What must we do to be saved?

[OhioBob]

Stylite:

Trad-Catholic,

You wouldn’t happen to be EENS by any chance?

What could possibly make you think that?

 

[Trad_Catholic]

Stylite:

Trad-Catholic,

You wouldn’t happen to be EENS by any chance? If not, please accept my apologies.

Maybe you could answer my question about mortal sin. Do you agree that one must have full knowledge and consent to be guilty of a grave sin?

Are you asking EENS or me?

 

[OhioBob]

Trad_Catholic:

Are you asking EENS or me?

I think the implication is that you and EENS are one and the same - EENS last post before suspension was 6/30 @ 1:50 pm, your first post after joining was 6/30 @ 1:58 pm. It seemed to be an interesting coincidence since your rhetoric is so similar.

Sorry if the assumption was incorrect.

Blessings.

 

[Melchior]

EENS:

Yes he has. He is CONSTANTLY rejecting is, as he believes heresy. Does his heresy disappear for a second, while he states that he believes all the Church teaches? If he does stop believing in the lutheran heresy, and he believes in the Church and is baptised, THEN he is saved. If not, he cannot be saved.

Funny, I thought Christ said believing in Him is what saved people. To be sure that should be in the context of the Church. But I suspect there are folks who mistake believing in the Church with believing in Christ.

Mel

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Mel,

I think some folks, notably the folks at the Nicene Council, understood that the true apostolic faith is one that believed in the Blessed Trinity AND professed belief in the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. In the early Church, Scripture, Tradition, and Church were understood to be in union with one another, not by man’s efforts, but by Divine guidance. Catholics continue to hold that belief. (Except EENS, who seems to be asserting that beginning with Pope Pius IX, the Catholic Church’s magisterium is so corrupted by modernism, that God placed divine authority to teach into the hands of “saint” Leonard Feeney.)

Faith is not just “fiduciary” as Luther seemed to emphasize, but having faith also refers to belief in the “deposit of faith.” One can believe in Jesus Christ in many various and often contradictory ways as the history of Christianity shows us. So, for a Catholic, to “have faith” means belief in the “deposit of faith” which is proposed by that Teaching Church having divine authority by virtue of the keys, having apostolic succession, and who continue to maintain, as did the Church of Chalcedon, Ephesus, etc., that the Roman Pontiff has primacy of honor AND jurisdictional authority over the universal Church.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

While EENS may be suspended, perhaps he will continue to read and to consider the following…

EENS said:

I made a response to that: his encyclical is not infallible Quanto conficiamur moerore. The Creeds, Councils, and Papal Bulls of the Church are infallible.

If his his intent was to restrict infallible decrees to Creeds, Councils, and Papal Bulls, he’s quite mistaken. For example, the Dogma regarding the Assumption of Mary was neither defined by a Creed, by a Council, or by a Papal Bull. It was infallibly defined in by Pope Pius XII in the Apostolic Constitution Munificentissiumus Deus.

According to Pope Pius IX in his defense against rationalism and indifference, *Singulari quadem, *in 1854:

“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 therin will perish in the flood; 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 quilt in this matter in the eyes of God.” (Denzinger 1647)

The implied thesis offered by EENS is that Pius IX was introducing “modernism” into Catholic teaching. Yet, the Pope most credited for fighting modernism was Pope St. Pius X. Pius X quotes from Piux IX favorably in his famous defense against modernism, Pascendi Dominici Gregis:
*

"All this, Venerable Brothers, is in formal opposition with the teachings of Our Predecessor, Pius IX …

Thus then, Venerable Brethren, for the Modernists, Nor indeed are they without precursors in their doctrines, for it was of these that Our Predecessor Pius IX wrote: These enemies of divine revelation extol human progress to the skies, and with rash and sacrilegious daring would have it introduced into the Catholic religion as if this religion were not the work of God but of man, or some kind of philosophical discovery susceptible of perfection by human efforts. …

… the doctrine of the Modernists offers nothing new - we find it condemned in the Syllabus of Pius IX…

… the Roman Pontiffs, Pius IV. and Pius IX., ordered the insertion in the profession of faith of the following declaration: I most firmly admit and embrace the apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions and other observances and constitutions of the Church. {NOTE: not just infallible dogmas, but also “constitutions of the Church” like Lumen Genium}
*Interesting how Pius IX’s interpretation of this infallible dogma has never been refuted by Pius X as “modernistic.”, nor contradicted by any Pope since. In fact, the Catholic champion against modernism, Pius X, explicitly states that modernist teaching is in opposition to the teachings of Pius IX.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Another point EENS ought to consider …

Pope Piux IX (quite orthodox according to St. Pius X) also condemned the proposition that only infallible dogmas of faith and morals are to be assented to and obeyed …

And, we cannot pass over in silence the boldness of those who “not enduring sound doctrine” [II Tim 4:3], contend that “without sin and with no loss of Catholic profession, one can withhold assent and obedience to those judgments and decrees of the Apostolic See, whose object is declared to relate to the general good of the Church and its rights and discipline, provided it does not touch dogmas of faith or morals.” There is no one who does not see and understand clearly and openly how opposed this is to the Catholic dogma of the plenary power divinely bestowed on the Roman Pointiff by Christ the Lord Himself of feeding, ruling, and governing the universal Church. (Denzinger 1698)

Which brings us back to the DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH, *Lumen Gentium, *SOLEMNLY promulgated by Pope Paul VI, which EENS seems to dissent with as “modernistic”:

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. (LG 16)

One must also remember, that although “Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense … no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man.” (CCC 1860).

 

[itsjustdave1988]

EENS said:

For example, there was never taught Baptism other than of water even merely 53 years ago. My mother was taugh that without water Baptism it is absolutely impossible to be saved (born 1951). She had a brain injury and lost a lot of her memory, yet she still clearly remembers that. (emphasis added)

Hmmmmmmmm… I suggest you compare what your mother remembered being taught to what verifiable sources of Catholic teaching stated over 50 years ago.

Your mother ought to have learned from the Baltimore Catechism of 1891 (written well more than 53 years ago), as it was the standard catechism in US Catholic schools at that time:

Here’s what it says:

Suppose, however, that there is a non-Catholic who firmly believes that the church to which he belongs is the true Church, and who has never – even in the past – had the slightest doubt of that fact – what will become of him?

If he was validly baptized and never committed a mortal sin, he will be saved; because, believing himself a member of the true Church, he was doing all he could to serve God according to his knowledge and the dictates of his conscience. But if ever he committed a mortal sin, his salvation would be very much more difficult. …

If, then, we found a Protestant who never committed a mortal sin after Baptism, and who never had the slightest doubt about the truth of his religion, that person would be saved; because, being baptized, he is a member of the Church, and being free from mortal sin he is a friend of God and could not in justice be condemned to Hell. Such a person would attend Mass and receive the Sacraments if he knew the Catholic Church to be the only true Church. … (Baltimore Catechism no. 4)

How about Baptism by desire ?

Q. How many kinds of Baptism are there?
**A. There are three kinds of Baptism: Baptism of water, of desire, and of **
blood. (ibid)

---

And from Dr. Ludwig Ott’s “Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma” first published in 1952:

Baptism of desire is the explicit or implicit desire for sacramental baptism (*votum baptismi) *associated with perfect contrition (contrition based upon charity).

The Council of Trent teaches that justification from original sin is not possible “without the washing unto regeneration or the desire for the same.”

From the Catechism of Pope St. Pius X (also well more than 50 years ago, first published in English in 1910):

Q: Can the absence of Baptism be supplied in any other way?
A: The absence of Baptism can be supplied by martyrdom, which is called Baptism of Blood, or by an act of perfect love of God, or of contrition, along with the **desire, at least implicit, of Baptism, and this is called Baptism of Desire. **

 

[Catholic29]

Anyone care to debate the Council Fathers and Pope Paul VI? Of course if any Traditionalist/Feeneyite does not accept the validity or authority of this document, one can start a new thread on why they reject the Apostolic authority of Vatican II and its Popes. But the debate would have to be with Fr. Feeney sympathizers and SSPXers, since the topic Sedevacantism is banned in this forum.

---

Dogmatic Constitution on the Church
Second Vatican Council

---

LUMEN GENTIUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964

**CHAPTER I **

THE MYSTERY OF THE CHURCH

1. Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God.(18*) In the first place we must recall the people to whom the testament and the promises were given and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh.(125) On account of their fathers this people remains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts He makes nor of the calls He issues.(126); But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Mohamedans, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind. 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.(19*) Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel.(20*) She knows that it is given by Him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life. But often men, deceived by the Evil One, have become vain in their reasonings and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, serving the creature rather than the Creator.(129) Or some there are who, living and dying in this world without God, are exposed to final despair. Wherefore to promote the glory of God and procure the salvation of all of these, and mindful of the command of the Lord, “Preach the Gospel to every creature”,(130) the Church fosters the missions with care and attention.

source: ewtn.com/library/councils/v2church.htm

 

[Malachi4U]

EENS,

I could not vote since there was not a “non of the above” answer.

Oh well.

 

[tjw163]

EENS:

As I have said many times before, I don’t believe in “invincible ignorance” saving a person.

Without getting too deep into this debate, I would like to point out one thing… invincible ignorance CANNOT SAVE a person. It’s not the ignorance that saves, it’s God’s grace that saves. The point the Church is trying to make is that some may be saved who, through no fault of their own, do not know and adhere to Church teaching because they are invincibly ignorant. In such a case, the person CAN be saved, not BECAUSE of his ignorance (as if ignorance is somehow a good to be sought, which it’s not), but rather because God found this to be a sufficient reason to show him mercy.

Not to be a fence-sitter here… I do think valid points can be found in both “sides” of the argument. Because ignorance is not a “good” to be grasped, we should certainly do our best to inform those who may be invincibly ignorant of the Catholic faith. And IN NO WAY can this be considered a disservice to the invincibly ignorant, because only when informed of the truth can a person CHOOSE the truth. The love of Christ is not something to be kept under a basket, out of fear that someone may not accept it as presented.

Blessings,
Tim

 

[paxvobiscum]

montanaman:

Lol. Yes, that’s true. And I too am proud to be Catholic–I once went around to all the area Protestant churches and tacked up ten reasons why they should accept Mary as their “personal mother.” The local priest wasn’t happy…

Since I’m reading this thread days after I would like to go off topic and request those ten reasons! I promise not to tack 'em anywhere!

 

[Leo44]

I have read this entire thread, and found it very informative, my congrads to all, and their efforts, may God bless you all, and please for those of us with less knowledge keep it up, we are all learning.

 

[rpp]

I wonder how four years of growth at CAF will affect this poll.

 

[justinthemartyr]

According to the church, our explicit belief in Christ and what he did on the cross saves us.

But…The church also states that those who by no fault of their own, have not explicitly known Jesus or heard and understood the gospel, can still be saved. they must believe in one God and do His will to the best of their ability(paraphrasing) this would include islamics and jews.

 

[Cling2Cross]

There must be a time in a person’s life where they hear the gospel and, by the power of the Holy Spirit and by the gift of God, He works repentance and faith into their heart and regenerates them…by His grace. There is repentance then leading to bowing to Christ as Lord and trusting in Him as Savior. This is the rebirth and only through the preaching of the gospel can this take place…

Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. (1 Peter 1:23 KJV)

Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. (John 3:3 KJV)

That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. (Romans 10:9 KJV)…
…How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? (Romans 10:14 KJV)

Once a person is in Christ…they have passed from death to life…

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. (John 5:24 KJV)

There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (Romans 8:1 KJV)

They are perfect in the eyes of God as they are joined to Christ by faith/justified by faith…

For by one offering *he hath perfected *for ever them that are sanctified. (Hebrews 10:14 KJV)

C2C