Author Topic: Great article on "Baptism of Desire." (Read 20722 times)

parentsfortruth · « **on:** June 15, 2011, 09:02:00 PM »

Had to share this. So many good points, and so much factual information contained here.

http://catholicism.org/baptism-of-desire-its-origin-and-abandonment-in-the-thought-of-saint-augustine.html

MyrnaM · « **Reply #1 on:** June 15, 2011, 10:48:49 PM »

Speaking of Baptism of Desire, I have been thinking..... oh, oh!

On Ascension Thur. the Epistle mentioned two baptisms one of water and one of Spirit.
I happen to believe as the Church teaches that baptism of blood and desire are valid teachings of the Church.
What about this baptism of the spirit, could that be the same as baptism of desire, in other words baptised by the Holy Ghost because a person died before water baptism took place.

Just asking!

Raoul76 · « **Reply #2 on:** June 15, 2011, 11:02:13 PM »

Man, I have an 80-year old friend. EIGHTY. He became a sede last year and goes to the CMRI. Today he calls me; his neighbor gave him some material from the Dimonds, about the "heretical CMRI." He finds it brilliant.

Dimonds, if you are reading this, think about what you're doing. Think hard. Any doubts deep down in there? Because you have an awful lot to answer for.

s2srea · « **Reply #3 on:** June 16, 2011, 01:02:18 AM »

The Diamonds are wrong for keeping the faithful away from valid sacraments... Ironically, and unfortunately, the same could be said for dogmatic sedevecantists.. It seems its only a matter of time that the spirit of Dogmatic SVism leads all of its followers to the same mentality the Diamonds keep...

SJB · « **Reply #4 on:** June 16, 2011, 07:35:46 AM »

Quote from: s2srea

The Diamonds are wrong for keeping the faithful away from valid sacraments... Ironically, and unfortunately, the same could be said for dogmatic sedevecantists.. It seems its only a matter of time that the spirit of Dogmatic SVism leads all of its followers to the same mentality the Diamonds keep...

Perfect example of a really rash and stupid comment.

s2srea · « **Reply #5 on:** June 16, 2011, 07:42:48 AM »

Rash, perhaps. Stupid- no; I spoke only from personal experience.

SJB · « **Reply #6 on:** June 16, 2011, 08:02:22 AM »

Quote from: s2srea

Rash, perhaps. Stupid- no; I spoke only from personal experience.

Rash is sinful. Stupid is excusable.

...leads all of its followers to the same mentality the Diamonds keep...

s2srea · « **Reply #7 on:** June 16, 2011, 08:35:17 AM »

Yes SJB... I was speaking of "dogmatic sedevecantists"... this type of holier-than-thou thinking leads many into further heresy. Somone who believes you must believe the pope is not the pope to be saved is already in heresy.. why would you defend that position? Am I wrong?

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #8 on:** June 16, 2011, 09:49:29 AM »

Sorry, but where did the Dimond brothers come into this? This isn't from their website.

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #9 on:** June 16, 2011, 09:50:53 AM »

Quote from: MyrnaM

Speaking of Baptism of Desire, I have been thinking..... oh, oh!

On Ascension Thur. the Epistle mentioned two baptisms one of water and one of Spirit.
I happen to believe as the Church teaches that baptism of blood and desire are valid teachings of the Church.
What about this baptism of the spirit, could that be the same as baptism of desire, in other words baptised by the Holy Ghost because a person died before water baptism took place.

Just asking!

Why don't you email Mr. Kelly about it? I'm sure he's got a very good answer for that question. :) :smile:

Darcy · « **Reply #10 on:** June 16, 2011, 11:20:37 AM »

I thought the Dimonds gave a good argument, however, I had to realize that we were taught about Baptism of Desire in the fifties. That was the teaching of the Church as I remember prevatican2.
We were taught that if you died for the Faith that you would go straight to Heaven. We were also taught that there was "invincible ignorance".
That is what I learned.
Now since v2, its an issue and the remnant faithful that should be united are divided over it.
Now some are fighting that the popes prior to 1500s are the only true Popes and all those souls coming after are condemned!

I feel very confused, majority of the time.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #11 on:** June 16, 2011, 01:30:10 PM »

There's no need to be confused. I don't know of a single theologian in the last three hundred years who taught what the Dimonds do. It is an error that sounds convincing because it sounds so opposed to Vatican II -- that's all.

In Europe, there are almost no Feeneyites, it's almost exclusively American. I've heard of one German Feeneyite, that's it.

Exilenomore · « **Reply #12 on:** June 16, 2011, 01:52:44 PM »

It is an American thing, yes.

Caminus · « **Reply #13 on:** June 16, 2011, 02:25:03 PM »

It's an erroneous reaction against rendering the dogma 'outside the Church there is no salvation' into a meaningless formula. The men who erroneously deny baptism of desire/blood understand there is a problem to be addressed, but they have misled themselves into thinking the cause of the problem is this doctrine when in reality the actual source of the problem is an erroneous ecclesiology. If they want to address the real issue, they will turn their attention to the theology of the Church, not in making rash denials of long established Catholic doctrine.

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #14 on:** June 16, 2011, 02:25:30 PM »

I still don't see how this article relates to the Dimond brothers....