at a person and say, "poor thing, you are just invincibly ignorant, that is why you reject", nor can I say, "you heretic, you are culpable of your ignorance!"
Only God knows, none of us do, not even the person themselves.
What I said is, it is valid and only God can judge it. I can't look at a person and say, "poor thing, you are just invincibly ignorant, that is why you reject", nor can I say, "you heretic, you are culpable of your ignorance!"
Only God knows, none of us do, not even the person themselves.
Upvote
0
I think it bears pointing out that when Eastern Churches returned to communion they have always been allowed to venerate Saints who lived in schism, yet where fighting against Rome was not part of the reason they were venerated.
Also, St. Augustine explains who should be called a heretic at the beginning of this letter:
CHURCH FATHERS: Letter 44 (St. Augustine)
Here's a good letter from the Holy Office under Pius XII that explains these concepts well:
APPENDIX E: The First “Ottaviani Intervention”
Also, even in regards to infants, we can't say with certainty. Even St. Thomas said they could be sanctified in the womb as a kind of privilege:
"Children while in the mother's womb have not yet come forth into the world to live among other men. Consequently they cannot be subject to the action of man, so as to receive the sacrament, at the hands of man, unto salvation. They can, however, be subject to the action of God, in Whose sight they live, so as, by a kind of privilege, to receive the grace of sanctification; as was the case with those who were sanctified in the womb."
SUMMA THEOLOGICA: Those who receive Baptism (Tertia Pars, Q. 68)
Anyway, all the major theological manuals approved by the Church under the same Pontiffs of the 18th century who made strong counters against the religious indifferentism of the Liberals, made provisions for those in good faith and the possibility of their salvation.
Also, just be careful with just cutting and pasting from certain internet cites and publications like cfnews, etc. as they often don't provide the context or they give things a meaning not given by orthodox theologians through the centuries
Also, St. Augustine explains who should be called a heretic at the beginning of this letter:
CHURCH FATHERS: Letter 44 (St. Augustine)
Here's a good letter from the Holy Office under Pius XII that explains these concepts well:
APPENDIX E: The First “Ottaviani Intervention”
Also, even in regards to infants, we can't say with certainty. Even St. Thomas said they could be sanctified in the womb as a kind of privilege:
"Children while in the mother's womb have not yet come forth into the world to live among other men. Consequently they cannot be subject to the action of man, so as to receive the sacrament, at the hands of man, unto salvation. They can, however, be subject to the action of God, in Whose sight they live, so as, by a kind of privilege, to receive the grace of sanctification; as was the case with those who were sanctified in the womb."
SUMMA THEOLOGICA: Those who receive Baptism (Tertia Pars, Q. 68)
Anyway, all the major theological manuals approved by the Church under the same Pontiffs of the 18th century who made strong counters against the religious indifferentism of the Liberals, made provisions for those in good faith and the possibility of their salvation.
Also, just be careful with just cutting and pasting from certain internet cites and publications like cfnews, etc. as they often don't provide the context or they give things a meaning not given by orthodox theologians through the centuries
Upvote
0
The thing with infants, seriously, there is no official position, Thomas and Augustine speculates.
I'm not saying we should not give consideration to their opinion but this is just an area that is not defined and won't be because Christ himself was silent on it.
I'm not saying we should not give consideration to their opinion but this is just an area that is not defined and won't be because Christ himself was silent on it.
Upvote
0
fated
The White Hart
Love of one sin in particular, or you could say a rejection of the responsibility to control oneself is often a barrier for young (and other ages too) men with regards to understanding the Catholic Church, that is, an impediment to knowing God. This is unfortunate, as a good Confessor should be able to guide us to and show the Father to us, through our suffering and failure.
Most or even all the people I've know who leave the Church really don't know what it teaches, or disagrees with its teachings (such as the Catechism) by stating them in ways that are not honest.
Most or even all the people I've know who leave the Church really don't know what it teaches, or disagrees with its teachings (such as the Catechism) by stating them in ways that are not honest.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
