Author Topic: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching  (Read 2543 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online DZ PLEASE

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 319
  • Reputation: +36/-72
Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching
« Reply #15 on: August 12, 2017, 08:39:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
  • By "observed" in "where Baptism of Desire is observed", I mean exactly what the Canon indicates, "Catechumens who, through no fault of their own, die without Baptism, are to be treated as baptized."
    Non-responsive. Must be something in the air sir. If you don't understand a request for terms, with all due you've no business mucking about with canon law.

    Offline JohnAnthonyMarie

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1189
    • Reputation: +576/-45
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching
    « Reply #16 on: August 12, 2017, 08:45:37 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!2
  • You are unable to defend your denial of an explicit Church reference to Baptism of Desire.  I could not care any less about your advice.
    Omnes pro Christo


    Online DZ PLEASE

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 319
    • Reputation: +36/-72
    Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching
    « Reply #17 on: August 12, 2017, 08:51:30 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • You are unable to defend your denial of an explicit Church reference to Baptism of Desire.  I could not care any less about your advice.
    Super. Take care. Bye.

    Offline JohnAnthonyMarie

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1189
    • Reputation: +576/-45
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching
    « Reply #18 on: August 12, 2017, 08:54:46 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • Pope Pius IX
    Singulari Quadam, 1854:
       174. "It must, of course, be held as a matter of faith that outside the apostolic Roman Church no one can be saved, that the Church is the only ark of salvation, and that whoever does not enter it will perish in the flood. On the other hand, it must likewise be held as certain that those who are affected by ignorance of the true religion, if it is invincible ignorance, are not subject to any guilt in this matter before the eyes of the Lord. Now, then, who could presume in himself an ability to set the boundaries of such ignorance, taking into consideration the natural differences of peoples, lands, native talents, and so many other factors? Only when we have been released from the bonds of this body and see God just as He is (see John 3:2) shall we really understand how close and beautiful a bond joins Divine mercy with Divine justice."
    Omnes pro Christo

    Offline San Bernardino

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 6
    • Reputation: +7/-7
    Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching
    « Reply #19 on: August 12, 2017, 10:00:27 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!2
  • @JohnAnthonyMarie

    I already answered your question and yes you are ignoring the infallible Teachings of the Church. I quoted Florence and Trent and you give me commentary on canons!   

    Do i reject that canon? Yes, there are other errors in that Code of Canon Law as well.

    1. It's a Dogma ALL who die in mortal sin or original sin go to Hell.

    2. Read what i wrote earlier, you have to make a decision, no way around this:

    Thus, the 1917 Code’s proposition in canon 737 that Baptism is necessary "at least in desire" for salvation is not binding on the universal Church or protected by infallibility.  Regarding its law in canon 1239, that unbaptized catechumens can be given Christian burial, this contradicts the entire Tradition of the Catholic Church for 1900 years on whether unbaptized persons can be given Christian burial


    Since the time of Jesus Christ and throughout all of history, the Catholic Church universally refused ecclesiastical burial to catechumens who died without the Sacrament of Baptism, as The Catholic Encyclopedia admits:
     
    The Catholic Encyclopedia, 'Baptism,' Volume 2, 1907: "A certain statement in the funeral oration of St. Ambrose over the Emperor Valentinian II has been brought forward as a proof that the Church offered sacrifices and prayers for catechumens who died before baptism. There is not a vestige of such a custom to be found anywhere... The practice of the Church is more correctly shown in the canon (xvii) of the Second Council of Braga (572 AD): 'Neither the commemoration of Sacrifice [oblationis] nor the service of chanting [psallendi] is to be employed for catechumens who have died without baptism.'"
     
         This is the law of the Catholic Church since the beginning and throughout all of history. So, since this issue is tied to the Faith and not merely disciplinary, either the Catholic Church was wrong since the time of Christ for refusing ecclesiastical burial for catechumens who died without baptism or the 1917 Code is wrong for granting it to them. It is either one or the other, because the 1917 Code directly contradicts the Traditional and constant law of the Catholic Church for nineteen centuries on this point which is tied to the Faith.  The answer is, obviously, that the 1917 Code is wrong and not infallible, and the Catholic Church’s law for all of history refusing ecclesiastical burial to catechumens is right. Also, it is interesting to note that the Latin version of the 1917 Code contains many footnotes to traditional popes, councils, etc. to show from where certain canons were derived. Canon 1239.2 on giving ecclesiastical burial to unbaptized catechumens has no footnote, not to any pope, previous law or council, simply because there is nothing in Tradition which supports it!!    
     
    You are being totally dishonest like most modernist heretics. 'B.o.d' and 'b.o.b' is simply a doctrine of man. Are you aware St.Robert Bellarmine taught 'b.o.d' but said unbaptized catechumens are not part of the Church?

    Are you aware St. Alphonsus admits that 'baptism of desire' does not take away the temporal punishment due to sin.This is a devastating problem for 'b.o.d' and its supporters.


    ST. ALPHONSUS ADMITS THAT 'BAPTISM OF DESIRE' DOES NOT PROVIDE THE GRACE OF SPIRITUAL REBIRTH/BAPTISM, WHICH TRENT SAYS EVERYONE MUST HAVE TO BE JUSTIFIED.


    St. Alphonsus: "Baptism of blowing is perfect conversion to God through contrition or through the love of God above all things, with the explicit desire, or implicit desire of the true river of baptism whose place it supplies (iuxta Trid. Sess. 14, c. 4) with respect to the remission of the guilt, but not with respect to the character to be imprinted, nor with respect to the full liability of the punishment to be removed: it is called of blowing because it is made through the impulse of the Holy Spirit, who is called a blowing." (St. Alphonsus, Moral Theology, Volume V, Book 6, n. 96)

    St. Alphonsus says that 'b.o.d' does not remove the temporal punishment due to sin. According to his explanation, someone who dies with a 'b.o.d' may need to spend time in Purgatory. That’s actually a fatal problem for the 'theory' because the Church has dogmatically defined that the grace of baptism is not merely the remission of the guilt of sin, but also the remission of all temporal punishment due to sin.

    Pope Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, "Exultate Deo," Nov. 22, 1439: "Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life… The effect of this sacrament is the remission of every fault, original and actual, and also of every punishment which is owed for the fault itself. Therefore to the baptized no satisfaction is to be enjoined for past sins; but dying, before they commit any fault, they immediately attain the kingdom of heaven and the vision of God."

    ALL THOSE BORN AGAIN HAVE EVERY PUNISHMENT DUE TO SIN REMITTED

    Likewise, the Council of Trent’s Decree on Original Sin solemnly defined that all those who are ‘born again’ have all the guilt and every punishment due to sin removed.  This grace of being 'born again' renders the recipients ‘immaculate’ and it leaves in them nothing that could retard their entrance into Heaven.

    Council of Trent, Sess. 5, Original Sin, #5, Ex Cathedra: "If any one denies, that, by the grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ, which is conferred in baptism, the guilt of original sin is remitted; or even asserts that the whole of that which has the true and proper nature of sin is not taken away; but says that it is only erased, or not imputed; let him be anathema. FOR, IN THOSE WHO ARE BORN AGAIN, there is nothing that God hates; because, there is no condemnation to those who are truly buried together with Christ by baptism into death; who walk not according to the flesh, but, putting off the old man, and putting on the new who is created according to God, are made innocent, immaculate, pure, guiltless, and beloved of God, heirs indeed of God, but joint heirs with Christ; in such a manner that absolutely nothing may delay them from entry into heaven."

    As we can see, it’s a Dogma that the grace of baptism/spiritual rebirth/being ‘born again’ provides not only justification and the remission of the guilt of sin, but also the remission of every punishment due to sin.

    TO BE JUSTIFIED EVERYONE MUST BE ‘BORN AGAIN’ – A GRACE WHICH INCLUDES THE REMISSION OF EVERY TEMPORAL PUNISHMENT DUE TO SIN

    Furthermore, it’s de fide definita that UNLESS YOU RECEIVE THE GRACE OF SPIRITUAL REBIRTH/BEING ‘BORN AGAIN’ YOU CAN NEVER BE JUSTIFIED!

    Council of Trent, Sess. 6, Chap. 3: "But though He died for all, yet all do not receive the benefit of His death, but those only to whom the merit of His passion is communicated; because as truly as men would not be born unjust, if they were not born through propagation of the seed of Adam, since by that propagation they contract through him, when they are conceived, injustice as their own, SO UNLESS THEY WERE BORN AGAIN IN CHRIST THEY WOULD NEVER BE JUSTIFIED, since by that new birth through the merit of His passion the grace by which they become just is bestowed upon them."

    Is this becoming clear?

    I noticed you're defending invincible ignorance also, wow what a surprise! [sarcasm]

    It's interesting how the modernists who defend the demonic doctrine of invincible ignorance are actually the most ignorant of Church Teaching and Scripture.

    Pope Pius IX was simply wrong, people who accept 'b.o.d' and 'b.o.d' are some of the most selective people i have come across. 

    Quick destruction of invincible ignorance:

      Pope St. Pius X, Acerbo Nimis (#2), April 15, 1905: "And so Our Predecessor, Benedict XIV, had just cause to write: 'We declare that a great number of those who are condemned to eternal punishment suffer that everlasting calamity because of ignorance of those mysteries of faith which must be known and believed in order to be numbered among the elect.'"

    Pope Gregory XVI, Probe Nostis (#6), Sept. 18, 1840: "We are thankful for the success of apostolic missions in America, the Indies, and other faithless lands... They search out those who sit in darkness and the shadow of death to summon them to the light and life of the Catholic religion... At length they snatch them from the devil’s rule, by the bath of regeneration and promote them to the freedom of God’s adopted sons."

    The great "Apostle of the Rocky Mountains," Fr. Pierre De Smet, who was the extraordinary missionary to the American Indians in the 19th century, was also convinced – with all the great Catholic missionaries before him – that all the Indians whom he did not reach would be eternally lost. 

    Fr. De Smet, S.J., Jan. 26, 1838: "New priests are to be added to the Potawatomi Mission, and my Superior, Father Verhaegen gives me hope that I will be sent. How happy I would be could I spend myself for the salvation of so many souls, who are lost because they have never known truth!" [Fr. E. Laveille, S.J., The Life of Fr. De Smet, p. 80]

    St. Alphonsus: "See also the special love which God has shown you in bringing you into life in a Christian country, and in the bosom of the Catholic or true Church. How many are born among the pagans, among the Jews, among the Mohometans and heretics, and all are lost." [Sermons of St. Alphonsus Liguori, Tan Books, 1982, p. 219.]


    MANY MANY other quotes can be provided. Here is God The Holy Ghost:

    2 Corinthians 4:3-4 "And if our gospel be also hid, it is hid to them that are lost, In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto them."

    Psalms 78:6 "Pour out thy wrath upon the nations that have not known thee: and upon the kingdoms that have not called upon thy name."

    1 Corinthians 6:9-10 "Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God."



    Offline An even Seven

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 776
    • Reputation: +170/-152
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching
    « Reply #20 on: August 13, 2017, 01:50:39 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Pope Pius IX
    Singulari Quadam, 1854:
       174. "It must, of course, be held as a matter of faith that outside the apostolic Roman Church no one can be saved, that the Church is the only ark of salvation, and that whoever does not enter it will perish in the flood. On the other hand, it must likewise be held as certain that those who are affected by ignorance of the true religion, if it is invincible ignorance, are not subject to any guilt in this matter before the eyes of the Lord. Now, then, who could presume in himself an ability to set the boundaries of such ignorance, taking into consideration the natural differences of peoples, lands, native talents, and so many other factors? Only when we have been released from the bonds of this body and see God just as He is (see John 3:2) shall we really understand how close and beautiful a bond joins Divine mercy with Divine justice."

    It's amazing that hardly any, if any, BODers/InIviners ever quote the entire paragraph of this FALLIBLE allocution to Cardinals. Here is the full text and the part they leave out in bold.
    Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quadem: For, it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood; but, on the other hand, it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, are not stained by any guilt in this matter in the eyes of God. Now, in truth, who would arrogate so much to himself as to mark the limits of such an ignorance, because of the nature and variety of peoples, regions, innate dispositions, and of so many other things? For, in truth, when released from these corporeal chains "we shall see God as He is" [1 John 3:2], we shall understand perfectly by how close and beautiful a bond divine mercy and justice are united; but, as long as we are on earth, weighed down by this mortal mass which blunts the soul, let us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, there is "one God, one faith, one baptism" [Eph. 4:5]; it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry.  

    1. Pope Pius IX is saying that the invincible ignorance will not save a person but that God does not find fault in this matter of their ignorance. This is unlike those who are culpable for their ignorance, they are at fault. It does not mean those individuals will not be damned for their other sins since there is no remission of sins outside the Church.
    2. In the section they never quote he clearly implies that while here on Earth, we are to believe that Baptism is necessary and to seek other avenues for salvation is not allowed discussion. So the supporters of salvific ignorance are disobeying the Pope when they further this point.
    3. The Doctors they love to quote are completely and explicitly against this. St. Thomas Aquinas, Sent. III, 25, Q. 2, A. 2, solute. 2: “If a man should have no one to instruct him, God will show him, unless he culpably wishes to remain where he is.” St. Alphonsus Liguori, Sermons (c. +1760): “How many are born among the pagans, among the Jews, among the Mohometans and heretics, and all are lost.”




    John 12:[42] However, many of the chief men also believed in him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, that they might not be cast out of the synagogue. [43] For they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God.

    Offline JohnAnthonyMarie

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1189
    • Reputation: +576/-45
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching
    « Reply #21 on: August 13, 2017, 04:29:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I choose to accept Canon Law as authentic Catholic teaching.  This is where we disagree.  
    Omnes pro Christo

    Online DZ PLEASE

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 319
    • Reputation: +36/-72
    Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching
    « Reply #22 on: August 13, 2017, 04:37:04 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I choose to accept Canon Law as authentic Catholic teaching.  This is where we disagree. 
    (Oo0)


    Offline San Bernardino

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 6
    • Reputation: +7/-7
    Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching
    « Reply #23 on: August 13, 2017, 05:27:14 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
  • I choose to accept Canon Law as authentic Catholic teaching.  This is where we disagree.  
    You're in denial. 
     The 1917 CCL is NOT Catholic Teaching. You honestly reject what the Catholic Church actually teaches. Your authority is a commentary on Canon Law. :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

    "Thus saith the Lord: Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord."
    Jeremiah 17:5

    "David was right in saying that all people lie. Mankind’s life on earth is a struggle and like the mountain dew that soon is gone, like the flower of the field that quickly withers. We mortals are so blind that out of such a multitude of people only a small portion know the true God, primarily in this part of the world, Europe, the Spaniards being the most faithful. Among those raised in the church, few confess the faith and many of them are in sin, so nineteen out of twenty parts of mankind live in darkness and blindness." [Colahan, The Visions of Sor María de Agreda p.53]

    Online DZ PLEASE

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 319
    • Reputation: +36/-72
    Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching
    « Reply #24 on: August 13, 2017, 05:48:49 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • You're in denial.
     The 1917 CCL is NOT Catholic Teaching. You honestly reject what the Catholic Church actually teaches. Your authority is a commentary on Canon Law. :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

    "Thus saith the Lord: Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord."
    Jeremiah 17:5

    "David was right in saying that all people lie. Mankind’s life on earth is a struggle and like the mountain dew that soon is gone, like the flower of the field that quickly withers. We mortals are so blind that out of such a multitude of people only a small portion know the true God, primarily in this part of the world, Europe, the Spaniards being the most faithful. Among those raised in the church, few confess the faith and many of them are in sin, so nineteen out of twenty parts of mankind live in darkness and blindness." [Colahan, The Visions of Sor María de Agreda p.53]
    Would it do any good to show where canon<human law can, has, does and must change?

    Nope. Wish you well if you try. Stiff necks, hard hearts and hard heads are impervious.

    Offline JohnAnthonyMarie

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1189
    • Reputation: +576/-45
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching
    « Reply #25 on: August 13, 2017, 02:07:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Quote
    Canon law may be divided into various branches, according to the points of view from which it is considered: (1) If we consider its sources, it comprises Divine law, including natural law, based on the nature of things and on the constitution given by Jesus Christ to His Church; and human or positive law, formulated by the legislator, in conformity with the Divine law. (2) If we consider the form in which it is found, we have the written law (jus scriptum) comprising the laws promulgated by the competent authorities, and the unwritten law (jus non scripture), or even customary law, resulting from practice and custom; the latter however became less important as the written law developed. (3) If we consider the subject matter of the law, we have the public law (jus publicum) and private law (jus privatum). This division is explained in two different ways by the different schools of writers: for most of the adherents of the Roman school, e.g. Cavagnis (Instit. jur. publ. eccl., Rome, 1906, I, 8 ), public law is the law of the Church as a perfect society, and even as a perfect society such as it has been established by its Divine founder: private law would therefore embrace all the regulations of the ecclesiastical authorities concerning the internal organization of that society, the functions of its ministers, the rights and duties of its members. Thus understood, the public ecclesiastical law would be derived almost exclusively from Divine and natural law.
    The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IX, pp. 56-66
    Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1910, Remy Lafort, Censor
    Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York
    Omnes pro Christo


    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7363
    • Reputation: +2733/-387
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching
    « Reply #26 on: August 13, 2017, 05:28:28 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • The below is Catholic teaching and I assure whoever reads this thread that feeneyites do not hate Catholic teaching, they defend it.


    CANON II.-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 anathema.

    Do not be afraid to abandon yourself unreservedly to His loving Providence, for a child cannot perish in the arms of a Father Who is omnipotent.

    St. Margaret Mary Alacoque

    Offline San Bernardino

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 6
    • Reputation: +7/-7
    Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching
    « Reply #27 on: August 13, 2017, 08:20:10 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • @Stubborn

    correct

    like i said earlier, Father Feeney [who was probably the last Catholic priest] is simply a diversion that modernist heretics use because they can't address the dogmatic facts. The modernist heretics who are calling true Catholics 'Feeneyites' commit the sin of calumny and are simply adding more punishments for themselves in Hell [unless they humble themselves and convert]. I just spoke to a modernist earlier, gave him irrefutable factual evidence for water baptism and he responds by quoting the Baltimore catechism! These people are simply in denial. There one and only goal is to go against the EENS Dogma. Their downfall is human respect, which damns the most people to Hell after the sins of pride and lust.

    Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, Sess. 2, Profession of Faith, Ex Cathedra: "I profess also that there are seven sacraments of the new law, truly and properly so called, instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ and necessary for salvation, though each person need not receive them all."

    The quote above along with dozens of others obliterates 'baptism' of desire and blood.

    Fr. Francois Laisney (Believer in Baptism of Desire), Is Feeneyism Catholic, p. 9: "Baptism of Desire is not a sacrament...it does not produce the sacramental character."

    There is ONLY one baptism, NOT 2 or 3. 

    For the obstinate modernists:

    When does 'b.o.d' take place? What if someone 'received' 'b.o.d' and then found someone to baptize him, does he get 're-baptized'? Or is he already baptized? If 'b.o.d' takes place at death where is that taught? Also if 'b.o.d/blood' is true [It's not] why were there countless miraculous baptisms throughout Church history? Why would St.Joan of Arc bring a dead infant back to life to baptize it? Why did St.Isaac Jogues and St.John De Brebeuf and the other 6 saints of the North American martyrs rush to baptize there catechumens if they were going to get martyred by the Iroquois? Wouldn't they just have been 'baptized' by blood?


    Offline Merry

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 65
    • Reputation: +37/-30
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching
    « Reply #28 on: August 13, 2017, 09:03:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Q.  What is a sacrament?

    A.  A sacrament is an outward sign, instituted by Christ to give grace.


    OUTWARD sign.

    Baptism of Desire is definitely NOT an OUTWARD SIGN!!!  It is NOT a sacrament.

      
    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"

    Online DZ PLEASE

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 319
    • Reputation: +36/-72
    Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching
    « Reply #29 on: August 13, 2017, 11:54:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IX, pp. 56-66
    Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1910, Remy Lafort, Censor
    Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York
    "SO WHAT!?/RELEVANVCE"

    This is another example of the "Lover of (Lies) Truth" cold-read and driftnet method of "scholastic spray and pray/see and say". This is what crayola sola scriptura people do to "prove" from mutant scripture.

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 
    Powered by SMFPacks WYSIWYG Editor