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

Author Topic: Miraculous Baptisms  (Read 112334 times)

4 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online WorldsAway

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1079
  • Reputation: +800/-109
  • Gender: Male
Re: Miraculous Baptisms
« Reply #30 on: Yesterday at 10:13:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Please provide one council or one Pope teaching Guardian Angels to the universal Church. Are they real? Why do you believe those silly fairy tales? We have only one mediator you know.
    Guardian Angels have biblical basis, and AFAIK is something that can actually be said to be the 'unanimous and constant" teaching of Church Fathers

    Quote
    If a doctrine [sic] has been around since at least the Fathers, been taught by St. Thomas, and never condemned by Pope or Council, what is the problem!?
    Are Sts. Cyprian and Alphonsus in error? Somebody should have corrected them in the course of Church History. If St. Thomas or Garrigou Lagrange didn't issue any correction, nobody will.

    BOD is not doctrine. It was not taught by Our Lord, the Apostles, or unanimously by the Fathers, and has never been taught by a Council or by a Pope to the universal Church. It is an opinion, and one that I do believe will be condemned one day. There is still time
    Quote
    I would like to forgive those suffering from the "No true Scottsman" fallacy for attacking the doctrines, since it occasions the responses of those better prepared to defend the things we take for granted better than I do.

    Have you read the actual doctrine I posted from Trent, Pope St. Leo the Great, Eugene IV and the Council of Florence? Please at least consider it..if you want, I can put it all in a single post for convenience. 
    John 15:19  If you had been of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

    Offline Shrewd Operator

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 187
    • Reputation: +109/-10
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Miraculous Baptisms
    « Reply #31 on: Yesterday at 11:16:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Guardian Angels have biblical basis, and AFAIK is something that can actually be said to be the 'unanimous and constant" teaching of Church Fathers

    BOD is not doctrine. It was not taught by Our Lord, the Apostles, or unanimously by the Fathers, and has never been taught by a Council or by a Pope to the universal Church. It is an opinion, and one that I do believe will be condemned one day. There is still time
    Have you read the actual doctrine I posted from Trent, Pope St. Leo the Great, Eugene IV and the Council of Florence? Please at least consider it..if you want, I can put it all in a single post for convenience.
    This doesn't sound like a strong enough argument to discredit BoB and BoD, (or Guardian Angles). This is also just an opinion.

    There are Scripture quotes to support BoD in the materials the other posters provided.

    BoD is a part of BoW doctrine as covered in all the sources you provided. All of the positive things they (Councils, etc.) have to say about BoW apply to the other two, as long as the nuances listed in the material the other posters gave are observed. If BoD were going to be condemned, it would have been condemned by Trent since it was so focused on justification and the Sacraments. The Council Fathers and Church Fathers were in a better position to know than anyone since, that's why nobody has condemned it up to now. The Feeneyite opinion is the novelty. That's why it's named after him.

    The only thing that can be condemned is the Modernist interpretation/opinion that aims for universal salvation by Bod. That will be condemned one day, unless you consider it already condemned by St. Pius X who condemned Modernism.


    Offline Tarmac Turkey

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 7
    • Reputation: +5/-1
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Miraculous Baptisms
    « Reply #32 on: Today at 03:40:09 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • It is not called the Boston Heresy for nothing. Pope St Pius X teaches Baptism of Desire and Blood in his Catchesim:

    16 Q. Is Baptism necessary to salvation?
    A. Baptism is absolutely necessary to salvation, for our Lord has expressly said: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God."


    17 Q. Can the absence of Baptism be supplied in any other way?
    A. The absence of Baptism can be supplied by martyrdom, which is called Baptism of Blood, or by an act of perfect love of God, or of contrition, along with the desire, at least implicit, of Baptism, and this is called Baptism of Desire.



    "He that shall lose his life for Me, shall find it." (Matt. 10:39) affirms Baptism of Blood by Our Lord Himself.


    Offline AnthonyPadua

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2640
    • Reputation: +1342/-288
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Miraculous Baptisms
    « Reply #33 on: Today at 04:53:49 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It is not called the Boston Heresy for nothing. Pope St Pius X teaches Baptism of Desire and Blood in his Catchesim:

    16 Q. Is Baptism necessary to salvation?
    A. Baptism is absolutely necessary to salvation, for our Lord has expressly said: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God."


    17 Q. Can the absence of Baptism be supplied in any other way?
    A. The absence of Baptism can be supplied by martyrdom, which is called Baptism of Blood, or by an act of perfect love of God, or of contrition, along with the desire, at least implicit, of Baptism, and this is called Baptism of Desire.



    "He that shall lose his life for Me, shall find it." (Matt. 10:39) affirms Baptism of Blood by Our Lord Himself.
    The original catechism does not have these in it. It's an addition. Also it's called the Boston heresy because jews and freemasons like to lie and deceive people, that's why all the newspapers immediately all printed that the Church changed her teaching on EENS.

    Emotionally minded people and people with weak logic are easily fooled by things like this.

    This doesn't sound like a strong enough argument to discredit BoB and BoD, (or Guardian Angles). This is also just an opinion.

    There are Scripture quotes to support BoD in the materials the other posters provided.

    BoD is a part of BoW doctrine as covered in all the sources you provided. All of the positive things they (Councils, etc.) have to say about BoW apply to the other two, as long as the nuances listed in the material the other posters gave are observed. If BoD were going to be condemned, it would have been condemned by Trent since it was so focused on justification and the Sacraments. The Council Fathers and Church Fathers were in a better position to know than anyone since, that's why nobody has condemned it up to now. The Feeneyite opinion is the novelty. That's why it's named after him.
    The only thing that can be condemned is the Modernist interpretation/opinion that aims for universal salvation by Bod. That will be condemned one day, unless you consider it already condemned by St. Pius X who condemned Modernism.

    No the infallible statements made by the Church reject the very notion of both BoD and BoB, that means scripture does not teach it and any interpretation that does so is wrong and contrary to faith. You are ignoring the truth here, very few fathers believed in these errors, even St Gregory nαzιunsus who the Church titles 'theologian' outright rejected BoD.

    It's clear you are here with bad will since you said "Feeneyite opinion is the novelty. That's why it's named after him."

    You ignored all the evidence that was contrary to your false beliefs and once again falsely as attributed rejection of BoD as an invention of Fr Feeney. But clearly St Gregory denied it, so is St Gregory a feeneyite? Or are you going to call us Gregoryites?

    Online WorldsAway

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1079
    • Reputation: +800/-109
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Miraculous Baptisms
    « Reply #34 on: Today at 06:49:37 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This doesn't sound like a strong enough argument to discredit BoB and BoD, (or Guardian Angles). This is also just an opinion.
    Sure, it's not. But I don't rely on Guardian Angels to disprove BOD.


    Quote
    There are Scripture quotes to support BoD in the materials the other posters provided.

    If they are read how the Church reads them, or how were are to read them in light of Church teaching, there are none. In fact, it is the exact opposite (e.g Trent 'as it is written' regarding John 3:5)


    Quote
    BoD is a part of BoW doctrine as covered in all the sources you provided. All of the positive things they (Councils, etc.) have to say about BoW apply to the other two, as long as the nuances listed in the material the other posters gave are observed. If BoD were going to be condemned, it would have been condemned by Trent since it was so focused on justification and the Sacraments. The Council Fathers and Church Fathers were in a better position to know than anyone since, that's why nobody has condemned it up to now. The Feeneyite opinion is the novelty. That's why it's named after him.

    No, it is not. Doctrine pertaining to the Sacrament of Baptism is just that..you will never, ever find the Church teaching a second or third baptism, or baptism without water or with blood, while treating on the Sacrament of Baptism. Again, it's almost always the exact opposite of what you are saying. When the Church teaches about Baptism, She teaches about water.

    For instance:

    Quote
    For, by baptism we are reborn spiritually; by confirmation we grow in grace and are strengthened in faith. Once reborn and strengthened, we are nourished by the food of the divine Eucharist. But if through sin we incur an illness of the soul, we are cured spiritually by penance. Spiritually also and bodily as suits the soul, by extreme unction. By orders the church is governed and spiritually multiplied; by matrimony it grows bodily.
    All these sacraments are made up of three elements: namely, things as the matter, words as the form, and the person of the minister who confers the sacrament with the intention of doing what the church does. If any of these is lacking, the sacrament is not effected.

    ...

    Holy baptism holds the first place among all the sacraments, for it is the gate of the spiritual life; through it we become members of Christ and of the body of the church. Since death came into the world through one person, unless we are born again of water and the spirit, we cannot, as Truth says, enter the kingdom of heaven. The matter of this sacrament is true and natural water, either hot or cold. The form is: I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit.

    Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence
    Quote
    Trent, ON THE SACRAMENTS IN GENERAL

    CANON IV.-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema

    ...

    ON BAPTISM [remember, Trent is treating on the Sacraments, this is a part of Trent's decree on the Sacraments]

    CANON II.-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 anathema.

    ...

    CANON V.-If any one saith, that baptism is free, that is, not necessary unto salvation; let him be anathema





    So, from these two councils we are taught:

    The Sacraments are necessary for salvation, though not all. (Trent, Sacraments, Canon IV) Meaning at least one is

    The Sacraments consist of matter, form, and intention. If any one of these is lacking, the Sacrament is not effected (Florence)

    The matter of Baptism is true and natural water (Florence, and Trent, On Baptism Canon II)

    The form of Baptism is "I baptize you in the name of the Father, etc." (Florence, and Trent, Baptism, Canon IV)

    The Sacrament of Baptism is the one Sacrament that is absolutely necessary for salvation (Trent, Baptism, Canon V and On the Sacraments, Canon IV)

    Without true and natural water, the Sacrament of Baptism, which is necessary for salvation, cannot be effected (Trent, Baptism, Canon II)



    At the very least, you must admit that BOD is not Church teaching, but the opinion of fallible men. If you want to hold the 'traditional' view of BOD, ok..but if you go into this believing it to be the teaching of the Church, you attribute to the Church something She has never taught. That is the major problem, and probably akin to heresy (saying the Church taught something, when She didn't).

    If you accept the fact that the Church has never taught BOD and that you have just been told it is so by fallible men..many who actually lie regarding Church teaching in an attempt to support their error..I think you will be much more open to seeing the truth about the matter, and why we hold that the Sacrament of Baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation
    John 15:19  If you had been of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.


    Online WorldsAway

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1079
    • Reputation: +800/-109
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Miraculous Baptisms
    « Reply #35 on: Today at 07:17:07 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It is not called the Boston Heresy for nothing. Pope St Pius X teaches Baptism of Desire and Blood in his Catchesim:

    16 Q. Is Baptism necessary to salvation?
    A. Baptism is absolutely necessary to salvation, for our Lord has expressly said: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God."


    17 Q. Can the absence of Baptism be supplied in any other way?
    A. The absence of Baptism can be supplied by martyrdom, which is called Baptism of Blood, or by an act of perfect love of God, or of contrition, along with the desire, at least implicit, of Baptism, and this is called Baptism of Desire.


    The "Boston Heresy Case" actually was about EENS, not BOD :facepalm:
    You only show your ignorance on the matter by saying such things


    But you're right, it's not called that for nothing. The heretics who denied EENS won the temporal fight, and many of them are probably paying the price now. Only Truth wins eternally


    Quote
    "He that shall lose his life for Me, shall find it." (Matt. 10:39) affirms Baptism of Blood by Our Lord Himself.


    Quote
    [The Church] firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the catholic church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the catholic church.

    Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence
    "Unity of the ecclesiastical body", meaning members. Who are members? Those who have been baptised with true and natural water in the form "I baptize you in the name of the Father, etc." as per Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence:

    Quote
    Holy baptism holds the first place among all the sacraments, for it is the gate of the spiritual life; through it we become members of Christ and of the body of the church. Since death came into the world through one person, unless we are born again of water and the spirit, we cannot, as Truth says, enter the kingdom of heaven. The matter of this sacrament is true and natural water

    John 15:19  If you had been of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 47555
    • Reputation: +28139/-5267
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Miraculous Baptisms
    « Reply #36 on: Today at 08:36:11 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That dogmatic definition from Florence is undoubtedly the single teaching that's hands down THE most fatal to BoD.  Second would be the EENS definition that there's no salvation outside the Church OF THE FAITHFUL (which excludes Catechumens).

    By its very definition, BoD refers to the idea that some people can benefit from the Sacrament UNTO SALVATION without being a member of the Church (in the unity of the Body of the Church).  This absolutely devastates the "soul of the Church" theory.

    See, since Trent taught that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation, to avoid heresy, you still have to say that it's the Sacrament operating somehow through the "votum" in order to achieve the effect.  To say that the Sacrament is not necessary or that people can be saved WITHOUT the Sacrament would be heretical.  You could try to say that you can be saved without the ACTUAL RECEPTION of the Sacrament, but not without the Sacrament.  That's why St. Robert Bellarmine carefully formulated his position by saying that you receive Baptism "in voto", so basically saying that it's an alternative mode of receiving it, rather than that you don't receive it at all ... since he knew that would be heretical.

    Well, Florence just blows that out the water, since it says that Sacraments cannot BENEFIT you to salvation.  That means there's no such thing as BoD.  If you're not a member of the Church, part of the Church's Body (which everybody knows that BoD recipients are not, admitted even by the BoDers) ... then it cannot even BENEFIT you to salvation.

    It's really case closed and game over for BoD theory.  We just need papal authority to clarify the matter once and for all, since short of that those who believe in BoD are going to cling to it with their cold dead hands not matter how strong the arguments are against it.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 47555
    • Reputation: +28139/-5267
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Miraculous Baptisms
    « Reply #37 on: Today at 08:39:45 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The "Boston Heresy Case" actually was about EENS, not BOD :facepalm:

    Not only that, but here again we have a clown that equates something in a Catechism with a teaching of the Magisterium, where it might as well be a dogmatic definition, so that disagreeing with a Catechism constitutes "heresy".  Yeah, well, Irish Catechisms denied papal infallibility, and Msgr. Fenton wrecks the Baltimore catechisms and has little good to say about it.  As for the St. Pius X one, the earliest version, the one that he was known to have written, makes no mention of BoD.  Then the thing underwent myriad revisions, especially after he became Pope, and it's unknown when the BoD stuff made it in there or whether it even had his approval.


    Offline JeanBaptistedeCouetus

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 46
    • Reputation: +26/-9
    Re: Miraculous Baptisms
    « Reply #38 on: Today at 09:11:55 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Not only that, but here again we have a clown that equates something in a Catechism with a teaching of the Magisterium, where it might as well be a dogmatic definition, so that disagreeing with a Catechism constitutes "heresy".  Yeah, well, Irish Catechisms denied papal infallibility, and Msgr. Fenton wrecks the Baltimore catechisms and has little good to say about it.  As for the St. Pius X one, the earliest version, the one that he was known to have written, makes no mention of BoD.  Then the thing underwent myriad revisions, especially after he became Pope, and it's unknown when the BoD stuff made it in there or whether it even had his approval.
    Your claim that ‘the earliest St. Pius X Catechism had no BoD, and that later revisions containing it may not have had his approval’ does not hold up to docuмentary scrutiny. The catechetical texts published and used under St. Pius X do include the explicit teaching on Baptism of Desire, and St. Pius X himself formally approved and prescribed an official short catechism for the Diocese and Province of Rome on 18 October 1912. There is no reliable evidence whatsoever that the Baptism-of-Desire formulations were added to the official editions during his pontificate without his knowledge or approval.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 47555
    • Reputation: +28139/-5267
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Miraculous Baptisms
    « Reply #39 on: Today at 10:44:42 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • As for the texts ... this has been deal with.  Someone found links to original copies and posted them online and the sections mentioned were not in the early printings, regardless of what later copies claim.

    But ... who cares?  If St. Pius X believed in BoD, we believe he was mistaken and we explain why.

    Nor did St. Pius X hold a heretical version of it and use it as an excuse to deny EENS dogma like the vast majority of you do.