The Fate of All Non-Christians

[desire_the_end]

catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0302fea3.asp

Is this a decent article, do you think?

I’m having trouble with my theology. On one hand I acknowledge that we are saved by grace through faith in charity…But doesn’t the church also teach invincinble ignorance? For those who don’t know the gospel or don’t understand it (have been lied to, betrayed, etc. etc.), is being brought into God’s love an absolute no? I wouldn’t think so…Though my Calvinist friend is absolutely opposed to the idea that let’s say…Ghandi could have been brought into God’s divine love due to his unbelief.

“If someone is not regenerated with the Holy Spirit, if they do not put their faith in Christ, then they ARE NOT SAVED.”

“Scripture tells us that if someone does not put faith in Christ, he WILL in fact blame them.”

"I’m pretty sure it doesn’t say that. Many people that are good or virtuous by the worlds standads are not saved. This should be obvious. And this is why I think you’re contradicting your theology. Man is saved by grace through FAITH ALONE. Not by living virtuously. Not by striving for peace. Not by doing certain deeds or works.

We are saved by grace through faith, and if we have true faith in Christ, God will do a great work in us. And our lives will bear fruit. But works without faith are DEAD."

etc. etc.

I’m also having a hard time understanding Romans 3:9-31.

“I would like you to read this and then see how your theology fits in.”

Yikes! I believe what the church teaches about there being no salvation outside the church, but I also believe in a just God who saves those who recognize His goodness in all of creation.

This thread has potential overall I think.

Blessings.

 

[USMC]

I’m having trouble with my theology. On one hand I acknowledge that we are saved by grace through faith in charity…But doesn’t the church also teach invincinble ignorance? For those who don’t know the gospel or don’t understand it (have been lied to, betrayed, etc. etc.), is being brought into God’s love an absolute no? I wouldn’t think so…

Firstly, there are a few things we must affirm: 1.) We must affirm that divine grace (sanctifying grace) is necessary for salvation; and 2.) that without faith a person cannot possess grace.

The question that some theologians discuss is exactly what kind of faith is necessary: is it explicit faith, or only implicit faith.

Explicit faith include explicit belief in at least the Trinity and Incarnation, without rejecting any other truths. In other words, we don’t have to explicitly know every single dogma of the Church; but we must know and believe in the Trinity and Incarnation, and we must not reject any dogma that we are aware of. That is explicit faith.

Implicit faith is possessed by a person who believes all the truths that have been revealed to them, and are so disposed that they would believe in the Trinity and Incarnation if it was made known to them. Such a person would be said to have “implicit faith”, since they don’t explicitly believe in the two necessary dogmas of the Trinity and Incarnation, but are so disposed that they would believe if it was revealed to them. (Of course, only God would know which people, or if any such people, exist.

Just about all theologians have held that explicit faith is necessary for salvation. In fact, the council of Florence dogmatically defined that a person must believe in those two article of faith to be saved.

But some have speculated that merely implicit faith, combined with perfect contrition (which is a gift from God), and an act of perfect charity, could bring such a person into the state of sanctifying grace.

My personal opinion is that if there are holy people who are living a life according to the natural law, and the inspirations of actual grace, that God will either send a missionary to them to reveal the truth to them, or else enlighten them internally.

Though my Calvinist friend is absolutely opposed to the idea that let’s say…Ghandi could have been brought into God’s divine love due to his unbelief.

I agree. Ghandi was not deserted on some desert island. In my opinion, if he was ignorant of the truth (and not outright rejecting it) it was due to his own negligence. If a person’s ignorance is due to their own negligence, then they are no invinvibly ignorant.

“If someone is not regenerated with the Holy Spirit, if they do not put their faith in Christ, then they ARE NOT SAVED.”

But the question is: can merely implicit faith, combined with perfect contrition, and a perfect act of charity, regenerate a person and bring them into the state of grace?

Many people that are good or virtuous by the worlds standads are not saved. This should be obvious. And this is why I think you’re contradicting your theology. Man is saved by grace through FAITH ALONE. Not by living virtuously. Not by striving for peace. Not by doing certain deeds or works.

First ask where the Bible says we are saved by faith “alone”. Then after he can’t show it to you, show him James 2:24, and ask him why he believes the contrary. When he says that James 2:24 only means that we are “justified before men” show him James 2:14, which says that such a faith will not “save” a person…

Then tell your friend that no one claims that a person is saved by living virtuously, or doing good; but that if a person does not live virtuously, or do good, they will not be saved. We are saved by grace, but only those who do what God commands will be saved by grace; and God commands that we live virtuously and do good: therefore it is not one or the other, as Protestants falsely believe, both both.

I’m also having a hard time understanding Romans 3:9-31.

“I would like you to read this and then see how your theology fits in.”

Yikes!

The “law” spoken of in the book of Romans is the Jewish law. It is basically saying that the Jewish religion will save no one. A person is saved by possessing sanctifying grace, which gives a higher form of life - eternal life - to the soul, and not by following the works of the Jewish law. That is basically what Paul is saying in the book of Romans and Ephesians.

I believe what the church teaches about there being no salvation outside the church, but I also believe in a just God who saves those who recognize His goodness in all of creation.

Is it impossible for God to bring all of the predestined into His Church - outside of which there is no salvation? Is that the one thing that is impossible for God?

 

[desire_the_end]

USMC:

My personal opinion is that if there are holy people who are living a life according to the natural law, and the inspirations of actual grace, that God will either send a missionary to them to reveal the truth to them, or else enlighten them internally.

This is my opinion as well.

I agree. Ghandi was not deserted on some desert island. In my opinion, if he was ignorant of the truth (and not outright rejecting it) it was due to his own negligence.

Or it is possible that he simply didn’t know the richness of the Faith…That is to say that it wasn’t simply neglicence but really just lacking knowledge on his part. But this is mere speculation. All have an audience with the Lord, and the Lord is merciful and just.

If a person’s ignorance is due to their own negligence, then they are no invinvibly ignorant.

So…What would count as being negligent? Simply not caring? Could you be a little more specific. Thanks.

But the question is: can merely implicit faith, combined with perfect contrition, and a perfect act of charity, regenerate a person and bring them into the state of grace?

I don’t know. Is this implicit faith a product of the grace that overflows from the wounds of Jesus?

I think it suffices to say that while we have the propensity to sin, we also have the call to righteousness written on our hearts (re: Job), and as it is written, can know God through the witness of creation (Romans 1:20)…It’s really up to us to repond to such revelation.

If the Christian God is indeed the one true God of All, then the chance exists. We don’t know what transpires between a person and God in that moment that they pass from life to death — thus — we cannot guarantee people who did not know Christ in life will be damned in death, just as we cannot guarantee that those who claimed to know Christ in life will automatically be part of the Kingdom of God.

Is it impossible for God to bring all of the predestined into His Church - outside of which there is no salvation? Is that the one thing that is impossible for God?

I don’t believe so.

I’m certain that God takes MANY things into account. Judgment Day has not happened yet. It only happens once. We find out then. There are some people who have never heard of Jesus by some circumstance, but that does not mean BAM! – they’re cut off. We only get one chance at this life and Christian or not, we will be held accountable for all good and evil, that much is certain.
I am made somewhat content by the literal silence on the issue in the Scriptures; I am fairly glad over it. If the Lord had a specific command regarding this and other mysterious circumstances, like the insane and the mentally retarded, he would have instructed as such. Since there is silence, we trust in God that he will provide in a more subtle fashion.

Thank you for your humble reply, brother.
lovetony

 

[trogiah]

From Matthew’s gospel: "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a rotten tree bear good fruit. So by their fruits you will know them. Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. "It seems clear from this passage and others that Jesus considered the actions of a person to matter more than the words.(Recall the parable of the two sons.)

It was an idea that even the Apostles found difficult to understand. After having visions and pondering their meaning Peter finally began to make sense out of this message.

From the Acts of the Apostles:"Then Peter proceeded to speak and said, “In truth, I see that God shows no partiality. Rather, in every nation whoever fears him and acts uprightly is acceptable to him.”

I have never met Gandhi but from all that I have read, written by him or by others, he was someone very much in touch with God’s Spirit even if He was not completely in touch with the historical significance of Christ’s church.
peace

Jim

 

[USMC]

USMC:

Ghandi was not deserted on some desert island. In my opinion, if he was ignorant of the truth (and not outright rejecting it) it was due to his own negligence.

desire the end:

Or it is possible that he simply didn’t know the richness of the Faith…That is to say that it wasn’t simply neglicence but really just lacking knowledge on his part.

Sure, anything is possible. But also remember that Ghandi may not have been damned due to his lack of faith - if such lack of faith was through no fault of his own: he may instead have been damned for some other sin he committed. In other words, if he was invincible ignorant it does not mean he was saved. Invincible ignorance is not a means of salvation: it isn’t the eighth sacrament.
desire the end:

So…What would count as being negligent? Simply not caring? Could you be a little more specific. Thanks.

According to the Catechism, faith requires a person to do the following three things:

1.) make efforts to find out what God has revealed;
2.) to believe firmly what God has revealed;
3.) to profess ones faith openly whenever necessary. (Baltimore Catechism)

To answer your question, I would say that being negligent would be not making a strong effort to find out what God has revealed. This could be due to many reasons, such as spending ones time on other less important matters; making money; lack of zeal for God; a sinful life, etc, etc. etc… If you think about it there are many people who don’t make much of an effort, or any effort at all, to find out the truth. They spend their lives working, or playing, or one of many other things, and simply do not take the time to look into the truth. This is often a result of the sin of indifference. I know many such people and I’m sure you do as well. If such people are ignorant of the truth, it is through their own negligence.
desire the end:

I don’t know. Is this implicit faith a product of the grace that overflows from the wounds of Jesus?

No. It is not a product of divine grace. It is just a good interior disposition of a person who has not yet heard the truth. It is the disposition of a person who would believe the truth if it was made known to him. It is a person who has made the effort to follow God to the best of his ability and knowledge, but simply has not heard the truth of the Trinity and Incarnation. Possibly his goodness was a product of his cooperation with actual grace, but his “implicit faith” was not a product of grace.
desire the end:

If the Christian God is indeed the one true God of All, then the chance exists. We don’t know what transpires between a person and God in that moment that they pass from life to death — thus — we cannot guarantee people who did not know Christ in life will be damned in death, just as we cannot guarantee that those who claimed to know Christ in life will automatically be part of the Kingdom of God.

I personally think that God does enlighten some people at the moment of death; not after death at judgment as some modernists now teach, but just prior to their death, when their will is still free and capable of choosing. Those who tried their best to serve God and learn the truth, may indeed be enlightened internally at the moment of death, and given a chance to accept the truth.

But, as St. John Vianney said regarding this matter, “as a tree leans so it falls”. A person who lives a bad life will probably die a bad death; just as the person who lives a good life will probably die a good death, because, “as the tree leans so it falls”.

continue

 

[USMC]

continuation
desire the end:

I’m certain that God takes MANY things into account.

No question about that. All things will be taken into account on judgment day.
desire the end:

There are some people who have never heard of Jesus by some circumstance, but that does not mean BAM! – they’re cut off. We only get one chance at this life and Christian or not, we will be held accountable for all good and evil, that much is certain.

There is some truth in that statement, but you (and I and every other Catholic) should not view it differently.

We should view it as though every single non-Catholic will be damned. This will help inspire us to do our best to convert them, and not grow slack because of the possibility that they could be saved. This thought – which may indeed be exactly right - inspired the missionaries to cross land and sea and to give their own lives to bring the Gospel to the pagans, and to convert the heretics. St. Francis De Sales was sent as a missionary to Geneva – the heart of Calvinism – shortly after the Protestant reformation, at a time when the Protestants were killing Catholics. His father made an appointment with the Bishop, who was sending him there, and said that his son would almost certainly be put to death. Nevertheless St. Francis went to into enemy territory. But, instead of being put to death, he converted 70,000 of them to the true faith.

We should think as the Church has always thought; that is, we should assume that all non-Catholics will be damned so that we will strive with all our might to convert them. We should not allow a possibility that a person who is not a visible member of the Church might attain salvation to lessen our fervor in converting them… and that is indeed what has happening by focusing too much emphasis on this “possibility”

In fact, Pope Pius IX, who is often quoted in defense of the possibility of a person being saved who is invincibly ignorance of the truth, also told the Bishops of his day that it was “forbidden” for them to inquire into this possibility. Isn’t that interesting? He actually forbade them from discussing it and told them, instead, to hold firmly that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church, and to preach it clearly to all of their faithful.

Pope Pius IX: “For, it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood; but on the other hand it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, are not stained by any guilt in this matter in the eyes of God. Now, in truth, who would arrogate so much to himself as to mark the limits of such an ignorance, because of the nature and variety of peoples, regions, innate disposition, and of so many other things? For, in truth, when released from these corporeal chains ‘we shall see God as He is’ * we shall understand perfectly by how close and beautiful a bond divine mercy and justice are united; but, as long as we are on earth, weighed down by this mortal mass which blunts the soul, let us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, there is ‘one God, one faith, one baptism’ [Eph. 4:5]; it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry.”

The invincibly ignorant are not guilty in God’s eyes for being ignorant, but they may indeed be guilty (and probably are) for some other sins they have committed.

Also, tt is not as though a non-Catholic will be “cut off” from salvation, as you said above. We MUST realize that we are all born damned – that is separated from grace. We are not born in the state of grace, then cut off through a failure to believe; we are born spiritually dead (separated from grace) and are brought to life through baptism.

There is a lot more than can be said on this subject, but that’s all for now.

God Bless,*

 

[Matt16_18]

desire the end:

Is this a decent article, do you think?

Yes.

I believe what the church teaches about there being no salvation outside the church, but I also believe in a just God who saves those who recognize His goodness in all of creation.

The article you hyperlinked says this:Just as people who lived before Christ was revealed didn’t have to know about him specifically to receive salvation, neither do people who have lived since the time of Christ have to specifically know about Christ in order to be saved if he hasn’t been revealed to them yet.

We are speaking here of those who through no fault of their own have no way of knowing of Christ or have not heard of him in a way that they can clearly understand who he is. If God commanded explicit faith in Christ and baptism as the only ways to be saved—even for those who have no way of knowing about Christ—then he would be commanding such people to do something they’re not capable of doing. This would be unjust and incompatible with his character. God doesn’t give us commands that we are not capable of obeying.

 

[desire_the_end]

USMC:

nvincible ignorance is not a means of salvation: it isn’t the eighth sacrament.

Right!

To answer your question, I would say that being negligent would be not making a strong effort to find out what God has revealed…They spend their lives working, or playing, or one of many other things, and simply do not take the time to look into the truth. This is often a result of the sin of indifference. I know many such people and I’m sure you do as well. If such people are ignorant of the truth, it is through their own negligence.

Yes…I know such people. I would consider such an attitude negligence. Understood.

Possibly his goodness was a product of his cooperation with actual grace, but his “implicit faith” was not a product of grace.

Right, but implicit faith is possible due to God’s grace.

I personally think that God does enlighten some people at the moment of death; not after death at judgment as some modernists now teach, but just prior to their death, when their will is still free and capable of choosing. Those who tried their best to serve God and learn the truth, may indeed be enlightened internally at the moment of death, and given a chance to accept the truth.

But, as St. John Vianney said regarding this matter, “as a tree leans so it falls”. A person who lives a bad life will probably die a bad death; just as the person who lives a good life will probably die a good death, because, “as the tree leans so it falls”.

Beautiful…Clearly St. John wasn’t Calvinist. hahaha

 

[desire_the_end]

USMC:

We should view it as though every single non-Catholic will be damned. This will help inspire us to do our best to convert them, and not grow slack because of the possibility that they could be saved. This thought – which may indeed be exactly right - inspired the missionaries to cross land and sea and to give their own lives to bring the Gospel to the pagans, and to convert the heretics. St. Francis De Sales was sent as a missionary to Geneva – the heart of Calvinism – shortly after the Protestant reformation, at a time when the Protestants were killing Catholics. His father made an appointment with the Bishop, who was sending him there, and said that his son would almost certainly be put to death. Nevertheless St. Francis went to into enemy territory. But, instead of being put to death, he converted 70,000 of them to the true faith.

Certainly. I all whom I know tto come to the knowledge of the truth. If you have any suggestions of literature by or about St. Francis De Sales, let me know.

Also, tt is not as though a non-Catholic will be “cut off” from salvation, as you said above. We MUST realize that we are all born damned – that is separated from grace. We are not born in the state of grace, then cut off through a failure to believe; we are born spiritually dead (separated from grace) and are brought to life through baptism.

I get what you’re saying and I guess my wording lacked exactitude. What I meant to say is that a non-believer who has never really come to the knowledge of the truth (and also the truth about the truth) can’t be entirely responsible for not accepting this truth into their lives. They aren’t cut off from the possibility of being saved.

There is a lot more than can be said on this subject, but that’s all for now.

God Bless,

Thanks! Peace be with you.

 

[USMC]

desire the end:

If you have any suggestions of literature by or about St. Francis De Sales, let me know.

Actually, I do have a great suggestion for you.

To convert the Calvininsts, St. Francis began by writing a tract each night and sliding it under someone’s door. People began to read these tracts and share them with other people. There was a lady in the town of Geneva who collected them, and they have been perserved to this day.

These tracts - the very one St. Francis wrote with his own hands to convert to Calvinists - were compiled into a book. The book is called The Catholic Controversy, and it is very good. The publisher is TAN books, out of Rockford Illinios. Their webiste is www.tanbooks.com.

 

[Matt16_18]

desire the end:

Right, but implicit faith is possible due to God’s grace.

LETTER OF THE SACRED CONGREGATION OF THE HOLY OFFICE

Archbishop Richard J. Cushing

Given on August 8, 1949 explaining the true sense of Catholic doctrine that there is no salvation outside the Church.
… that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.

However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.

… it must not be thought that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated by perfect charity. Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person has supernatural faith: “For he who comes to God must believe that God exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him” (Heb. 11:6).

 

[richbansha]

I hesitate to mention this because it could be a source of outrage.

Bl John Scotus was as good a Greek scholar and as ever lived. His grasp of classical philosophy has rarely been equalled and never surpassed. He took Paul’s statements in ICor 15:23-28, “God will be all in all”, to mean that everyone – even the devils – will in the very end be saved.

Many people find such assertions shocking but it need not conflict with official teaching. The Church as the Bride of Christ just might exist until the very edge of enternity and long enough to win Satan himself into salvation. If anyone has invincible ignorance it is him.

 

[John_Henry]

richbansha:

He took Paul’s statements in ICor 15:23-28, “God will be all in all”, to mean that everyone – even the devils – will in the very end be saved.

Many people find such assertions shocking but it need not conflict with official teaching.

Actually it does conflict with Church teaching…from the Catechism:

**393 **It is the *irrevocable *character of their choice, and not a defect in the infinite divine mercy, that makes the angels’ sin unforgivable. “There is no repentance for the angels after their fall, just as there is no repentance for men after death.”

 

[MikeinSD]

I’ve posted elsewhere here that I have some devout Jewish friends. The Othodox Jews especially believe that they are the heirs of Abraham and the promises God made to him. They believe the covenants (sp?) that their ancestors made with God are still binding today. And Jews of all persuasions get furious if you tell them they are going to hell because they are not Christians.

Also did not JPII say the Jewish people’s covenants with God are still in force?

 

[JSmitty2005]

MikeinSD:

And Jews of all persuasions get furious if you tell them they are going to hell because they are not Christians.

Jesus didn’t seem to have a problem telling the Jews that. He also didn’t really care much about getting people furious. In fact, He got the Jews so furious that they murdered Him.

Also did not JPII say the Jewish people’s covenants with God are still in force?

No. :nope:

 

[richbansha]

393 It is the irrevocable character of their choice, and not a defect in the infinite divine mercy, that makes the angels’ sin unforgivable. “There is no repentance for the angels after their fall, just as there is no repentance for men after death.”

Let’s take a closer look at this. It says there is no repentance. It does not say that there is no salvation. That these angels refuse to repent in no way limits God’s capacity to have mercy on them. Jesus did say that with God all things are possible. Did he not?

The love of God is infinite. The sacrifce of Christ is sufficient to redeem any and all sin. How many human Fathers will beat his own child to death because she was obstinate? I wouldn’t. Maybe I am completely mistaken, but I like to think that our Heavenly Father is even a shade better than I am.

As for the sufficiency of the theology, I am willing to defer to JPII on that. Though he did not endorse Scotus’ views, I doubt very much that he would have beatified Scotus if those views were clearly heretical.

 

[Derffred]

I myself struggled with this question for quite some time. Then the saying “Lord, grant me the ability to changes the things I can, accept the things I cannot change and the ability to know the difference.” (Or something like that) People can and will always debate this topic. It is not my position to pass judgement, someone much greater than us will do this. In my mortal life I seek, through Gods grace that he granted me, to be saved. I will help others when I can, represent christ as best I can through my life, and bring them to christ if possible. So the answer I have is not really an answer, rather it is a suggestion to continue down the narrow path in life and emulate teh good samaratian (sp?) when possible.

 

[desire_the_end]

Speaking of the Jews…What do we make of “All of Israel will be saved” from Paul’s letter to the Romans?

 

[ReformedCatholic]

Ghandi? Damned? LOL A devoutly religious man who loved God and loved others “as I have loved you.” The only human to ever liberate an entire nation and millions of people through peaceful means. He did not actively and persistently turn away from God, so therefore he is with God.

 

[ReformedCatholic]

If Christ died for our sins, then what is there to be “saved” from? I can see this as puzzling our non-Christian friends.