Read an Interview with Matthew, the owner of CathInfo

Author Topic: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB  (Read 2582 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3229
  • Reputation: +1964/-976
  • Gender: Male
Re: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB
« Reply #30 on: July 16, 2018, 09:00:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • St Alphonsus' theory is riddled with problems.  Read here:  https://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/st-alphonsus-blatant-error-on-baptism-of-desire/#.W01MctVKiM8

    St Alphonsus is not infallible.  Trent is.  Trent says the desire must be for baptism, to be justified, which means explicit desire.

    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3383
    • Reputation: +4011/-203
    • Gender: Male
      • The Trad Forum
    Re: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB
    « Reply #31 on: July 16, 2018, 09:03:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • I never said I was.  I just said that I can see the argument and I understand St Thomas' logic (which he never said was certain, just speculation).  A person who is formally taking classes and planning on getting baptized, 1) desires EXPLICITY the faith, 2) is TAKING ACTION to get the faith, and 3) has made a COMMITMENT to the Church.  All other scenarios of BOD fail all 3 of those tests.  It makes no sense, logically or theologically, that they could be saved.  
    .
    With respect Pax, I don't think you understand St. Thomas's logic at all.  You want to read ST III, Q 62 & 65. 
    .
    Saint Thomas teaches that baptism of desire is possible because of the distinction in efficient causes of justification (principal and instrumental).  Metaphysically speaking (which is really what counts, after all), this distinction between efficient causes is the reason BoD is possible.  Now that very same logic is retained by Trent in describing the causes of justification, and it describes them just as St. Thomas did, and it does so right after saying that a desire for baptism may suffice to justify and after describing the sanctification process of a catechumen culminating in perfect charity before baptism.
    .
    If Trent, as many contend, actually condemns BoD, it couldn't have picked a more awful patron of the Council!  It couldn't have picked a worse explanation of justification's causes than the very explanation that makes BoD possible in the first place
    .
    As to the rest of what you said, I don't really know what to say except to read it over again and make sure that you've actually said what you want to.
    More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com


    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3383
    • Reputation: +4011/-203
    • Gender: Male
      • The Trad Forum
    Re: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB
    « Reply #32 on: July 16, 2018, 09:05:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • St Alphonsus' theory is riddled with problems.  Read here:  https://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/st-alphonsus-blatant-error-on-baptism-of-desire/#.W01MctVKiM8

    St Alphonsus is not infallible.  Trent is.  Trent says the desire must be for baptism, to be justified, which means explicit desire.
    .
    Saint Alphonsus is "riddled with problems."  Here!  Read some fake monks to get the "real scoop" on what the Church teaches.
    .
    I'm done.
    .
    I'll leave you with this:
    .
    "Although he wrote so vast a number of works, it has nevertheless been found, upon the strict examination which has been instituted in regard to them, that they may be read by the faithful without the least fear of finding the smallest error in them" (Pope Gregory XVI, Canonization Bull of St. Alphonsus, 1839).
    More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3229
    • Reputation: +1964/-976
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB
    « Reply #33 on: July 16, 2018, 09:09:43 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    Read some fake monks to get the "real scoop" on what the Church teaches.
    If you're scared to challenge your views, then you're not intellectually honest.  Who cares who made the argument?  Just because a person is wrong in one area doesn't mean they're wrong in all areas.  The diamond bros aren't the only ones who point out the flaws of St Alphonsus' views.

    p.s. the church has NEVER SAID that all writings of a saint are infallible.  That's ridiculous.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8781
    • Reputation: +3463/-720
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB
    « Reply #34 on: July 17, 2018, 06:11:42 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • If you're scared to challenge your views, then you're not intellectually honest.  Who cares who made the argument?  Just because a person is wrong in one area doesn't mean they're wrong in all areas.  The diamond bros aren't the only ones who point out the flaws of St Alphonsus' views.

    p.s. the church has NEVER SAID that all writings of a saint are infallible.  That's ridiculous.
    This.

    Whatever St. Thomas, the greatest theologian of all time taught, and whatever the other great saints taught, was over ruled by Trent, who, with the full authority of the Church's infallibility, explicitly decreed that 1) justification is attainable through the desire for the sacrament, 2) the sacrament is necessary for salvation, 3) what the matter of the sacrament of baptism is, 4) who may administer the sacrament, and 5) condemns those who say the sacrament is not necessary.

    No matter what anyone wants to argue about the issue, even if the whole world wants to insist that salvation via a BOD is a doctrine of the Church, they have not only the above facts to contend with, they also must admit that the term a "baptism of desire" is not mentioned, defined nor is it found anywhere in any official Church documents.

    Although over the last century or two the error of a BOD, like the error of the NO (Modernism) has been infiltrated into the seminaries, the catechisms and all the manifestations of the Church, the trad groups who promote it do so in error based on the above facts.
    I say that it is licit to resist the Roman Pontiff by not doing what he orders and by impeding the execution of his will; it is not licit, however, to judge, punish or depose him, since these are acts proper to a superior." St. Robert Bellarmine


    Offline Merry

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 301
    • Reputation: +165/-46
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB
    « Reply #35 on: July 17, 2018, 09:12:41 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Trying again -

     
    EXTRA ECCLESIAM – Baptism of Water, Blood, Desire
     
    Let's look briefly again at the 3 infallible definitions regarding No Salvation Outside the Church –
     
     #1There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.”
     (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215.)
     
     #2 “We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.)
     
     #3 “The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.)
     
     A few talking points follow in their regard –
     
     With dogma, one starts THERE, or WITH IT – and works out accordingly. Dogma is not the handmaid of theory, or some previously-argued theology or, as we see in our age, simply ignored or denigrated to liberal interpretation.
     
     The No Salvation doctrine never needed defining previous to the years seen above, as until then it was understood that the Church held and taught such accordingly. As princes and people began to question and lose respect for the papacy, and depreciate the Church, definitions were forthcoming from the Holy Ghost.
     
     And notice the rise in specificity with each.  They become increasingly more exacting – and not to be misunderstood.
     
     Also note the particular years in which these pronouncements were made. One wonders how St. Thomas (d. 1274), who held baptism of desire, would have thusly termed his works if he lived and studied after Definition 2 and 3 were made. Surely it is to be hoped – if not assumed - that he would have submitted as a Catholic and as a preacher and teacher, and dropped any “desire” notion he otherwise propounded. It is allowed to hope that, as there is a similar turmoil in our day on the issue of salvation, baptism – and even justification – that the Church in happier, future days, may define with further clarity on the issue.
     
     The original version of the Catechism of the Council of Trent - call it the Latin version - has NO MENTION of either “baptism of blood” or “baptism of desire”! These phrases did not appear in Trent catechism copies until the late 1800s.  
     
     Further, this Council defined: If anyone say that real and natural water is not necessary for baptism, and thus distort those words of our Lord Jesus Christ: “Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost (he cannot enter into the kingdom of God)” (Jn. 3:5), let him be anathema. 
    (Session VII – Canon 2)  
     
     We are therefore obliged to believe this.

     
     As for the Catechism of St. Pius X, or the Baltimore Catechism for that matter - they do not have the same authority as definitions of the Church – or the Catechism which the defining Council of Trent promulgated (the original, untouched Catechism of the Council of Trent).
     
     We do not learn our theology directly from the Fathers or Doctors, any more than we learn our religion directly from the Bible. We learn our religion directly from the Church through her Magisterium which is guided and protected by the Holy Ghost. As Queen Isabella once said to her confessor as he attempted to answer a question she had presented to him: “Father, I do not want to know what the Fathers said, good as they were.  I want to know what the Church says.”


    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 Anathama.  -COUNCIL OF TRENT Sess VII Canon II “On Baptism"

    Offline MarylandTrad

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 186
    • Reputation: +204/-42
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB
    « Reply #36 on: July 17, 2018, 06:36:57 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, that's not true at all. Saint Alphonsus (just to take the most noteworthy example) said that it could be implicit. And then when he died, his canonization bull declared that his work could be read without fear of discovering even the smallest error.


    St. Alphonsus expressed very clearly in several of his works that an explicit faith in the Trinity and Incarnation is necessary for salvation by a necessity of means. If he used the word “implicit” in reference to BOD, he must have meant that those who have an explicit faith in the Trinity and Incarnation can be justified by an implicit desire for Baptism prior to having received Baptism and prior even to having been told anything about the Sacrament. This is completely different from what the liberalizing “traditionalist” associations mean when they use the expression “implicit BOD”.

    St. Alphonsus wrote the following in his History of Heresies and their Refutation:


    Quote
    Still we answer the Semipelagians, and say, that infidels who arrive at the use of reason, and are not converted to the Faith, cannot be excused, because though they do not receive sufficient proximate Grace, still they are not deprived of remote Grace, as a means of becoming converted. But what is this remote Grace? St. Thomas explains it, when he says, that if any one was brought up in the wilds, or even among brute beasts, and if he followed the law of natural reason, to desire what is good, and to avoid what is wicked, we should certainly believe either that God, by an internal inspiration, would reveal to him what he should believe, or would send some one to preach the Faith to him, as he sent Peter to Cornelius. Thus, then, according to the Angelic Doctor, God, at least remotely, gives to the infidels, who have the use of reason, sufficient Grace to obtain salvation, and this Grace consists in a certain instruction of the mind, and in a movement of the will, to observe the natural law; and if the infidel co-operates with this movement, observing the precepts of the law of nature, and abstaining from grievous sins, he will certainly receive, through the merits of Jesus Christ, the Grace proximately sufficient to embrace the Faith, and save his soul.

    Under Pope Clement XI in 1703, when the missionary movement to “ignorant natives” was at its height, all missionaries were explicitly forbidden by the Holy Office to baptize a barbarian, even if he was dying, unless they elicited from him an explicit act of belief in Jesus Christ. Nor was it enough, declared the Holy Office, for this barbarian to know that God exists and is a remunerator. He must be told all the central mysteries of the Faith that derive from the Blessed Trinity and the Incarnation. The administration of the Sacrament of Baptism to a person who does not have an explicit faith in the Trinity would be invalid. Are you honestly willing to speculate that infidels can baptize themselves by “desire” knowing all the while that they cannot be validly baptized by water?
    "The Blessed Eucharist means nothing to a man who thinks other people can get along without It. The Blessed Eucharist means nothing to a communicant who thinks he needs It but someone else does not. The Blessed Eucharist means nothing to a communicant who offers others any charity ahead of this Charity of the Bread of Life." -Fr. Leonard Feeney, Bread of Life

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15656
    • Reputation: +8263/-2595
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB
    « Reply #37 on: July 18, 2018, 08:45:09 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • St. Alphonsus expressed very clearly in several of his works that an explicit faith in the Trinity and Incarnation is necessary for salvation by a necessity of means. If he used the word “implicit” in reference to BOD, he must have meant that those who have an explicit faith in the Trinity and Incarnation can be justified by an implicit desire for Baptism prior to having received Baptism and prior even to having been told anything about the Sacrament.

    Correct.  St. Alphonsus is using the term implicit narrowly.

    Explicit Desire for Baptism:  "I intend to be baptized." (note that votum is much more than a "desire" but is always loosely translated as such).
    Implicit Desire for Baptism:  "I want to become a Catholic." (intention to be baptized implicit in the intention to become Catholic)

    Now the modern heretics go, several steps removd, all the way down the line to ...
    Implicit Desire:  "I want to be a good person and do what God wants."


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15656
    • Reputation: +8263/-2595
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB
    « Reply #38 on: July 18, 2018, 08:48:45 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .
    Saint Alphonsus is "riddled with problems."  Here!  Read some fake monks to get the "real scoop" on what the Church teaches.
    .
    I'm done.
    .
    I'll leave you with this:
    .
    "Although he wrote so vast a number of works, it has nevertheless been found, upon the strict examination which has been instituted in regard to them, that they may be read by the faithful without the least fear of finding the smallest error in them" (Pope Gregory XVI, Canonization Bull of St. Alphonsus, 1839).

    Actually study the problem instead of running away crying and pouting like a baby.

    St. Alphonsus cited a letter from one of the Pope Innocents as proof that BoD was de fide ... misconstruing the authority of the letter.  In a very similar letter, another Pope states that someone who is saved by BoD enters heaven "without delay" after their death.  Yet St. Alphonsus speculated, contrary to this papal teaching, that those who are saved by BoD do NOT have all the temporal punishment due to sin remitted, and thus would tarry in Purgatory for some time.  So he contradicts papal teaching that, according to his own standards, would make his theory heretical.

    St. Alphonsus was not infallible, period, regardless of the flowery language used by Pope Gregory XVI.  Quite a few theologians disagree with a number of his conclusions regarding moral theology.

    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1022/-1610
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB
    « Reply #39 on: July 18, 2018, 09:10:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Is there no difference between these teachings? 


    Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of desire of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.


    Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

    Offline JPaul

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3832
    • Reputation: +3712/-282
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB
    « Reply #40 on: July 18, 2018, 10:00:32 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Now the modern heretics go, several steps removd, all the way down the line to ...
    Implicit Desire:  "I want to be a good person and do what God wants."
    This is what the "preservers" of tradition teach. This leaves most Traditional Catholics almost bereft of the True teaching of the Church. We should not judge a cleric by the lace and vestments her wears, but the soundness of the doctrine that he believes and teaches.


    Offline JohnAnthonyMarie

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1295
    • Reputation: +601/-60
    • Gender: Male
      • TraditionalCatholic.net
    Re: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB
    « Reply #41 on: July 23, 2018, 07:50:25 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • The original Baltimore catechism of the 1800s has no mention of BOD or salvation for “sincere” non-Catholics. 





     
    Omnes pro Christo

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3229
    • Reputation: +1964/-976
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB
    « Reply #42 on: July 23, 2018, 08:42:21 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • That's has a copyright of 1921...and it's a commentary on the actual baltimore council.  First edition is from 1885.

    Offline JohnAnthonyMarie

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1295
    • Reputation: +601/-60
    • Gender: Male
      • TraditionalCatholic.net
    Re: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB
    « Reply #43 on: July 24, 2018, 01:30:29 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That's has a copyright of 1921...and it's a commentary on the actual baltimore council.  First edition is from 1885.
    Yes; Do you have a link to the original version?
    Omnes pro Christo

    Offline JohnAnthonyMarie

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1295
    • Reputation: +601/-60
    • Gender: Male
      • TraditionalCatholic.net
    Re: Traditional Groups the Reject BOD/BOB
    « Reply #44 on: July 24, 2018, 01:35:45 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14552/14552.txt

    Baltimore Catechism No. 2

    IMPRIMATUR

    New York, April 6, 1885. John Cardinal McCloskey, Archbishop of New
    York.

    Baltimore, April 6, 1885. "The Catechism ordered by The Third Plenary
    Council of Baltimore, having been diligently compared and examined, is
    hereby approved."
    + James Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, Apostolic Delegate.

    157. Q. How many kinds of Baptism are there?
    A. There are three kinds of Baptism: Baptism of water, of desire, and of
    blood.
    Omnes pro Christo

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16