U
underacloud
Guest
Oh dear. I see where this is going and I do not wish to indulge you. Sedevacantism is not tolerated in this forum.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
T
theoda
Guest
It requires invincible ignorance. Nowadays, everyone can read about Catholicism really easily using the internet.From the Catechism, regarding Baptism of Desire:
It is extremely hard to be saved with invincible ignorance. No one will tell you to live a good life, there won’t be any book to tell you what to do.
T
theoda
Guest
Doesn’t necessarily have to be sedvacantismOh dear. I see where this is going and I do not wish to indulge you. Sedevacantism is not tolerated in this forum.
L
Lvybs
Guest
Where have I explicitly advocated sedevacantism? All I was saying was that the Church teaches EENS. Besides, labels are silly. We should not identify ourselves as “sedeplenist” or “sedevacantist” either way, but rather simply as “Catholics”.Oh dear. I see where this is going and I do not wish to indulge you. Sedevacantism is not tolerated in this forum.
U
underacloud
Guest
From this audience with Pope John Paul II:It requires invincible ignorance. Nowadays, everyone can read about Catholicism really easily using the internet.
It is extremely hard to be saved with invincible ignorance. No one will tell you to live a good life, there won’t be any book to tell you what to do.
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/alpha/data/aud19950531en.html
.Certainly, the condition “inculpably ignorant” cannot be verified nor weighed by human evaluation, but must be left to the divine judgment alone
And in Redemptoris Missio when he said:
Many people do not have the opportunity to come to know or accept the Gospel revelation or to enter the Church. The social and cultural conditions in which they live do not permit this, and frequently they have been brought up in other religious traditions
U
underacloud
Guest
Oh, good. Then if you are not a sedevacantist, you should happily accept the teachings of St John Paul II. Yes, the Church teaches EENS, but has in recent times clarified what the teahing is, as per my previous quotes and the great encyclical Redemptoris Missio.Where have I advocated sedevacantism? All I was saying was that the Church teaches EENS.
L
Lvybs
Guest
No Catholic can accept a denial of EENS. He did contradict centuries of infallible teachings, and yes, I prefer the Council of Trent to John Paul the Small, thank you.Oh, good. Then if you are not a sedevacantist, you should happily accept the teachings of St John Paul II. Yes, the Church teaches EENS, but has in recent times clarified what the teahing is, as per my previous quotes and the great encyclical Redemptoris Missio.
T
tdgesq
Guest
It’s Saint John Paul II. Was Pope Pius the IX denying EENS here?:John Paul II was clearly denying EENS here.
- Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments. Quanto conficiamur moerore.
Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things,(127) and as Saviour wills that all men be saved.(128) Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Lumen Gentium 16.
The Church has the authority to interpret its own dogmatic decrees, no matter how clear it may seem to you personally.
T
tdgesq
Guest
Ahh… I wonder why Pope Pius X put Pius the IX up for canonization if he was so wrong about this? It looks like your stay with us here at CA will be brief.No Catholic can accept a denial of EENS. He did contradict centuries of infallible teachings, and yes, I prefer the Council of Trent to John Paul the Small, thank you.
T
theoda
Guest
Lvybs, do you reject baptism of desire and invincible ignorance?
L
Lvybs
Guest
I don’t think Pius IX was referring to invincible ignorance in the same manner you were. To wit, the very next paragraph in that encyclical.It’s Saint John Paul II. Was Pope Pius the IX denying EENS here?:
Was Vatican II denying EENS here?:
- Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments. Quanto conficiamur moerore.
Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things,(127) and as Saviour wills that all men be saved.(128) Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Lumen Gentium 16.
The Church has the authority to interpret its own dogmatic decrees, no matter how clear it may seem to you personally.
“8. Also well known is the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. Eternal salvation cannot be obtained by those who oppose the authority and statements of the same Church and are stubbornly separated from the unity of the Church and also from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff, to whom “the custody of the vineyard has been committed by the Savior.”[4] The words of Christ are clear enough: “If he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you a Gentile and a tax collector;”[5] “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me;”[6] “He who does not believe will be condemned;”[7] “He who does not believe is already condemned;”[8] “He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters.”[9] The Apostle Paul says that such persons are “perverted and self-condemned;”[10] the Prince of the Apostles calls them “false teachers . . . who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master. . . bringing upon themselves swift destruction.””
I find it odd that liberals always resort to Vatican II to back up their claim, as if the Church was born then, and no other teachings matter. Once again, clarification does not entail contradiction–quite the contrary. The Church insists upon clarity on everything, and because of its clear teachings, the Church thrived for 1,960 years. However, in the past 50 years since Vatican II, we have seen a massive drop off in faith, and global apostasy. This is no coincidence.
L
Lvybs
Guest
You must not have read my previous posts. I spoke specifically about BoB and BoD.Lvybs, do you reject baptism of desire and invincible ignorance. I’m confused what’s going on?
U
underacloud
Guest
This post has been reported.No Catholic can accept a denial of EENS. He did contradict centuries of infallible teachings, and yes, I prefer the Council of Trent to John Paul the Small, thank you.
I am certainly not precious about robust arguments on this forum, but cannot stand back and allow such disparaging of such a loved and great pope and saint.
L
Lvybs
Guest
That doesn’t bother me. Look, I posted 2000 years worth of Catholic teaching on this matter, and you refuse to address it. Pius IX clearly did not deny EENS, and I suspect you have not read The Syllabus of Errors or any of his writings, for that matter, and instead googled the issue in hopes of finding a quick response to me. Quite sad.This post has been reported.
I am certainly not precious about robust arguments on this forum, but cannot stand back and allow such disparaging of such a loved and great pope and saint.
Once again, I invite you folk to tedeum.boards.net to continue this discussion.
T
theoda
Guest
Why is there only 3 pages instead of 4? Did someone delete posts or is it a glitch?
Also, was Lvybs banned because it seems like now he didn’t even post on the thread.
Also, was Lvybs banned because it seems like now he didn’t even post on the thread.
U
underacloud
Guest
It would seem Lvybs’ posts were removed because they were expressing sedevacantist views and were in particular disparaging towards a certain post-Vatican II pope. Not sure if Lvybs has been banned.Why is there only 3 pages instead of 4? Did someone delete posts or is it a glitch?
Also, was Lvybs banned because it seems like now he didn’t even post on the thread.
To be clear, I reported one such post and so may have triggered this.
T
theoda
Guest
Usually though I thought posts remained and all it said under a person’s name was “Banned”It would seem Lvybs’ posts were removed because they were expressing sedevacantist views and were in particular disparaging towards a certain post-Vatican II pope. Not sure if Lvybs has been banned.
To be clear, I reported one such post and so may have triggered this.
U
underacloud
Guest
Depends I think on the content of the posts. Certainly I’ve seen posts removed before and poster’s entire contributions to a thread removed (other than those sections quoted by others, such as remain in this thread).Usually though I thought posts remained and all it said under a person’s name was “Banned”
C
Crown_of_Stars
Guest
This has always put a scare into me. It either means we have to be “perfect”, or it’s more so meaning that the way we have to be is very difficult. I’m hoping it means the latter.“Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few.”
B
BobCatholic
Guest
So how long was it between beginning of the world and the end? Or beginning of humanity to the end of the world?Here is something from Sacred Scripture that may help. My bolding.
If only one person per year gets saved, and there are billions of years…sure, there will be countless.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.