FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Another EENS, please be patient...
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
(06-01-2011, 07:24 PM)Gregory I Wrote: [ -> ]Look, I can rephrase the whole thing: Can being DISPOSED toward justice actually justify in and of itself? Does a disposition convey sanctifying grace as an instrumental cause?
It's not the disposition towards justice that justifies.  It's Christ imparting sanctifying grace upon one who is as disposed as Christ demands. Christ directly rather than Christ through water, because He (alone) knows the circumstances and the heart of a man, and chooses whom He will.

As to other things... be patient (as the subject of this thread says)
If it is not the disposition that justifies, then desiring baptism as a disposition does not justify. Christ alone justifies in the way he WANTS to. But HE HAS SAID HOW HE WILL DO THIS, I think this is fairly clear, John Chapter 3.
(06-01-2011, 07:12 PM)Gregory I Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-01-2011, 06:17 PM)Doce Me Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-01-2011, 05:43 PM)wulfrano Wrote: [ -> ]All I know or care to know is what Pius IX and the Holy Office of Pius XII said concerning the salvation of those who are in invincible ignorance.

That is a pretty safe attitude.

Gregory (if I am right) instead puts down Pope Pius IX (and probably the Holy Office), in addition to respected Catholic theologians (such as Ludwig Ott)  (and on and on) because he is personally sure that they cannot be reconciled with Trent (his interpretation) and (e.g.) "the dogma that original sin alone is punished with hell"

It is better to question one's own thinking for far longer, and to make every effort to better understand how truths fit together, not on pitting them one against the other and dismissing truth as error.  We are meant to listen to the teaching Church, especially the Pope, and not to think only about solemn doctrines in a corner by ourselves.

Gregory, I will answer more if I can find the time.  I am not trying to  "slide" past anything.

It's not my interpretation. Read Abp. George Hay, Read Fr. Meuller, Read Orestes Brownson. A Catholic Bishop, Priest and Lay theologian. All from the 19th century. And there is STILL no documentation from the ordinary magisterium supporting baptism of desire yet...

I would love to see the documentation from the ORDINARY MAGISTERIUM (Not private letters) that displays the doctrine of baptism of desire: THat is, the doctrine that those who are invincibly ignorant of our religion can be saved in the sincere and honest obeservance of their own. And this ignorance excuses one, not only from the sinfulness of unblief, but from any obligation to know the Catholic faith, and the one unique Christ, apart from whom none can be saved.

Also, I'd like to know how you reconcile what Pope Pius IX said with the DOGMA (That is what it is, sorry) that those who die in original sin ALONE are punished in hell.

Show me where the ordinary magisterium teaches this, because this is what the theologians of today say.

Ultimately, the mercy of God has the last word.
(06-01-2011, 10:33 PM)Doce Me Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-01-2011, 07:24 PM)Gregory I Wrote: [ -> ]Look, I can rephrase the whole thing: Can being DISPOSED toward justice actually justify in and of itself? Does a disposition convey sanctifying grace as an instrumental cause?
It's not the disposition towards justice that justifies.  It's Christ imparting sanctifying grace upon one who is as disposed as Christ demands. Christ directly rather than Christ through water, because He (alone) knows the circumstances and the heart of a man, and chooses whom He will.

As to other things... be patient (as the subject of this thread says)

This.
Catholics must assent to Encyclicals:

"PopePius XII, encyclical Humani Generis" Wrote:It is not to be thought that what is set down in Encyclical Letters
does not demand assent in itself, because in these the popes do
not exercise the supreme powers of their magisterium. For these
matters are taught by the ordinary magisterium, regarding which
the following is pertinent ‘He who heareth you, heareth me.’; and
usually what is set forth and inculcated in Encyclical Letters, already
pertains to Catholic doctrine.” Humani Generis (1950), DZ
2313.

Moreover, Catholics are also commanded to assent to what is taught by the common consent of Catholic theologians:

"Pius IX, Tuas Libenter" Wrote:“But, since it is a matter of that subjection by which in conscience all those Catholics are bound who work in the speculative sciences, in order that they may bring new advantage to the Church by their writings, on that account, then, the men of that same convention should realize that it is not sufficient for learned Catholics to accept and revere the foresaid dogmas of the Church, but that it is also necessary to subject themselves to the decisions pertaining to doctrine which are issued by the Pontifical Congregations, and also to those forms of doctrine which are held by the common and constant consent of Catholics as theological truths and conclusions, so certain that opinions opposed to these same forms of doctrine, although they cannot be called heretical, nevertheless deserve some theological censure.” Tuas Libenter (1863), DZ 1684.

The following article explains the principles here http://www.traditionalmass.org/images/ar...roofed.pdf

It also contains a list of 25 qualified (properly educated) (pre-Vatican II) theologians who believe in Baptism of Desire, and the degree of assent they say Catholics must have.

Which leads us back to:
"Pope Pius IX, Encyclical Quanto Conficiamur Moerore" Wrote:7. Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments.

If you don't believe in baptism of desire, then of course this is inconsistent with the doctrine that with original sin alone you cannot be saved.

But as Ludwig Ott pointed out, baptism of desire (the first time that Christ gives Sanctifying Grace) REMOVES original sin, so if the person remains in the state of grace (always with Christ's help) Christ saves him.  There is no inconsistency.  Original sin of course doesn't return, but mortal sin is ever so easy without the Church.

Because the teaching of Baptism of Desire has never been formally defined by the Church, of course there aren't many details about who, when, and how.  But I think there doesn't need to be;  Baptism of Desire is God's prerogative; Sanctifying Grace comes through Christ, the Head of the Church.
(06-02-2011, 12:16 AM)Doce Me Wrote: [ -> ]Catholics must assent to Encyclicals:

"PopePius XII, encyclical Humani Generis" Wrote:It is not to be thought that what is set down in Encyclical Letters
does not demand assent in itself, because in these the popes do
not exercise the supreme powers of their magisterium. For these
matters are taught by the ordinary magisterium, regarding which
the following is pertinent ‘He who heareth you, heareth me.’; and
usually what is set forth and inculcated in Encyclical Letters, already
pertains to Catholic doctrine.” Humani Generis (1950), DZ
2313.

Moreover, Catholics are also commanded to assent to what is taught by the common consent of Catholic theologians:

"Pius IX, Tuas Libenter" Wrote:“But, since it is a matter of that subjection by which in conscience all those Catholics are bound who work in the speculative sciences, in order that they may bring new advantage to the Church by their writings, on that account, then, the men of that same convention should realize that it is not sufficient for learned Catholics to accept and revere the foresaid dogmas of the Church, but that it is also necessary to subject themselves to the decisions pertaining to doctrine which are issued by the Pontifical Congregations, and also to those forms of doctrine which are held by the common and constant consent of Catholics as theological truths and conclusions, so certain that opinions opposed to these same forms of doctrine, although they cannot be called heretical, nevertheless deserve some theological censure.” Tuas Libenter (1863), DZ 1684.

The following article explains the principles here http://www.traditionalmass.org/images/ar...roofed.pdf

It also contains a list of 25 qualified (properly educated) (pre-Vatican II) theologians who believe in Baptism of Desire, and the degree of assent they say Catholics must have.

Which leads us back to:
"Pope Pius IX, Encyclical Quanto Conficiamur Moerore" Wrote:7. Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments.

If you don't believe in baptism of desire, then of course this is inconsistent with the doctrine that with original sin alone you cannot be saved.

But as Ludwig Ott pointed out, baptism of desire (the first time that Christ gives Sanctifying Grace) REMOVES original sin, so if the person remains in the state of grace (always with Christ's help) Christ saves him.  There is no inconsistency.  Original sin of course doesn't return, but mortal sin is ever so easy without the Church.

Because the teaching of Baptism of Desire has never been formally defined by the Church, of course there aren't many details about who, when, and how.  But I think there doesn't need to be;  Baptism of Desire is God's prerogative; Sanctifying Grace comes through Christ, the Head of the Church.

This.
(06-01-2011, 11:40 PM)wulfrano Wrote: [ -> ]Ultimately, the mercy of God has the last word.

Actually, isn't the Justice of God the last word?
(06-02-2011, 12:07 PM)Stubborn Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-01-2011, 11:40 PM)wulfrano Wrote: [ -> ]Ultimately, the mercy of God has the last word.

Actually, isn't the Justice of God the last word?

Yes.

But we must rely on God's mercy in the meantime in order to straighten up our ways.
Quote:that displays the doctrine of baptism of desire: THat is, the doctrine that those who are invincibly ignorant of our religion can be saved in the sincere and honest obeservance of their own.
That is not the baptism of desire.  Someone who is invincibly ignorant can not desire baptism.  What you describe is Pelagian heresy.

Baptism of desire is when someone who has FAITH in Jesus, wants to join the Church.  But he dies of a heart attack before he can get baptized.  That is the baptism of desire.  And there are good arguments for and against for it.  I personally believe in it.  But I respect the Feeneyite position.

By the way, the private letter labeled a "protocol" from the Holy Office, never published in the AAS, mentions that someone who is invincibly ignorant who is saved without baptism must have Faith and do works of PERFECT Charity.  While this communication is no where near infallible, still it can be said that we have ZERO evidence of this ever happening.  We have never come across someone with miraculous Faith in Jesus.  
(06-02-2011, 02:13 PM)James02 Wrote: [ -> ]
Quote:that displays the doctrine of baptism of desire: THat is, the doctrine that those who are invincibly ignorant of our religion can be saved in the sincere and honest obeservance of their own.
That is not the baptism of desire.  Someone who is invincibly ignorant can not desire baptism.  What you describe is Pelagian heresy.

I'm totally unwilling to accuse Pope Pius IX of Pelagian heresy.  He said: (to repeat this over and over, but perhaps it is worth it)
"Pope Pius IX, Encyclical Quanto Conficiamur Moerore" Wrote:7. Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments.

The "precepts inscribed by God on all hearts" and the "light and grace", together with any miraculous enlightenment God chooses to give, will be enough for the  necessary faith - God knows what that faith is.

Invincible ignorance means ignorance that is inculpable and unavoidable by any HUMAN means.  OF COURSE God can overcome ignorance, after death or before.  It is still invincible by HUMAN means.

(06-02-2011, 02:13 PM)James02 Wrote: [ -> ]By the way, the private letter labeled a "protocol" from the Holy Office, never published in the AAS, mentions that someone who is invincibly ignorant who is saved without baptism must have Faith and do works of PERFECT Charity.  While this communication is no where near infallible, still it can be said that we have ZERO evidence of this ever happening.  We have never come across someone with miraculous Faith in Jesus.  

Perfect Charity can be internal acts of charity, not necessarily external works.  Baptism of Desire is INTERNAL, not a visible miracle.