Author Topic: Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD  (Read 2547 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tornpage

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 372
  • Reputation: +83/-62
  • Gender: Male
Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD
« on: October 01, 2017, 07:58:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    Others of these websites, such as that of the Dimond brothers, take too unacceptably rigorist a view of this dogma, uncharitably and unjustly anathematizing as hell-bound heretics those who today might hold -- as did St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Alphonsus de Liguori, and in fact every single doctor of the Church and every catechism and theological manual used by the Church for the last millennium -- to the remote possibility of salvation for Catholic catechumens who hold the Catholic Faith and who possess perfect charity and perfect contrition for their sins, and thus might qualify to receive the grace of the sacrament of baptism when they are unable, through no fault of their own, to receive the sacrament itself -- especially if these spiritual qualities are evidenced by their martyrdom for the Catholic Faith. Such a rare occurrence would still require the existence of the sacrament of baptism and derive its efficacy from the sacrament, thus arguably not negating John 3:5 and similar papal statements. This would be the classic doctrine -- not the modern liberal version thereof -- of "baptism by desire" and "baptism by blood," admittedly never dogmatically defined by any pope or council, but equally admittedly never explicitly condemned by any pope or council either. At best this teaching is a tolerable theological opinion within the parameters of Catholic orthodoxy, certainly not de fide but arguably proximate to faith. At worst it is an error, as yet uncondemned by the magisterium, but certainly not a heresy, since saints and doctors held and taught it (seemingly with the full approval of Rome) and died without abjuring it (so far as we know), and yet were canonized and officially declared trustworthy Doctors of the Faith.

    http://www.gerrymatatics.org/GRIsGerrySede.html
    "[L]et us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, there is 'one God, one faith, one baptism' [Eph. 4:5]; it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry."

    Pope Pius IX, Singulari quadem

    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1471
    • Reputation: +847/-333
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD
    « Reply #1 on: October 01, 2017, 12:41:37 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • If that is what BODers believed, there would be no firther discussion on the subject. Unfortunately, 99% of BODers believe that much more than catechumens can be saved, they all end up believing that people can be saved without belief in Christ or the Holy Trinity, indeed, without any real desire to be baptized, or Catholic. 
    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 DZ PLEASE

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2934
    • Reputation: +734/-773
    • Gender: Male
    • "Lord, have mercy."
    Re: Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD
    « Reply #2 on: October 01, 2017, 02:36:37 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • There comes a certain point when a person's assertions don't really merit further consideration ,such as with "The GMat"

    There are only so many hours.

    He's made himself a joke.

    Study him over time, and see if you don't concur.

    Time I won't get back.

    Just one excerpt to think really hard about; "... but certainly not a heresy, since saints and doctors held and taught it."
    "Lord, have mercy".

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 14693
    • Reputation: +7438/-290
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD
    « Reply #3 on: October 01, 2017, 05:39:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If that is what BODers believed, there would be no firther discussion on the subject. Unfortunately, 99% of BODers believe that much more than catechumens can be saved, they all end up believing that people can be saved without belief in Christ or the Holy Trinity, indeed, without any real desire to be baptized, or Catholic.
    .
    The effects of this curious aspect of Modernism is demonstrated today to me by a person to whom I mentioned that Hugh Hefner is most likely being tormented by demons in hell. This is a man who was a non-Catholic, apparently a Jew, who never had a word to say in support of Christianity nor is there any reason to think he had been baptized. 
    .
    The person responded by saying about Hefner, "...unless he repented." In other words, he only needed to "repent" before he died and the rest would take care of itself. What about baptism? If he only had a vague longing for something good, would that be sufficient without baptism? 
    .
    This is a man who made crude jokes about life after death, reminiscent of Jews who think this life is all there is, and when it's over, it's over. He loved this life just the way it is, "thank you very much." He had far more than a vague longing for something good. He had all the goodness he could have dreamed of, and he had it right here, right now. The end.
    .
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline DZ PLEASE

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2934
    • Reputation: +734/-773
    • Gender: Male
    • "Lord, have mercy."
    Re: Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD
    « Reply #4 on: October 01, 2017, 05:42:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .
    The effects of this curious aspect of Modernism is demonstrated today to me by a person to whom I mentioned that Hugh Hefner is most likely being tormented by demons in hell. This is a man who was a non-Catholic, apparently a Jew, who never had a word to say in support of Christianity nor is there any reason to think he had been baptized.
    .
    The person responded by saying about Hefner, "...unless he repented." In other words, he only needed to "repent" before he died and the rest would take care of itself. What about baptism? If he only had a vague longing for something good, would that be sufficient without baptism?
    .
    This is a man who made crude jokes about life after death, reminiscent of Jews who think this life is all there is, and when it's over, it's over. He loved this life just the way it is, "thank you very much." He had far more than a vague longing for something good. He had all the goodness he could have dreamed of, and he had it right here, right now. The end.
    In the practical order at least, he is presumed to have died as he lived, . * . ...?
    "Lord, have mercy".


    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 14693
    • Reputation: +7438/-290
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD
    « Reply #5 on: October 01, 2017, 05:42:32 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Just one excerpt to think really hard about; "... but certainly not a heresy, since saints and doctors held and taught it."

    .
    Perhaps you are unaware that Saints and Doctors of the Church have been known to teach error.
    .
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline DZ PLEASE

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2934
    • Reputation: +734/-773
    • Gender: Male
    • "Lord, have mercy."
    Re: Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD
    « Reply #6 on: October 01, 2017, 05:45:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .
    Perhaps you are unaware that Saints and Doctors of the Church have been known to teach error.
    I think that you're trying to force-feed Twinkies to "Brunhilda" man.
    "Lord, have mercy".

    Offline tornpage

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 372
    • Reputation: +83/-62
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD
    « Reply #7 on: October 01, 2017, 07:28:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • There comes a certain point when a person's assertions don't really merit further consideration ,such as with "The GMat"

    There are only so many hours.

    He's made himself a joke.

    Study him over time, and see if you don't concur.

    Time I won't get back.

    Just one excerpt to think really hard about; "... but certainly not a heresy, since saints and doctors held and taught it."

    GMat:
    Sedevacantism - check.
    BOD - quoted above, check. 
    Supplied jurisdiction, epikeia - no check.
    Not advocating GMat generally, but the quote was worth posting for its treatment on the BOD issue. He takes the reasonable position IMO. 

    Quote
    ... but certainly not a heresy, since saints and doctors held and taught it."
    Ok. Concedo on that point. Just because perhaps no saint or doctor committed heresy by teaching something then heretical doesn't mean the Church didn't later settle an issue in a way that makes the teaching (not the saint or doctor at the time they held it) in fact heretical. 
    You got him. 
    "[L]et us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, there is 'one God, one faith, one baptism' [Eph. 4:5]; it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry."

    Pope Pius IX, Singulari quadem


    Offline DZ PLEASE

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2934
    • Reputation: +734/-773
    • Gender: Male
    • "Lord, have mercy."
    Re: Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD
    « Reply #8 on: October 01, 2017, 07:40:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • You got him.
    Thanks, but no thanks,  you can keep him if you like.

    To be fair, and kudos on avoiding rash conclusions, we can't become fed up if we haven't eaten too much yet.

    Just because I have...

    If nothing else, shady thinking can make for great chew toys; however, it can be dangerous playing out of league, for you start absorbing things that you shouldn't or perhaps get injured, or cause injury that otherwise wouldn't have occurred.

    Example: it may be fun or useful to "box" your son, but if you're a Tyson, and that's your training...?

    Thanks again.
    "Lord, have mercy".

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12423
    • Reputation: +6445/-1028
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD
    « Reply #9 on: October 01, 2017, 08:26:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Matatics:

    Quote
    Such a rare occurrence would still require the existence of the sacrament of baptism and derive its efficacy from the sacrament, thus arguably not negating John 3:5 and similar papal statements.

    This has been exactly my position for many years.  So long as one continues to state that the Sacrament of Baptism remains the instrumental cause of justification, and that BoD/BoB derive their efficacy therefrom, one avoids heresy in this speculative opinion.  But 99% of BoDers do not believe this and therefore embrace heresy against the teaching of Trent.  LoT, paying attention?

    Offline tornpage

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 372
    • Reputation: +83/-62
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD
    « Reply #10 on: October 01, 2017, 10:08:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This has been exactly my position for many years.  So long as one continues to state that the Sacrament of Baptism remains the instrumental cause of justification, and that BoD/BoB derive their efficacy therefrom, one avoids heresy in this speculative opinion.  But 99% of BoDers do not believe this and therefore embrace heresy against the teaching of Trent.  LoT, paying attention?
    Yes. I think Matatics is spot on with the way he treats of this subject . . . and I know your view, and you are as well.
    As to LoT, he will probably not comment but spam this thread tomorrow morning.
    "[L]et us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, there is 'one God, one faith, one baptism' [Eph. 4:5]; it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry."

    Pope Pius IX, Singulari quadem


    Offline Catholictrue

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 71
    • Reputation: +77/-37
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD
    « Reply #11 on: October 02, 2017, 11:56:46 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yes. I think Matatics is spot on with the way he treats of this subject . . . and I know your view, and you are as well.
    As to LoT, he will probably not comment but spam this thread tomorrow morning.
    No, Tornpage, you, Ladislaus and Matatics are not ‘spot on’ on this subject.  You are all quite wrong.  First, contrary to the impression created by the post, Matatics does not limit the orthodox view of EENS to the position that unbaptized catechumens can be saved without baptism.  Matatics in fact holds that Suprema Haec Sacra is orthodox, even though SHS is heretical.  It teaches that salvation is possible for much more than unbaptized catechumens (e.g. those in ‘invincible ignorance’).  Matatics thus accepts a heretical document on the matter.  Matatics also considers to be Catholic those who believe that souls can be saved in false religions.  That proves that he does not uphold the Church’s teaching on the necessity of the Catholic faith for salvation, despite his claims to the contrary.

    Second, Matatics blatantly contradicts himself, and reveals the emptiness and falsity of his position, when he writes:

    Gerry Matatics: “… thus might qualify to receive the grace of the sacrament of baptism when they are unable, through no fault of their own, to receive the sacrament itself… Such a rare occurrence would still require the existence of the sacrament of baptism and derive its efficacy from the sacrament, thus arguably not negating John 3:5 and similar papal statements.”

    So, Matatics says 1) they are “unable… to receive the sacrament” but 2) this “would still require the existence of the sacrament of baptism”.  That’s a blatant contradiction and a lie.  To this contradictory nonsense, Ladislaus wrote: “This has been exactly my position for many years.”  This reveals the falsity of Ladislaus’ position, his blindness, and it shows again that he doesn’t even know what a sacrament is.  Ladislaus, there’s no such thing as the Sacrament of Baptism without the matter or external sign (i.e. the water).  I emphasize this to you because you repeatedly make the same false argument and deny Catholic teaching on this matter.  You repeatedly teach heresy by stating that it’s acceptable to hold that the Sacrament of Baptism can be present or received without water (the matter).  Read the Church’s teaching on the issue:

    Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, 1439: “All these sacraments are made up of three elements: namely, things as the matter, words as the form, and the person of the minister who confers the sacrament with the intention of doing what the Church does.  If any of these is lacking, the sacrament is not effected.”

    To contend that real and natural water is not necessary for the Sacrament of Baptism is contrary to this canon as well.

    Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Can. 2 on the Sacrament of Baptism, Sess. 7, 1547, ex cathedra: “If anyone should say that real and natural water is not necessary for baptism, and on that account should distort those words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit’ [John 3:5], into some metaphor: let him be anathema.”

    Matatics further contradicts himself when he says that BOD supplies the grace of baptism while he references St. Alphonsus and other theologians who taught that the grace of baptism is not needed for BOD.  So, Tornpage, your statement that Matatics is ‘spot on’ is an example of bad will and blindness.  Were you the one who said that you’re still not convinced of sedevacantism, even though you lean that way?  If that was you, I can see why.  You have a problem with faith and accepting truth.

    Offline tornpage

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 372
    • Reputation: +83/-62
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD
    « Reply #12 on: October 02, 2017, 12:07:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Catholic Truth,

    First, I notice you make a lot of claims regarding Mr. Matatics without citing any "proof." Where's the beef?

    As to your assertion:


    Quote
    So, Matatics says 1) they are “unable… to receive the sacrament” but 2) this “would still require the existence of the sacrament of baptism”.  That’s a blatant contradiction and a lie.  

    You might be able to desire something that doesn't exist, something that simply exists in your mind, but if you desire something that in fact exists, such as a catechumen desires to receive the sacrament of baptism, the existence of the sacrament is necessary to that desire, the desire for it, and it is that desire that is posited as capable of producing justification.

    To have an explicit desire for X, X must exist to move the desire. The existence of X, either in reality or in your mind, is necessary for a desire for X. 

    Rather than being a contradiction and a lie, it's logically consistent and true.

    Don't have time to address the rest of this, but will try to come back to it.

    "[L]et us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, there is 'one God, one faith, one baptism' [Eph. 4:5]; it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry."

    Pope Pius IX, Singulari quadem

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12423
    • Reputation: +6445/-1028
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD
    « Reply #13 on: October 02, 2017, 02:01:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Catholictrue, logic fails you.

    What positive Catholic dogma would render BoD heretical?  It's the dogma that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation.  Now, if one wanted to make some distinction while preserving this necessity of Baptism for salvation, one would avoid heresy, since one would not be directly contradicting the dogma that Baptism is necessary for salvation.  Even if that opinion is false, the opinion would not be heretical in the strict sense of the word and could not be assigned the theoloogical note of "heresy".  That's THE error of MHFM, the theological note they assign to the error of BoD (taken in isolation).  Now, certainly, the vast majority (well over 99%) of BoD promoters at the same time embrace one or another actual heresies (such as Pelagianism), but BoD, taken in isolation, provided that whatever distinction a theologian makes preserves the necessity of Baptism for salvation (i.e. that salvation cannot happen without it), would not strictly be heretical.

    Offline DZ PLEASE

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2934
    • Reputation: +734/-773
    • Gender: Male
    • "Lord, have mercy."
    Re: Gerry Matatics on EENS, BOD
    « Reply #14 on: October 02, 2017, 04:48:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I think that ya'll might be talking past.
    "Lord, have mercy".

     

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