FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Baptism of Desire: Avoiding the Red Herrings on a Nearby Thread
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
(01-01-2012, 01:59 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-01-2012, 01:56 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]It's my understanding that the Universal and Ordinary Magisterium is infallible (see Vatican I), and included in its expression is the common and constant consent of theologians when they teach doctrines to be de fide or theologically certain (see Tanquerey and Van Noort).  Opposing such doctrines is sinful.

Such as Vatican II and the magisterium of its popes and theologians?

Almost all of the Church today, except for a very reduced number of trads, believes in the new teachings.

It seems as though the Church's theologians haven't done much teaching in the last 50 years and have all but abandoned the classification of doctrines (Professio Fidei notwithstanding).

As for Vatican II and the post-conciliar Magisterium, I cannot get into it here due to the forum's rules.
(01-01-2012, 02:09 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-01-2012, 01:59 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-01-2012, 01:56 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]It's my understanding that the Universal and Ordinary Magisterium is infallible (see Vatican I), and included in its expression is the common and constant consent of theologians when they teach doctrines to be de fide or theologically certain (see Tanquerey and Van Noort).  Opposing such doctrines is sinful.

Such as Vatican II and the magisterium of its popes and theologians?

Almost all of the Church today, except for a very reduced number of trads, believes in the new teachings.

It seems as though the Church's theologians haven't done much teaching in the last 50 years and have all but abandoned the classification of doctrines (Professio Fidei notwithstanding).

As for Vatican II and the post-conciliar Magisterium, I cannot get into it here due to the forum's rules.

Nevertheless, the cognitive dissonance is apparent.

The due obedience owed to the Church that any priest or catechist would teach you before the Council is largely responsible for people losing the faith afterwards.
(01-01-2012, 01:56 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]Stubborn,
Your example of St. Joseph's death doesn't work because, like the Holy Innocents and St. Dismas, he died before Christ did and so had to wait for Him to open the gates of Heaven, much like the Holy Innocents and St. Dismas died before the Great Commission (around the time when Baptism became necessary for salvation) and so are bad proofs for baptism of desire.

You're missing my point.

BOD can put the person in a state of justification - that's what Trent's catechism teaches - I agree with that.
The syllogism in the link pretty much says the consensus of the theologians is that dying justified is the only thing needed for salvation:

BOD = one is in the state of justification.

So the syllogism is: Justification + OM teaching that dying justified = salvation = harmony

My question asks - - - - if being justified is the only requirement, certainly St. Joseph was justified  - why was he not  immediately rewarded salvation when he died?
(12-31-2011, 04:42 PM)FatherCekada Wrote: [ -> ]Unfortunately the pro-Feeney faction

I was unaware that Sts. Augustine, Gregory Nazianzen, Ambrose, and Fulgentius were Feeneyites...
(01-01-2012, 03:00 PM)Stubborn Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-01-2012, 01:56 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]Stubborn,
Your example of St. Joseph's death doesn't work because, like the Holy Innocents and St. Dismas, he died before Christ did and so had to wait for Him to open the gates of Heaven, much like the Holy Innocents and St. Dismas died before the Great Commission (around the time when Baptism became necessary for salvation) and so are bad proofs for baptism of desire.

You're missing my point.

BOD can put the person in a state of justification - that's what Trent's catechism teaches - I agree with that.
The syllogism in the link pretty much says the consensus of the theologians is that dying justified is the only thing needed for salvation:

BOD = one is in the state of justification.

So the syllogism is: Justification + OM teaching that dying justified = salvation = harmony

My question asks - - - - if being justified is the only requirement, certainly St. Joseph was justified  - why was he not  immediately rewarded salvation when he died?

And you have missed my point: no one of the justified dead went to Heaven before Christ did, just as none of them needed to be baptized before Christ made it obligatory.  "Justification = salvation" is not at issue here due to the extraordinary circumstances of Christ having to open Heaven for the just to enter into it.  Likewise, the Holy Innocents and St. Dismas did not need baptism as it had not yet been made obligatory at the times of their deaths.

That dying justified merits eternal life comes directly from Trent, so it is not a mere teaching of the of the Ordinary Magisterium.

The syllogism argues that Catholics are bound to the de fide and theologically certain  doctrines taught by theologians and that theologians DO teach baptism of desire as being either de fide or theologically certain.  Fr. Cekada then asks which premise do pro-Feeneyites deny.
(01-01-2012, 03:38 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]The syllogism argues that Catholics are bound to the de fide and theologically certain  doctrines taught by theologians and that theologians DO teach baptism of desire as being either de fide or theologically certain.  Fr. Cekada then asks which premise do pro-Feeneyites deny.

So we are bound to choose whether to be bound to the OM that teach BOD or the infallible teachings which declare the necessity of water?

Which is your choice?
(01-01-2012, 06:43 PM)Stubborn Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-01-2012, 03:38 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]The syllogism argues that Catholics are bound to the de fide and theologically certain  doctrines taught by theologians and that theologians DO teach baptism of desire as being either de fide or theologically certain.  Fr. Cekada then asks which premise do pro-Feeneyites deny.

So we are bound to choose whether to be bound to the OM that teach BOD or the infallible teachings which declare the necessity of water?

Which is your choice?

The magisterium can't contradict itself.  Either the Papacy has been sedevacant since the the reign of Saint Pius V or there is no contradiction. 
(01-01-2012, 06:45 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-01-2012, 06:43 PM)Stubborn Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-01-2012, 03:38 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]The syllogism argues that Catholics are bound to the de fide and theologically certain  doctrines taught by theologians and that theologians DO teach baptism of desire as being either de fide or theologically certain.  Fr. Cekada then asks which premise do pro-Feeneyites deny.

So we are bound to choose whether to be bound to the OM that teach BOD or the infallible teachings which declare the necessity of water?

Which is your choice?

The magisterium can't contradict itself.  Either the Papacy has been sedevacant since the the reign of Saint Pius V or there is no contradiction. 

Well if the magisterium cannot contradict itself then it should be an easy question to answer no?
(01-01-2012, 06:49 PM)Stubborn Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-01-2012, 06:45 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-01-2012, 06:43 PM)Stubborn Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-01-2012, 03:38 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]The syllogism argues that Catholics are bound to the de fide and theologically certain  doctrines taught by theologians and that theologians DO teach baptism of desire as being either de fide or theologically certain.  Fr. Cekada then asks which premise do pro-Feeneyites deny.

So we are bound to choose whether to be bound to the OM that teach BOD or the infallible teachings which declare the necessity of water?

Which is your choice?

The magisterium can't contradict itself.  Either the Papacy has been sedevacant since the the reign of Saint Pius V or there is no contradiction. 

Well if the magisterium cannot contradict itself then it should be an easy question to answer no?

Right! 
After some technical glitches, I finally managed to post the chart with the teaching of theologians on baptism of desire and baptism of blood.

You can find on the other thread here:

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/inde...sg33667832

Enjoy!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23