Author Topic: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent  (Read 7535 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nandarani

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 84
  • Reputation: +28/-16
  • Gender: Female
  • raised in the Episcopal Church
Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #15 on: May 18, 2018, 08:09:40 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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   


    Offline JohnAnthonyMarie

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1297
    • Reputation: +603/-63
    • Gender: Male
      • TraditionalCatholic.net
    Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
    « Reply #16 on: May 28, 2018, 12:45:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Baptism of Desire is specifically identified in Canon Law

    Quote
    1917 Code of Canon Law
    On Ecclesiastical Burial - (Canon 1239. 2)
     § 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."
    Omnes pro Christo


    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1028/-1634
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
    « Reply #17 on: May 28, 2018, 01:07:07 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.

    Offline trad123

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1242
    • Reputation: +197/-119
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
    « Reply #18 on: May 28, 2018, 02:58:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.  
    2 Corinthians 4:3-4

    And if our gospel be also hid, it is hid to them that are lost, In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto them.

    Offline trad123

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1242
    • Reputation: +197/-119
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
    « Reply #19 on: May 28, 2018, 03:28:37 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.
    2 Corinthians 4:3-4

    And if our gospel be also hid, it is hid to them that are lost, In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto them.


    Offline trad123

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1242
    • Reputation: +197/-119
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
    « Reply #20 on: May 28, 2018, 03:30:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Attachment
    2 Corinthians 4:3-4

    And if our gospel be also hid, it is hid to them that are lost, In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto them.

    Offline trad123

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1242
    • Reputation: +197/-119
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
    « Reply #21 on: May 28, 2018, 03:49:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • How many hold out baptism of desire for those who aren't even catechumens, who don't even profess the Catholic faith?


    Liguori, St Alphonsus. Sermons for All the Sundays in the Year (p. 273). Veritatis Splendor Publications. Kindle Edition.

    Sermon 29. Trinity Sunday. - On the Love of the Three Divine Persons for Man


    Quote
    4. See also the special love which God has shown you in bringing you into life in a Christian country, and in the bosom of the Catholic or true Church. How many are born among the pagans, among the Jews, among the Mahometans and heretics, and all are lost. Consider that, compared with these, only a few not even the tenth part of the human race have the happiness of being born in a country where the true faith reigns; and, among that small number, he has chosen you.


    http://www.papalencyclicals.net/greg16/g16summo.htm

    Summo Iugiter Studio, On Mixed Marriages, Pope Gregory XVI - 1832


    Quote
    2.

    (. . .)

    Finally some of these misguided people attempt to persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only in the Catholic religion, but that even heretics may attain eternal life.

    Only Catholics can be saved, who will say otherwise?
    2 Corinthians 4:3-4

    And if our gospel be also hid, it is hid to them that are lost, In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto them.

    Offline JohnAnthonyMarie

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1297
    • Reputation: +603/-63
    • Gender: Male
      • TraditionalCatholic.net
    Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
    « Reply #22 on: May 29, 2018, 12:22:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.
    The first sentence in the reply above is identified in the very first canon of Canon Law - Licet in Codice iuris canonici Ecclesiae quoque Orientalis disciplina saepe referatur, ipse tamen unam respicit Latinam Ecclesiam, neque Orientalem obligat, nisi de iis agatur, quae ex ipsa rei natura etiam Orientalem afficiunt.  The second sentence above is immaterial because Canon Law is from the magisterium of the Catholic Church.

    Do you disagree with Canon 1239 § 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.)


    Omnes pro Christo


    Offline JohnAnthonyMarie

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1297
    • Reputation: +603/-63
    • Gender: Male
      • TraditionalCatholic.net
    Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
    « Reply #23 on: May 29, 2018, 12:47:57 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The Council of Trent, Seventh Session, On the Sacraments in General, Canon IV says, "If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema."  

    I might suggest digesting this canon in three parts (divided by semicolons), that (1) the sacraments are necessary for salvation, (2) with them, or a desire for them, men obtain from God the grace of justification, and (3) that all the sacraments are not necessary for every individual.
    Omnes pro Christo

    Offline JohnAnthonyMarie

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1297
    • Reputation: +603/-63
    • Gender: Male
      • TraditionalCatholic.net
    Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
    « Reply #24 on: May 29, 2018, 12:52:11 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Pope Pius XII, in his encyclical on the promotion of false doctrines, states,
    Quote
       "7. Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments."
       "8. Also well known is the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. Eternal salvation cannot be obtained by those who oppose the authority and statements of the same Church and are stubbornly separated from the unity of the Church and also from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff, to whom 'the custody of the vineyard has been committed by the Savior.'(Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon in its letter to Pope Leo.) The words of Christ are clear enough: 'If he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you a Gentile and a tax collector;'(Mt 15.17.) 'He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me;'(Lk 10.16.) 'He who does not believe will be condemned;'(Mk 16.16.) 'He who does not believe is already condemned;'(Jn 3.18.) 'He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters.'(Lk 11.23.) The Apostle Paul says that such persons are 'perverted and self-condemned;'(Ti 3.11.) the Prince of the Apostles calls them 'false teachers . . . who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master. . . bringing upon themselves swift destruction.'(2 Pt 2.1.) "

    Omnes pro Christo

    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3544
    • Reputation: +1849/-1063
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
    « Reply #25 on: May 29, 2018, 12:56:06 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Genuinuely curious here - how do those who reject BOD understand the following from the Council of Trent

    Decree on Justification - (Session 6, Chapter 4):
       "In these words a description of the justification of a sinner is given as being a translation from that state in which man is born a child of the first Adam to the state of grace and of the 'adoption of the Sons' (Rom. 8:15) of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Savior and this translation after the promulgation of the Gospel cannot be effected except through the laver of regeneration or a desire for it, (sine lavacro regenerationis aut eius voto) as it is written: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter in the kingdom of God" (John 3:5).

    99% of the people who promote BOD do not even believe that a desire to be baptized is necessary for salvation, nor a desire to be a Catholic, or belief in Christ and the Holy Trinity. They believe that Mohamedans, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews etc., can be saved without "a desire to be baptized, nor a desire to be a Catholic, or belief in Christ and the Holy Trinity".

    If you are sincere as you say, ponder on that, for that is the REAL SUBJECT to be debated with the promoters of BOD, and not some catechumen who got run over by a bus on his way to be baptized.
    The Vatican II church - Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962

    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Mat 24:24


    Offline JohnAnthonyMarie

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1297
    • Reputation: +603/-63
    • Gender: Male
      • TraditionalCatholic.net
    Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
    « Reply #26 on: May 29, 2018, 01:06:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • A purported percentage of people that error has little to do with truth.  

    As was provided in the original post, Saint Alphonsus Liguori is noted as saying,
    Quote
    "But baptism of desire is perfect conversion to God by contrition or love of God above all things accompanied by an explicit or implicit desire for true Baptism of water, the place of which it takes as to the remission of guilt, but not as to the impression of the [baptismal] character or as to the removal of all debt of punishment. It is called 'of wind' ['flaminis'] because it takes place by the impulse of the Holy Ghost Who is called a wind ['flamen']. Now it is de fide that men are also saved by Baptism of desire, by virtue of the Canon 'Apostolicam De Presbytero Non Baptizato' and the Council of Trent, Session 6, Chapter 4, where it is said that no one can be saved 'without the laver of regeneration or the desire for it.'"

    Referring to The Council of Trent, Sixth Session, On Justification, Chapter IV,
    Quote
    A description is introduced of the Justification of the impious, and of the Manner thereof under the law of grace. By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a translation, from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace, and of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.

    So, I believe it is absolutely safe to say that, "Catechumens who, through no fault of their own, die without Baptism, are to be treated as baptized."
    Omnes pro Christo

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 20229
    • Reputation: +11029/-5308
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
    « Reply #27 on: May 29, 2018, 10:00:24 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • Penance is a different case however. Whereas natural and true Baptism is specifically stated to be required by Trent, it's also taught in Trent and ever since that perfect contrition or unavailability of the Sacrament can allow Penance in voto. But like you said, extending that to Baptism is like extending it to Eucharist.

    Or, rather, it's like extending in voto to Holy Orders.  None of the "character" Sacraments can be received in voto.  BoDers admit that the character/seal isn't received in BoD but claim that the character is not essential to the effects of the Sacrament.  But in Holy Orders, you can't have Holy Orders without the character.  That's because it's essential to Holy Orders to have the priestly character.  Why then wouldn't that be the case with Baptism?  It's that character which makes us members of the Church and adopted children of God.  Just as Holy Orders makes a man take on the persona Christi, so does Baptism, only to a lesser extent, so that God the Father recognizes as His sons, being in the image of His Son.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 20229
    • Reputation: +11029/-5308
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
    « Reply #28 on: May 29, 2018, 10:03:53 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • So, I believe it is absolutely safe to say that, "Catechumens who, through no fault of their own, die without Baptism, are to be treated as baptized."

    You guys always take this line out of context.  This means NOTHING MORE than that Catechumens should receive Catholic burial.  It does not mean that CATEGORICALLY they are to be treated as baptized and considered saved.

    Here's the entire context of the passage.
    1) Only the baptized can receive Catholic burial (principle).
    2) Catechumens are to be treated as baptized (for the purposes of #1 above).

    It's a legalistic circumlocution which says essentially "Only the baptized and catechumens can receive Catholic burial."

    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1028/-1634
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
    « Reply #29 on: May 29, 2018, 11:02:32 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Or, rather, it's like extending in voto to Holy Orders.  None of the "character" Sacraments can be received in voto.  BoDers admit that the character/seal isn't received in BoD but claim that the character is not essential to the effects of the Sacrament.  But in Holy Orders, you can't have Holy Orders without the character.  That's because it's essential to Holy Orders to have the priestly character.  Why then wouldn't that be the case with Baptism?  It's that character which makes us members of the Church and adopted children of God.  Just as Holy Orders makes a man take on the persona Christi, so does Baptism, only to a lesser extent, so that God the Father recognizes as His sons, being in the image of His Son.
    Interestingly, there are a growing number of Catholics (including Pfeifferites) who believe that the character IS received in bod.  That original sin IS remitted, as well as the reception of justification.  They say everything Baptism does, bod does equally since bod is now said to be a fully functional aspect of Baptism.  And why not?  It becomes impossible to prove anything against bod being an inward sign, with all the benefits of the outward sign, if one has already accepted bod exists. After all, God can do anything and isn't tied to the sacraments, they say.  Naturally, once you cross the line, anything goes.  Every single warning and condemnation is redefined to explain how this works, so using Church teachings to debunk bod falls on deaf ears since bod has now become Baptism!  Redefining terms is at the heart of the bod apologetic which proves to me at least, bod is modernism at its finest.  This is relatively new, too.  Once upon a time, bod'ers would never insist bod was a dogma, nor that the recipients get the character, or remission of sin.  They sure do now.      


     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16