I disagree (vehemently) w/ St Augustine.. so call me Heretic or whatever
#41
(05-26-2018, 12:38 AM)Dominicus Wrote: I just quoted st Thomas saying that martyrdom could supply the effects of baptism without actually having a sacramental baptism.
Disclaimer: the website I got the quotes from is run by people who support the Siri/"Pope in red" thesis. I don't hold this thesis; I just know their website has the proper quotes to refute Feeneyism.

"Pope Urban V……POPE of the Catholic Church ...Teaching authority to be obeyed by all - regarding the Angelic Doctor (St. Thomas Aquinas):  "We command you to follow the doctrine of St. Thomas as the Catholic doctrine, and study to embrace it with all your power." (Pope Urban V, letter to the Academy of Toulouse)"

http://www.todayscatholicworld.com/dims-refuted.htm

"...this sacrament [Baptism] consisteth of an external element of water, and internal virtue of the Holy Spirit. ....Though in this case, God which hath not bound his grace, in respect of his own freedom, to any Sacrament, may and doth accept them as baptized, which either are martyred before they could be baptized, or else depart this life with vow and desire to have that Sacrament, but by some remediless necessity could not obtain it." (Excerpts from the Annotations [*Official Commentary] on John 3:5, from the Roman Catholic Bible [Douay Rheims 1582 A.D. version]"

"On Ecclesiastical Burial - 1917 Code of Canon Law (Can 1239. 2)

 "Catechumens whothrough no fault of their owndie WITHOUT Baptismare to be treated as baptized."
[-] The following 1 user Likes In His Love's post:
  • Dominicus
Reply
#42
(05-26-2018, 12:43 AM)In His Love Wrote:
(05-26-2018, 12:38 AM)Dominicus Wrote: I just quoted st Thomas saying that martyrdom could supply the effects of baptism without actually having a sacramental baptism.
Disclaimer: the website I got the quotes from is run by people who support the Siri/"Pope in red" thesis. I don't hold this thesis; I just know their website has the proper quotes to refute Feeneyism.

"Pope Urban V……POPE of the Catholic Church ...Teaching authority to be obeyed by all - regarding the Angelic Doctor (St. Thomas Aquinas):  "We command you to follow the doctrine of St. Thomas as the Catholic doctrine, and study to embrace it with all your power." (Pope Urban V, letter to the Academy of Toulouse)"

http://www.todayscatholicworld.com/dims-refuted.htm

"...this sacrament [Baptism] consisteth of an external element of water, and internal virtue of the Holy Spirit. ....Though in this case, God which hath not bound his grace, in respect of his own freedom, to any Sacrament, may and doth accept them as baptized, which either are martyred before they could be baptized, or else depart this life with vow and desire to have that Sacrament, but by some remediless necessity could not obtain it." (Excerpts from the Annotations [*Official Commentary] on John 3:5, from the Roman Catholic Bible [Douay Rheims 1582 A.D. version]"

"On Ecclesiastical Burial - 1917 Code of Canon Law (Can 1239. 2)

 "Catechumens whothrough no fault of their owndie WITHOUT Baptismare to be treated as baptized."

Pope Urban V's letter was to the Academy of Toulouse, not the universal church.  Even the Fathers of Trent held St. Thomas Aquinas in high esteem, putting the volumes of the Summa and the old and vulgate edition of the scriptures upon the altar before them.  However, the result of the Council of Trent was to reaffirm the necessity of the sacrament of baptism for salvation (like the Council of Vienne and Florence, etc., before Trent), rather than to speculate about the unseen effects of human desire and suffering upon their salvation.

Regarding the annotations in the Rheims translation of the old and vulgate edition of the New Testament, the annotations do not fall under the teaching office of the church.  When annotations such as these are found to be contrary to what the Church holds (seen in the teachings of Popes via Councils, etc.), and contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers, we have to reject them.

"Furthermore, in order to restrain petulant spirits, It decrees, that no one, relying on his own skill, shall,–in matters of faith, and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, –wresting the sacred Scripture to his own senses, presume to interpret the said sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which holy mother Church,–whose it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the holy Scriptures,–hath held and doth hold; or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers; even though such interpretations were never (intended) to be at any time published." (Session 4, Council of Trent)

1917 CIC does make a christian burial provision for those who die without baptism (through no fault of their own) as catechumens. I looked it up in my own copy to verify. I checked 1983 CIC can. 1183 also to verify a reflection of the 1917 CIC. It states much the same. However, it also goes on to give the same regard to unbaptized infants for ecclesiastical funerals. In the face of the teaching of the Council of Florence (i.e., the only remedy for infants is the sacrament of baptism) these canons can't really be used to prove any church teaching, only to tell you what the current church law is.
Reply
#43
The Council of Trent was convened in the wake of the protestant revolt. They had to address things like private interpretation.

Dominicus' point still stands: "Would you say that saints Emerentiana and Perpetua are in Hell? I would say not, especially as St. Perpetua is invoked in the newer version of the litany of the saints."
Reply
#44
Not to mention that St. Emerentiana et al. mentioned earlier are said to be "baptized in her own blood" by the martyrology. Now if one is already baptized by water it does not hold that one can be baptized a second time by blood.
Surréxit Dóminus vere, Alleluia!
[-] The following 1 user Likes Dominicus's post:
  • In His Love
Reply
#45
(05-26-2018, 01:29 AM)Dominicus Wrote: Not to mention that St. Emerentiana et al. mentioned earlier are said to be "baptized in her own blood" by the martyrology. Now if one is already baptized by water it does not hold that one can be baptized a second time by blood.

I am not claiming that a person receives the sacrament twice by receiving it once.

To be baptized in one's blood is not a sacrament.  To use the three notions (vow of baptism, baptized in one's blood, and sacrament of baptism) as if they're all sacraments is error.  We believe in one Lord, one faith, one baptism.  If the "one" is the sacrament of baptism, and to be baptized in one's blood is not the sacrament of baptism, then nothing stands in the way of being baptized in one's blood after the sacrament of baptism.  The vow of baptism and justification can precede reception of the sacrament (as taught in the Council of Trent, session 6), but the supernatural virtue of faith and salvation only follow after the sacrament of baptism.

Only the sacrament imparts an indelible character which would prevent it from being repeated.
Reply
#46
(05-26-2018, 01:47 AM)yablabo Wrote:
(05-26-2018, 01:29 AM)Dominicus Wrote: Not to mention that St. Emerentiana et al. mentioned earlier are said to be "baptized in her own blood" by the martyrology. Now if one is already baptized by water it does not hold that one can be baptized a second time by blood.

I am not claiming that a person receives the sacrament twice by receiving it once.

To be baptized in one's blood is not a sacrament.  To use the three notions (vow of baptism, baptized in one's blood, and sacrament of baptism) as if they're all sacraments is error.  We believe in one Lord, one faith, one baptism.  If the "one" is the sacrament of baptism, and to be baptized in one's blood is not the sacrament of baptism, then nothing stands in the way of being baptized in one's blood after the sacrament of baptism.  The vow of baptism and justification can precede reception of the sacrament (as taught in the Council of Trent, session 6), but the supernatural virtue of faith and salvation only follow after the sacrament of baptism.

Only the sacrament imparts an indelible character which would prevent it from being repeated.
I reiterate:

Baltimore Catechism, 1891:

"157. Q. How many kinds of Baptism are there?

A. There are three kinds of Baptism: Baptism of water, of desire, and of blood."

It's a "both/and" situation here. Yes, there is one Baptism, but that one Baptism can be received in one of these three ways. To say otherwise is an error.
Reply
#47
I quoted the Catechism of St Pius X, a Pope, to the same effect, and it didn't faze him.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
  “Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog also.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'


Reply
#48
Yablabo. I ask you to read article 2 of question 68 of the third part of the Summa theologica and then tell me if you still deny baptism of desire and blood.
Surréxit Dóminus vere, Alleluia!
Reply
#49
(05-26-2018, 02:39 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: I quoted the Catechism of St Pius X, a Pope, to the same effect, and it didn't faze him.

Him is a her.
Reply
#50
(05-26-2018, 03:42 AM)Dominicus Wrote: Yablabo. I ask you to read article 2 of question 68 of the third part of the Summa theologica and then tell me if you still deny baptism of desire and blood.

I read it. I do not agree with your interpretation of it.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)