L
Lormar
Guest
When you find out, let me know.
- Status
J
jwinch2
Guest
Agreed. As noted by Pope Benedict, the Second Vatican Council has often been interpreted outside of the context of Sacred Tradition. This has led to many errors of implementation, etc. that have been widely documented. As he stated more than once, the documents of the council are supposed to be placed into the context of Sacred Tradition. However, contrary to his instruction, what seems to have happened often, which even now continues, is that Sacred Tradition is placed into the context of Vatican II.
The Second Vatican Council is a valid council, but according to Pope Benedict XVI, it was supposed to be what he called a “humble council” in that it did not promulgate any new doctrine.
His Holiness, Pope John XXIII, who called Vatican II in the first place, specifically stated that it was supposed to “transmit the doctrine, pure and integral, without any attenuation or distortion”.
attenuate
at·ten·u·ate [v. uh-ten-yoo-eyt; adj. uh-ten-yoo-it, -eyt] verb, at·ten·u·at·ed, at·ten·u·at·ing, adjective
verb (used with object)
- to weaken or reduce in force, intensity, effect, quantity, or value: to attenuate desire.
- to make thin; make slender or fine.
- Bacteriology, Immunology . to render less virulent, as a strain of pathogenic virus or bacterium.
- Electronics. to decrease the amplitude of (an electronic signal).
verb (used without object) - to become thin or fine; lessen.
dis·tort [dih-stawrt]
verb (used with object)
- to twist awry or out of shape; make crooked or deformed: Arthritis had distorted his fingers.
- to give a false, perverted, or disproportionate meaning to; misrepresent: to distort the facts.
- Electronics. to reproduce or amplify (a signal) inaccurately by changing the frequencies or unequally changing the delay or amplitude of the components of the output wave.
J
jwinch2
Guest
You are most welcome. If you do so, and then go back and read Vatican II and the CCC when it speaks on the same subject, I think things will make more sense. I have actually sat down and read them side by side so that I could get my head around things.
I hope that it helps you.
God bless,
D
DJLake
Guest
What has changed? 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.
vs.
"No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.)
I apologize in advance for possibly misunderstanding what you have said.
The Church has always taught that unbaptized martyrs of the Catholic Faith are saved via baptism of blood. We have ancient Saints that fit into this category.
J
jwinch2
Guest
Please read the document I shared on baptism. I think it will clear things up for you. Please understand, the traditional teaching of the Church does include baptism of desire and of blood.
In case you missed it: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10816533&postcount=10
God Bless,
M
McCall1981
Guest
The wiggle room is in the new documents, not the old ones.
The newer docs have wiggle room to spare, which is the heart of the problem in my opinion.
B
Basilios
Guest
There is no old and new; there is only eternal truth. The newer expression can only be understood while keeping in mind the older stuff. I think the problem is that in the newer formulations there is an unhealthy emphasis on the truths that (a) God is not bound by the sacraments and (b) that invincible ignorance is true. These things are true and always have been, though.
All popes have been valid popes. Don’t let Satan lead you away from the faith.
D
DJLake
Guest
I agree that Vatican II must be seen in the light of tradition, but the change in the No Salvation teaching occurred way before Vatican II.
In his encyclical Quanto conficiamur moerore, 1863, Pius IX said:
It is known to us and to you that those who are in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion, but who observe carefully the natural law, and the precepts graven by God upon the hearts of all men, and who being disposed to obey God lead an honest and upright life, may, aided by the light of divine grace, attain to eternal life; for God who sees clearly, searches and knows the heart, the disposition, the thoughts and intentions of each, in His supreme mercy and goodness by no means permits that anyone suffer eternal punishment, who has not of his own free will fallen into sin.
Again, contrast with:
◦“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.)
In his encyclical Quanto conficiamur moerore, 1863, Pius IX said:
It is known to us and to you that those who are in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion, but who observe carefully the natural law, and the precepts graven by God upon the hearts of all men, and who being disposed to obey God lead an honest and upright life, may, aided by the light of divine grace, attain to eternal life; for God who sees clearly, searches and knows the heart, the disposition, the thoughts and intentions of each, in His supreme mercy and goodness by no means permits that anyone suffer eternal punishment, who has not of his own free will fallen into sin.
Again, contrast with:
◦“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.)
J
jwinch2
Guest
If you read all of it in context, rather than piecemeal, I think it may help you get a bit more clarity.
I’ll add the 4th century unbaptized, catechumen martyr, St Emerentiana as one of many ancient examples.
See: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerentiana
J
jwinch2
Guest
Yep.
D
DJLake
Guest
Unfortunately, the old documents are tight and shut leaving no room for exceptions. This to me is a bigger problem. I can never accept that an innocent person will be condemned to hell. Would we condemn babies who through no fault of their own are not baptized? Would we condemn to hell all those in the Eastern Churches who make the same claim as we, that they are the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church? Would we condemn all others of all religious who live good and holy lives? How about retarded individuals who do not profess the true faith? Do we condemn them as well? If not, are we more merciful than God himself>
However, St. Ambrose has no doubt about the salvation of Valentinian the Younger, who has asked for baptism, but had died before the saint could reach him (“De Obitu Valentini.”, n. 51, P.L. XVI, 1374). Hence the common teaching was that the defect of baptism might be supplied by desire.
Source: newadvent.org/cathen/03430b.htm
Source: newadvent.org/cathen/03430b.htm
We do not condemn the babies to hell. However, we cannot know that God saved them. Anyone who dies in a state of original sin will go to hell unless God intervenes.
B
Basilios
Guest
It’s not us that ‘condemn’ to Hell. Catholic doctrine is not something that is done/made/created; it just is. These questions of yours are very complex, and a bit beyond all human minds in some way. It is traditionally believed that all people receive the graces to go to Heaven. Those who reject the grace justly go to hell. Now, work that in with the rest of Catholic doctrine (all of it is a whole) and it should make a lot more sense.
As for babies unbaptized - don’t be stressed. The ‘hell’ they go to is not the hell of the damned. The hell they go to is one of perfect natural happiness - they just do not ever experience supernatural joy. This is the opinion of some Church Doctors but the Church has never said that they are not somehow saved by God (I don’t believe they are saved supernaturally speaking but I guess one can believe that God allows it). This is why abortion is such an evil - souls are denied the chance to attain supernatural joy with God in Heaven forever.
C
cjpayn2
Guest
How is a baby to know about the Church and its teachings? Pope Eugene’s bull condemns the ones who do not remain in the bosom and the unity of the Church. A baby does not have the knowledge to retain or even understand the teachings of the Church to not remain in unity with Her. The Church is not condemning these souls, no on can say with 100% accuracy what happens to those souls. We leave that up to God.
P
Prie_dieu
Guest
No he wasn’t. The Church authorities justly condemned Father Feeney for his acts of disobedience against his superiors, not for holding a particular doctrine. Father Feeney was reconciled to the Church without ever having to change his views and I’m positive that even now all of his spiritual descendants have been reconciled to the Church and operate within ecclesiastical structures all the while holding to the same doctrines as they always have.
Father Feeney consistently disobeyed his Jesuit superior, his diocese’s bishop and then Rome. It was his actions that brought him to trouble in the end.
And I would just like to point out that some people are far too dismissive of Father Feeney. I’m not a Feeneyite and I consider their views to be inherently illogical because of the separation of Salvation and Justification. But they are not evil heretics that condemn poor innocent little peoples to the fires of hell. Father Feeney was once described as the greatest theologian in North America by Archbishop Sheen. The man was an intellectual heavyweight and deserves some respect.
M
McCall1981
Guest
Perhaps reconciling old docs with new ones isn’t really the problem you’re experiencing. It seems that the problem you’re experiencing may be more that you simply have a hard time accepting the older documents. I say this because you seem to want to find a way to invalidate the older docs, but that’s not possible.
If so, I think this is more of a spiritual issue, rather than a document issue. The relationship between God’s Mercy, and Hell, and salvation and such is hard to grasp for anyone. Maybe praying about it would be more helpful than reading documents. We all need to learn to submit our understanding to God’s understanding, and our will to God’s will, but it’s a very hard lesson. I struggle with it everyday.
C
cjpayn2
Guest
Also, take into context the time period in which this was given. Read it again and focus on the groups of people Pope Eugene IV is speaking:
“It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”
“It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”
- Status