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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 40 41 [42]

Author Topic: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent  (Read 23278 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Last Tradhican

Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #205 on: June 06, 2018, 08:38:32 PM »
Quote from: JohnAnthonyMarie on June 06, 2018, 04:19:06 PM
Like I said, your last post, wherein you quote Church doctrine then supply a response in red which you attribute to observers of the Church's teaching on baptism of desire.  This is dishonest, a strawman argument.  Church teaching isn't a debate, it should be a discussion.
I do not know what planet you have been living in, but in this planet, what I wrote is exactly what 99% of all those that defend baptism of desire believe. In all of my years of discussions with people here on CI and elsewhere,  the conclusion is that they only hide behind the defense of baptism of desire of the catechumen, when they actual oppose St. Thomas, and teach that people can be saved without any desire to be baptized or Catholic and without  belief in the Incarnation (that Jesus Christ is God) and the Holy Trinity. The SSPX, and all the sede groups (Cekada is one of them) teach the same. It is what Abp. Lefebvre learned, believed and taught all of his ordained like Cekada.

If you are the rare individual (I have only met one in my life) that condemns them as false BODers, then I congratulate you. I have nothing against anyone that teaches the innocuous theory of the baptism of desire of the catechumen of St. Thomas. However, like I said, I have only met one person in 15 years that restricted his belief to BOD of the catechumen and that condemned the teaching of salvation by belief in a God that rewards. Concerning this question, in our times, a real Catholic should spend his time fighting those that teach salvation by belief in a God that rewards, rather than attacking what they call the "Feeneyites". In my long experience, and as a matter of fact, I have found that all of those writers who call people Feeneyites, ALL believe that non-Catholics can be saved without any desire to be baptized or Catholic and without  belief in the Incarnation Jesus Christ ids God) and the Holy Trinity. 
Logged

Offline Last Tradhican

Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #206 on: June 06, 2018, 08:47:54 PM »
Here's somethin I wrote on CI over a year ago:


Excellent defense.  When some time passes in your discussions with him, at the right time, I'd shift to attack mode and ask him if he believes that non-Catholics can be saved by their belief in a God that rewards if he agrees with Pope Francis and Abp. Lefebvre, for this is the heart of the problem, not a catechumen who dies by accident before he is baptized.:

Quote
I start by saying – and this is the fundamental thing – that God’s mercy has no limits if you go to him with a sincere and contrite heart. The issue for those who do not believe in God is to obey their conscience. (Pope Francis)

Bergolio's quote is nothing more than the theory of implicit faith which is believed by 99% of you believers of baptism of desire. It is providential that now Pope Francis is openly teaching it. Maybe this will convert the 99% of you believers in baptism of desire who stubbornly stick with your belief that implicit faith is true. I am presently discussing implicit faith on two other threads with two believers of the implicit faith theory. I keep describing it rather than calling it by its name (of implicit Faith), so as to avoid any wiggle room for those adherents:



The belief that a person who has no explicit desire to be a Catholic, or be baptized, or belief in the Trinity and the Incarnation can be saved.



I keep repeating that this belief is opposed to ALL of tradition and revelation, that is, opposed to ALL the Fathers, Doctors, Saints, and the Athanasian Creed (of the Fathers!). I keep repeating that No Father, Doctor, Saint, ever taught that. Yet, I am fought at every turn by the believers in baptism of desire.







There is no reason for the SSPX to write all those books about BOD if it was about a catechumen who died by accident before he was baptized. They wrote all those books because they want to defend their variant of BOD, salvation for non-Catholics by their belief in a God that rewards.



If they were just going to defend the belief of BOD of a catechumen, they didn’t need to write all those books, they just needed on sentence, like this:



"You strict interpreters of the Council of Trent-Canons on the Sacrament of Baptism, Canons 2 and 5, are only putting up this long debate over a catechumen who dies by accident before being baptized? This is a waste of ink!"



----------------------------------------------------------

The SSPX writes all of those books for a reason. I think that two of the reasons are:



1) they don't want to be further "stigmatized' by Rome as "Feeneyites", so they use the Feeneyites as whipping boys to show Rome that the SSPX is  liberal, just like the conciliar church with regard to EENS.



2) All the priests of the SSPX have been taught in their seminaries that non-Catholics can be saved, even if they are not baptized nor have a desire to be baptized (implicit faith, the complete opposite of baptism of desire). Here are the Abp. himself and Bishop Fellay, saying it:





Well, above you have Pope Francis teaching the same as the SSPX and what 99% of BODers fight me at every turn to defend,  this dark side in the minds of baptism of desire adherents and they now complain about what Pope Francis said.  Why aren't you defending Pope Francis like you defend Abp. Lefebvre (AB) and all of the traditionalist priests that learned from AB or teach the same as AB (Fr. Cekada, SSPV, SSPX, CMRI)?



From the book Against the Heresies, by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre:



1. Page 216: “Evidently, certain distinctions must be made. Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.), but not by this religion. There may be souls who, not knowing Our Lord, have by the grace of the good Lord, good interior dispositions, who submit to God...But some of these persons make an act of love which implicitly is equivalent to baptism of desire. It is uniquely by this means that they are able to be saved.”





2.Page 217: “One cannot say, then, that no one is saved in these religions…”



Pages 217-218: “This is then what Pius IX said and what he condemned. It is necessary to understand the formulation that was so often employed by the Fathers of the Church: ‘Outside the Church there is no salvation.’ When we say that, it is incorrectly believed that we think that all the Protestants, all the Moslems, all the Buddhists, all those who do not publicly belong to the Catholic Church go to hell. Now, I repeat, it is possible for someone to be saved in these religions, but they are saved by the Church, and so the formulation is true: Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. This must be preached.”

__________________________________________



Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “We know that there are two other baptisms, that of desire and that of blood. These produce an invisible but real link with Christ but do not produce all of the effects which are received in the baptism of water… And the Church has always taught that you have people who will be in heaven, who are in the state of grace, who have been saved without knowing the Catholic Church. We know this. And yet, how is it possible if you cannot be saved outside the Church? It is absolutely true that they will be saved through the Catholic Church because they will be united to Christ, to the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Catholic Church. It will, however, remain invisible, because this visible link is impossible for them. Consider a Hindu in Tibet who has no knowledge of the Catholic Church. He lives according to his conscience and to the laws which God has put into his heart. He can be in the state of grace, and if he dies in this state of grace, he will go to heaven.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5.)

---------------------------------------------------------

So much for desire to be baptized, or desire to be a Catholic, or a catechumen, or a martyr!



This is the Achilles heal of all the traditional priests ordained by the SSPX. If they can be led to accept even in implicit faith, then the accepting of the teaching that Vatican II contains no errors when interpreted accrding to tradtion, is an easy step.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 40 41 [42]
« previous next »