So, are you saying implicit desire and implicit faith call into doubt the dogma of EENS, or not?

Of course they undermine EENS, as you do.

You see, Nado, it's very clear to all of us that you are not interested in Baptism of Desire.  You are interested in redefining Catholic ecclesiology and rejecting the dogma EENS ... as are 99.9% of all BoDers.

Ironic that you would accuse me of losing the faith when you don't believe in one of the core Catholic dogmas.

Obviously the terms you threw out there need clarification.

1) "Implicit Desire"

2) "Implicit Faith"

There's implicit desire and then there's implicit desire.
Implicit Desire 1:  I desire to become a Catholic (implicit desire for Baptism).
Implicit Desire 2:  I'm a good guy worshipping The Great Thumb.  Because I believe that the Great Thumb rewards the good (thumbs up) and punishes the wicked (thumbs down), and I try to do what Great Thumb wants, I have implicit desire.

There's implicit faith and then there's implicit faith.
Implicit Faith 1:  I believe in the Holy Trinity and in the core mysteries surrounding Jesus Christ.  I have implicit faith in everything that the Church teaches (e.g. the Immaculate Conception, etc.) because I have the formal motive of faith.
Implicit Faith 2:  I believe in The Great Thumb; therefore I have implicit faith.

So, Nado,

1) Do you attend a CMRI chapel?

2) Are you a personal friend of Myrna?

You're absolutely right, Ladislaus. The issue is the salvation of non-Catholics. EENS precludes this and all the Creeds about the necessity of the Catholic Faith preclude it. And every Pope, Doctor and Saint and practically all of Tradition for 1950 years is in agreement with Pope Gregory XVI, men are only saved in the Catholic religion, so neither infidels nor heretics can attain eternal life.

Even on the eve of the Council, the majority still believed and taught that salvation was impossible without knowledge of the Holy Trinity, and the Incarnation of the Son of God.

most theologians teach that the minimum explicit content of supernatural and salvific faith includes, not only the truths of God’s existence and of His action as the Rewarder of good and the Punisher of evil, but also the mysteries of the Blessed Trinity and the Incarnation

Let me ask you, Nado, if the Church in future defined solemnly that the Catholic Faith, expressly including the knowledge of at least the essential mysteries such as the Trinity and Incarnation, was necessary for salvation, would you believe it or would you resist it? Do you know better than the vast majority of theologians, the Fathers, the Scriptures, countless Popes, countless Creeds taken by them and consecrated by antiquity and Tradition, beside ecclesiastical approbation, and practically all Saints and Doctors for 1950 years? If you say yes, then you need to ask yourself why you choose novelty over Tradition. Despite your protestations to the contrary, you do believe there is salvation outside the Church and without the Catholic Faith.

Pope Pius IV, “This true Catholic Faith, outside of which no one can be saved… I now profess and truly hold…",

Pope Benedict XVI, “This Faith of the Catholic Church, without which no one can be saved, and which of my own accord I now profess and truly hold…”

"In the second place, we ask whether you and the Armenians obedient to you believe that no man of the wayfarers outside of the Faith of this Church ... can finally be saved… In the ninth place, if you have believed and do believe that all who have raised themselves against the Faith of the Roman Church and have died in final impenitence have been damned and have descended to the eternal punishments of hell."

To be saved, a non-Catholic must have repented and become Catholic. If he did not, but died without doing so, he is lost. St. Pius X assures us, those who die as infidels are lost. Pope Gregory XVI assures us heretics cannot attain eternal life, and men are saved only in the Catholic religion. You ought to ask yourself why you resist a teaching taught by all Tradition, and whether you really are willing to believe whatever the Church teaches.

The result error of "Invincible Ignorance" / "Implicit Faith" is brilliantly described here by Fr. Feeney in his letter to Pius XII:

"THE WAY TO BE SAVED IS BY BEING SINCERE TO YOUR RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS AND LEADING A GOOD LIFE. If one of your convictions happens to be that the Roman Catholic Church is the true Church of Christ, then you are obliged to join it. If you do not sincerely think it is the one way to salvation, then you are invincibly ignorant and God will save you, apart from the Church. YOU ARE THEN SAID TO BELONG TO THE SOUL OF THE CHURCH, and whatever you desire for yourself in the way of salvation, Catholic theologians are prepared to call "Baptism of Desire". Were you to sincerely think that the Roman Catholic Church is not the true Church of Christ, it would be a sin for you to join it."

Quote from: Emerentiana

Thanks Nado for taking over this tired old subject!    

You're welcome.

Quote from: Emerentiana

Most of us are totally fed up with it, but the Feenyites never quit trying  to resurrect the topic, in hopes they can covert some unsuspecting soul to their false way of believing.

"Taking over" would involve actually attempting to address the points made by Nishant and myself.

Thank semi-Feeneyite Matthew for that. He considers them to possibly have a case, and doesn't mind them making their case ad nauseam. (That is, if he doesn't actually hold to it himself but reluctant to come out).

Ah, yes, believing in EENS involves "semi-Feeneyitism".

Quote from: Emerentiana

It matters not to them that ALL of the Traditional clergy teach BOB and BOD!  They follow the Diamonds and Fr Feeney !  

Their idea of "remnant" is much smaller, though inconsistently most of them believe the Novus Ordo leaders represent the true Church!

Fine, go ahead and ignore me.

Nishant believes in BoD.  Address his points please.

You guys are losing the Faith if you think both the "teaching Church" and the "believing Church" as a whole could accept something against a dogma for generations ...

Explain, then, heretic, how the Church could have taught and believed for 1600 years that explicit belief in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation are necessary for salvation, and yet you deny the same.

You are therefore a heretic by your own criteria for denying these truths.

You are the one who is a pollution to Catholic doctrine.

The result error of "Invincible Ignorance" / "Implicit Faith" is brilliantly described here by Fr. Feeney in his letter to Pius XII:

Quote from: Fr. Feeney

"THE WAY TO BE SAVED IS BY BEING SINCERE TO YOUR RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS AND LEADING A GOOD LIFE. If one of your convictions happens to be that the Roman Catholic Church is the true Church of Christ, then you are obliged to join it. If you do not sincerely think it is the one way to salvation, then you are invincibly ignorant and God will save you, apart from the Church. YOU ARE THEN SAID TO BELONG TO THE SOUL OF THE CHURCH, and whatever you desire for yourself in the way of salvation, Catholic theologians are prepared to call "Baptism of Desire". Were you to sincerely think that the Roman Catholic Church is not the true Church of Christ, it would be a sin for you to join it."

Notice here that Fr. Feeney did not condemn Baptism of Desire per se as heretical but he point out that BOD was the NAME the liberals were masking behind to support their heresy of "Invincible Ignorance" and its children. The same can be said about "Implicit Faith".

These terms are very dangerous in Modernist hands. The effects of this XX century heresy of non Catholics belonging somehow to the "soul" of the Church have been disastrous. It has result in a global spread indifferentism and a total lack of true and real Catholic evangelization:

Were we to stop at this point, it would appear that the decline of apostolic spirit in the American Church has been a strictly intramural affair, with all the impetus coming from clerical compromisers who have sought to wear their Roman collars in liberal comfort, avoiding the tangles and thickets of an active, practical apostolate. Such an explanation might be convincing, but it would certainly he incomplete. For we could devote a dozen more issues to those outside pressures which have closed in on the apostolic mission of the Church.

These enemies from without are the numerous offspring (both men and movements) of the French Revolution — the progeny of that Judaeo-Masonic union which has been so fatal to the Church in every country. And the most successful of them, in terms of headway made against the Catholic apostolate, is assuredly the interfaith “Brotherhood” campaign.

Through the press, radio, television, motion pictures, through every public means of persuasion, Americans, and perforce American Catholics, have been bombarded with the Brotherhood propaganda. “It’s not his religion that counts” ... “One belief is as good as another” ... ” “We’re all headed in the same direction, anyway” ... etc. Incessant talk like this puts the predatory Catholic convert-maker in practically a criminal class. And figures published in 1955 indicate that the Church’s should-be apostles are going right along with the Brotherhood act. A national poll showed that nearly eighty per cent of America’s Catholic bishops had authorized diocesan participation in that overt Judaeo-Masonic combine, the National Conference of Christians and Jews, the country’s chief Brotherhood promoters. We may be certain that the percentage has not lately decreased.

Consequently, we have the sad assurance that America, and the American Catholic Church with it, Z GVis fast being subjected to the interfaith religion of Brotherhood — the Christ-less naturalism of the Masons and the Jews. And we are faced with the even sadder reality that Americans are still being denied the clear and salutary challenge of the Catholic Faith — a challenge which we know they can meet with a generosity and a vitality which would bring new blessings to our country, and new saints to our Catholic altars.

We know who is behind all this. That the freemasons and the Jews openly engage in this anti-Catholic campaign that destroys the exclusivity of the Church for salvation is understandable and can be expected, but that Catholic "traditionalist" orders such as the CMRI also engage and promote this same very liberal error in naïve and nostalgic Catholics - snatching them away from the True Faith - is not only an ironic joke but right down diabolical.  

Quote from: Nado

In 1950, immediately after defining the dogma of the Assumption, the text says:

"if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith."

You Feeneyites would have us faithful Catholics believe that St. Alphonsus called into doubt the dogma of EENS, as well as did the popes that canonized and made him a Doctor of the Church. So, they fell away completely from the faith, or were so incompetent as to not notice....and the whole Catholic world with them!!

You are smarter than them all, right? Right?  Every time I bring this up, the Feeneyites all skip right over it. It is so utterly absurd to anyone who has a healthy grasp on the Faith and the holiness of the Church as a divine society.

BUMP.

St. Alphonsus did not believe that one could be saved without explicit belief in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation.  He mentioned that as a minority belief ... which Msgr. Fenton still said it was at the time of Vatican II.

So now your entire Ordinary Universal Magisterium argument boils down to a position held by a single Church Doctor.

You have utter contempt for the dogma EENS.  You have no belief in or any sense for what the supernatural means and what the order of grace means.  You are a Pelagian heretic.  You deny the necessity of the Sacraments for salvation.  You are anathema.