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

Author Topic: The Absurdities of The Feeneyite Heresy  (Read 32201 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: The Absurdities of The Feeneyite Heresy
« Reply #180 on: February 09, 2021, 10:18:26 AM »
St. Ambrose taught Valentian was saved by Baptism of Desire. St. Augustine taught Cornelius was justified by Baptism of Desire. Not sure about St. Chrysostom. Anyway, the Church settled the question in the Middle Ages only, through two Papal decrees. Can you explain why St. Alphonsus says it is now, after the Council of Trent, de fide that souls are saved by Baptism of Desire, and why the Church has said Catholics can safely follow St. Alphonsus. I could cite other Doctors like St. Bernard, St. Bonaventure, St. Thomas etc.

Stubborn, the Church has taught in many place, after the Council of Trent, the doctrine of Baptism of Desire, including Trent's Catechism. See: http://www.baptismofdesire.com/

"·     Baltimore Catechism (19th and 20th centuries): Q. 653. Is Baptism of desire or of blood sufficient to produce the effects of Baptism of water? A. Baptism of desire or of blood is sufficient to produce the effects of the Baptism of water, if it is impossible to receive the Baptism of water.

Q. 512. How are such persons said to belong to the Church? A. Such persons are said to belong to the "soul of the church"; that is, they are really members of the Church without knowing it. Those who share in its Sacraments and worship are said to belong to the body or visible part of the Church.

[Note: The Baltimore Catechism was issued by the Third Council of Baltimore in 1884, and was approved by Pope Leo XIII in 1885 as the standard for Catholic schools in the United States, where it remained the standard for nearly a century. Even after extreme scrutiny and corrections after being published, the content on the threefold baptism has remained in the catechism to this day.]
 

·     St. Pope Pius X (early 20th century)Catechism of Christian Doctrine (Catechism of St. Pius X):

The Creed, Ninth Article, The Church in Particular: 29 Q. But if a man through no fault of his own is outside the Church, can he be saved? A. If he is outside the Church through no fault of his, that is, if he is in good faith, and if he has received Baptism, or at least has the implicit desire of Baptism; and if, moreover, he sincerely seeks the truth and does God's will as best he can such a man is indeed separated from the body of the Church, but is united to the soul of the Church and consequently is on the way of salvation

Baptism, Necessity of Baptism and Obligations of the Baptized: 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.
 

·     Catholic Encyclopedia (~1913)Baptism: Substitutes for the Sacrament: “The Fathers and theologians frequently divide baptism into three kinds: the baptism of water (aquæ or fluminis), the baptism of desire (flaminis), and the baptism of blood (sanguinis). However, only the first is a real sacrament. The latter two are denominated baptism only analogically, inasmuch as they supply the principal effect of baptism, namely, the grace which remits sins. It is the teaching of the Catholic Church that when the baptism of water becomes a physical or moral impossibility, eternal life may be obtained by the baptism of desire or the baptism of blood.”

Baptism: The Baptism of Desire: “This doctrine is set forth clearly by the Council of Trent. In the fourteenth session (cap. iv) the council teaches that contrition is sometimes perfected by charity, and reconciles man to God, before the Sacrament of Penance is received. In the fourth chapter of the sixth session, in speaking of the necessity of baptism, it says that men can not obtain original justice "except by the washing of regeneration or its desire" (voto)."


If Trent did not intend to teach Baptism of Desire, it would not have used the word voto with respect to Baptism. But the Council did.

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: The Absurdities of The Feeneyite Heresy
« Reply #181 on: February 09, 2021, 10:43:58 AM »
St. Ambrose taught Valentian was saved by Baptism of Desire. St. Augustine taught Cornelius was justified by Baptism of Desire. Not sure about St. Chrysostom. Anyway, the Church settled the question in the Middle Ages only, through two Papal decrees. Can you explain why St. Alphonsus says it is now, after the Council of Trent, de fide that souls are saved by Baptism of Desire, and why the Church has said Catholics can safely follow St. Alphonsus. I could cite other Doctors like St. Bernard, St. Bonaventure, St. Thomas etc.

Stubborn, the Church has taught in many place, after the Council of Trent, the doctrine of Baptism of Desire, including Trent's Catechism. See: http://www.baptismofdesire.com/  ...

If Trent did not intend to teach Baptism of Desire, it would not have used the word voto with respect to Baptism. But the Council did.
We all know saints and catechisms have taught one version or another of a BOD, The Church  at Trent however says the sacraments are necessary for salvation. Trent infallibly said" no sacrament = no justification and no desire = no justification.

 How is it possible to take "no desire = no justification" to "desire = salvation"? Can you explain that?

Why do you and all BODers disagree with the Church? What is it exactly that drives you to ignore Trent and place the saints and catechisms as having authority over Trent?

All I asked for was one instance or condition where God could not provide the sacrament.


Re: The Absurdities of The Feeneyite Heresy
« Reply #182 on: February 09, 2021, 11:01:09 AM »
The Church has condemned your false interpretation of Trent. The Church has authorized St. Alphonsus teaching that souls are saved by Baptism of Desire. The Church and Her Popes have said any Catholic may safely repeat St. Alphonsus' teaching. That's what I'm doing.

You are giving your own false interpretation, your personal "spin". Trent taught Baptism of Desire, Perfect Contrition and Spiritual Communion. It is a fact whether you accept it or not. If you won't hear it from the Church, you will hear it from God at the Judgment.

God can provide the Sacrament wherever and whenever He chooses. And He does. And He can also provide forgiveness through Perfect Contrition wherever and whenever He chooses. And He does. The Church has spoken. The case is closed. Baptism of Desire exists. 

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: The Absurdities of The Feeneyite Heresy
« Reply #183 on: February 09, 2021, 11:51:48 AM »
The Church has condemned your false interpretation of Trent. 

Nonsense.  Just because the Church authorized the teachings of St. Alphonsus doesn't mean that every teaching of his has Magisterial force.  We have a fair number of theologians who disagree with a fair number of things taught by St. Alphonsus.  Doctors disagreed with each other.

There are theology manuals used in seminaries after Trent which characterized BoD as a disputed question.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: The Absurdities of The Feeneyite Heresy
« Reply #184 on: February 09, 2021, 11:55:47 AM »
St. Ambrose taught Valentian was saved by Baptism of Desire. St. Augustine taught Cornelius was justified by Baptism of Desire.

Nope.  St. Ambrose' oration is ambiguous; it COULD mean Baptism of Desire, or it could mean nothing at all, or it could be a reference to Baptism of Blood since Valentinian was killed by Arians for being anti-Arian.  Elsewhere in his writing, St. Ambrose explicitly rejects the possibility of salvation for even devout catechumens who die before Baptism.  St. Augustine early on believed in BoD but then fiercely rejected it after his maturation in the faith, and some of the strongest anti-BoD statements in existence come from non other than the post-Pelagian Augustine.

We have several Church Fathers who explicitly reject Baptism of Desire.

Unlike you, Rahner has the honesty to admit this.

BTW:  AT BEST, St. Ambrose taught that Valentinian MIGHT HAVE BEEN "saved by Baptism of Desire".  What, is he God that he knew for sure that Valentinian was saved?