Author Topic: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood  (Read 1934 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline An even Seven

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1369
  • Reputation: +476/-303
  • Gender: Male
Re: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood
« Reply #15 on: September 13, 2017, 10:16:48 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yes, and here's another example.  St. Alphonsus says that those who are saved by BoD still have Purgatory time left.  But Pope Innocent III said in his famous letter about BoB that such a one would arrive at his heavenly home "without delay" (aka, without Purgatory).

    Also, the grace of initial justification = regeneration, and regeneration = a complete renewal so that there's no remaining sin to expiate (both according to Trent).  Consequently, if there is such a thing as BoD, it would NOT entail any Purgatory (if one died immediately afterwards without committing any other sins).
    Good point. Another contradiction within their sources.
    Matthew 15:9 And in vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines and commandments of men.

    Offline DZ PLEASE

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2934
    • Reputation: +732/-768
    • Gender: Male
    • "Lord, have mercy."
    Re: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood
    « Reply #16 on: September 13, 2017, 10:19:43 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • AES,

    It's hardly conclusive proof, but when we're discussing the ordinary magisterium, we aren't looking for a smoking gun, we're just looking for a consensus.  It isn't so much about the passage itself (in Maccabees) as it is about what the Church's approved teachers have taken it to mean.  Scripture is only a remote rule of faith, for understanding of it we look to the Church and her lawfully deputed authors.  So, it's simply added to the rest of the sources affirming the existence of BoD.
    .
    To confuseDZ:
    .
    I am demonstrating that the denial of the Holy Innocents and St. Dismas as a proof of BoD is untenable.  The denial of the proof goes like this:
    .
    -The Holy Innocents and St. Dismas belonged to the Old Covenant
    -Therefore, baptism was not necessary for them
    -Therefore, they could not have received Baptism of Desire, which is a substitute operation whereby the soul is purged of original sin in place of actual water baptism
    -Therefore, as non-recipients of BoD, they do not support BoD
    .
    I can use the same assumption (that one must be a direct example of such and such a thing to be a proof of such and such a thing) to show that Maccabees doesn't support purgatory:
    .
    -The Maccabees belonged to the Old Covenant
    -The fathers in the Old Covenant who were justified only went to the Limbus Patrum
    -Therefore, they would not have gone to purgatory
    -Therefore, the prayers they offered for supplication of their dead do not support purgatory
    .
    But Maccabees is commonly regarded as supporting purgatory by commentators, showing that the commentators do not require one to directly experience what one's experience suggests, foretells, or implies.  
    .
    At least he admits that he intends to confuse. This explains much.
    "Lord, have mercy".


    Offline tornpage

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 350
    • Reputation: +80/-57
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood
    « Reply #17 on: September 13, 2017, 11:05:42 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1


  • DZ,

    Solid reasoning from you too, DZ. Solid form from both of you. 

    I looked at the Scriptural index in my Denzingers: no citation of 2 Maccabees. Not conclusive, but relevant I think. 

    Since I believe that the game changed with the New Law and the promulgation of the Gospel, I agree with you, DZ, that the use of 2 Maccabees for purgatory loses its force. It's simply evidence they went somewhere

    This thread is a good example of how we can have genuine discussion of substance. 

    Thanks,

    Tornpage
    "Assuredly the infinite power of God is not bound by anything; all things obey it as so many passive instruments. In regard to this external principle, therefore, we must inquire which one of all the means in His power Christ did actually adopt."

    Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum

    Offline tornpage

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 350
    • Reputation: +80/-57
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood
    « Reply #18 on: September 13, 2017, 11:07:46 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Yes, and here's another example.  St. Alphonsus says that those who are saved by BoD still have Purgatory time left.  But Pope Innocent III said in his famous letter about BoB that such a one would arrive at his heavenly home "without delay" (aka, without Purgatory).

    Also, the grace of initial justification = regeneration, and regeneration = a complete renewal so that there's no remaining sin to expiate (both according to Trent).  Consequently, if there is such a thing as BoD, it would NOT entail any Purgatory (if one died immediately afterwards without committing any other sins).
    Yes, a good point.
    I'd love to see a genuine magisterium of a true pope resolve these issues. 
    "Assuredly the infinite power of God is not bound by anything; all things obey it as so many passive instruments. In regard to this external principle, therefore, we must inquire which one of all the means in His power Christ did actually adopt."

    Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum

    Offline DZ PLEASE

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2934
    • Reputation: +732/-768
    • Gender: Male
    • "Lord, have mercy."
    Re: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood
    « Reply #19 on: September 13, 2017, 11:45:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • DZ,

    Solid reasoning from you too, DZ. Solid form from both of you.

    I looked at the Scriptural index in my Denzingers: no citation of 2 Maccabees. Not conclusive, but relevant I think.

    Since I believe that the game changed with the New Law and the promulgation of the Gospel, I agree with you, DZ, that the use of 2 Maccabees for purgatory loses its force. It's simply evidence they went somewhere.

    This thread is a good example of how we can have genuine discussion of substance.

    Thanks,

    Tornpage
    You as well, but to be fair to M, I'm not saying that exegetes haven't used that, just perhaps not quite how things are seemingly presented here. Also to be fair, even the "Holy Grail" of an always on point academic forum doesn't always lend itself to these things very well.

    That's one reason why I try to take things in the smallest possible portions, and no more at a time.

    Otherwise, and I"m sure you see it here all the time, it's a goat rodeo. Maccabees, of course, tells us something, just like many things, it may not tell us what we think, what we want, or even if it does, perhaps not in the manner that we might think or like.

    Either way, and I'm hardly Mr. Spock with Logic, but then  again neither was Mr. Spock, S. Dismas, the holy innocents aren't necessarily pro or con. I think Mith is wrong on that point.

    They aren't equivalent even granting what he says of 2 Macc.
    "Lord, have mercy".


    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8480
    • Reputation: +1086/-822
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood
    « Reply #20 on: September 13, 2017, 02:26:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Do we care whether the Church teaches Baptism of Blood or only whether the Holy Innocents do not prove Baptism of Blood?
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline An even Seven

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1369
    • Reputation: +476/-303
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood
    « Reply #21 on: September 13, 2017, 02:47:30 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Do we care whether the Church teaches Baptism of Blood or only whether the Holy Innocents do not prove Baptism of Blood?
    I know you will never believe Catholic Truth, so I'm trying to at least decrease the number of your spams.
    Matthew 15:9 And in vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines and commandments of men.

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8480
    • Reputation: +1086/-822
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood
    « Reply #22 on: September 14, 2017, 05:07:27 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I know you will never believe Catholic Truth, so I'm trying to at least decrease the number of your spams.
    Yuck.  Can you answer the question.  Do we care whether BOB is true or not? Catholics do.  Do you?
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church


    Offline An even Seven

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1369
    • Reputation: +476/-303
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood
    « Reply #23 on: September 15, 2017, 04:53:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yuck.  Can you answer the question.  Do we care whether BOB is true or not? Catholics do.  Do you?
    If it were true, I would care. What we have is some Fathers, Saints etc... speculating about Catechumens receiving the Sacrament in desire or through martyrdom. This does not make BOD a Catholic Truth. The Catholic Truth is that Baptism is necessary to be within the Catholic Church and being within the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation. Therefor, Baptism in water is necessary for Salvation. That is Truth and is what Catholics should care about.
    Matthew 15:9 And in vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines and commandments of men.

    Offline GJC

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 468
    • Reputation: +126/-60
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood
    « Reply #24 on: September 18, 2017, 08:15:06 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yes, and here's another example.  St. Alphonsus says that those who are saved by BoD still have Purgatory time left.  But Pope Innocent III said in his famous letter about BoB that such a one would arrive at his heavenly home "without delay" (aka, without Purgatory).

    Also, the grace of initial justification = regeneration, and regeneration = a complete renewal so that there's no remaining sin to expiate (both according to Trent).  Consequently, if there is such a thing as BoD, it would NOT entail any Purgatory (if one died immediately afterwards without committing any other sins).
    Exactly.... and since the majority of those who support BoD believe that the grace of baptism/spiritual rebirth occurs in Bod they contradict their sources: namely St Thomas and Alphonsus. 



    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8480
    • Reputation: +1086/-822
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood
    « Reply #25 on: September 18, 2017, 08:47:17 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Baptism of blood applies to those who die for Christ or the Faith which the Holy Innocents did.  That is the principal of BOD.  At least according to those who are authorized to teach the Catholic faith rather than 21st century bloggers with their novel American heresy.
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11595
    • Reputation: +6144/-868
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood
    « Reply #26 on: September 19, 2017, 12:57:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Baptism of blood applies to those who die for Christ or the Faith which the Holy Innocents did.  That is the principal of BOD.  At least according to those who are authorized to teach the Catholic faith rather than 21st century bloggers with their novel American heresy.

    Again, logic is not your strength.  Question is whether BoD can supply for Sacramental Baptism.  Since, however, the Holy Innocents were not required to be baptized, it's unknown based on this example.

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8480
    • Reputation: +1086/-822
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood
    « Reply #27 on: September 19, 2017, 01:10:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  •   In this passage Pope Pius XII put his finger upon the cause and the nature of the defective explanations of the Church's necessity for salvation which had occurred in some popular Catholic writing over the course of the past few decades. In the final analysis, men made mistakes about the necessity of the Church for salvation because they did not realize the paramount fact that the visible society which we know as the Catholic Church is actually the Mystical body of Jesus Christ, the true and supernatural kingdom of God on earth, and thus the community within which alone men may achieve salvaific union with God in Christ. And likewise, in the last analysis, the mistakes common among some Catholic popularizers in the field of sacred doctrine were made by attempting to show how we could accept the formula "no salvation outside the Church" and, at the same time, explain that formula in such a way as to void it of all real meaning. Fenton
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11595
    • Reputation: +6144/-868
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood
    « Reply #28 on: September 19, 2017, 01:46:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  •  :D

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8480
    • Reputation: +1086/-822
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Innocents not Proof of Baptism of Blood
    « Reply #29 on: September 19, 2017, 01:50:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  •     Hence some Catholic writers on theological subjects, in their anxiety to present the Church in as favorable a light as possible to non-Catholics, have tended to soften or even, for all intents and purposes, to suppress this part of Catholic doctrine. They realize that the very heart or center of the dogma that the Catholic Church is truly the one and only supernatural kingdom of God on earth is to be found in the teaching that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Most of them had enough historical learning to know that, during the period of the earliest controversies between Catholic and Protestant writers, the matter of the necessity of the Church for salvation was hardly ever subject to dispute. They recognized that both Catholics and Protestants held that the true Church was necessary for the attainment of eternal salvation. The basic theological question that divided these fifteenth- and sixteenth-century authors was this: Exactly where is the true Church of Jesus Christ, the one and only supernatural kingdom of God on earth, to be found? Fenton 
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

     

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