Author Topic: 19th Century Catechisms, BOD, BOB, Invincible Ignorance (Read 5174 times)

LeDeg · « **Reply #5 on:** February 11, 2020, 07:05:59 PM »

Quote from: Banezian on February 11, 2020, 06:56:14 PM

Fr. Müller DID teach a form of BOD( albeit rigorous) He would not have agreed with Fr. Feeney

I did not say otherwise. Nevertheless, he was chastised by his superiors when they caved under pressure. It demonstrates the step by step decline. A perfect example. Look at what Bishop Sanborn says about Fr. Muller with a book that has nothing to do with BOD. He doesn't even agree with you about this.
https://www.truerestoration.org/press/the-sinners-return-to-god/
Disclaimer
Father Muller, in another work, denied Baptism of Desire. To deny Baptism of Desire, however, is contrary to the teaching of the Council of Trent, Pope Pius IX, Pope Pius XII, as well as to the teaching of Saint Augustine, Saint Ambrose, Saint Thomas Aquinas, Saint Robert Bellarmine, all of them canonized Doctors of the Church, as well as to the teaching of all Catholic theologians, and to the common teaching of the Catholic Church as expressed in its catechisms. Nonetheless, there is no trace of this error in this work of Father Muller. Consequently I approve of this book, but at the same time I caution the reader against Father Muller’s error in another work. – Bishop Sanborn

Banezian · « **Reply #6 on:** February 11, 2020, 07:21:49 PM »

Quote from: LeDeg on February 11, 2020, 07:05:59 PM

I did not say otherwise. Nevertheless, he was chastised by his superiors when they caved under pressure. It demonstrates the step by step decline. A perfect example. Look at what Bishop Sanborn says about Fr. Muller with a book that has nothing to do with BOD. He doesn't even agree with you about this.
https://www.truerestoration.org/press/the-sinners-return-to-god/
Disclaimer
Father Muller, in another work, denied Baptism of Desire. To deny Baptism of Desire, however, is contrary to the teaching of the Council of Trent, Pope Pius IX, Pope Pius XII, as well as to the teaching of Saint Augustine, Saint Ambrose, Saint Thomas Aquinas, Saint Robert Bellarmine, all of them canonized Doctors of the Church, as well as to the teaching of all Catholic theologians, and to the common teaching of the Catholic Church as expressed in its catechisms. Nonetheless, there is no trace of this error in this work of Father Muller. Consequently I approve of this book, but at the same time I caution the reader against Father Muller’s error in another work. – Bishop Sanborn

Yes I’ve seen that. I wonder which work of Fr. Muller’s Bp. Sanborn is referring to

DecemRationis · « **Reply #7 on:** February 11, 2020, 08:05:12 PM »

Here's a 1752 Catechism:

https://books.google.com/books?id=1-4CAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

It supports knowledge of the "rewarder God" as sufficient for salvation in some cases since it indicates knowledge of the Trinity and Incarnation only necessary "where ever the Gospel is sufficiently published according to the more probable opinion of Divines" (see attached).

It speaks of baptism of desire, on page 87, though it seems to limit it to catechumens.

LeDeg · « **Reply #8 on:** February 11, 2020, 08:31:47 PM »

Quote from: DecemRationis on February 11, 2020, 08:05:12 PM

Here's a 1752 Catechism:

https://books.google.com/books?id=1-4CAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

It supports knowledge of the "rewarder God" as sufficient for salvation in some cases since it indicates knowledge of the Trinity and Incarnation only necessary "where ever the Gospel is sufficiently published according to the more probable opinion of Divines" (see attached).

It speaks of baptism of desire, on page 87, though it seems to limit it to catechumens.

Your screen shot says something that makes no sense to me.
A non Catholic can make a confession to God (act of contrition?)but then when he knows what he must do, he has to make it over again (I assume it means to a priest after entering the Church?)? So did his first act count or not?

Was not the Jesuits (Molinists?) the ones that really pushed this "Rewarder God" concept?

Ladislaus · « **Reply #9 on:** February 11, 2020, 09:23:02 PM »

Yes, Rewarder God theory was invented by the Jesuits right around the year 1600.

As St. Alphonsus pointed out, all the Scriptures and the Fathers teach that explicit knowledge of Jesus Christ and the Holy Trinity are necessary for salvation. But the Rewarder God theorists avoided heresy by claiming that the necessity for this explicit faith was a necessity of precept (vs. necessity of means).

HOWEVER ... in 1703 the Holy Office rejected that distinction, stating quite clearly that these things must be known by necessity of means.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: 19th Century Catechisms, BOD, BOB, Invincible Ignorance (Read 5174 times)

LeDeg

Re: 19th Century Catechisms, BOD, BOB, Invincible Ignorance

Banezian

Re: 19th Century Catechisms, BOD, BOB, Invincible Ignorance

DecemRationis

Re: 19th Century Catechisms, BOD, BOB, Invincible Ignorance

LeDeg

Re: 19th Century Catechisms, BOD, BOB, Invincible Ignorance

Ladislaus

Re: 19th Century Catechisms, BOD, BOB, Invincible Ignorance