Author Topic: Great article on "Baptism of Desire." (Read 24127 times)

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....