Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Bishop Williamson on Feeneyites  (Read 729 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Bishop Williamson on Feeneyites
« Reply #55 on: Today at 03:44:27 PM »
On top of my previous comment, you mentioned "heretic" which, by definition, are already baptized individuals that reject one or more doctrines of the faith. So I don't see how baptism of blood or desire apply to them.
This quote, if you notice, is speaking of salvation, not of baptism. 

It is saying that no one can be saved even if he sheds his blood for Christ, because our works are nothing if done without Faith, and therefore without supernatural charity, the latter of which can only be had if one possesses the true Faith.

Catechumens who die for the Faith are by that very fact part of the Church. The act of dying for the Faith IS their entrance into the Church.

The Holy Innocents are a perfect example of this. True, this was before the law of baptism was promulgated, but do not act like this concept is inconsistent with sound theology, because it certainly is not.

Online DecemRationis

  • Supporter
Re: Bishop Williamson on Feeneyites
« Reply #56 on: Today at 04:38:00 PM »
But which one is it though? Is it a theological error to reject it? Or mortal sin? If it was such a big deal I think the theologians wouldn't be all over the board in terms of what the penalty is.

I'm by no means an expert on theological notes, but isn't theological error less than heresy? It's heresy that places one outside the Church. The majority of these theologians hold denial of BoD to be less than heresy. If the Church not only hasn't pronounced Feeneyites heretics, and theologians can't even agree on what denial of BoD is, there is no basis for holding Feeneyites to be heretics beside individual, non-binding personal opinion. 

So Catholics who deny communion with Feeneyites would seem to be guilty of excessive, ah, zeal, and actually schism. Doesn't Bishop Sanborn's group do this?

Just another example of the mess we are in in this post-Vatican II Apostasy.