CathInfo.com

I need true instruction, advice, and prayers. This question of whether the Dimond brothers, the Feeneyites, etc are correct or whether the other side is has been boggling my mind, just as sedevacantism did before.

I read about baptism of desire/blood in the Baltimore catechism, this article on Mr. Griff Ruby's site, Fr. Anthony Cekada's article y here, and more. I just don't know what to do. I care only for holding the Faith and going to Heaven. Its just that the Dimond argument is so strong. Its so clearly spelled out, dogmatically.

You are right, it is clearly spelled out, and they answer all the points brought up by the SSPX, Cekada, Griff, whoever. it's easy to defend their position because they have the truth on their side. HOWEVER, telling people that they should not go to chapels that don't believe in EENS as it is written, would mean that there is practically nowhere to go today, as pretty much everyone believes that anyone who is "good' can be saved outside of the Church.


I came from the opposite camp than you. I'm from Latin America, and we were always taught that all non-Catholics go to hell. So, when I start hearing all these undefined excuses like implicit faith and invincible ignorance, I was forced to study the matter.

There is a thread that I started on BOD entitled Dying by "Accident" before being baptized, and BOD?, which is going on right now, you are welcomed to join it. And don't sweat it, you don't need to be a "home aloner" to be a believer in EENS as it is written.

Please dear friends, can anyone help me. Especially when it comes to implicit faith and invincible ignorance.

If you were to believe in the theory of baptism of desire catechumen, that would be one thing, you'd have some support from tradition, BUT, implicit faith and invincible ignorance, are way off the chart. They have absolutely no support from any tradition, they are novelties, that lead to our present situation where Catholics believe that anyone can be saved outside of the Church.

Quote from: Jim

I need true instruction, advice, and prayers. This question of whether the Dimond brothers, the Feeneyites, etc are correct or whether the other side is has been boggling my mind, just as sedevacantism did before.

I read about baptism of desire/blood in the Baltimore catechism, this article on Mr. Griff Ruby's site, Fr. Anthony Cekada's article y here, and more. I just don't know what to do. I care only for holding the Faith and going to Heaven. Its just that the Dimond argument is so strong. Its so clearly spelled out, dogmatically.

Please dear friends, can anyone help me. Especially when it comes to implicit faith and invincible ignorance.

I am feeling tempted to embrace Feeneyism and home-aloneism. I do not feel that I can be judged a pertinacious heretic by anyone, since we are not in normal times, and I cannot write the Holy Office, Pius XII, etc and ask them personally this conflict in my mind.

Please, say any players you can for me, even though I don't do so often for others. Please my friends. Our Lady of Good Counsel, pray for us who have recourse to thee!

Nadie-

   You need to free your mind from the two Satanic snares of Sedevacantism and "No Salvation Without Water Baptism."

   Come out of the manuals for a while and return to common sense.

   If these people are right, the Church has been teaching error since the time of St. Peter.

   

   Correction-

   I should have addressed this to Jim, not Nadie.

  Listen Seraphim! ALL of the trad groups, including the SSPX, all believe in baptism of desire and water.   The sedes are not to blame for this.
I wouldnt classify the Diamond brother heretics  in the same category as the trad priests and bishops.
/
The longer this inter regnum lasts, the more confusion there will be!  

God has not left his church, but has at present  provided us with priests to say mass and to give us the sacraments.
Try and look at things simply.  We will soon be in the catacombs with no priests to say mass, as they will be hunted and killed by the NWO.
Then we can be home aloners.