Basically what  Fr. Feeney is answering is that it is a stupid question.

If someone asked Bowler: "What happens to a catechumen who is justified before he receives the sacrament of baptism, but dies before he can get baptized?"

Bowler responds: That's the ridiculous question, for whomever God has  predestinated for baptism can't be snatched away from his predestination. You are splitting two things that go together, like splitting the body and the soul., and then asking the ridiculous question. The end result of your ridiculous question we see today, in all manner of rationalization, and speculation, that has ended in "no practical difference" between it and outside the Church there is salvation. You are in a vortex of confusion.

St. Augustine:
“If you wish to be a Catholic, do not venture to believe, to say, or to teach that ‘they whom the Lord has predestinated for baptism can be snatched away from his predestination[/b], or die before that has been accomplished in them which the Almighty has predestined.’ There is in such a dogma more power than I can tell assigned to chances in opposition to the power of God, by the occurrence of which casualties that which He has predestinated is not permitted to come to pass. It is hardly necessary to spend time or earnest words in cautioning the man who takes up with this error against the absolute vortex of confusion into which it will absorb him, when I shall sufficiently meet the case if I briefly warn the prudent man who is ready to receive correction against the threatening mischief.” (On the Soul and Its Origin 3, 13)

Quote from: bowler

Basically what  Fr. Feeney is answering is that it is a stupid question.

If someone asked Bowler: "What happens to a catechumen who is justified before he receives the sacrament of baptism, but dies before he can get baptized?"

Bowler responds: That's the ridiculous question, for whomever God has  predestinated for baptism can't be snatched away from his predestination. You are splitting two things that go together, like splitting the body and the soul., and then asking the ridiculous question. The end result of your ridiculous question we see today, in all manner of rationalization, and speculation, that has ended in "no practical difference" between it and outside the Church there is salvation. You are in a vortex of confusion.

St. Augustine:
“If you wish to be a Catholic, do not venture to believe, to say, or to teach that ‘they whom the Lord has predestinated for baptism can be snatched away from his predestination[/b], or die before that has been accomplished in them which the Almighty has predestined.’ There is in such a dogma more power than I can tell assigned to chances in opposition to the power of God, by the occurrence of which casualties that which He has predestinated is not permitted to come to pass. It is hardly necessary to spend time or earnest words in cautioning the man who takes up with this error against the absolute vortex of confusion into which it will absorb him, when I shall sufficiently meet the case if I briefly warn the prudent man who is ready to receive correction against the threatening mischief.” (On the Soul and Its Origin 3, 13)

 If what LOT believes were true (that nay unbaptized person can be saved even if they have no explicit desire to be a Catholic or belief in Christ), then his God is disordered, for He would have preordained thousands of people to be raised from the dead just to receive the sacrament of baptism for no reason, and others he preordained to be saved unbaptized, while He wasted His baptism on millions who died in mortal sin, and his clear dogmas on EENS and baptism and  and John  3:5, do not mean what they clearly say. You are in the Vortex of confusion.

Catechism of the Council of Trent (16th century): The Sacraments, Baptism: "...should any unforeseen accident make it impossible for adults to be washed in the salutary waters, their intention and determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness."


St. Augustine, Church Father and Doctor of the Church (4th-5th Century): The Seven Books of Augustin, Bishop of Hippo, On Baptism, Against the Donatists, Book IV, Ch 22: "That the place of baptism is sometimes supplied by martyrdom is supported by an argument by no means trivial, which the blessed Cyprian adduces from the thief, to whom, though he was not baptized, it was yet said, "To-day shall thou be with me in Paradise." On considering which, again and again, I find that not only martyrdom for the sake of Christ may supply what was wanting of baptism, but also faith and conversion of heart, if recourse may not be had to the celebration of the mystery of baptism for want of time. For neither was that thief crucified for the name of Christ, but as the reward of his own deeds; nor did he suffer because he believed, but he believed while suffering. It was shown, therefore, in the case of that thief, how great is the power even without the visible sacrament of baptism, of what the apostle says, "With the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." But the want is supplied invisibly only when the administration of baptism is prevented, not by contempt for religion, but by the necessity of the moment."
Ch23: "But as in the thief, to whom the material administration of the sacrament was necessarily wanting, the salvation was complete, because it was spiritually present through his piety, so, when the sacrament itself is present, salvation is complete, if what the thief possessed be unavoidably wanting."
Ch24: "And as in the thief the gracious goodness of the Almighty supplied what had been wanting in the sacrament of baptism, because it had been missing not from pride or contempt, but from want of opportunity..."
Ch25: "By all these considerations it is proved that the sacrament of baptism is one thing, the conversion of the heart another; but that man's salvation is made complete through the two together. Nor are we to suppose that, if one of these be wanting, it necessarily follows that the other is wanting also; because the sacrament may exist in the infant without the conversion of the heart; and this was found to be possible without the sacrament in the case of the thief, God in either case filling up what was involuntarily wanting. But when either of these requisites is wanting intentionally, then the man is responsible for the omission. And baptism may exist when the conversion of the heart is wanting; but, with respect to such conversion, it may indeed be found when baptism has not been received, but never when it has been despised."

From City of God, Book XIII, Chapter 7: "Of the Death Which the Unbaptized Suffer for the Confession of Christ: For whatever unbaptized persons die confessing Christ, this confession is of the same efficacy for the remission of sins as if they were washed in the sacred font of baptism. For He who said, "Unless a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God," John 3:5 made also an exception in their favor, in that other sentence where He no less absolutely said, "Whosoever shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven;" Matthew 10:32 and in another place, "Whosoever will lose his life for my sake, shall find it." Matthew 16:25"

A Treatise on the Soul and Its Origin, Book II, Ch17, Disobedient Compassion and Compassionate Disobedience Reprobated and Martyrdom In Lieu Of Baptism: "Truth, by the mouth of Itself incarnate, proclaims as if in a voice of thunder: "Except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." And in order to except martyrs from this sentence, to whose lot it has fallen to be slain for the name of Christ before being washed in the baptism of Christ, He says in another passage, "He that loseth his life for my sake shall find it."

A Treatise On the Soul and Its Origin, by Aurelius Augustin, Bishop of Hippo; In Four Books, 419, Book 1, CH 11, Title Of Chapter 11: "Martyrdom for Christ Supplies the Place of Baptism. The Faith of the Thief Who Was Crucified Along with Christ Taken As Martyrdom And Hence for Baptism".

 On the Soul and Its Origin, Book 1, Ch 10: "Moreover, from the time when He said, "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven;" and again, "He that loseth his life for my sake shall find it; " no one becomes a member of Christ except it be either by baptism in Christ, or death for Christ."

• Pope Innocent II (12th Century): From his letter "Apostolicam Sedem" to the Bishop of Cremona, "We assert without hesitation (on the authority of the holy Fathers Augustine and Ambrose) that the 'priest' whom you indicated (in your letter) had died without the water of baptism, because he persevered in the Faith of Holy Mother Church and in the confession of the name of Christ, was freed from original sin and attained the joys of the heavenly fatherland. Read [brother] in the eighth book of Augustine's City of God where among other things it is written: 'Baptism is administered invisibly to one whom not contempt of religion, but death excludes.' Read again the book also of the blessed Ambrose concerning the death of Valentinian where he says the same thing. Therefore, to questions concerning the dead, you should hold the opinions of the learned Fathers, and in your church you should join in prayers and you should have sacrifices offered to God for the 'priest' mentioned." (Denzinger 388)

 

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Thank you for getting the thread back to sanity.

Church or bowler.  Church or bowler.  I take the Church.  Hopefully bowler becomes Catholic before he died.

So, Saint Augustine ended his life as a non-Catholic?!

Yes, you did!  Fact is that Saint Augustine changed his mind with respect to "Baptism of Desire":

Quote

"...we have to admit...that the testimony of the Fathers, with regard to the possibility of salvation for someone outside the Church, is very weak. Certainly even the ancient Church knew that the grace of God can be found also outside the Church and even before Faith. But the view that such divine grace can lead man to his final salvation without leading him first into the visible Church, is something, at any rate, which met with very little approval in the ancient Church. For, with reference to the optimistic views on the salvation of catechumens as found in many of the Fathers, it must be noted that such a candidate for baptism was regarded in some sense or other as already 'Christianus', and also that certain Fathers, such as Gregory nαzιanzen 57 and Gregory of Nyssa 58 deny altogether the justifying power of love or of the desire for baptism. Hence it will be impossible to speak of a consensus dogmaticus in the early Church regarding the possibility of salvation for the non-baptized, and especially for someone who is not even a catechumen. In fact, even St. Augustine, in his last (anti-pelagian) period, no longer maintained the possibility of a baptism by desire.

http://www.marycoredemptrix.com/laisneyism.html

So, did Saint Augustine die as a heretic?

Quote from: Jehanne

Yes, you did!  Fact is that Saint Augustine changed his mind with respect to "Baptism of Desire":

Quote

"...we have to admit...that the testimony of the Fathers, with regard to the possibility of salvation for someone outside the Church, is very weak. Certainly even the ancient Church knew that the grace of God can be found also outside the Church and even before Faith. But the view that such divine grace can lead man to his final salvation without leading him first into the visible Church, is something, at any rate, which met with very little approval in the ancient Church. For, with reference to the optimistic views on the salvation of catechumens as found in many of the Fathers, it must be noted that such a candidate for baptism was regarded in some sense or other as already 'Christianus', and also that certain Fathers, such as Gregory nαzιanzen 57 and Gregory of Nyssa 58 deny altogether the justifying power of love or of the desire for baptism. Hence it will be impossible to speak of a consensus dogmaticus in the early Church regarding the possibility of salvation for the non-baptized, and especially for someone who is not even a catechumen. In fact, even St. Augustine, in his last (anti-pelagian) period, no longer maintained the possibility of a baptism by desire.

http://www.marycoredemptrix.com/laisneyism.html

So, did Saint Augustine die as a heretic?

I have heard that argument before.  And I have heard it refuted.  But why are you concerned about Augustine, when you ignore all the other Fathers, Doctors, Popes, Saints, the Holy Office and theologians who contradict you and Father Feeney?

Did all of the above also change their mind?  This should make the latest headlines.  It would be of great interest to me if they did.

Quote from: Cantarella

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Quote from: Jehanne

Yes, you did!  Fact is that Saint Augustine changed his mind with respect to "Baptism of Desire":

Quote

"...we have to admit...that the testimony of the Fathers, with regard to the possibility of salvation for someone outside the Church, is very weak. Certainly even the ancient Church knew that the grace of God can be found also outside the Church and even before Faith. But the view that such divine grace can lead man to his final salvation without leading him first into the visible Church, is something, at any rate, which met with very little approval in the ancient Church. For, with reference to the optimistic views on the salvation of catechumens as found in many of the Fathers, it must be noted that such a candidate for baptism was regarded in some sense or other as already 'Christianus', and also that certain Fathers, such as Gregory nαzιanzen 57 and Gregory of Nyssa 58 deny altogether the justifying power of love or of the desire for baptism. Hence it will be impossible to speak of a consensus dogmaticus in the early Church regarding the possibility of salvation for the non-baptized, and especially for someone who is not even a catechumen. In fact, even St. Augustine, in his last (anti-pelagian) period, no longer maintained the possibility of a baptism by desire.

http://www.marycoredemptrix.com/laisneyism.html

So, did Saint Augustine die as a heretic?

I have heard that argument before.  And I have heard it refuted.  But why are you concerned about Augustine, when you ignore all the other Fathers, Doctors, Popes, Saints, the Holy Office and theologians who contradict you and Father Feeney?

Did all of the above also change their mind?  This should make the latest headlines.  It would be of great interest to me if they did.

And why are you so concerned about all the other Fathers, Doctors, Popes, Saints, the Holy Office and theologians if you want to ignore the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself?

" Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God".

You act as if  contradict or "ignore" the words of our Lord which is absurd on its face.

This is obvious to rational creatures.  Do you suggest that all of the above were not aware of the quote you provide?

Not all of the the Fathers, Doctors, Popes, and Saints, have agreed on Baptism of Desire. BoD has not been uninimously taught by the Church Fathers.

I am not saying those who do, are not aware of Our Lord's words, but they have not taken them literally. If you start "interpreting" Our Lord's teachings, you start falling into protestant heresy.