Author Topic: We Believe What the Church Teaches No Matter What it Is (Read 12266 times)

Jehanne · « **Reply #45 on:** September 17, 2009, 09:45:31 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

BROKEN RECORD TIME!!!

"The thief was saved BEFORE Christ's resurrection, and it was not until AFTER His resurrection that the Old Law was abrogated and the New Testament, including the Law of Baptism went into effect!"

All Christian writers agree on this!

Was that Eastern time or Jerusalem time? Yes, I agree, Baptism or at least the explicit vow to receive it. I honestly do not see why Father Feeney felt that the Sacrament of Baptism was absolutely necessary. Are you suggesting that Pope Innocent III was a heretic:

http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/eens.html

CM · « **Reply #46 on:** September 17, 2009, 09:52:38 PM »

What on earth are you talking about Don?

Why would Pope Innocent III be a heretic? State your case rather than asking me to read the heretic Matt1618's article. I don't have the time or inclination.

Jehanne · « **Reply #47 on:** September 17, 2009, 10:05:43 PM »

CM · « **Reply #48 on:** September 17, 2009, 10:36:48 PM »

First, he was stating his personal theological opinion, and this was a private letter, not a public one, and hence fallible. Also Matt is wrong, the letter was written in 1206, not 1208.

Second of all, this was fully 9 years before the Fourth Lateran Council, whereby he made it a dogma that one must be of the Faithful to be saved.

Third, it had not at that time been defined that such a "baptism" was invalid.

Pope Innocent III was not a heretic, and this does nothing to prove baptism of desire, which is eliminated by more decrees than just those Matt1618 has attempted to dissect.

Building a belief in doctrines, based on fallible sources is like building a house upon the sand. No. You build your house on the ROCK of St. Peter, and what has been infallibly revealed by means of the same rock, if you expect to withstand the wind and the rain.

Jehanne · « **Reply #49 on:** September 17, 2009, 10:47:41 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

First, he was stating his personal theological opinion, and this was a private letter, not a public one, and hence fallible. Also Matt is wrong, the letter was written in 1206, not 1208.

He never stated, "Hey, this is my opinion, blah, blah, blah...if you have a different opinion, that's okay...." Just consider Pope John XXII who was expressing his "opinion" about the Beatific Vision and whether such occurs immediately after death. The Medieval Church was on him like "flies on poop" about his "opinion." If Pope Innocent III had an "opinion" that individuals could be saved through the explicit desire for the Sacrament of Baptism even though they were unable to receive the Sacrament, it's good enough for me. A number of other Fathers, Saints, Doctors, and Popes also shared that opinion. I understand your opinion on the issue. Does it really matter?

CM · « **Reply #50 on:** September 17, 2009, 10:51:49 PM »

Don't you get it?

It was after Pope Innocent III expressed this opinion that it was eliminated as a possibility by the INFALLIBLE Magisterium.

Nothing should be "good enough" for you that contradicts the Solemn Magisterium.

Denying a dogma makes one a heretic, do you understand that?

CM · « **Reply #51 on:** September 17, 2009, 10:54:14 PM »

My "opinion" is not my own in this matter. It is exactly in line with the dogmas of the Council of Lateran the Fourth, Vienne, Florence, Trent, Vatican.

There is not a single one of these decrees I have to deny to hold my "opinion".

There are several that you have to deny to hold yours.

CMMM · « **Reply #52 on:** September 18, 2009, 06:36:41 AM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

My "opinion" is not my own in this matter. It is exactly in line with the dogmas of the Council of Lateran the Fourth, Vienne, Florence, Trent, Vatican.

There is not a single one of these decrees I have to deny to hold my "opinion".

There are several that you have to deny to hold yours.

He doesn't have to deny any. He understands them as the church has always taught them.

Jehanne · « **Reply #53 on:** September 18, 2009, 06:50:44 AM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

Don't you get it?

It was after Pope Innocent III expressed this opinion that it was eliminated as a possibility by the INFALLIBLE Magisterium.

Nothing should be "good enough" for you that contradicts the Solemn Magisterium.

Denying a dogma makes one a heretic, do you understand that?

So, are you saying that Pope Innocent III changed his opinion after the Fourth Lateran Council? If so, what evidence do you have for that?

CM · « **Reply #54 on:** September 18, 2009, 02:59:52 PM »

He doesn't need to have changed his opinion. He simply needs to have kept it to himself. If he did not publicly repeat it, he cannot be charged with contradicting any dogmas.

Jehanne · « **Reply #55 on:** September 18, 2009, 03:23:06 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

He doesn't need to have changed his opinion. He simply needs to have kept it to himself. If he did not publicly repeat it, he cannot be charged with contradicting any dogmas.

Yeah, and he was a sitting Pope, right? And, you think that he would have just "kept it to himself," saying "Oops, I made this Little Goof early on in my Pontificate, and if I just don't tell anyone..." No, sorry, this is fundamental, Catholic Theology 101. I don' think that Innocent made a mistake at the Fourth Lateran Council, and I don't think that he made a mistake six or seven years earlier when he penned that "private" letter.

CM · « **Reply #56 on:** September 18, 2009, 08:15:09 PM »

Whatever you say. At the time of his letter, it had not been defined that baptism was the only way to enter the Church, and it had not been defined that it was necessary for salvation to be of the faithful. He never publicly taught that a person can be saved outside of the faithful, or without baptism.

As a matter of fact, LoT posted an interesting article by the baptism of desire heretic Griff Ruby, wherein he has us draw four quadrants on a page of paper, representing the pope's intention and profession. From what I can tell, he is spot on in that regard and I suggest you read it over again.

Don, you can choose to believe in a proposition that is contrary to the explicit words of the infallible Magisterium if you want to, it is your choice. You don't have the right to do it, however.

Nobody has the right to believe in anything contrary to something that is de fide divina et catholica.

Anybody who consciously believes such a thing is a heretic and outside of the Church, and we all know where that leads.

Jehanne · « **Reply #57 on:** September 18, 2009, 08:28:39 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

Whatever you say. At the time of his letter, it had not been defined that baptism was the only way to enter the Church, and it had not been defined that it was necessary for salvation to be of the faithful. He never publicly taught that a person can be saved outside of the faithful, or without baptism.

As a matter of fact, LoT posted an interesting article by the baptism of desire heretic Griff Ruby, wherein he has us draw four quadrants on a page of paper, representing the pope's intention and profession. From what I can tell, he is spot on in that regard and I suggest you read it over again.

Don, you can choose to believe in a proposition that is contrary to the explicit words of the infallible Magisterium if you want to, it is your choice. You don't have the right to do it, however.

Nobody has the right to believe in anything contrary to something that is de fide divina et catholica.

Anybody who consciously believes such a thing is a heretic and outside of the Church, and we all know where that leads.

Well, if canonizations are infallible, then St. Thomas is in Heaven right now, correct? And, he taught Baptism of Desire, right? Besides, why would he be elevated to the status of a Doctor of the Church if he held to heretical ideas??

CM · « **Reply #58 on:** September 18, 2009, 08:38:56 PM »

Canonizations are not infallible. Read the Vatican Councils definition of infallibility.

Jehanne · « **Reply #59 on:** September 18, 2009, 08:40:50 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

Canonizations are not infallible. Read the Vatican Councils definition of infallibility.

We will need to start a new thread on this one! Everything that I have read suggest that canonizations are, in fact, infallible.