Latest topics
» Rethink "Feeneyism"?
Thu Jul 13, 2017 4:24 pm by tornpage

» Brother Andre Marie MICM, the Prior at the St. Benedict Center does not correct Frs.Brian Harrison and Cekada,Bishops Sanborn,Pirvanus,Kelly and Fellay
Wed Jun 28, 2017 4:24 pm by MRyan

» Revisiting Diocese/Parish Screening Policy
Wed Jun 28, 2017 4:03 pm by MRyan

» When sedes and trads can accept that Pius XII made a mistake then popes since John XXIII are no more in heresy
Wed Jun 28, 2017 3:08 pm by MRyan

» Doctrinal talks were conducted with Fr.Gleize on 'the other side'
Mon Jun 26, 2017 9:08 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Pope Benedict permitted Fr. Jean Marie Gleize to lead in doctrinal talks since he was a liberal ?
Mon Jun 26, 2017 8:59 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Padre Pio told Fr.Gabriel Amorth," It is Satan who has been introduced into the bosom of the Church and within a very short time will come to rule a false Church" -Bishop Richard Williamson
Sun Jun 25, 2017 9:14 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Mons. Brunero Gherardini misled the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and many traditionalists
Sun Jun 25, 2017 7:18 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Official statement from SSPX awaited : Fr.Gleize and other theologians have got it wrong
Sat Jun 24, 2017 10:10 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Brother Andre Marie MICM too is teaching error : Bishop Sanborn cannot report at the Chancery office
Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:50 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Magsiterial Heresy ?
Sat Sep 26, 2015 8:36 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Magisterium should apologise to the SSPX for the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre
Sat Sep 26, 2015 8:34 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Brother Francis MICM made a mistake on Vatican Council II
Sat Sep 26, 2015 5:14 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Legion of Christ universities in Rome adapt to leftist laws
Fri May 22, 2015 7:53 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» CM, SSPX, MICM deny the Faith to please superiors
Thu May 21, 2015 4:44 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» SSPX and Church Militant are using the same liberal theology and are unaware of it
Wed May 20, 2015 9:54 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Michael Voris uses liberal theology and yet critcizes Michael Coren
Tue May 19, 2015 10:10 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Fr.John Zuhlsdorf condones Mass for suicide
Tue May 19, 2015 9:18 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Vatican Council II is traditional or liberal depending on how you interpret the Letter of the Holy Office
Mon May 18, 2015 5:57 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Church Militant unable to answer questions on extra ecclesiam nulla salus
Sun May 17, 2015 5:55 am by Lionel L. Andrades


Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Lionel Andrades on Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:58 am

At the centre of the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) rejecting Vatican Council II is the controversy over Fr.Leonard Feeney.

The SSPX and the St.Benedict Centers clashed because both assumed that the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance were explicit ,visible and known to us in the present times in specific cases.So the SSPX accepted the baptism of desire etc as an exception to the dogma while the St.Benedict Center, did not consider it an exception.In this sense they rejected it.They rejected defacto, known baptism of desire but accepted it in principle, they even provided a definition of it.

The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at the St.Benedict Centers are also traditionalists like the SSPX.

They reject the parts of Vatican Council II which they believe clash with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. However in general, in principle they say that they accept Vatican Council II.They choose to leave the controversial parts as un-addressed.

But if there are no known exceptions to the dogma, since the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance etc are just hypotehtical for us,then the Council does not clash with extra ecclesiam nulla salus.There would be nothing in Vatican Council II which contradicts the SSPX and the St.Benedict Center traditional position on other religions and ecumenism.

So the Prior of the St.Benedict Center,Richmond,N.H for example, would not be able to cite any text in Vatican Council II which would contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus as interpreted by Fr.Leonard Feeney.

If one of the St.Benedict Centers issues a statement saying that Vatican Council II does not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus, it could be an insight for all Catholics, especially the SSPX.


Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Lionel Andrades on Sat Jan 26, 2013 11:06 am

Traditionalists still assume that the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus : no canonical status for the SSPX when they are really in agreement with Vatican Council II

When Jeffery Mirus of Catholic Culture writes a report critical on extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the community of Fr.Leonard Feeney, Brother Andre Marie MICM will respond.

Jeffery Mirus will assume that the baptism of desire is explicit and known to us in personal cases so it is an exception .Brother Andre Marie Prior at the St.Benedict Center,one of Fr.Leonard Feeney's communities in the USA, will defend Fr.Leonard Feeney and say historically and theologically the baptism of desire was not considered a Sacrament and so the baptism of water is also needed for those catechumens who have a genuine desire and perfect charity.

So he will accept the baptism of desire in principle as containing the baptism of water and so it is not an exception to the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.It is that every one needs to be a visible member of the Church with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation.

Without the baptism of water there cannot be a catechumen saved for Brother Andre Marie. So in the case of the baptism of desire, God would provide the grace for a preacher to come and baptise the catechumen.

What Brother Andre Marie and Mr.Brian Kelly on the Catholicism.org website have not done is to use another approach . They could simply tell Jeff Mirus that for something to be an exception it has to be known.We don't know any case of the baptism of desire in 2013.

So they accept the baptism of desire as a possibility, followed with the baptism of water, and none of these cases are known to us personally in real life. So how can what we do not know be an exception?

This could be the approach also with the Society of St.Pius X(SSPX).

If there are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus in Vatican Council II then the Council is in agreement with the SSPX on the subject of other religions and ecumenism.

So Vatican Council II is in agreement with the traditionalists position on other religions and the SSPX does not know this and the St.Benedict Centers are not helping them to know this. If the St.Benedict Center accepts Vatican Council II and also that non Catholic religions are not paths to salvation then the SSPX could use this model. Since the St.Benedict Centers affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and this is compatible with Vatican Council II.

The Sisters of St.Benedict Center, in the diocese of Worcester have canonical status. They affirm the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Fr.Leonard Feeney, and the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are accepted in principle as possibilities. It is known that they are not explicit for them to be exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma. So Vatican Council II is in accord with extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

If any one protests why are these traditonalists given canonical status when they hold the 'rigorist interpretation' of Fr.Leonard Feeney they simply explain that what does not exist cannot be an exception.They do not know any one in 2013 saved with implicit salvation which is visible for us humans.

In general, I notice on forums, Traditionalists still assume that implicit to us salvation is explicit and visible.Even if they do not accept Vatican Council II, traditionalists with the SSPX and St.Benedict Centers could agree that there is no visible baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance and that these cases can only be accepted in principle.

Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  George Brenner on Sat Jan 26, 2013 3:05 pm

Lionel said :
If any one protests why are these traditonalists given canonical status when they hold the 'rigorist interpretation' of Fr.Leonard Feeney they simply explain that what does not exist cannot be an exception

In these words lie the problem. If you believe these words you do not believe in Church teaching. For to agree with "that what does not exist" specifically means that souls were not and are not saved by Baptism of Desire. You not only error in personal judgement but by saying "what does not exist" you are judging the mercies of God as not possible; a God who is not bound by His Sacraments. If a tree falls in the forrest, it is a fact that it fell in the forrest whether known, unknown live or dead tree.I still feel that what you are trying to say is that you and I along with the Church MUST teach the faith with the absolute mandates of No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church and the necessity of Baptism by water. In doing this the Church invites and desires all to belong to the one and only one true faith outside which there is No Salvation. If this is done we please Jesus who founded our Church and when and if a soul is saved by Baptism of Desire as the Church teaches ( which by the way you constanty post that VII is NOT in error but go on to explain your take on how to teach baptism of desire) this subject finds closure. I admire Father Feeney on teaching the faith with love and passion and agree that many of his contemporaries were already inplying or teaching that Salvation in other faiths was acceptable and pleasing to God, and we need not bother, offend of try to convert them. Maybe this is your point of contention??? baptism of desire can not be ignored or left to private intrepretation. Are there any souls saved by baptism of desire in 2013 as you continully ask? My reply is that we MUST teaach the faith and entrust this question to God. I spend time on this subject and yet for me it has no real significance in trying to be a good Catholic.

JMJ,

George

JMJ,

George
avatar
George Brenner

Posts : 604
Reputation : 674
Join date : 2011-09-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Lionel Andrades on Sun Jan 27, 2013 11:22 am

FOR FR.FRANCOIS LAISNEY AND BRO.THOMAS AUGUSTINE IN PRINCIPLE CASES ARE ASSUMED TO BE EXPLICIT AND REAL
When Brother Thomas Augustine MICM says a catechumen can be saved with a genuine desire, charity and followed with the baptism of water and Father Francois Laisney says a genuine desire and charity with God’s grace is sufficient for salvation they are both referring to a hypothetical case.

It is important to note that this case is accepted only as a possibility. It is theoretical. This case is not real, visible and known in 2013. It cannot ever be known to us. So it can only be accepted in theory. It is explicit only for God and never explicit for Bro.Thomas Augustine or Fr.Francois Laisney.

So in either of the two ways, what is in principle and does not exist in the present reality, cannot be an exception to the literal interpretation of the dogma by Fr. Leonard Feeney.Since it does not exist in fact it cannot be an exception.

Similalry when I say that there are only Catholics in Heaven I mean in principle, in faith, in theory that all those who are saved in Heaven have received the baptism of water. In reality I have not been to Heaven so I would not know this as a fact.I accept it in faith.

Similarly when Fr. Laisney or a member of the SSPX says there are cases of people in heaven who are there without the baptism of water - this is hypothetical. I would not know this for a fact until I am in Heaven and God allows me to see it for myself. Presently these cases would be explicit only for God.

For the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Brother Thomas Augustine’s community these cases are explicit ?

Jerry:
Let's take a simple declarative statement.

"There exists in Heaven a soul who died outside the Church."
The statement is either true or false. We might not know the answer, but it is true or false, right?

Lionel:
There exists in Heaven a soul who died outside the Church!
How would you know?
How would you know either way if there exists or there does not exist?
This is what I have been saying all this time.
Implicit salvation is always unknown to us.
A possibility is not a reality.

Jerry
I am certain that the Slaves and Fr. Feeney would say "false." I certainly say "false."

Lionel
You would say false since you assume that those saved with the baptism of desire etc, without the Sacraments (CCC 1257) would be concrete cases, known to us and since they are known,they would be known exceptions to Cantate Domino, and so you must reject it.

Jerry
Dogma is God's revealed truth, and must be true both for Him and for us.

Lionel:
Yes. For centuries the Church taught the dogma on salvation along with implicit baptism of desire etc and there was no contradiction. The contradiction came in the 1940s with explicitly known baptism of desire etc. It is the traditionalists who assume that implicit baptism of desire is explicit for us human beings. This was the error of Cardinal Richard Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston and the Jesuits there.

Jerry
If God saves even one soul outside the Church, then He cannot bind us to the dogma, for that would violate truth.

Lionel:
The manner God chooses to save a soul is known only to Him.

For instance someone could die without the baptism of water and God could not condemn him. Instead he could send him or her back to earth to be baptized by the saints. This has been the experience of St. Francis Xavier etc.

When the Sultan who met St.Francis of Assisi was on his death bed Franciscan Friars suddenly appeared and baptized him.

Jerry
God saves even one soul outside the Church, then He cannot bind us to the dogma, for that would violate truth.

Lionel
Even if he did or did not- what bearing does it have on the truth?

The truth is that everyone on earth needs Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation. (AG 7, Cantate Domino, CCC 846 etc).

If God chooses to save one soul outside the Church, God being God, how does it cancel the dogmatic teaching? Since, you would not know this case, any way.

Jerry
In a subsequent post, you are now saying "For the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary there can be people saved with implicit desire, charity ..."

Lionel
This was a definition of the baptism of desire on the website of a Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary community.

The Slaves accept the baptism of desire with a condition, the necessity of receiving the baptism of water.

For Jerry and other traditionalists there is no in principle and in fact distinction.They simply assume that what can be known only in principle is explicit for us.

When the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257 says God is not limited to the Sacraments and it also says the Church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water it is making the in principle and in fact distinction. In principle, in theory a person can be saved without the Sacrament of baptism, in reality, in fact in 2013 every one needs the baptism of water for salvation.

This passage is contradictory for the traditionalists and they have expressed their confusion over it on traditionalist forums.

So when this in principle and in fact distinction is not made it is obvious that Brother Thomas Augustine and Fr. Francois Laisney will interpret Vatican Council II as break with the past. It will be a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, for Brother Thomas Augustine.

Brother Thomas Augustine and the Sisters of St. Benedict Center in the Worcester where they have canonical status, by now could have been approaching other religious communities in the dioceses and asking them to accept the literal interpretation of the dogma along with the baptism of desire accepted in principle as a possibility and known only to God. Like CCC 1257 it would not contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction. It is compatible with Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church since implicit to us salvation can never be an exception since it is never explicit for us.

When the St. Benedict Center in Worcester, who have canonical status, affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma along with implicit for us baptism of desire (and with a condition, the baptism of water) it does not violate the Principle of Non Contradiction.

Theoretically, one may ask is this an exception to the rule that everyone needs the baptism of water for salvation (John 3:5)? No! Since it is a hypothetical case it is not an exception. What is a probability (baptism of desire, being saved in invincible ignorance etc) is not a known reality. It is not real. What is accepted or rejected in doctrine is hypothetical and so it cannot be an exception to the dogma which says all need to convert into the church visibly for salvation.

Bother Thomas Augustine at the St.Benedict Center, Worcester and Fr.Francois Laisney of the SSPX are both mixing up an in principle theoretical doctrine as being real and known, they are both like two sides of the same coin

Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Lionel Andrades on Sun Jan 27, 2013 11:39 am

George:
In these words lie the problem. If you believe these words you do not believe in Church teaching. For to agree with "that what does not exist" specifically means that souls were not and are not saved by Baptism of Desire.

Lionel:
In principle they can be saved, implicit to us they can be saved, explicitly we do not know of any case.What is a possibility is not a known reality.What is theoretical and not practically known does not exist for us in the present time.

George:
You not only error in personal judgement but by saying "what does not exist" you are judging the mercies of God as not possible; a God who is not bound by His Sacraments.

Lionel:
George the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257 says God is not bound to the Sacraments and yet it also says the Church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water. Is this not contradictory for you?

It would be contradictory if yuu do not make the in principle and infact distinction. The Church uses this distinction in the Introduction to Dominus Iesus when it refers to dejure(in principle) and defacto.

George:
If a tree falls in the forrest, it is a fact that it fell in the forrest whether known, unknown live or dead tree.

Lionel:
If a tree falls in the forest and we do not see it fall and yet accept that it fell then this is an in principle statement, something we accept in principle, in faith.

If someone goes to Heaven saved with the baptism of desire followed by the baptism of water we accept it in principle even though it is not a fact for us, even though we do not know this case.And since we do not know this case for a fact, it cannot be said to be an exception to all needing the baptism of water .This is a common error among Catholics.

At the same time we cannot say there is no baptism of desire. Since there could be a baptism of desire accepted in principle.

..if a soul is saved by Baptism of Desire as the Church teaches ( which by the way you constanty post that VII is NOT in error but go on to explain your take on how to teach baptism of desire) this subject finds closure.

Lionel:
Yes a soul is saved with the baptism of desire we accept this in principle.It is always implicit. Implicit cases of salvation also mentioned in Vatican Council II are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.


I admire Father Feeney on teaching the faith with love and passion and agree that many of his contemporaries were already inplying or teaching that Salvation in other faiths was acceptable and pleasing to God, and we need not bother, offend of try to convert them. Maybe this is your point of contention???

Lionel:
Salvation in other faiths is a possibility and a possibility is not an actual known fact and so it does not contradict the literal interpretation of the dogma according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.

George:
Are there any souls saved by baptism of desire in 2013 as you continully ask?

Lionel:
George, you have said before that you do not know any such case. You cannot meet any such case. This is correct.

Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  George Brenner on Sun Jan 27, 2013 2:22 pm

Lionel,

So in your opinion did Father Feeney belive in the possibilities in principle of Baptism of Desire?


Lionel posts:
George:
If a tree falls in the forrest, it is a fact that it fell in the forrest whether known, unknown live or dead tree.

Lionel:
If a tree falls in the forest and we do not see it fall and yet accept that it fell then this is an in principle statement, something we accept in principle, in faith.



Seriously, sounds like a doubting Thomas to me on your need to personally SEE a soul that might be saved by Baptism of Desire. The Church teaches that souls may be saved by Baptism of Desire as God desires and for you to confine God to his Sacraments is not in your realm as a mere mortal to do so. You are suggesting or outright saying that God is bound to save by your formula and NOT Church teaching. This does not excuse us from teaching the faith of No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church and Baptism by water. I completely abhor the modernist thinking that we should not approach the (eg:Protestant) and explain with charity and love that need to be Catholic. If we teach the faith we have done our duty before God and Salvation then transends to God for judgement and not you or I. Sounds like you and I are both teaching the faith correctly but that you misunderstand baptism of blood, baptism of desire and Invincible Ignorance but then again you probably think the same of me. As you know from past shared posts to each other we both agree that NSOCC has been reduced to a meaningless formula as Pope Pius XII warned it might.

JMJ,

George
avatar
George Brenner

Posts : 604
Reputation : 674
Join date : 2011-09-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Lionel Andrades on Mon Jan 28, 2013 4:22 am

Lionel:
George the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257 says God is not bound to the Sacraments and yet it also says the Church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water. Is this not contradictory for you?

It would be contradictory if yuu do not make the in principle and infact distinction. The Church uses this distinction in the Introduction to Dominus Iesus when it refers to dejure(in principle) and defacto

George, did the Church make a mistake in CCC 1257 ?

Once on the forum Pascendi, Bill had a problem with this passage.

For Bill, just like you and Bro.Thomas Augustine MICM there is no in principle and defacto distinction. It is a defacto-defacto reasoning. It is not a rational dejure-defacto reasoning as used in CCC 1257.

So like CCC 1257 they interpret the baptism of desire also with the defacto-defacto reasoning. They assume that the baptism of desire are defacto( known in reality cases, in the present times) and it contradicts the dogma which says defacto every one needs to enter the Church for salvation. Defacto-defacto. This reasoning is irrational.

Similarly with Vatican Council II.

Defacto ( in reality in the present times and known to us) a person could be saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience) (LG 16). This contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which says every one defacto needs to be a visible member of the Church for salvation.

So the false conclusion is that since Vatican Council II says defacto a person can be saved in invincible ignorance etc , the Council contradicts the dogma which says all need to defacto enter the Church. This is contradictory. It is opposed to the Principle of Non Contradiction.

If one uses the dejure-defacto distinction then it does not contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction.


Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Lionel Andrades on Mon Jan 28, 2013 4:29 am


George,
So in your opinion did Father Feeney belive in the possibilities in principle of Baptism of Desire?

Lionel:
I think Fr.Leonard Feeney was saying that every one needed to be a visible member of the Catholic Church (defacto) for salvation and the baptism of desire was not a (defacto) exception.

In the Bread of Life he refers to a Catechumen who could receive justification with implicit desire and that this case could receive salvation with the baptism of water.So it is not a rejection of the baptism of desire. He was saying there was a condition.

So we can accept the baptism of desire with the condition that it has to include the baptism of water for salvation. So in principle we can accept this. This is acceptable dejure. Since it is not known in the present times it is not defacto. It does not contradict the dogma on salvation.




Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Lionel Andrades on Mon Jan 28, 2013 4:31 am

George
Seriously, sounds like a doubting Thomas to me on your need to personally SEE a soul that might be saved by Baptism of Desire.

Lionel:
Even if we want to see such a soul we cannot. We can only accept the baptism of desire as a possibility.
We both agree that we cannot see these cases in 2013.

Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Lionel Andrades on Mon Jan 28, 2013 4:37 am

George
The Church teaches that souls may be saved by Baptism of Desire as God desires...


Lionel:
Yes we both agree that the Church teaches that souls may be saved by Baptism of Desire.

The confusion arose when you said that there is no baptism of desire.
Note here you agree that a soul may be saved by the Baptism of desire.
You also agree that we cannot see these cases.
So we are both saying the same thing.

When you say that a soul may be saved with the Baptism of desire this is an in principle, dejure statement. Something theoretical, which we accept in faith.

When you say that we cannot see these cases you are referring to the baptism of desire not being visible to you personally in 2013. It is not defacto. It is not known in fact for you. It is not known in reality.It cannot be seen.

So if you would make the distinction between the two there would not be confusion for us.


Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  George Brenner on Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:25 pm

Lionel, I am still not sure why you keep stressing the known from the unlnown and the defacto from the dejure. We all do not know of any souls that are in Heaven unless they are proclaimed Saints by the Church. So I feel that your constant discussion of being known to us is a mute point. How could we possibly know about ANY persons eternal judgement until after they die. Even then until Judgement is made by God or someone is declared a Saint by the Church Salvation is unknown. What is your point? Who is saying that 'the person over there in the blue shirt is definetly going to Heaven'?

Lionel when you say:
So we can accept the baptism of desire with the condition that it has to include the baptism of water for salvation.

Who are you to put restrictions on God who is not bound by His Sacraments.

During the course of history, some, many , most take your pick, have prayed for someone who has died and perhaps we even know that they have NOT been baptised and perhaps we know that they were NOT Catholic. But we do know that attempts were made to teach and help them become Catholics ,sometimes right up to their death. So when we offer up prayers, say littanies and pray to God and Blessed Mother for mercy, is this an exercise in the impossible? Do we do this only to comfort the living Family? Are we really just plain hypocrites? Or maybe just maybe, Lionel as this person is sinking into death HE/She says My dear God so and so was right and I am so sorry for my life and my sins , please have mercy on me. Lionel what about the thousands of situations that might exist that we could never imagine? And yet you dictate to God that He must in your words use Baptism of Water. You can not even fathom the possibilities that come before our all knowing, all loving, all just and all merciful God.
Do you not realize that God and Blessed Mother can do what we might think is neither probable or possible. God, Jesus, the Holy Ghost, Blessed Mother, St. Joseph and Heaven take over where mortals , including Church, family and priests end their influence. WE are bound by the Sacraments and so we must teach the Faith with truth and conviction but you do not understand the possibilities of Baptism of desire that are not known to us and you all but make it sound like that you hope it cannot happen or baptism of desire is some less the desireable back door approach to Salvation opposed to Church teaching on its incorporation into Salvation as judged by God.. Abuse and failure by clerics to teach the faith is another subject. Do not confuse it with this one.

JMJ,

Your Friend

George

avatar
George Brenner

Posts : 604
Reputation : 674
Join date : 2011-09-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Lionel Andrades on Tue Jan 29, 2013 12:56 pm

George,
We began this communication when you said the familiar 'there is no baptism of desire'.
I have heard this before and asked others to explain what they mean.

What do they mean by there is no baptism of desire ?

1. If they are saying that Fr.Leonard Feeney meant that there is no baptism of desire which contradicts the dogma then they are correct.

2. If they are saying that Fr.Leonard Feeney meant that there is a baptism of desire which would include the baptism of water and so provide salvation, then they are correct. Since the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Fr.Leonard Feney's community accept that implicit desire, with charity and grace is followed by the baptism of water always and it can lead to salvation.This is accepted in principle.

So now yuu have clarified the issue and agree with the above statements.

1.You say that we cannot see any one saved with the baptism of desire since these cases are of course only known to God.We cannot meet such a person.
2. And you say that a person can be saved with the baptism of desire as the Church teaches and of course no one would know such a case.

So when you earlier said there was no baptism of desire you clarify by agreeing that in real life, on the strets,in fact we can never meet a person saved with the baptism of desire so it does not contradict Fr.Leonard Feney and the Church teaches that there is a baptism of desire.So we accept it in faith as a possibility and since it is not known it does not contradict the dogma as it was known for centuries.

Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  George Brenner on Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:38 pm

Lionel, here is one of your latest exchanges:


Lionel:
Since we, you and I, have not discovered this fact for ourself in Heaven, there are no known cases to contradict CCC 1257, when it says God is not limited to the Sacrament of Baptism. There is no error.


Columba:
Not only that; we would have to say also that Christ Himself was in error when he proclaimed that without the regeneration in water a man cannot enter the kingdom of God.
Lionel:
The error would exist if we knew for a fact that there was such a case in Heaven.


And now Lionel you have taken Baptism of Desire to such a degree that if YOU knew that there was in fact a case of baptism of desire then Christ Himself was in error. Is that what you really wanted to imply???


JMJ,

George
avatar
George Brenner

Posts : 604
Reputation : 674
Join date : 2011-09-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Lionel Andrades on Wed Jan 30, 2013 5:27 am

Lionel:
Since we, you and I, have not discovered this fact for ourself in Heaven, there are no known cases to contradict CCC 1257, when it says God is not limited to the Sacrament of Baptism. There is no error.


Columba:
Not only that; we would have to say also that Christ Himself was in error when he proclaimed that without the regeneration in water a man cannot enter the kingdom of God.
Lionel:
The error would exist if we knew for a fact that there was such a case in Heaven.


And now Lionel you have taken Baptism of Desire to such a degree that if YOU knew that there was in fact a case of baptism of desire then Christ Himself was in error. Is that what you really wanted to imply???

Lionel:

George,
I am saying that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is not in error at CCC 1257.

If we knew that there was in fact a case of the baptism of desire then it would in fact be an exception to the dogma.

Since we do not know presently in fact a case of the baptism of desire it is not an exception to the dogma.

The issue is not if the baptism of desire exists or does not exist. The issue is if the baptism of desire is explcit for us or is not explicit for us.If it is not visible for us it does not contradict the dogma or Fr.Leonard Feeney.

If it is not visible for us then when CCC 1257 says God is not limited to the Sacraments it means the baptism of desire is a possibility, accepted theoretically, in faith only, and so it does not contradict CCC 1257 when it also says every one on earth needs the baptism of water for salvation and the Church knows of no other means to salvation.

Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  MRyan on Wed Jan 30, 2013 11:03 am

Lionel wrote:

"1258 The Church has always held the firm conviction that those who suffer death for the sake of the faith without having received Baptism are baptized by their death for and with Christ. This Baptism of blood, like the desire for Baptism, brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament.(2473)"

(Similalry only Jesus can judge who has the baptism of desire who is really a martyr. So this cannot be an exception.)
On the contrary, the Church herself has judged such cases, which is why, as tradition holds, such non-Baptized martyrs are included in the Roman Martyrology.

Similarly only Jesus can judge who has the baptism of internal regeneration, and who is really saved.

The 800lb. flaw in your argument that refuses to go away is your blatant contradiction that says the baptisms of blood and desire are not exceptions to the alleged dogma that declares no one can be saved outside of visible external membership in the Church.

If there is salvation outside of visible membership by way of the internal bonds of faith and charity, then, whether they can be definitively “known” to us (as in the case of the canonized non-baptized martyrs) or not is absolutely irrelevant, it is an exception to visible external membership, pure and simple.

Its time you addressed the 800 lb. gorilla; for it hasn’t budged one inch.


You think you can get around this with a sleight of hand that removes “salvation” from your own dogma of visible membership while applying a litmus test of visible salvation to the doctrines of the baptisms of blood and desire.

It doesn’t work. Your dogma says there is NO SALVATION outside of visible external membership when in fact we cannot see the salvation of the visible members of the Church, we can only accept their salvation in theory. In other words, their salvation is theoretical, just as it is with the catechumen who is already united to the Church, but not by formal incorporation.

So in all cases, except by way of formal canonization, we cannot know with certainty if any particular adult in 2013 is saved, since we cannot “see” sanctifying grace, except by way of its visible manifestations; so there is no such thing as “explicit visible salvation”, period.

In other words, "only Jesus can judge who has the baptism" of internal regeneration and thus, who is "really" saved.

We accept in faith that all of those who die in a state of sanctifying grace are saved.

We accept in faith that the Holy Ghost is not confined to the visible Church when pouring forth the salvific graces that flow from and through the Church.

We accept in faith that there is no salvation outside the Church in re, or at least in voto, as the Church understands and teaches this same dogma.

We do not accept in “principle” the doctrines of the baptism of blood and desire, we accept them in faith by the authority of the ecclesia docens, of which our Lord said, “he who hears you, hears Me”.
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2257
Reputation : 2429
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  MRyan on Wed Jan 30, 2013 11:20 am

Lionel wrote:

The issue is not if the baptism of desire exists or does not exist. The issue is if the baptism of desire is explcit for us or is not explicit for us. If it is not visible for us it does not contradict the dogma or Fr. Leonard Feeney.
Whether the salvation of someone is visible or not (and it is not visible, not for anyone; at least not definitively), if, as in the case of the non-baptized martyrs, someone is saved outside of visible external membership, this is in fact an exception to the dogma of Fr. Feeney.

The baptism of desire, visibly manifested by the profession of the true faith, a sincere contrition/charity and a fervent desire to enter the Church, is known to the Church; therefore, the Church considers the faith-filled catechumen as one of her own (IN the Church, though not yet formally).

That we cannot see their salvation is irrelevant, for we cannot see the salvation of any adult, externally united to the Church or not.
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2257
Reputation : 2429
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  MRyan on Wed Jan 30, 2013 11:34 am

Lionel wrote:

Since we do not know presently in fact a case of the baptism of desire it is not an exception to the dogma.
The Church knows and accepts in fact a case of the baptism of desire as it is visibly manifested in the faith, charity and desire of the catechumen, and which places him IN the Church. If he dies in the internal bonds of faith and charity (in a state of grace), he is assured of salvation, just as a visibly Baptized formal member of the Church is assured of salvation IF he dies in a state of grace, that being a state of internal unity with our Lord.
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2257
Reputation : 2429
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Lionel Andrades on Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:25 pm

Lionel wrote:
Since we do not know presently in fact a case of the baptism of desire it is not an exception to the dogma.
Michael
The Church knows and accepts in fact

Lionel:
In fact refers to what is personally known and visible.There is no such catechumen known to you and me.

Michael:
a case of the baptism of desire as it is visibly manifested in the faith, charity and desire of the catechumen,

Lionel:
How can it be visibly manifested in the faith,charity and desire of the catechumen when we do not know who is this catechumen ?
Hypothetically, in faith- yes. In fact it is unknown.


and which places him IN the Church. If he dies in the internal bonds of faith and charity (in a state of grace), he is assured of salvation, just as a visibly Baptized formal member of the Church is assured of salvation IF he dies in a state of grace, that being a state of internal unity with our Lord.
Lionel:
Yes we accept this in principle.
We accept this as a possibility but since it is not an explicit case, it is not an exception to the dogma and to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Lionel Andrades on Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:28 pm

Lionel wrote:
The issue is not if the baptism of desire exists or does not exist. The issue is if the baptism of desire is explcit for us or is not explicit for us. If it is not visible for us it does not contradict the dogma or Fr. Leonard Feeney.
Whether the salvation of someone is visible or not (and it is not visible, not for anyone; at least not definitively), if, as in the case of the non-baptized martyrs, someone is saved outside of visible external membership, this is in fact an exception to the dogma of Fr. Feeney.

Michael:
The baptism of desire, visibly manifested by the profession of the true faith, a sincere contrition/charity and a fervent desire to enter the Church, is known to the Church; therefore, the Church considers the faith-filled catechumen as one of her own (IN the Church, though not yet formally).

Lionel:
Yes in principle. In faith , we agree.
However it is irrelevant to the dogma since this case is not known personally.You do not know the name of this catechuman.

Michael:
That we cannot see their salvation is irrelevant, for we cannot see the salvation of any adult, externally united to the Church or not.

Lionel:
So it is irrelevant to the dogma. We agree.

Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Lionel Andrades on Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:34 pm

Lionel wrote:
"1258 The Church has always held the firm conviction that those who suffer death for the sake of the faith without having received Baptism are baptized by their death for and with Christ. This Baptism of blood, like the desire for Baptism, brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament.(2473)"

(Similalry only Jesus can judge who has the baptism of desire who is really a martyr. So this cannot be an exception.)

Michael:
On the contrary, the Church herself has judged such cases, which is why, as tradition holds, such non-Baptized martyrs are included in the Roman Martyrology.
Lionel:
We accept the Roman Martyrology, when the Church declares someone a martyr. As Jehanne pointed out on another thread, we cannot judge who has perfect charity, we cannot judge whom God will judge to be a martyr.

Mi
chael:
Similarly only Jesus can judge who has the baptism of internal regeneration, and who is really saved.

Lionel:
Agreed and so the baptism of blood(martrydom) is not a known exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It is as irrelevant to the dogma as is the baptism f desire.

Michael:
The 800lb. flaw in your argument that refuses to go away is your blatant contradiction that says the baptisms of blood and desire are not exceptions to the alleged dogma

Lionel:
They are not exceptions since only Jesus can know and judge these cases in Heaven. On earth we would not know except for those declared martrys by the Church.




Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Jehanne on Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:52 pm

Lionel Andrades wrote:
Michael:
On the contrary, the Church herself has judged such cases, which is why, as tradition holds, such non-Baptized martyrs are included in the Roman Martyrology.
Lionel:
We accept the Roman Martyrology, when the Church declares someone a martyr. As Jehanne pointed out on another thread, we cannot judge who has perfect charity, we cannot judge whom God will judge to be a martyr.

Indeed, we cannot know if any catechumen has perfect charity. The Holy Office letter makes this absolute requirement crystal clear:

But it must not be thought that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated by perfect charity. Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person has supernatural faith: "For he who comes to God must believe that God exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him" (Heb. 11:6). The Council of Trent declares ( Session VI, chap. 8 ): "Faith is the beginning of man's salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and attain to the fellowship of His children" (Denzinger, n. 801).

This is why the Roman Catechism states the following:

Ordinarily They Are Not Baptised At Once

On adults, however, the Church has not been accustomed to confer the Sacrament of Baptism at once, but has ordained that it be deferred for a certain time. The delay is not attended with the same danger as in the case of infants, which we have already mentioned; should any unforeseen accident make it impossible for adults to be washed in the salutary waters, their intention and determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness.

Nay, this delay seems to be attended with some advantages. And first, since the Church must take particular care that none approach this Sacrament through hypocrisy and dissimulation, the intentions of such as seek Baptism, are better examined and ascertained. Hence it is that we read in the decrees of ancient Councils that Jewish converts to the Catholic faith, before admission to Baptism, should spend some months in the ranks of the catechumens.

Furthermore, the candidate for Baptism is thus better instructed in the doctrine of the faith which he is to profess, and in the practices of the Christian life. Finally, when Baptism is administered to adults with solemn ceremonies on the appointed days of Easter and Pentecost only greater religious reverence is shown to the Sacrament.

In Case Of Necessity Adults May Be: Baptised At Once

Sometimes, however, when there exists a just and necessary cause, as in the case of imminent danger of death, Baptism is not to be deferred, particularly if the person to be baptised is well instructed in the mysteries of faith. This we find to have been done by Philip, and by the Prince of the Apostles, when without any delay, the one baptised the eunuch of Queen Candace; the other, Cornelius, as soon as they expressed a wish to embrace the faith.

As the authors of the Roman Catechism understood and as the Council of Trent taught, "repentance for past sins" is not monolithic:

1453 The contrition called "imperfect" (or "attrition") is also a gift of God, a prompting of the Holy Spirit. It is born of the consideration of sin's ugliness or the fear of eternal damnation and the other penalties threatening the sinner (contrition of fear). Such a stirring of conscience can initiate an interior process which, under the prompting of grace, will be brought to completion by sacramental absolution. By itself however, imperfect contrition cannot obtain the forgiveness of grave sins, but it disposes one to obtain forgiveness in the sacrament of Penance.

So, we are faced with yet another tautology, for how could any catechumen ever know that his/her contrition was perfect? And, how could anyone else ever know the interior dispositions of a catechumen, or anyone else for that matter?

With the Sacraments, come certainty, at least for the person who receives them. This is why the Holy Office letter stated (as I posted before):

Toward the end of this same encyclical letter, when most affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions those who "are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire," and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but on the other hand states that they are in a condition "in which they cannot be sure of their salvation" since "they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church" (AAS, 1. c., p. 243). With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire, and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally well in every religion (cf. Pope Pius IX, Allocution, <Singulari quadam>, in <Denzinger>, n. 1641 ff.; also Pope Pius IX in the encyclical letter, <Quanto conficiamur moerore>, in <Denzinger>, n. 1677).

In any case, sacramental Baptism or no Baptism, submission to the Roman Pontiff is an indispensable condition for eternal life:

“Where the necessity of salvation is concerned all the faithful of Christ must be subject to the Roman Pontiff, as we are taught by Holy Scripture, the testimony of the holy fathers, and by that constitution of our predecessor of happy memory, Boniface VIII, which begins Unam Sanctam.” (Pope Leo X, Fifth Lateran Council)

Of course, "all the faithful of Christ" would include catechumens.
avatar
Jehanne

Posts : 926
Reputation : 1025
Join date : 2010-12-21
Age : 49
Location : Iowa

http://unamsanctamecclesiamcatholicam.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  MRyan on Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:21 pm

Lionel Andrades wrote:
Michael
Lionel Andrades wrote:
Since we do not know presently in fact a case of the baptism of desire it is not an exception to the dogma.

The Church knows and accepts in fact a case of the baptism of desire as it is visibly manifested in the faith, charity and desire of the catechumen,
In fact refers to what is personally known and visible. There is no such catechumen known to you and me. How can it be visibly manifested in the faith, charity and desire of the catechumen when we do not know who is this catechumen? Hypothetically, in faith- yes. In fact it is unknown.
No, it is in fact personally known through the visible manifestations of the catechumen's explicit faith, explicit charity/contrition and his explicit desire to enter the Church. It is this explicit faith-filled intention that the Church accepts as objective evidence that the baptism of desire exists, just as she presumes that the dispositions necessary for the sacrament of baptism to bear the fruit of sanctification exist in the souls of adults who are regenerated in the waters of Baptism. But, she cannot "know" if they will be saved.

This is why the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium #14, teaches:

Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.
This is also why Doctor/Saint Robert Bellarmine taught:

Outside the Church no one is saved, should be understood of those who belong to the Church neither in reality nor in desire, just as theologians commonly speak about baptism. Because catechumens, even though not in church in re (in reality), are in the church in voto (by desire) , and in that way they can be saved.” (De Ecclesia militante , chap 3., ed. Giuliano, vol. 2, p. 76.)
He does not say that they are saved, but only that they can be saved by the very same baptism of desire, just as Baptized adults can be saved by the same dispositions (though their charity need not be “perfect”) that place them in a state of grace.

You cannot say that Baptized adults are visibly saved, so your severely flawed theory is false.

Lionel Andrades wrote:
Michael:
and which places him IN the Church. If he dies in the internal bonds of faith and charity (in a state of grace), he is assured of salvation, just as a visibly Baptized formal member of the Church is assured of salvation IF he dies in a state of grace, that being a state of internal unity with our Lord.
Yes we accept this in principle.
No, we accept it on faith that in both cases if they die in a state of sanctifying grace, they are assured of salvation.

Lionel Andrades wrote: We accept this as a possibility but since it is not an explicit case, it is not an exception to the dogma and to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.
Again, your theory is false. “Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her”. This is not a definitive assurance of his salvation, but serves as visible objective evidence of his internal incorporation in the Church. We do not assume salvation for anyone, and there is no known explicit case in 2013 of an adult’s salvation by visible external membership.
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2257
Reputation : 2429
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Jehanne on Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:39 pm

Mike,

Your reasoning is somewhat fallacious. Priests make judgments about a person's state of imperfect contrition all the time; if such is present, absolution is granted; if not, absolution is withheld. So, a Catholic who receives, say, the Anointing of the Sick, we can, to a moral certitude, make a judgment about the interior disposition of that individual.

With perfect contrition, no such judgment can be made, except, perhaps, in martyrdom. This is why the Catechism states:

1284 In case of necessity, any person can baptize provided that he have the intention of doing that which the Church does and provided that he pours water on the candidate's head while saying: "I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

Here's why:

1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

For catechumens, more is required:

1259 For catechumens who die before their Baptism, their explicit desire to receive it, together with repentance for their sins, and charity, assures them the salvation that they were not able to receive through the sacrament.

Once again, imperfect contrition, for a catechumen, would not be sufficient:

1453 The contrition called "imperfect" (or "attrition") is also a gift of God, a prompting of the Holy Spirit. It is born of the consideration of sin's ugliness or the fear of eternal damnation and the other penalties threatening the sinner (contrition of fear). Such a stirring of conscience can initiate an interior process which, under the prompting of grace, will be brought to completion by sacramental absolution. By itself however, imperfect contrition cannot obtain the forgiveness of grave sins, but it disposes one to obtain forgiveness in the sacrament of Penance.

In conclusion, a catechumen who dies without sacramental Baptism may go to eternal Hell for want of that Sacrament. As for knowing someone's salvation, explicitly, we have the examples of those whom the Church has canonized, all of whom have been visible members of the Catholic Church.
avatar
Jehanne

Posts : 926
Reputation : 1025
Join date : 2010-12-21
Age : 49
Location : Iowa

http://unamsanctamecclesiamcatholicam.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  MRyan on Wed Jan 30, 2013 5:17 pm

Lionel Andrades wrote:
Michael wrote:
Lionel Andrades wrote:
The issue is not if the baptism of desire exists or does not exist. The issue is if the baptism of desire is explcit for us or is not explicit for us. If it is not visible for us it does not contradict the dogma or Fr. Leonard Feeney.
The faith-filled catechumen who is IN the Church is visible to us, so if he is saved by the same grace that saves the baptized who are properly disposed, this would contradict the so-called dogma of Fr. Feeney of no salvation outside of visible external membership.

Again, the baptism of desire, visibly manifested by the profession of the true faith, a sincere contrition/charity and a fervent desire to enter the Church, is known to the Church; therefore, the Church considers the faith-filled catechumen as one of her own (IN the Church, though not yet formally).
Yes in principle. In faith, we agree.
No, we do not agree “in principle”, for I accept it on faith; faith in the ecclesia docens and faith in the infallibility of the 2nd Vatican Council’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (on a matter of faith) where it is taught that the explicit intention of the faith-filled Catechumen places him IN the Church where he is joined to her IN FACT.

Lionel Andrades wrote:However it is irrelevant to the dogma since this case is not known personally. You do not know the name of this catechuman.
Of course I know his name, for he is visible to me and to the Church when we observe the manifestations of his explicit faith, charity/contrition and desire. Whether he will be saved or not does not change the fact of his incorporation; the Church teaches that he is already joined to the Church.

Lionel Andrades wrote:
Michael wrote: That we cannot see their salvation is irrelevant, for we cannot see the salvation of any adult, externally united to the Church or not.
So it is irrelevant to the dogma. We agree.
No we don’t agree, for not only do I reject your dogma that says there is absolutely no salvation outside of visible external membership, I categorically reject the logic behind your false thesis. You have yet to confront the fallacy of your theory (the 800 lb. gorilla in the room), and have only brushed it away. I can assure you it is not going anywhere.

Doctor/Saint Bellarmine certainly thought that the baptisms of blood and desire were relevant to a correct understanding of the dogma when he taught:

Outside the Church no one is saved, should be understood of those who belong to the Church neither in reality nor in desire, just as theologians commonly speak about baptism. Because catechumens, even though not in church in re (in reality), are in the church in voto (by desire), and in that way they can be saved.” (De Ecclesia militante , chap 3., ed. Giuliano, vol. 2, p. 76.)
Continuing:

Lionel Andrades wrote:
Michael wrote: The 800lb. flaw in your argument that refuses to go away is your blatant contradiction that says the baptisms of blood and desire are not exceptions to the alleged dogma
They are not exceptions since only Jesus can know and judge these cases in Heaven. On earth we would not know except for those declared martrys by the Church.
Jesus does not “judge” whether someone is an external and visible member of the Church, he “judges” their faith, charity and desire to be united to Him (and His Church); in other words He judges their souls and whether they are united to Him as His adopted sons and heirs to the kingdom.

Again, you have not addressed the so-called dogma itself, which says there is no salvation outside of visible external membership, a salvation that you cannot see!

If a catechumen can be saved (should he die before receiving the sacrament(s), by the very fact of his being joined to the Church in the bonds of faith, charity and intention that are manifested in the external (visible) forum, then he is saved outside of visible external membership.

Stop telling us we cannot see the faith-filled catechumen, when we can, especially when the Church has embraced him as one of her own.

Furthermore, “that only Jesus can know and judge these cases in Heaven” applies to the visible members of the Church as well, so you have proved nothing. In fact, your hypocrisy and error are on full display when you start citing Jehanne:

We accept the Roman Martyrology, when the Church declares someone a martyr. As Jehanne pointed out on another thread, we cannot judge who has perfect charity, we cannot judge whom God will judge to be a martyr.
We can indeed “judge” who has “perfect charity” in those martyrs whose zeal for the true faith and burning love of God motivate them to give their lives for our Lord before they can be Baptized as formal members. The non-baptized martyrs who are now canonized saints were recognized by the faithful as true martyrs long before they were ever formally canonized. Without such a tradition, they wouldn’t be “known” or canonized.

This distinction between perfect charity (for the baptism of blood/desire) and attrition for the baptized is irrelevant, for only God can judge who has either.
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2257
Reputation : 2429
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Jehanne on Wed Jan 30, 2013 5:27 pm

MRyan wrote:No, we do not agree “in principle”, for I accept it on faith; faith in the ecclesia docens and faith in the infallibility of the 2nd Vatican Council’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (on a matter of faith) where it is taught that the explicit intention of the faith-filled Catechumen places him IN the Church where he is joined to her IN FACT.

First off, Vatican II made no infallible declarations; everyone knows that. In addition, Lumen Gentium taught that it is possible to be "in the church" and yet still go to Hell:

They are fully incorporated in the society of the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ accept her entire system and all the means of salvation given to her, and are united with her as part of her visible bodily structure and through her with Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. The bonds which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a "bodily" manner and not "in his heart." All the Church's children should remember that their exalted status is to be attributed not to their own merits but to the special grace of Christ. If they fail moreover to respond to that grace in thought, word and deed, not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged. (Lumen Gentium, 14)

As far as martyrs who allegedly died without sacramental Baptism, nowhere has the Church ever taught, let alone defined, that there are individuals in Paradise who have ended this life without sacramental Baptism. Pose this question to the CDF if you want:

Must Catholics believe, as part of divine Revelation, that there are individuals in Paradise who have ended this life without sacramental Baptism?

The will answer:

Reply: In the negative.
avatar
Jehanne

Posts : 926
Reputation : 1025
Join date : 2010-12-21
Age : 49
Location : Iowa

http://unamsanctamecclesiamcatholicam.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  MRyan on Wed Jan 30, 2013 6:10 pm

Jehanne wrote:Mike,

Your reasoning is somewhat fallacious. Priests make judgments about a person's state of imperfect contrition all the time; if such is present, absolution is granted; if not, absolution is withheld. So, a Catholic who receives, say, the Anointing of the Sick, we can, to a moral certitude, make a judgment about the interior disposition of that individual.
There is nothing "fallacious" about it. The latter part of your statement is correct, but totally irrelevant to this debate, unless you want to tell me that the priest or anyone else can "see" the visible salvation of someone with a contrition that is not perfect, but sufficient. Even with absolution, the state of his soul is known only to God, and you know this for a fact, and act as if I don't.

If one cannot "judge", for the purpose of an "assured" salvation, "perfect contrition", then neither can one judge the degree of contrition of a Baptized soul - which can be known only to God.

In other words, you cannot have it both ways.

This debate is over what constitutes incorporation in the Church. Lionel denies (or deems "irrelevant") that the faith-filled catechumen is incorporated in the Church because we cannot see the true state of his soul, as if we can see the true state of the soul of Baptized adults.

If that is not your argument, then I would ask that you step aside, for my argument is with Lionel, and I do not want to confuse this debate with irrelevant tangential issues.

Face it, Jehanne, you are inventing a "fallacious" straw-man, why, I have no idea.

Jehanne wrote:
In conclusion, a catechumen who dies without sacramental Baptism may go to eternal Hell for want of that Sacrament.
Or he may go to heaven, just as the baptized soul can go to either. So what is your point?

Jehanne wrote: As for knowing someone's salvation, explicitly, we have the examples of those whom the Church has canonized, all of whom have been visible members of the Catholic Church.
Precisely, now, explain that to Lionel.
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2257
Reputation : 2429
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  MRyan on Wed Jan 30, 2013 6:55 pm

Jehanne wrote:
MRyan wrote:No, we do not agree “in principle”, for I accept it on faith; faith in the ecclesia docens and faith in the infallibility of the 2nd Vatican Council’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (on a matter of faith) where it is taught that the explicit intention of the faith-filled Catechumen places him IN the Church where he is joined to her IN FACT.
First off, Vatican II made no infallible declarations; everyone knows that.
No, what you mean to say is that VCII did not define ex cathedra any dogmas through the supreme magisterium; but to say that she did not teach infallibly is a blatant falsehood. Not only did she definitely and infallibly settle open questions on Orders (for the diaconate) and on Episcopal Collegiality, she taught infallibly on numerous doctrines of the faith, whether confirming existing doctrines, or expounding upon other points of doctrine.

An Ecumenical Council is protected from teaching error on matters of faith or morals she proposes for the universal Church - period. In other words, she cannot give harm to the faith or teach a false, let alone heretical, doctrine; even if she is not protected from all error in the explication of the doctrine.

Jehanne wrote:In addition, Lumen Gentium taught that it is possible to be "in the church" and yet still go to Hell:
No kidding, Jehanne, why are you doing this? Who are you debating?

Jehanne wrote:
As far as martyrs who allegedly died without sacramental Baptism, nowhere has the Church ever taught, let alone defined, that there are individuals in Paradise who have ended this life without sacramental Baptism.
This is absolutely false, for the Roman Martyrology itself is Liturgical testament to the Church's belief that there are souls in heaven who were baptized in blood and left this world without the sacrament of Baptism. That you dispute this tradition is absolutely irrelevant.

Jehanne wrote:
Pose this question to the CDF if you want:

"Must Catholics believe, as part of divine Revelation, that there are individuals in Paradise who have ended this life without sacramental Baptism?"
No, you submit it if you want, for the question is ridiculous, but apropos for the Feeneyite contingent who refuses to recognize the various levels of belief and submission to the magisterium, and recognizes only divinely revealed and formally defined truths as "binding"; the rest of the less than formally defined truths can be taken out with the morning trash if they don't square with the Feeneyite private interpretation of dogma.
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2257
Reputation : 2429
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Jehanne on Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:12 pm

MRyan wrote:
Jehanne wrote:
In conclusion, a catechumen who dies without sacramental Baptism may go to eternal Hell for want of that Sacrament.
Or he may go to heaven, just as the baptized soul can go to either. So what is your point?

That imperfect contrition does not remit grave sins, outside of sacramental Baptism, and after that, sacramental Confession or at least the Anointing of the Sick. A Sacrament is a visible sign of an invisible grace, and with the Sacraments, one can have an assurance of everlasting life, if one receives the Sacraments with a proper disposition, of at least imperfect contrition.
avatar
Jehanne

Posts : 926
Reputation : 1025
Join date : 2010-12-21
Age : 49
Location : Iowa

http://unamsanctamecclesiamcatholicam.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  MRyan on Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:36 pm

Jehanne wrote:
MRyan wrote:
Jehanne wrote:
In conclusion, a catechumen who dies without sacramental Baptism may go to eternal Hell for want of that Sacrament.
Or he may go to heaven, just as the baptized soul can go to either. So what is your point?

That imperfect contrition does not remit grave sins, outside of sacramental Baptism, and after that, sacramental Confession or at least the Anointing of the Sick. A Sacrament is a visible sign of an invisible grace, and with the Sacraments, one can have an assurance of everlasting life, if one receives the Sacraments with a proper disposition, of at least imperfect contrition.
Again, what is your point? Why are you presenting this straw-man, and what does it have to do with me?
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2257
Reputation : 2429
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Jehanne on Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:52 pm

MRyan wrote:
Jehanne wrote:
MRyan wrote:
Jehanne wrote:
In conclusion, a catechumen who dies without sacramental Baptism may go to eternal Hell for want of that Sacrament.
Or he may go to heaven, just as the baptized soul can go to either. So what is your point?

That imperfect contrition does not remit grave sins, outside of sacramental Baptism, and after that, sacramental Confession or at least the Anointing of the Sick. A Sacrament is a visible sign of an invisible grace, and with the Sacraments, one can have an assurance of everlasting life, if one receives the Sacraments with a proper disposition, of at least imperfect contrition.
Again, what is your point? Why are you presenting this straw-man, and what does it have to do with me?

That "Baptism of Desire," to the extent that it is operative in the World, is an unknown. We cannot observe it, just as we cannot observe "perfect contrition" either. That the One and Triune God would even allow someone with the proper dispositions to end this life without sacramental Baptism is also an unknown, and if He does allow that occur, how often such occurs is anyone's guess.

One the other hand, we can observe the Sacraments in action, and in the case of infant Baptism, it's a 100% guarantee! For adults, we can have a "certain hope," even beyond a "good hope" that if the Sacrament was administered correctly with the proper dispositions, then the individual in question received the divine graces through the merits of Jesus Christ.
avatar
Jehanne

Posts : 926
Reputation : 1025
Join date : 2010-12-21
Age : 49
Location : Iowa

http://unamsanctamecclesiamcatholicam.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  MRyan on Wed Jan 30, 2013 9:30 pm

Jehanne wrote:
MRyan wrote:
Again, what is your point? Why are you presenting this straw-man, and what does it have to do with me?

That "Baptism of Desire," to the extent that it is operative in the World, is an unknown. We cannot observe it. That the One and Triune God would even allow someone with the proper dispositions to end this life without sacramental Baptism is also an unknown, and if He does allow that occur, how often such occurs is anyone's guess.
As I told Lionel, this is false. You are speaking of baptism of desire strictly from the standpoint of final salvation, while the Church takes the catechumen's explicit faith, explicit charity/contrition and his explicit desire and intention as objective evidence that the baptism of desire exists, and thus, it is this same explicit intention that joins the catechumen to the Church:

No, it [baptism of desire] is in fact personally known through the visible manifestations of the catechumen's explicit faith, explicit charity/contrition and his explicit desire to enter the Church. It is this explicit faith-filled intention that the Church accepts as objective evidence that the baptism of desire exists, just as she presumes that the dispositions necessary for the sacrament of baptism to bear the fruit of sanctification exist in the souls of adults who are regenerated in the waters of Baptism. But, she cannot "know" if they will be saved.

This is why the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium #14, teaches:

Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.
This is also why Doctor/Saint Robert Bellarmine taught:

Outside the Church no one is saved, should be understood of those who belong to the Church neither in reality nor in desire, just as theologians commonly speak about baptism. Because catechumens, even though not in church in re (in reality), are in the church in voto (by desire), and in that way they can be saved.” (De Ecclesia militante , chap 3., ed. Giuliano, vol. 2, p. 76.)
He does not say that they are saved, but only that they can be saved by the very same baptism of desire, just as Baptized adults can be saved by the same dispositions (though their charity need not be “perfect”) that place them in a state of grace.

You cannot say that Baptized adults are visibly saved, so your severely flawed theory is false.
Don't you just love arguing against the Church and Doctors such as St. Bellarmine?

Jehanne wrote:One the other hand, we can observe the Sacraments in action, and in the case of infant Baptism, it's a 100% guarantee!
Irrelevant to this debate.

Jehanne wrote:For adults, we can have a "certain hope," even beyond a "good hope" that if the Sacrament was administered correct with the proper dispositions, then the individual in question received the graces.
Certainly, but we cannot have the assurance of salvation, can we. Your sliding scales of “hope”, from the “no hope” of salvation for unbaptized infants; to the catechumen, who we bet you would assign a “doubtful hope”; and finally to the “good hope" for the baptized who appear to be properly disposed, is really quite irrelevant, for your private opinions have nothing to do with whether the Church considers good-faith catechumens to be incorporated into the Church, which she certainly does, and says so quite explicitly and infallibly in a Dogmatic Constitution.

Come on, Jehanne, get with the program.
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2257
Reputation : 2429
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Jehanne on Wed Jan 30, 2013 9:58 pm

MRyan wrote:
Jehanne wrote:
MRyan wrote:
Again, what is your point? Why are you presenting this straw-man, and what does it have to do with me?

That "Baptism of Desire," to the extent that it is operative in the World, is an unknown. We cannot observe it. That the One and Triune God would even allow someone with the proper dispositions to end this life without sacramental Baptism is also an unknown, and if He does allow that occur, how often such occurs is anyone's guess.
As I told Lionel, this is false. You are speaking of baptism of desire strictly from the standpoint of final salvation, while the Church takes the catechumen's explicit faith, explicit charity/contrition and his explicit desire and intention as objective evidence that the baptism of desire exists, and thus, it is this same explicit intention that joins the catechumen to the Church:

I agree with the above 100%, and I believe that Father Feeney would have, also! However, even if Father Feeney would have disagreed, I believe that catechumens are joined to the Church, clearly, and yes, I believe that such is de fide. This is why Pope Leo X chose his words carefully:

“Where the necessity of salvation is concerned all the faithful of Christ must be subject to the Roman Pontiff, as we are taught by Holy Scripture, the testimony of the holy fathers, and by that constitution of our predecessor of happy memory, Boniface VIII, which begins Unam Sanctam.” (Fifth Lateran Council)

Question is, "Would the One and Triune God allow such a 'faith-filled' catechumen to depart this life without the character of Baptism?" Because, as we have seen, it is only the character of Baptism which will remit the temporal punishments of Purgatory, at least in the absence of martyrdom:

978 "When we made our first profession of faith while receiving the holy Baptism that cleansed us, the forgiveness we received then was so full and complete that there remained in us absolutely nothing left to efface, neither original sin nor offenses committed by our own will, nor was there left any penalty to suffer in order to expiate them. . . . Yet the grace of Baptism delivers no one from all the weakness of nature. On the contrary, we must still combat the movements of concupiscence that never cease leading us into evil."

So, the character of Baptism is important, no?

MRyan wrote:
Jehanne wrote:For adults, we can have a "certain hope," even beyond a "good hope" that if the Sacrament was administered correct with the proper dispositions, then the individual in question received the graces.
Certainly, but we cannot have the assurance of salvation, can we. Your sliding scales of “hope”, from the “no hope” of salvation for unbaptized infants; to the catechumen, who we bet you would assign a “doubtful hope”; and finally to the “good hope" for the baptized who appear to be properly disposed, is really quite irrelevant, for your private opinions have nothing to do with whether the Church considers good-faith catechumens to be incorporated into the Church, which she certainly does, and says so quite explicitly and infallibly in a Dogmatic Constitution.

None of Father Feeney's true followers believe that a catechumen who has perfect charity and contrition for his/her sins will end-up in eternal Hell. Period. As for being incorporated into the Church, yes, I would agree with that. Question is, "Will the One and Triune God, in His Sovereignty over all of His Creation, 'dot' and 'cross' His Sacramental Is and Ts?"
avatar
Jehanne

Posts : 926
Reputation : 1025
Join date : 2010-12-21
Age : 49
Location : Iowa

http://unamsanctamecclesiamcatholicam.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  George Brenner on Wed Jan 30, 2013 10:27 pm

God is not what you imagine or what you think you understand. If you understand you have failed. ~Saint Augustine
avatar
George Brenner

Posts : 604
Reputation : 674
Join date : 2011-09-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  MRyan on Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:53 pm

Lionel wrote:

I think Fr.Leonard Feeney was saying that every one needed to be a visible member of the Catholic Church (defacto) for salvation and the baptism of desire was not a (defacto) exception.
And Fr. Feeney was mistaken. Visible membership in the Catholic Church is necessary de jure and de facto for all of those who know of its necessity, and is necessary de facto but not de jure for those who do not know (or cannot fulfill the law), and are excused by some necessity beyond their control.

I also believe that you are misappropriating or abusing somewhat the legal designations de jure (“what the law says”) and de facto ("for all intents and purposes”, “how that rule or law is actually practiced" or "in fact"), when you should be utilizing the more precise theological terms of necessity of means and necessity of precept. However, since your entire theory is based on the false premise of an absolute necessity of visible external membership for salvation, I can understand the distinctions in law, and will place the de jure and de facto legal principles into context as we discuss the necessity of means and precept.

We must recognize the classic distinction between necessity of means and precept, where the latter is required by the law de jure (“what the law says”), and the former de facto ("for all intents and purposes", “how that rule or law is actually practiced", or "in fact").

However, we also need to make another distinction with respect to the necessity of being joined to the Church (de facto) which is necessary as a necessity of means. This distinction recognizes that the visible Church is the divinely instituted general help and the ordinary means of salvation (see the 1949 Holy Office Letter) and thus, visible external membership is not intrinsic to salvation, but is necessary as an extrinsic necessity of means. Being joined to the Church; however, is an intrinsic condition for salvation (as is regeneration) that must be realized de facto or "in fact" (in re); or "for all intents and purposes" or “in practice” (in voto), and thus, not necessarily through visible membership since it may be realized de facto by an internal unity effected by faith, charity and intention (desire).

Note well that the internal bonds of unity are required de facto (in fact) for being joined to the Church, and that this has nothing to do with whether we can see these internal bonds that result in a state of grace de facto, which, of course - we cannot, not for any adult, period. However, we can see the external manifestations of an explicit faith, charity and intention by which the Church determines that a catechumen is joined to the Church internally de facto (“in fact”), and externally de facto ("for all intents and purposes" or “in practice”; in voto).

This is why the CCC teaches: “Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament”. The CCC is referring to the sacrament itself, which is necessary de jure (by the law) and de facto (in fact) “for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament”. For those to whom the Gospel has not been proclaimed and/or who have not had the possibility of asking for this sacrament, it is necessary de facto ("for all intents and purposes" or “in practice” as an extrinsic necessity of means; in voto), but not de jure.

So we can accept the baptism of desire with the condition that it has to include the baptism of water for salvation. So in principle we can accept this. This is acceptable dejure. Since it is not known in the present times it is not defacto. It does not contradict the dogma on salvation.
This is wrong on more than one level:

The baptism of desire serves as a replacement de facto (in fact) for the sacrament of baptism when it is impossible to receive. This is not a “principle”; it is a doctrine of the Church.

With the exception of the canonized saints, salvation cannot be known (de facto) for any adult, so applying this false litmus test to the baptism of desire has no relevancy whatsoever.

The faith-filled visible catechumen is joined to the Church de facto, and the fact that we cannot see his salvation is as relevant as the fact that we cannot see the de facto salvation of any baptized adult.

Lionel wrote:

In the Bread of Life he refers to a Catechumen who could receive justification with implicit desire and that this case could receive salvation with the baptism of water. So it is not a rejection of the baptism of desire. He was saying there was a condition.
It was not a rejection of the baptism of desire that place one in a state of sanctifying grace de facto, it was rejection of the baptism of desire that is efficacious for salvation de facto, when the sacrament is impossible to receive de facto (in fact).

In other words, it was a rejection de facto of the doctrine of the baptism of desire.
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2257
Reputation : 2429
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  MRyan on Thu Jan 31, 2013 3:29 pm

Jehanne wrote:
None of Father Feeney's true followers believe that a catechumen who has perfect charity and contrition for his/her sins will end-up in eternal Hell. Period. As for being incorporated into the Church, yes, I would agree with that. Question is, "Will the One and Triune God, in His Sovereignty over all of His Creation, 'dot' and 'cross' His Sacramental Is and Ts?"
No, according to the true followers, they do not go to eternal Hell, but neither do they go to eternal Heaven.

Jehanne, I wish you would stop pretending to know what the “true followers” of Fr. Feeney actually believe, especially when Fr. Feeney said in Bread of Life that the catechumen who was justified prior to his baptism would almost certainly fall from grace ("in a day or two, maybe three") if the sacrament was not actually conferred, and thus, he would not be saved; after all, "If it was not your fault that you did not receive it, then you just do not go to heaven. You are lacking something required for Heaven" (pp 126-127).

The St. Benedict Center NH takes it a step further by suggesting that there is something inherently defective in the sanctifying grace of the non-water Baptized that does not actually translate a soul into an adopted son and true heir to the kingdom, not so long as the seal of Baptism is lacking.

In other words, the “true followers” of Fr. Feeney who run the show in NH do NOT believe in the salvific efficacy of the baptisms of blood and desire, so perfect charity and contrition (if even possible) are meaningless for salvation unless and until the sacrament is actually conferred, for that is the ONLY way the catechumen and the martyr will attain heaven, according to Feeneyite lore.

So your “Period” is not a period; it is a huge “however” that fails to mention that Fr. Feeney did not actually believe that a sanctified soul could die in a state of grace without water Baptism, or that the “true followers” do not believe in the salvific efficacy of the baptisms of blood and desire. Period.
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2257
Reputation : 2429
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Jehanne on Thu Jan 31, 2013 5:40 pm

MRyan wrote:The St. Benedict Center NH takes it a step further by suggesting that there is something inherently defective in the sanctifying grace of the non-water Baptized that does not actually translate a soul into an adopted son and true heir to the kingdom, not so long as the seal of Baptism is lacking.

These are the folks who are in full communion with their Bishop, right? In any case, my views are my own, and I consider myself to be a "true follower" of Father Feeney's theological opinions. Of course, we both know that the good Father only presented his views as such:

http://www.marycoredemptrix.com/laisneyism.html

After all, if the late Brother Thomas Mary Sennott did not get his facts straight, who can we trust? And, please, don't go quoting Father Feeney's The Bread of Life verbatim. As we both know, that book was a bit of a polemic, as evidence by the fact that significant sections of it were written in the second person.

So, instead of focusing on areas of disagreement (as has been mostly the case now for over two years), let's focus on some areas of agreement:

1) Baptism of Desire confers grace. We all agree that Cornelius received justification prior to his sacramental Baptism. No doubt about that. If he was not "in the Church" prior to his baptism, he was at least "joined to her."

2) Sacramental Baptism imprints the character and confers additional graces. No doubts on this one, either. Sacramental baptism gives the catechumen divine graces; for starters, it remits the temporal punishments due to sin.

Do individuals, having worthy received #1 die before receiving #2? Well, according to the Roman Martyrology, it would seem so, but then again, there is the Golden Legend:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Legend

Pretty popular several centuries ago, if Wikipedia is to be believed, "a late medieval bestseller" and "printed in more editions than the Bible". Here's one:

Ancient sources on Trajan's personality and accomplishments are unanimously positive. Pliny the Younger, for example, celebrates Trajan in his panegyric as a wise and just emperor and a moral man. Dio Cassius added that he always remained dignified and fair. The Christianisation of Rome resulted in further embellishment of his legend: it was commonly said in medieval times that Pope Gregory I, through divine intercession, resurrected Trajan from the dead and baptized him into the Christian faith. An account of this features in the Golden Legend.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trajan

The Golden Legend can be found here:

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/goldenlegend/index.asp

Point is that if the One and Triune God can raise people from the dead, then He do the same for whomever He wills, so the individuals listed in the Roman Martyrology may have experienced that grace, also. Here is what the Roman Martyrology does say:

January 23: At Rome, St. Emerentiana, Virgin and Martyr, who was stoned by the heathen while still a catechumen, when she was praying at the tomb of St. Agnes, whose foster-sister she was.

April 12: At Braga, in Portugal, St. Victor, Martyr, who, while still yet a catechumen, refused to worship an idol, and confessed Christ Jesus with great constancy, and so after many torments, he merited to be baptized in his own blood, his head being cut off.

http://www.cmri.org/02-baptism_blood-desire_quotes.shtml

However, is there more to these martyrs stories here? Time and Eternity will tell.
avatar
Jehanne

Posts : 926
Reputation : 1025
Join date : 2010-12-21
Age : 49
Location : Iowa

http://unamsanctamecclesiamcatholicam.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  MRyan on Thu Jan 31, 2013 6:53 pm

Jehanne wrote:
MRyan wrote:The St. Benedict Center NH takes it a step further by suggesting that there is something inherently defective in the sanctifying grace of the non-water Baptized that does not actually translate a soul into an adopted son and true heir to the kingdom, not so long as the seal of Baptism is lacking.

These are the folks who are in full communion with their Bishop, right? In any case, my views are my own, and I consider myself to be a "true follower" of Father Feeney's theological opinions. Of course, we both know that the good Father only presented his views as such:

http://www.marycoredemptrix.com/laisneyism.html
Correct on all counts, I am just setting the record straight. "Full communion" does not mean that they cannot be in error on a specific point of doctrine, especially when they propose it as their fallible opinion and recognize the "orthodoxy" of the Church's teaching (in competition with their own, of course).

Jehanne wrote:After all, if the late Brother Thomas Mary Sennott did not get his facts straight, who can we trust? And, please, don't go quoting Father Feeney's The Bread of Life verbatim. As we both know, that book was a bit of a polemic, as evidence by the fact that significant sections of it were written in the second person.
Bro. Sennott got several of his facts wrong, particularity as they relate to doctrine and the Magisterium. Fr. Feeney's book was indeed a bit of a polemic, but some of his beliefs are clearly stated, and clearly reflected in the teachings of the St. Benedict Center.

I am not going to comment on the "golden legend" and needless speculations over some of the miraculous baptisms of the once dead. The doctrine on the salvific efficacy of the baptisms of blood and desire is true, or it is false, that's where we should focus our attention when refuting the baptism of desire naysayers.
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2257
Reputation : 2429
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Lionel Andrades on Tue Feb 05, 2013 9:51 am

Michael:
The doctrine on the salvific efficacy of the baptisms of blood and desire is true, or it is false, that's where we should focus our attention when refuting the baptism of desire naysayers.
Lionel:
I think on whether the baptism of desire etc is physically visible or not is where we should focus our attention.
Since only if it is physically observable can it be an exception to every one needing to be a visible member of the Church to avoid Hell.

Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Lionel Andrades on Tue Feb 05, 2013 10:03 am


I come back to the point that at the centre of the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) rejecting Vatican Council II is the controversy over Fr.Leonard Feeney.

They are using the false premise of 'implicit desire being physically visible' 'the dead are visible' and they are applying it to Vatican Council II , extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Letter of the Holy Office,Mystici Corporis, Catechism of the Catholic Church etc.

They are getting no help in detecting this error. No help is coming from the St.Benedict Centers.


Lionel Andrades

Posts : 260
Reputation : 384
Join date : 2013-01-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Traditionalists at the St.Benedict Centers, USA could come to the aid of the SSPX

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum