Is it Acceptable to Believe Only Catholics ARE Saved?

[tdgesq]

I hardly think there is no justification for my position. The Church teaches the necessity of the Church for salvation - extra ecclesium nulla salus - but recognizes that those outside the Church through no fault of their own (invincible ignorance) are not damned for finding themselves outside the Church. However, the Church also teaches that the Sacraments are the primary way God has chosen to give us His grace - and we know salvation is through grace alone. Thus, those without the sacraments are in an inferior position to be saved. Further, we know Christ founded the Church to help ppl attain salvation. Those outside the Church are not making use of this help and thus are again in a worse position. Finally, we know post-baptismal mortal sins must be confessed to a priest for forgiveness. Again we see non-Catholics in jeopardy of not being saved by their lack of having every thing Christ wants us to have. It is important because of the massive implications one position or the other have for Evangelization

That seems at odds with this:

It’s absolutely speculative.

In any case, how do you assign the probability that “few” are invincibly ignorant rather than “many” are invincibly ignorant?

 

[PietroPaolo]

That seems at odds with this:

Why? Something can be both speculative and reasonable, no? Speculative theology is “pushing the limits” of what we definitively know, but it is still based on what we do know. That is, we may have good reasons for speculating this over that conclusion without claiming to know it is certainly true.

In any case, how do you assign the probability that “few” are invincibly ignorant rather than “many” are invincibly ignorant?

I don’t. Invincible ignorance doesn’t equal automatic salvation, it just means you aren’t damned for being outside the Church. You can be invincibly ignorant, murder someone and still go to Hell.

 

[tdgesq]

Why? Something can be both speculative and reasonable, no? Speculative theology is “pushing the limits” of what we definitively know, but it is still based on what we do know. That is, we may have good reasons for speculating this over that conclusion without claiming to know it is certainly true.

I guess I took the qualifier “absolutely” to mean something more than just speculative theology.

I don’t. Invincible ignorance doesn’t equal automatic salvation, it just means you aren’t damned for being outside the Church. You can be invincibly ignorant, murder someone and still go to Hell.

I suppose that’s true, but how does the possibility that a non-Catholic will commit a mortal sin assist you to determine the probability that few will be saved as opposed to many?