Baptism of Desire: Avoiding the Red Herrings on a Nearby Thread
(01-25-2012, 12:02 PM)JoniCath Wrote:
(01-24-2012, 06:23 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(01-24-2012, 05:04 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote:
(01-24-2012, 03:12 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(01-24-2012, 02:39 PM)yablabo Wrote: Is St. Liguori referring to "saved" in the same sense that the Ninevites were "saved" temporally by their penance only later to be destroyed by God?  or "saved" in the sense that at death one enters into the beatific vision?  and If the second is answered in the affirmative, then what happens when a person sins mortally after his "baptism of desire"?  does he once again baptize himself by desire and experience the remission of that sin?  if he can continually re-baptize himself by his desire for the laver of regeneration after sinning mortally, what sense is there ever to have recourse to the sacraments, least of all Baptism and Penance?

Baptism of Desire, if attained, is a one-time deal at the time of death, due to perfect contrition and charity.  Really, why are you trying to make this so hard, when it really is simple?

This post should end the thread, but sadly (as experience shows), it will not...  if I ever post in another BoD thread on Fish Eaters, then please PM me to yell at me (out of charity)!  :LOL:

Can do.  :LOL:

May I ask for the same thing? I learned ages ago that there is no use arguing with Feeneyites! I asked my sister some time ago to......if she ever finds me in a nursing home sitting in the "party room" with a party hat perched on my head.........to just SHOOT me. The same goes for engaging in arguments with the followers of the hate monger, leonard feeney.

Hate monger? Fr. Feeney was devoted to our Lady at all times, and was reconciled to the church without giving up any of his views.

Are you aware that all the fathers of the church prior to St. Bernard of Clairveaux unanimously teach that Baptism is an ABSOLUTE and universal obligation and necessity, and that the unanimous teaching is that none can be saved without it? THis is easily seen from the first century up until the 12th century. It's unanimous.
Reply
(01-26-2012, 02:38 AM)Gregory I Wrote: Hate monger? Fr. Feeney was devoted to our Lady at all times, and was reconciled to the church without giving up any of his views.

Are you aware that all the fathers of the church prior to St. Bernard of Clairveaux unanimously teach that Baptism is an ABSOLUTE and universal obligation and necessity, and that the unanimous teaching is that none can be saved without it? THis is easily seen from the first century up until the 12th century. It's unanimous.

The truth is the first thing out the window in any sort of discussion. 

I think some of the posters on this thread are more concerned with justifying their spiritual investments than searching for truth in communion...as reflected in the lack of willingness to examine the veracity and the logic behind their claims viz. "baptism of desire."  There is more interest in putting forth the notion that we must adhere to the theologians at all costs, to heck with what the Pope has defined or condemned in his infallible magisterium.

-- Nicole
Reply
St. Gregory Nazianzen Wrote:If you were able to judge a man who intends to commit murder solely by his intention and without any act of murder, then you could likewise reckon as baptized one who desired baptism. But, since you cannot do the former, how can you do the latter? If you prefer, we will put it this way: If, in your opinion, desire has equal power with actual baptism, then make the same judgment in regard to glory. You would then be satisfied to desire glory, as though that longing itself were glory. Do you suffer any damage by not attaining the actual glory, as long as you have a desire for it? I cannot see it!

from his Oration on Divine Light, XL, #23
Reply
I like how this issue has gotten those who oppose Baptism of Desire to really go back to look for quotations to support their position. It's a rare day indeed when you see trads quoting St. Gregory of Nazianzus!
Reply
(01-26-2012, 01:10 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote: I like how this issue has gotten those who oppose Baptism of Desire to really go back to look for quotations to support their position. It's a rare day indeed when you see trads quoting St. Gregory of Nazianzus!

There must be loads of fascinating saints' writings out there that no one talks about anymore. Thinking about it makes me excited. I want to go exploring.
Reply
(01-26-2012, 12:01 PM)yablabo Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 02:38 AM)Gregory I Wrote: Hate monger? Fr. Feeney was devoted to our Lady at all times, and was reconciled to the church without giving up any of his views.

Are you aware that all the fathers of the church prior to St. Bernard of Clairveaux unanimously teach that Baptism is an ABSOLUTE and universal obligation and necessity, and that the unanimous teaching is that none can be saved without it? THis is easily seen from the first century up until the 12th century. It's unanimous.

The truth is the first thing out the window in any sort of discussion. 

I think some of the posters on this thread are more concerned with justifying their spiritual investments than searching for truth in communion...as reflected in the lack of willingness to examine the veracity and the logic behind their claims viz. "baptism of desire."  There is more interest in putting forth the notion that we must adhere to the theologians at all costs, to heck with what the Pope has defined or condemned in his infallible magisterium.

-- Nicole

Physician, heal thyself.  :eyeroll:

The point is, the Magisterium has not defined things the way you seem to think it has, and the universal ordinary testimony of the Church testifies to this, particularly in the documents of Trent.  That you are obstinate in your views is unfortunate.
Reply
(01-26-2012, 01:10 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote: I like how this issue has gotten those who oppose Baptism of Desire to really go back to look for quotations to support their position. It's a rare day indeed when you see trads quoting St. Gregory of Nazianzus!

I don't profess to be a "trad" so...I guess you gotta keep looking for one who will quote St. Nazianzen... :)

-- Nicole
Reply
(01-26-2012, 03:12 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 12:01 PM)yablabo Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 02:38 AM)Gregory I Wrote: Hate monger? Fr. Feeney was devoted to our Lady at all times, and was reconciled to the church without giving up any of his views.

Are you aware that all the fathers of the church prior to St. Bernard of Clairveaux unanimously teach that Baptism is an ABSOLUTE and universal obligation and necessity, and that the unanimous teaching is that none can be saved without it? THis is easily seen from the first century up until the 12th century. It's unanimous.

The truth is the first thing out the window in any sort of discussion. 

I think some of the posters on this thread are more concerned with justifying their spiritual investments than searching for truth in communion...as reflected in the lack of willingness to examine the veracity and the logic behind their claims viz. "baptism of desire."  There is more interest in putting forth the notion that we must adhere to the theologians at all costs, to heck with what the Pope has defined or condemned in his infallible magisterium.

-- Nicole

Physician, heal thyself.  :eyeroll:

The point is, the Magisterium has not defined things the way you seem to think it has, and the universal ordinary testimony of the Church testifies to this, particularly in the documents of Trent.  That you are obstinate in your views is unfortunate.

So you say, but you will not provide proof of such.  You quote the likes of Ludwig Otto, not testimony of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium.

And on the subject of solemn judgments of the Roman Pontiffs:  Provide a single quotation from the Council of Trent that contains the term "baptismus flaminis."...or better yet...an explicit statement from Trent that "voto baptismi" is salvific.  If you say it's there, you must be able to provide evidence of such :)

-- Nicole
Reply
(01-26-2012, 04:09 PM)yablabo Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 03:12 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 12:01 PM)yablabo Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 02:38 AM)Gregory I Wrote: Hate monger? Fr. Feeney was devoted to our Lady at all times, and was reconciled to the church without giving up any of his views.

Are you aware that all the fathers of the church prior to St. Bernard of Clairveaux unanimously teach that Baptism is an ABSOLUTE and universal obligation and necessity, and that the unanimous teaching is that none can be saved without it? THis is easily seen from the first century up until the 12th century. It's unanimous.

The truth is the first thing out the window in any sort of discussion. 

I think some of the posters on this thread are more concerned with justifying their spiritual investments than searching for truth in communion...as reflected in the lack of willingness to examine the veracity and the logic behind their claims viz. "baptism of desire."  There is more interest in putting forth the notion that we must adhere to the theologians at all costs, to heck with what the Pope has defined or condemned in his infallible magisterium.

-- Nicole

Physician, heal thyself.  :eyeroll:

The point is, the Magisterium has not defined things the way you seem to think it has, and the universal ordinary testimony of the Church testifies to this, particularly in the documents of Trent.  That you are obstinate in your views is unfortunate.

So you say, but you will not provide proof of such.  You quote the likes of Ludwig Otto, not testimony of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium.

And on the subject of solemn judgments of the Roman Pontiffs:  Provide a single quotation from the Council of Trent that contains the term "baptismus flaminis."...or better yet...an explicit statement from Trent that "voto baptismi" is salvific.  If you say it's there, you must be able to provide evidence of such :)

-- Nicole

"By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,- as being a translation [transformation], from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the State of Grace, and of the adoption of the Sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Saviour. And this translation [transformation], since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire [in voto; votum Baptismi] thereof, as it is written - 'unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God' [John 3:5]" (Council of Trent, Session 6, Monday, January 13, 1547 A.D., Decree on Justification, Chapter IV)

You have been pointed here before, and how this has been interpreted by all the Doctors to mean Baptism of Desire.  Your continual refusal to read this in line with the Church is nothing other than rank Protestantism.  And believe me, I know Protestantism when I see it.
Reply
(01-26-2012, 01:10 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote: I like how this issue has gotten those who oppose Baptism of Desire to really go back to look for quotations to support their position. It's a rare day indeed when you see trads quoting St. Gregory of Nazianzus!

Is this sarcastic?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)