What is exactly and precisely "invincible ignorance"?

[Ammi]

The Church usually doesnt interpret specific passages. And encourages us to read the Word.

So what good is reading something, if you dont get a message from it?

Tell me, what do these passages mean to you?

Matthew 13
“Hear then the parable of the sower. When any one hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what is sown in his heart ; this is what was sown along the path.

Luke 8
Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God. The ones along the path are those who have heard; then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, that they may not believe and be saved.

 

[steve-b]

thistle:

If you die in a state of mortal sin it does not matter how many good works you have done on earth you will still go to Hell.

Does it seem logical or moral that someone who is a good Christian their whole life, living a holy and altruistic life, but in their final hours commits a mortal sin and dies before they can confess ---- this person is sent to eternal punishment?

Good question.

Re: Christian

Christian = anyone validly baptized. Rather broad, agreed?

So

the question THEN amounts to

How does one define

"good, holy, altruistic " Christian"

What if

that "Christian" is a non Catholic "Christian" ? They read their bible, AND are shown their own history where they begqn and who started them, which they find is NOT instituted by Christ but by mere schismatic and heretical men/women, AND still that Christian, decides, to never becomes fully incorporated in the one and ONLY Church Jesus established (the Catholic Church) WHO wanted EVERYONE to be in perfect unity in His Church HERE and receiving the sacraments HE established for our salvation? One example HERE

Q​

Are there no eternal consequences for THEM, for that decision they make?
MasterHaster:

Hitler who theoretically becomes a believer on his deathbed is rewarded with eternal life?

We’re told, His last act was to put a bullet through his head.

 

[blackforest]

“What do these passages mean to you?” is a very sola-scriptura Protestant question. “To you” makes it relative, and as Catholics, we look at much bigger picture that involves historical/theological context, as well as reason and tradition. “What does this mean to you?” is precisely the question that got Christianity into the mess its in - namely, fragmenting into 1000s of denominations and sub-denominations.

Let’s take an example. If I went strictly with what Matthew 13 appeared to say, it looks like Jesus is saying that anyone who’s familiar with Christianity and doesn’t decide to follow it is evil. Fortunately, I’m confident that the matter is a little more complex than that, as our Church doesn’t even teach that.

 

[Wm777]

Invincibly Ignorant = Father forgive them, for they know not what they do.

No man can fully fathom God or the mysteries of our faith;
Everyone also knows man is destined to fall by our Lord’s own falling three times;
and the demands of the CCC - while aligned with God’s perfection - can only provide for man,
since sinful man cannot measure up to them in his own imperfections.

In fact, any man who calls himself perfect (except Jesus himself) would probably be speaking like a fool…

Eyeballing Invincible igrnorance therefore - it can only mean love covers a multitude of sins an knowledge of Christ mercy prevails in all cases… The only sin which cannot be forgiven is thus one against the Holy Spirit… We can rest assured in that…

But you may want to check your references, as I am just thinking intuitively…

 

[Ammi]

“What do these passages mean to you?” is a very sola-scriptura Protestant question. “To you” makes it relative, and as Catholics, we look at much bigger picture that involves historical/theological context, as well as reason and tradition. “What does this mean to you?” is precisely the question that got Christianity into the mess its in - namely, fragmenting into 1000s of denominations and sub-denominations.

Then what is the point of reading Scripture at all? If it doesnt speak to you, personally at all? I understand reading in light of Church doctrine, but that doesnt equate to “I cant understand any Scripture.”

Let’s take an example. If I went strictly with what Matthew 13 appeared to say, it looks like Jesus is saying that anyone who’s familiar with Christianity and doesn’t decide to follow it is evil. Fortunately, I’m confident that the matter is a little more complex than that, as our Church doesn’t even teach that.

We all are born in a state of Original sin. Yet we are not totally evil. God strives to draw us to Himself.

I’m unaware of any Church Teaching which addresses someone who even hears the Gospel Word, yet does not believe, and yet is still in His grace. The Church is careful not to contradict Mark 16:16

Those who do not know the Gospel can be seeking God, and relying on His grace and may attain salvation. Yet when someone who hears and is aware of the Gospel, yet rejects, they choose evil. Or remain separated from Him. Because they cannot seek God and reject His most revealed self (Jesus).

 

[LilyM]

Crusader13:

That wouldn’t really explain the circumstances of invincible ignorance. On the one hand you could choose to further explore the truthfulness of his claim by actually going to his home to see if what he said were true.

But that is not the case. The claimant says that the LGM were there, but left without any mark, and there is no other evidence left for their presence.

However, if you choose to dismiss his claim by saying to yourself, “that’s absurd, I’m not going to bother looking into such an illogical story because it’s a waste of time.” Now you have chosen to disbelieve in such a claim without having done anything to disprove it.

You cannot disprove something for which there is no verifiable evidence. The absence of proof IS NOT a proof of absence, but the absence of evidence IS an evidence of absence. Observe the difference between “proof” and “evidence”.

Of course people dismiss absurd claims all the time without looking into them. To check claims is a time consuming process and it usually costs utilizing valuable resources, which could be used better for evaluating reasonable claims. After all the resources are scarce, and wasting them on absurd claims is irrational.

Don’t forget, the onus is on the one who makes a positive claim.

But you don’t need to see marks of the LGM, any more than you need to see Einstein’s manuscript proof of e=mc2.

You test the spirits - is your neighbour prone to say things that arent true in general? How likely that your neighbour was mentally ill/on drugs/joking/deliberately lying at the time of that particular claim?

And it can be time consuming, but if the subject and consequences are serious, then it is important to invest some time in it.

 

[al2o3]

My question is: “do you have any reason to have that faith?” Because faith can be several kinds: “reasonably established belief, for which there is no sufficient evidence” and “blind faith”.

Faith is generated and sustained from encounter. One encounters Christ (or remains open to encounter Christ) - whether it is an encounter that is supernatural eg: Paul, or encountering Him in another human being, or encountering Him in Truth and Beauty or encountering Him in the Scriptures. It is an act of “free will” to remain open to this encounter. That is why faith is often referred to as a gift. He does not hide (!), He reveals Himself to us, we only need to be open to recognise Him. This faith is not “blind” rather it is an encounter that is undeniable to yourself - it is not sustained by the evidence of others, though others might witness to the same encounter as recorded by the apostles and their contemporaries.

 

[Ammi]

"What do these passages mean to you?" is a very sola-scriptura Protestant question. “To you” makes it relative, and as Catholics, we look at much bigger picture that involves historical/theological context, as well as reason and tradition. “What does this mean to you?” is precisely the question that got Christianity into the mess its in - namely, fragmenting into 1000s of denominations and sub-denominations.

The question is not “Sola Scriptura” at all. Catholics are free to take meaning from Scriptures. It doesnt mean we disregard (or extract something which contradicts infallible Teaching) Church Teaching in doing so by any means.

Again, very few specific Scripture passages are formally defined. And even then, that doesnt mean those passages are limited to relating one theological truth.

 

[Pattylt]

Can I back up a second and ask a question? If God judges us upon our death but the only way to go to Hell is by choice, what is God judging? Because I certainly wouldn’t choose Hell at that point. I’d finally have my necessary information that there is a God! At that point, I’d certainly realize my error but I assume God would also know why I didn’t believe. So, I am certainly dying in my sins unforgiven but Hell is MY choice? This just goes beyond making sense to me…sorry!

Or, are you saying that by dying unforgiven my choice was made in this earthly life and God is judging me condemned ? Which does kind of look like He is sending me to Hell. Any help or would you prefer a new topic? Thanks.

 

[AlbMagno]

Hell is the state of absence of God (or minimal presence, if you want, otherwise people in Hell wouldn’t exist). Absence of Love.

Every sin is rooted in absence of Love, to us, to God, or to others. We say that we choose Hell because when we mortally sin we voluntarily reject Love itself, we reject God Himself.

So when God will judge, He will really discern what’s in our soul, in our will, as He is the only one who can see fully what we are and did, and therefore judge if we are unrepentant or not for our absence in Love. But before that, we chose the sin and chose unrepentance.

It’s like saying a criminal judges himself by commiting the crime.

 

[Pattylt]

Well, I guess they are pointless to God but not to me and those I love and those I help. Would you recommend that all non Catholics or all non Christians stop loving and helping others because it’s pointless? Or, is only pointless for obtaining heaven?

 

[blackforest]

But if she’s charitable throughout her life yet never becomes a believing Catholic - i.e. hears the message and rejects it - she goes to hell, right?

She’s a long-time CAF user, has heard Christ’s message, and chosen not to be Catholic. Does this mean she’s going to hell?

If she exercises kindness in her daily interactions, volunteers in soup kitchens, and makes amends for any wrongs, it’s all in vain because she’s still going to hell, right?

So what on earth would motivate her to exert so much goodness when she could just as easily choose to cheat on her taxes and join a cartel gang? Staying out of jail in this life and hell in the next one? Or might there be something deeper and more intrinsic that enables her and people life her to pursue Christian living without professing to Christianity?

It is at this point that CAFers who are all mortal-sin this and hellfire-that start backpedaling: "Well, no one really knows who goes where . . . "

I agree. That’s why we should be humbler in our assertions. I’m convinced that the light of Christ can shine in even through people who do not profess to His teachings. “Conservative” Catholics, whatever that even means, tend not to agree with me.

The question is not “Sola Scriptura” at all. Catholics are free to take meaning from Scriptures. It doesnt mean we disregard (or extract something which contradicts infallible Teaching) Church Teaching in doing so by any means.

The key words are “to you.” Particularly on theological issues as hotly contested as this one, we Catholics take a holistic, three-pillared approach of Scripture, reason, and tradition.

Then what is the point of reading Scripture at all? If it doesnt speak to you, personally at all?

Now where on earth did I say to throw out the baby with the bath-water? Read the Scriptures. But don’t rely completely on your own personal interpretation.

 

[blackforest]

I guess I’d better believe it or else I’m going to hell . . . .

What about my questions?

So what on earth would motivate her to exert so much goodness when she could just as easily choose to cheat on her taxes and join a cartel gang? Staying out of jail in this life and hell in the next one? Or might there be something deeper and more intrinsic that enables her and people life her to pursue Christian living without professing to Christianity?

 

[blackforest]

I’ve already stated that I need to speak to clergy instead of lay CAFers. I’m clearly not going to get substantive answers in this thread. Muting for now.

 

[Ammi]

But if she’s charitable throughout her life yet never becomes a believing Catholic - i.e. hears the message and rejects it - she goes to hell, right?

Good faith and works are a preparation to receive the Gospel, not a justification to reject it.

She’s a long-time CAF user, has heard Christ’s message, and chosen not to be Catholic. Does this mean she’s going to hell? If she exercises kindness in her daily interactions, volunteers in soup kitchens, and makes amends for any wrongs, it’s all in vain because she’s still going to hell, right?

I’m talking about the Gospel, not choosing any particular Christian denomination. It can be all done in good faith, if it is a preparation to give thanks for the Gospel.

Now where on earth did I say to throw out the baby with the bath-water? Read the Scriptures. But don’t rely completely on your own personal interpretation.

I dont rely on my own interpretation. I am Catholic. So I also believe the Spirit helps us understand all Catholic Faith.

 

[steve-b]

Or, are you saying that by dying unforgiven my choice was made in this earthly life and God is judging me condemned ? Which does kind of look like He is sending me to Hell. Any help or would you prefer a new topic? Thanks.

If this response is more than you are asking for, just say so

For clarity

Where a soul goes at death is always the result of God’s judgement. We don’t judge ourselves.

So

Once a person has come to the knowledge of this truth, about sin & forgiveness, and still dies in grave (mortal ) sin, then while it’s God who judges that, the person knows the consequences are there already for mortal sins on the soul… Scripture identifies grave sins, as well as, the consequences for one’s soul who dies in any of those sins. They won’t inherit heaven., IOW they go to hell. Once a person knows this, they should avoid mortal sin like the plague. If one falls into mortal sin, then the remedy has ALSO been provided by God,. it’s sacramental confession, established by Jesus.

Because

all sin is a choice,

that we choose to commit, using free will which God gave all of us, THEN it could also be said if one goes to Hell, they went there by choices they made and in the end, didn’t repent for any of it right up to death…

God offers Forgiveness

till our last breath…for EVERYONE.

If someone doesn’t take advantage of that grace, and doesn’t repent of their sin(s) , then that’s a choice one makes on this side of eternity where asking for forgiveness is possible and forgiveness takes place…

Re: sorrow (repentance) for our sins

There is a distinction between sorrow for light weight sins, not mortal sin, called (venial) sin vs grave (mortal ) sin.

John the apostle makes that distinction between the 2 sins HERE

AND (again, all emphasis in text is mine)

1492 Repentance (also called contrition) must be inspired by motives that arise from faith. If repentance arises from love of charity for God, it is called “perfect” contrition; if it is founded on other motives, it is called “imperfect.”

"Other motives" e.g. As in fear of hell.

1453 The contrition called "imperfect" (or “attrition”) is also a gift of God, a prompting of the Holy Spirit. It is born of the consideration of sin’s ugliness or the fear of eternal damnation and the other penalties threatening the sinner (contrition of fear). Such a stirring of conscience can initiate an interior process which, under the prompting of grace, will be brought to completion by sacramental absolution. By itself however, imperfect contrition cannot obtain the forgiveness of grave sins, but it disposes one to obtain forgiveness in the sacrament of Penance.

Therefore

imperfect contrition is fine for forgiveness of minor sins
Perfect contrition, OTOH, is required for mortal sin + a firm resolve to get to confession ( a sacrament Jesus established) ASAP

 

[Ammi]

I’ve already stated that I need to speak to clergy instead of lay CAFers. I’m clearly not going to get substantive answers in this thread. Muting for now.

Ask three priests, and see what they have in common.

 

[Pattylt]

that we choose to commit, using free will which God gave all of us, THEN it could also be said if one goes to Hell, they went there by choices they made and in the end, didn’t repent for any of it right up to death …

Saying it’s the choices we made vs. saying WE CHOOSE Hell are two very different things. The first is logical but, to me, the second is not. Yet, I seem to always hear or read the second.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

that we choose to commit, using free will which God gave all of us, THEN it could also be said if one goes to Hell, they went there by choices they made and in the end, didn’t repent for any of it right up to death …

Saying it’s the choices we made vs. saying WE CHOOSE Hell are two very different things. The first is logical but, to me, the second is not. Yet, I seem to always hear or read the second.

Let’s use an example from the OT

Ezekiel describes 4 potential scenerios.

Here Ez 3:17-21 , Please read 1st before looking at my scenarios

So what if

A= me a Catholic,
B = anyone doing wrong,
Life=heaven,
Death=hell,

Here’s 4 potential scenarios described by Ezekiel (ALL emphasis mine )

1. “If I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his life, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at your hand.” . IOW A gives B no warning. A & B are both screwed. Both die

2. “But if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, or from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but you will have saved your life.” . IOW A gives B warning. B ignores the warning. A lives B is screwed.

3. “if a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits iniquity, and I lay a stumbling block before him, he shall die; because you have not warned him, he shall die for his sin, and his righteous deeds which he has done shall not be remembered; but his blood I will require at your hand.” . IOW A gives B no warning. A is screwed. B is being B and is screwed and ALSO, his good works are not remembered

4. "Nevertheless if you warn the righteous man not to sin, and he does not sin, he shall surely live, because he took warning; and you will have saved your life.” . IOW A warns B and B listens and changes, A & B live

So

putting this as God sees it, As a result of the instruction and consequences given, I would do all I can, to be in scenarios 2 & 4 and avoid #s 1 & 3 like the plague.

Information. is given, warning is given, and Choices are freely made…right?

 

[Pattylt]

Information. is given, warning is given, and Choices are freely made…right?

My answer is that I never had a choice. For whatever reason, I am unable to believe in the supernatural. It’s not how I started…it’s how I ended up. I am unable to choose to believe in something I dont believe. It’s like asking me to believe gravity doesn’t apply to me. I just can not make myself believe that I’ll float.

I’ve said before, I accept that I’m different from most people. Either my brain is just different somehow or I’m just an odd egg. There are many things I can believe without evidence if it still makes sense to me but God isn’t in the group. I assume it’s a character flaw. You can call it pride or stubbornness or radical skepticism but I went from a believer to a non over a four year period and have never been able to believe since.