Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => The Feeneyism Ghetto => Topic started by: Last Tradhican on August 11, 2018, 12:20:44 PM
-
Just a word of advice from a fellow strict EENSer that has been at this for almost 25 years:
Do not waste your time debating about the baptism of desire of the catechumen of St. Thomas Aquinas and later St. Alphonsus Ligouri, or the word "desire" used in Trent, for the people whom you are debating with totally reject the sources they are using to defend their belief! They do not even believe that a desire to be baptized is necessary for salvation. You are assuming that they believe in the baptism of desire of St. Alphonsus Ligouri, but they do not, for they believe that people can be saved who have no belief in the Incarnation and the Holy Trinity. No saint EVER taught what they believe. Do not assume anything, first determine with them if they believe in salvation by implicit faith, which is salvation by belief in a God that rewards, a salvation that does not require a desire for baptism, nor a desire to be a Catholic, nor belief in the Incarnation or the Holy Trinity. Debating about the baptism of desire of St. Thomas Aquinas wit those people is like arranging chairs on the Titanic.
In my 25 years of dending the dogmas on EENS and the sacrament of baptism, I have only met one promoter of baptism of desire that truly restricted it to the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas. Do not waste your time debating about the innocuous theory of baptism of desire of St. Thomas, it is a theory which if true affects numerically speaking almost no one.
-
By debating with these false BODers about the Baptism of desire of the catechumen, you are filling pages of material that will obscure the truth, the fact that they believe that people can be saved without baptism, without a desire to be baptized, without a desire to be a Catholic, and without belief in the Incarnation and the Holy Trinity.
Try what I am teaching here, and you will go straight to the problem and shine a light directly of what they truly believe. These people are all liars who are just hiding behind St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Alphonsus Ligouri, when they really totally reject them AND of course all the dogmas on EENS.
-
The Council of Trent was well aware of the "three baptisms" as speculated by St. Thomas Aquinas a few centuries earlier. Still it does not teach three baptisms. In no way does it teach any other way to justification than the one Sacrament of Baptism. Furthermore it explicitly forbids to henceforth believe, preach, or teach anything about justification other than the same Council. (http://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/trent/sixth-session.htm)
-
Baptism of desire. Salvation of desire. Very important distinction. Can bod provide salvation, just for desiring salvation? Everyone in the world wants salvation, peace, rest, joy, comfort...But will everyone obtain salvation just by desiring it? A person must desire Baptism.
Going a step further, when someone really desires baptism, God gives it to them in reality because God doesn't offer a substitute gift for the one desired, He gives the gift that is desired, even under the most impossible circuŠ¼stances. If person does not desire the gift that saves...he gets nothing. Desire for Baptism is necessary to obtain Baptism. Even the Church supplies by proxy, the godparents for the desire, for children. Desire for salvation is insufficient in itself to save anyone. Good post LT.
-
I agree wholeheartedly, Last Tradhican. I've been saying the same thing for years here. I don't even care to debate someone who believes in the requirement for explicit faith in order to have BoD. There used to be a poster here, Arvinger, who believed that way, and yet I always felt that he was on the "right" side of the issue because of his insistence on explicit faith for salvation. In most debates with BoDers, he was on OUR side and arguing against them. I have NO QUARREL with someone who believes in the BoD of St. Thomas Aquinas or St. Robert Bellarmine. St. Robert Bellarmine explicitly limited BoD to the catechumen, and the scholastic question he asked was "Whether the catechumen who dies" before receiving Baptism can be saved? If that's your view of BoD, then you're entitled to follow these Doctors of the Church on that speculative theory. I have no quarrel with you, and I will not waste 10 seconds of my time arguing the point.
No, BoD has for a long time been about little more than EENS-denial; they use it as a way to undercut EENS so that, in the end, they believe that all manner of infidels can be saved.
-
In my 25 years of dending the dogmas on EENS and the sacrament of baptism, I have only met one promoter of baptism of desire that truly restricted it to the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas. Do not waste your time debating about the innocuous theory of baptism of desire of St. Thomas, it is a theory which if true affects numerically speaking almost no one.
Nishant and Arvinger here on CI. Nishant could be a LITTLE slippery at times, but Arvinger was extremely solid, and I regularly praised him. Matto also seemed to hold a very similar position, but he moved around a lot, so I'm not sure where he's at now on this.
-
I've even suggested an articulation of BoD to BoDers that would not be heretical as their usual formulations are, but they have rejected these.