Fr. Ralph Martin - Will Many Be Saved?

[concretecamper]

I guess Original Sin and its effects are a bit outdated anyway.

 

[Rhamiel]

John 10:16 seems to imply differently or at least Christ says it explicitly that he has more than one fold.

I thought that "other sheep pen" was a reference to the Gentiles?
also He says they will become one flock
not dozens of different flocks that teach different things

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

I thought that "other sheep pen" was a reference to the Gentiles?
also He says they will become one flock
not dozens of different flocks that teach different things

One flock in heaven perhaps?

 

[concretecamper]

There is no contradiction, just a fuller and more mature understanding of the dogma.

Non-Christians are not left out in the cold. Read the Catechism as it deals with all this. I have already posted this, but I will post it again:

The Catechism gives the answer:




And again:

Posting the same paragraphs a second time doesn't make them more relevant to the discussion.

 

[concretecamper]

I thought that "other sheep pen" was a reference to the Gentiles?
also He says they will become one flock
not dozens of different flocks that teach different things

Yes, commentary on this passage tells us the other pen is the gentiles.

 

[BroIgnatius]

The Baptism by Blood and Baptism by Desire exceptions would appear in this age to apply to non-Christians only. I believe that said exceptions were originally applied by some, by no means all, Early Church Fathers regarding Christian candidates who had not yet been baptized and confirmed.

Yes, both can pertain to catechumens, who die by martyrdom or for any reason before they had a chance to be baptized. This still applies today.

 

[BroIgnatius]

Posting the same paragraphs a second time doesn't make them more relevant to the discussion.

Excuse me? Why the catty remark?

Apparently the same paragraphs did have to be posted again because they apparently were not read the first time, it seems. And these paragraphs are not only relevant, but are utterly relevant to the discussion. It answers the question.

 

[concretecamper]

Excuse me? Why the catty remark?

Apparently the same paragraphs did have to be posted again because they apparently were not read the first time, it seems. And these paragraphs are not only relevant, but are utterly relevant to the discussion. It answers the question.

Not snarky. I was just wondering why you would requote the same paragraphs. You may think that they address the issue at hand but I do not. I don't think God wants us to read between the lines.

 

[Rhamiel]

Excuse me? Why the catty remark?

Apparently the same paragraphs did have to be posted again because they apparently were not read the first time, it seems. And these paragraphs are not only relevant, but are utterly relevant to the discussion. It answers the question.

but this does not apply to those who reject the Catholic Church

 

[BroIgnatius]

Not snarky. I was just wondering why you would requote the same paragraphs. You may think that they address the issue at hand but I do not. I don't think God wants us to read between the lines.

This is not between the lines, what I quoted is Church teaching. Maybe you do not think those paragraphs apply, but the Church does and that is all that counts. However, it is the job of the Church to read between the lines (e.g., teachings on transubstantiation, Marian dogmas, and even some of the Christological doctrines and the Trinity are all reading between the lines)

If you do not understand how those paragraphs apply, I will be happy to explain.

 

[BroIgnatius]

but this does not apply to those who reject the Catholic Church

A person must reject the Catholic Church with full knowledge and no impairment of free will (no diminished capacity). That is what those paragraphs I quoted were about. A grave sin cannot be mortal without these two conditions, and the only people going to hell are those with mortal sin on their souls when they die.

1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God's law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.

In addition to unintentional ignorance the Church also mentions diminished responsibility that may remove imputability:

1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.

Then the Catechism gives three examples to demonstrate the principle of this diminished responsibility. These three examples are but examples. There are many other situations of diminished responsibility/impairment of the will (bold is my emphasis to point out the sentence referring to diminished responsibility):

The first is an example of an atheist who is impaired due to upbringing and other factors, such as psychological issues, and also poor example and testimony of Christians:

2125 Since it rejects or denies the existence of God, atheism is a sin against the virtue of religion. The imputability of this offense can be significantly diminished in virtue of the intentions and the circumstances. "Believers can have more than a little to do with the rise of atheism. To the extent that they are careless about their instruction in the faith, or present its teaching falsely, or even fail in their religious, moral, or social life, they must be said to conceal rather than to reveal the true nature of God and of religion."

The second example is of prostitutes who are impaired due to life circumstances, duress and other matters:

2355 Prostitution does injury to the dignity of the person who engages in it, reducing the person to an instrument of sexual pleasure. The one who pays sins gravely against himself: he violates the chastity to which his Baptism pledged him and defiles his body, the temple of the Holy Spirit. Prostitution is a social scourge. It usually involves women, but also men, children, and adolescents (The latter two cases involve the added sin of scandal.). While it is always gravely sinful to engage in prostitution, the imputability of the offense can be attenuated by destitution, blackmail, or social pressure.

The third example deals with people who are impaired by addiction, immaturity, acquired habit, and psychological issues:

2352 By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. "Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action."138 "The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose." For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of "the sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved."139

To form an equitable judgment about the subjects' moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety or other psychological or social factors that lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability.

 

[Basil the Great]

The OP began this discussion with a question and a statement that he/she did not want the EENS salvation doctrine to be discussed. Well, I thought at the time that there was no way that EENS could not be discussed and naturally it has been, to some extent anyway. Still, the question of this thread still seems to be on the table. Just how many will be saved - very few, few, many, most, all? I recall that a few saints predicted that few will be saved. I believe that one had a vision which said that yesterday thousands perished and that only 7 of them will be saved. Yes, I know that such visions are optional for believing in them or not. Still, it seems that none of us here care to express a view as to how many will be saved, myself included. Perhaps thinking about the question of this thread is enough to scare many of us? The thought that most of mankind could possibly be excluded from heaven is a frightening prospect.

 

[Rhamiel]

The OP began this discussion with a question and a statement that he/she did not want the EENS salvation doctrine to be discussed. Well, I thought at the time that there was no way that EENS could not be discussed and naturally it has been, to some extent anyway. Still, the question of this thread still seems to be on the table. Just how many will be saved - very few, few, many, most, all? I recall that a few saints predicted that few will be saved. I believe that one had a vision which said that yesterday thousands perished and that only 7 of them will be saved. Yes, I know that such visions are not optional for believing in them or not. Still, it seems that none of us here care to express a view as to how many will be saved, myself included. Perhaps thinking about the question of this thread is enough to scare many of us? The thought that most of mankind could possibly be excluded from heaven is a frightening prospect.

yes such prophetic visions are not binding

but when they line up in a general kind of consensus we should take them into serious consideration
so many great Saints have said that only a few would be saved, but of course, everyone thinks they know better then the Saints

 

[BroIgnatius]

What is OP? and what is EENS?

 

[Basil the Great]

EENS = Extra Ecclessiam Nulla Sallus = Outside the Church, There is no Salvation (the ancient salvation doctrine that goes back probably to the 2nd Century)
OP = Original Poster