Invincibly ignorant?

[filius_Immacula]

If a protestant is a anticatholic, but o,nly hates a caricature of the church, and does not understand the churchis necessary for salvation, is that still invincible ignorance

 

[DavidFilmer]

It’s really not possible to say. We don’t actually know how invincible ignorance works. We know it’s possible, but we don’t know if it has ever applied to anyone (or if it has applied to many). We don’t know what criteria God uses to make this decision.

That’s why we should take little comfort in the idea of invincible ignorance. We should not neglect the Great Commission to spread the Gospel and Baptize the world because we think that invincible ignorance will cover people that we neglected to evangelize.

Baptism (with confession, if necessary) is an absolute guarantee. Invincible ignorance is a complete mystery.

 

[filius_Immacula]

True true, so much of salvation is mysterious hehe. I guess we mustpersevere untilthe end because who knows God’s mind

 

[DavidFilmer]

True true, so much of salvation is mysterious hehe.

Well, there’s nothing mysterious about Baptism. At least not about the end result (saving Grace).

Baptism is the ordinary means of salvation, and it offers a 100% guarantee of success.

 

[filius_Immacula]

Amen to that, thank God for the sacraments. I just ask these things because many of ky beloved family members are protestant andi. Worry for teir salvatio constantly

 

[DavidFilmer]

many [of] beloved family members are protestant [and I worry] for [their salvation] constantly

If they’re protestant then they have probably received valid Christian Baptism (most protestants have). This is the ordinary means of salvation, whether you’re Catholic or not.

The problem is whether they have committed any mortal sins since then. They don’t have recourse to Sacramental Confession.

There’s an ongoing and centuries-old debate about whether it is "easy’ or “hard” for a person of good will to even commit mortal sin. I’m not talking about obstinately wicked people, but your workaday Christian who wants to lead a good life but falters along the way.

And nobody knows what side of that debate is true.

But, if it’s “hard” to fall into mortal sin and your relatives are eventually saved, they will be saved by the Grace of their Christian Baptism, not by any invincible ignorance.

 

[filius_Immacula]

Amen to that,^^
And thank you this is very comforting

 

[MarcoPolo]

If a protestant is a anticatholic, but o,nly hates a caricature of the church, and does not understand the churchis necessary for salvation, is that still invincible ignorance

I would answer it conditionally. If that person is seeking the truth earnestly, but has been polluted by false caricatures through no fault of his own, then, yes, he could be invincibly ignorant. But if that person to some degree or other accepts the false caricature when his conscience somewhere tells him it is a false caricature, or suspects it would be right to investigate the validity of the caricature further and refuses, then that person might be held quite culpable for his refusal to embrace the Church. The criteria is described in the Catechism 846-848.

 

[benjohnson]

That’s why we should take little comfort in the idea of invincible ignorance. We should not neglect the Great Commission to spread the Gospel and Baptize the world because we think that invincible ignorance will cover people that we neglected to evangelize.

As a Lutheran, I say AMEN!

I appreciate any and all Catholics sharing the Gospel to any and all.

While I’m obviously not Catholic, we both share a mutual joy and obligation to share what God has given to this fallen world.

If indeed the idea of invincible ignorance can’t be relied on, then I say “What are you waiting for - go forth and proclaim the Gospel.”

 

[DavidFilmer]

If indeed the idea of invincible ignorance can’t be relied on, then I say “What are you waiting for - go forth and proclaim the Gospel.”

As a Catholic, I say AMEN.

 

[Latinitas]

If a protestant is a anticatholic, but o,nly hates a caricature of the church, and does not understand the churchis necessary for salvation, is that still invincible ignorance

Yes, provided that such hatred is not wilful (he or she is brought up in it). In which case, yes, it is inculpable on his or her part.

Benedicat Deus,
Latinitas

 

[Vico]

If a protestant is a anti-catholic, but only hates a caricature of the church, and does not understand the church is necessary for salvation, is that still invincible ignorance

Either the evil committed by the person can be imputed to him - with vincible ignorance - or cannot be imputed to him - with invincible ignorance.

So acting against conscience is imputable, and also sinful acts due to not making the effort to discover truth and goodness are imputable.

It therefore is not possible to make a categorical answer for your question.

Catechism of the Catholic Church: 1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man “takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin.” In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

1794 A good and pure conscience is enlightened by true faith, for charity proceeds at the same time "from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith.

 

[thistle]

As we do not know with any certainty how invincible works the best solution is to become a sacramentally baptised Catholic.
We know that baptism is necessary for salvation and that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.

 

[steve_b]

If a protestant is a anticatholic, but only hates a caricature of the church, and does not understand the churchis necessary for salvation, is that still invincible ignorance

Invincible ignorance presumes much effort has been made to know and understand a subject, but after much effort expended, they still can’t know or understand the subject
· Invincible ignorance is not something that is voluntary. It is involuntary. For example, Rejection of knowledge, is a voluntary act, and If one knows a teaching and the importance of a teaching, and rejects it, then one cannot claim Invincible Ignorance, for rejection of knowledge has become at that point willfull and voluntary. It is not imputed as a sin if one fails to know what is unable to know. Consequently ignorance of such things is called invincible, because it cannot be overcome by study. For this reason such ignorance, not being voluntary, since it is not in our power to be rid of it, is not a sin: OTOH, vincible ignorance is a sin, if it is about things one is bound to know.
As to your question, Re: the Protestant,

Invincible ignorance can’t automatically be presumed. The Protestant, or any other non-Catholic, will be judged on their knowledge and actions consumate with the opportunities that are presented to him/her. It is not a light matter however, but a most undesirable position to be in - especially for those in more affluent countries where information has never been so ready and easy to access about the Catholic faith. IOW 1791

Vincible ignorance is the 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.
IOW, this ignorance isn’t innocent. 1791

So the question is, Re: invincible ignorance,

who is this person who qualifies for such ignorance, who would find the Catholic Faith sooooo difficult to understand, that after much effort and study they still can’t understand it or dispell faulty notions of said faith?

 

[Ignatius]

If a protestant is a anticatholic, but only hates a caricature of the church, and does not understand the church is necessary for salvation, is that still invincible ignorance

We all have an obligation to seek out the Truth. True information about the Catholic Church in this country, so if he willfully remains ignorant, that is on him. Unless there is something preventing him from understanding it, that is not invincible ignorance.
OTOH, Only God knows what efforts he has made and what is blocking his understanding, we can’t judge.

 

[ericc]

If a protestant is a anticatholic, but o,nly hates a caricature of the church, and does not understand the churchis necessary for salvation, is that still invincible ignorance

If one has no way of knowing, one may be able to claim invincible ignorance. But if one “hates” the church without attempting to seek the truth, then one has pre-judged and pre-condemned which is prohibited. And if one has attempted to seek the truth, how can one be invincibly ignorant?