Since you are a BODer, I'm not sure what your point is here -  since you are one who says that there is salvation without the sacrament and that man is justified by a BOD - which, a BOD = by faith alone.

Everything you posted from St. Alphonsus conforms with the decrees of Trent and what the Church has always taught and - the same as what Fr. Feeney taught for that matter.

12.  The heretics say that no sacrament is necessary, inasmuch as they hold that man is justified by faith alone, .........  But this is certainly false, and is condemned in the fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth canons:  for as we know from the Scriptures, some of the sacraments are necessary (necessitate Medii) as a means without which salvation is impossible. Thus Baptism is necessary for all...

Seriously, are you accusing yourself of being a heretic? I ask because he is condemning pretty much everything you've been posting about a BOD.

13. ....But, Pallavicini says that this is a mere dream of Soave:  for the theologians of Trent could not have adduced the example of Cornelius or of the good thief in defense of such an opinion, when everyone knew that the obligation of Baptism did not commence till after the death of the Saviour, and after the promulgation of the Gospel.

So according to St. Alphonsus, he seems to agree with Pallavicini in that using St. Dismas, the Good Thief, and St. Cornellius as examples of salvation without the sacrament is wrong - this has been pointed out to you and the BODers numerous times, the obligation to receive the sacrament was not yet instituted.

 

 

13. .... Besides, who can deny that the act of perfect love of God, which is sufficient for justification, includes an implicit desire of Baptism, of Penance and of the Eucharist.  He who wishes the whole, wishes every part of that whole, and all the means for its attainment.  In order to be justified without Baptism, an infidel must love God above all things and must have a universal will to observe the divine precepts, among which the first is to receive Baptism: and therefore in order to be justified it is necessary for him to have at least an implicit desire of that sacrament.  For it is certain that to such desire is ascribed the spiritual regeneration of a person who has not been baptized, and the remission of sins to baptized persons who have contrition, is likewise ascribed to the explicit or implicit desire of sacramental absolution.

This is also in agreement with the decrees of Trent and is no endorsement of salvation without the sacrament.
 
Since he is explaining Trent, it is obvious that he is speaking of the catechumen about to be received into the Church through the reception of the sacraments, lest he would not include "...Penance and of the Eucharist." after Baptism.

14.  In the fourth canon the words licet omnia singulis necessaria non sint, were afterwards inserted. By this canon it was intended to condemn Luther, who asserts that none of the sacraments is absolutely necessary for salvation, because as has been already said, he ascribed all salvation to faith, and nothing to the efficacy of the sacraments.

Here again, he echoes Trent in condemnation of Luther and everyone who claims that salvation is possible without the sacrament.


What is your point posting this from the great saint - is this your way of admitting that you've been all wrong?  :scratchchin:

What heresy?

YOU are the one who blinds yourself to what the saint is actually teaching.

Tell me, do you honestly read it to say that a BOD rewards salvation without the sacrament?

REMEMBER, according to you, he is explaining the teaching of Trent - and IMO, he explains it wonderfully!

There's no point arguing with the Cushingite heretics, Stubborn.  They're obstinate in their error.

Quote from: Ladislaus

There's no point arguing with the Cushingite heretics, Stubborn.  They're obstinate in their error.

I am no supporter of Cushing, as I have told you before.  Do you enjoy misrepresenting people to support your heresy?

You follow his heresy.  You continue to call us "Feeneyite heretics", so I will refer to you as a Cushingite heretic.

Quote from: Ambrose

Quote from: Ladislaus

There's no point arguing with the Cushingite heretics, Stubborn.  They're obstinate in their error.

I am no supporter of Cushing, as I have told you before.  Do you enjoy misrepresenting people to support your heresy?

You follow his heresy.  You continue to call us "Feeneyite heretics", so I will refer to you as a Cushingite heretic.

Feeney was the one who first same up with the idea of denying that Baptism of Desire and Blood were sufficient for salvation.  

Name anyone else within the last 500 years prior to him who ever professed such an idea?  

The heresy is named after him, as he was the founder.  Cushing did not found anything, in my opinion, he was a follower, and not the brightest bulb, who was go with the flow with the Vatican II heretics.

I have nothing in common with Cushing, so your attempt to associate me with him is foolish.  

Quote from: Ambrose

Feeney was the one who first same up with the idea of denying that Baptism of Desire and Blood were sufficient for salvation.

You're kidding, right?

St. Augustine, St. John Chrysostom, St. Gregory nαzιanzen, St. Ambrose, etc.  And the BURDEN OF PROOF that such a thing as BoD exists is squarely on you, since the Church teaches dogmatically the necessity of the Sacraments for salvation.  There's no proof that BoD exists.  There's no consensus of the Fathers, and there's no theology that would derive it from other revealed dogmas.  It's nothing more than a piece of speculative theology.

St. Augustine admitted that he made the idea up.

Name a Catholic since Trent who denied Baptism of Desire and Blood, prior to the Feeney movement.  

Quote from: Stubborn

What heresy?

YOU are the one who blinds yourself to what the saint is actually teaching.

Tell me, do you honestly read it to say that a BOD rewards salvation without the sacrament?

REMEMBER, according to you, he is explaining the teaching of Trent - and IMO, he explains it wonderfully!

I gave you the commentary on your proof text canon from Trent.  St. Alphonsus explains what you must believe, but you will not hear him.

Read his words again:

St. Alphonsus in his commentary on Session VII, Can. 4 taught:

Quote

In order to be justified without Baptism, an infidel must love God above all things and must have a universal will to observe the divine precepts, among which the first is to receive Baptism: and therefore in order to be justified it is necessary for him to have at least an implicit desire of that sacrament.  For it is certain that to such desire is ascribed the spiritual regeneration of a person who has not been baptized, and the remission of sins to baptized persons who have contrition, is likewise ascribed to the explicit or implicit desire of sacramental absolution.

How dumb am I that for a moment,  I thought you were admitting that you've been wrong -  but the whole time you STILL reject the clear teaching and choose instead to blind yourself.
 
Obviously I totally underestimated the power of that nasty old lex orandi of yours.

No, YOU read his words again:

12.  The heretics say that no sacrament is necessary, inasmuch as they hold that man is justified by faith alone, .........  But this is certainly false, and is condemned in the fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth canons:  for as we know from the Scriptures, some of the sacraments are necessary (necessitate Medii) as a means without which salvation is impossible. Thus Baptism is necessary for all...

You call Fr. Feeney a heretic and you call us heretics because we believe as the Church teaches - that the sacrament is a necessity for all. We believe along with St. Alphonsus that "the sacraments are necessary (necessitate Medii) as a means without which salvation is impossible. Thus Baptism is necessary for all."

So you can call St. Alphonsus a heretic too because it is obvious from #12 that he believes "the sacraments are necessary (necessitate Medii) as a means without which salvation is impossible. Thus Baptism is necessary for all." as well.

All I can say to you is thanks for enlightening me. I already knew you despised the sacraments, but I have a better understanding now that you detest them much more than I thought was possible. You really do reject the truth with your full might and will.

You'll remain in my prayers.