Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5

Author Topic: Feeneyism Destroyed  (Read 2852 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SeanJohnson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15064
  • Reputation: +9980/-3161
  • Gender: Male
Re: Feeneyism Destroyed
« Reply #45 on: August 10, 2019, 11:08:36 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 10, 2019, 07:39:18 PM
    Johnson's up to his old tricks  He fled the other thread when his argument about God being "unjust" in not providing the opportunity for salvation to everyone.  So he spins up a bunch of spam threads to distract from the fact that he was destroyed.

    Next, Johnson will demand that Matthew ban us "heretics", and then pretend to storm out of CI, never to return.

    After that, he'll start posting the same nonsense in the Anonymous forum.

    Then he'll magically reappear after claiming that he'd never return.

    I know I made a good post when Loudestmouth goes apoplectic, and runs off 12-13 2-sentence posts in response.

    Oh, the frothy lathering, and gnashing of Feeneyite teeth; I can hear the wailing...
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline roscoe

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7611
    • Reputation: +617/-404
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeneyism Destroyed
    « Reply #46 on: August 11, 2019, 01:10:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • There is NO SUCH THING as a 'Feeneyite'... :sleep:
    Logged
    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10312
    • Reputation: +6220/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeneyism Destroyed
    « Reply #47 on: August 11, 2019, 06:17:58 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

    • Quote
    Feeney persisted in his errors, and in 1953 he was excommunicated by Pope Pius XII ferendae sententiae for grave disobedience, as he obstinately refused to obey the order to appear at the Vatican to explain his doctrine, even under pain of excommunication. (The false pope Paul VI eventually rescinded the excommunication, at least putatively.)
    I enjoy the insanity of contradiction when the sspx or sedes point out Fr Feeney's "excommunication", being that all of the bishops of both these groups are excommunicated as well.  The 2nd contradiction is that most sedes don't even consider Pius XII to have been a valid pope.  The 3rd contradiction is that Paul VI rescinded the excommunication, which the sspx should accept, but they don't.  
    .
    Contradictions all around.  But the worst one is Sean, a rabid anti-sede, using Sede sources for this topic.  Ahh, isn't summertime great for cherry-picking?
    Logged

    Offline trad123

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2042
    • Reputation: +448/-96
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeneyism Destroyed
    « Reply #48 on: August 11, 2019, 06:23:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on August 11, 2019, 06:17:58 PM
    The 2nd contradiction is that most sedes don't even consider Pius XII to have been a valid pope.

    Where do you get that from?
    Logged
    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.

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeneyism Destroyed
    « Reply #49 on: August 11, 2019, 06:29:58 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!1
    • There is NO SUCH THING as Roscoe.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeneyism Destroyed
    « Reply #50 on: August 11, 2019, 07:39:33 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Hey, Sean, are you ready to take a stab yet about why you don't consider it unjust that God would not give an infant who dies without Baptism a chance at salvation?
    Logged

    Offline forlorn

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2449
    • Reputation: +964/-1098
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeneyism Destroyed
    « Reply #51 on: August 11, 2019, 07:40:09 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 10, 2019, 11:08:36 PM
    I know I made a good post when Loudestmouth goes apoplectic, and runs off 12-13 2-sentence posts in response.

    Oh, the frothy lathering, and gnashing of Feeneyite teeth; I can hear the wailing...
    Still no attempt to address our points. I'll ask again. If God would be unjust for not giving an invincibly ignorant man a chance at the beatific vision, then how is God not unjust for creating souls which He knows will be aborted, or die as infants before baptism? If you believe unbaptised babies don't go to Heaven, while simultaneously saying that the creation of any soul that didn't get a chance at the Beatific Vision is unjust, then you are saying God is unjust.

    Major: The creation of souls that do not have a chance to achieve the Beatific Vision is unjust
    Minor: Aborted babies, which God creates, do not get a chance to achieve the Beatific Vision.
    Conclusion: God is unjust.

    You've spent over a week dodging this basic point, that your premises when followed to their logical conclusions would mean God is unjust. Which is ridiculous and blasphemous.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeneyism Destroyed
    « Reply #52 on: August 11, 2019, 08:17:37 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 11, 2019, 07:39:33 PM
    Hey, Sean, are you ready to take a stab yet about why you don't consider it unjust that God would not give an infant who dies without Baptism a chance at salvation?

    Loudestmouth-

    That is YOUR position, not mine.

    My position is that it WOULD be unjust to create someone unavoidably destined for damnation (Calvin).
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline forlorn

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2449
    • Reputation: +964/-1098
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeneyism Destroyed
    « Reply #53 on: August 11, 2019, 08:30:49 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 11, 2019, 08:17:37 PM
    Loudestmouth-

    That is YOUR position, not mine.

    My position is that it WOULD be unjust to create someone unavoidably destined for damnation (Calvin).
    If they died without stain of mortal sin, they would go to Limbo just like an unbaptised infant. 
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeneyism Destroyed
    « Reply #54 on: August 12, 2019, 08:28:44 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 11, 2019, 08:17:37 PM
    Loudestmouth-

    That is YOUR position, not mine.

    My position is that it WOULD be unjust to create someone unavoidably destined for damnation (Calvin).

    So, clarify.  Which part of the position is not yours?  Do you not believe that unbaptized infants who die can be saved?

    Nice try to slither out, Johnson, but there's nothing unjust about an adult going to hell.  Whatever punishment said adult would receive would be imposed in strict justice in consequence of his sins.  As forlorn pointed out, had they committed no sins, they would also not have any eternal punishment but would be in the same state as unbaptized infants.

    So you stewed over this for nearly a week, and this is the best you could come up with?

    Of course, it's also a lie, Johnson, because you had previous stated that it would be unjust for God not to give souls a chance at salvation (with no reference do damnation).  So are you amending your position?  Are you saying that it is NOT unjust for God not to give any given soul a chance for salvation?
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeneyism Destroyed
    « Reply #55 on: August 12, 2019, 08:35:52 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • LET US NOW EXPOSE JOHNSON'S LIE --

    in the previous thread, Johnson declared:

    Quote
    Limbo is the border region of hell: Those who are consigned to it do not see the face of God (which is the primary punishment of the damned).

    They may be saved from the pain of sense (Aquinas v Augustine), but not from the loss of the beatific vision which they experienced at their particular judgment.

    A God who would do this would be unjust, which ought to show the Feeneyite error.

    So previously, Johnson stated that God would be unjust for sending someone to Limbo without first having a chance for salvation.

    Now Johnson lies and claims that his position has been that God would only be unjust for actually damning someone to hell (vs. Limbo).
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeneyism Destroyed
    « Reply #56 on: August 12, 2019, 08:44:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 12, 2019, 08:35:52 AM
    LET US NOW EXPOSE JOHNSON'S LIE --

    in the previous thread, Johnson declared:

    So previously, Johnson stated that God would be unjust for sending someone to Limbo without first having a chance for salvation.

    Now Johnson lies and claims that his position has been that God would only be unjust for actually damning someone to hell (vs. Limbo).
    Loudestmouth-

    Limbo IS in hell.

    http://danteworlds.laits.utexas.edu/circle1.html
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeneyism Destroyed
    « Reply #57 on: August 12, 2019, 11:26:12 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 12, 2019, 08:44:13 AM
    Loudestmouth-

    Limbo IS in hell.

    http://danteworlds.laits.utexas.edu/circle1.html

    :facepalm:

    You're too much of an ignoramus to even understand how you lie and contradict yourself.

    Try to follow along without hurting yourself.

    You SEEM to be arguing in this thread that God would not be unjust to send unbaptized infants to Limbo, claiming that is your position ... whereas on the earlier thread you declared that God would be unjust even to send people to Limbo without giving them a "chance".
    Logged

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1889
    • Reputation: +500/-141
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeneyism Destroyed
    « Reply #58 on: August 12, 2019, 07:58:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I'm gonna add my voice to Ladislaus' question.  And I believe in Baptism of Desire.

    If an infant dies in infancy, without baptism, they had no chance of salvation, yet they go to Limbo.

    So why is it UNJUST for God to similarly sentence an adult who has never heard the gospel or committed a mortal sin to Limbo?

    I can see why it would be unjust if God sentenced them to eternal torment.  I think that would be unjust, as far as I can understand.  But how is anyone owed the beatific vision, or even a chance at it?  Isn't saying that anyone is owed such a thing pelagian?
    Logged

    Online JoeZ

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 348
    • Reputation: +224/-27
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeneyism Destroyed
    « Reply #59 on: August 12, 2019, 08:47:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • If I may,

    Christ's words Himself from the Gospel of Matthew, chptr XI;

    "Woe to thee, Corozain, woe to thee, Bethsaida: for if in Tyre and Sidon had been wrought the miracles that have been wrought in you, they had long ago done penance in sackcloth and ashes. [22] But I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment, than for you. [23]And thou Capharnaum, shalt thou be exalted up to heaven? thou shalt go down even unto hell. For if in Sodom had been wrought the miracles that have been wrought in thee, perhaps it had remained unto this day. [24] But I say unto you, that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee. [25] At that time Jesus answered and said: I confess to thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to the little ones."

    Implicit in His argument is the seeming inequity of revelation. Why are those from Trye and Sidon kept ignorant of something that would lead to their salvation. God's ways are inscrutable, we can only guess. Is their ignorance a mercy as was stated before? If God reveals too much to the Sodomites perhaps those souls loose their free will because they can't help but choose the good. That's how free will works. Why is one saved and one is not? St Augustine says you begin to err as soon as you begin to wonder. 
    Logged
    Pray the Holy Rosary.
    Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5
    « previous next »