Author Topic: THE CASE AGAINST FATHER FEENEY (Read 6173 times)

CM · « **Reply #15 on:** October 03, 2009, 02:02:11 AM »

There is NO supernatural Faith outside of the Church. This is bestowed IN BAPTISM. Don't make me drag out all the quotes from Trent.

Jehanne · « **Reply #16 on:** October 03, 2009, 08:12:41 AM »

Quote from: SJB

jehanne,

The point is that THE SACRAMENT of BAPTISM is not NOT required in EVERY case. Do you now admit this?

Now you know why I thought you were a female. :) No offense to any females out there, either. I knew Clare was a female...but not from her arguments. :)

The name "Jehanne" is a French name. Actually, there are men and women who have had that name throughout history. A quick Google search will reveal who they are.

Jehanne · « **Reply #17 on:** October 03, 2009, 08:14:12 AM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

Don't make me drag out all the quotes from Trent.

Do it, please!

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #18 on:** October 03, 2009, 08:52:35 AM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

There is NO supernatural Faith outside of the Church.

Kind of like how there was NO supernatural Faith outside of the OT ѕуηαgσgυє?

Job ringing any bells?

CM · « **Reply #19 on:** October 03, 2009, 05:04:11 PM »

Would you kindly cite the passages from Job that you believe support your position?

SJB · « **Reply #20 on:** October 03, 2009, 07:36:34 PM »

Quote from: Jehanne

Quote from: SJB
jehanne,

The point is that THE SACRAMENT of BAPTISM is not NOT required in EVERY case. Do you now admit this?

Now you know why I thought you were a female. :) No offense to any females out there, either. I knew Clare was a female...but not from her arguments. :)

The name "Jehanne" is a French name. Actually, there are men and women who have had that name throughout history. A quick Google search will reveal who they are.

Actually, I wasn't referring to your pseudonym...more your style of argument. Both you and CM apparently missed that. :)

Jehanne · « **Reply #21 on:** October 03, 2009, 07:39:59 PM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: Jehanne
Quote from: SJB
jehanne,

The point is that THE SACRAMENT of BAPTISM is not NOT required in EVERY case. Do you now admit this?

Now you know why I thought you were a female. :) No offense to any females out there, either. I knew Clare was a female...but not from her arguments. :)

The name "Jehanne" is a French name. Actually, there are men and women who have had that name throughout history. A quick Google search will reveal who they are.

Actually, I wasn't referring to your pseudonym...more your style of argument. Both you and CM apparently missed that. :)

So, you're saying that I argue like a girl?!

CM · « **Reply #22 on:** October 03, 2009, 08:23:53 PM »

Quote from: Jehanne

Quote from: Catholic Martyr
Don't make me drag out all the quotes from Trent.

Do it, please!

Quote from: Pope Paul III, at Trent, Session 6, Decree on Justification, Chapter 7 (What the justification of the impious is, and what are the causes thereof),

the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which (faith) no man was ever justified;

In Baptism is bestowed the supernatural faith, whereby a man is justified. This is de fide.

Quote

For, although no one can be just, but he to whom the merits of the Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ are communicated, yet is this done in the said justification of the impious, when by the merit of that same most holy Passion, the charity of God is poured forth, by the Holy Spirit, in the hearts of those that are justified, and is inherent therein: whence, man, through Jesus Christ, in whom he is ingrafted, receives, in the said justification, together with the remission of sins, all these (gifts) infused at once, faith, hope, and charity.

These are all received at once at Baptism.

Quote

For faith, unless hope and charity be added thereto, neither unites man perfectly with Christ, nor makes him a living member of His body. For which reason it is most truly said, that Faith without works is dead and profitless; and, In Christ Jesus neither circuмcision, availeth anything, nor uncircuмcision, but faith which worketh by charity. This faith, catechumens beg of the Church-agreeably to a tradition of the apostles-previously to the sacrament of Baptism; when they beg for the faith which bestows life everlasting, which, without hope and charity, faith cannot bestow:

The tradition of the Apostles is that this saving faith does not exist in a catechumen previously to Baptism.

Finally, Trent teaches that no man can be justified (as you know) without the laver of regeneration or the votum for it. These are not mutually exclusive causes of justification, but both are required for justification to take place.

There is not dogmatic support for the contrary heretical opinion ANYWHERE.

Jehanne · « **Reply #23 on:** October 03, 2009, 09:53:35 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

Quote from: Pope Paul III, at Trent, Session 6, Decree on Justification, Chapter 7 (What the justification of the impious is, and what are the causes thereof),
the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which (faith) no man was ever justified;

Thanks! Sums it up nice, doesn't it?! No "implicit faith" here, eh? Quite the contrary.

SJB · « **Reply #24 on:** October 04, 2009, 01:26:12 PM »

Quote from: Jehanne

Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Jehanne
Quote from: SJB
jehanne,

The point is that THE SACRAMENT of BAPTISM is not NOT required in EVERY case. Do you now admit this?

Now you know why I thought you were a female. :) No offense to any females out there, either. I knew Clare was a female...but not from her arguments. :)

The name "Jehanne" is a French name. Actually, there are men and women who have had that name throughout history. A quick Google search will reveal who they are.

Actually, I wasn't referring to your pseudonym...more your style of argument. Both you and CM apparently missed that. :)

So, you're saying that I argue like a girl?!

Seriously, what else could I be saying.

Jehanne · « **Reply #25 on:** October 04, 2009, 04:01:17 PM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: Jehanne
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Jehanne
Quote from: SJB
jehanne,

The point is that THE SACRAMENT of BAPTISM is not NOT required in EVERY case. Do you now admit this?

Now you know why I thought you were a female. :) No offense to any females out there, either. I knew Clare was a female...but not from her arguments. :)

The name "Jehanne" is a French name. Actually, there are men and women who have had that name throughout history. A quick Google search will reveal who they are.

Actually, I wasn't referring to your pseudonym...more your style of argument. Both you and CM apparently missed that. :)

So, you're saying that I argue like a girl?!

Seriously, what else could I be saying.

Okay, fine. Fortunately, I think that the infallible decrees of the Church are clear enough, at least for me.

SJB · « **Reply #26 on:** October 04, 2009, 04:16:48 PM »

Quote from: Jehanne

Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Jehanne
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Jehanne
Quote from: SJB
jehanne,

The point is that THE SACRAMENT of BAPTISM is not NOT required in EVERY case. Do you now admit this?

Now you know why I thought you were a female. :) No offense to any females out there, either. I knew Clare was a female...but not from her arguments. :)

The name "Jehanne" is a French name. Actually, there are men and women who have had that name throughout history. A quick Google search will reveal who they are.

Actually, I wasn't referring to your pseudonym...more your style of argument. Both you and CM apparently missed that. :)

So, you're saying that I argue like a girl?!

Seriously, what else could I be saying.

Okay, fine. Fortunately, I think that the infallible decrees of the Church are clear enough, at least for me.

Can you be sure you are infallible in understanding these decrees? It is a serious question too...could you be mistaken?

Jehanne · « **Reply #27 on:** October 04, 2009, 04:28:42 PM »

Quote from: SJB

Can you be sure you are infallible in understanding these decrees? It is a serious question too...could you be mistaken?

Sure. From a historical point of view, absolutely not. Secular historians, even atheistic ones, virtually all acknowledge the fact that Catholics, from before the time of Saint Augustine, until well after the Reformation, believed that all non-Catholics perished in the "eternal fire." Catholic liberalism, which began in the 18th-century, introduced the theological novelty of "invincible ignorance," which is now applied to virtually all non-Catholics, by traditionalists and modernist Catholics alike. Here is but one historical example out of many:

http://smu.edu/ijas/1431trial.html

"When it was explained to her what the Church Militant meant, and [she was] admonished to believe and hold the article Unam Sanctam Ecclesiam, etc., and to submit to the Church Militant,

She answered: I believe in the Church on earth; but for my deeds and words, as I have previously said, I refer the whole matter to God, Who caused me to do what I have done.

She said also that she submits to God her Creator, Who caused her to do what she did; and refers it to Him in His own Person.

Asked if she means that she has no judge on earth, and our Holy Father the Pope is not her judge,

She replied: I will tell you nothing else. I have a good Master, Our Lord, in Whom I trust for everything, and not in any other.

She was told that if she did not wish to believe in the Church and in the article Ecclesiam Sanctam Catholicam, she would be a heretic to uphold [her views], and that she would be punished by other judges who would sentence her to be burned.

She answered: I will tell you nothing else. And [even] if I saw the fire, I should tell you what I have told you, and nothing else.

Questioned as to whether, if the General Council, that is to say our Holy Father, the Cardinals [and the rest] were here, she would be willing to submit..."

Many other historical examples exist.

SJB · « **Reply #28 on:** October 04, 2009, 05:26:21 PM »

Quote from: Jehanne

Quote from: SJB
Can you be sure you are infallible in understanding these decrees? It is a serious question too...could you be mistaken?

Sure. From a historical point of view, absolutely not. Secular historians, even atheistic ones, virtually all acknowledge the fact that Catholics, from before the time of Saint Augustine, until well after the Reformation, believed that all non-Catholics perished in the "eternal fire." Catholic liberalism, which began in the 18th-century, introduced the theological novelty of "invincible ignorance," which is now applied to virtually all non-Catholics, by traditionalists and modernist Catholics alike. Here is but one historical example out of many:

http://smu.edu/ijas/1431trial.html

"When it was explained to her what the Church Militant meant, and [she was] admonished to believe and hold the article Unam Sanctam Ecclesiam, etc., and to submit to the Church Militant,

She answered: I believe in the Church on earth; but for my deeds and words, as I have previously said, I refer the whole matter to God, Who caused me to do what I have done.

She said also that she submits to God her Creator, Who caused her to do what she did; and refers it to Him in His own Person.

Asked if she means that she has no judge on earth, and our Holy Father the Pope is not her judge,

She replied: I will tell you nothing else. I have a good Master, Our Lord, in Whom I trust for everything, and not in any other.

She was told that if she did not wish to believe in the Church and in the article Ecclesiam Sanctam Catholicam, she would be a heretic to uphold [her views], and that she would be punished by other judges who would sentence her to be burned.

She answered: I will tell you nothing else. And [even] if I saw the fire, I should tell you what I have told you, and nothing else.

Questioned as to whether, if the General Council, that is to say our Holy Father, the Cardinals [and the rest] were here, she would be willing to submit..."

Many other historical examples exist.

Invincible ignorance...or inculpable ignorance is not a theological novelty. Where are you getting this?

Can one be inculpably ignorant of a particular law? The concept is hardly "novel".

Jehanne · « **Reply #29 on:** October 04, 2009, 05:42:09 PM »

Quote from: SJB

Can one be inculpably ignorant of a particular law? The concept is hardly "novel".

I have posted this quote from Saint Thomas over and over. Please read it:

"Unbelief may be taken in two ways: first, by way of pure negation, so that a man be called an unbeliever, merely because he has not the faith. Secondly, unbelief may be taken by way of opposition to the faith; in which sense a man refuses to hear the faith, or despises it, according to Isaiah 53:1: "Who hath believed our report?" It is this that completes the notion of unbelief, and it is in this sense that unbelief is a sin.

If, however, we take it by way of pure negation, as we find it in those who have heard nothing about the faith, it bears the character, not of sin, but of punishment, because such like ignorance of Divine things is a result of the sin of our first parent. If such like unbelievers are damned, it is on account of other sins, which cannot be taken away without faith, but not on account of their sin of unbelief. Hence Our Lord said (John 15:22) "If I had not come, and spoken to them, they would not have sin"; which Augustine expounds (Tract. lxxxix in Joan.) as "referring to the sin whereby they believed not in Christ." " (Summa Theologica II II Q.10, A.1)