Author Topic: FDS: Feeney Derangement Syndrome (Read 3718 times)

Lazarus · « **Reply #85 on:** **Yesterday** at 01:02:42 PM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on Yesterday at 12:19:37 PM

St Alphonsus could’ve changed his opinion on BOD, just like St Augustine did. Just like +ABL changed his opinion on new Rome. People who write a lot, like St Alphonsus, over multiple DECADES, are allowed to change their minds.

If you can’t at least admit he said one thing and then a contrary thing, you’re just not honest.

You do not truly think St Alphonsus contradicted himself. Otherwise, in your argument, you would have provided a date for when St Alphonsus wrote those statements in order to understand which of St Alphonsus' opinions were written LAST , because St Alphonsus was more likely to be correct in his later life than during his youth. You would have said '"St Alphonsus wrote X in his earlier years" "St Alphonsus contradicted himself and wrote Y in his later years" "Therefore Y is more credible".
You did no such thing.

You are grasping at straws and trying to rationalize why St Alphonsus would (seemingly) contradict himself. HE DIDN'T CONTRADICT HIMSELF.

Incredulous · « **Reply #86 on:** **Yesterday** at 01:07:01 PM »

Quote from: Lazarus on Yesterday at 10:23:44 AM

After re-thinking about the argument we had over baptism of desire and what Trent's council says, I decided to check the latin from Trent's council.

The argument used by feyneites is that Trent's council says that the sentence from Trent's council means we need both baptism and the desire of baptism to be baptised. They argue that after all, an adult cannot be baptised against their consent, since it'd make baptism invalid.

The usual interpretation of Trent's council is that to be saved we need baptism OR we need the desire of baptism. That's the interpretation that people who push for BOD think is correct.

To verify which interpretation is correct, here's the latin :

Trent council says :

"C. iv. Quibus verbis justificationis impii descriptio insinuatur, ut si translatio… Quae quidem translatio post Evangelium promulgatum, sine lavacro regenerationis aut ejus voto, fieri non potest, sicut scriptum est : Nisi quis renatus fuerit exaqua et Spiritu Sancto, non potest introire in regnum Dei."

Trent council says "aut" which means OR it does not mean and. That means, we need either baptism OR the desire of baptism, we do not need baptism AND the desire of baptism.

If Trent's council wanted to say that we needed both, it would use the word "et" not "aut".

So, just the desire is sufficient for the Sacrament?

This reminds me of the Jєωιѕн mockery of a Catholic Baptism.

They've historically postured and mocked us saying that even a drowning jew could access the Sacrament by merely wishing it.

Father Feeney's discernment of the weakness of Catholic's and their Sacramental identity influenced him to confront these false ecuмenical claims and mockeries.

Lazarus · « **Reply #87 on:** **Yesterday** at 01:21:27 PM »

Quote from: Incredulous on Yesterday at 01:07:01 PM

So, just the desire is sufficient for the Sacrament?

This reminds me of the Jєωιѕн mockery of a Catholic Baptism.

They've historically postured and mocked us saying that even a drowning jew could access the Sacrament by merely wishing it.

Father Feeney's discernment of the weakness of Catholic's and their Sacramental identity influenced him to confront these false ecuмenical claims and mockeries.

It is only sufficient if it's literally impossible for you to get baptized otherwise. It is only sufficient when priests DENY baptism to you, quoting Church teachings that say to not baptize adults too soon, because priests knew that desire for baptism would be enough even in the case they died.

Church doctrine teaches that it is never too late to repent. Imagine, if someone wants to repent and to convert to Christianity, that they possess true and perfect contrition of their past sins, but they are about to be executed and they do not have the time to get baptized. Why would God let them go to hell?

If baptism of desire didn't exist, then it would be too late, God would damn them to hell because they didn't repent sooner. That makes no sense.

There is another reason why Trent council says "OR" and not "AND". If being saved required both a desire for baptism and baptism, then it would be impossible for newborns (who cannot desire baptism) to be saved. How do you explain that?
The reason priests were desperate to baptize newborns is because they know that newborns cannot be saved by a desire for baptism. That's the whole reason parents who do not baptize their children are gravely sinning.

It is clear that from a theological point of view baptism of desire is superior to its absence. The doctrine is cleaner, more self-consistent.

Confession is the same. If no priest can reach you, you get absolution if you have perfect contrition. But what kind of Catholic with perfect contrition would refuse to get a confession ASAP if they could do it?

For baptism it is the same.

Lazarus · « **Reply #88 on:** **Yesterday** at 01:41:54 PM »

Quote from: Incredulous on Yesterday at 01:07:01 PM

So, just the desire is sufficient for the Sacrament?

This reminds me of the Jєωιѕн mockery of a Catholic Baptism.

They've historically postured and mocked us saying that even a drowning jew could access the Sacrament by merely wishing it.

Father Feeney's discernment of the weakness of Catholic's and their Sacramental identity influenced him to confront these false ecuмenical claims and mockeries.

I have something else to add, which is extremely important, it's from the Old Testament the book of Job 9.

For those who want to read the full passage from this magnificent poem, here :

https://thedouayrheims.com/odr/job/9

I'll quote what I am concerned about :

"And Job answering, said:

Indeed I know it is so, and that man is not justified compared with God.

If he will content with him, he cannot answer him one for a thousand.

He is wise of heart, and strong of force: who hath resisted him, and hath had peace?

He that transported mountains, and they whom he subverted in his fury, knew not.

He that removeth the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof are shaken.

He that commandeth the sun, and it riseth not: and shutteth up the stars as it were under a seal:

He that alone spreadeth the heaven, & goeth upon the waves of the sea.

He that maketh Arcturus, and Orion, and Hyades, and the inner parts of the south.

He that doth great things and incomprehensible, and marvelous, of the which there is no number.

If he come to me, I shall not see him: if he depart, I shall not understand.

If suddenly he ask, who shall answer him? Or who can say: Why doest thou so?

God whose wrath no man can resist, and under whom they stoop that carry the world.

How great am I then, that I may answer him, and speak in my words with him?

Who although I have any just thing, will not answer, but will beseech my judge.

And when he shall hear me invocating, I do not believe that he hath heard my voice.

For in a hurlwind shall he break me, and shall multiply my wounds yea without cause.

He granteth not my spirit to rest, and he filleth me with bitterness.

If strength be demanded, he is most strong: if equity of judgment, no man dare give testimony for me.

If I will justify myself, mine own mouth shall condemn me: if I will shew myself innocent, he shall prove me wicked."

If God wanted excuses to send people to hell, there is not a single human being in history (Christ aside and Immaculate Mary aside) who could dare claim that they are just.

I don't know who are the "Jews" you talked about, but they should have read the book of Job before opening their mouths.

Lazarus · « **Reply #89 on:** **Yesterday** at 01:50:06 PM »

I want to share with all of you the glory of God, because it is extraordinary and because I need to give Him what He is owed.

At first, I was frustrated and angry by your arguments, thinking them completely stupid and beneath me. Then, through learning how to counter those arguments, I became more adept at moral theology and at interpretating Church teachings. I found original ways to think about the subject of baptism of desire that most people would never have thought of. And finally, now, my understanding has reached the point where I can see fully the glory of God in the true Church Doctrine.

I no longer believe in baptism of desire just because I am obeying the Church. I now understand perfectly, fully, how important that Church teaching is.

May God bless you all, give you an edifying life and may you die in a state of grace.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: FDS: Feeney Derangement Syndrome (Read 3718 times)

Lazarus

Re: FDS: Feeney Derangement Syndrome

Incredulous

Re: FDS: Feeney Derangement Syndrome

Lazarus

Re: FDS: Feeney Derangement Syndrome

Lazarus

Re: FDS: Feeney Derangement Syndrome

Lazarus

Re: FDS: Feeney Derangement Syndrome