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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17 ... 23

Author Topic: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor  (Read 20111 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Meg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6795
  • Reputation: +3472/-2999
  • Gender: Female
Re: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor
« Reply #210 on: September 08, 2017, 09:41:14 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on September 08, 2017, 09:17:02 AM
    It was nice to see the rational discussion that ensued after his departure yesterday.

    Which probably had something to do with you not being involved in the discussion either, yesterday.
    Logged
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1159/-864
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor
    « Reply #211 on: September 12, 2017, 08:12:57 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Bellator Dei on September 07, 2017, 02:54:31 PM
    Maybe so...  But the words of Saint Augustine are certainly wavering.  He had to weigh Cyprian's argument again and again because he couldn't point to any Church teaching on a BOD - He's merely stating his opinion, based on the opinion of another fallible human being.

    Also, it should be noted that by considering the example of the good thief, we can already see where St. Cyprian has erred in his argument.  Of course, we know that the Sacrament of Baptism wasn't obligatory until AFTER the resurrection, so the good thief died under the old law.    
      
    So you pit yourself against Saint Cyprian and a host of others and we are to believe you are in the right.  Saint Augustine was not wavering in his other quote.  Aquinas settled it Trent proved it settled. Are you one of those who claim that Trent did not teach that the desire for the sacrament could be salvific? 
    Logged
    "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 Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1159/-864
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor
    « Reply #212 on: September 12, 2017, 09:46:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • You see contradiction where the Fathers, Saints, Doctors and Popes do not.
    Logged
    "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 Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1159/-864
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor
    « Reply #213 on: September 12, 2017, 09:55:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Bellator Dei on September 12, 2017, 09:48:52 AM
    Is the Catechism of the Council of Trent wrong when it states that the Sacrament of Baptism became obligatory AFTER the Resurrection?
    Of course not.
    Logged
    "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 DZ PLEASE

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2928
    • Reputation: +741/-787
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor
    « Reply #214 on: September 12, 2017, 09:55:31 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Lover of Truth on September 12, 2017, 09:46:58 AM
    You see contradiction where the Fathers, Saints, Doctors and Popes do not.
    Seeing contradiction where it is goes far in explaining dogmatic definitions in the first place, where "baby dogmas come from."

    If everything were clear, were a given, and "Fathers, saints, docs and popes" never did disagree, or were always "on the same page", then what is dogma, and what's the point of it to begin with?

    What is the standard motive, the pressure, that drives, for example, a dogmatic definition?

     I have no reason to care what your answer is, as long as you remain as you are. The question is just something to consider.
    Logged

    Offline DZ PLEASE

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2928
    • Reputation: +741/-787
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor
    « Reply #215 on: September 12, 2017, 10:00:24 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: An even Seven on September 12, 2017, 09:57:53 AM
    Do you admit then that the Holy Innocents and the Good Thief cannot be brought forward as examples of BOB? And that you will stop citing those sources who say they are?
    You have "met" LoL before, right?
    Logged

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1159/-864
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor
    « Reply #216 on: September 12, 2017, 10:02:09 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Bellator Dei on September 12, 2017, 09:58:51 AM
    Then how can the Good Thief, and the Holy Innocents for that matter, be used as an argument in favor of BOD?
    It is the same principal.  But if you want do discredit what legitimate authorities have given as example would you say that Emerentiana counts?  Or are those who reject the teaching of the Fathers, Saints, Doctors and Popes on the issue forced to say "she must have been secretly water baptized when no one was looking or there to make record of it"?  
    Logged
    "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 Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1159/-864
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor
    « Reply #217 on: September 12, 2017, 10:11:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
    • Quote from: An even Seven on September 12, 2017, 10:08:08 AM
    So what's your answer?
    Saint Emerentiana is a Saint who was not baptized with water.  She lived after the promulgation of the Gospel.  
    Logged
    "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 Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1159/-864
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor
    « Reply #218 on: September 12, 2017, 10:15:04 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: An even Seven on September 12, 2017, 10:12:23 AM
    To this:
    Do you admit that authoritative sources quoted are more reliable on Catholic doctrine than you?  Why do you ignore Saint Emerentiana?  For convenience?
    Logged
    "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 Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1159/-864
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor
    « Reply #219 on: September 12, 2017, 10:15:52 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Bellator Dei on September 12, 2017, 10:14:01 AM
    We can address Saint Emerentiana some other time.  

    We're discussing whether or not the Good Thief can be used as an argument for BOD, when Baptism wasn't a requisite for salvation at the time.  

    What BOD principles can be applied to the Good Thief when there was no requirement for him to be Baptized?  
    We can get to it now as she is an example that the Feeneyites cannot use the above excuse for.  
    Logged
    "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 DZ PLEASE

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2928
    • Reputation: +741/-787
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor
    « Reply #220 on: September 12, 2017, 10:16:29 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Lover of Truth on September 12, 2017, 10:11:05 AM
    Saint Emerentiana is a Saint who was not baptized with water.  She lived after the promulgation of the Gospel.  
    Seven, LoL; LoL, Seven.
    Logged

    Offline Merry

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 666
    • Reputation: +401/-99
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor
    « Reply #221 on: September 12, 2017, 10:17:43 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Dear Calumniating Lover of Truth (remember:  Monsignor Cassano - who said Fr. Feeney's Bread of Life book had no errors in it, and you said the Monsignor must have therefore been a Mason - duh) - if St. Emerentiana has been held as a Saint by the Catholic Church, she had to have been baptized by water at some point, and God of course would know this -- even if no one else did -- and even if she herself did not know it!!  Even if she was baptized as an infant and was not informed of it, or aware of it -- what matters is that God knows she is baptized. 

    Baptism of water was not of necessity until Pentecost Sunday when the Church was born. 

    The Holy Innocents and the Good Thief did not have "Catholic" requirements.

    After Pentecost, one had to have Baptism of Water in order to have Original Sin removed and have the indelible mark put on your soul.

    Even Our Lady had to have Baptism of Water in order to receive the other sacraments, although she did not need it of course, to remove Original Sin.

    Our Lord says this. The Council of Trent says this.  The Church says this.  NO ONE ELSE'S OPINION MATTERS. ALL ELSE IS ERROR OR SPECULATION. 

    WATER is DOCTRINE - the MATTER of the sacrament of Baptism. 

    Some people don't know their faith.  Some people just like a ruckus - they like attention on a website.

        
    Logged
    If any one saith that true and natural water is not of necessity for baptism, and on that account wrests to some sort of metaphor those words of Our Lord Jesus Christ, "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost...,"  Let Him Be Anathama.  -COUNCIL OF TRENT Sess VII Canon II “On Baptism"

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1159/-864
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor
    « Reply #222 on: September 12, 2017, 10:17:57 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Bellator Dei on September 12, 2017, 10:14:01 AM
    We can address Saint Emerentiana some other time.  

    We're discussing whether or not the Good Thief can be used as an argument for BOD, when Baptism wasn't a requisite for salvation at the time.  

    What BOD principles can be applied to the Good Thief when there was no requirement for him to be Baptized?  
    I can trust 21st century lay-bloggers or Sainted Doctors on the issue?

    Quote
     St. Alphonsus Liguori, Doctor of the Church (18th century): Moral Theology, Book 6, Section II (About Baptism and Confirmation), Chapter 1 (On Baptism), page 310, no. 96: "Baptism of desire is perfect conversion to God by contrition or love of God above all things accompanied by an explicit or implicit desire for true baptism of water, the place of which it takes as to the remission of guilt, but not as to the impression of the [baptismal] character or as to the removal of all debt of punishment. It is called "of wind" ["flaminis"] because it takes place by the impulse of the Holy Ghost who is called a wind ["flamen"]. Now it is "de fide" that men are also saved by Baptism of desire, by virtue of the Canon Apostolicam, "de presbytero non baptizato" and of the Council of Trent, session 6, Chapter 4 where it is said that no one can be saved 'without the laver of regeneration or the desire for it.'" (Note: Unbelievers can see the original book in Latin here. Turn to page 310 in the book (or page 157 of the PDF file).

     Moral Theology, Bk. 6, nn. 95-97: "Baptism of blood is the shedding of one's blood, i.e. death, suffered for the faith or for some other Christian virtue. Now this Baptism is comparable to true baptism because, like true Baptism, it remits both guilt and punishment as it were ex opere operato… Hence martyrdom avails also for infants seeing that the Church venerates the Holy Innocents as true martyrs. That is why Suarez rightly teaches that the opposing view is at least temerarious."

    On the Council of Trent, 1846, Pg. 128-129 (Duffy): "Who can deny that the act of perfect love of God, which is sufficient for justification, includes an implicit desire of Baptism, of Penance, and of the Eucharist. He who wishes the whole wishes the every part of that whole and all the means necessary for its attainment. In order to be justified without baptism, an infidel must love God above all things, and must have an universal will to observe all the divine precepts, among which the first is to receive baptism: and therefore in order to be justified it is necessary for him to have at least an implicit desire of that sacrament."


    Do you fault me for trusting the later?  If so who is it that should be concerned about their position?
    Logged
    "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 Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1159/-864
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor
    « Reply #223 on: September 12, 2017, 10:22:45 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Merry on September 12, 2017, 10:17:43 AM
    Dear Calumniating Lover of Truth (remember:  Monsignor Cassano - who said Fr. Feeney's Bread of Life book had no errors in it, and you said the Monsignor must have therefore been a Mason - duh) - if St. Emerentiana has been held as a Saint by the Catholic Church, she had to have been baptized by water at some point, and God of course would know this -- even if no one else did -- and even if she herself did not know it!!  Even if she was baptized as an infant and was not informed of it, or aware of it -- what matters is that God knows she is baptized.

    Baptism of water was not of necessity until Pentecost Sunday when the Church was born.

    The Holy Innocents and the Good Thief did not have "Catholic" requirements.

    After Pentecost, one had to have Baptism of Water in order to have Original Sin removed and have the indelible mark put on your soul.

    Even Our Lady had to have Baptism of Water in order to receive the other sacraments, although she did not need it of course, to remove Original Sin.

    Our Lord says this. The Council of Trent says this.  The Church says this.  NO ONE ELSE'S OPINION MATTERS. ALL ELSE IS ERROR OR SPECULATION.

    WATER is DOCTRINE - the MATTER of the sacrament of Baptism.

    Some people don't know their faith.  Some people just like a ruckus - they like attention on a website.

        
    Dear Yuck.  Quite pretending you know anything.
    Logged
    "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 DZ PLEASE

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2928
    • Reputation: +741/-787
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ladislaus the Calumniating Detractor
    « Reply #224 on: September 12, 2017, 10:24:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • I can't speak for any else, but I can't wait till this all pays off and LoL curbstomps Ladislaus as "the Calumniating Detractoratin'" dog that surely he must be to go to all this work.

    Such a clever strategem it is too; I totally don't even suspect how LoL is setting this up for the coup de grace. On the face of it, it seems 180 degrees, (sorry Frisbeeans) from any relevance to Ladi's dirty rotten scoundrel(cy?) at all.

    Clever bugger. Watch that one. :popcorn:
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17 ... 23
    « previous next »