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

Author Topic: What's with the Dimond brothers?  (Read 18186 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: What's with the Dimond brothers?
« Reply #50 on: April 14, 2018, 10:10:26 PM »
By their approval of beliefs that allowed people outside of the Church to be saved, they opened the gates for modern clergymen to fling open the gates to all infidels. Now we're stuck with the V2 Popes saying "It doesn't matter if one is Catholic".

The belief that Jews, Muslims, etc. can be saved is certainly heresy, but the failure of pre-V2 Popes to condemn it while it was running rampant among the clergy, and the support given to it by post-V2 Popes, means that a Catholic who believes it probably thinks that's what the Church teaches. So it probably isn't a formal heresy in most cases.
Which pre vat 2 popes are you referring to? Which writings of pre vat 2 speak to muslims or jews being saved?

Re: What's with the Dimond brothers?
« Reply #51 on: April 15, 2018, 10:29:55 AM »
Which pre vat 2 popes are you referring to? Which writings of pre vat 2 speak to muslims or jews being saved?
I didn't say that at all. What I said is that pre-Vat 2 Popes approved beliefs that allowed people outside the Church to be saved(Pope Pius IX taught invincible ignorance and Pope Pius XII believed unbaptised infants are saved), while also failing to condemn the rampant heresy among their clergy that other non-Catholics can be saved. EENS used to be very simple, NO ONE outside the Church can be saved whatsoever. But by those Popes expanding EENS to include people who are outside the Church, they justified modernist heretics to start teaching that others outside the Church could be saved too. And they failed to condemn those beliefs. 
Now we're stuck with post Vat 2 Popes who actively support the belief that muslims and jews can be saved, with Francis even saying that "It doesn't matter if one is Catholic." 
I would not blame the average Catholic layman for thinking BOD is what the Church teaches. It is the fault of the Church for failing to condemn heresies among its own ranks that led to Vatican 2 in the first place, where they proceeded to embrace all those heresies. 


Re: What's with the Dimond brothers?
« Reply #52 on: April 15, 2018, 01:19:57 PM »
I didn't say that at all. What I said is that pre-Vat 2 Popes approved beliefs that allowed people outside the Church to be saved(Pope Pius IX taught invincible ignorance and Pope Pius XII believed unbaptised infants are saved), while also failing to condemn the rampant heresy among their clergy that other non-Catholics can be saved. EENS used to be very simple, NO ONE outside the Church can be saved whatsoever. But by those Popes expanding EENS to include people who are outside the Church, they justified modernist heretics to start teaching that others outside the Church could be saved too. And they failed to condemn those beliefs.
Now we're stuck with post Vat 2 Popes who actively support the belief that muslims and jews can be saved, with Francis even saying that "It doesn't matter if one is Catholic."
I would not blame the average Catholic layman for thinking BOD is what the Church teaches. It is the fault of the Church for failing to condemn heresies among its own ranks that led to Vatican 2 in the first place, where they proceeded to embrace all those heresies.
Pope Pius IX didn’t teach non catholics are saved through invincible ignorance, we can argue that point if you like. Can you give me the quote of Pope Pius XII teaching unbaptized children are saved? I thank you in advance.

Re: What's with the Dimond brothers?
« Reply #53 on: April 15, 2018, 01:51:51 PM »
Pope Pius IX didn’t teach non catholics are saved through invincible ignorance, we can argue that point if you like. Can you give me the quote of Pope Pius XII teaching unbaptized children are saved? I thank you in advance.
Sorry I misremembered entirely. What he said was very different and I apologise for the mistake, but still a form of BOD. He said unbaptised infants are NOT saved, but that an unbaptised ADULT can be saved through an act of love. So still saying that baptism is not necessary, and a less extreme form of BOD.
Quote
An act of love is sufficient for the adult to obtain sanctifying grace and to supply the lack of baptism
https://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P511029.HTM