Author Topic: Dying by "Accident" before being baptized, and BOD? (Read 18830 times)

nadieimportante · « **Reply #300 on:** December 11, 2011, 06:34:01 PM »

Quote

-Are you a sede?

No

Quote

-Where do you assist at?

SSPX

Quote

-How do you explain the fact that the overwhelming majority of traditional priests (both SSPX and sede) believe in BOD/BOB?

That's only in the USA. My family elders (Spain taught) never heard of BOD. I'm 57. The USA is a good place to loose the faith.

USA trads represent like what? 1/10 of 1% of the world's Catholics? Sedes like 1/10 of that? Does that prove them wrong about their ideas?

Quote

-Are they committing an error, a material heresey, or outright heresey?

It's spelled heresy. AND That's your problem, I don't concern myself with such accusations, I only seek truth. You won't find me anywhere calling anyone a heretic or schismatic unless they're real heretics/schismatics like the Eastern Orthodox, or Protestants.

curiouscatholic23 · « **Reply #301 on:** December 11, 2011, 07:07:28 PM »

Quote from: nadieimportante

Quote
-Are you a sede?

No

Quote
-Where do you assist at?

SSPX

Quote
-How do you explain the fact that the overwhelming majority of traditional priests (both SSPX and sede) believe in BOD/BOB?

That's only in the USA. My family elders (Spain taught) never heard of BOD. I'm 57. The USA is a good place to loose the faith.

USA trads represent like what? 1/10 of 1% of the world's Catholics? Sedes like 1/10 of that? Does that prove them wrong about their ideas?

Quote
-Are they committing an error, a material heresey, or outright heresey?

It's spelled heresy. AND That's your problem, I don't concern myself with such accusations, I only seek truth. You won't find me anywhere calling anyone a heretic or schismatic unless they're real heretics/schismatics like the Eastern Orthodox, or Protestants.

Actually deciding whether believing in BOD is either an error or a heresy is important considering you have some sede clergy like Fr. Cekada who openly impose their error/hersey/whatever you want to call it on their faithful by refusing communion to those who reject BOD.

And the USA does not represent 1/10 of 1% of the world's catholics, and americans make up more than 10% of the world's sedes. Quit exaggerating.

nadieimportante · « **Reply #302 on:** December 12, 2011, 12:09:18 AM »

Quote

Actually deciding whether believing in BOD is either an error or a heresy is important considering you have some sede clergy like Fr. Cekada who openly impose their error/hersey/whatever you want to call it on their faithful by refusing communion to those who reject BOD.

Deciding is not important, and neither is Cekada important. His personal decisions only affect himself and those few people that go to his chapel. He's plain wrong in what he is doing, and he'll have to answer to God for that one.

I have to answer to God too. I'm not going to call anyone a heretic today, unless they are Eastern Orthodox, or Protestants.

nadieimportante · « **Reply #303 on:** December 12, 2011, 01:06:25 AM »

Quote

Cupertino: You consider that an "authoritative source", the fact your own relatives didn't hear of something? It is not even valid reasoning.

I posted enough authoritative sources for 10 threads. You are not going to drag me into your personal opinions mud wrestling ring. Don't waste my time.

Quote

Now let me give you an authoritative source to prove that reasoning is an authority.

"Liberalism is a Sin" which was sent to Rome to be scrutinized, and the Holy Office glowingly praised it in 1887. Nadie, so much of what you have said here recently against reasoning is proven wrong by this authoritative source:

Liberalism is a Sin (1887) said:

Wow, you actually posted a source! Good for you. Nevertheless, your "reason" is still just your personal opinions. You still have to post your sources for whatever personal "reasoning" you come up with. There's 2000 years of church writings to pick from.

Your posting of that quote as a "source" for what you are trying to prove (I don't have a clue where you are going with this) reminds me of the story of the cat:

"There was once a cat who dreamed that he was a man, dreaming that he was a cat. When he woke up, he did not know whether he was a man or a cat."

Stubborn · « **Reply #304 on:** December 12, 2011, 05:07:59 AM »

Quote from: Cupertino

You have a huge problem, Nadie, if you reject deductive reasoning, and try to making reason something subjective. It is a disastrous path.

1) EENS was solemnly defined.
2) Anyone calling into doubt defined dogma loses the Faith.
3) the Church cannot fail to let 100 years go by without condemning a heresy publicly circulating among Catholics.

Nadie, let me know if you personally accept all of these or not.

Your #3 is not so. Not sure where the time limit of 100 years comes from but it doesn't work that way.

Many centuries can pass before the Church infallibly condemns as heresy or defines a dogma.

The Church allows debates to go on and on - till the learned have exhausted every and all arguments for and against whatever article of faith is in question.

Then perhaps a month, year or a few more centuries can pass while all the arguments are carefully tallied, weighed and measured before the Pope actually defines anything. This is not all that uncommon. This may well be what is going on with BOD.

Stubborn · « **Reply #305 on:** December 12, 2011, 06:38:55 AM »

Quote from: Cupertino

The number of years was merely a sizable chunk.

Can a #2 that calls into doubt an a already solemnly defined #1 be permitted to be taught to all the faithful in officially approved books for learning for over 100 years, and the Catholic Church, with her popes, Saints and body of clergy and faithful not notice it at all?

Absolutely. BOD is proof of it.

The necessity of the Sacrament was defined at Trent. People see one mis-translated word mentioned twice ("desire") then use that to support their theory of BOD and start spreading it.

Anyone who reads what Trent declared, i.e. read what is written not what they want it to say, will absolutely have a dilemma on their hands if they believe in BOD.

The fact that BOD contradicts infallible declarations notwithstanding.

nadieimportante · « **Reply #306 on:** December 12, 2011, 12:17:14 PM »

Quote from: Cupertino

You have a huge problem, Nadie, if you reject deductive reasoning, and try to making reason something subjective. It is a disastrous path.

1) EENS was solemnly defined.
2) Anyone calling into doubt defined dogma loses the Faith.
3) the Church cannot fail to let 100 years go by without condemning a heresy publicly circulating among Catholics.

Nadie, let me know if you personally accept all of these or not.

You just made up points 2 & 3. And your "deductive reasoning" is just your own "reasoning" based on false premises.

You have yet to post a definition of what your brand of BOD is. We don't know what you believe.
You have not posted any sources for anything that you write. All you do is write.

curiouscatholic23 · « **Reply #307 on:** December 12, 2011, 10:42:25 PM »

Quote from: nadieimportante

Quote from: Cupertino
Nadie, your position is patently absurd. I don't need to write much, nor scream my words, as you do.

Everyone knows and accepts the solemn teaching there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Quotes have been given for that here.

It is also known that anyone who calls into doubt solemn teaching has fallen away completely from the Faith.

Nadie, your position makes the Catechism of the Council of Trent, St. Alphonsus Liguouri and Pius IX all call into doubt previous solemn teaching...but nobody in the whole Church noticed, and it was never an issue!!

You are smarter than them all! Your position is absurd.

Below is quoted a previous posting response which sums up my position on baptism of desire of the catechumen, and baptism of blood. My position is clear, it is out in the light for all to see.

Your position on the other hand is hidden, either due to ignorance, or on purpose, I can't judge hearts.

Cupertino said: "Everyone knows and accepts the solemn teaching there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church (EENS). Quotes have been given for that here."

Nadie answers: All the quotes on EENS were posted by me.

Cupertino said: It is also known that anyone who calls into doubt solemn teaching has fallen away completely from the Faith.

Nadie responds: Yes, EENS is dogmatic, and anyone who calls it into doubt has completely lost the faith

Cupertino said Nadie, your position makes the Catechism of the Council of Trent, St. Alphonsus Liguouri and Pius IX all call into doubt previous solemn teaching...but nobody in the whole Church noticed, and it was never an issue!!

Nadie responds: That is a perfect example of Protestant self opinion on your part. Not one authoritative quote from you, just your opinions. Are we supposed to take your word for it?

What previous "solemn teaching", dogmatic teaching, that can't be denied, are you referring too? Not even BOD of the catechumen has been solemnly declared, infallible declared, nor declared by the universal ordinary magisterium! More importantly, you have not clearly limited your "baptism of desire", to the (only real) baptism of desire which finds support from St. Alphonsus Ligouri, and St. Thomas. You are hiding behind baptism of desire of the catechumen, of the Catechism of Trent, St. Thomas and St. Alphonsus, when you really believe in all the MUTANT false forms, which are actually opposed by The Catechism of Trent, St. Thomas and St. Alphonsus. Read below, and come out into the light and explain yourself.

Quote from: nadieimportante
Quote from: curiouscatholic23
Question for Nadie:

Were there not many and numerous medieval saints who believed in baptism of blood and desire? According to your logic, they would had to have been heretics.

Don't mix baptism of blood with baptism of desire of the catechumen, and all the other modern offshoots of it. That is just a tactic to FIND the support of some saints. A few saints don't make doctrine. Read all the dogmatic decrees I posted, not one mention of an excuse like BOD or BOB, not one in the history of the Church.

There are maybe like 10 examples of baptism of blood saints in the 2000 year history. Not one can be proved not to have been baptized. Now, there are thousands upon thousands of examples of people who are incomprehensible just hanging on to life for the longest time, then they are baptized and immediately die. Fr. DeSmet details thousands of such infant and elderly baptisms he administered himself in his book written in the 1850's. There are hundreds of examples of people sent back from the dead just to be baptized.

Why would God not provide any examples of baptism of blood except like 10 back 1800 years ago, and then God provides hundreds of thousands of examples of persons who scarcely held on to life and died by the groves (as described by Fr. Smet), immediately upon being baptized? Why would God provide so many examples of people sent back from the dead just to be baptized?

That's baptism of blood, and as for baptism of desire of the catechumen (forget all the other offshoots of it, they have no support from the medieval saints )there is not one single example in 2000 years.

Read all the dogmatic decrees I posted, not one mention of an excuse like BOD or BOB, not one in the history of the Church. Catholics follow dogma, not a story here and there over 2000 years.

As for calling anyone a heretic, I don't do that, not for BOB or BOD of the catechumen. If a person wants to believe in baptism of blood, it's no big deal, a non-baptized person who dies wanting to be a baptized Catholic, where are they? I've never seen one. BOD of the catechumen, how many catechumens who died before being baptized can there be? One hear one there? Those theoretical loopholes, are not the problem, the problem is today that there are scarcely any believers in BOD and BOB that restrict their belief to just baptism of blood and baptism of desire of the catechumen, ALL of them believe in all the other offshoots to different levels, offshoots like implicit desire of those that don't even want to be Catholics or baptized, implicit faith, invincible ignorance, an invisible church that includes non-Catholic "good" people, and universal salvation for all. THAT IS THE PROBLEM, that seed brought us the false ecuмenism of Assisi, and Vatican II, what Catholics believe today, that basically outside of the church there IS salvation. That's the root cause of why we are in the predicament that we are in.

:applause: :applause:

nadieimportante · « **Reply #308 on:** December 13, 2011, 05:27:27 PM »

Quote from: Cupertino

Nadie, let me know.

Quote

Nadie wrote: You have yet to post a definition of what your brand of BOD is. We don't know what you believe.

Cupertino, let me know.

nadieimportante · « **Reply #309 on:** December 14, 2011, 05:21:06 PM »

You have yet to post a definition of what your brand of BOD is. We don't know what you believe. Until you post in detail what variety of BOD that you believe, this thread is finished.

Augstine Baker · « **Reply #310 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:47:28 PM »

Quote from: Cupertino

Quote from: nadieimportante
You have yet to post a definition of what your brand of BOD is. We don't know what you believe. Until you post in detail what variety of BOD that you believe, this thread is finished.

I believe I did.

How about if you list the "brands", and I will choose one.

No you didn't.

Augstine Baker · « **Reply #311 on:** December 14, 2011, 09:05:15 PM »

Quote from: Cupertino

Quote from: Augstine Baker
Quote from: Cupertino
Quote from: nadieimportante
You have yet to post a definition of what your brand of BOD is. We don't know what you believe. Until you post in detail what variety of BOD that you believe, this thread is finished.

I believe I did.

How about if you list the "brands", and I will choose one.

No you didn't.

Here is what I wrote, and it seemed to satisfy at the time:

Quote
I believe in the dogma of no salvation outside the Catholic Church, and I believe that the teachings of the Catechism of the Council of Trent, St. Alphonsus and Pius IX on the matter of baptism of desire are in perfect conformity with that dogma.

Now for the list of "brands"?

Why don't you explain what YOU think they mean?

pax · « **Reply #312 on:** December 15, 2011, 08:08:15 AM »

Quote from: Cupertino

Quote from: Augstine Baker
Quote from: Cupertino
Quote from: Augstine Baker
Quote from: Cupertino
Quote from: nadieimportante
You have yet to post a definition of what your brand of BOD is. We don't know what you believe. Until you post in detail what variety of BOD that you believe, this thread is finished.

I believe I did.

How about if you list the "brands", and I will choose one.

No you didn't.

Here is what I wrote, and it seemed to satisfy at the time:

Quote
I believe in the dogma of no salvation outside the Catholic Church, and I believe that the teachings of the Catechism of the Council of Trent, St. Alphonsus and Pius IX on the matter of baptism of desire are in perfect conformity with that dogma.

Now for the list of "brands"?

Why don't you explain what YOU think they mean?

Thanks, but I don't want to play games. Let me see this list of "brands" and I will choose one. I never heard of "brands of BOD" before.

I know what he means. The most irritating brand being the Invincible Ignorance Brand. They are the ones who proclaim possessing invincible ignorance as a get-out-of-hell-free card. All those currently persevering in invincible ignorance -- yes, it is seen by some as a virtue -- automatically receive BOD and have the road to heaven opened up for them. One almost gets the feeling that revealing the Faith to them would be doing them a disservice.

Augstine Baker · « **Reply #313 on:** December 15, 2011, 10:59:53 AM »

Quote from: Cupertino

Quote from: Augstine Baker
Quote from: Cupertino
Quote from: Augstine Baker
Quote from: Cupertino
Quote from: nadieimportante
You have yet to post a definition of what your brand of BOD is. We don't know what you believe. Until you post in detail what variety of BOD that you believe, this thread is finished.

I believe I did.

How about if you list the "brands", and I will choose one.

No you didn't.

Here is what I wrote, and it seemed to satisfy at the time:

Quote
I believe in the dogma of no salvation outside the Catholic Church, and I believe that the teachings of the Catechism of the Council of Trent, St. Alphonsus and Pius IX on the matter of baptism of desire are in perfect conformity with that dogma.

Now for the list of "brands"?

Why don't you explain what YOU think they mean?

Thanks, but I don't want to play games. Let me see this list of "brands" and I will choose one. I never heard of "brands of BOD" before.

I'm not playing games either.

Pius IX said a lot of things about BoD and there are different people who've made different readings of what he's said on the matter.

If you choose not to explain exactly what it is about what he said or you allege he says, there's not much point in continuing and it's pretty dishonest of you to put the blame on me when you're the one who's made the assertion in the first place.

Jim · « **Reply #314 on:** December 15, 2011, 06:35:17 PM »

Why do hardcore Feeneyites such as the Dimonds consider Catholics today as heretics, yet they do not call Pius IX, Cardinals Ottaviani and Marchetti-Selvaggiani, et al heretics damned to Hell?

Considering the situation of the Church since 1958/63/65, with confusion and the possible lack of a Supreme Pontiff which should lessen the culpability of the faithful, to me, at least, the Dimonds seem to make it easier to be culpable.

The pope, whether it is the current one and the SSPX "convert" thesis is correct, or the Cassiciacuм Thesis is correct, or the sedevacantist thesis is correct, God willing, once this crisis is over, a Pope must effectively end the debate.

As I previously mentioned, I only wish to hold the Catholic Faith. As such, if anyone charges me of heresy, I appeal to eternal Rome, I appeal to the Most Holy Office of the Inquisition, I appeal to my Archdiocese, which may be vacant, to decide if I am simply mistaken, or if I am pertinacious. I can say right now that I do not pertinaciously hold to heresy with full consent of the will, due to the situation the Church is in. Also, the Dimonds have no authority or jurisdiction to try and/or condemn me or anyone else who believes that Baptism of Blood and Baptism of Desire is a true teaching of the Church, in the words of St. Alphonsus, "de Fide."