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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 42

Author Topic: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent  (Read 24188 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nandarani

Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #15 on: May 18, 2018, 08:09:40 PM »
This is from Patrick Henry who was Brother Joachim I learned recently from Joseph Marie, http://bishopjosephmarie.org/ 
They were together at Mt. St. Michael's together 18 months several decades ago. 

It is in question and answer format.

If anyone finds it easy to refute after reading the entire thing and answering every single question (one can stop with difficulty it seemed to me)  they are more up on the controversy than I am which would not be unlikely.  I came down on the side of the compiler. 

His writings on geo centrism and anything else are equally intense.  He is a 'studied' person; I've read that term used to mean, someone who has a LOT of information digested and ready to use, about in this case, the traditional Church. 

Patrick is a home alone who has it seemed to me when I studied his work and interacted with him by phone and e-mail priced himself out of  other options because of a fund of knowledge coupled with a strong tendency to drive to reach a satisfying bottom line at no matter the cost past the point of Charity in the current confusion.  That was my view anyway.  I got off the train later at Charity and walk on from there, now.   

His thinking is like that of Eric Hoyle's whose Confessional Jurisdiction pdf is equally exacting. 

That's to give you some background.  For his views on jurisdiction, I digested a long tape series, "Who is Right and Who is Wrong" in the Audio section.  It is hugely enlightening on the CMRI and contains many recordings of actual talks given at the time; in fact listening one cannot predict the outcome or initially the point of view of the recorder of the tapes, made before the internet.  

This site has many good offerings in the Audio section of a spiritual nature.  It is a trove of treasures in fact.  Here is another one: http://www.traditionalcatholic.co/  audio and print; one would need several lifetimes to get through 1/4 of it in a state of recollection and prayer.

This is Patrick's take on baptism of desire.  I wanted to know because I have several friends for whose sake I wanted to know...

http://www.jmjsite.com/r/rejecters.pdf   

Logged

Offline JohnAnthonyMarie

Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #16 on: May 28, 2018, 12:45:20 PM »
Baptism of Desire is specifically identified in Canon Law

Quote
1917 Code of Canon Law
On Ecclesiastical Burial - (Canon 1239. 2)
 ยง 2. Catechumeni qui nulla sua culpa sine baptismo moriantur, baptizatis accensendi sunt.
    "Catechumens who, through no fault of their own, die without Baptism, are to be treated as baptized."

The Sacred Canons by Rev. John A. Abbo. St.T.L., J.C.D., and Rev. Jerome D. Hannan, A.M., LL.B., S.T.D., J.C.D.
 Commentary on the Code:
    "The reason for this rule is that they are justly supposed to have met death united to Christ through Baptism of Desire."
Logged

Offline happenby

Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #17 on: May 28, 2018, 01:07:07 PM »
Baptism of desire rests on a single premise: that God cannot or will not get the Sacrament of Baptism to the informed penitent before he dies. 

God is said to provide a lesser miracle of mercy because He isn't able to provide a substantial miracle of mercy. 

Ridiculous.  Unproven.  Blasphemous.
Logged

Offline trad123

  • Supporter
Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #18 on: May 28, 2018, 02:58:08 PM »
Quote from: Mega-fin on November 24, 2017, 09:05:54 PM
Genuinuely curious here - how do those who reject BOD understand the following from the Council of Trent and St Alphonsus in regards to the same?

Council of Trent 1545-1563
Canons on the Sacraments in General: - (Canon 4):
   "If anyone shall say that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation, but are superfluous, and that although all are not necessary for every individual, without them or without the desire of them (sine eis aut eorum voto), through faith alone men obtain from God the grace of justification; let him be anathema."


Lets change the focus here to 'faith alone'


I'm attaching a screenshot; excerpt from:

Bernard Of Clairvaux: On Baptism And The Office of the Bishops, pgs. 159 - 160

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0879075678/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0879075678&linkCode=as2&tag=httpwwwchanco-20 />


Quote
8. It would be hard, believe me, to tear me away from these two pillars--I mean Augustine and Ambrose. I own to going along with them in wisdom or in error, for I too believe that a person can be saved by faith alone, through the desire to receive the sacrament, but only if such a one is forestalled by death or prevented by some other insuperable force from implementing this devout desire. Perhaps this was why the Savior, when he said: Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, took care not to repeat 'whoever is not baptized', but only, whoever does not believe will be condemned, imitating strongly that faith is sometimes sufficient for salvation and that without it nothing suffices.  
Logged

Offline trad123

  • Supporter
Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #19 on: May 28, 2018, 03:28:37 PM »
Quote
Baptism of Desire is specifically identified in Canon Law

I'm attaching another excerpt, from a different work:

https://books.google.com/books?id=2XbtF6Y21LUC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

The 1917 Pio Benedictine Code of Canon Law, published by Ignatius Press, page 29

Quote
Although in the Code of canon law the discipline of the Oriental Church is frequently referenced, nevertheless, this Code applies only to the Latin Church and does not bind the Oriental, unless it treats of things that, by their nature, apply to the Oriental.

The 1917 Code is not binding on the universal Church, but only the Latin rite. It can be argued that the Code does not possess infallibility.


That the Code binds only the Latin rite is repeated in the 1983 Code:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2.HTM

1983 Code of Canon Law


Quote
Can. 1 The canons of this Code regard only the Latin Church.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 42
« previous next »