Read an Interview with Matthew, the owner of CathInfo

Author Topic: A reflection on the 1949 Holy Office Letter.  (Read 3772 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ambrose

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3447
  • Reputation: +2423/-11
  • Gender: Male
A reflection on the 1949 Holy Office Letter.
« Reply #60 on: November 04, 2014, 04:17:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Stubborn
    Quote from: Ambrose
    Quote from: Cantarella
    But Trent did not teach BOD no matter how many times Ambrose says it. Actually Trent emphasized the absolute need of the Sacraments for salvation and anathemized those such as Ambrose who deny it.


    Yes, Trent did teach Baptism of Desire.  You apparently did not read the sources that I gave.  

    I can't cure your wilful ignorance, only you can.  


    Trent did not teach YOUR version of a BOD.

    Best thing you can do is repeat what Trent actually did teach over and over every day until you believe it, as I suggested numerous times over this past year already.


    You and all of your likeminded Feeneyites were asked months ago to give even one approved source, a Doctor, theologian, or other approved source that understands Trent according to your unapproved interpreation.  

    All we heard were crickets.

    On our side, you were provided with numerous approved sources that all understood the obvious meaning of Trent as teaching Baptism of Desire.

    Like every Protestant before you, you just ignore the facts, and love your private interpretations.  Feeneyism resembles Catholicism, but it is grounded in private judgment, not authority.
    The Council of Trent, The Catechism of the Council of Trent, Papal Teaching, The Teaching of the Holy Office, The Teaching of the Church Fathers, The Code of Canon Law, Countless approved catechisms, The Doctors of the Church, The teaching of the Dogmatic

    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7782
    • Reputation: +4568/-575
    • Gender: Female
    A reflection on the 1949 Holy Office Letter.
    « Reply #61 on: November 04, 2014, 05:12:32 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ambrose
    Quote from: Cantarella
    Quote from: Ambrose
    Quote from: Cantarella
    Quote from: Ambrose

    Baptism of Desire is de fide, to deny it is heresy.

    Baptism of Blood is certain, to deny it is the mortal sin of temerity.


    Who said that? It must be someone even more modernist than Pope Paul VI, Pope John XXIII, Pope JJII, and Pope Francis for sure, as not even they have gone this far.


    Read my footer.


    Ambrose's footer is false. It is just not true that all taught BOD, but even if it was true, that does not make Baptism of Desire an infallible dogma, which is what Ambrose preaches.


    The sources are all HERE

    Let him with ears hear, let him with eyes see.

    I wonder how easy Luther would have fooled you to with his "great knowledge" if you lived in his time?

    You fall for the Feeneyite propaganda hook, line, and sinker.




    This is a biased compilation of quotes which mostly have NOTHING to do with the teaching on BOD / BOB and most certainly NOT with the Pelagian distorted idea that BOD could ever apply to someone who does not hold the Catholic Faith.

    Who is Christopher P. Conlon anyway?
       
    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.


    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 9259
    • Reputation: +3686/-829
    • Gender: Male
    A reflection on the 1949 Holy Office Letter.
    « Reply #62 on: November 04, 2014, 05:27:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ambrose
    Quote from: Stubborn
    Quote from: Ambrose
    Quote from: Cantarella
    But Trent did not teach BOD no matter how many times Ambrose says it. Actually Trent emphasized the absolute need of the Sacraments for salvation and anathemized those such as Ambrose who deny it.


    Yes, Trent did teach Baptism of Desire.  You apparently did not read the sources that I gave.  

    I can't cure your wilful ignorance, only you can.  


    Trent did not teach YOUR version of a BOD.

    Best thing you can do is repeat what Trent actually did teach over and over every day until you believe it, as I suggested numerous times over this past year already.


    You and all of your likeminded Feeneyites were asked months ago to give even one approved source, a Doctor, theologian, or other approved source that understands Trent according to your unapproved interpreation.  

    All we heard were crickets.

    On our side, you were provided with numerous approved sources that all understood the obvious meaning of Trent as teaching Baptism of Desire.

    Like every Protestant before you, you just ignore the facts, and love your private interpretations.  Feeneyism resembles Catholicism, but it is grounded in private judgment, not authority.


    All you heard were crickets because you have ears but cannot hear (and eyes to see but you cannot see).

    You have the prot video for your version of a living example of your BOD, so please, refrain from calling your a BOD a teaching of the Catholic Church from now on.

    The proof your version is prot is recorded on that video for you.


    For a small gain they travel far; for eternal life many will scarcely lift a foot from the ground. - Thomas A Kempis

    Offline Ambrose

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3447
    • Reputation: +2423/-11
    • Gender: Male
    A reflection on the 1949 Holy Office Letter.
    « Reply #63 on: November 04, 2014, 05:52:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Cantarella
    Quote from: Ambrose
    Quote from: Cantarella
    Quote from: Ambrose
    Quote from: Cantarella
    Quote from: Ambrose

    Baptism of Desire is de fide, to deny it is heresy.

    Baptism of Blood is certain, to deny it is the mortal sin of temerity.


    Who said that? It must be someone even more modernist than Pope Paul VI, Pope John XXIII, Pope JJII, and Pope Francis for sure, as not even they have gone this far.


    Read my footer.


    Ambrose's footer is false. It is just not true that all taught BOD, but even if it was true, that does not make Baptism of Desire an infallible dogma, which is what Ambrose preaches.


    The sources are all HERE

    Let him with ears hear, let him with eyes see.

    I wonder how easy Luther would have fooled you to with his "great knowledge" if you lived in his time?

    You fall for the Feeneyite propaganda hook, line, and sinker.




    This is a biased compilation of quotes which mostly have NOTHING to do with the teaching on BOD / BOB and most certainly NOT with the Pelagian distorted idea that BOD could ever apply to someone who does not hold the Catholic Faith.

    Who is Christopher P. Conlon anyway?
       


    Bias?  The quotes are all sourced.  Can you demonstrate which quotes are biased?  

    Baptism of Desire is the teahing of the Church.  The proof has been presented to you, but you willfully reject it.  This only increases your culpability.  Do you care about your soul?  Do you fear Hell?  You don't seem like you do.

    The Council of Trent, The Catechism of the Council of Trent, Papal Teaching, The Teaching of the Holy Office, The Teaching of the Church Fathers, The Code of Canon Law, Countless approved catechisms, The Doctors of the Church, The teaching of the Dogmatic

    Offline Ambrose

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3447
    • Reputation: +2423/-11
    • Gender: Male
    A reflection on the 1949 Holy Office Letter.
    « Reply #64 on: November 04, 2014, 05:56:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Stubborn
    Quote from: Ambrose
    Quote from: Stubborn
    Quote from: Ambrose
    Quote from: Cantarella
    But Trent did not teach BOD no matter how many times Ambrose says it. Actually Trent emphasized the absolute need of the Sacraments for salvation and anathemized those such as Ambrose who deny it.


    Yes, Trent did teach Baptism of Desire.  You apparently did not read the sources that I gave.  

    I can't cure your wilful ignorance, only you can.  


    Trent did not teach YOUR version of a BOD.

    Best thing you can do is repeat what Trent actually did teach over and over every day until you believe it, as I suggested numerous times over this past year already.


    You and all of your likeminded Feeneyites were asked months ago to give even one approved source, a Doctor, theologian, or other approved source that understands Trent according to your unapproved interpreation.  

    All we heard were crickets.

    On our side, you were provided with numerous approved sources that all understood the obvious meaning of Trent as teaching Baptism of Desire.

    Like every Protestant before you, you just ignore the facts, and love your private interpretations.  Feeneyism resembles Catholicism, but it is grounded in private judgment, not authority.


    All you heard were crickets because you have ears but cannot hear (and eyes to see but you cannot see).

    You have the prot video for your version of a living example of your BOD, so please, refrain from calling your a BOD a teaching of the Catholic Church from now on.

    The proof your version is prot is recorded on that video for you.




    I only heard crickets because you dodged the question.  Are you saying now that you answered it?
    The Council of Trent, The Catechism of the Council of Trent, Papal Teaching, The Teaching of the Holy Office, The Teaching of the Church Fathers, The Code of Canon Law, Countless approved catechisms, The Doctors of the Church, The teaching of the Dogmatic


    Offline JPaul

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3832
    • Reputation: +3716/-290
    • Gender: Male
    A reflection on the 1949 Holy Office Letter.
    « Reply #65 on: November 27, 2014, 06:10:39 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Gee, all of this time, and the semi-universalists are still at it................

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17390
    • Reputation: +9712/-4263
    • Gender: Male
    A reflection on the 1949 Holy Office Letter.
    « Reply #66 on: November 27, 2014, 06:55:19 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • So Ambrose the Pelagian has returned.

    Offline JPaul

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3832
    • Reputation: +3716/-290
    • Gender: Male
    A reflection on the 1949 Holy Office Letter.
    « Reply #67 on: November 28, 2014, 06:30:34 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    So Ambrose the Pelagian has returned.


    Apparently so, and seemingly with some collaborators...............



    Approved collaborators of course.


     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16