Author Topic: Extra Ecclesia Nulla Salus (Read 8496 times)

Caminus · « **Reply #30 on:** August 30, 2009, 12:02:27 AM »

Quote

Yes He can

You just conceded the doctrine of baptism of desire and blood.

CM · « **Reply #31 on:** August 30, 2009, 01:09:22 AM »

The person who quoted me above seems to believe he has won a victory over the truth that baptism of desire and baptism of blood are in fact heresies. I did not concede baptism of desire or baptism of blood. My words have been presented out of context, and blatantly so. Here is what was said and how I responded:

Quote from: I

Quote
But your argument fails because it does not address the fact that God can without injustice act outside of His sacraments.

Yes He can, but for this one sacrament He closed the door.

This is not to suggest that I believe a person can receive the grace of all other sacraments without actually receiving the sacrament.

I do not believe a person can have Holy Orders of desire for example. Nor do I believe a person can receive Confirmation of desire.

Also note that these two sacraments (Holy Orders and Confirmation) share something in common with the sacrament of Baptism. They confer a character, and cannot be repeated without sacrilege.

I am interested to see if anybody will try to argue that a person can have Holy Orders of desire or Confirmation of desire. If they will not argue this, why not? And if they still believe in baptism of desire, why, when it is 'built' the same way as Holy Orders and Confirmation? Why, when it is not 'built' like Penance and the Eucharist, which are both repeatable and DO NOT confer a character?

And I still want to know how the heretics will explain away this:

Baptism of desire says that a person can get into heaven without the baptismal character, which identifies them as a Christian.

Baptism of desire says that a person can get into heaven without being having passed through the gateway to the other sacraments, and therefore be in heaven, yet not be permitted to receive absolution for sins or to partake of the body and blood of Jesus Christ!

Belief in baptism of desire suggests that a person may somehow enter the Catholic Church without ever receiving the sacrament of Baptism. This means that the person SHOULD be allowed access to the sacraments. If they are not allowed access to the sacraments, why?

Belief in baptism of desire means that a person who received it will go to purgatory, since not all debt of temporal punishment is washed away, only to suffer without any hope of intercession from the Church Militant, because the centuries old Tradition of the Church PROHIBITS offering sacrifices for their souls. This tradition would either be harmful to these souls, or baptism of desire is not true, which indeed it is not.

Quote from: The infallible Council of Florence, LITERALLY

Holy Baptism holds the first place among all the sacraments, for

it is the gate of the spiritual life;

through IT we become members of Christ and of the body of the Church.

Since death came into the world through one person,

unless we are born again of water and the spirit,

WE CANNOT,

as Truth says,

enter the kingdom of heaven...

(elimination of exceptions anybody?)

Quote from: And immediately after that, Pope Eugene IV at Florence also infallibly

The matter of this sacrament is true and natural water, either hot or cold. The form is: I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit.

Pope Eugene was talking about the SACRAMENT of Baptism and how WE CANNOT AS THE TRUTH SAYS enter heaven unless we receive the SACRAMENT of Baptism so as to be admitted to the spiritual life.

This heresy is like a stinky weed that was initially speculated about, inculpably, by holy people BEFORE it was infallibly rendered heretical; people today blindly believe in it despite the numerous MONUMENTAL contradictions it posits against the Extraordinary Magisterium they glibly claim to believe.

Quote from: About these people, the LORD

This people honoureth me with their lips: but their heart is far from me.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #32 on:** August 30, 2009, 01:41:44 AM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

'Lover of Truth' and everyone else, STOP trying to put non-Catholics in heaven. It's heresy, pure and simple.

Of course it is. What you do not seem to grasp is that such is not what I, LoT, et alii are 'trying to do'.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #33 on:** August 30, 2009, 01:42:46 AM »

Quote from: Vladimir

They argue that infidels can enter the Church before death through extraordinary (and of course supernatural) means.

Jackpot.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #34 on:** August 30, 2009, 01:52:38 AM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

Will you accuse Him of contravening His own laws and decrees? You suggest that He is able to do so. How many times to I have to say that YES God, by virtue of His divinity is capable of ALL things whatsoever, but by virtue of His justice, we know that there are certain things He WILL NOT DO...

...Why is it so hard to believe that God will INFALLIBLY ADHERE TO HIS OWN IRREVOCABLE LAW?

Why is it so hard to believe that the Lawgiver, for His own reasons, might operate above/outside His own decrees, in order to attain the ultimate end - salus animarum? What is a miracle, after all?

Do not even earthly kings, at times, commute a sentence, etc, for various reasons? In so doing, are they betraying the justice they are bound to uphold according to the very raison d'etre of their office?

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #35 on:** August 30, 2009, 02:19:04 AM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

Will you accuse Him of contravening His own laws and decrees?

He does so every single time he wants, for example, to attest to the supernatural sanctity of one of His friends.

He did so left, right, and center while on earth, in order to heal the physically and spiritually wounded sheep and draw all things to Himself. He also used them, by the way, to confound those who choked themselves (and others) to death on the letter of the law.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #36 on:** August 30, 2009, 02:32:47 AM »

Following from what gladius says, "What man shall there be among you, that hath one sheep: and if the same fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not take hold on it and lift it up?"

Here God is contravening his own decree -- his own commandment -- and saying in some cases it is permissible to do heavy labor on the Sabbath, following the SPIRIT of the law, through the virtue of charity, and slightly bending the letter.

You see, God, being God, if He so chooses, can be flexible with His own laws, and this is one means by which he shows His power over the heavens and Earth. How do we know He CAN be flexible with baptism? The Good Thief, for one.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #37 on:** August 30, 2009, 02:57:25 AM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

...Belief in baptism of desire suggests that a person may somehow enter the Catholic Church without ever receiving the sacrament of Baptism. This means that the person SHOULD be allowed access to the sacraments. If they are not allowed access to the sacraments, why?

Does the fact that a person is cleansed of sin through perfect contrition mean that he SHOULD be allowed access to the other sacraments again, even if he has not gone to confession? No.

Such a man, clean though he is in the sight of God, is NOT allowed to receive any of the other sacraments of God at the hands of men until he has confessed his sins. Why, CM?

CM · « **Reply #38 on:** August 30, 2009, 03:16:11 AM »

Quote from: gladius veritatis

Such a man, clean though he is in the sight of God, is NOT allowed to receive any of the other sacraments of God at the hands of men until he has confessed his sins. Why, CM?

Because no person can know if they have perfect contrition, short of a private revelation from God. Reception of the sacraments while in the state of mortal sin is a sacrilege, and therefore the priest is bound to prevent the possibility of such an offense taking place, one because it offends God, and two because it endangers the soul of the recipient of the sacrament.

CM · « **Reply #39 on:** August 30, 2009, 03:17:23 AM »

However, if a person is in heaven, how can he eternally eat the true Mana of heaven, which is Jesus Christ, if he has not first been admitted to the spiritual life by Holy Baptism?

CM · « **Reply #40 on:** August 30, 2009, 03:19:59 AM »

A person in heaven will be known to have achieved perfect contrition, or they would not be there.

However, you guys are both confusing Divinely instituted disciplines with Divinely instituted dogmas.

You argue that the letter of the law is not as important as the spirit of the law. Noted.

Note this: Vatican Council affirms that in matters of faith and morals, it is the LETTER that must be adhered to; Pope Leo XIII states that receding from the letter of Divinely revealed dogma is heresy, pure and simple; Pope Pius X condemns the error, which states that a dogma is not indeed a truth fallen from heaven, or that it is only something to be regarded in the general order, but not to be believed absolutely.

Authoritative quote time!

Quote from: Pope Pius, at the Vatican Council, in Session 3, Chapter 4, #14, infallibly

Hence, too, that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by Holy mother Church, and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.

Quote from: Pope Leo XIII, in Satis Cognitum,

The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium.

Quote from: Pope Pius, in Lamentabili sane, condemend these propositions, which the Modernists (and you) have

22. The dogmas the Church holds out as revealed are not truths which have fallen from heaven. They are an interpretation of religious facts which the human mind has acquired by laborious effort.

26. The dogmas of the Faith are to be held only according to their practical sense; that is to say, as preceptive norms of conduct and not as norms of believing.

Number 26 applies perfectly to anyone who believes in baptism of desire. These Modernists argue that baptism, although admittedly held to be necessary by a necessity of means, nevertheless does not have to be received in a manner concurrent with the decrees of the Church. In this, they deny the dogmatic teachings on a matter of faith that has been defined numerous times, receding from the letter, and falling under the condemnation of Pope Leo XIII in Satis Cognitum.

Note that I have provided a sound answer to every objection that has been asserted in favour of baptism of desire. It has nothing to do with my own ability; I have the truth on my side, otherwise I would falter under all these darts.

The heresy of baptism of desire is keeping people blind and outside of the Church.

CM · « **Reply #41 on:** August 30, 2009, 03:29:53 AM »

A discipline is something pertaining to faith and morals.

Jesus Christ would never have fornicated. He never would have gotten drunk. He never would have said there are more than one true God. He never would have worshiped an idol. He never would have denied the resurrection. He never would have transgressed any law that was based upon a matter of FAITH or MORALS.

Furthermore, He even insisted on being baptized, Himself, and stated in clear terms "so it becometh us to fulfill all justice." He was a man, and as a man, would not enter into heaven unbaptized.

And Raoul76, the Good Thief, St. Dismas (whom we do not know if he was baptized or not or if he was circuмsized or not, as Scripture does not say) was taken to paradise by Christ BEFORE the New Testament went into effect. The Old Testament law was in force up until the Holy Passion of the LORD.

Vladimir · « **Reply #42 on:** August 30, 2009, 11:02:54 AM »

Quote from: Raoul76

Following from what gladius says, "What man shall there be among you, that hath one sheep: and if the same fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not take hold on it and lift it up?"

Here God is contravening his own decree -- his own commandment -- and saying in some cases it is permissible to do heavy labor on the Sabbath, following the SPIRIT of the law, through the virtue of charity, and slightly bending the letter.

You see, God, being God, if He so chooses, can be flexible with His own laws, and this is one means by which he shows His power over the heavens and Earth. How do we know He CAN be flexible with baptism? The Good Thief, for one.

Although the Good Thief is not a good example, the first part of your post brings up a very interesting point.

Caminus · « **Reply #43 on:** August 30, 2009, 01:10:58 PM »

The reason why orders and matrimony cannot be obtained by desire is because they are not necessary for salvation, among other things. You admit spiritual communion and perfect contrition, yet you arbitrarily shut the door on baptism. You do this because you misunderstand the decrees of the Church. Once you've admitted that God can and does in principle at least work outside of the sacraments, you're very special pleading is obvious when it comes to baptism. You say "all but this one." LOL...on what grounds? Certainly not tradition since you reject catholic tradition.

Caminus · « **Reply #44 on:** August 30, 2009, 04:11:35 PM »

Once again, you've conceded the entire point, all the special pleading aside, for if you admit that God can act, under certain circuмstances, outside of one sacrament, you have no grounds to assert that he wouldn't or couldn't with regard to another, as a matter of Justice or Oath or any other like argument. Once again, I exhort you to follow all doctrine with regard to all the sacraments. Follow tradition and the Fathers and the Magisterium and you won't go wrong.