Author Topic: Fr. Stepanich on Outside of the Church There is No Salvation (Read 22350 times)

CM · « **Reply #20 on:** July 18, 2009, 02:59:35 PM »

Holy Martyrs: How many times have I posted this on the forum now, along with the argument about the Good Thief?

Both took place before the Great Commission, before Christ's resurrection.

Catechism of the Council of Trent, Baptism made obligatory after Christ's Resurrection, p. 171: "Holy writers are unanimous in saying that after the Resurrection of our Lord, when He gave His Apostles the command to go and teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, the law of Baptism became obligatory on all who were to be saved."

I do not attack Christ's priests. I do not recognize as Christ's priests anybody who is a member of a false church.

And yes C.M.M.M, I apologize for missing the "hands and feet of the Lord" comment.

Elizabeth I have zero training and I don't claim to. So what? I believe God, not men. Training is offered by men, dogmatic decrees are given by God.

Dogmatic decrees are not to be interpreted. They are to be BELIEVED based on the OBJECTIVE SENSE of the text.

Here it is one more time:

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session 3, Chapter 4 (#6, 7), ex cathedra: "God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever be in opposition to truth. The appearance of this kind of specious contradiction is chiefly due to the fact that either the dogmas of faith are not understood and explained in accordance with the mind of the Church, or unsound views are mistaken for the conclusions of reason.

"Therefore we define that every assertion contrary to the truth of enlightened faith is totally false."

Some saints have taught doctrines, which have later been abrogated by infallible decrees. Those doctrines are totally false. And some have taught these doctrines despite having these decrees available to them. They were either in heresy and retracted, in material heresy, their works were tampered with, and yes even quite possibly the pope who canonized them may have believed the heresy also, but never publicly taught it and therefore never become a public heretic.

Does it not occur to anyone here that God speaks in ex cathedra decrees and will not contradict Himself? There is no baptism of desire or blood. Countless decrees, when understood as objective truths, have completely closed the door on them. That is why they are heresy.

CMMM · « **Reply #21 on:** July 19, 2009, 01:52:32 AM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

Catechism of the Council of Trent, Baptism made obligatory after Christ's Resurrection, p. 171: "Holy writers are unanimous in saying that after the Resurrection of our Lord, when He gave His Apostles the command to go and teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, the law of Baptism became obligatory on all who were to be saved."

Interesting how it does not say water baptism became obligatory, just the law of baptism, no? Most likely because the same catechism does defend baptism by desire or blood.

That's almost like 'Cafeteria Catechism'! :roll-laugh1:

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

Dogmatic decrees are not to be interpreted. They are to be BELIEVED based on the OBJECTIVE SENSE of the text.

Here it is one more time:

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session 3, Chapter 4 (#6, 7), ex cathedra: "God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever be in opposition to truth. The appearance of this kind of specious contradiction is chiefly due to the fact that either the dogmas of faith are not understood and explained in accordance with the mind of the Church, or unsound views are mistaken for the conclusions of reason.

"Therefore we define that every assertion contrary to the truth of enlightened faith is totally false."

Some saints have taught doctrines, which have later been abrogated by infallible decrees. Those doctrines are totally false. And some have taught these doctrines despite having these decrees available to them. They were either in heresy and retracted, in material heresy, their works were tampered with, and yes even quite possibly the pope who canonized them may have believed the heresy also, but never publicly taught it and therefore never become a public heretic.

Does it not occur to anyone here that God speaks in ex cathedra decrees and will not contradict Himself? There is no baptism of desire or blood. Countless decrees, when understood as objective truths, have completely closed the door on them. That is why they are heresy.

'... either the dogmas of faith are not understood and explained in accordance with the mind of the Church, or unsound views are mistaken for the conclusions of reason.'

What sort of assurance do you have that you are understanding and explaining them in accordance with the church? It sounds to me that it is quite possible that they need to be, perhaps not interpreted, but most definitely explained?

Where interpretation would be an individual understanding explanation would be the church and her teaching on the subject, correct? And if so, the church, as far as explanation is concerned, would consist of the magisterium, the pope, and sacred tradition/fathers.

Off to work, I'll chew this more while there...

CM · « **Reply #22 on:** July 19, 2009, 04:02:10 AM »

Elizabeth · « **Reply #23 on:** July 19, 2009, 09:37:02 AM »

CM I'm going to make a big, rash guesshere: you are also not a Latinist.

And Fr. Stepanich went over the falsified Council of Trent stuff, origination from South Bend, Indiana.

How would you possibly be able to prove that the Latin is ambiguous?

CM · « **Reply #24 on:** July 19, 2009, 04:37:59 PM »

Just read the link, and make up your own mind. My friend, from whom I received the Catechism translation .pdf I refer to, had paid a professional Latin translator to analyze that section of text from the Catechism.

Also, I happen to have a natural gift for languages, and learn them very quickly (when I purpose to). I only speak two (English and French, both from infancy), but I have picked up random bits from Polish, Russian, German, Dutch, Albanian, Portuguese, Japanese as well as Latin, from the limited contact I have had with people who speak these languages.

I love languages! :smile: