Sede Catholic,
You asked me if i had an "ordered mind", but it is obvious it is you who has a completely disordered mind.
Your barrage of illogical and excessively repeated posts, and your general writting style, prove you are a little messed up in the head and that you lack calm and focus. Do you have any mental illnesses i should be aware about? How old are you? How many times did you say St. Alphonsus was a Doctor of the Church? How many times did you say Pius XII was the Pope?
I will ask you to please be a little more coherent and organized in the way you write. I'm having a hard time trying to understand some of the things you say.
Concerning the Diary, I still stand by all I said but I will say nothing more until i get exact quotes. Just you wait.
Concerning St. Alphonsus, his basis for saying bod is "de fide" is Sess. 6, Chap. 4 of the Counci of Trent.
Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Sess. 6, Chap. 4: “In these words there is suggested a description of the justification of the impious, how there is a transition from that state in which a person is born as a child of the first Adam to the state of grace and of adoption as sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ our savior; indeed, this transition, once the gospel has been promulgated, cannot take place without the laver of regeneration or a desire for it, as it is written: Unless a man is born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God (John 3:5).”
The fact is that "Or" in latin, "aut", which is the word Trent used, can mean both "or" and "and". That is, the passage can be read as:
A) "...indeed, this transition, once the gospel has been promulgated, cannot take place without the laver of regeneration
or a desire for it..."
B) "...indeed, this transition, once the gospel has been promulgated, cannot take place without the laver of regeneration
and a desire for it..."
Did you get that? I'll say it again: Sess. 6, Chap. 4
can be read both ways. This means you simply cannot say it teaches bod without question, because it can also be read to exclude bod.
The point is, therefore, that,
at the very least, all baptism of desire advocates must admit that this passage can be read both ways, and therefore that
the understanding depends upon whether one believes that the desire for baptism is enough or not. But if a baptism of desire advocate admits (as he must in honesty) that this passage may not teach baptism of desire, then he is admitting that the understanding of it must be garnered not only from the immediate context (which affirms John 3:5 as it is written and therefore excludes baptism of desire), but also from all of the other statements on Baptism and Justification in Trent. And what do all of the other passages in Trent say on the necessity of Baptism? Do they teach an understanding open to baptism of desire, or do they exclude any salvation without water baptism? The answer is undeniable.
Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, canons on the Sacrament of Baptism, canon 5: “
If anyone says that baptism [the sacrament] is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.”
Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, On Original Sin, Session V: “By one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death... so that in them there may be washed away by regeneration, what they have contracted by generation, ‘
For unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God [John 3:5].”
Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, canons on the Sacrament of Baptism, Session 7, canon 2: “
If anyone shall say that real and natural water is not necessary for baptism, and on that account those words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit’ [John 3:5], are distorted into some sort of metaphor: let him be anathema.”
The Council of Trent teaches infallibly that the
Sacrament of Baptism (the "baptisms" are not Sacraments), is
necessary for salvation.
And what does “necessary” mean? According to Part III, Q. 68, A. 2, Obj. 3 in St. Thomas’ own Summa Theologica, “
that is necessary without which something cannot be (Metaph. V).” Thus, “necessary” means without which something cannot be. Thus, salvation cannot be – it is impossible – without the Sacrament of Baptism. BOD/BOB says
it isn't necessary, therefore they are heretical.
To advance St. Alphonsus's opinion on some matter as if it were a dogma is not Catholic. But this is what all the defenders of bod do all the time. Nothing new here.
St. Augustine held that it was
de fide that unbaptized infants suffer the fires of Hell and St. Cyprian held that it was
de fide that heretics cannot validly baptize. Both were dead wrong. Do you follow their teaching on those matters?
Prosologion, it is not a lie:
What's not a lie?
Saint Aphonsus is a Doctor of the Church.
We are to listen to Doctors of the Church.
Not only that , but the Church has accorded him the title, “The Doctor of Moral Theology”.
And St. Thomas is the "Angelic Doctor". But do you follow his erroneous teaching on the Immaculate Conception? That is, if you are even aware of it.
Pope Benedict XIV, Apostolica (# 6), June 26, 1749: “
The Church’s judgment is preferable to that of a Doctor renowned for his holiness and teaching.”
Pope Pius XII, Humani generis (# 21), Aug. 12, 1950: “
This deposit of faith our Divine Redeemer has given for authentic interpretation not to each of the faithful, not even to theologians, but only to the Teaching Authority of the Church.’”
Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi dominic gregis (#45), Sept. 8, 1907: “It goes without saying that if anything is met with among the scholastic doctors which may be regarded as an excess of subtlety, or which is altogether destitute of probability, We have no desire whatever to propose it for the imitation of present generations.”
Quit elevating saints, doctors and theologians to Papal status, giving them infallibility they don't have and "preferring their judgment to that of the Church's".
Also, Saint Thomas Aquinas, Saint Augustine, and Saint Alphonsus Liguori all believed in the Baptism of Desire.
Wow, 3 saints. That number seems oddly low for a "unanimous" teaching no?
Those who have been brainwashed by apologists for the theory of baptism of desire may be surprised to learn that of all the fathers of the Church,
only 1 can even be brought forward by baptism of desire advocates as having taught the concept. That’s correct, only one, St. Augustine. The baptism of desire advocates will make a feeble attempt to bring forward a second father, St. Ambrose; but even if that were true, that would make
only two fathers
out of hundreds who can be quoted as ever having speculated on the concept of baptism of desire.
I will show you more than 15 Fathers and Saints who taught you can't be saved without the Sacrament of Baptism:
In 140 A.D., the early Church Father Hermas quotes Jesus in John 3:5, and writes:
“They had need to come up through the water, so that they might be made alive;
for they could not otherwise enter into the kingdom of God."
In 155 A.D., St. Justin the Martyr writes:
“… they are led by us to a place where there is water; and there they are reborn in the same kind of rebirth in which we ourselves were reborn… in the name of God… they receive the washing of water. For Christ said, ‘Unless you be reborn, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.’ The reason for doing this we have learned from the apostles.”
Notice that St. Justin Martyr quotes the words of Jesus in John 3:5, and based on Christ’s words he teaches that it is from apostolic tradition that no one at all can enter Heaven without being born again of water and the Spirit in the Sacrament of Baptism.
In his dialogue with Trypho the Jew, also dated 155 A.D., St. Justin Martyr further writes:
“… hasten to learn in what way forgiveness of sins and a hope of the inheritance… may be yours. There is no other way than this: acknowledge Christ, be washed in the washing announced by Isaias [Baptism]…”
In 180 A.D., St. Irenaeus writes:
“… giving the disciples the power of regenerating in God, He said to them: ‘Go teach all nations, and baptize… Just as dry wheat without moisture cannot become one dough or one loaf, so also, we who are many cannot be made one in Christ Jesus, without the water from heaven…Our bodies achieve unity through the washing… our souls, however, through the Spirit. Both, then, are necessary.”
Here we see again a clear enunciation of the constant and apostolic Tradition that no one is saved without the Sacrament of Baptism, from no less than the great apostolic father St. Irenaeus in the 2nd century. St. Irenaeus knew St. Polycarp and St. Polycarp knew the Apostle John himself.
In 181 A.D., St. Theophilus continues the Tradition:
“… those things which were created from the waters were blessed by God, so that this might also be a sign that men would at a future time receive repentance and remission of sins through water and the bath of regeneration…”
In 203 A.D., Tertullian writes:
“… it is in fact prescribed that no one can attain to salvation without Baptism, especially in view of that declaration of the Lord, who says: ‘Unless a man shall be born of water, he shall not have life [John 3:5]…”
Notice how Tertullian affirms the same apostolic Tradition that no one is saved without water baptism based on the words of Jesus Himself.
Tertullian further writes in 203 A.D.:
“A treatise on our sacrament of water, by which the sins of our earlier blindness are washed away … nor can we otherwise be saved, except by permanently abiding in the water.”
Baptism has also been called since apostolic times the Seal, the Sign and the Illumination; for without this Seal, Sign or Illumination no one is forgiven of original sin or sealed as a member of Jesus Christ.
“… he that confirmeth us with you in Christ, and that hath anointed us, is God: Who also hath sealed us, and given the pledge of the Spirit in our hearts.” (2 Cor. 1:21-22)
As early as 140 A.D., Hermas had already taught this truth – that Baptism is the Seal – which was delivered by the Apostles from Jesus Christ.
Hermas, 140 A.D.: “… before a man bears the name of the Son of God, he is dead. But when he receives the seal, he puts mortality aside and again receives life. The seal, therefore, is the water. They go down into the water dead, and come out of it alive.”
In the famous work entitled The Second Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, 120-170 A.D., we read:
“For of those who have not kept the seal of baptism he says: ‘Their worm shall not die, and their fire shall not be quenched.’”
St. Ephraim, c. 350 A.D.: “… we are anointed in Baptism, whereby we bear His seal.”
St. Gregory Nyssa, c. 380 A.D.: “Make haste, O sheep, towards the sign of the cross and the Seal [Baptism] which will save you from your misery!”
St. Clement of Alexandria, 202 A.D.:
“When we are baptized, we are enlightened. Being enlightened, we are adopted as sons… This work is variously called grace, illumination, perfection, washing. It is a washing by which we are cleansed of sins…”
Origen, 244 A.D.:
“The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants… there is in everyone the innate stains of sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit.”
St. Aphraates, the oldest of the Syrian fathers, writes in 336 A.D.:
“This, then, is faith: that a man believe in God … His Spirit …His Christ… Also, that a man believe in the resurrection of the dead; and moreover, that he believe in the Sacrament of Baptism. This is the belief of the Church of God.”
The same Syrian father further writes:
“For from baptism we receive the Spirit of Christ… For the Spirit is absent from all those who are born of the flesh, until they come to the water of re-birth.”
Here we see in the writings of St. Aphraates the same teaching of Tradition on the absolute necessity of water baptism for salvation based on the words of Christ in John 3:5.
St. Cyril of Jerusalem, 350 A.D.:
“He says, ‘Unless a man be born again’ – and He adds the words ‘of water and the Spirit’ – he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God…..if a man be virtuous in his deeds, but does not receive the seal by means of the water, shall he enter into the kingdom of heaven. A bold saying, but not mine; for it is Jesus who has declared it.”
We see that St. Cyril continues the apostolic Tradition that no one enters heaven without being born again of water and the Spirit, based again on an absolute understanding Our Lord’s own words in John 3:5.
St. Basil the Great, c. 355 A.D.:
“Whence is it that we are Christians? Through faith, all will answer. How are we saved? By being born again in the grace of baptism… For it is the same loss for anyone to depart this life unbaptized, as to receive that baptism from which one thing of what has been handed down has been omitted."
St. Gregory of Elvira, 360 A.D.:
“Christ is called Net, because through Him and in Him the diverse multitudes of peoples are gathered from the sea of the world, through the water of Baptism and into the Church, where a distinction is made between the good and the wicked.”
St. Ephraim, 366 A.D.:
“This the Most Holy Catholic Church professes. In this same Holy Trinity She baptizes unto eternal life.”
Pope St. Damasus, 382 A.D.:
“This, then, is the salvation of Christians: that believing in the Trinity, that is, in the Father, and in the Son and in the Holy Spirit, and baptized in it…”
St. Ambrose, 387 A.D.:
“… no one ascends into the kingdom of heaven except through the Sacrament of Baptism.”
St. Ambrose, 387 A.D.:
“‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.’ No one is excepted: not the infant, not the one prevented by some necessity.”
St. Ambrose, De mysteriis, 390-391 A.D.:
“You have read, therefore, that the three witnesses in Baptism are one: water, blood, and the spirit; and if you withdraw any one of these, the Sacrament of Baptism is not valid. For what is water without the cross of Christ? A common element without any sacramental effect. Nor on the other hand is there any mystery of regeneration without water: for ‘unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.’ [John 3:5] Even a catechumen believes in the cross of the Lord Jesus, by which also he is signed; but, unless he be baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, he cannot receive the remission of sins nor be recipient of the gift of spiritual grace.”
St. John Chrysostom, 392 A.D.:
“Weep for the unbelievers; weep for those who differ not a whit from them, those who go hence without illumination, without the seal! … They are outside the royal city…. with the condemned. ‘Amen, I tell you, if anyone is not born of water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”
St Augustine, 395 A.D.:
“… God does not forgive sins except to the baptized.”
Pope St. Innocent, 414 A.D.:
“But that which Your Fraternity asserts the Pelagians preach, that even without the grace of Baptism infants are able to be endowed with the rewards of eternal life, is quite idiotic.”
Pope St. Gregory the Great, c. 590 A.D.:
“Forgiveness of sin is bestowed on us only by the baptism of Christ.”
Theophylactus, Patriarch of Bulgaria, c. 800 A.D.:
“He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved. It does not suffice to believe; he who believes, and is not yet baptized, but is only a catechumen, has not yet fully acquired salvation.”
Many other passages could be quoted from the fathers, but it is a fact that the fathers of the Church are unanimous from the beginning of the apostolic age that no one at all can be saved without receiving the Sacrament of Baptism, based on the words of Jesus Christ in John 3:5. The eminent Patristic Scholar Fr. William Jurgens, who has literally read thousands of texts from the fathers, was forced to admit the following (even though he believes in baptism of desire) in his three volume set on the fathers of the Church.
Fr. William Jurgens: “
If there were not a constant tradition in the Fathers that the Gospel message of ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost he cannot enter into the kingdom of God’ is to be taken absolutely, it would be easy to say that Our Savior simply did not see fit to mention the obvious exceptions of invincible ignorance and physical impossibility.
But the tradition in fact is there; and it is likely enough to be found so constant as to constitute revelation.”
Topic: POPE SAINT PIUS V SHOWS THAT THE NOVUS ORDO IS INVALID (Read 12531 times)