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

Author Topic: Do you agree with St. Benedict's Centre on both BOD and EENS?  (Read 16807 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: Do you agree with St. Benedict's Centre on both BOD and EENS?
« Reply #5 on: March 15, 2019, 08:11:19 AM »
The Baltimore Catechism was produced by American Bishops.  It's hardly infallible.

Offline JoeZ

  • Supporter
Re: Do you agree with St. Benedict's Centre on both BOD and EENS?
« Reply #6 on: March 15, 2019, 08:18:28 AM »
 
1.    Catechisms are not protected by infallibility. Introduction XXXVI from the Fifteenth Printing of The Catechism of the Council of Trent states: “Official docuмents have occasionally been issued by Popes to explain certain points of Catholic teaching to individuals, or to local Christian communities; whereas the Roman Catechism comprises practically the whole body of Christian doctrine, and is addressed to the whole Church. Its teaching is not infallible; but it holds a place between approved catechisms and what is de fide.”

Since catechisms are not infallible, there is a possibility that erroneous theories such as baptism of desire and baptism of blood could make their way into them. Moreover, the original edition of The Catechism of the Council of Trent did not contain baptism of blood or baptism of desire. This is attested to by Fr. Wathen in his work Who Shall Ascend (p.225), where he states, “In the original edition of The Catechism, there is no mention of either term. In fact, one will not find the insertion of these terms [baptisms of desire and blood] until the late nineteenth century.” Modernists (Modernism is the synthesis of all error) have recently inserted these ideas into the catechisms and other Catholic publications like the Denzinger with an eye to the end goal of attacking the dogma of no salvation outside the Catholic Church. In their ancient form, BOD and BOB concerned only the catechumen and as such they are a theological speculation that is in error only of only a minor theological note, but in their modern form, that of the “anonymous Christian” variety by Karl Rahner, the idea of implicit desire was introduced and taken to heretical extremes, ie baptism doesn’t even have to be desired to place one in the Church. The 1949 Letter of the Holy Office, which may well actually be faked by +Cushing, has been elevated to dogma, placed in the Denzinger, and is even used in Vatican 2 as support for its worst heresy. If one holds the idea of implicit BOD then one cannot argue against Vatican 2’s new ecclesiology, one must respect as deeply profound John Paul 2’s subsistence theology, and one cannot condemn the interfaith ceremonies of Assisi.


Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Do you agree with St. Benedict's Centre on both BOD and EENS?
« Reply #7 on: March 15, 2019, 08:34:19 AM »
Xavier, you completely misinterpret the quotation from St. Augustine.

Please note that Baptism of Desire is NOT the Sacrament of Baptism.  So please re-read the citation from St. Augustine with that in mind and try again.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Do you agree with St. Benedict's Centre on both BOD and EENS?
« Reply #8 on: March 15, 2019, 08:35:32 AM »
Yes, I agree.

I believe a BOD, which is a man made doctrine that teaches a good intention by an infidel, brought on by an unforeseen accident, is salvific, is a terrible insult to the Providence of an all knowing and all mighty God.

Stubborn, you're only agreeing because Xavier is misinterpreting the citation from St. Augustine.  He takes it as evidence in SUPPORT of Baptism of Desire, rather than the opposite ... which is exactly what it is.

Offline DecemRationis

  • Supporter
Re: Do you agree with St. Benedict's Centre on both BOD and EENS?
« Reply #9 on: March 15, 2019, 08:47:43 AM »

. Moreover, the original edition of The Catechism of the Council of Trent did not contain baptism of blood or baptism of desire. This is attested to by Fr. Wathen in his work Who Shall Ascend (p.225), where he states, “In the original edition of The Catechism, there is no mention of either term. In fact, one will not find the insertion of these terms [baptisms of desire and blood] until the late nineteenth century.” 
Joe,

Are you sure Father Wathen is talking of the Catechism of Trent and not the Baltimore Catechism? If so, what authority does he give for that other than the assertion?

There's a video on youtube where Father Jenkins talks about seeing an original edition of the Catechism of Trent in Latin which contained the famous passage about BOD availing to justification in case of an unforeseen accident preventing baptism. At least Father Jenkins give as authority his own eyes. 


DR