CathInfo.com

St. Alphonsus Denying a BOD.....

From:  (An Exposition and Defence of All the Points of Faith Discussed and Defined by the Sacred Council of Trent, Along With the Refutation of the Errors of the Pretended Reformers, Saint Alphonsus Liguori, Dublin, 1846.)

The Council of Trent, Session Seven, Sacraments in General, Canon 4 states:

Quote

CANON IV.-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.

St. Alphonsus:

"The heretics say that no sacrament is necessary, inasmuch as they hold that man is justified by faith alone, and that the sacraments only serve to excite and nourish this faith, which (as they say) can be equally excited and nourished by preaching.  But this is certainly false, and is condemned in the fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth canons:  for as we know from the Scriptures, some of the sacraments are necessary (necessitate Medii) as a means without which salvation is impossible. Thus Baptism is necessary for all, Penance for them who have fallen into sin after Baptism, and the Eucharist is necessary for all at least in desire (in voto)."

The internet has caused a lot of general confusion, but it has especially contributed to many theological misunderstandings, since many texts are accessible which previously would only have been given to those under the direction of a properly trained and informed cleric.

Clergy are not only usually properly educated, they are also given the grace to understand truths of the Faith with greater clarity than laity, simply on account of their vocations to the priesthood and episcopate, which involves the duty to guide the faithful.

It is a simple fact that Catholics all over the world were taught baptism of desire and of blood in their Catechisms. Like pious, obedient children, they did not presume to scrutinize the texts of Councils, which is part of Tradition, and not to be read leisurely by the faithful. Like pious, obedient children, they listened to their Bishops, the latter of whom constitute the teaching Church, the former constitute the hearing Church.

Having read some Catholic Church history, I have found that it was always the approach of the Church for the Bishops to either write pastoral letters, or give informative sermons on what the Church's definitions were at recent Councils, and expounded upon them in order to give their people proper instruction. This is part of the hierarchical structure that Our Lord established.

The problem of not relying on Bishops, and laymen taking theological matters into their own hands as if equal with the clergy, came about because of a misunderstanding of papal infallibility after it was defined in 1870. When that was promulgated, many people thought that unless something was defined ex cathedra or in a Council, what the Pope or Bishops taught did not matter.

Catechisms being all laity had access to before, we would have to assert that for centuries, the faithful adhered to heresy, and a heresy that is central to one's basic understanding of salvation.

As if the doctors of the Church and clergy never had a sufficient understanding of baptism and the Council of Florence! This whole thing is absurd.

Please show me anywhere in Church history that clergy were not only permitted but praised for teaching an erroneous interpretation of a Council, AFTER the Council, because this is what the logical conclusion is if we want to say all the saints, doctors, clergy post-Trent were just WRONG.