Invincible ignorance, Protestants, and you

[Confiteor_Deo]

I have never heard one sermon in any Catholic parish, in 20 years of being conscientious about sermons, ever stating the necessity of being Catholic for salvation. I’m NOT arguing that you or others haven’t.

I have attended ecumenical events in the past that included Catholic priests, and at times bishops, and never once did they proclaim the necessity of being Catholic to the non-RC Christians who were in attendance at these gatherings.

Whatever ecumenism meant in the past, NOW it means “our differences don’t matter.”

It is universal common sense that actions speak louder than words. That is a 101 sort of logic. There are plenty of words stating the necessity of being Catholic. I’d love to see action from the modern hierarchy. Because so far, they don’t seem to preach that message- NOT saying because they reject it- maybe they are just too focused on secular salvation via Social Justice and Climate action.

However, the dogma of the Catholic Church never changes and is forever mandated for Catholics to believe. It is a dogma that outside of the Catholic Church, there is no salvation. This will never change no matter what the Bishops do or say, including the Holy Father, because it is from the deposit of faith given to us by God.

In my old parish, I didn’t here a word of hell or the Church being the true Church. Did I believe it to no longer be something I should believe? No, since I read that the Church herself teaches it still. If you went to traditional Catholic churches, you would hear about the Church being the only source of salvation. Modern Bishops & priests usually focus mostly on trivial things like immigration and the death penalty, but that doesn’t mean abortion and sodomite unions are no longer immoral. It is simply the choice of the clergy to disregard these (some of them anyway).

 

[Gorgias]

With all due respect, you most likely can’t point to one time when Pope Francis has called the Roman Catholic Church the “One True Faith,” and specifically that it is necessary for salvation for people to belong to the Roman Catholic Church.

Again, you’re building a straw man here – requiring a certain phrase or two to be used in order for you to conclude that Francis is witnessing to the truth of the Catholic Church. Have you read Lumen Fidei? Especially paragraph 40 and following – here, he’s talking about the ways that the Church teaches the truth (Apostolic Tradition and sacraments). What Church teaches Sacred Tradition? What Church teaches the seven sacraments? The Catholic Church. I’m hoping you can see, outremer, that what you call ‘crickets’ is actually an exposition of the faith that doesn’t run around screaming ‘heretic!’ or ‘convert or burn!’, but rather, teaches the truth gently and without compromise. Do we need to shout from the treetops “ONE TRUE FAITH!” if we want to teach the one true faith? Of course not. And, when we teach the faith, gently and with love, we are witnessing to the truth of Christ that’s found in the Catholic Church.

As a Church, we do not seek the conversion of non-Catholics to the Roman Catholic Church, because in essence most of them belong to the mystical Body of Christ.

But, we do seek conversion. Just not in a way that would be perceived negatively as ‘proselytizing’.

I know you are passionate about your faith, which is noble. If you believe it is necessary to convert non-Catholics to the Roman Catholic Church, go forth and evangelize. You will not find this objective among the clergy and the Vatican.

Sure I will. Just not in the way that you think we’ll find it.

 

[Vico]

I’ve been reading all I can on Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus (No Salvation Outside the Church).

To what degree does invincible ignorance befall Protestants? I’m the only Catholic at my job and the rest are all evangelical/pentecostal types. They all seem to “know” about the Catholic Church, but would rather attend their various Protestant services.

Does invincble ignorance lie within them to a degree that they are included/excluded wtih the nulla salus belief?

Catholic Encyclopedia
Taking account of the person in whom the error exists, it is said to be either vincible or invincible. Error is deemed to be invincible when, in spite of what is called moral diligence in the premises, it still persists. This may happen either because one has never been touched with any doubt as to the validity of one’s stand, or as to the necessity of an inquiry, or it may be that one having, with full honesty of purpose, used such efforts as are demanded by the importance of the question at issue, is nevertheless unable to discover the truth. Much depends on the value to be attached to the phrase “moral diligence”. It is not easy to state it in any set formula, unless it be this, that it is the diligence which prudent persons are accustomed to bringing to bear upon the settlement of like matters. This notion may be set forth more in detail by the following considerations:

• The moral diligence required does not mean that a person is to have recourse to every conceivable expedient.
• It does imply that the endeavours made by an agent, to set himself right, should be such as are exacted by the seriousness of the business involved, as well as bear a proper ratio to his capacity and resources.

Error is reckoned morally vincible as often as it is chargeable to the failure to exercise these ordinary and necessary precautions.
Delany, J. (1909). Error. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
newadvent.org/cathen/05525a.htm

 

[jmr_1985]

I have never heard one sermon in any Catholic parish, in 20 years of being conscientious about sermons, ever stating the necessity of being Catholic for salvation. I’m NOT arguing that you or others haven’t.

I have attended ecumenical events in the past that included Catholic priests, and at times bishops, and never once did they proclaim the necessity of being Catholic to the non-RC Christians who were in attendance at these gatherings.

Whatever ecumenism meant in the past, NOW it means “our differences don’t matter.”

It is universal common sense that actions speak louder than words. That is a 101 sort of logic. There are plenty of words stating the necessity of being Catholic. I’d love to see action from the modern hierarchy. Because so far, they don’t seem to preach that message- NOT saying because they reject it- maybe they are just too focused on secular salvation via Social Justice and Climate action.

There has been much false ecumenism since the council. That doesn’t change the teachings of the Church. It usually takes 50 to 100 years to digest the teachings of a council. Doesn’t mean Protestants aren’t our brothers and sisters by Baptism. But, that doesn’t mean the Church’s teachings have changed either.

JMR

 

[Memaw]

It is lamentable to see how many Catholics have left the Church and even more lamentable to see how many within the Church are heretical. I say that the hierarchy is what is culpable for the great damage that has been done in the Church over the years both from their silence and their spread of heresy. Now the laity must take up the job of fixing the mess.

Many lapsed Catholics return to their Catholic Faith after they see how confusing the other denominations are. What is really amazing is how many Protestant ministers are becoming Catholic after they study the Early Church Fathers and Sacred Scriptures, and the TRUTH of what the Catholic Church really teaches and believes. Especially Apostolic Succession, the REAL Presence of Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament, the authority of the Pope, and all 7 Sacraments!!! Watch “Journey Home” on Monday nights at 7 pm CST and reruns at noon on weekdays CST. On EWTN, Catholic Cable Network. God Bless, Memaw

 

[AttendeDomine]

It’s not our business to try to judge the souls of anyone to make a determination as to whether they are in a state of grace, whether they are holy, whether they are invincibly ignorant, or anything else of that sort. That’s a question for God, and frankly, meddling too much in all of this can be seeking knowledge that is beyond our state in life.

Fr. Hardon defined **vincible **ignorance like this:

Lack of knowledge for which a person is morally responsible. It is culpable ignorance because it could be cleared up if the person used sufficient diligence. One is said to be simply (but culpably) ignorant if one fails to make enough effort to learn what should be known; guilt then depends on one’s lack of effort to clear up the ignorance. That person is crassly ignorant when the lack of knowledge is not directly willed but rather due to neglect or laziness; as a result the guilt is somewhat lessened, but in grave matters a person would still be gravely responsible. A person has affected ignorance when one deliberately fosters it in order not to be inhibited in what one wants to do; such ignorance is gravely wrong when it concerns serious matters. (Etym. Latin vincibilis, easily overcome; ignorantia, want of knowledge or information.)

Those are the principles of the matter. Going beyond those principles, and making applications in a given person’s life, is not something we have sufficient information to determine. It is our business to pray for non-Catholics, to evangelize them, and to have hope in God’s mercy even for those souls who are not Catholic.

 

[AttendeDomine]

I have attended ecumenical events in the past that included Catholic priests, and at times bishops, and never once did they proclaim the necessity of being Catholic to the non-RC Christians who were in attendance at these gatherings.

Whatever ecumenism meant in the past, NOW it means “our differences don’t matter.”

Non sequitur. One method of evangelization instead of another does not imply that the Church thinks that differences don’t matter.

Catholics are perfectly entitled to evangelize non-Catholics through their lives, rather than outright through cliches and scripted openings, and by making themselves available to answer questions should they come up.

Not everyone enjoys being brow-beat and attacked based on whether they belong to that religion or that one. People don’t appreciate being approached in a way which comes across as triumphalistic and judgmental. Frankly, that sort of thing makes many individuals instantly turn away their attention. Being a living witness of salt and light is a wonderful way to entice non-Catholics to seek the fullness of truth, and this is the present focus of the Church.

It is our job as Catholics to evangelize our neighbor without giving them outright reasons to ignore us before we can even get started. I’m sorry, but approaching someone with a, “Hey, are ya saved, brother?! Let me tell ya about how you can avoid burning in hell forever by joining your local RCIA right now!” won’t work for 95% of the modern, Western world.

 

[outremer]

I’ve spoken my piece. I learned years ago that arguing with convinced, passionate people is a forlorn task.

I have a challenge for you all who still believe that the Catholic Church actively seeks the conversions of non-Catholics through active evangelization efforts:

Call your local diocesan office, and ask them if the diocese would be willing to host active evangelization efforts that seek to bring non-RC Christians into the confines of the official Roman Catholic Church. Ask them if they would support an effort to go door to door, especially to non-Catholic churches, to spread the news that being Catholic is necessary for salvation.

I bet you all will be surprised by the responses from the dioceses.

 

[Deo_Gratias42]

For me, two passages- one from the Bible, one from Vatican II- solve this problem.

Mark 9:38-39

Second Vatican Council- Decree on Ecumenism - Unitatis Redintegratio

In this modern age, you won’t find the Pope, Cardinals, bishops, and even priests going out and evangelizing Protestants, Orthodox, or other non-Roman Catholic Christians. The spirit of the Counter-Reformation is deceased; it does not exist now.

Our differences as Christians no longer matter, praise God.

Indifference is still a heresy. All Vatican II did was restate that those who are validly baptized are Christians. They’re our separated brethren. The No Salvation Outside of the Catholic Church is still a dogma. Everyone who is saved (which Jesus told us is not many), are saved through the Catholic Church. Those who die in the state of mortal sin go to Hell (another dogma). The normal means to get back into the state of grace which Jesus himself established is the sacrament of penance. Only the Orthodox Christians have apostolic succession and have access to this sacrament. For those who don’t have the sacraments, it’s going to be very difficult to be saved.

 

[thistle]

Silence speaks volumes. Tens of millions of Catholics have abandoned the Church, primarily for Evangelical denominations. And yet, I hear crickets from the Pope and the Vatican.

Is it acceptable for Catholics to become Non-Catholics? I’d say the silence from our hierarchy is very disconcerting.

Obviously not. It is a sin of grave matter to walk away from the Church. What silence from our hierarchy? Church teaching is clear.

CCC 2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. "Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."

 

[outremer]

Indifference is still a heresy. All Vatican II did was restate that those who are validly baptized are Christians. They’re our separated brethren. The No Salvation Outside of the Catholic Church is still a dogma. Everyone who is saved (which Jesus told us is not many), are saved through the Catholic Church. Those who die in the state of mortal sin go to Hell (another dogma). The normal means to get back into the state of grace which Jesus himself established is the sacrament of penance. Only the Orthodox Christians have apostolic succession and have access to this sacrament. For those who don’t have the sacraments, it’s going to be very difficult to be saved.

You’re preaching to the crowd my friend. You need to send such messages to the bishops, and other clerics, who participate in ecumenical services where the “One True Catholic Faith” is not openly proclaimed to the non-RC Christian attendants.

If the Church still does actually believe in the necessity of converting non-Catholics to the Roman Catholic Church, then they are doing an astoundingly horrid job of accomplishing this task. Catholics have abandoned the Church by the tens of millions.

Why the Catholic Church is losing Latin America, and how it’s trying to get it back

A religious revolution is underway in Latin America. Between 1900 and 1960, 90% of Latin Americans were Catholics. But in the last fifty years, that figure has slumped to 69%, according to a recent survey by the Pew Research Center (from which most of the data in this article are taken). The continent may still be home to 425 million Catholics—40% of the world’s total—but the Vatican’s grip is slipping.

Massive declines. Their modern “Evangelization” strategy has obviously failed.

 

[jmr_1985]

You’re preaching to the crowd my friend. You need to send such messages to the bishops, and other clerics . . .
Their modern “Evangelization” strategy has obviously failed.

Outremer, what I think you are failing to see is that we don’t necessarily disagree with you. However, just because certain bishops and clerics are currently behaving in a certain way, does not mean they are correct. CA Live did a radio program entitled “False Ecumenism” at some point within the last few years. If you want to know the teaching of the Catholic Church on this issue you should look at Lumen gentium, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, written at the Second Vatican Council:

This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that **the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. **Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.

See also the Catechism of the Catholic Church, published first in 1992:

“Outside the Church there is no salvation”

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. **Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:**

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

848 “Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men.”

Thus, when you look to the documents of the Church, the teaching is clear: Outside of the Church, there is no salvation. However, Christians (and others) in an imperfect communion with the Church may still obtain salvation if they are ignorant that the Catholic Church is the one, true Church. That being said, “the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men.” Just because the Church is arguably doing a bad job at this, doesn’t change the obligation. That doesn’t mean that we beat people over the head about becoming Catholic. Still, we have an obligation to evangelize ALL about the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

 

[Vico]

Indifference is still a heresy. All Vatican II did was restate that those who are validly baptized are Christians. They’re our separated brethren. The No Salvation Outside of the Catholic Church is still a dogma. Everyone who is saved (which Jesus told us is not many), are saved through the Catholic Church. Those who die in the state of mortal sin go to Hell (another dogma). The normal means to get back into the state of grace which Jesus himself established is the sacrament of penance. Only the Orthodox Christians have apostolic succession and have access to this sacrament. For those who don’t have the sacraments, it’s going to be very difficult to be saved.

Exactly what I was taught in the Baltimore Catechism (No. 4) shown below.
121. Q. Are all bound to belong to the Church? A. All are bound to belong to the Church, and he who knows the Church to be the true Church and remains out of it, cannot be saved. …
Suppose, however, that there is a non-Catholic who firmly believes that the church to which he belongs is the true Church, and who has never — even in the past — had the slightest doubt of that fact — what will become of him?

If he was validly baptized and never committed a mortal sin, he will be saved; because, believing himself a member of the true Church, he was doing all he could to serve God according to his knowledge and the dictates of his conscience. But if ever he committed a mortal sin, his salvation would be very much more difficult. A mortal sin once committed remains on the soul till it is forgiven. Now, how could his mortal sin be forgiven? Not in the Sacrament of Penance, for the Protestant does not go to confession; and if he does, his minister — not being a true priest — has no power to forgive sins. Does he know that without confession it requires an act of perfect contrition to blot out mortal sin, and can he easily make such an act? What we call contrition is often only imperfect contrition — that is, sorrow for our sins because we fear their punishment in Hell or dread the loss of Heaven. If a Catholic — with all the instruction he has received about how to make an act of perfect contrition and all the practice he has had in making such acts — might find it difficult to make an act of perfect contrition after having committed a mortal sin, how much difficulty will not a Protestant have in making an act of perfect contrition, who does not know about this requirement and who has not been taught to make continued acts of perfect contrition all his life. It is to be feared either he would not know of this necessary means of regaining God’s friendship, or he would be unable to elicit the necessary act of perfect contrition, and thus the mortal sin would remain upon his soul and he would die an enemy of God.

If, then, we found a Protestant who never committed a mortal sin after Baptism, and who never had the slightest doubt about the truth of his religion, that person would be saved; because, being baptized, he is a member of the Church, and being free from mortal sin he is a friend of God and could not in justice be condemned to Hell. Such a person would attend Mass and receive the Sacraments if he knew the Catholic Church to be the only true Church.

I am giving you an example, however, that is rarely found, except in the case of infants or very small children baptized in Protestant sects.

 

[Gorgias]

I’ve spoken my piece. I learned years ago that arguing with convinced, passionate people is a forlorn task.

Oddly enough, that’s my reaction to this thread, too…

I have a challenge for you all who still believe that the Catholic Church actively seeks the conversions of non-Catholics through active evangelization efforts:

Call your local diocesan office, and ask them if the diocese would be willing to host active evangelization efforts that seek to bring non-RC Christians into the confines of the official Roman Catholic Church. Ask them if they would support an effort to go door to door, especially to non-Catholic churches, to spread the news that being Catholic is necessary for salvation.

I don’t know if you even can see it, but do you realize you’re still making the same mistake? You’re confusing the general notion of ‘ecumenism’ with the specific notion of ‘ecumenism in the way that outremer would do it if he were the one in charge.’ The two are distinctly different notions, but you treat them as if they’re the same – that is, as if your opinion on how ecumenism should happen is the only way to do ecumenism. As soon as they plop a miter down on your head or mine, we can start making those kinds of statements. Until then, you might consider that your assertions border on an uncharitable calumny toward the leaders of our Church.

I bet you all will be surprised by the responses from the dioceses.

Nah… not at all. In fact, I wonder if they’d respond, “outremer? Is that you again? We already told you – we disagree that your way is the best way to do ecumenism…”

 

[outremer]

Nah… not at all. In fact, I wonder if they’d respond, “outremer? Is that you again? We already told you – we disagree that your way is the best way to do ecumenism…”

How “I” do ecumenism? That’s a strawman.

Is the “best” way to “do” ecumenism to ignore the errors of the non-Catholic religions? Is praying with non-Catholic religions the best way to “do” ecumenism? How about saying a prayer at the Western Wall, or the Blue Mosque, or a Pentecostal church in Italy? Is that why conversions to Catholicism are…well, not soaring. In fact, millions of Catholics are abandoning the Church on a seemingly yearly basis. Millions who don’t abandon the Church hold views that outright contradict the Faith.

How’s that modern way of “doing” ecumenism working? Are millions converting now because Pope Francis is the Pontiff? If this modern ecumenism works so well, why isn’t most of the western world Catholic by now?

 

[outremer]

How do you convert people without telling them that their current views are wrong? Eventually you have to be “negative” about their beliefs, no matter how polite your presentation. Opponents of conversion have conflated “proselytism” and “evangelization” to give the latter a negative connotation.

Were the major multi-faith, multi-denominational prayer gatherings at Assisi used to spread the truth of Catholicism? I’m sorry, the list goes on.

 

[Gorgias]

How “I” do ecumenism? That’s a strawman.

No it isn’t – it’s precisely what you’re suggesting, whether you recognize it or not. You’re giving us your ideas on how it should be done (albeit implicitly), and castigating Church leadership for not doing it that way.

Is the “best” way to “do” ecumenism to ignore the errors of the non-Catholic religions?

No, that’s what’s not in play: what you’re asking for is the Church to address these errors publicly. Do you really think that’s the most effective way to bring about change in people’s hearts? After all, I keep telling you about the ‘error’ in your logic here, and I don’t see you jumping up and down and thanking me for pointing out the error of your ways. Do you really think that non-Catholic Christians would act any differently? :nope:

Is praying with non-Catholic religions the best way to “do” ecumenism? How about saying a prayer at the Western Wall, or the Blue Mosque, or a Pentecostal church in Italy?

You seem to misunderstand what ecumenism is and what it isn’t, as well. Ecumenism is only about bringing our non-Catholic Christian brothers and sisters to an understanding of the Truth. Encounters with believers in Judaism and in Islam isn’t ‘ecumenism’, it’s ‘inter-religious dialogue’. The goals of the latter are different than those of the former.

How’s that modern way of “doing” ecumenism working? Are millions converting now because Pope Francis is the Pontiff? If this modern ecumenism works so well, why isn’t most of the western world Catholic by now?

Again, if you know of a way to make it work – and can substantiate that method – we’re all ears. Otherwise, simply complaining “we’re not anathematizing heretics vigorously enough any more these days!” isn’t going to help…

 

[punisherthunder]

It sounds more and more like there’s no salvation outside the Church. I found this from Saint John Vianney :

The Cure of Ars once gave a medal to a Protestant who visited him, who exclaimed: “Dear sir, you have given a medal to one who is a heretic, at least I am a heretic from your point of view. But although we are not of the same religion, I hope we shall both one day be in Heaven.” The holy priest took the gentleman’s hand in his own, and giving him a look which seemed to reach his very soul, answered him, “Alas! my friend, we cannot be together in Heaven, unless we have begun to live so in this world. Death makes no change in that. As the tree falls so shall it lie. Jesus Christ has said, ‘He that does not hear the Church, let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican.’ And He said again, ‘There shall be one fold and one shepherd,’ and He made St. Peter the chief shepherd of His flock.” Then, in a voice full of sweetness, he added, “My dear friend, there are not two ways of serving Jesus Christ; there is only one good way, and that is to serve Him as He Himself wishes to be served.” Saying this, the priest left him. But these words sank deeply into the good man’s heart, and led him to renounce the errors in which he had been brought up, and he became a fervent Catholic.

If anyone has more quotes like this from the saints about Protestants, please share them.

 

[Gorgias]

How do you convert people without telling them that their current views are wrong?

You don’t convert them; the Holy Spirit converts them. Therefore, you don’t have to berate them, confront them, or “be ‘negative’” to them – you just tell them the truth, and you let the Holy Spirit work on their hearts.

Eventually you have to be “negative” about their beliefs, no matter how polite your presentation.

No you don’t. You just make the case for your beliefs, and leave it at that. They’ll come back to you with questions, sometimes. But, we don’t beat people up and expect them to to respond “thank you sir, may I have another?”…

Were the major multi-faith, multi-denominational prayer gatherings at Assisi used to spread the truth of Catholicism? I’m sorry, the list goes on.

If they were “multi-faith”, then they aren’t examples of ecumenism; they’re examples of inter-religious dialogue. Again, the goals of these two efforts aren’t the same.

 

[Confiteor_Deo]

If anyone has more quotes like this from the saints about Protestants, please share them.

I found a couple that could be applied to Protestants.

“No man can find salvation except in the Catholic Church. Outside the Catholic Church one can have everything except salvation. One can have honor, one can have the sacraments, one can sing alleluia, one can answer amen, one can have faith in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and preach it too, but never can one find salvation except in the Catholic Church.” -St. Augustine

“There is no entering into salvation outside the Church, just as in the time of the deluge there was none outside the ark, which denotes the Church.” -St. Thomas Aquinas