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

Author Topic: Fr. Müller and Fr. Feeney-Any Differences with EENS?  (Read 1694 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: Fr. Müller and Fr. Feeney-Any Differences with EENS?
« Reply #5 on: October 02, 2019, 12:44:19 PM »
Quote
Q. Can the baptism of water never be supplied?

A. When it is impossible to have it, it may
be supplied by the baptism of desire, or by the
baptism of blood.
[/pre]
This is one of the dangerous questions / answers that launches people headlong into belief that a BOD is a doctrine of the Church. First off, the question is hypothetical, second, the hypothetical answer ignores / denies the doctrine of the Divine Providence re: Mat. 7:8

Granted it takes the faith, but with the faith, it is easily understood that Almighty God provided the sacrament for every single person who ever have -  and till the end of time ever will receive the sacrament. He is the One that provided us all with the time to do it, the water for doing it, and the minister for doing it. The doctrine of the Church that's *always* forgotten or denied in the hypothetical answer, is that if God arranged for you to be baptized, it is by that very same Providence He arranges for anyone else who desires or is willing to receive it. 

I know very little about Fr. Muller, but now have reason to read what he has to say - thanks for the link donkath!




 

Re: Fr. Müller and Fr. Feeney-Any Differences with EENS?
« Reply #6 on: October 02, 2019, 08:10:55 PM »


The premise of the answer,

“When it is impossible to receive it...”

Is a lie.   

It is not impossible to receive Baptism of water, ever.  

And those who presume that there are cases of where it is impossible, deny the almighty power of God to provide it, through Divine providence.



Re: Fr. Müller and Fr. Feeney-Any Differences with EENS?
« Reply #7 on: October 02, 2019, 10:51:18 PM »
.
I suppose there is room to argue, if one wishes, that Mueller believe as Feeney did-- that baptism of desire "justified but did not save."  But not much room.  The sensible way of reading him seems to be that he disagreed with Feeney on this point.  Mueller seems to have regarded baptism of desire as an efficacious supplying of the waters of baptism.  That is not what Feeney believed.
Catholic Family News (John Vennari) in the later 1990's (if I remember correctly) ran a long series over many issues on Fr. Muller's teachings on EENS, it was at the end that they mentioned Muller's belief in BOD and BOB of the catechumen. I also remember reading that Fr. Feeney at one time believed likewise, but later changed. That limited BOD is something that could be discussed with Fr. Muller and anyone who writes (believes) as he did, in the limited to catechumen BOD, however, there is practically no  one today who believes as Fr. Muller, so it is pointless to discuss the subject with them, as they do not believe in the limited BOD of Fr. Muller, St. Thomas and St. Alphonsus Ligouri. The 99% of so-called BODers today, believe that anyone can be saved by God in any religion.

Re: Fr. Müller and Fr. Feeney-Any Differences with EENS?
« Reply #8 on: October 02, 2019, 11:03:27 PM »
He is the One that provided us all with the time to do it, the water for doing it, and the minister for doing it.
God is the one that put us in the place and time in which we are born and live, he gave us the grace to convert "provided us with the time, the water to do it, and the minister for doing it" and gave us the grace to persevere  to the end.

Everyone that is not a baptized Catholic AND in a state of grace at death will be lost, and would have ended lost had he lived for another 1000 years.

Re: Fr. Müller and Fr. Feeney-Any Differences with EENS?
« Reply #9 on: October 03, 2019, 10:19:16 PM »
On Stephen Heiner's website, he sells one of Muller's books and below it has this disclaimer from +Sanborn.


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


https://www.truerestoration.org/press/the-sinners-return-to-god/