Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 17

Author Topic: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"  (Read 26788 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SeanJohnson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15060
  • Reputation: +10006/-3163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
« Reply #195 on: August 22, 2018, 04:03:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on August 22, 2018, 02:57:36 PM
    CANON III.-If any one saith, that without the prevenient inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and without his help, man can believe, hope, love, or be penitent as he ought, so as that the grace of Justification may be bestowed upon him; let him be anathema.

    Unless the Holy Ghost provides man with the disposition/inspiration to be justified, then he will not be.  Unless the Holy Ghost disposes man to accept the Church, he will not accept it.

    Those whom God does not dispose/inspire to be baptized or to have knowledge of the Faith, are those whom God knew, from all eternity, would not accept His graces.  Usually the adage of "grace builds on nature" applies.  This is called the mystery of salvation.

    Your quote has nothing to do with the comment you are responding to.

    It is more or less a condemnation of Pelagianism.

    My response that that implicit baptism pertains to souls who never had a chance to accept or deny the faith was in response to the assertion that such had denied the faith.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12581
    • Reputation: +8006/-2488
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #196 on: August 22, 2018, 04:07:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • There is no such thing as 'invincible ignorance':

    That was the true light, which enlighteneth every man that cometh into this world.  (John 1:9)
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #197 on: August 22, 2018, 04:10:37 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on August 22, 2018, 04:07:48 PM
    There is no such thing as 'invincible ignorance':

    That was the true light, which enlighteneth every man that cometh into this world.  (John 1:9)

    Then why are saints, popes, and doctors discussing and teaching it?

    Moreover, why are none found condemning it?
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #198 on: August 22, 2018, 04:13:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: 2Vermont on August 22, 2018, 03:23:11 PM
    The only thing that that post states is that, in order for implicit BOD to apply, a person must make an "explicit act of faith in at least one aspect of the true religion".  Can you provide examples of what those aspects would be?  This is what at least a handful of us are asking here.  If we have missed it, then just copy and paste it in a new post.

    2V-

    A supernatural faith in any article of faith  suffices for a man to desire the whole faith.

    For example, if a priest or book taught one the dogma of the Trinity or Incarnation, it might in so dispose a soul to implicitly desire and accept the whole thing, had they only known (which is why only God can say who really has been baptized by implicit desire).

    Obviously, the more doctrine is known, the better the chance the implicit desire can be formed (but also, the greater chance it will be rejected).

    What we are really talking about here is cooperation with grace and merit (subjects I will not even enter into, if we are flailing so wildly on the basics).
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12581
    • Reputation: +8006/-2488
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #199 on: August 22, 2018, 04:15:19 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

    • Quote
    A supernatural faith in any article of faith  suffices for a man to desire the whole faith.
    This is a denial of what Trent teaches.  
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #200 on: August 22, 2018, 04:23:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on August 22, 2018, 04:15:19 PM
    This is a denial of what Trent teaches.  

    You have demonstrated repeatedly that you really have no idea what Trent teaches (similar to the way in which a Feeneyite has no idea what John 3:5 teaches).
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12581
    • Reputation: +8006/-2488
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #201 on: August 22, 2018, 04:29:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Trent does not make ANY exceptions for those ignorant of the Faith.  No one can be ignorant of the natural law, but they can be ignorant of the Faith...but this does not excuse them from the obligation to be a member of the Church.

    Those who follow the natural law will be given the grace to hear the Truths of the Faith.  As Scripture says: “God wills that all men be saved and to come to the knowledge of the Truth.”

    Most do not follow the natural law, so God does not give them an opportunity to hear the Faith because it is casting “pearls before swine”.  As St Luke explains:  

    He that is faithful in that which is least, is faithful also in that which is greater: and he that is unjust in that which is little, is unjust also in that which is greater.  (Luke 16:10)

    Further, as Trent teaches, no one is able to have the grace to accept the Truth, unless he is inspired by the Holy Spirit and properly disposed.  So, the idea that one in sin (ie all those unbaptized) can make an “act of supernatural faith” is anti-Trent.  One in sin can’t do ANYTHING supernatural, which requires grace.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #202 on: August 22, 2018, 04:34:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on August 22, 2018, 04:29:51 PM
    Trent does not make ANY exceptions for those ignorant of the Faith.  No one can be ignorant of the natural law, but they can be ignorant of the Faith...but this does not excuse them from the obligation to be a member of the Church.

    Those who follow the natural law will be given the grace to hear the Truths of the Faith.  As Scripture says: “God wills that all men be saved and to come to the knowledge of the Truth.”

    Most do not follow the natural law, so God does not give them an opportunity to hear the Faith because it is casting “pearls before swine”.  As St Luke explains:  

    He that is faithful in that which is least, is faithful also in that which is greater: and he that is unjust in that which is little, is unjust also in that which is greater.  (Luke 16:10)

    However, as Trent teaches, no one is able to have the grace to accept the Truth, unless he is inspired by the Holy Spirit and properly disposed.  So, the idea that one in sin (ie all those unbaptized) can make an “act of supernatural faith” is anti-Trent.  One in sin can’t do ANYTHING supernatural, which requires grace.  

    Trent does not distinguish between explicit or implicit baptism of desire.

    Since both were commonly taught both before and after the council, the presumption is that Trent codified both as an article of faith.

    And the presumption is transformed into a certainty by recalling that not only have Doctors of the Church so interpreted that council, but the infallible universal ordinary magisterium has taught thusly without contradiction ever after.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #203 on: August 22, 2018, 04:43:55 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
    • As we are now running over the same old ground, I leave this thread exactly where I first broached the subject a week ago:

    Feeneyite’s (and sedes) suffer from a peculiar Anglo narrowness of mind, which tends to make them play off one doctrine against another, rather than a broadmindedness which would enable them to integrate doctrine by nuance, distinction, and context (all of which arouse in them the suspicion of compromise and contradiction so prominently displayed in this/these threads).

    But there is no way around it:

    Either I and the entire universal ordinary magisterium since Trent have a better grasp of what that council really taught, or Fr Feeney was the greatest Catholic in the history of the Church, and there has been a sede vacante/interregnum for hundreds of years.

    Pax.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12581
    • Reputation: +8006/-2488
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #204 on: August 22, 2018, 04:59:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • The problem is that you erroneously interpret implicit desire contrary to Trent.  Go re-read the entire Session 6.  I'll post part of Chapter VI below:

    http://www.thecounciloftrent.com/ch6.htm
    CHAPTER VI. The manner of Preparation.

    Now they (adults) are disposed unto the said justice, when, excited and assisted by divine grace, conceiving faith by hearing, they are freely moved towards God, believing those things to be true which God has revealed and promised (Incarnation, Original Sin, Trinity, Redemption...not just one of these, but ALL OF THEM),

    -and this especially, that God justifies the impious by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus; and when, understanding themselves to be sinners, they, by turning themselves, from the fear of divine justice whereby they are profitably agitated, to consider the mercy of God, are raised unto hope, confiding that God will be propitious to them for Christ's sake; and they begin to love Him as the fountain of all justice; and are therefore moved against sins by a certain hatred and detestation, to wit, by that penitence which must be performed before baptism: (So penitence MUST be part of this implicit desire for the Faith.  A generalized "belief in God" or a desire to "do what God wants" is not sufficient.)

     lastly, when they purpose to receive baptism, to begin a new life, and to keep the commandments of God.  (The desire for Baptism can be implicit, in the sense that it is "implied" by actions and not VERBALLY expressed, but that does not mean that the desire is unexpressed, for Trent says that one must purpose/decide to receive baptism, to begin a new life (i.e. turn from sin) and keep the commandments.  This means that the person, in his heart, must WILL that baptism be received, even if he does not explicity tell anyone else, though by his actions, it is implied what he wants (i.e. he takes catechism classes).
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12581
    • Reputation: +8006/-2488
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #205 on: August 22, 2018, 05:02:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    You have demonstrated repeatedly that you really have no idea what Trent teaches
    A non-answer.
    Logged

    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6293
    • Reputation: +3330/-1939
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #206 on: August 22, 2018, 05:04:12 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 22, 2018, 03:58:28 PM
    That implicit baptism of desire is taught in most post-Tridentine catechisms, taught or accepted by all pope’s, saints, and that Council itself (which did not distinguish between explicit and partial mplicit), and contradicted by none, shows it is the Feeneyites, and not I, who are misinterpreting Trent.
    I quoted about 20 dogmas and the writer bypasses them all (does an end run) with his persona opinion, never analyzing how his "implicit baptism of desire" fares against all those dogmas.

    Add to that the lie that "implicit baptism of desire is taught in most post-Tridentine catechisms, taught or accepted by all pope’s, saints, and that Council". The writer does not even know that what he believes, and teaches here is not implicit baptism of desire but is salvation by implicit faith, which is a novelty and does not require belief in the Incarnation and the Holy Trinity, and is not taught by Trent, or any Saint or Pope ever. He does not know the difference between implicit baptism of desire, which requires a belief in the Incarnation and the Holy Trinity and what he believes which is salvation by implicit faith. The writer is totally winging his every word. The blind leading the blind.

    "For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: 4And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables. (2Tim4)

    I post 20 dogmas (sound Doctrine) and the writer post his erroneous personal opinions.
    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14845
    • Reputation: +6145/-916
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #207 on: August 22, 2018, 05:08:06 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 22, 2018, 03:53:13 PM
    Nonsense:

    That there is such a thing as invincible ignorance refutes your claim that all those who are outside the visible Church are so by their own will.
    Ridiculous. It is only all too easy to prove you are entirely wrong - simply go out and ask the first person you see, it matters not whether they be invincibly ignorant, an altogether sincere non-Catholic or anything in between, and tell them what they MUST do in order to attain salvation. When they tell you they want no part of it, there is the proof you are wrong. Keep asking until you find one who wants to become a member, maybe take out an add or TV commercial - let us know how that goes for you.

    Again, if God can arrange for you to be in the Church, by the very same Providence He can arrange for anyone else who desires or is willing to enter it.

    This simple truth all BODers wholly reject, and all BODers absolutely have got to reject Divine Providence in this matter, if they are to maintain their error in favor of man saving himself.

    In all things God provides for us whatever it might be that we need for us attaining salvation, if we do not obtain what we [desire or] pray for, we must suppose it is not conducive to our salvation, in comparison of which all else is of little moment, so says the Haydock as regards Matthew 7:8 - so the BODers are trying to convince the population that God does not consider the sacrament He personally instituted for no other reason than for our salvation, conducive to our salvation.

    Quite amazing when you stop to think about how screwed up the dogmatic BODers are.

    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12581
    • Reputation: +8006/-2488
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #208 on: August 22, 2018, 05:08:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    Trent does not distinguish between explicit or implicit baptism of desire.
    The desire can be expressed (explicit) or implied (implicit) to other persons or the Church, but the person is required to DECIDE, to WILL that he receive baptism.  The desire for baptism SPECIFICALLY is required.    See chapter 6, of session 6.

    Quote
    Since both were commonly taught both before and after the council, the presumption is that Trent codified both as an article of faith.
    If you define implicit as Trent does, then I agree.

    Quote
    And the presumption is transformed into a certainty by recalling that not only have Doctors of the Church so interpreted that council, but the infallible universal ordinary magisterium has taught thusly without contradiction ever after.
    There's plenty of theologians who agree with you, but there's not a consensus, so the universal magisterium is not in play here, thus neither is infallibility.
    Logged

    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6293
    • Reputation: +3330/-1939
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #209 on: August 22, 2018, 05:20:51 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • I don't see it as so dangerous to the faith if people really only believed in the baptism of desire of the catechumen of St. Thomas Aquinas (STA), however, no one today does restrict it to STA's BOD. In my experience, even those that say they restrict it to STA's BOD, do not really, for you never see them strongly opposing implicit faith'ers as they do with there incesant adamant fight against strict EENSers. In my experience that is because they really do not restrict their belief to STA's BOD, because if they really believed STA's BOD like say St. Alphonsus Ligouri, they would oppose the teaching, like St. Alphonsus Ligouri did. 



    Here is St. Alphonsus Ligouri in his own words teaching against what everyone today believes, that BOD saves  Jews, Mohamedans, all non-Catholics, even the invisible ignorant. I don't see ONE so-called defender of STA's BOD teaching this way, not a ONE!



    ST. ALPHONSUS LIGOURI REJECTED IMPLICIT FAITH

    St. Alphonsus, quoted in Fr. Michael Muller’s The Catholic Dogma: “‘Some theologians hold that the belief of the two other articles - the Incarnation of the Son of God, and the Trinity of Persons - is strictly commanded but not necessary, as a means without which salvation is impossible; so that a person inculpably ignorant of them may be saved. But according to the more common and truer opinion, the explicit belief of these articles is necessary as a means without which no adult can be saved.’ (First Command. No. 8.).”

    St. Alphonsus: “See also the special love which God has shown you in bringing you into life in a Christian country, and in the bosom of the Catholic or true Church. How many are born among the pagans, among the Jews, among the Mohometans and heretics, and all are lost.” (Sermons of St. Alphonsus Liguori, Tan Books, 1982, p. 219)



    St. Alphonsus: “If you are ignorant of the truths of the faith, you are obliged to learn them. Every Christian is bound to learn the Creed, the Our Father, and the Hail Mary under pain of mortal sin. Many have no idea of the Most Holy Trinity, the Incarnation, mortal sin, Judgment, Paradise, Hell, or Eternity; and this deplorable ignorance damns them.” (Michael Malone, The Apostolic Digest, p. 159.)








    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 17
    « previous next »