Author Topic: Father Kramer to the Feeneyites (Read 18091 times)

Ambrose · « **on:** May 21, 2014, 01:38:44 PM »

Posted on Facebook, April 27, 2014

Father Kramer wrote:

Quote

TO ALL FEENEYITES:

Your disagreement with the infallibly defined doctrine of Baptism of Desire is as irrational as it is heretical. You have no excuse: Justification takes place by the laver of regeneration or the desire of it ("aut ejus voto"). The doctrine is interpreted in that sense officially in the Roman Catechism. The doctrine of baptism by "votum" is explained in the Roman Catechism by authotity of the pope who presided over the latter sessions of the Council of Trent and formulated by the most eminent Council Fathers of Trent, namely, St. Charles Borromeo. Do you disagree with their undertanding of the expression "aut ejus voto" -- of them who formulated and ratified the Decree on Justification? Do you disagree with all the popes and doctors who understood the Decree as clearly teaching Baptism of Desire? Are you aware that Vatican I defined under penalty of «anathema» that you must understand the dogmas as the Church has understood and understands them? The Church has always understood and understands the dogma in question to mean "without the laver of regeneration or the desire of it" The Church has always understood and transmitted the clearly expressed doctrine of the Decree on Justification that those who die justified and sanctified by baptism "or the desire of it" inherit eternal life -- yet you disagree with the constant teaching of the Church on this point of dogma. Are you aware that just because the word «aut» can sometimes mean "and" as well as "or" is absolutely of no consequence here? The term "votum" is always employed in reference to the fulfillment of some future deed or duty, and therefore cannot be correctly translated in this context as "the laver of regeneration and the desire of it"; as if one being baptized at present could absurdly have the simultaneous desire to receive it at some time in the future. Your disagrerment is a direct denial of an infallibly defined teaching of the Council of Trent, and of the infallible teaching of the ordinary magisterium. By your obstinate denial of the defined dogma, you place yourself under the «anathema» (Canon 33 Decree on Justification) and outside the Church.

Cantarella · « **Reply #1 on:** May 21, 2014, 01:47:32 PM »

We need not Fr. Kramer to interpret for us after 2000 years, the infallible Church teaching on EENS. The denial of "Extra Eccleasiam Nulla Salus" is a novelty. Fr. Kramer is far from being the binding authority of the Church. Truth is there is absolutely no salvation for any human being outside actual baptized membership in the Roman Catholic Church.

With all due respect, and out of genuine curiosity, what is behind all the anti-feeneyite agenda of the CMRI?

Ambrose · « **Reply #2 on:** May 21, 2014, 01:50:38 PM »

Quote from: Cantarella

We need not Fr. Kramer to interpret for us after 2000 years, the infallible Church teaching on EENS. Fr. Kramer is far from being the binding authority of the Church. Truth is there is absolutely no salvation for any human being outside actual baptized membership in the Roman Catholic Church.

With all due respect, Ambrose and out of genuine curiosity, what is behind all the anti-feeneyite agenda of the CMRI?

You should ask them, I am not a member of the CMRI.

My guess though, is that as Catholics we have a duty to defend the Faith from heresy. The denial of Baptism of Desire is a dangerous modern heresy and Catholics must stand against it.

Cantarella · « **Reply #3 on:** May 21, 2014, 02:11:33 PM »

Perhaps it is because CMRI fervently adheres to the Suprema haec sacra letter published which in 1949 against Fr. Leonard Feeney. This letter teaches salvation for non-Catholics (this is non-members of the Body of Christ) via “implicit” baptism of desire, and invincible ignorance.

Also, CMRI twice published in their Quarterly Magazine an article entitled, “The Salvation of Those Outside the Church.” It was published in the Winter 1992 issue of The Reign of Mary, The CMRI’s publication.

Does someone have a link for said article? It would be a most delightful read!

The article is supposed to indicate that those who die as non-Catholics can be saved, which is a heretical rejection of Catholic dogma. This article is not the only one. CMRI has published other pamphlets defending Baptism of "Desire" and salvation for those outside the visible Church.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #4 on:** May 21, 2014, 02:19:16 PM »

Coming from someone who thinks that Benedict is still the pope because Francis is guilty of the same heresy regarding the Jєωs that Benedict also held. Go figure.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #5 on:** May 21, 2014, 02:28:53 PM »

Not to mention that Father Kramer has already discredited himself when it comes to both theology and reading comprehension. He juxtaposes texts from the Church which condemn the notion that the Old Law and Mosaic ritual have not been revoked with mention that the Old Covenant has never been revoked.

His discussion of "votum" and the "future" is nothing short of idiotic.

Stubborn · « **Reply #6 on:** May 21, 2014, 02:44:18 PM »

Ambrose just showing how he defends the heretical belief that No Sacrament At All is necessary for salvation - it's like he needs his fix or something.

Please note that Ambrose, like Fr. Kramer and all other NSAAers, cannot bring themselves to defend any sacrament - and it is particularly impossible for them to defend the necessity of the sacrament of baptism unto salvation as they no not believe they are necessary for anything at all.

Trent's catechism teaches the reason for this is because Ambrose and all NSAAers despise the sacraments.

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #7 on:** May 21, 2014, 03:18:47 PM »

Quote from: Cantarella

We need not Fr. Kramer to interpret for us after 2000 years, the infallible Church teaching on EENS. The denial of "Extra Eccleasiam Nulla Salus" is a novelty. Fr. Kramer is far from being the binding authority of the Church. Truth is there is absolutely no salvation for any human being outside actual baptized membership in the Roman Catholic Church.

With all due respect, and out of genuine curiosity, what is behind all the anti-feeneyite agenda of the CMRI?

I was getting ready to ask what's with all the Feeneyites or EENS-defenders who are novus ordites? The novus ordo has been mocking EENS since the early 1950's.

Deny EENS? The novus ordo denies Our Lord by saying that non-Christian faiths have the means of salvationin them.

Cantarella · « **Reply #8 on:** May 21, 2014, 03:35:56 PM »

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

Quote from: Cantarella
We need not Fr. Kramer to interpret for us after 2000 years, the infallible Church teaching on EENS. The denial of "Extra Eccleasiam Nulla Salus" is a novelty. Fr. Kramer is far from being the binding authority of the Church. Truth is there is absolutely no salvation for any human being outside actual baptized membership in the Roman Catholic Church.

With all due respect, and out of genuine curiosity, what is behind all the anti-feeneyite agenda of the CMRI?

I was getting ready to ask what's with all the Feeneyites or EENS-defenders who are novus ordites? The novus ordo has been mocking EENS since the early 1950's.

Deny EENS? The novus ordo denies Our Lord by saying that non-Christian faiths have the means of salvationin them.

There are "feeneyites" that happen to attend the Novus Ordo Mass, which is a separate and distinct rite of Mass within the Latin Church.

JPaul · « **Reply #9 on:** May 21, 2014, 05:14:03 PM »

Quote from: Cantarella

Quote from: Capt McQuigg
Quote from: Cantarella
We need not Fr. Kramer to interpret for us after 2000 years, the infallible Church teaching on EENS. The denial of "Extra Eccleasiam Nulla Salus" is a novelty. Fr. Kramer is far from being the binding authority of the Church. Truth is there is absolutely no salvation for any human being outside actual baptized membership in the Roman Catholic Church.

With all due respect, and out of genuine curiosity, what is behind all the anti-feeneyite agenda of the CMRI?

I was getting ready to ask what's with all the Feeneyites or EENS-defenders who are novus ordites? The novus ordo has been mocking EENS since the early 1950's.

Deny EENS? The novus ordo denies Our Lord by saying that non-Christian faiths have the means of salvationin them.

There are "feeneyites" that happen to attend the Novus Ordo Mass, which is a separate and distinct rite of Mass within the Latin Church.

It is not Catholic, it is not a work of the Church , and it is always a sacrilege.

Ambrose · « **Reply #10 on:** May 21, 2014, 05:57:48 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Ambrose just showing how he defends the heretical belief that No Sacrament At All is necessary for salvation - it's like he needs his fix or something.

Please note that Ambrose, like Fr. Kramer and all other NSAAers, cannot bring themselves to defend any sacrament - and it is particularly impossible for them to defend the necessity of the sacrament of baptism unto salvation as they no not believe they are necessary for anything at all.

Trent's catechism teaches the reason for this is because Ambrose and all NSAAers despise the sacraments.

No, just defending the Catholoc Faith, whole and entire. You think that you can deny an article of Faith and be saved, but you at wrong. I hope for your sake that God will forgive your ignorance of Catholic Teaching.

To deny Baptism of Desire is to deny a de fide teaching of the Church, and is heresy.

JoeZ · « **Reply #11 on:** May 21, 2014, 06:15:13 PM »

Father Kramer is then, of necessity, arguing that forced baptisms are efficacious to salvation. When speaking of adults (because the referneced canon is concerning the baptism of the impious), if either the water or desire separate from each other is enough to save, making desire alone enough to save, then necessarily water alone saves despite the will.

God bless,
JoeZ

Ambrose · « **Reply #12 on:** May 21, 2014, 07:32:46 PM »

Quote from: JoeZ

Father Kramer is then, of necessity, arguing that forced baptisms are efficacious to salvation. When speaking of adults (because the referneced canon is concerning the baptism of the impious), if either the water or desire separate from each other is enough to save, making desire alone enough to save, then necessarily water alone saves despite the will.

God bless,
JoeZ

Baptism of Desire has been carefully explained by the theologians over and over again.

JoeZ · « **Reply #13 on:** May 21, 2014, 10:09:14 PM »

Quote from: Ambrose

Quote from: JoeZ
Father Kramer is then, of necessity, arguing that forced baptisms are efficacious to salvation. When speaking of adults (because the referneced canon is concerning the baptism of the impious), if either the water or desire separate from each other is enough to save, making desire alone enough to save, then necessarily water alone saves despite the will.

God bless,
JoeZ

Baptism of Desire has been carefully explained by the theologians over and over again.

With all due respect, dear Ambrose, that is not an answer to my position.

Please ask yourself why you will not answer this directly. One should never fear argument when he is on the side of truth because truth has the advantage of being supported by God.

God bless,
JoeZ

PS When the honestly mistaken man sees the truth, he will either cease to be mistaken or cease to be honest.

Ambrose · « **Reply #14 on:** May 21, 2014, 11:08:13 PM »

Quote from: JoeZ

Quote from: Ambrose
Quote from: JoeZ
Father Kramer is then, of necessity, arguing that forced baptisms are efficacious to salvation. When speaking of adults (because the referneced canon is concerning the baptism of the impious), if either the water or desire separate from each other is enough to save, making desire alone enough to save, then necessarily water alone saves despite the will.

God bless,
JoeZ

Baptism of Desire has been carefully explained by the theologians over and over again.

With all due respect, dear Ambrose, that is not an answer to my position.

Please ask yourself why you will not answer this directly. One should never fear argument when he is on the side of truth because truth has the advantage of being supported by God.

God bless,
JoeZ

PS When the honestly mistaken man sees the truth, he will either cease to be mistaken or cease to be honest.

Can you quote Fr. Kramer as saying that forced baptisms are efficacious to salvation. I have never read any such idea from him.

I was not dodging your question, rather urging you to pick up an approved theology manual and begin learning.