St. Thomas Aquinas on the salvation of non-Christians

[Lazerlike42]

Matt16_18:

Pope Pius IX teaches in Quanto conficiamur moerore that “God … 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.” If no one can suffer eternal punisment that has not fallen into sin by his own free will, then who are those that are damed to eternal punishment that die in “original sin only”?

This seems really problematic. There seems to be a contradiction between Florence and Pius IX. I’d really appreciate anyone who can clear this up.

 

[Matt16_18]

Lazerlike42:

This seems really problematic. There seems to be a contradiction between Florence and Pius IX. I’d really appreciate anyone who can clear this up.

I believe the key to your struggle lies in understanding the difference between eternal punishment in the pool of fire that is the result of unrepentance for mortal sin, and temporal punishments that purify us and make us able to actualize what God has created us for - union with God in the beholding of the beatific vision.

Seen in the right light, sufferings we endure on earth can be seen as a blessing if these sufferings cleanse us and make us ready for the joy of union with God.

 

[USMC]

Matt16_18:

Pope Pius IX teaches in Quanto conficiamur moerore that “God … 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.” If no one can suffer eternal punisment that has not fallen into sin by his own free will, then who are those that are damed to eternal punishment that die in “original sin only”?

Lazerlike42:

This seems really problematic. There seems to be a contradiction between Florence and Pius IX. I’d really appreciate anyone who can clear this up.

You will need to verify this, but I am pretty sure the Latin original of Quanto Conficiamur Moerore does not say that no one will suffer eternal “punishment”, but eternal torment.

Those in Limbo do suffer the loss of the beatific vision, but it is believed that they do not suffer physical torment.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Matt16_18:

Can you directly address the question of who it is that the Church teaches will be damned to the eternal fires of hell because they died “in original sin only”?

The Church has never definitively named anyone who has descended to hell. Instead, the Church has dogmatically asserted that any who dies in mortal or original sin descend into hell. Why? Because if they died in mortal or original sin, then they necessarily did not have the grace of Christ in them when they died. This means precisely what Paul VI stated in his *Credo of the People of God, *that only those who die in a state of grace will be among the people of God eternally after death. To be in a state of grace, one would necessarily have to be already washed of orginal sin. It is two ways of saying the same exact thing.

As for the fires of hell, that pertains to poena sensus.St. Augustine asserts that infants who die in original sin would suffer eternally from this punishment, however St. Thomas differs. He states that they eternally suffer from poena damni only (lacking the Beatific Vision of God), and yet their eternal existence would actually be more blissful than when on earth. These two theories are speculative.

What is not speculative, as affirmed by two Ecumencial Councils (Florence and Lyons II), is that those who die in original sin descend to hell. If you die in original sin, you necessarily lack the grace of Christ at death. What is not speculative, as affirmed by Paul VI, is that only those who die in the grace of Christ are among the people of God in the eternity beyond death.

I could not tell you who is among the reprobate, as the Church cannot even tell you that. What the Church can (and did) tell us is the condition of the soul at death for those who will be in heaven, and those who die in original sin are not among them.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Lazerlike42:

This seems really problematic. There seems to be a contradiction between Florence and Pius IX. I’d really appreciate anyone who can clear this up.

My understanding of Pius IX’s assertion is similar to Fr. William Most:

Latin poena need not mean infliction of pain: can mean lack of
something. If an unbaptized infant dies in original sin…then it has a penalty in not getting the vision of God. But it has no suffering. Cf. the words of Pius IX above, and St. Thomas, De malo, q. 5 a 3 ad 4: “The infants are separated from God perpetually, in regard to the loss of glory, which they do not know about, but not in regard to participation in natural goods, which they do know. . … That which they have through nature, they possess without pain.”

So there is “poena” in a loss, but one that causes no suffering nor
do they even know they have lost it. (Fr. William Most, St. Augustine On Grace and Predestination)

Given the interpretation of Pius IX’s teaching by Fr. Most, which is in accord with St. Thomas, then there’s no conflict between Florence (and Lyons II) and the teaching of Pius IX. I find it difficult to interpret Pius IX as if he intended to overturn the teachings of two Ecumenical Councils by mere implication. Nonetheless, it appears Pius IX has affirmed St. Thomas view and not St. Augustine’s view about the “differing punishments” of those in who die in mortal sin versus only original sin.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

The Latin word used by Pius IX is “suppliciis” which is more accurately translated “torments.”

The point being, the loss of the Beatific Vision is a **punishment **but not a torment.

“Torment” is how it is translated by The Sources of Catholic Dogma, which is Henry Denzinger’s Thirtieth Edition of *Enchiridion Symbolorum, *as translated by Roy F. Defarrari.

In context, is is clear the Pius IX is speaking of adults who may or may not be afflicted with invincible ignorance. He is contrasting those who commit material mortal sin with those who commit formal mortal sin, and speaking of their “torment” in hell. This is what he stated…

And here, beloved Sons and Venerable Brethren, it is necessary once more to mention and censure the serious error into which some Catholics have unfortunately fallen. For they are of the opinion that men who live in errors, estranged from the true faith and from Catholic unity, can attain eternal life. This is in direct opposition to Catholic teaching.

We all know that those who are afflicted with invincible ignorance with regard to our holy religion, if they carefully keep the precepts of the natural law that have been written by God in the hearts of all men, if they are prepared to obey God, and if they lead a virtuous and dutiful life, can attain eternal life by the power of divine
light and grace. ***For God, Who reads comprehensively in every detail the minds and souls, the thoughts and habits of all men, will not permit, in accordance with His infinite goodness and mercy, anyone who is not guilty of a voluntary fault to suffer eternal torments (suppliciis). ***

He is clearly speaking of adults in the context above, for whom it is possible to commit voluntary fault. He is not addressing those for whom it is not possible to commit voluntary fault, and cannot be understood to exlude those who die in original sin from their eternal state where they at least lack the beatific vision as St. Thomas taught.

 

[USMC]

itsjustdave1988:

USMC,

The Latin word used by Pius IX is “suppliciis” which is more accurately translated “torments.”

The point being, the loss of the Beatific Vision is a **punishment **but not a torment.

“Torment” is how it is translated by The Sources of Catholic Dogma, which is Henry Denzinger’s Thirtieth Edition of *Enchiridion Symbolorum, *as translated by Roy F. Defarrari.

I thought so. Translating it as “torment” fits in nicely with the teaching of St. Thomas.