Author Topic: We Believe What the Church Teaches No Matter What it Is (Read 16778 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?