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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24]

Author Topic: Possible strict-EENS chapel  (Read 130485 times)

1 Member and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AnthonyPadua

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2788
  • Reputation: +1399/-316
  • Gender: Male
Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel
« Reply #345 on: Yesterday at 06:40:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Gray2023 on Yesterday at 06:14:48 PM
    But that person had the sin of presumption.  It does not mean that BoD is not a thing because people use it improperly..

    I still don't get why we argue about this sooo much.  We need to just convert everybody as best we can using EENS  Period.  End of story.
    Because most trads do not believe EENS. And they viciously attack those who do by calling us heretics.

    They are also using a false version of BoD to gut EENS. This have been explained many times and you still don't seem to get it. (Also no version of BoD is 'correct' but the Saints speculated for catechumans only).
    Logged

    Offline OABrownson1876

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 757
    • Reputation: +634/-30
    • Gender: Male
      • The Orestes Brownson Society
    Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel
    « Reply #346 on: Yesterday at 07:21:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Angelus on December 14, 2025, 03:29:48 PM
    Says the man who puts Leonard Feeney's interpretation of those teachings ABOVE the interpretation of Pius IX.
    The reign of Pope Pius IX was thirty-two years.  I find it admirable how so many Catholic individuals are just yearning to find a way to put noxious heretics into heaven because they are so sincere in their heresies.  The poor native who was on a desert island, sucking on Coca Cola, looking at his cellphone, but could not find out about the Church.  Poor guy!  It is laughable to think that everything Pope Pius IX has written is infallible.  When the pope writes an Encyclical - even if he is a pre-Vatican II pope - is just as fallible as any other theologian. The only exception is an Encyclical which invokes the charism of infallibility, and even then usually only one or two sentences are the subject of infallibility. 
    Logged
    Bryan Shepherd, M.A. Phil.
    PO Box 17248
    2312 S. Preston
    Louisville, Ky. 40217; email:letsgobryan@protonmail.com. substack: bryanshepherd.substack.com
    website: www.orestesbrownson.org. Rumble: rumble.com/user/Orestes76

    Offline Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 3514
    • Reputation: +1932/-992
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel
    « Reply #347 on: Yesterday at 07:43:31 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: AnthonyPadua on Yesterday at 06:40:56 PM
    Because most trads do not believe EENS. And they viciously attack those who do by calling us heretics.

    They are also using a false version of BoD to gut EENS. This have been explained many times and you still don't seem to get it. (Also no version of BoD is 'correct' but the Saints speculated for catechumans only).
    If I don't get it and others don't get it and there is no official docuмent from the church condemning BoD or defining BoD, then it is still up for discussion.  Correct?

    If you are talking about people who are Novus Ordo Catholics and people who follow the SSPX then of course they do not believe in EENS, because they have been taught incorrectly. I am just tired of non theologians, people who have no authority in the Church what so ever deciding that this topic has been dogmatically decided and people can call others heretics because of it.  Do not be naive BoDers and Non-BoDers both call each other heretics in a heated debate.  In this day and age nobody seems to know their proper place with God.  Just saying.
    Logged
    Fatti Maschii, Parole Femine

    Online Maria Auxiliadora

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1468
    • Reputation: +1391/-144
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel
    « Reply #348 on: Today at 01:46:47 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Gray2023 on Yesterday at 07:43:31 PM
    If I don't get it and others don't get it and there is no official docuмent from the church condemning BoD or defining BoD, then it is still up for discussion.  Correct?

    If you are talking about people who are Novus Ordo Catholics and people who follow the SSPX then of course they do not believe in EENS, because they have been taught incorrectly. I am just tired of non theologians, people who have no authority in the Church what so ever deciding that this topic has been dogmatically decided and people can call others heretics because of it.  Do not be naive BoDers and Non-BoDers both call each other heretics in a heated debate.  In this day and age nobody seems to know their proper place with God.  Just saying.

    Gray,
    My husband and I spoke to you at SSP&P chapel in York after Mass about 2 years ago when you visited on a Dominican saint Feast because your priest was not well. You were all emotion attacking "Feenyism". You brought it up. When dogma was mentioned, you had absolutely no idea what it was and asked the question "Where do I find dogma?" You are correct, there are no theologians here but some, have been long time Catholics, some for 50+ years in tradition. As a convert and recent in tradition, I respectfully suggest you dedicate your time on subjects you know more about. I've enjoyed some of your topics. "Just saying".
    Logged
    The love of God be your motivation, the will of God your guiding principle, the glory of God your goal.
    (St. Clement Mary Hofbauer)

    Offline AnthonyPadua

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2788
    • Reputation: +1399/-316
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel
    « Reply #349 on: Today at 04:38:08 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: OABrownson1876 on Yesterday at 07:21:54 PM
    The reign of Pope Pius IX was thirty-two years.  I find it admirable how so many Catholic individuals are just yearning to find a way to put noxious heretics into heaven because they are so sincere in their heresies.  The poor native who was on a desert island, sucking on Coca Cola, looking at his cellphone, but could not find out about the Church.  Poor guy!  It is laughable to think that everything Pope Pius IX has written is infallible.  When the pope writes an Encyclical - even if he is a pre-Vatican II pope - is just as fallible as any other theologian. The only exception is an Encyclical which invokes the charism of infallibility, and even then usually only one or two sentences are the subject of infallibility.
    What's really funny is that Pope Pius IX never said that the invincible ignorant is saved in ignorance. Modernists have twisted his words to add stuff that isn't there. He never said he is saved in ignorance or without baptism or without faith, instead he says he is saved by the 'Divine Light' which is of course baptism/the faith. So he is really saying God will provide the means.
    Logged

    Offline AnthonyPadua

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2788
    • Reputation: +1399/-316
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel
    « Reply #350 on: Today at 04:41:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Gray2023 on Yesterday at 07:43:31 PM
    If I don't get it and others don't get it and there is no official docuмent from the church condemning BoD or defining BoD, then it is still up for discussion.  Correct?

    If you are talking about people who are Novus Ordo Catholics and people who follow the SSPX then of course they do not believe in EENS, because they have been taught incorrectly. I am just tired of non theologians, people who have no authority in the Church what so ever deciding that this topic has been dogmatically decided and people can call others heretics because of it.  Do not be naive BoDers and Non-BoDers both call each other heretics in a heated debate.  In this day and age nobody seems to know their proper place with God.  Just saying.
    Most people extend BoD to non-catechumans, this is heresy and contrary to the speculation of some Saints.

    The Church has made infallible statements which make BoD and BoB impossible. The quote by Pope Siricius is ond such example as is Florence.
    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 15320
    • Reputation: +6264/-924
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel
    « Reply #351 on: Today at 04:43:56 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Gray2023 on Yesterday at 07:43:31 PM
    If I don't get it and others don't get it and there is no official docuмent from the church condemning BoD or defining BoD, then it is still up for discussion.  Correct?

    If you are talking about people who are Novus Ordo Catholics and people who follow the SSPX then of course they do not believe in EENS, because they have been taught incorrectly. I am just tired of non theologians, people who have no authority in the Church what so ever deciding that this topic has been dogmatically decided and people can call others heretics because of it.  Do not be naive BoDers and Non-BoDers both call each other heretics in a heated debate.  In this day and age nobody seems to know their proper place with God.  Just saying.
    Well Gray, we say that Trent condemns a BOD as "some sort of metaphor." All the proponents of a BOD did was name "the metaphor" BOD.  What we do have is the Church infallibly decreeing that the sacrament of baptism is necessary for salvation. As such, anyone lacking that which is necessary for salvation can not, per the Church, attain salvation.

    Trent:
    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 optional, that is, not necessary unto salvation; let him be anathema.
    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 Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 3514
    • Reputation: +1932/-992
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel
    « Reply #352 on: Today at 05:56:11 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Maria Auxiliadora on Today at 01:46:47 AM
    Gray,
    My husband and I spoke to you at SSP&P chapel in York after Mass about 2 years ago when you visited on a Dominican saint Feast because your priest was not well. You were all emotion attacking "Feenyism". You brought it up. When dogma was mentioned, you had absolutely no idea what it was and asked the question "Where do I find dogma?" You are correct, there are no theologians here but some, have been long time Catholics, some for 50+ years in tradition. As a convert and recent in tradition, I respectfully suggest you dedicate your time on subjects you know more about. I've enjoyed some of your topics. "Just saying".
    Wow.  I have been in tradition for 20+ years.  And I can't believe you write something like this publicly instead of privately. Just because you have been doing something for a long time, doesn't mean you have the correct answers.  And yes 2 years ago i was emotional about the Crisis and the lack of charity among traditionalists. I now have just learned to accept that people will mostly do what they want because all of us are contaminated by pride.

    Again the solution to all this doesn't require getting into the weeds on this topic.  It just requires Catholics doing their best to convert people to Truth.  It should be used as a motivation for us to do the correct thing and not a stick to beat people with. 
    Logged
    Fatti Maschii, Parole Femine

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13222
    • Reputation: +8330/-2574
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel
    « Reply #353 on: Today at 08:19:32 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Gray2023 on Today at 05:56:11 AM
    Again the solution to all this doesn't require getting into the weeds on this topic.  
    Yes, this is the solution.  If one wants to understand a complex theological question, one has to read, study and research.  If you don't, fine.  Go find another topic.
    Logged

    Offline Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 3514
    • Reputation: +1932/-992
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel
    « Reply #354 on: Today at 08:44:14 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on Today at 08:19:32 AM
    Yes, this is the solution.  If one wants to understand a complex theological question, one has to read, study and research.  If you don't, fine.  Go find another topic.
    Without the proper authorities in check how does a bunch of lay people discussing the matter accomplish anything.  

    Since people do not accept the Baltimore Catechism, does that mean we had false popes before V2?  And how far back do we go?  Does that mean the Church is defectible?  

    All of this has to make sense and if you don't patiently take the time to discuss this with idiots like me then all you really want is an echo chamber of everyone agreeing with you (all the people who follow Father Feeney.)
    Logged
    Fatti Maschii, Parole Femine

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13222
    • Reputation: +8330/-2574
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Possible strict-EENS chapel
    « Reply #355 on: Today at 10:36:15 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Gray2023 on Today at 08:44:14 AM
    Without the proper authorities in check how does a bunch of lay people discussing the matter accomplish anything. 
    Part of it is doctrinal, part is theory.  The Church has YET to decide the matter, so there's no "proper authorities" to speak of, except the Saints and a few statements from Rome.  With research and time, you can pretty well determine the parameters of the question (i.e.  Saying "this" is going too far into heresy; saying "that" is an acceptable theory).

    The whole debate can be boiled down to this:

    If one looks objectively at EENS, the reason why it has been thrice-defined is because it is THE DOCTRINE which stands in the way of a global religion, new-age-ecuмenism and antichrist.  It is also THE DOCTRINE which V2 changed the most...in prep for their V2 religion.  It is also THE DOCTRINE which we humans have the hardest time of, i.e. sentimentality and also the mystery of salvation (i.e. understanding God's mercy/justice).

    Fr Feeney was fighting V2 errors in the 40s/50s before V2 even existed.  Then V2 comes along and basically says "universal salvation is ok". 
    1.  Most Trads say Fr Feeney was wrong - i.e. his fight against universal salvation was wrong.
    2.  Most Trads say V2's universal salvation is wrong - i.e. implicitly agreeing with Fr Feeney.
    3.  Most Trads don't see the contradiction.

    1.  Fr Feeney said that non-baptized persons who wanted baptism but die beforehand do not 100% go to heaven, because it's not been defined.  We don't know.  Probably Limbo.
    2.  V2 says that non-baptized persons who wanted baptism are saved.
    3.  Trads reject V2 as error.
    4.  Trads also reject Fr Feeney as error.
    5.  Trads say V2 was too lenient (i.e. non-baptized are saved) but that Fr Feeney was too strict (i.e. non-baptized go to limbo).  So where do they go???
    6.  Or...Trads say V2 was wrong but still agree that non-baptized are saved, and falsely think they are Traditional, even though they accept V2 heresies.

    The contradiction is immense.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24]
    « previous next »