Author Topic: No Salvation Outside the Church (Read 11027 times)

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #45 on:** January 07, 2014, 09:58:03 AM »

How can anyone who in effect calls Saint Alphonsus a heretic be allowed on this forum? Especially after continually showing their obstinacy in their willful blindness and perniciousness in bad will.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #46 on:** January 07, 2014, 10:00:50 AM »

Quote from: Cantarella

"Baptism of Desire" is in clear contradiction to the concept of the Elect and Predestination (and predilection, a concept that I am currently studying). God, in His Infinite Omnipotence, will ensure that His elect WILL get baptized with water, just as Christ, Our Savior, instituted it and also that his elect come to the knowledge of the True faith and do not remain in state of ignorance.

Predestination to evil is clearly excluded in the first canon of Quierzy, but as far for predestination to eternal life, it is viewed as a grace, a special mercy as regards the elect whom God by His grace has predestined to life, and to eternal life. Again, as St Augustine puts it: "God already knew, when He predestined, what He must do to bring His elect infallibly to eternal life."

Church teaching on predestination:

(a) The cause of predestination to grace is not the foreknowledge of naturally good works performed, nor is it due to any preliminary acts of the natural order that are supposed to prepare for salvation. (b) Predestination to glory is not due to foreseen supernatural merits that would continue to be effective apart from the special gift of final perseverance. (c) Complete predestination, which comprises the whole series of graces, is gratuitous or previous to foreseen merits. And St. Thomas understands this to mean that "whatsoever is in man disposing him towards salvation, is all included under the effect of predestination."(46) In a word: "that some are saved is the gift of Him who saves."(47)

(a) God wills in a certain way to save all men and He makes the fulfilment of His precepts possible for all; (b) There is no predestination to evil, but God has decreed from all eternity to inflict eternal punishment for the sin of final impenitence which He foresaw, He being by no means the cause of it but merely permitting it.

That there is an Elect is Church teaching but I don't think that there is an infallible dogma on how this Elect is chosen by God. It is my understanding that Catholics are free to support the Thomist view or the Molinist view on predestination. I am more of the Thomist view so far, but I have not recollected all my thoughts on it. If someone has recommendations on the topic I will greatly appreciate it.

God will ensure His elect are saved not that they will get water poured on their heads. Why would He be more concerned about water than salvation?

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #47 on:** January 07, 2014, 10:02:27 AM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan

G-L is probably the most well-respected and trustworthy Thomist theologian of the 20th century, and an extremely pious and devout one at that.

If you want to know the Catholic faith, you can't do much better.

If you want to read something that will fit into pre-determined misconceptions, just read Bowler.

This is an incredibly good post and could not have been worded more precisely and accurately. :applause: :applause: :applause:

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #48 on:** January 07, 2014, 10:04:13 AM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan

Quote from: Stubborn
Quote from: Mithrandylan
G-L is probably the most well-respected and trustworthy Thomist theologian of the 20th century, and an extremely pious and devout one at that.

If you want to know the Catholic faith, you can't do much better.

If you want to read something that will fit into pre-determined misconceptions, just read Bowler.

Myth, think about what you just said for a moment - "the most well-respected and trustworthy Thomist theologian of the 20th century" - if he was any good, he would most certainly at least be obscure, more likely slandered and known as a heretic of some sort.

"Well respected" theologians of the 20th century will have much to answer for thanks to the crisis; being the most respected theologian of the 20th century (Fenton also shares that "honor") is not a badge of honor, not by a long shot.

OK, replace "of" with "in" the 20th century if that makes you feel better.

G-L did not contribute to the crisis.

Having to defend him on a Catholic forum is lamentable.

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:
:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:
:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

I think I have a new best friend.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #49 on:** January 07, 2014, 10:09:02 AM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: Mithrandylan
Quote from: Stubborn
Quote from: Mithrandylan
G-L is probably the most well-respected and trustworthy Thomist theologian of the 20th century, and an extremely pious and devout one at that.

If you want to know the Catholic faith, you can't do much better.

If you want to read something that will fit into pre-determined misconceptions, just read Bowler.

Myth, think about what you just said for a moment - "the most well-respected and trustworthy Thomist theologian of the 20th century" - if he was any good, he would most certainly at least be obscure, more likely slandered and known as a heretic of some sort.

"Well respected" theologians of the 20th century will have much to answer for thanks to the crisis; being the most respected theologian of the 20th century (Fenton also shares that "honor") is not a badge of honor, not by a long shot.

OK, replace "of" with "in" the 20th century if that makes you feel better.

G-L did not contribute to the crisis.

Having to defend him on a Catholic forum is lamentable.

That's a result of having these unorthodox creatures on a Catholic forum.

They have a seeming desperate need to manifest their unorthodoxy all the time.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #50 on:** January 07, 2014, 10:10:20 AM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: Stubborn
Any 20th century theologian who is well respected should be suspected of being a part of the problem. If he would have been part of the solution he would have most assuredly been anything except well respected. That's the way the modernists work. And that doesn't mean G-L did not teach the truth, it only means he compromised it enough to not get slandered into oblivion.

What a stupid and ignorant comment. This just further indicates what many of us already know about you.

Thanks to you SJB, I read the above comment from Stubborn which I would not have read on my own. Can I throw it back? Incredible!

bowler · « **Reply #51 on:** January 07, 2014, 10:10:30 AM »

Well LOV, you did not answer my question like always and made a slanderous lying accusation against me that I called St. alphonsus Ligouri a heretic.

It is a waste of time to converse with you. You are back in HIDE mode.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #52 on:** January 07, 2014, 10:11:44 AM »

Quote from: Cantarella

Quote from: bowler
Quote from: Cantarella
Quote from: Cantarella
If someone has recommendations on the topic I will greatly appreciate it.

I just ordered the works of Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange on Predestination. Can someone recommend more books / authors on it?

Garrigou-Lagrange is a modern day, 20th century theologian, and a Heroin BODer. I don't recommend him, as he does not write clearly. When you are finished reading him you'll be even more confused than had you never read him.

Start by reading the Catholic Encyclopedia of 1907 online at newadvent on Predestination. Then read what the Great Fathers of the Church had to say.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/a.htm

Oh Oh, I had no idea :surprised: . If he is a defender of BOD, then, I am already biased and has lost all credibility. Someone had recommended that book before. I guess I just stick to St. Augustine and St Thomas on the matter of Predestination then.

But not on the matter of BOD?

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #53 on:** January 07, 2014, 10:14:25 AM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan

Quote from: Cantarella
Quote from: bowler
Quote from: Cantarella
Quote from: Cantarella
If someone has recommendations on the topic I will greatly appreciate it.

I just ordered the works of Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange on Predestination. Can someone recommend more books / authors on it?

Garrigou-Lagrange is a modern day, 20th century theologian, and a Heroin BODer. I don't recommend him, as he does not write clearly. When you are finished reading him you'll be even more confused than had you never read him.

Start by reading the Catholic Encyclopedia of 1907 online at newadvent on Predestination. Then read what the Great Fathers of the Church had to say.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/a.htm

Oh Oh, I had no idea :surprised: . If he is a defender of BOD, then, I am already biased and has lost all credibility. Someone had recommended that book before. I guess I just stick to St. Augustine and St Thomas on the matter of Predestination then.

That's why I said G-L is a renown Thomist theologian. He understood St Thomas as well as anyone.

Why not make up your own mind? Plenty of G-L's works are available online in their entirety for free.

I'm not sure why Bowler is recommending the Catholic Encyclopedia. It has "heroin BOD."

They point to sources that condemn their errors. It is the case of having it both ways. Or rather one way, their own way in contradistinction from the Catholic Church. But logic, facts, reason and proof do not convince them. Hopefully their obstinacy is being used by God as a tool to inspire others to defend against their errors and present the truth to the good-willed and sincere.

bowler · « **Reply #54 on:** January 07, 2014, 10:17:49 AM »

Quote from: bowler

Quote from: bowler
Quote from: andysloan
That there is No salvation Outside the Church is defined dogma and cannot be disputed.

That a Baptism of desire is possible and effective is clear in the example of

What is this supernatural faith that saves without the sacrament of baptism composed of, a belief in what?

Quote from: andysloan
To Bowler

It is understood that baptism is necessary for salvation. Therefore, as I reasoned earlier, the good thief received the sacrament of baptism by desire or else how could Our Lord state:

Luke 23:43

"And Jesus said to him: Amen I say to thee, this day thou shalt be with me in paradise."

Otherwise, you must explain how the good thief attained to salvation without water baptism.

The Good Thief received salvation the same way as Adam and Eve, who also were not baptized, and he ended up in the same place as Adam and Eve after he died.

Now answer my question: What is this supernatural faith that saves people TODAY without the sacrament of baptism composed of, a belief in what?

Quote from: andysloan

Bowler stated:

The Good Thief received salvation the same way as Adam and Eve,

The corollary of this is that baptism is not necessary for salvation, which refutes dogma. Christ said that the good thief would with be WITH HIM in paradise. Therefore, he must have received the effect of baptism through desire, being unable to receive it through water.

The question you pose about "supernatural faith without baptism", I assume is a reference to BOD and BOB. This has already been dealt with.

You have not answered my question. This is the third time I ask.. I don't have a clue what you are trying to inculcate people with here if you don't answer my question.

The sacrament of baptism was not necessary for salvation under the Old Covenant. The Good Thief and Adam and Eve, Abraham, Abel, Moses ect, were all in the same boat, they did not need to be baptized.

From The Catechism of Trent: Baptism Made Obligatory After Christ's Resurrection
The second period to be distinguished, that is, the time when the law of Baptism was made, also admits of no doubt. Holy writers are unanimous in saying that after the Resurrection of our Lord, when He gave to His Apostles the command to go and teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, the law of Baptism became obligatory on all who were to be saved.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #55 on:** January 07, 2014, 10:21:40 AM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: Stubborn
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Stubborn
Any 20th century theologian who is well respected should be suspected of being a part of the problem. If he would have been part of the solution he would have most assuredly been anything except well respected. That's the way the modernists work. And that doesn't mean G-L did not teach the truth, it only means he compromised it enough to not get slandered into oblivion.

What a stupid and ignorant comment. This just further indicates what many of us already know about you.

No, no SJB, you just don't understand how we got into this crisis is all. If you will spend some time meditating on it, perhaps you will begin to understand how it all works and in time you will fully understand.

But for now, remember that if there was any hope of salvation outside the Catholic Church, Holy Mother would have never needed to teach infallibly at all - much less confuse everyone into thinking that when She declared that There is No salvation outside the Church REALLY meant there is salvation outside the Church.

This didn't get us into a crisis:

Extract from St Alphonsus Liguori: Moral Theology, Bk. 6, nn. 95-7.
Concerning Baptism

Baptism, therefore, coming from a Greek word that means ablution or immersion in water, is distinguished into Baptism of water ["fluminis"], of desire ["flaminis" = wind] and of blood.

We shall speak below of Baptism of water, which was very probably instituted before the passion of Christ the Lord, when Christ was baptised by John. But 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 pres--bytero 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".

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. I say as it were because martyrdom does not act by as strict a causality ["non ita stricte"] as the sacraments, but by a certain privilege on account of its resemblance to the passion of Christ. 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 [i.e. the view that infants are not able to benefit from Baptism of blood – translator] is at least temerarious. In adults, however, acceptance of martyrdom is required, at least habitually from a supernatural motive.

It is clear that martyrdom is not a sacrament, because it is not an action instituted by Christ, and for the same reason neither was the Baptism of John a sacrament: it did not sanctify a man, but only prepared him for the coming of Christ.

St. Robert Bellarmine, Of The Church Militant, III, 3, “Of those who are not baptized

*“Martyrdom is rightly called, and is, a certain baptism.” (On the Sacrament of Baptism, Bk. I, Ch. VI, (Tom. 3, p. 120A))
“Concerning catechumens there is a greater difficulty, because they are faithful [have the faith] and can be saved if they die in this state, and yet outside the Church no one is saved, as outside the ark of Noah. […] I answer therefore that, when it is said outside the Church no one is saved, it must be understood of those who belong to her neither in actual fact nor in desire [desiderio], as theologians commonly speak on baptism. Because the catechumens are in the Church, though not in actual fact, yet at least in resolution [voto], therefore they can be saved. (Of The Church Militant, III, 3, “Of those who are not baptized”)

Douay Catechism (by Henry Tuberville, D.D. 1649)

“Q. Can a man be saved without baptism?

“A. He cannot, unless he have it either actual or in desire, with contrition, or to be baptized in his blood as the holy Innocents were, which suffered for Christ.”

Mgr. J. H. Hervé, Manuale Theologiae Dogmaticae (Vol. III: chap. IV) - 1931

II. On those for whom Baptism of water can be supplied:

"The various baptisms: from the Council of Trent itself and from the things stated, it stands firm that Baptism is necessary, yet in fact or in desire; therefore in an extraordinary case it can be supplied. Further, according to the Catholic doctrine, there are two things by which the sacrament of Baptism can be supplied, namely an act of perfect charity with the desire of Baptism and the death as martyr. Since these two are a compensation for Baptism of water, they themselves are called Baptism, too, in order that they may be comprehended with it under one as it were generic name; so the act of love with desire for Baptism is called Baptismus flaminis (Baptism of the Spirit) and the martyrium (Baptism of Blood)."

Pope Pius XII, Address to Italian Midwives

If what We have said up to now deals with the protection and the care of natural life, it should hold all the more in regard to the supernatural life which the newly born infant receives with Baptism. In the present economy there is no other way of communicating this life to the child who has not yet the use of reason. But, nevertheless, the state of grace at the moment of death is absolutely necessary for salvation. Without it, it is not possible to attain supernatural happiness, the beatific vision of God. An act of love can suffice for an adult to obtain sanctifying grace and supply for the absence of Baptism; for the unborn child or for the newly born, this way is not open.

All you can claim is that NOBODY has understood Trent properly, but you and your simpleton cronies have.

[/b]

Their apparent bad-will is absolutely maddening. That bothers me perhaps as much as the error itself.

Also above you show that the Good Thief probably was saved by BOD as it is asserted that the Sacrament of Baptism was already in force before the Crucifixion.

Quote

We shall speak below of Baptism of water, which was very probably instituted before the passion of Christ the Lord, when Christ was baptised by John.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #56 on:** January 07, 2014, 10:25:49 AM »

Quote from: andysloan

That there is No salvation Outside the Church is defined dogma and cannot be disputed.

That a Baptism of desire is possible and effective is clear in the example of the good thief:

Luke 23:43

"And Jesus said to him: Amen I say to thee, this day thou shalt be with me in paradise."

The receipt of the truths of the Catholic faith, follows commensurately with correspondence to grace in the interior will, such that it is subject to God and His laws.

John 7:16-17

"Jesus answered them, and said: My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man do the will of him; he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself."

Thus also does St Thomas state:

"In all who are in a state of grace, there must needs be rectitude of the will, since grace prepares man's will for good, according to Augustine (Contra Julian. Pelag. iv, 3). Now the will cannot be rightly directed to good, unless there be already some knowledge of the truth, since the object of the will is good understood, as stated in De Anima iii, 7. Again, just as the Holy Ghost directs man's will by the gift of charity, so as to move it directly to some supernatural good; so also, by the gift of understanding, He enlightens the human mind, so that it knows some supernatural truth, to which the right will needs to tend."

On the Gift of Understanding

Therefore, the good thief, after initially rejecting Christ (Matt 27:44) was converted during his crucifixion and was enlightened in mind to belief in Christ:

Luke 23:42

"And he said to Jesus: Lord, remember me when thou shalt come into thy kingdom."

1 Corinthians 12:3

"And no man can say the Lord Jesus, but by the Holy Ghost."

Therefore, if his understanding knew not all the doctrines of the Catholic faith, he had implicit acceptance through what we might call "mother truths", because God has so ordered that some doctrine is taught directly by the Holy Ghost and some by the Church/preachers.

1 Corinthians 2:13

"Which things also we speak, not in the learned words of human wisdom; but in the doctrine of the Spirit"

Hebrews 6:1-2

"Wherefore leaving the word of the beginning of Christ, let us go on to things more perfect, not laying again the foundation of penance from dead works, and of faith towards God, Of the doctrine of baptisms, and imposition of hands..."

Thus failure of consent to Catholic doctrine by heretics and in its cause, is seen as follows:

1 Timothy 6:3-5

"If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to that doctrine which is according to godliness, He is proud, knowing nothing, but sick about questions and strifes of words; from which arise envies, contentions, blasphemies, evil suspicions, Conflicts of men corrupted in mind, and who are destitute of the truth,"

Thus the good thief was saved because full consent in the will to God's will commensurates with full consent to Catholic doctrine.

Why providence gives some to be saved through a baptism of desire rather than through the orthodox channel of the church is a mystery of predestination, but is some wise ordering of our God of Whom it is written:

1 Timothy 2:4

"Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth."

When the Feeneyite haters down-thumb you when you post facts it means you are doing something good.

Cantarella · « **Reply #57 on:** January 07, 2014, 10:26:01 AM »

Quote from: andysloan

It is understood that baptism is necessary for salvation. Therefore, as I reasoned earlier, the good thief received the sacrament of baptism by desire or else how could Our Lord state:

Luke 23:43

"And Jesus said to him: Amen I say to thee, this day thou shalt be with me in paradise."

Otherwise, you must explain how the good thief attained to salvation without water baptism.

The good thief received salvation under the Old Law. Christ came to fulfill and replace the Old Law and institute a New Law for the salvation of humankind. This New Law is was fully established after Jesus's death. He said in the Cross, "it is finished". All the sacraments of the New Testament are instituted by Christ the Lord and entrusted to the Church. That is why there is absolutely no means of salvation outside the Catholic Church. Baptism being the first of all. The matter for Baptism as given to us by Christ Himself is true and natural water. There is no Baptism of Desire.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #58 on:** January 07, 2014, 10:26:58 AM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: bowler
The HIDE option on CI is also an excellent tool, specially for a person like SJB, who never says anything worth hearing.

You seem to be responding to me anyway, don't you follow your own advice?

I'm sure the thing that bothers you is my requirement that you actually support what you are claiming. I don't know why you believe long unsupported arguments need long responses. They don't.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

SJB · « **Reply #59 on:** January 07, 2014, 10:30:13 AM »

Quote from: cantrella

The matter for Baptism as given to us by Christ Himself is true and natural water. There is no Baptism of Desire.

The matter for the Sacrament is true and natural water. Nobody has denied this nor have they contradicted it.