Absurd in the extreme. You are an agnostic through and through, Ladislaus, that is why you have not the certainty that faith always produces (for certitude belongs to the perfection of the intellect as St. Thomas says) and being tossed about by doubts speak only for yourself when you say you "know nothing of the sort." The Church however knows for certain from Holy Scripture that the Baptism of Desire exists and is at least certain doctrine. Based on St. Alphonsus' Moral Theology and several other works approved by the Church for instruction in seminaries, all Catholics are free to hold and teach it is even de fide. Anyone who denied it would not be permitted to teach in a seminary, just like if he denied any other doctrine taught therein and approved for teaching as doctrine by a long line of traditional Popes. And your thinking is carnal when you say teaching catechumens to make regular acts of pure love of God or contrition (ie for His own sake and beyond all things, sorry only for having offended His infinite goodness) along with the desire to go to the priest as soon as possible could possibly reduce the desire to receive the actual Sacrament as soon as that becomes possible. And Yes, that distinction is real.
Contrary to Feeneyite novelties, moral and physical impossibility on the part of the penitent (not of course on the part of God, which is an absurd strawman from your side) is a well known and universally accepted situation. The Roman Catechism says "when any unforeseen accident (unforeseen of course by the catechumen) makes it impossible (there goes your theory) to be washed in the salutary waters (this rules out an alleged secret last minute water baptism), their intention and determination to receive baptism will avail them to grace and righteousness". For anyone who comes to the Church as an obedient son ready to learn from Her rather than as a follower of Dimondite novelties, it is forever settled that the Baptism of Desire exists. The only question is whether a man will submit and remain in the state of grace or stubborn deny it and fall into mortal sin.
Finally, to your other strawman, I don't reject Vatican II entirely, as you well know, but believe it must be interpreted in the light of Tradition. I've never broken communion with the Church and the SSPX is also regularised now, as the Pope himself would tell you. You should avail yourself of the faculties granted them by the Holy Father during this Jubilee Year of Mercy and ask in confession to be fully received back into the Church. Pope St. PIUS X also explains to you "an act of perfect love of God or contrition ... is called Baptism of Desire."
Hey Nishant, you are a remarkably blind apostate. I won't spend my time going on and on with a person who hates the truth, but I will tell you this with
total certainty: you are of the Devil and on the road to Hell. It would laughable for someone like you, who thinks that Jorge Bergoglio is in the Church of Christ and is not even an actual heretic, to call another person faithless and heretical, if it didn't reveal the deplorable state of your blindness.
You profess communion with a man who says that Luther was right on Justification. You are nothing more than a faithless apostate (and a Protestant).
Francis: “
I think that the intentions of Martin Luther were not mistaken. He was a reformer… in that time, the Church was not exactly a model to imitate. There was corruption in the Church, there was worldliness, attachment to money, to power…and this he protested. Then he was intelligent and took some steps forward justifying, and because he did this.
And today Lutherans and Catholics, Protestants, all of us agree on the doctrine of justification. On this point, which is very important, he did not err." [/color]
So, someone can agree with Luther on Justification and not be a heretic, according to you, but people who deny the man-made myth of BOD are heretics. You are a total fool.
You support the SSPX, which denies the solemn 'canonizations' issued by their 'pope', holds that souls can be saved in false religions, and has adopted an utterly schismatic position for many years. You further show your dishonesty by saying that 'I don't reject Vatican II entirely.' That is a ridiculous diversion. You don't reject the Protestant Westminster Confession of Faith entirely, either. It has some truth in it, too. But you reject the official teachings of your 'pope' on faith and morals at an ecuмenical council, including what was 'declared' to be 'in divine revelation' by that council. That is heresy. You also reject doctrines that your 'popes' have taught to the universal Church in various forms and declared to be 'magisterial' for decades.
Your arguments on BOD are also heretical trash. You preach a false gospel. Here's a clue: a man cannot make any act of love that is salvific until he has been regenerated. Regeneration cannot come from man's work, love or desire. That is the explicit teaching of Scripture on how one is first saved, and it is the teaching of Catholic dogma. As MHFM's article 'The Best Argument Against Baptism of Desire' explains:
This regeneration, which one must have to be first justified, is not the result of man's works. That means it can’t be brought about by one’s charity, love, contrition, desire, shedding of blood, etc., as ‘baptism of desire’ and ‘blood’ posit. In fact, Scripture explicitly teaches that the rebirth one must have is not of man’s will or blood (John 1:13)!
Titus 3:5- “
He saved us, not because of works done by us [/b]in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit.”
1 Peter 1:3-4- “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you.”
John 1:12-13- “But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God,
who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.”Contrary to Scripture and Catholic teaching, you hold that a man's love/work brings about regeneration, when Scripture and Catholic truth declare exactly the opposite. And we're discussing regeneration or the first justification here, so any attempt on your part to bring up perfect contrition after baptism and prior to confession (in one who has already been regenerated by God) is specious nonsense.
You are, however, correct about something: Ladislaus (who promotes some truth) repeatedly shifts his position and has no certainty or firm conviction because he doesn't have any real faith. (He might not even say that Jorge Bergoglio is definitely a heretic who is outside the Church, which would be a case in point.)
You are also a heretic for holding that one can be regenerated and still not be forgiven of the temporal punishment due to sin, contrary to the express teaching of the Church at Trent, in Scripture and in papal pronouncements. You adopt that heresy in a futile attempt to defend St. Alphonsus' false explanation of BOD. Since you worship man, you think that you can just cling to an opinion of a saint, even when it is demonstrably false. But that is not the Church's teaching. (However, typical of a hypocrite, you dissent from St. Alphonsus when he teaches that to reject a canonization or consider it erroneous is a 'mortal sin'.)
You are nothing more than a demonic hater of the truth who obstinately professes communion with Jorge Bergoglio and other notorious heretics.
Topic: St. Catherine of Siena does NOT teach Baptism of Desire (Read 2956 times)