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

Author Topic: Father Feeney on Trent (Session VI, Chapter 4) or the Catechism of Trent on BOD  (Read 16505 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online Stubborn

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 14691
  • Reputation: +6054/-904
  • Gender: Male
The Gospel: "Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." John 3:5

I don't see any room for BOD in that statement. The same statement from Our Lord used to contextualize the same definition of Trent that is abused by BOD advocates.
Indeed.

And that is not a mere statement, that is Divine Revelation, a truth revealed by God Himself. Again, how is it that Catholic people are able to read that and at the same time believe a BOD - *and* condemn as heretics those who believe this Revelation?

What is it that goes on in their mind?
"But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

Offline DigitalLogos

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8304
  • Reputation: +4717/-754
  • Gender: Male
  • Slave to the Sacred Heart
    • Twitter
Indeed.

And that is not a mere statement, that is Divine Revelation, a truth revealed by God Himself. Again, how is it that Catholic people are able to read that and at the same time believe a BOD - *and* condemn as heretics those who believe this Revelation?

What is it that goes on in their mind?
Actual heresy has that effect. It blinds them to the Truth.
"Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." [Matt. 6:34]

"In all thy works remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin." [Ecclus. 7:40]

"A holy man continueth in wisdom as the sun: but a fool is changed as the moon." [Ecclus. 27:12]


Offline 2Vermont

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11364
  • Reputation: +6340/-1103
  • Gender: Female

I must commend your great faith, where given that your father who passed away was Jєωιѕн, you nevertheless have not had a knee-jerk emotional reaction to rally behind the notion of BoD.  I believe that many of the most ardent proponents of BoD are motivated by emotional considerations and not by faith and reason.  
I find it even harder with my mother, but she's still alive, so I continue to pray daily for her conversion before her death...that she explicitly request baptism to me [because quite honestly that's the only way I see it happening given the people around her].

Offline DecemRationis

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2312
  • Reputation: +867/-144
  • Gender: Male
Actual heresy has that effect. It blinds them to the Truth.

What "heresy" is that exactly? 
Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

Online Stubborn

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 14691
  • Reputation: +6054/-904
  • Gender: Male
Actual heresy has that effect. It blinds them to the Truth.
True, yet aside from a BOD, they profess the Catholic faith - so I would not say *they* are heretics, rather simply mistaken. I would say they are heretics as my personal opinion, if they persist in promoting the idea as LOT did a few years ago when he blindly flooded the place with BOD propaganda for months. That was really something. I thought he flipped his lid or something for a while - it was that extreme.

"But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse


Offline DigitalLogos

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8304
  • Reputation: +4717/-754
  • Gender: Male
  • Slave to the Sacred Heart
    • Twitter
What "heresy" is that exactly?
Pelagianism, for one.
Two: the belief that souls can be saved without baptism outside of the Church.
Three: that there are three baptisms, not one: "One Lord, one faith, one baptism." [Ephesians 4:5]

True, yet aside from a BOD, they profess the Catholic faith - so I would not say *they* are heretics, rather simply mistaken. I would say they are heretics as my personal opinion, if they persist in promoting the idea as LOT did a few years ago when he blindly flooded the place with BOD propaganda for months. That was really something. I thought he flipped his lid or something for a while - it was that extreme.
Right. I'm not saying anyone in particular in this thread is overtly a heretic. One only becomes a heretic when they've been shown repeatedly the truth on the matter and persist in the error that souls can be saved without baptism. You see this, unfortunately, with a lot of invincible ignorance-BOD adherents.
"Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." [Matt. 6:34]

"In all thy works remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin." [Ecclus. 7:40]

"A holy man continueth in wisdom as the sun: but a fool is changed as the moon." [Ecclus. 27:12]

Online Stubborn

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 14691
  • Reputation: +6054/-904
  • Gender: Male
What "heresy" is that exactly?
Denying a single doctrine of the Church is the sin of heresy, in this case the doctrine being denied is John 3:5.
"But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

Offline DecemRationis

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2312
  • Reputation: +867/-144
  • Gender: Male
True, yet aside from a BOD, they profess the Catholic faith - so I would not say *they* are heretics, rather simply mistaken. I would say they are heretics as my personal opinion, if they persist in promoting the idea as LOT did a few years ago when he blindly flooded the place with BOD propaganda for months. That was really something. I thought he flipped his lid or something for a while - it was that extreme.

Stubborn,

Just to be clear, you would say not say St. Thomas of Aquinas, St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Alphonsus - I'll stop there - were in your personal opinion heretics, right? Only people who "persist in promoting the idea"? Not sure how one parses that, but . . . 

DR

Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.


Offline DecemRationis

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2312
  • Reputation: +867/-144
  • Gender: Male

Pelagianism, for one.
Two: the belief that souls can be saved without baptism outside of the Church.
Three: that there are three baptisms, not one: "One Lord, one faith, one baptism." [Ephesians 4:5]
Right. I'm not saying anyone in particular in this thread is overtly a heretic. One only becomes a heretic when they've been shown repeatedly the truth on the matter and persist in the error that souls can be saved without baptism. You see this, unfortunately, with a lot of invincible ignorance-BOD adherents.

DL,

Right, no one can be saved outside the Church. So, Pelagians or anyone who asserts otherwise, sure. Although some may say "outside" and only mean they are not formal members of the body - like I think of the Pius X catechism, which says "outside" but then also says they are united to the soul of the Church, thus not really "outside." That was just some sloppy language.

So, if, say, St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Alphonus, St. Thomas of Aquinas, were to read this or some other threads in the ghetto here and be "shown repeatedly" what I guess they didn't consider or were not exposed to, they would be persisting in heresy and heretics?

DR
Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

Offline DigitalLogos

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8304
  • Reputation: +4717/-754
  • Gender: Male
  • Slave to the Sacred Heart
    • Twitter
Stubborn,

Just to be clear, you would say not say St. Thomas of Aquinas, St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Alphonsus - I'll stop there - were in your personal opinion heretics, right? Only people who "persist in promoting the idea"? Not sure how one parses that, but . . .

DR

Not Stubborn, but there's a distinction here. Ss. Thomas and Alphonsus taught that SOME CATECHUMENS may be saved through BOD, BUT they would go to Purgatory before entering the Kingdom. I disagree with them, but it isn't heresy because catechumens are still visible members of the Church. And it's a very narrow margin that MAY be saved by it.

Modern BOD heretics believe that ANYONE can be saved by BOD, including those outside of the Body, such as infidels (Jєωs, pagans, Muslims, etc) which is DIRECTLY CONTRARY to defined DOGMA on EENS.
"Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." [Matt. 6:34]

"In all thy works remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin." [Ecclus. 7:40]

"A holy man continueth in wisdom as the sun: but a fool is changed as the moon." [Ecclus. 27:12]

Offline DecemRationis

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2312
  • Reputation: +867/-144
  • Gender: Male
Modern BOD heretics believe that ANYONE can be saved by BOD, including those outside of the Body, such as infidels (Jєωs, pagans, Muslims, etc) which is DIRECTLY CONTRARY to defined DOGMA on EENS.

Concedo. 

But it is possible to extend the notion of a BOD beyond catechumen and those with an explicit desire for the sacrament. I would not call that heresy, as the Church hasn't, and indeed some very great and wise Catholics have taught it. 

I say you'd be going too far to say that anyone who says that someone who has an implicit desire for the sacrament, with explicit faith in Christ, can be saved is a heretic.

As for me, I have expressed my opinion on this here, and indicated that I believe the desire necessary requires an explicit desire for the sacrament. I also think I have very good reasons for that, but allow that I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer and respect the opinion of some very great and wise Catholics on that.

DR
Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.


Online Stubborn

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 14691
  • Reputation: +6054/-904
  • Gender: Male
Stubborn,

Just to be clear, you would say not say St. Thomas of Aquinas, St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Alphonsus - I'll stop there - were in your personal opinion heretics, right? Only people who "persist in promoting the idea"? Not sure how one parses that, but . . .

DR

Well, I would say that Trent closed the issue for all time, and since Trent taught John 3:5 and contrary to a BOD, whoever still believes a BOD is in error - not a heretic. St. Thomas was in error on this subject and other subjects as well - so what? Regardless, St. Thomas died way before Trent, as for the other saints, it's whatever. If St. Thomas, arguably the greatest of all theologians, was in error on this subject - then no one is immune from error on this subject.

This is not at all about the great saints and Fathers, it's all about Trent having cleared up the matter for all of the faithful for all time, yet because there are text books we call catechisms with teachings contrary to Trent on this subject, the Catholic people believe the text books over Trent's clear teachings - why? That's all I'm asking, that is what I would like to know.

"But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

Offline DecemRationis

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2312
  • Reputation: +867/-144
  • Gender: Male
Well, I would say that Trent closed the issue for all time, and since Trent taught John 3:5 and contrary to a BOD, whoever still believes a BOD is in error - not a heretic. St. Thomas was in error on this subject and other subjects as well - so what? Regardless, St. Thomas died way before Trent, as for the other saints, it's whatever. If St. Thomas, arguably the greatest of all theologians, was in error on this subject - then no one is immune from error on this subject.

This is not at all about the great saints and Fathers, it's all about Trent having cleared up the matter for all of the faithful for all time, yet because there are text books we call catechisms with teachings contrary to Trent on this subject, the Catholic people believe the text books over Trent's clear teachings - why? That's all I'm asking, that is what I would like to know.

St. Robert and St. Alphonsus are after Trent. That's the "whatever." 
Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

Offline DecemRationis

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2312
  • Reputation: +867/-144
  • Gender: Male
Orestes Brownson gives an excellent summary of the issue:



Quote
It is evident, both from Bellarmine and Billuart, that no one can be saved unless he belongs to the visible communion of the Church, either actually or virtually, and also that the salvation of catechumens can be asserted only because they do so belong; that is, because they are in the vestibule, for the purpose of entering, – have already entered in their will and proximate disposition. St. Thomas teaches with regard to these, in case they have faith working by love, that all they lack is the reception of the visible sacrament in re; but if they are prevented by death from receiving it in re before the Church is ready to administer it, that God supplies the defect, accepts the will for the deed, and reputes them to be baptized. If the defect is supplied, and God reputes them to be baptized, they are so in effect, have in effect received the visible sacrament, are truly members of the external communion of the Church, and therefore are saved in it, not out of it (Summa, 3, Q.68, a.2, corp. ad 2. Et ad 3.)… …Bellarmine, Billuart, Perrone, etc., in speaking of persons as belonging to the soul and not to the body, mean, it is evident, not persons who in no sense belong to the body, but simply those who, though they in effect belong to it, do not belong to it in the full and strict sense of the word, because they have not received the visible sacrament in re. All they teach is simply that persons may be saved who have not received the visible sacrament in re; but they by no means teach that persons can be saved without having received the visible sacrament at all. There is no difference between their view and ours, for we have never contended for anything more than this; only we think, that, in these times especially, when the tendency is to depreciate the external, it is more proper to speak of them simply as belonging to the soul, for the fact the most important to be insisted on is, not that it is impossible to be saved without receiving the visible sacrament in re, but that it is impossible to be saved without receiving the visible sacrament at least in voto et proxima dispositione.


Brownson, Orestes. “The Great Question.” Brownson’s Quarterly Review. Oct. 1847. Found in: Brownson, Henry F. The Works of Orestes A. Brownson: Collected and Arranged. Vol.V. (pp.562-563). Detroit: Thorndike Nourse, Publisher, 1884.




Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

Online Stubborn

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 14691
  • Reputation: +6054/-904
  • Gender: Male
St. Robert and St. Alphonsus are after Trent. That's the "whatever."

True, yet St. Alphonsus condemned a BOD - also, apparently, taught it. 

Again, yes, it's whatever. It is "whatever" because Trent is the final word on the matter, and unlike the saints, we cannot question Trent's teaching, nor can we believe contrary to it - and certainly we cannot do both at the same time, yet most do. Why?   
"But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse