tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-59629850192038887012024-03-13T05:17:11.723-07:00The Catholic Vox --- a call for Vatican III--(understanding no salvation outside the Church)<a href="http://catholicvox.blogspot.com/"><u>Home-page</u></a>
<b>"Every question you ever wanted answered about the dogma 'No Salvation Outside the Church"</b>
Vatican III in the post is fictitious but also serious.
We hope for a REAL Third Vatican Council to clear up the mess of the past 50 years.
This blog hopefully will give some insights <a href="http://catholicvox.blogspot.com/2009/03/session-one-dogmatic-constitution-of.html"><u>Vatican III--Session I</u></a>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comBlogger216125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-25664287248247747162023-02-04T18:21:00.003-08:002023-02-04T18:21:34.651-08:00The Errors of the Laisneyites
<p align="center"><a name="top"></a></p>
<p align="center"></p><p> Catholic Vox editor: Here we present an older defense of EENS defened by Michael Malone, against Fr. Laisney of the SSPX.<br /></p><p>=================================================<br /><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica;"></span></p><div align="center"><center><table align="center" style="table-layout: fixed; width: 600px;"><tbody><tr><td valign="top"><a name="2"></a><blockquote><a name="2">
</a><blockquote><a name="2"></a><a name="2"><span style="color: black; font-family: arial, helvetica;">
</span><p align="center"><span style="color: black; font-family: arial, helvetica;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: medium;">FOREWORD</span><span style="color: black; font-size: medium;"></span></p><span style="color: black;"></span></a></blockquote></blockquote><a name="2"><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">In a September 1998
article in <i>The Angelus</i>, house organ for the Lefebvre Society of St.
Pius X, Fr. François Laisney attacked Fr. Leonard Feeney (<i>R.I.P.</i>)
and the dogmas of the Catholic religion for which he was so famous for
championing in this, an age of heresy run wild. My refutations of Fr.
Laisney's positions are delivered consecutively, as in a
debate.</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<p> </p>
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">Mike Malone</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: xx-large;">
</span><p align="center"><span style="color: black; font-size: xx-large;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: large;">Three Errors
of the Feeneyites</span><span style="color: black; font-size: medium;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="center"><span style="color: black; font-size: medium;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: medium;">By Rev. Fr.
François Laisney</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<p> </p>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">Error I.
Misrepresentation of the Dogma, "Outside the Church There Is No
Salvation." The first error of those who take their doctrine from Rev.
Fr. Leonard Feeney, commonly known as "Feeneyites," is that they
misrepresent the dogma, "Outside the [Catholic] Church there is no
salvation."</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">It is scarcely a
misrepresentation to take the Popes literally when they define a dogma of
the Church which must be taken literally if it is to be taken at all. On
the contrary, it is a misrepresentation of a defined dogma to say that it
does not really means what it literally says. And to lump all such who
take the Popes at their word "Feeneyites" is to categorize all faithful
and orthodox Catholics, indeed including even little recently-baptized
infants, as followers of Fr. Feeney. </span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">Catholics do not "take
their doctrine" from Fr. Feeney, nor, in fact, do all those who believe
literally what the Church teaches. Even if Leonard Feeney had never
existed, we would have to believe what the Popes have defined for us.
Logically, we might then be called "Eugene-the-Fourthites" or
"Innocent-Thirdites" or "Boniface-Eighthites," and so on. Besides, why
denigrate the good name of a priest personally exonerated by a reigning
Pontiff by calling his close associates "Feeneyites"? In English, such
unsolicited slurs go back at least to the days of Shakespeare, when the
members of the Company of Jesus were named by those who detested the
truths taught by them "Jesuites." But, for the sake of concision - and
since even the name "Jesuit" came into such unequalled glory even in the
days of Shakespeare - we will allow Fr. Laisney's appellation, although
both uncharitable and inaccurate, to stand.</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<p> </p>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">The Feeneyites
misrepresent this as, "Without baptism of water there is no
salvation."</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">This is absolutely untrue,
since no Catholic is permitted to hold any particular
<i><b>interpretation</b></i> of dogma but they must indeed believe, as
Trent defined infallibly, that without baptism of water there <i><b>is
</b></i>no salvation whatsoever possible (Canon V<i>, On The Sacrament of
Baptism</i>). Moreover, to misrepresent the Feeneyite crusade as one
solely for water, thus reducing the over-all "package," does not follow at
all, nor is it a true representation of the totality and impact of Fr.
Leonard Feeney's crusade for the conversion of America. </span></p><p><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;"><span></span></span></p><a name='more'></a><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;"> </span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><p></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">Nevertheless, the element
and innocence of water is genuinely required for the salvation of souls;
as the <i>Catechism of Trent </i>declares: "Water, which is always at hand
and within the reach of everyone, was the most fitting matter of a
sacrament which is necessary to everyone for salvation" (<i>Frs. McHugh
and Callan edition, p.166</i>).</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">St. Cyprian (c.210-258) was the
first Catholic saint to use in writing 1 the expression "extra ecciesiam
nulla salus," ("Outside the Church there is no
salvation").</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">In order to make such a
claim, Fr. Laisney would logically have been compelled to read each and
every thing written by any "Catholic saint" who ever lived and wrote
anything at all, up to and including the days of St. Cyprian. <i><b>Do you
really think he did?</b></i> </span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">Here is a pertinent
observation - the <i>Acts of the Apostles</i> was written by St. Luke
scarcely thirty years after the Ascension according to Fr. Laisney's
famous "common theological opinion." In 67 A.D., then, St. Luke wrote
these inspired and infallible words: "The Lord added daily to the Church
those being saved" (<i>2:47</i>), thus logically excluding from salvation
those not "added." What makes this observation important to our refutation
of Fr. Laisney position is that anything henceforward, which serves to
contradict these infallible words, serves at the same time necessarily to
posit that we do not have to take the Word of God specifically as handed
down to us in its literal and obvious meaning.</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">In the very passage in
which he uses this phrase, St. Cyprian also expresses that baptism of
water is inferior to baptism of blood. Since baptism of blood, he says,
is not fruitful outside the Church, because "outside the Church there is
no salvation," baptism of water also cannot be fruitful outside the
Church. The reason for this is that it would imprint the character of
baptism but would not give sanctifying grace, i.e., justification, which
opens the gates of heaven.</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">We must agree completely
with St. Cyprian here.<i> As far as sanctifying grace is concerned</i>,
the martyrdom of a Catholic is greater in efficacy than his original
baptism in water. For "Greater love than this, no man has, that a man lay
down his life for his friends" (<i>John 15:13</i>). Even though the martyr
does not recapture the sacramental grace (an actual grace peculiar to each
individual sacrament when administered), nevertheless the influx of the
sanctity of justification (Sanctifying Grace) is greater, since he who
loves more receives more of it, "whereas to whom less is forgiven, he
loveth less" (<i>Luke 7:47</i>). And since as St. Cyprian is admitted to
have said, "outside the Church there is no salvation," therefore neither
baptism of blood <i><b>nor</b> </i>baptism of desire are fruitful unto
salvation, since neither of them "would imprint the character of baptism."
This comes only in the Sacrament of Baptism, which necessarily requires
the matter of the sacrament - <i><b>water</b></i>. </span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">But note here that Fr.
Laisney begs the question concerning justification itself. There is no
word of the Magisterium declaring infallibly that "justification opens the
gates of Heaven." Justification was defined by Trent in Session VI to
account for a couple things, <i><b>none</b></i> of which involved "opening
the gates of Heaven." Moreover, there is only one gate to Heaven, Jesus
Christ, "I am the door; if any man enter in by Me, he shall be saved "
(<i>John 10:9</i>). Jesus is "the way" (<i>John 14:6</i>) and He is the
<i><b>solitary</b></i> entrance. " We must become, therefore, an Alter
Christus - <i>another Christ</i> - to go where He has gone (<i>John
3:13</i>); and the <i><b>only</b></i> way this can be done is by means of
reception of sacramental baptism.</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<p> </p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">In the very next
paragraph, St. Cyprian teaches, with all the fathers, doctors, popes and
unanimously all theologians, that baptism of blood, that is, dying for
the Catholic Faith, is the most glorious and perfect baptism of all,
explicitly stating "even without the water."</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<p> </p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">In order to make such a
rash statement as this, Fr. Laisney would logically and necessarily have
had to have studied the writings of "all the fathers, doctors, popes and
unanimously all theologians" who have lived from the year 33 to our own
day. In fact, Fr. Laisney emphasizes this list of authorities by putting
it in bold italics. The fact is, it is a bold falsehood on its italic
face. Besides, to add that St. Cyprian appears to make an exception here
in behalf of those "dying for the Catholic Faith" does not mean that "all"
the others did. In fact, several did not. But more on this later.
Meanwhile, here is St. Robert Bellarmine, a Doctor of the Church with a
far different opinion (<i>On the Sacrament of Baptism</i>, Book I, Chapter
4) -</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">Those who imagine that
there is another remedy besides Baptism openly contradict the Gospels,
the Councils, the Fathers, and the consensus of the universal
Church.</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<p> </p></span></blockquote></blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">But let us look more
closely at this quote of Fr. Laisney and the position he claims we should
hold from it. He merely states that many authorities have deemed martyrdom
a more "glorious and perfect baptism" than sacramental baptism - and, as
far as the gift of Sanctifying Grace bestowed for it - what Catholic can
possibly disagree? </span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<p> </p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">In the paragraph following this
one, St. Cyprian teaches that Catholic faithful who, through no fault of
their own, were received into the Catholic Church without a valid baptism,
2 would still go to heaven. This is to say that they would die with the
requisite Catholic faith and charity, necessary to go to heaven, though
without the waters of baptism. These requisites are exactly the conditions
of "baptism of desire."</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">How can anyone at all be
"received into the Catholic Church without a valid baptism"? Is this what
St. Cyprian writes, or is a construction on his words by Fr. Laisney? Can
any human being exist outside the Church because of an invalid baptism and
still be termed a member of the "Catholic faithful"? Remember: St. Cyprian
held that the Sacrament of Baptism administered outside the pale of the
Church by heretics was no sacrament at all. In his reference no.2 (below),
Fr. Laisney himself admits that St. Cyprian was mistaken in his baptismal
theology. This furore over the rebaptism of already-validly-baptized
heretics was what caused the falling out between Cyprian and Pope St.
Stephen I (d.257); for Pope St. Stephen was considered a liberal by the
great St. Cyprian precisely because the Holy Father refused to rebaptize
converted apostates. </span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">Cyprian came very close to
schism himself on this point, publicly calling Pope St. Stephen "depraved,
inept, blind, obstinate, and universally sinful." He refused to recant and
died in disobedience to the Holy Father, demonstrating how even the most
eminent Doctors of the Church can err. In fact, every famous Father of the
Church published errors which later had to be corrected in <i>Council</i>,
just as the opinions even of the Great St. Gregory I about the End of Time
were condemned at the Ecumenical Council of Lateran V. The eminent St.
Augustine wrote a <i>Book of Corrections</i> to his own mistakes, and was
in the process of writing yet another <i>Book of Corrections</i> when he
went to his reward.</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">Saint Cyprian was
therefore in no position to "teach" anything to the Church universal as
literally postulated by Fr. Laisney. The prerogative of personal
Infallibility was granted solely to the Pope, and then only under the very
strict conditions defined at the Council of Vatican I. The private
speculations of various Fathers or Doctors in no way binds the faithful,
and not a single one of their propositions is magisterial. Saint Cyprian
here was witnessing not to that which has come down to us De Fide, but to
his own private speculations. As is taught in Patristic Theology,
<i><b>every</b></i> Father of the Church (such as St. Cyprian) produced
mistakes and material heresies which had to be corrected later by the
Church herself, in fact most of them in <i><b>council</b></i>.</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">Why not then believe the dogma
"outside the Church there is no salvation" "...with the same sense and the
same understanding (<i>in eodem sensu eademque sententia</i>)" 3 as the
whole Catholic Church has taught it from the beginning, that is, including
the "three baptisms"? Fr. Leonard Feeney and his followers give a new
meaning, a new interpretation, to this dogma.</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">"Why not believe in three
baptism for salvation"? Precisely because it would entail tacking onto
that which has been given us as infallible that which is
<i><b>fallible</b></i>. Vatican Council I defined that dogmas proclaimed
by the Magisterim are to be believed precisely as they are declared, and
that the Church "understands her dogmas by the very words She has once
declared, and there must never be a withdrawal from this meaning..."
(<i>Dei</i> <i>Filius</i>, Chapter 3 & Canon 3). </span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">Moreover, the Church has
solemnly condemned as heresy the notion that dogmas have a meaning which
goes <i><b>beyond</b></i> the words as literally declared in any dogmatic
formula (cf. <i>Lamentabili</i>, #22,26,54,64 and <i>Pascendi</i>: Dz
2079-2081, 2087 promulgated by Pope St. Pius X, 1907). Even in its native
ambiguity, Vatican II declared that magisterial definitions are
"irreformable by their very nature" (<i>Lumen</i> <i>Gentium</i>, 25).
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre personally signed this decree!</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">But notice how Fr. Laisney
Begs The Question again, when he declares (without proof) that "the whole
Church" has taught three baptisms from the beginning. Now, anything taught
by the Church is, by definition, infallible. Our Lord Jesus Christ did not
arrange the teachings of His Church according to the Extraordinary
Magisterium, the Ordinary Magisterium, the Supreme Magisterium, the
Authentic Magisterium, or any <i>Ex Cathedra</i> arrangement. He said,
quite simply, "He who hears you, hears Me" (<i>Luke 10:16</i>); and, since
Jesus is infallibly true in every utterance of his doctrinal demands, so
therefore is His Church.</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">Consequently, inasmuch as
the Church (to say nothing of it "whole" or otherwise) has
<i><b>never</b></i> taught infallibly more than a single baptism for the
attainment of eternal bliss, Father's insinuations and statements are both
illogical and false on their face. Moreover, it is not Father Feeney who
gave a new meaning to the De Fide teaching of the Church that all men
must, in the New Testament, receive the Sacrament of Baptism to be saved.
This has <i><b>always</b></i> been the understanding of the Church, even
including those Fathers and Doctors who speculated against it privately.
</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">Father Feeney's meaning to
the Dogma that you have to be a Catholic to go to Heaven is simply a
literal reiteration of what has been defined and come down to us since the
year 99, when all Divine Revelation came to an end with the death of the
last Apostle. If, therefore, it can be shown that the Church at
<i><b>any</b></i> time since then held the Faith the way Father Feeney
taught it, then ineluctably anyone who teaches any <i><b>other </b></i>way
is the one who is guilty of misinterpreting the meaning and sense of Holy
Mother Church in her infallible declarations.</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">Here, then, is the
admission of one of our country's most eminent Patristic Theologians,
having researched in their original languages virtually all the existing
writings of the Fathers of the Church. His name is Fr. William Jurgens,
</span><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">Professor of Patristic Theology at St.
Mary's Seminary in Cleveland a quarter-century ago,</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;"> and he can scarcely be deemed a "Feeneyite." His
book (in three volumes) is called <i>The Faith of the Early Fathers</i>
(emphasis is my own, for obvious reasons) -</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">If there were not a
<i><b>constant tradition</b></i> in the Fathers that the Gospel
message of 'Unless a man be born again of water," etc., is to be taken
<i><b>absolutely</b></i>, it would be easy to say that Our Savior
simply did not see fit to mention the obvious exceptions of Invincible
Ignorance and physical impossibility. But the tradition is in fact
there, and it is likely enough to be found <i><b>so constant</b></i>
as to <i><b>constitute Revelation</b></i>.</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p></blockquote></blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">Father Jurgens is by no
stretch of the imagination a traditionalist in the matter of sacramental
baptism; thus, he goes on to provide his own brand of private speculations
against what he has already declared as the "absolute" necessity of water
baptism being found so "constantly" in the Fathers as to "constitute
Revelation," but his private speculations, like those of Fr. Laisney, are
arrantly beside the point. The point being that, if Fr. Jurgens is
correct, in his area of expertise as a Patristic theologian, then Fr.
Laisney is incorrect in his presumptions that Father Feeney misunderstood
the true sense of the Mind of the Church. And, since Father Laisney cannot
produce a single statement from the Church which is pronounced
<i><b>infallibly</b></i> saying that a sacramentally-unbaptized soul can
enter Heaven, it is he, not Jurgens, who is in error on the issue of what
the Church really teaches and genuinely demands that we hold by
Faith.</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<p> </p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">This traditional
interpretation of this dogma, including the "three baptisms," is that of
St. Cyprian, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, St. Fulgentius, St. Bernard,
St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Peter Canisius, St.
Alphonsus de Liguori, Pope Innocent II, Pope Innocent III, the Council
of Trent, Pope Pius IX, Pope St. Pius X, etc., and unanimously all
theologians (prior to the modernists). St. Alphonsus says: "It is de
fide<i> </i>[<i>that is, it belongs to the Catholic Faith Ed</i>.] that
there are some men saved also by the baptism of the
Spirit."4</span><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<p> </p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">A few Doctors of the
Church, such as Bernard and Thomas, can be argued to have held the
salvational benefit of baptism of desire; however, to the list of Fathers
alone, Fr. Laisney could also have added the names of </span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Tertullian, St. Basil the Great, St. John
Chrysostom, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Gregory Nazianzen, St. Bede the
Venerable, and St. Prosper of Aquitaine - at least tentatively - for they
also admittedly brought up the subject. It must be pointed out, however,
that Ss. Ambrose and Augustine, as well as the eventual apostate
Tertullian, all literally and diametrically contradict themselves
regarding "baptism of desire" and "blood" as a means of salvation in
several other places in which they insisted upon the
<i><b>absoluteness</b></i> of the need for water. Moreover, their putative
exemption of "non-aquatic" baptisms for salvation was explicitly
contradicted by other <i><b>contemporary</b></i> writers who, accurately
or otherwise, claimed that these Fathers have been misunderstood and
misinterpreted.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: x-small;">
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Saint Augustine concurs with St. Cyril of Jerusalem,
St. Gregory Nazianzen, and others in specifically denying that the State
of Sanctifying Grace is sufficient to save <i><b>anyone</b></i> without
the actual reception of the Sacrament of Water Baptism. He makes this
statement explicitly in his essay<i> On Baptism, Against the
Donatists</i>, in Book IV, Chapter 21, number 28. We must also modify the
alleged support of St. Ambrose (if any) for salvific baptism of desire by
pointing out that it is based solely by certain interpreters on his
<i>Eulogy to Emperor Valentinian</i>. This conjecture on their part is
expressly contested by one of our greatest patristic historians, Father
Jacques-Paul Migne (<i>PL, vol.16, p.412, no.19</i>) and the <i>Eulogy
</i>itself is invariably mistranslated by modern heretics and their
willing editors. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">In fact, St. Ambrose declares explicitly that the
royal twenty-year-old emperor actually <i><b>did</b></i> receive the
sacrament he so earnestly desired, and in no place declared otherwise. His
speech on the occasion of the Emperor's death acknowledged the
congregation's lament that Valentinian had not received the
<i>sacramenta</i> of Baptism, not the <i>Sacrament</i> thereof.
"Sacramenta" is the plural form of a Latin word which means the formal
oaths (or "forms" of the sacrament as explained by Fr. William Jurgens in
his conscientious translation of this eulogy), that is: the formal and
external <i><b>rituals</b></i> provided for in a Catholic liturgy in
church, for which, of course, no one had time. This was the most prudently
logical conclusion Ambrose could reach, considering that the he was also
aware of the virtual certainty that the emperor had <i><b>long
since</b></i> already been baptized validly, although as an Arian, having
been raised by his mother Justina in this sect for many years - thus
rendering altogether moot the entire contention of modern quibblers such
as Fr. Laisney and his followers.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">It is also very questionable whether Ss. John
Chrysostom, Gregory Nazianzen, Prosper, and others who brought up what
today is called "Baptism of Blood" can be held literally from their
statements to have meant salvation by martyrdom short of the font, for
several were manifestly and expressly speaking of the martyrdom of those
<i><b>already</b> </i>baptized with water. In various places, St. Prosper
of Aquitaine as well as St. John Chrysostom equate the term "baptism of
blood" explicitly and specifically with justification, not salvation.
Nevertheless, it is not altogether uncharacteristic - although
self-negating as viable witness on behalf of Liberal heretics - that
several of these Fathers waffled diametrically back and forth, sometimes
within the very same document under discussion.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Along with the mass of the early Fathers of the Church
who held explicitly to baptism of water for salvation must necessarily be
added the overwhelming preponderance of those Fathers, Doctors, and
Ecclesiastical Writers of the first centuries of the Church catalogued by
Father Tixeront in his masterful <i>Handbook of Patrology</i>, which lists
over five hundred authentic witnesses to the true Faith, and whose
cumulative testimony compelled the discerning Father William A. Jurgens to
corroborate the witness of Tradition that "<i>Unless a man be born again
of water</i>, etc., is to be taken <i><b>absolutely</b></i>." </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">The Fathers of the Church, therefore, taken as a
whole, can only<i> </i>be said to have verified definitively the official
and authentic teaching of the one true Church that it is
<i><b>absolutely</b></i> necessary for the salvation of
<i><b>every</b></i> human creature to be baptized in the water of the
<i><b>actual</b></i> sacrament instituted by Our Lord Jesus Christ. On the
other hand, it is intellectually dishonest to suggest otherwise. And to
exalt the personal theological opinions of a handful - even an impressive
and well-known handful - to the rank of ecclesiastical Tradition or even
magisterial infallibility is not only an exercise in sophomoric
legerdemain, but also a specious brand of facile shortsightedness
unconscionable in a serious study of Patristic Theology.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">To repeat - this dogma of salvation by means of
baptism alone is not something that has been dreamed up by radical,
reactionary recalcitrants, nor by some lone Bostonian priest stumping a
soap-box half-a-century ago, nor by any other ordained minister of
Almighty God who has committed himself to preserve both his vows and his
Faith in serving those over whom God has placed him. This De Fide
proposition is constituted and established by the current, authentic and
official Magisterium of the Church of Jesus Christ as part and parcel of
the only true religion to grace the face of God's green earth. Therefore,
Pope Paul , </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">in his Apostolic
Exhortation <i>On the Fifth Anniversary of the Closing of Vatican II</i>,
</span><span style="font-family: Arial;">proclaimed in 1970 -</span></p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">If for whatever reason we deny the
<i><b>absoluteness</b> </i>of the law of God concerning the necessity
of water baptism for salvation, or any other defined dogma, then we
too excommunicate ourselves by our heresy from the
Church.</span></p></blockquote></blockquote>
<p><span style="color: black;"> </span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Look at the Laisney citation once
more. That "it belongs to the Catholic Faith," as St. Maria's Editor
explains, can only mean that St. Alphonsus Maria did <i><b>not</b></i>
consider it De Fide <i><b>Definita</b></i>. Hence, "that some men are
saved by the baptism of the Spirit" is not to be found in any
pronouncement of the Solemn Magisterium but only, if it exists at all, in
the Ordinary Magisterium which <i><b>must</b></i> always be taken in the
light of Tradition and not on the say-so of any individual Father or
Doctor of the Church. Moreover, note well - <i><b>nowhere</b></i> in this
very statement provided us by Fr. Laisney does St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori
actually state that the men saved by baptism of the Spirit are not
previously baptized with water! In fact, The washing free of sin produced
by baptism of the Spirit and its accompanying acts of repentance, etc.,
can readily be admitted by all Catholics to fulfill all requirements
necessary for entrance into Heaven, but only if a man has first received
the Character of the Sacrament.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The reference given for this
Footnote No. 4 is, simply, "On Baptism," Ch.1. Granted that Father Laisney
may have access to a book by St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori by this name, but
it does not appear in the "The <i>Complete</i> Works of Saint Alponsus de
Liguori" published in twenty-two volumes by his own Order, the
Redemptorist Fathers, in 1926, nor is it mentioned among his works by the
Catholic Encyclopedia of 1903. In those Complete Works, St. Alphonsus
Maria explicitly contradicts the contentions of the Laisneyites by saying:
"The Catechism of Trent teaches that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary
for everyone <i><b>without exception</b></i>." Does this sound like a man
who truly considers Fr. Laisney's exception of desire "De
Fide"?</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">My own shelves are blessed by the
presence of fifteen of the books written by this last of the Doctors of
the Church to die (1787), and it is true that in one of them,
"Instructions on the Commandments and Sacraments," St. Alphonsus Maria
posits the notion that "ardent desire for baptism" can get a person to
Heaven without the sacrament, so long as the person has the Catholic Faith
(<i>On The Sacrament Of Baptism</i>, Chapter II:2); however, as Blessed
Henro Suso points out in his <i>Spiritual Discourses</i>, "God
<i><b>never</b></i> leaves unrewarded the ardent desires of holy souls.".
Nevertheless, in this very work St. Alphonsus Maria does <i><b>not</b></i>
say what Fr. Laisney <i><b>says</b></i> he said, namely, that such a
speculation is <i>De Fide</i> </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">-</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;"> and nowhere does he declare that this is in any
way at all a teaching of the Magisterium, Solemn or Ordinary. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">In fact, St. Alphonsus Maria
attests, in so many words, that this is merely his own private opinion
when he declares: "I say" that an the unbaptized can be saved. He does not
in this book claim that "the Church says" so. Besides - and this is of
greatest import - <i><b>no</b></i> Father or Doctor of the Church as such
is any more infallible than the next man in the pew. Not even all the
Fathers of the Church put together can come up with an infallible
proclamation of the Catholic Faith. As Fr. Jurgens points out
-</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The Fathers and early
Christian Writers do not agree with each other with a precise
mathematical unanimity, nor could it be expected that they would. And
in any case, we must stress that a particular patristic text is in no
instance to be regarded as 'proof' of a particular doctrine. Dogmas
are not "proved" by patristic statements, but by the infallible
teaching instruments of the Church. The value of the Fathers and
Writers is this: that in the aggregate they demonstrate what the
Church believes and teaches; and, again in the aggregate, they provide
a witness to Tradition, that Tradition which is itself a vehicle of
Revelation.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">And remember, this is the Father
Jurgens who admitted that the teaching of the Fathers on the "absolute"
necessity of water baptism was so "constant"<i> </i>as to constitute that
"Revelation" of which he speaks. Note, however, that Father Laisney is
once again Begging the Question by citing among all his authorities the
Council of Trent, as though it corroborated his brand of the "traditional
interpretation of this dogma." Trent <i><b>nowhere </b></i>interpreted the
possibility of salvation for any single unbaptized person in the New
Testament. In fact, they clearly defined that if anyone held that the
Sacrament of Baptism (and this ineluctably necessitates the administration
of it in water) is <i><b>not</b></i> necessary for salvation, they were
accursed (Canon V, <i>On the Sacrament of Baptism</i>).</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">True, Trent defined that with the
proper dispositions (which they defined elsewhere fourteen times) an
individual could achieve the State of Justification prior to the actual
reception of the Sacrament, and it is <i><b>this</b></i> and this alone
which has come down to us De Fide from the year 99, and which no "follower
of Father Feeney" <i><b>ever</b></i> contested. Yes, Catholics hold that a
man can get into a state of grace prior to water baptism (after all,
weren't all the Old Testament saints in the state of grace?), but
<i><b>no</b></i> Catholic is permitted to argue that it is Church teaching
a man in the New Testament can save his soul without it, as does Fr.
Laisney.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The traditional interpretation
of "Outside the Church there is no salvation," was approved by the
Council of Florence (1438-1445). The Council Fathers present made theirs
the doctrine of St. Thomas on baptism of desire, saying that for
children one ought not to wait 40 or 80 days for their instruction,
because for them there was "no other remedy."5 This expression is taken
directly from St. Thomas (<i>Summa</i> <i>Theologica</i>, IIIa, Q.68,
A.3) and it refers explicitly to baptism of desire (<i>Summa
Theologica</i>, IIIa, Q.68, A.2). Despite the fact that the Council of
Florence espoused the doctrine of St. Thomas Aquinas, it is astonishing
to see Feeneyites opposing this council to St. Thomas!</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Here we go again, with Fr.
Laisney Begging the Question. First, he expects his readers to believe
that the traditional interpretation of "Outside the Church no salvation"
should be interpreted that there is salvation outside the Church (by way
of baptism of desire), then declares that the Council of Florence adopted
St. Thomas' doctrine on baptism of desire for salvation as their own
infallibly-stated position. As to the former presumption, we have only his
conclusion (not only unsupported by, but also explicitly contradicted by
Tradition, no matter how "traditional" he deems his opinion); and, as for
the latter presumption, he can cite no single declaration from the Council
of Florence that "the Council Fathers present made theirs the doctrine of
St. Thomas on baptism of desire." We are left solely with his own
presumptions, conclusions, hypotheses, and opinions. Besides all of which,
neither St. Thomas, Florence, nor Trent <i><b>ever</b></i> used the
expression "baptism of desire." So how could Florence or anyone else adopt
and promulgate the doctrine of St. Thomas on "baptism of
desire"?</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">That infants indeed "have no
remedy" other than the Sacrament of Baptism to attain Heaven has no
bearing at all on the fact that they also have no other remedy but the
sacrament to achieve Sanctifying Grace. As St. Thomas says in the
reference cited by Fr. Laisney, "children should be baptized without delay
- because in them we do not look for better instruction or fuller
conversion." </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Now, ask yourselves. Would
"better instruction" or "fuller conversion" be an immediate remedy for the
loss of Heaven or for the loss of Grace? It would serve <i><b>only</b></i>
to increase Grace; therefore, delaying baptism would not in itself be as
dangerous to adults as to children. Why? Because, and even Feeneyites
admit this, adults can indeed attain Sanctifying Grace prior to the actual
reception of the Sacrament of Baptism when properly disposed.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">What the Council of Florence was
talking about in the precise reference cited by Fr. Laisney is - precisely
as the Council itself declared - simply that the baptism of infants should
not be delayed, as it often was in those days, "for forty or eighty days"
and <i><b>not</b></i>, as Fr. Laisney would mislead us into believing,
because the Council fathers were trying to sneak baptism of desire for
salvation into their decrees by a back door. The fact that St. Thomas
refers "explicitly to baptism of desire" is in no way tantamount to the
Council explicitly endorsing baptism of desire for salvation, because it
obviously did not (or we would not be having this discussion at all!).
Neither is there any clear proof that "the Council of Florence espoused
the doctrine of St. Thomas Aquinas" in the matter at all. We have only
Father Laisney's speculation on that, and here he is really stretching.
</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The Laisneyites, therefore, are
manifestly attempting to get their followers to believe that Florence said
something which it clearly did not say, just as those who add the
exceptions of baptism of desire and blood to <i>John 3:5</i> intend to
make Jesus say something which He clearly did not say. We must logically
respond to Father Laisney: You are "making void the Word of God by your
own tradition" (<i>Mark 7:13</i>); in fact, Fr. Laisney, you are hinging
your entire thesis on an undefined "exception." Or, to use your own words:
It is astonishing to see you opposing this Council to Fr.
Feeney!</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<p> </p>
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">None of the arguments of the
Feeneyites have value against the rock of Tradition. But, to be
consistent, let us refute two more of their major errors.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Let us stop right here first, and
examine the word of Fr. Laisney. He holds out Tradition as though (a) his
arguments rest upon it, which we have proven fallacious, and (b) as though
it were alone the Rock of Truth against which good Catholics are able to
hold no other "value." But this is erroneous. Catholics do
<i><b>not</b></i> believe simply in Tradition any more than they simply
believe even a solitary word of Holy Scripture! Good Catholics are allowed
by the Church to believe only one single thing:<i><b> what the Church
teaches</b></i>. And the authentic teaching of the Magisterium of the
Roman Catholic Church can never vary, in either its substance or in its
interpretation, from that which has been held universally by the faithful
the world over since the death of the last Apostle.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">As a dogmatic theologian, Fr.
Laisney should know (and long since have pointed out) that Scripture and
Tradition are the two <i><b>remote</b></i> sources of our Faith, and that
the <i><b>immediate</b></i> source is exclusively the voice of the
Magisterium. Jesus said: "He who hears you, hears Me" (<i>Luke 10:16</i>)
- He did not tell us to go back and double-check Scripture or Tradition
<i><b>after</b></i> the Popes have defined infallibly a doctrine of Faith
to be held by all Catholics universally. But this is precisely what Fr.
Laisney is doing. He is reading the words of Innocent III, Boniface VIII,
and Eugene IV on the absolute necessity of actual membership in the Roman
Catholic Church for eternal salvation, and then furiously researching
Scripture and Tradition looking for loopholes to their plain and simple
(and infallible) proclamations. Father Laisney is not holding the Faith,
he is holding a bag of loopholes!</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Our Divine Savior did not give to
private judgment that which is contained from Scripture and Tradition in
the Deposit of Faith, but to the ecclesiastical Magisterium of the one,
true Church. "It is clear, therefore," Vatican Council II correctly and
aptly informs us, "that, in the supremely wise arrangement of God, Sacred
Tradition, Holy Scripture, and the Magisterium of the Church are so
connected and associated that not one of them can stand without the
others" (<i>Dei Verbum</i>, no.10). </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The Magisterium cites the two
remote sources of Scripture and Tradition in giving support to its
pronouncements; but, even in cases in which these sources may even seem
silent, is enabled by Jesus Christ to define truths of Faith and Morals on
its own, in the sense that the Magisterium alone is now the Voice of God
on this earth. In fact, as St. Augustine wrote, "I myself would not
believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not
influence me to do so" (<i>Against the Letter of Mani</i>, V:6). This
authority is precisely the <i><b>power</b></i> of the Magisterium to be
forever excercised by the official teachers of the Church, to whom Our
Lord's last words were: "All power in Heaven and on earth has been given
to Me; go therefore <i><b>you</b></i> teach all nations, baptizing them in
the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" (<i>Matthew
28:18</i>).</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">In closing this section, we
should remind ourselves of the danger of hanging our hats on the
theological speculations of private Doctors of the Church, even one as
eminent as St. Thomas. "The Angel of the Schools" was in error on many
points and in many ways, as his editors and biographers point out. Saint
Thomas wrote one hundred books, and as a wise man once pointed out so
trenchantly: "The only man who never makes a mistake is the man who never
works." Thus, St. Thomas suffered from his share of mistakes. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">For example, the book he was
writing when he died in 1274 is called<i> The Compendium of Theology</i>.
In it are found nine explicit errors and several others which must be
called questionably so. He believed that "animals and plants are generated
by the sun (no's. 43, 101, 127) and even that "the sun has some part in
the generation of man" (no. 170) - virtually a tenet of modern Astrology!
- but held that the sun itself was "incorruptible" (no's. 170, 74) - even
though we know conclusively now that stars do burn out. He wrote that
"semen is the product of surplus food" (no. 161), which all but reduces
the generation of mankind to the eating of too many leftovers! Moreover,
in what must have pleased the Manichean heretics even of his own day, St.
Thomas wrote that every act of sexual intercourse "involves unclean
infection" and that "the uncleanness of sexual intercourse signifies the
uncleanness of Original Sin" (<i>Summa</i> <i>Theologica</i> I-II, q.102,
art.5, ad 3).</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Doctor André Daignes, Professor
of Philosophy in Buenos Aires, pointed out twenty-four
<i><b>formal</b></i> errors in the <i>Summa</i> <i>Theologica</i> of Saint
Thomas alone. For instance, in his <i>Sum</i>-<i>ma</i>, St. Thomas states
that, in man's conception, he first receives an imperfect soul, and later
a more perfect one (<i>Summa Theologica</i>,<i> </i>III, Q.33, art.3,
ad.3); that a fetus receives first a "nutritive soul, then a sensitive
soul, and lastly an intellectual soul"; and that the earlier souls are
then destroyed or "corrupted" (<i>Part 1</i>, Q.118, Art.2, ad.2) - all of
which would obviously serve to support the sinful errors of those who in
our day promote evolution and abortion. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">And of course we are all
painfully familiar with his errors against the Immaculate Conception, in
which he patently denied its possibility. Saint Thomas explicitly stated
that "The Blessed Virgin was conceived in Original Sin" (<i>Summa</i>
<i>Theologica</i>, III, q.31, art.8, ad 2) and that "she did indeed
contract Original Sin" (III, q.27, art.2 ad 2 and art.3 ad 4); perhaps
even more explicitly he twice denies the Immaculate Conception in his
famed <i>Commentary on the Hail Mary</i> (cf. The Three Greatest Prayers,
Manchester, NH: Sophia Institute Press, 1990, p.166). He even states that
"indeed, she <i><b>had</b></i> to be conceived with Original Sin" (<i>The
Compendium of Theology</i>, no. 224).</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Yet it is Saint Thomas himself
who affirms: "The custom of the Church has very great authority, and ought
to be jealously observed in all things, since the very doctrine of
Catholic doctors derives its authority from the Church. Hence, we ought to
abide by the authority of the Church rather than by that of an Augustine
or a Jerome or of any doctor whatsoever" (<i>Summa</i> <i>Theologica</i>,
II-II, q.10, art.12). And it's a good thing, too, since he was joined by
six other eminent authorities in denying the Immaculate Conception
</span><span style="font-family: Arial;">-<span style="color: black;"> </span>St. John Damascene,
St. Anselm, St. Bonaventure, St. Bernard, St. Peter Damian, and St. Albert
the Great<i> </i>-<i><b> almost a fourth of the Doctors of the Church!
</b></i></span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">For, in the words of Pope John Paul II, "It would be a
serious abuse to replace the Word of God with the word of man, no matter
who the author might be" (<i>Dominicæ</i> <i>Cenæ</i>, Feb. 24, 1980).
Therefore, a theological speculation, based on the presumptions of a St.
Thomas or a St. Augustine or a Frank Laisney or anyone else, possesses for
its authority just that: a speculative presumption - or, as Protestants
would call it, <i><b>Private</b></i> <i><b>Judgment</b></i>.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Error II. The Doctrine of Baptism of Desire Is
Optional.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Neither (a) Baptism of Desire for Salvation nor (b)
Baptism of Desire for Justification are optional, since the Church has
defined against (a) and for (b). Neither of them, therefore, is any longer
permissible for free discussion as opinions or options.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">The Feeneyites present the Church's doctrine of
baptism of desire as a question to be freely discussed within the
Church: "...what amounts to an academic difference to be settled by the
Church." 6 If this were the case, each school of thought would then have
to be accepted until the pope later defined this doctrine. This is
false.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">This is indeed false, but not for the reasons Fr.
Laisney will go on to suggest. It cannot be claimed that baptism of desire
for salvation is merely a difference of opinion, as you will see. But
first, however, let us admit the truth that it is both anachronistic and
self-contradictory for any member of Saint Benedict Center to consider
salvation by baptism of desire little more than "an academic difference"
between schools of thinkers with "rights" to opposing positions.
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">If Baptism of Desire were not a fundamental ingredient
in the original Center crusade, why in the world did the Founder of SBC,
Catherine Clarke, take such pains to complain about it way back in 1949,
almost half-a-century ago? On page 74 of her book, <i>Loyolas &
Cabots</i>, you will see very clearly that baptism of desire was one of
the first and primary excuses cast in the face of those who held out for
the Dogma of Salvation. Like Sr. Catherine, we continue to be "shocked to
a realization of what is happening to the Faith" by virtue of the heresy
of Baptism of Desire For The Salvation of Non-Catholics. Dare the true
faithful deem discussion on Desire little more than opinions, theories, or
"private speculations meriting individual consideration?"</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Brother Robert Mary of SBC wrote a wonderful book
called "Father Feeney and the Truth about Salvation" as recently as 1995.
It was published by the very religious order specifically under attack by
Father Laisney. "For the record," writes Brother (on p.19), "Father
Feeney's position on baptism of desire and baptism of blood was first
published in his book, <i>Bread of Life</i>, in October, 1952. In this
book, Fr. Feeney condemns baptism of desire as a substitute for the
Sacrament of Baptism in getting souls into Heaven without water as
"<i><b>heresy</b></i>" (<i>twice</i>). Father Feeney calls desire "a
splendid diabolical word" and termed it explicitly "sinful." Diabolical
sinfulness is never the result of worthy opinion or a right to private
speculation, but can only fall under the realm of <i><b>formal</b></i>
heresy, not merely material error.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">We are compelled to hold therefore that, ever since
the Canon of Trent on the Sacrament of Baptism was infallible promulgated
- which declares that whoever says Baptism is optional, and therefore not
necessary for salvation, is to be accursed - no Catholic dare conjecture
any opposing opinion, including pre-eminent Catholic doctors like St.
Alphonsus Maria Liguori. We might also contrast his error on baptism of
desire in his <i>book On the Commandments and Sacraments</i> to his other
book, <i>Dogmatic Works</i>, also called "An Exposition and Defense of All
the Points of Faith Discussed and Defined by the Sacred Council of Trent"
- in which you will find <i><b>nary a word</b></i> about baptism of desire
or blood! </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">What we do know for sure is that even the greatest of
saints have fallen into the error of material heresies. This is
demonstrable proof that the Vicar of Christ alone can provide definitions
of Catholic dogma <i><b>infallibly</b></i>. And he has done so, both in
his decrees and in his Canons broadcast to the entire world of Catholics.
Inasmuch as each individual Canon thus promulgated condemns those who hold
the opposite, and since a man can be damned for denying just one Canon -
even if he affirmed every other point of the Catholic Faith - this
ineluctably means that each Canon can stand on its own with no further
reference to any other Canon, decree, infallible declaration, or
magisterial pronouncement. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">If this were not the case, then each Canon would not
have its own anathema attached to it, and one could not be condemned for
denying it (all by itself), because it would need to have reference to
some other statement. But Canons with their own anathemas attached to them
do not have such references. Therefore, the conclusion of Canon 5 of the
Council of Trent's decree <i>On the Sacrament of Baptism</i> in regard to
the subject of whether sacramental water is necessary for salvation,
remains perfectly valid and infallibly determinate on its own without
further reference to any other declaration of Trent. Canons are by nature
infallible pronouncements of the Church inasmuch as no one can formally be
anathematized for denying that which might be true as private speculation.
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Canons, therefore, are to be understood in their
literal sense and precisely as they are declared, as are all dogmatic
pronouncements of the Church. There is no other conceivable conclusion.
This constitutes the most fundamental error of Father Laisney and his
followers.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">The error here is to claim that only that which has
already been defined belongs to the deposit of Faith, and everything
else is opened to free discussion.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">A sly and misleading concept! Neither Fr. Feeney nor
any of his followers ever made such a claim. There are many doctrines
traditionally held as belonging De Fide to the corpus of the Catholic
Faith prior to becoming De<i> </i>Fide<i> <b>Definita</b></i>. The
Immaculate Conception was not defined until 1854 and the Assumption until
1950, yet were held De Fide by the universal Church (though debated even
by Doctors thereof). There are many, many mysteries of the Faith held De
Fide, yet <i><b>still</b></i> undefined in formal proclamation by the
Church. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">But can any theologian honestly argue that salvation
by baptism of desire or blood is "open to free discussion" when Trent has
closed the door on the subject precisely by defining it as dogma and then
attaching infallible Canons condemning those who refuse to believe it? If,
in fact, St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori or any other ecclesiastical authority
contended that it was still open to free debate since they continued to
consider desire or blood salvific, then these authorities were simply as
mistaken as is Fr. Laisney. </span></p>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Leonard Feeney never taught any doctrine as being that
of the Church which was not contained in the body of Divine Revelation and
thus held De Fide even <i><b>prior</b> </i>to any formal definition. Was
not the Divinity of Jesus Christ De<i> </i>Fide before it was officially
defined by the Council of Nicea in 325? Shouldn't Father Laisney or any
other dogmatic theologian worth his salt be aware that there have always
been doctrines of the Church infallibly held De Fide from the five or six
magisterial sources <i><b>other</b></i> than definitive proclamation?
</span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Saint Alphonsus Maria avows in his <i>Exposition of
Trent</i> that "we must believe with the <i><b>certainty</b></i> of the
Faith not only what has been defined by the Church, but also what appears
to be clearly contained in Scripture; otherwise, everyone might doubt of
any truth expressed in the Sacred Writings <i><b>prior</b></i> to the
definition of the Church." It follows, then, that we are not allowed to
doubt any truth clearly contained in Holy Writ, and that we are allowed to
hold to the literal word of any doctrinal and moral truth found explicitly
in Holy Scripture, even <i><b>before</b></i> they are defined by the
Magisterium. Now, the faithful professed De Fide the belief in the
absolute necessity of receiving sacramental baptism in order to attain
eternal salvation during the centuries prior to its formal definition by
the various Councils of the Church; and they did so precisely because of
the manifestly literal declaration of Jesus Christ as recorded in St.
John's Gospel: "Unless one be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he
cannot enter into the kingdom of God." </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Consequently, on the absolute
necessity of sacramental water baptism for salvation, we not only hold
that which has come down to us as De Fide from the very beginning, but now
also that which has been defined. Rome <i><b>has</b></i> spoken, and the
case is therefore <i><b>closed</b></i>.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<p> </p>
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The truth is that one must
believe everything which belongs to the deposit of Faith, that being
what has already been defined and that which is not yet defined but is
unanimously taught by the Church.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">All Catholics agree to this
statement; but not all Catholics, the world over, and at all times have
"unanimously" considered non-aquatic "baptisms" salvific. For the
Laisneyites to do so is to fall into grievous error by denying that which
is De Fide, even though he does so <i><b>before </b></i>the formal
magisterial condemnation of their specific heresies. For, no Catholics is
required nor expected to wait until "baptism of desire or blood for
salvation" is censured in a future <i>Syllabus of Errors</i> in order to
abhor it as heretical.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<p> </p>
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Such is the case for the
doctrine on baptism of desire, by the Feeneyites own admission. They
write: "This teaching [on the "three baptisms"] indeed was and is the
common teaching of theologians since the early part of this millennium."
7</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Since when has the "common
teaching of theologians" become the "unanimous" teaching of the Roman
Catholic Church binding on all her members? And even if this theological
opinion has been common only since "the early part of this millenium," it
patently is not part of the Deposit of Faith delivered once and for all to
the saints. Father Laisney has shot himself in the foot again. What
<i><b>is</b></i> undeniably De Fide is that which was defined infallibly
by Trent - that baptism of desire can get a properly prepared person into
the state of Sanctifying Grace. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The Council went no farther, but
Fr. Laisney insists on doing so, adding his own pretensions to the
definition of Trent in the process. Such "theology" is both devious and
duplicitous. Bear in mind that "it was the common teaching of theologians"
- especially those called "Scholastics," such as St. Thomas - that Our
Lady was <i><b>not</b></i> immaculately conceived, even though the
man-in-the-pew held out for a papal definition that was long in coming and
was, in fact, produced only in this last century.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">We can only behold in utter awe
both the clarity and virtue of infallibility, which is denied to Doctors
and lavished on Popes, as well as the power with which that grace makes
itself heard unerringly and unequivocally throughout the universal realm
of Christendom. However, the Laisneyites worship the common teaching of
theologians even when it serves to contradict that which has been
infallibly defined by the Magisterium.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<p> </p>
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">However, this was not only the
"common teaching of theologians," but also that of popes, Doctors of the
Church, and saints! In addition, it is found even before this millennium
in the very early years of the Church without a single dissenting
voice.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Father is at it again, begging
the question. <i><b>Some</b></i> does not equal <i><b>All</b></i>. And
although it is to be admitted that some writers argued for salvation
without the actual reception of the Sacrament of Baptism, not a single one
of them has done so <i><b>infallibly</b></i>. If even one of them had, I
would be the first to renounce my position and put down my pen. Since not
a one of <i><b>has</b></i>, then in all honesty Father Laisney ought to do
the same.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">And - not one "single dissenting
voice" in all those years? Apparently, Father Laisney has not fully read
the words of St. Gregory Nazianzen,<i> The Divine Theologian</i>, who was
a Father of the Church of the very early fourth century, and who is today
a Doctor of the Universal Church called, by those in the Oriental Rites,
"The Great Greek Doctor." Here is what this Doctor of the Church has to
say, from his famous <i>Oration on the Holy Lights</i>, precisely and
specifically on the issue of baptism of desire:</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">If you are able to judge a
man who intends to commit murder solely by his intention, and without
there having been any act of murder, then you can likewise reckon as
baptized one who desired baptism without having received baptism. But
if you cannot do the former, how can you do the latter? <i><b>I cannot
see it!</b></i> If you prefer, we will put it like this: if, in your
opinion, desire has equal power with actual baptism, then make the
same judgment in regard to glory [<i>salvation</i>]. You will then be
satisfied to long for glory, as though that longing itself were glory.
Do you suffer any damage by not attaining actual glory, as long as you
have a desire for it? <i><b>I cannot see it!</b></i></span><i><b><span style="color: black;"></span></b></i></p></blockquote></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Or examine closely the words of
the great St. Augustine in his study of the thirteenth Chapter of St.
John's Gospel (<i>tract 7</i>) on this very issue: "Of what use would
repentance be, even before Baptism, if Baptism did not
follow?"</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<p> </p>
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Therefore one ought to believe
in the doctrine of "three baptisms," as it belongs to the Catholic
Faith, though not yet defined. That is why St. Alphonsus can say, as we
have already reported: "It is de fide...."</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">All Catholics are required
believe in the doctrine of the three baptisms, true, but
<i><b>only</b></i> "as it belongs to the Catholic Faith," and not as Fr.
Laisney misinterprets it. Baptism of Desire <i><b>for remission of
sins</b></i> must certainly be held De Fide (and, since Trent, De Fide
Definita), but nowhere can salvation by baptism of desire be found as
taught infallibly by any organ of the Catholic Church. In point of
theological fact, such a definition would constitute just as much a
literal contradiction to what has <i><b>already</b></i> been defined
infallibly by the Magisterium as is the "common opinion of theologians"
held by the Laisneyites.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<p> </p>
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">We can concede that if a point
of doctrine is not yet defined, one may be excused in case of ignorance
or may be allowed to discuss some precision within the doctrine. In the
case of baptism of desire, for instance, we are allowed to discuss how
explicit the Catholic Faith must be in one for baptism of
desire.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">It is this precise concession, of
course, which excuses those seven Doctors of the Church from being formal
heretics in denying the Immaculate Conception. However, it is an insidious
denial of defined dogma for Fr. Laisney to imply, as he does here, that
the Catholic Faith is not explicitly required for the remission of sins in
desire for baptism. Trent has taught definitively that there are several
very purposeful and explicit Acts required for the bestowal of sanctifying
grace prior to the actual reception of water baptism - an Act of Catholic
Faith (which can only be made by one who has reached the use of reason,
and necessitates an express and conscious submission to the Pope of Rome),
an Act of Perfect Contrition or Charity, etc., including an express
intention, purpose, and <i><b>avowed</b></i> plan to receive sacramental
water baptism. The awareness for such acts leaves no wriggle room for the
haziness of an "Implicit" Act.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<p> </p>
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">But one is not allowed to
simply deny baptism of desire and reject the doctrine itself. Rigorism
always tends to destroy the truth.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote><span style="color: black; font-size: x-small;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Neither is any Catholic, Fr.
Laisney included, ever allowed to reject the doctrine of the necessity of
water baptism for salvation as taught infallibly by more than one
Ecumenical Council, by holding to baptism of desire as in itself
sufficient for salvation. And it is, of course, impossible for one
infallible source to contradict literally another infallible source. It is
possible only for theologians such as Fr. Laisney to do this, and then
only by adding non-infallible innuendoes, emendations, and additions to
the Word of God as heard throughout His Church since 99 A.D. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">But does, in fact, "rigorism
always tend to destroy truth"? No, but it often tends to destroy
falsehood! Witness the killing of 850 heathen priests by St. Elias in
<i>the Third Book of Kings</i> (18:40). I reckon those heathens deemed
this a bit rigoristic. Elias sure wasn't very ecumenical! Or take the
destruction of all mankind on the face of this earth with the exception of
those mere "eight souls" (<i>I Peter 3:20</i>) during the Flood of Noah.
It seems certain that these survivors must have considered God a Deity of
supreme rigor. Bear in mind that Jesus Himself said: "I came not to send
peace, but the sword" (<i>Matthew10:34</i>); " Do you think that I have
come to give peace on earth? I tell you no, but rather division" <i>(Luke
12:51</i>). "If any man <i><b>hate</b></i> not his father, and mother, and
wife, and children, and brothers, and sisters ... he cannot be My
disciple" (<i>Luke 14:26</i>). Do you suppose any thinking man deems this
anything other that arrant "rigorism"? </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Pope Paul IV declared: "Even if
my own father were a heretic, I would gather the wood to burn him at the
stake!" (</span><span style="font-family: Arial;"><i>James Laynez, Jesuit</i>, Fr. Joseph
Fichter, SJ, St. Louis: B. Herder, 1944, p.179). <span style="color: black;">Mercy
me! Is it a dishonorable species of rigor to punish heresy and uphold the
Catholic Faith? The saints have always detested heresy with every ounce of
rigor they could muster! </span>Saint Francis de Sales, a 17th Century
Doctor of the one, true Church, noted for his sweet docility, did not
begin his career as anything but a swordswinging crusader for the Faith.
He lopped off the heads of Protestants verbally, and without any show of
what today's liberals might call politically-correct mercy, particularly
in his famous <i>Catholic Controversies</i> (TAN, 1989). The following
excerpts which bear on Baptism of Desire, are copied verbatim from that
book.</span></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Either you had the true Faith, or you had it not.
If not, O unhappy ones, you are damned! - Or else men can be saved
outside the true Church, which is impossible! Here is the definition
of the Church: The Church is a holy university or general company of
men united and collected together in the profession of the one same
Christian Faith; in the participation of the same Sacraments and
Sacrifice; and in obedience to the one same Vicar and lieutenant
General on earth of Our Lord Jesus Christ and Successor of St. Peter;
under the charge of lawful bishops. Thank God we are not Jews; we are
Catholics! We would deserve to be shipwrecked if we were to cast
ourselves out of the ship of the public judgment of the Church, to
sail in the miserable rowboat of these new, discordant, private
inspirations. Our faith would not be Catholic, but private.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">The Word of God is infallible; the Word of God
declares that Baptism is necessary for salvation; therefore, Baptism
is necessary for salvation. Holy Scripture is a most excellent and
profitable doctrine. <i><b>everything</b></i> contrary to it is
falsehood and impiety! Holy Scripture is so much the rule of Christian
Faith that we are obliged to every kind of obligation to believe most
exactly all that it contains, and not to believe
<i><b>anything</b></i> which may be<b><i> ever-so-little</i>
<i>contrary</i> <i>to it</i></b>. When God says to Joshua: "Let not
the Book of this Law depart from thy mouth," He shows clearly that He
willed him to have it always in his mind, and to let no persuasion
enter which might be contrary to it. Are not the Holy Scriptures the
true testament of the eternal God? Being such, how can we alter even
the <i><b>smallest point</b></i> without impiety? For Our Lord, having
duly expressed in Scripture His will, if we add <i><b>anything</b></i>
of our own, we shall make the statement <i><b>go beyond</b></i> the
will of the Testator. If we take <i><b>anything</b></i> away, we shall
make it fall short. If we make changes, we shall set it awry and it
will no longer correspond to the will of the Author nor be a correct
statement. Our Lord puts a value on the iotas, yea, the mere little
points and accents of His holy words. Whoever alters or adds the
<i><b>slightest</b></i> accent in Scripture is a sacrilegious man and
deserves the death of one who dares to mingle the profane with the
sacred!</span></p></blockquote></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Does this sound like a Catholic overcome by
"rigorism," one who might consider Fr. Laisney worthy of death? You make
the call!</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">He who denies a point of
doctrine of the Church, knowing that it is unanimously taught in the
Tradition of the Church, even though it is not yet defined, is not
without sin against the virtue of Faith "without which [Faith] no one
ever was justified" (Denzinger, The Sources of Catholic Dogma, 799;
hereafter abbreviated Dz).</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Please bear in mind that Dz 799
is a citation from Trent on Justification, and pertains only to the above
remarks in quotation marks. The introductory thinking is solely that of
Fr. Laisney. But even in this, Feeneyites readily concur. However, it is
Fr. Laisney and his ilk who are denying the doctrine of the Church as
taught De Fide in Tradition. And it <i><b>has </b></i>been defined that
the Sacrament (not the "desire" for it) is necessary for the attainment of
the Beatific Vision. We can scarcely see how anyone who now denies this in
any fashion can ever be justified, ever be considered anything but a
sinner against the virtue of Faith, and much less saved in
eternity.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black;"> </span></p><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Error III. The Council of Trent
Teaches That Baptism of Desire Is Sufficient for Justification "But not
for Salvation."</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">How can Fr.Laisney class this as
an "error" when it is demonstrably true? Read the Canons for
yourself!</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black;"> </span></p><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Let us preface this section by
saying the Council of Trent clearly teaches that baptism of desire is
sufficient for justification. The Council anathematizes anyone believing
the contrary. It is very explicitly stated in Session VII Canon 4 on the
sacraments in general: "If anyone says that the sacraments of the New
Law are not necessary for salvation, but that they are superfluous; and
that men can, without the sacraments or the desire of them, obtain the
grace of justification by faith alone, although it is true that not all
the Sacraments are necessary for each individual; let him be anathema."
(<i>The Church Teaches</i>, 668; Dz 847).</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">No Catholic has any problem
whatsoever with this, but only with Fr. Laisney's lamentable oversight in
equating Justification with Salvation, and in his incorrect translation of
the Latin from Trent when he erroneously the Council of Trent teach
<i><b>desire</b></i>, when that is not what Trent said at all (more on
this below). Meanwhile (and again), Fr. Laisney is putting his own words
into the mouth of the Magisterium.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Go back and re-read Fr. Laisney's
citation above. Trent defined that the justice of God is the single formal
cause of our own justification, but the Council in no way suggested that
Sanctifying Grace is the solitary cause of our eternal salvation, for
there is an ontological difference between Sanctification and Salvation
which has escaped the likes of Fr. Lais-ney. As a matter of Canonical
fact, the Council of Trent <i><b>itself</b></i> differentiates between
getting into Grace and getting into Heaven:</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">If anyone says that the
Sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for
<i><b>salvation</b></i>, but are superfluous, and that, without them
or without the <i>votum</i> for them, men obtain from God through
faith alone the grace of <i><b>justification </b></i>... Let him be
anathema.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">In other words: (a) the
Sacraments are necessary for salvation, and (b) the Sacraments
<i><b>or</b></i> <i><b>the vowed intention to receive them</b></i> are
necessary for justification. The Sacraments of the Church can produce
salvation; the <i>votum </i>for certain of them can produce justification.
These productions cannot be theologically equalized. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">We must be wary of ambiguous
translations from the original Latin. The accuracy of Latin is supreme
and must be respected.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">This being the self-admitted
case, why is it that Fr. Laisney does not respect supremely the
<i><b>accurate</b></i> correct translation of Trent? It is
<i><b>not</b></i> (as he renders it) "without the sacraments or the desire
of them" (Canon IV, <i>On the Sacraments</i>) or "this translation [into
Justice] cannot be effected except through the laver of regeneration or
the desire for it" (Chapter Four of the <i>Decree on Justification</i>).
In every instance, Trent uses the word <i><b>votum</b> </i>not
<i><b>desire</b></i>.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span></span><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: black;"></span></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;">The Council of
Trent declares that in the New Testament, to get out of the state of sin
and into the State of Grace, one must receive the Sacrament of Baptism or
its <i>votum</i>. In the four places the Council of Trent speaks of this,
the council fathers invariably use the word </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: large;"><i>votum</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;"> which comes from the Latin for "vow," and not "desire" which
derives from the Latin "cupere." What is this <i>votum</i>? - according to
the definition of Trent, it is a conscious avowal to receive the Sacrament
of Baptism. And in another dozen places Trent defined infallibly the
various conscious and constituent acts which are required for the making
of this vow: Acts of Catholic Faith, Hope, and Charity, Perfect
Contrition, and True Repentance for our sins. Furthermore, since this Vow
and these Acts can only be offered formally, purposefully, and
intentionally, no amount of vague "desire" or unconscious "longing" can
possibly serve to introduce man to the sanctification of God's grace. But
even allowing for the mistranslation of "desire" for <i>votum</i>, we can
only agree that Trent defined Justice attainable by way of
desire-for-baptism, <i><b>not</b></i> baptism-of-desire!</span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: black;"></span></span></p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">In a recent flyer published by the Feeneyites
entitled, "Desire, Justification, and Salvation at the Council of
Trent," an ambiguous translation of Session VI Chapter 7 (Dz 799) is
used: "...the instrumental cause [<i>of justification Ed</i>.] is the
sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which no
one is ever justified...." Now the Latin has: "<i>sine qua nulliunquam
contigit iustificatio</i>." In the Latin original, therefore, the phrase
"without which" (or, in the Latin original, "<i>sine qua</i>," is a
feminine pronoun meant to agree with a feminine noun) refers to the
"faith" (a feminine noun in Latin) and not to "sacrament" (a neuter noun
in Latin meant to agree with a neuter pronoun). If it was "sacrament"
the Council Fathers wanted to highlight "without which no one is ever
justified," they would have written "<i>sine
quo</i>."</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Amazing how Father Laisney condescends to correct the
poor illiterate Feeneyites on their mistranslation of feminine nouns and
pronouns, their "simplistic and sophomoric" <i>Sine Qua</i>'s and
<i>Sine</i> <i>Quo</i>'s, but cannot seem to get his own
<i><b>votum</b></i> down correctly. But (at least on this point) he is
absolutely correct. The Faith, without which no one is ever justified, is
the same Faith without which no one is saved (<i>Mark 16:16</i>) and
without which it is impossible to please God at all (<i>Hebrews 11:6</i>).
Therefore - thank God! - Father is correct in his translation here at
last, even though he lacks the Faith. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Every heretic holds to heresy, and every heresy
contains at least a smidgen of truth - or one wouldn't buy into it at all.
Heretics, therefore, are "forever learning, and never coming to the
knowledge of the truth" (<i>II Timothy 3:7</i>). Bear in mind that Lucifer
is a brilliant linguist, but of eminently bad will. Now, God "wills all
men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (<i>I Timothy
2:4</i>). If the Laisneyites do not come to the knowledge of truth, it
cannot be God's fault. For there is only one thing in all human creation
which can frustrate the universal will of God that all men come to the
knowledge of the truth, and that is <i><b>man's own bad will</b></i>. And,
as St. Augustine points out (Dz 804), "God does not abandon the just
unless they first abandon Him."</span></p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">The English translation of Chapter 7 as found in
<i>The Church Teaches</i> (TCT 563) accurately reflects the Latin
(<i>The Church Teaches</i>, TAN Books & Publishers, Inc., Rockford,
IL ~ 61105). In this edition, this important sentence is correctly
translated: "The instrumental cause [<i>of justification Ed</i>.] is the
sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith; without faith no
one has ever been justified." The correct translation of the original
Latin expresses the Church's traditional teaching and refutes the
Feeneyite error.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">I suppose he means to say "refute the Feeneyite
<i><b>translation</b></i>," but Fr. Laisney is adept at Begging the
Question by now. If only he would refute his own mistranslation along with
his genuine theological errors to boot!</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">When the Council of Trent is read carefully, we see
that the Council teaches that: "...it is necessary to believe that the
justified have everything necessary for them to be regarded as having
completely satisfied the divine law for this life by their works, at
least those which they have performed in God. And they may be regarded
as having likewise truly merited the eternal life they will certainly
attain in due time (if they but die in the state of grace), because
Christ our Savior says: He who drinks of the water that I shall give
him, shall never thirst, but it will become in him a fountain of water
springing up into life everlasting." (<i>Session VI</i>,
Chapter16).</span></p></blockquote>
<p> </p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Father Laisney has taken care to leave out the
preceding sentence of Trent in this definition. Let me provide it for you:
Our Lord "continually infuses His virtue into the Justified, a virtue
which always precedes their good <i><b>works</b></i>, which accompanies
and follows them, and without which they could in no way be pleasing and
meritorious before God." What is the first of all good works? Baptism into
the Church, of course. As a matter of fact, this entire Chapter of Trent
is entitled: "The Fruit of Justification, that is, the Merit of Good
<i><b>Works</b></i>..." </span></p>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">So now go back and "read carefully" Fr. Laisney's
selection from this Chapter, and you will see that "the justified have
<i><b>everything</b> <b>necessary</b></i> for them to be regarded as
having completely satisfied the divine law for this life by their works" -
and ask yourself this: How can a man "be regarded as having
<i><b>completely</b></i> satisfied the Divine Law" prior to receiving
baptism into the Church established by God for our eternal salvation?
Didn't Jesus Christ make the Sacrament of Baptism a <i><b>Law</b></i> to
be fulfilled by all men on this earth?</span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Dare any devout Catholic, who trusts in God to keep
His promises, suggest with Fr. Laisney that, in exceptional cases, He
might <i><b>not</b></i>? Do we honestly believe that God would give a man
the grace to desire the Sacrament of Baptism with all his heart, and then
not see to it that the man does not in eventual fact receive it? "Delight
in the Lord and He will give thee the requests of thy heart; commit thy
way to the Lord and trust in Him, and <i><b>He will do it</b></i>"
(<i>Psalm 36:4-5</i>).</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Thus, Trent declares infallibly that "Christ our
Savior says: He who <i><b>drinks</b></i> of the water I <i><b>shall give
him</b></i>," obviously meaning that Jesus will indeed give the water of
baptism to all those desiring to drink it. It can only be said, therefore,
that Trent is speaking here of souls justified in the waters of the
Sacrament, and not of some mere "desire" for the Sacrament. Moreover, left
unfulfilled and incomplete, even the <i>votum</i> for the Sacrament will
not get you anything but damned to Hell, and all the "eternal life" which
you might have "merited" will be lost forever. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">You have to have Sanctifying Grace in order to "work
out your salvation in fear and trembling" (<i>Philippians</i> <i>2:12</i>)
- and this "working out," denotes "satisfying <i><b>completely </b></i>the
Divine Law." Can any one who might be justified prior to satisfying
completely the Divine Law be claimed as having <i><b>in fact
</b></i>satisfied completely the Divine Law? "When you have done all these
things commanded you, say: We are unprofitable servants, we have done that
which we ought to do "(<i>Luke 17:10</i>). If we "ought" to be baptized
because it has admittedly been "commanded," and we do not perform this
work, then we have truly become "the unprofitable servant cast out into
the exterior darkness where there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth"
(<i>Matthew 25:30</i>)!</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">There is another fundamental error with the
Laisneyites. For these heretics, God has become a cosmic exercise in
eternally hopeless self-frustration, a petulant deity who delights in
chimerical whimsy by denying men of good-will <i><b>precisely</b></i> that
which He dangles before them - indeed, that which has been infallibly
defined by His ecclesial Voice on earth as being specifically requisite
for their eternal salvation. They consequently conjecture that God permits
such souls never to be brought to the perfection of grace found only in
water baptism and, moreover, that God even appears to have second thoughts
as to how such souls are to be saved short of eventual reception of the
Faith and sacraments which He alone has inspired in them, and which alone
can satisfy man's supernal vocation. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">For such heretics, the "due time" of which Trent
speaks does not mean the ultimate eventuality of reaching the font of
Baptism, but rather that God dispenses with the Sacrament altogether just
in case He cannot stop a Greyhound bus from running over a catechumen on
his way to the font. The Due Time of Trent has become for them the
entrance into bliss, not the entrance into the Church by obedience to her
Commandments. Saint John Chrysostom refutes the Laisneyites by professing
that "it is perfectly clear that you will achieve what you earnestly
strive for, as long as you will it. Let us only apply ourselves to the
task at hand, let us only be serious about it, and <i><b>everything else
will follow</b></i>" (<i>On Hebrews</i>, 16:4). As St. John Eudes writes:
</span></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">He Who lavishes His gifts on so many Mohammedans,
blasphemers, godless persons, and atheists, will He forsake His own
true children? It is impossible! Utterly <i><b>impossible!</b></i> Let
us be anxious only to please Him and accomplish faithfully what He
asks of us, and He will take care of <i><b>all</b></i> that is
necessary and expedient for us. </span></p>
<p align="right"><span style="font-family: Arial;">(<i>Letters and Shorter Works</i>, NY:
Kenedy & Sons, 1948, p.134)</span></p></blockquote></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Is it indeed even <i><b>possible</b></i> that God
would give us the grace to make that <i>votum</i> for the first of all His
sacraments, and <i><b>not</b></i> see to it that we live to receive
Baptism in actuality (presuming our genuine worth)? Saint Cyprian exclaims
in his <i>Exhortation to Martyrdom </i>that "Almighty God <i><b>cannot
</b></i>withold aid" to a man who trusts in His providence. For, "God does
not forsake those who have once been justified by His grace, unless He
first be forsaken by them," adds St. Augustine (<i>On Nature and
Grace</i>, 26).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Thus, "God's gifts and His call can never be
withdrawn; He will never go back on His promises" (<i>Romans 11:29</i>).
"So far as relates to spiritual goods for eternal salvation," declares St.
Alphonsus Maria Liguori, "God's promise to hear us is not conditional, but
<i><b>absolute</b></i>." And this truly <i><b>is</b></i> De Fide. For,
"God, Who has begun a good work in you, will perfect it unto the Day of
Christ Jesus" (<i>Philippians</i> <i>1:6</i>). Only the Almighty can begin
this "good work" of conversion in the souls of His Elect, and He has
guaranteed that "He <i><b>will</b></i> perfect it." This is God's literal,
verbatim, word-for-word pledge to any member of humankind who will listen.
"Therefore, I say unto you: all things whatsoever you ask for, when you
pray, believe that you shall receive, and they shall come to you"
(<i>Mark</i> <i>11:24</i>).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Since, as Trent has declared, "the justified have
everything necessary" for salvation but, as the Laisneyites argue, with
Grace alone prior to Baptism, then why did the Council define infallibly
(Canon 20 <i>On Justification</i>), that: "If anyone shall say that a man
who is justified and ever-so-perfect is not bound to observe the
Commandments of God <i><b>and of the Church</b></i> ... let him be
anathema!"? How can one obey the Commandments of the Church unless he is
first made a member of the Church, which membership comes only by way of
actual reception of the Sacrament of Baptism.? If Justification
<i><b>alone</b></i> is all you need to go to Heaven, why bring up the
Commandments of the Church at all - the first of which is, by definition,
to get baptized with water?</span></p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">In other words, salvation, which is at the end of
the Christian life on earth, only requires perseverance in the state of
grace received at justification, which is at the beginning of the
Christian life on earth.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Ignoring the fact that Baptism has been defined
infallibly requisite for salvation, ask yourself - how long can any man
expect to "persevere in the state of grace received at justification"
<i><b>without</b></i> the Sacraments? Our Lord instituted the sacramental
system precisely so that we could maintain the life of grace in us! It is
written that St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Therese the Little Flower, and
various other saints, managed to preserve their baptismal innocence, but
they received the Sacraments very often. Saint Joan of Arc is recorded to
have gone to Confession three times a day!</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Our Immaculate Mother Mary was defined by Trent never
even to have committed the least venial sin, and she received Holy
Communion every single day for the twenty-five years of life which
remained for her - which, of course, means that the Blessed Mother had to
have been baptized first. Did she receive her Divine Son in Holy Communion
simply because it was "a nice thing to do in His memory" or because she
felt it <i><b>necessary</b></i>? And if Our Lady needed the Eucharist,
then she needed Baptism; and, if the Mother of God needed Baptism,
<i><b>who doesn't?</b></i></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">And how can Fr. Laisney proclaim so self-assuredly
that "justification is the beginning of the Christian life on earth"? For,
it does not seem that such has ever been defined or taught De Fide by the
Catholic Church. In short, how can one live the <i><b>life</b></i> of
Christ without <i><b>becoming</b></i> Christ first, and thus having
necessarily been baptized? In his <i>Sermon to Catechumens On the
Creed</i>, St. Augustine makes it clear that "in the Church there are
three ways in which sins are forgiven: in baptism, in prayer, and in the
greater humility of penance. Nevertheless, God does not forgive sins
except to the baptized." </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">In St. Augustine's thinking, it appears almost as
though there is something left unforgiven to those who have not yet
undergone actual baptism, regardless of whether they have attained some
species of Justification by virtue of <i>votum</i> or not. Saint Augustine
even dares to say that, "without the sacraments, access cannot be had to
<i><b>true</b></i> Life" (<i>On the Gospel of John</i>, tract 120). For
this reason, Trent defined that "all <i><b>true</b></i> Justification
either begins through the sacraments or, once begun, increases through
them, or when lost is regained through them" (<i>Prologue</i>, Session
VII; DZ, no.843a). "For," as its Catechism explains: "Sins can be forgiven
only through the Sacraments<i><b> when duly administered</b></i>."
(<i>Catechism of Trent</i>, Frs. McHugh-Callan ed., p.115). </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Is there something about sin held in abeyance until
actual reception of the Sacrament of Baptism, even for those reaching
justification prior to its reception? Were all those souls ultimately
saved out of the Old Testament, even though having died justified, held in
abeyance in the Limbo of the Fathers for the same reason? Is there,
consequently, something about sin which can only be rectified only by
being plunged into the Body of Jesus Christ which, in the New Testament
takes place <i><b>exclusively</b></i> in the actual reception of His
Sacrament of water Baptism? "For," asks St. Gregory of Nyssa in his
<i>Oration on the Word Made Flesh</i>, "how can you put on Christ unless
you receive the Mark of Christ? - unless you receive His baptism?"
().</span></p><i><b>
</b></i><p><i><b><span style="font-family: Arial;">Christian</span></b></i><span style="font-family: Arial;"> life, therefore, cannot be said to
exist prior to the actual reception of Baptism, which immerses us in
Christ and makes us in fact Another Christ - an <i>Alter Christus</i>. A
species of justifying grace commences with <i>votum</i>, it is true, but
no grace is essentially and specifically "Christian" until the Character
of Christ is imprinted on the soul in Holy Baptism. This Character is not
to be found in mere desire for Baptism, nor even in its formal
<i>votum</i>, and not even in those sainted souls in the Limbo of the Old
Testament who certainly were not living the "life of Christ" ahead of
Christ Himself. Saint Ambrose declared that "the mystery of regeneration
does not exist <i><b>at all</b></i> without water. Even the catechumen
believes ... but, unless he be baptized in the name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, he <i><b>cannot</b></i> receive remission
of his sins nor the gift of spiritual grace." Saint Pacian, an early
Father therefore asks: "Does Christ call the unbaptized <i>The Church?
</i>Is an unregenerated man <i>The Body of Christ?</i>" (Epistle III,
9:12). In his famous <i>Catena </i>Aurea, St. Thomas writes that "he who
believes and is not yet baptized, but is only a catechumen, has not yet
<i><b>fully</b></i> acquired salvation." The third Council of Valence
consequently declares that "<i><b>All</b></i> the multitude of the
faithful are regenerated from water and the Holy Spirit, and <i><b>through
this</b></i> truly incorporated into the Church" (Dz 324).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Perhaps this is all purely speculative. And perhaps my
authorities cited on this particular issue are all terribly mistaken. But
then, is it not more likely that it is Fr. Laisney and his gullible
followers who are mistaken? Trent says that salvation lies in store
<i><b>solely</b></i> for those who have begun to live the life of Christ
in the Baptism of Christ. Or, let us put it this way -</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">1) It is infallible that there is no salvation outside
the Church.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">2) It is infallible that you cannot be a member of the
Church till Baptism.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">3) It is infallible, therefore, that there is no
salvation prior to Baptism in water.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">a) It is infallible that all those saved must be
subject to the Pope.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">b) t is infallible that none of the unbaptized are
subject to the Pope.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">c) It is infallible, therefore, that only the baptized
can be saved.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">There? It's as simple as 1, 2, 3 or A, B, C. And we
didn't even need a Latin dictionary!</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Baptism is the sacrament of justification, the
sacrament of the beginning of the Christian life. If one has received
sanctifying grace, which is the reality of the sacrament - <i>res
sacramenti</i> - of baptism, he only needs to persevere in that grace to
be saved. Perseverance in grace requires obedience to the Commandments
of God, including the commandment to receive the sacrament of baptism.
Thus there remains for him the obligation to receive baptism of water.
But, this is no longer absolutely necessary (by necessity of means),
since he has already received by grace the ultimate fruit of that
means.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Ss. Augustine and Alphonsus Maria Liguori deemed the
Character, received exclusively in the actual reception of sacramental
baptism, the greatest effect of the Sacrament - not Sanctifying Grace.
Saint Alphonsus Maria Liguori says: "Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy
Orders have for their <i><b>chief </b></i>effect the impression of
Character, that is to say, a sort of spiritual Mark which becomes
identified with the soul, and is forever indelible" (<i>Commandments and
Sacraments</i>, Part II:2). In agreement with St. Alphonsus Maria, St.
Augustine speaks as though there were scarcely any result
<i><b>other</b></i> than living incorporation into Jesus as His very Self
which is achieved when we are Marked as such: "The effect of baptism is to
make those who are baptized incorporated into Christ as His members"<i>
(De Peccatorum Meritis et Remissione</i>, I; cf. also St. Thomas Aquinas,
<i>Summa Theologica </i>III, Q.68, art.5). </span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Saint Cyril of Jerusalem (<i>On</i> <i>Baptism</i>,
Lecture III:4) and St. John Chrysostom </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">(Homily III on <i>Philippians</i>)</span><span style="font-family: Arial;">,
Fathers and Doctors of the Church, write that no man can possibly enter
into the kingdom of Heaven without the Character of Christ which even Fr.
Laisney admits is bestowed exclusively in sacramental baptism.
</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">It is for this reason that Fr.
Matthias Scheeben, one of the greatest theologians of last century,
declared in his masterpiece, <i>The Mysteries of Christianity</i>: "We
must realize that, in the Sacraments by which the Character is produced,
it is the <i><b>center </b></i>of their entire causality and significance,
and that in the other Sacraments it is the basis and point-of-departure of
their entire activity."</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">If we are to follow the heresy of the Laisneyites, we
would be compelled to argue that unbaptized non-members of the Body of
Jesus Christ can go to Heaven. Since the contrary has been defined
infallibly by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church many times over,
anything which serves to contradict it can only be considered formally
heretical, regardless of whether its propagators are material or formal
heretics in the subjective forum. It is, therefore, central to their
position for the Laisneyites to claim that <i><b>all</b></i> that is
needed for salvation is the State of Grace, but this notion has already
been sufficiently refuted to go over the groundwork again. However, such
Grace <i><b>is</b></i> all that is necessary - for those who die and go to
Judgment baptized with water.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Jesus Christ never instituted "Res Sacramenti" or any
other ingredient of a Sacrament. He gave us seven full Sacraments, and we
either make use of them or be damned. Besides, how can one possess the
"reality of a sacrament" without having in really received the sacrament
itself? This appears to be a theological distinction tantamount to
gobbledeegook. Are there such things as the <i><b>Unreality</b></i> of
Sacraments? Do we receive Jesus in the Holy Communion in
<i><b>reality</b></i>, or not? In this, it seems, Fr. Laisney is following
the error of St. Thomas, who is classed philosophically as a "Moderate
Realist." Now. Go into your local McDonald's and see if you can buy a
moderately real cup of coffee.</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">It [<i>Baptism</i>] still remains necessary in
virtue of our Lord's precept to be baptized by
water.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Now, this is interesting. The Lord goes to the trouble
to give us commandments which are "necessary," but not "in reality"
necessary. This way lies not only Moderate Reality but a replay of
Original Sin as well! God said to Adam & Eve: "If you eat of the tree
of the knowledge of good and evil, you <i><b>shall</b></i> die the death."
No ifs, ands, or buts. Then Lucifer slides in and suggests, "No, you shall
not die the death!" You can almost hear him pleading for a lack of clarity
on the part of God - that He had not made His commands plainly
<i><b>absolute</b></i>, but left their necessity in a status of being
merely moderately real. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">A true-life adventure - once I was on a bus crossing
the country. At one stop, a woman climbed aboard, seated herself right
behind the driver, and commenced to light up a cigarette. "Lady!" he
shouted, "Don't you see that sign right there? <i>No Smoking!</i>" "Aha,"
she retorted; "but it doesn't say <i><b>absolutely</b></i> no
smoking!"</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">The beauty of God's Providence in making His
regulations necessary by law is that otherwise we might not obey, and thus
fail to obtain those things <i><b>by which alone </b></i>we can be saved.
Is this not the way with any good Father or Mother to their children? It
is absolutely necessary that we make our way home to Heaven; therefore,
God ordains that we look both ways when crossing the street. Father
Laisney is arguing that we do not absolutely have to look both ways. No
wonder his catechumens get run over!</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">When and if circumstances independent of our will
prevent us from fulfilling such a precept, the principle taught by St.
Cyprian, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, and others is to be applied: "God
takes the will as the fact." 9 This means that God accepts the intention
to receive the sacrament of baptism as equivalent to the actual
reception of the sacrament.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">In this scenario, a man and woman can have "Matrimony
be Desire" (but don't worry; the poor wife's resulting pregnancy would
only be Moderately Real). Note well - the Laisneyites are saying that
there are some commandments of God which are impossible for us to obey.
They do this by insinuating that it <i><b>is </b></i>possible that some
men can <i><b>not</b></i>, in fact,<i><b> </b></i>obey them. And this is a
formally condemned heresy. Trent defined infallibly: "If anyone shall say
that the commandments of God are, <i><b>even for one who is justified and
constituted in grace</b></i>, impossible to observe, let him be anathema"
(Canon 18, <i>On Justification</i>).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Ask yourself - Who put the grace into a man's heart to
arrive at the intention to receive the Sacrament of Baptism in the first
place? All such graces come exclusively from God, never from our own
wills. It is the Lord alone Who gives men "the power to be made the sons
of God, to those who believe in His name, who are born not of blood, nor
of the will of the flesh, <i><b>nor of the will of man</b></i>, but of
God" (<i>John 1:12-13</i>).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Now, (1) since the grace to desire Baptism can come
only from God, and (2) since He cannot go back on his promises, nor see
His Graces made void (except by our <i><b>bad</b></i> will), and (3)
inasmuch as we are not allowed to say that even a person who is already in
the State of Sanctifying Grace cannot obey the will of God to be baptized
with water, then it follows ineluctable that (4) all men of good will
shall receive Sacramental Baptism; furthermore (5) that only those who
place an impediment of their own wills against such reception of the
Sacrament will never come to receive it. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">"My Word will <i><b>not</b></i> return to Me void,
saith the Lord God" (<i>Isaias 55:11</i>). The only one who can make void
the word of God is man himself. Let us therefore never place ourselves in
the camp of the Laisneyites who busy themselves "making void the word of
God" (<i>Mark 7:13</i>) by calling His commands "impossible to
obey."</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">It is false to pretend that Canon 4 of Session VII
(TCT 668) of the Council of Trent (quoted above) on the Sacraments in
General deals with justification as opposed to
salvation.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">On the contrary, it is patently false on Fr. Laisney's
part to pretend that Canon 4 of Session VII of the Council of Trent "On
The Sacraments in General" does <i><b>not</b></i> distinguish
justification as opposed to salvation. It is erroneous to presume that
there is no distinction between justification and salvation in either the
teaching or the mind of the Church. In point of fact, the Church
<i><b>functions</b></i> upon just such a distinction. Read Canon 4 "On the
Sacraments" again:</span></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">If anyone says that the Sacraments of the New Law
are not necessary for <i><b>salvation</b></i>, but are superfluous,
and that, without them or without the desire for them, men obtain from
God through faith alone the grace of <i><b>justification</b></i> ...
Let him be anathema.</span></p></blockquote></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">According to this literal statement, "desire of them"
can refer <i><b>solely </b></i>to the condition of justification, not to
salvation. By the demands of Catholic theology, rationality, and even good
grammar, the words concerning <i>votum</i> modify <i><b>only</b></i> the
condition necessary for the attainment of justification. It cannot relate
logically back to what has been defined as necessary for salvation, namely
"the sacraments of the New Law." To pretend it does is to attack the very
expression employed by the Church in this infallible declaration.
Consequently, the phrase concerning desire is concerned exclusively in
reference to justification alone. The attainment of justification,
therefore, cannot be considered as good as having received a sacrament,
and certainly not as good as being in Heaven. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Additional proclamations of the Magisterium denote a
clear and traditional distinction between the attainment of Justice and
the attainment of Heaven. In the <i>their Decree on Justification</i> (Dz
796) Trent infallibly declared that, after specific conditions are met,
the <i>votum</i> for Baptism can suffice for justification, and ony
justification alone is mentioned. Nowhere has the Church ever decreed that
this vowed intention can suffice for salvation. Whereas elsewhere, in
regards to salvation, Trent decrees the necessity of water Baptism
precisely by condemning those who would deny its necessity, and does so in
language which allows for no exceptions whatsoever (Dz 858, 861). We have
already cited the declaration of Pope Lox XIII, that Catholics "can make
no exception where no distinction is made" (<i>Satis Cognitum</i>, June
29, 1896). Thus, St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori concludes that "the law of
baptism admits of <i><b>no</b></i> exceptions" (<i>Explanation of
Trent</i>, p.128, no.13).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">The First Vatican Council proclaimed in 1870: "Since
without faith it is impossible to please God, no one is justified without
it, <i><b>nor</b></i> will anyone attain <i><b>eternal life </b></i>unless
he perseveres to the end in it." (<i>On</i> <i>Faith</i>, chap.3, Dz
1792). Such infallible documents manifestly demonstrate that the Church
has all along understood justification and salvation to be distinct, and
that the former is simply <i><b>one</b></i> of the prerequisites for the
attainment of the latter. Though a catechumen can achieve the state of
justification with the resolve to receive the sacraments, the Magisterium
makes it clear that not one of them could enter Heaven without their
reception.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">In all finality, the ability to grasp distinctions is,
as St. Thomas observes in his <i>Psychology </i>(the study of creatures
which have animate souls), the first mark of wisdom. In fact, many of our
most fundamental Catholic dogmas rest on their employment. We conclude,
for example, that the Persons in the Godhead are <i><b>distinct</b></i>,
but not separate. We <i><b>distinguish</b></i> between the human nature
and the Divine Nature of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. Saint
Vincent Ferrer remarked that the angels of God could tell those who are
baptized from those who are not, merely by the <i><b>distinguishing
Mark</b></i> bestowed exclusively in the Sacrament of Baptism. In one of
their humorous sophisms, the Jesuits once taught me: "If you cannot solve
an issue, make distinctions!" But this only points out the historical fact
that distinctions produced in dogmatic theology are sometimes genuinely
necessary to a proper comprehension of our Catholic Faith.</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Desire is explicitly mentioned in this Canon, for
when it uses the expression<i> </i>"<i>aut eorum voto</i>," it admits
that the grace of justification can be obtained by desire of the
sacraments.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Persistence in the mistranslation of "voto"
(<i>votum</i>) as "cupido" (<i>desire</i>) is equally a false pretense on
the part of the Laisneyites. <i>Voto</i> is from a neuter noun in Latin,
<i>cupido</i> is a feminine noun. Father cites the "explicitly mentioned"
phrase in this Canon as "<i>aut eorum</i> <i><b>voto</b></i>" - and any
first-semester Latin student knows that this is to be translated "or its
<i><b>vow</b></i>" and never "or its <i><b>desire</b></i>," as Fr. Laisney
and his followers in the SSPX persist in mistranslating it.
<i><b>Can</b></i> "the grace of justification can be obtained by desire of
the sacraments"? Not always and, in the case of mere "desire" never. Can
justification be obtained by the avowed intention to receive certain
Sacraments? Yes, but generally only those Sacraments which are called
Sacraments of the Dead (Baptism and Penance), not those which are
Sacraments of the Living. For, Sacraments of the Living are, by
definition, received by those already <i><b>in</b></i> the state of
justification.</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">It is also false to say that Canon 5 on the
Sacrament of Baptism from Session VII of the Council of Trent deals with
salvation as opposed to justification.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">To refresh your memory: Canon 5 <i>On the Sacrament of
Baptism</i> declares infallibly that: "If anyone says that baptism is
optional, that is, not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema." Are
Feeneyites the only ones who fail to see any reference whatsoever to
justification in this infallible statement? In fact, doesn't everyone
notice that the word "anyone" necessarily includes Fr. Laisney and his
followers?</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Indeed Canon 4 (of Session VII) deals explicitly
with the necessity of sacraments "for salvation." In that context, the
expression "grace of justification" appears manifestly as being
precisely the only essential requisite for salvation, as is taught
explicitly in Session VI Chapter 16.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">First of all, Session VII of Trent decreed
<i><b>two</b></i> Canons numbered "4" - one <i>on The Sacraments in
General</i>, and one on <i>The Sacrament of Baptism</i>. Even though Fr.
Laisney may have lost his concentration by this time, and thus fails to
specify which one he is talking about, it seems obvious enough with a
little study that he can only be referring to Canon 4 of the <i>Decree on
the Sacraments in General</i>. So here it is again: </span></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law
are not necessary for <i><b>salvation</b></i>, but are superfluous
[for salvation], <i><b>and</b></i> that without them or without the
<i><b>votum</b></i> for them [the consciously vowed intention to
receive them], men obtain through faith alone the grace of
<i><b>justification</b></i> - although not all [of the sacraments] are
necessary for each one [since, for example, priests don't usually
receive the Sacrament of Matrimony] - let him be
anathema.</span></p></blockquote></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Now. Father temerariously (and hilariously) proclaims:
"In that context, the expression 'grace of justification' appears
manifestly as being precisely the only essential requisite for salvation.
Incredible (literally)! Trent anathematizes <i><b>anyone</b></i> who dares
to say that the Sacraments are not necessary for salvation, and Fr.
Laisney concludes that this "manifests precisely" that the only essential
requisite for salvation is the grace of justification! <i>Hello!</i> Are
you getting this?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Then Father goes right on, willy-nilly, to add that
this "is taught explicitly in Session VI Chapter 16." Here then, for your
perusal, is the pertinent "explicit teaching" from Session VI, Chapter 16
of the Council of Trent (again, there <i><b>is</b></i> no Chapter 16 from
Session VI <i>On</i> <i>Reform</i>; you must look this up in a totally
separate section of Session VI) -</span></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">To those who <i><b>work well</b></i> unto the end,
and trust in God, eternal life is to be offered ... to be faithfully
given <i><b>to their good works</b></i> and merits. For this is the
crown of Justice [Eternal Life in Heaven obtained by <i><b>good
works</b></i> done in Jesus Christ] ... For, since Jesus Christ
Himself, as the Head into the members, and Vine into the branches,
continually infuses strength into those who are justified, which
strength always precedes, accompanies, and follows their good works
[<i>Whoa!</i> You mean Jesus gives the strength to all those who are
justified to follow up by actually performing the Good Work of getting
baptized?], without which they could not in any manner be pleasing and
meritorious, we must believe that nothing further is lacking to those
who are justified to prevent them from being considered to have,
<i><b>by those very works which have been done in God</b></i>, fully
satisfied the divine Law according to the state of this life, and to
have truly merited Eternal Life, to be obtained in its [due] time,
provided that they depart [this life] in Grace
....</span></p></blockquote></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">It must be asked - can any man be considered to have
done sufficient <i><b>works </b></i>towards the "satisfaction of the
Divine Law" (which Father Laisney has already admitted to require Baptism)
without having actually <i><b>been</b></i> baptized? Saint Augustine, in
his <i>On Christian Doctrine </i>(II) declares that "the grace of God
towards men may occasionally be such that they have justification prior to
the outward reception of the sacraments. However, such persons must
necessarily <i><b>receive</b></i> the sacraments." Can it reasonably be
expected that any man might be able to perform all other good works "done
in Jesus Christ," but find no time for Baptism - or that God would even
accept his other good works and still make it impossible for him to be
baptized? What sort of facile and sophomoric reasoning is this?
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Certainly, nothing is lacking to those who "fully
satisfy" the divine law of baptism, precisely as canonized by the Council
of Trent. However, to use the Council <i><b>against </b></i>itself in this
context is arrantly fraudulent. Can anyone in his right mind believe that
here, or anywhere else in its infallible decrees, Trent "manifests
precisely that the only essential requisite for salvation is the grace of
justification"? Or has mere "desire" now been equated with actual "works"?
What <i><b>work</b></i> is so indispensable for salvation that "<i><b>no
one</b></i>" can contradict its necessity, except Baptism of Water and the
other Sacraments which follow it (and none <i><b>can</b></i> follow unless
one is first baptized)?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">As George Orwell declared in his book <i>1984</i>,
this is Newspeak and Doublethink par excellence! Or as Alice said in
Wonderland, "It's becoming weirder and weirder."</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">That which is said of the sacraments in general
applies to each sacrament in particular, without having to be repeated
each time.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">If this is true, can you have "Confirmation By
Desire," or do you really have to take a slap in the face? Do feminists in
the Church today enjoy "Ordination By Desire?" What Father should be
saying is that, yes, under the properly-defined conditions Sanctifying
Grace can indeed be had prior to the actual reception of the sacraments.
However, this in no way implies that the sacramental graces peculiar to
each sacrament can be had prior to the actual reception thereof, nor can
the Character impressed by Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy Orders be had
prior to the actual reception of those sacraments. </span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Simplistic reasoning which disregards the explicit
teaching of the Church on baptism of desire only arrives at false
conclusions.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">We are explicitly commanded to become like little
children if we are ever to reach salvation (<i>Mark 10:15</i>). God has
not required anyone to graduate from a School of Theology with advanced
degrees in order to enter into His kingdom. Pope John Paul II declared
that "faithful <i><b>ignorance</b></i> is better than temerarious
knowledge" (<i>General Audience</i>, "Augustine of Hippo," August 28,
1986). Temerarious means foolishly rash boldness. The truths of the Faith,
therefore, are necessary for salvation, and they are consequently and
irrefutably eminently comprehensible to the least little child of God.
Now, how many children do you know who enjoy anything <i><b>but</b></i>
"simplistic reasoning"?</span></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">I confess to Thee, O Father, Lord of Heaven and
earth, because Thou hast hidden these things from the wise and
prudent, and hast revealed them to little ones. Yea, Father, for so it
hath seemed good in Thy sight. <i>Luke 10: 21</i>
</span></p></blockquote></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">There is a deep truth underlying the words of G. K.
Chesterton when he stated that "God gave us the Church to save us from
theologians." The fact is, it is the Roman Catholic Church alone which can
speak infallibly, whereas theologians fall on their academic faces every
day. Consequently, as Pope Pius XII decreed in <i>Humani Generis</i> (no.
21), </span></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">God has given to His Church a living Teaching
authority to elucidate and explain what is contained in the deposit of
faith only obscurely and implicitly. This deposit of faith our Divine
Redeemer has given for authentic interpretation not to each of the
faithful, nor even to theologians, but <i><b>only</b></i> to the
teaching authority of the Church.</span></p></blockquote></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">For this reason, even the littlest of children with
the use of reason can claim a perfect and literal understanding of the
infallible Canons and Decrees given us by the Magisterium, "that
understanding which Holy Mother Church has <i><b>once</b></i> declared"(Dz
1800). Our greatest theologian is perhaps St. Thomas Aquinas, and he
professed that "a thing may be so necessary that, without it, the end
cannot be attained ... In this way the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary
to the individual, <i><b>simply </b></i>and <i><b>absolutely</b></i>."
(<i>Summa</i> <i>Theologica</i>, III, Q. 65, Art.4). Perhaps the "Dumb Ox"
was more simplistically childlike than Fr. Laisney gives him
credit!</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Besides, the Catholic Church has no "explicit teaching
on baptism of desire"; She has only an infallible definition that
explicitly defines the possibility of attaining justification prior to
baptism, and denies expressly that anyone without the sacrament can go to
Heaven. See? That should be simple enough for anyone, even without
Advanced Degrees.</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">That it is not necessary to repeat the clause
"<i>gre aut voto</i>" is so much the more true since baptism of desire
is an exception, a special case, not the normal
one.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">It surely must be presumed by Fr. Laisney and his ilk
that every little Catholic schoolboy carries around a Latin dictionary and
a set of theological text books, all the better to follow his arguments.
But yes - baptism of desire (if we must call it that) is indeed an
exception to the normal rule of how one can get justified in the sight of
God, <i><b>not</b></i> an exception of how one gets into the Beatific
sight of God!</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">In his <i>Treatise on Baptism</i> of a
century-and-a-half ago, Arch-bishop Patrick Kenrick of Baltimore explained
the necessary condition of salvation demanded by Our Lord in<i> John
3:5</i> by writing: "When a condition of salvation is proclaimed on divine
authority, it is rash to indulge in speculation; it is impious to arraign
the decree at the tribunal of our erring reason." Therefore, if we desire
to see anyone excused from the universal requirement of baptism, we must
necessarily presume on the infallible Magisterium of the true Church to
corroborate our expectations and, in the event of a <i><b>lack</b></i> of
such substantiation, we must irrefutably fall back on the absolute
"condition of salvation as proclaimed on divine authority" detailed by
Archbishop Kenrick.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Were any exception allowed to the eventual, actual,
and absolute necessity of baptism, and it were not genuinely true that all
men in the New Testament must be baptized or be damned, Our Lord Jesus
Christ would have had to have made it clarion clear in Revelation for us.
"If not, I would have told you!" (<i>John 14:2</i>), Our Redeemer assures
us. And, in point of fact, it would not have been the first instance of
Our Lord making an exception to His own Word. In <i>Matthew 5:32</i>, He
declares: "Whoever puts away his wife, <i><b>except for
fornication</b></i>, and marries another, commits adultery." Jesus Christ
alone established the Sacramental System for our salvation, and Jesus
Christ alone can make an exception in the matter of His Sacramental
Theology. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Therefore no individual dare add an exception, not
even the barest shadow of an exception, to the necessity of the Sacrament
of Water Baptism for eternal salvation - not even to favor those who may
actually manage to have reached justification before he reaches the water
of the sacrament. Never - repeat: <i><b>never</b></i> - has the
Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church ever taught in any way whatsoever
that a person has no need to obey the command of Almighty God to receive
the Sacrament of Holy Baptism in order to be saved. Pius XI declared
-</span></p>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">This Sovereign Master has issued
commandments,<br />The value of which is independent<br />Of every time and
every space,<br />Indeed, of country and of of race!<br />As God's sun
shines on every human face,<br />So does His law know neither exception
nor caste!</span></p>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">(<i>The World's Great Catholic Literature</i>,
George Shuster, editor, Harrison, NY: Roman Catholic Books, 1994,
p.264). </span></p></blockquote></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">This is Dogma set in poetry!</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">As we have already seen, the Council of Trent defined
infallibly that "No one, however much justified, should consider himself
exempt from the observance of the commandments." If, then, anyone is
presumptuous enough to hold that any human is exempt from the observance
of baptism, and that the Sacrament therefore is, for him, merely an
option, they are necessarily arguing against an explicit definition of the
Church as well as holding that which the Church has never decreed.
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">When it comes to submission to the laws laid down by
Christ and His Church, Pope Leo XIII renders our note of obedience quite
simply: "We can make no exception where no distinction is made" (<i>Satis
Cognitum</i>, June 29, 1896).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Now, experts in the field, such as Fr. Laisney
presumes to be, distinguish two levels, or kinds, of necessity: that of
<i>Precept</i> and that of <i>Means</i>. Laws of precept are sometimes
dispensable when they lead readily to harm (<i>Luke 6:1</i>) or scandal
(<i>Matthew 17:26</i>); however, according to Msgr. Joseph Pohle,
theologians have traditionally considered baptism necessary for salvation
<i><b>both</b></i> by precept and by means (<i>The Sacraments</i>, London:
B. Herder, vol.1, p. 238). </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">This signalizes the fact that the good achieved by
this sacrament is necessary for salvation under any and all conceivable
circumstances whatsoever. The notion of "precept" necessarily denotes a
law given us by a Lawgiver who has the ultimate authority to tell us what
to do. For this reason, the Council of Trent cursed anyone who "says that
Jesus Christ was given by God to men as a Redeemer to trust, but not also
as a Legislator to obey" (<i>Decree On Justification</i>, Canon 21). If we
wish to be saved, we must submit, and that is all that need be kept in
mind concerning the Requirement of Necessity. And the simplest child of
God can comprehend this even on his day off.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Our Redeemer has commanded us to love Him, and His
Church has demanded by Precept that we receive Him in Holy Communion at
least once a year to remain in this love. By thus subjecting us to a code
of laws, Our Lord is sweetly providing us with the very means to
salvation, as already explained. "If you love Me, keep My commandments,"
our Blessed Savior told us the solemn evening before His Passion (<i>John
14:15</i>). One of those commandments is that we all be baptized with
water sacramentally, and this command is absolutely universal in scope:
"Be baptized, <i><b>every one of you</b></i>" (<i>Acts
2:38</i>).</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">One need not mention exceptions each time one speaks
of a law. For instance, there are many definitions of the Church on
original sin that do not mention the Immaculate Conception. This does
not invalidate the Immaculate Conception!</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Then why did the Church feel the need even to
<i><b>mention</b></i> the privileged exceptions enjoyed specifically the
Blessed Mother of God? Thus, we have consequently come to acknowledge
three, <i><b>and only three</b></i>, explicitly-defined exceptions in
regard to our Blessed Lady Mary in her unique privileges:</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">1) <i>No Original Sin</i>: </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Definition of the Immaculate Conception,
1854;</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">2) <i>No Personal Sin</i>: </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Definition of Trent: Canon 23, Justifi cation,
1547;</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">3) <i>No Bodily Corruption</i>: </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Definition of the Assumption, November,
1950.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">It is interesting to note that not even Our Lady
herself has been mentioned by Fr. Laisney as <i><b>not</b></i> needing to
undergo the Sacrament of Baptism in order to join her Divine Son in the
bliss of the Beatific Vision of Heaven. Following Fr. Laisney's own logic
here, we must hold that she was, in fact, baptized with water, even though
her baptism is never explicitly mentioned anywhere in the bible.
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">That all men who go to Judgment out of the New
Testament (<i>and Our Lady died under its regulations</i>) must receive
water baptism to be saved has been infallibly defined. And that the Mother
of God was, in fact, baptized with water is the explicit teaching of St.
Ephrem, a Father and Doctor of the Church. Another early Father, the abbot
Euthymius, flourished in Palestine in the 4th Century and, according to
him, "the belief of the most ancient Fathers was that Christ Himself
baptized the Blessed Virgin and St. Peter" (<i>Saint Ephrem the
Syrian</i>: Hymns and Sermons, Lamys, Mechlin: 1902). Question - Why would
Our Lady, hailed "full of grace" by God Himself, need baptism of water? As
St. Thomas Aquinas writes in his <i>Summa Theologica</i> (III, Q.68,
art.1, Obj.3):</span></p>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;"><i>
</i><p><i><span style="font-family: Arial;">Objection</span></i><span style="font-family: Arial;">: Baptism is given in order that man
may, through grace, be cleansed from sin. But those who are sanctified
in the womb obtain this without Baptism. Thus they are not bound to
receive Baptism.</span></p><i>
</i><p><i><span style="font-family: Arial;">Reply</span></i><span style="font-family: Arial;">: Those sanctified in the womb indeed
receive grace, which cleanses them from Original Sin, but they do not
therefore receive the Character, by which they are conformed to
Christ. Consequently, if anyone were sanctified in the womb now, they
would need to be baptized in order to be conformed to Christ's other
members by receiving the Character.
</span></p></span></blockquote></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">"For," as St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori adds (half a
millenium later) in his comprehensive <i>Preaching of God's Word</i>,
"Even those freed from Original Sin are subjects for this Sacrament of
Baptism because it was instituted by Our Divine Lord not only for the
remission of Original Sin, but also in order that we might be incorporated
with the Church" </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Now let us ask Fr. Laisney and his follower - If Our
Lady Mary was not herself exempted from the law of baptism in order to
receive the Bread of Life here on earth, and to get to Heaven afterward,
who <i><b>doesn't</b></i> need to obey the law? What possible exemption
can be made for the slaves and subjects of this royal Queen of Heaven when
the Queen herself required the sacrament of initiation?</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">For instance Pope St. Zosimus wrote: "<i>nullus</i>
<i>omnino</i> - absolutely nobody" (Dz 109a) was exempt of the guilt of
original sin.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">If <i><b>absolutely</b></i> nobody born of woman
escaped the guilt of Original Sin, then Jesus didn't either. The fact is,
God Himself uses the very same sort of language in spelling out our
sinfulness:</span></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">There is no man who does not sin. <i>III Kings
8:46</i></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">If we say we have not sinned, we make Jesus Christ
a liar. <i>I John 1:10</i></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">All of us have gone astray; everyone has turned
aside. <i>Isaias 53:6</i></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">There is no one who does good; there is not so
much as one. <i>Romans 3:12</i></span></p></blockquote></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">The Laisneyites are claiming very illogically that,
(1) because our Faith teaches that all men have sinned, and we know that
Our Lord and Lady never sinned, (2) therefore, the exception of Our Lord
and Lady is not explicitly demanded and that, (3) consequently, the
salvation of the unbaptized need not be mentioned explicitly either, even
though (4) the Faith teaches that all men must be baptized to go to
Heaven.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Even if (2) above were true, The "therefore" in it
does not logically follow from what is stated in (1); thus, their
"consequently" in (3) entails no consequence at all. The argument is
formally invalid. The Laisneyites draw a principle from (2) with (3) when
actually no principle whatsoever can logically be drawn from (2). The
Laisneyites' supposed principle of applying exceptions to other dogmas is
based simply on the presumed <i><b>lack</b></i> of action on the part of
the Church in failing to promulgate an explicit exception to a specific
dogma. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">What we have here is a type of inductive argument, the
conclusion to which does not at all follow from its particular example -
which example is itself in error anyway, for the Church <i><b>has</b></i>
explicitly pronounced on the matter of the exceptions of Our Lord and Lady
to the guilt of Original Sin. Father Laisney's speculation of applying
exceptions to other dogmas is based simply on the alleged silence of the
Church in failing to provide expressly for an exception to a separate
dogma. But no principle has been, nor can positively be, legitimately and
logically established by such a method, even if it were true (which it is
not)..</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">The notion, therefore - that the exception of Our Lord
and Lady is not explicitly demanded - is erroneous both in fact and in the
very principle which the Laisneyites attempt draw from it. In each and
every case, whenever the Church has infallibly pronounced on a point of
doctrine which is universal in scope and in consequence (for example sin,
the necessity for Baptism, Church membership, the true Faith, contrition,
etc.), She has <i><b>never</b></i> failed to name or allow for exceptions
should one possibly exist. Consider the defined dogma that sin is
universal and that all men are sinners.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Witness the Councils of Carthage XVI (Dz 102) and of
Trent (Dz 791): "Since what the Apostles says: 'Through one man sin
entered into the world (and through sin death), and so passed into all
men, in whom all have sinned' (<i>Romans 5: 12</i>), must not be
understood otherwise than the Catholic Church spread everywhere <i><b>has
always understood it</b></i>." The Church has here solemnly and infallibly
given us a condition with which to understand the word "all" in
<i>Romans</i>. And of course, in the very decree on Original Sin (Dz 792),
the Catholic Church declared that the "Immaculate Virgin Mary was
<i><b>not</b></i> included in this decree" of universal sinfulness.
Therefore, the exception of Our Lady is infallibly and explicitly
decreed.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Here is the Council of Ephesus (Dz 130): "In the
transgression of Adam, all men lost their natural power and innocence, and
no one can rise from the depth of that ruin by way of free will <i>unless
the grace of God raise him up</i>." Again, the Church provides for us a
qualitative clause which modifies a universal example and is in perfect
accord with what She has defined concerning Our Lady - that it was by
God's special grace she was conceived immaculately and lived
sinlessly.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">The Council of Orange II (Dz 175) also quotes
<i>Romans 5:12</i>, but the Church declared both <i><b>previously</b></i>
(at Carthage) and <i><b>afterwards</b></i> (at Trent) that this worldwide
sinfulness must not be understood otherwise than the Church "has always
understood it" - which understanding is explicitly that Mother of God is
totally exempt from sin. Also, no such conditions or qualifications, let
alone exceptions, have <i><b>ever </b></i>been provided in
<i><b>any</b></i> of the following points of doctrine: </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">There is no salvation outside actual membership in the
Roman Catholic Church<i> </i>(Dz 430, 468-469, 714); </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Sacramental (water) Baptism is a necessary requirement
for genuine membership in the Church (Dz 696, 895); </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">The Sacramental of Baptism is therefore necessary for
eternal salvation (Dz 858, 861). </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">In point of fact, any exception to the dogma of "No
Salvation Outside the Church" has been infallibly <i><b>denied</b></i> by
Ven. Pope Pius XI in his Syllabus of Errors (Dz 1717), when he condemned
the following as heresy - that "we must at least have good hope concerning
the eternal salvation of all those who in nowise are in the true Church of
Christ." This very Pope declared to all the bishops of the world on
December 9, 1854: "Endeavor as much as you can to drive from the mind of
men that impious and equally fatal opinion that the way of eternal
salvation can be found in any religion whatsoever" (Dz 1646). On August
10, 1863, he wrote every living member of the hierachy in Italy:
</span></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">We should condemn a very grave error in which some
Catholics are unhappily engaged, who believe that men living in error
and separated from the true Faith and from Catholic unity, can attain
eternal life. Indeed, this is certainly completely contrary to
Catholic teaching. (Dz 1677)</span></p></blockquote></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Note that Ven. Pope Pius IX describes this heresy as
"an impious <i><b>opinion</b></i>." In the same vein, it is the
Laisneyites who are holding to a wicked conjecture on the issue of
sacramental baptism, and traditional Catholics who are holding to the
explicit definitions of Trent. Technically speaking, according to their
structure, content, and literal exposition, Canons 2 and 5 <i>On the
Sacrament of Baptism</i> from the Council of Trent are sufficiently clear
and explicit condemnations of those who would allow for any such
exceptions. This alone destroys the facetious arguments of any
Laisneyite.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">We know by Faith that Our Lord and Lady's sinlessness
<i><b>have </b></i>been explicitly and infallibly declared; hence, the
argument cannot be extended for the benefit of the unbaptized. Jesus
declared that one one could convict Him "of sin" (<i>John 8: 46</i>), and
God tells us expressly that He was "without sin" (<i>Hebrews 4:15</i>).
Pope Pius IX defined that Our Lady Mary was conceived without Original
Sin, and Trent decreed infallibly that she never even committed a venial
sin throughout the entirety of her earthly life (Canon 23, <i>O</i>n
<i>Justification</i>). </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Therefore, if there is any exception to the universal
requirement that all men need baptism to get to Heaven, there should have
been a correspondingly explicit and infallible statement of the
Magisterium, in order for Fr. Laisney's presumptions to hold any water -
forgive the pun, but <i><b>there is no such statement</b></i>. My endeavor
in "belaboring" this point is to demonstrate the clever insidiousness of
Theology Lite. <i>Beware!</i></span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Such a "definition" must be understood as the Church
understands it, that is, in this particular case, not including the
Blessed Virgin Mary.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">When "such a definition" is produced, and along comes
a later one granting an exception to the universality of the original
statement as we have seen expressly in the case of Our Lady (above), the
Mind of the Church is clear and needs no further "definition." It is as
disingenuous for the Laisneyites to persist in seeking undefined
"exceptions" as it is misleading for them to argue that any definition of
the Church must be "understood as the Church understands" them when, in
actuality (a) it is the Laisneyites themselves who insist on providing the
faithful such "understandings" and (b) the literal meaning of a definition
is (<i>by definition!</i>) to make things sufficiently clear in the first
place - indeed, so clear that a simplistic child can comprehend its
meaning without recourse to a single Latin lexicon.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Is there really any pressing need for a reigning
Pontiff to produce a contemporary Syllabus of Errors, spelling out each
and every modernist error employed by the Laisneyites or other heretics?
Absolutely speaking, no. The Faith which has come to us from the Apostles
is all we need, ultimately, to correct their thinking, to know
definitively what the Church teaches, and thus to save our own souls.
However, in the Pro-vidence of God, there are often urgent reasons for the
Magisterium of Holy Mother Church to compile and compose such an updated
Syllabus. The Devil and his henchmen, the heretics who (whether knowingly
or not) serve him, have no imagination whatsoever. They continue
throughout the pages of history to raise hoary heads of heresies long
since refutable by the most child-like reading of the articles of Faith.
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">For this reason, the Vicars of Christ for the past
half-millenium have decreed explicit lists of such errors precisely
because, although the same heresies continue to be broached and broadcast,
the terminology in which they are cast is deceptively snake-like in its
insidious insinuations. Thus, once more, we shall surely see the Vicar of
Jesus Christ declare infallibly the errors to be found all around us
today, not only in the likes of Laisney, but also in the decrees of
Vatican Council II and in the new "Catholic Catechism" as well. It will
take a little sifting on his part because, admittedly, there are some
genuinely beautiful expressions in the Council and Catechism. So, what
<i><b>are</b></i> the children of the Church to do? "Examine all things,
and hold fast to that which is good!" (<i>I Thessalonians
5:21</i>).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">To think with the Mind of the Church, and thus to
understand everything She declares to us with her own understanding, can
in no way be left to the domain of heretical theologians and their
followers. For it is certain that their own hazy subtleties are more
difficult to fathom (and eminently more impossible to prove) than the
clear and literal Articles of Faith which refute them!</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">In the same way, it is sufficient that baptism of
desire be explicitly taught by the Church, by the Council of Trent, in
some place, but it is not necessary to expect it on every page of her
teaching.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">And yet, in <i><b>no</b></i> place can baptism of
desire as sufficient in itself for salvation be found as "explicitly
taught" in <i><b>any</b></i> declaration of the official and infallible
Magisterium of the Catholic Church - before, during, or after Trent! If
there were, we would have no further need for this discussion, since I
would be in the forefront of promoting as a substitute for the Sacrament
established by God and demanded even of His own Mother.</span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Silence on an exception is not a negation of
it.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Neither is silence an acceptable proof of positive
affirmation! (<i>Recall the Fifth Amendment</i>). But this is precisely
the affirmation Fr. Laisney has made of baptism of desire for salvation,
and which he is trying to make you believe - that it is a definitive and
infallible teaching of the Church, when the infallible fact is that the
Canons of Trent on the Sacrament of Baptism are explicit condemnations on
those very persons who would <i><b>make</b></i> exceptions! Still, Fr.
Laisney finds a way to make exceptions to the infallibly-defined dogma
that you have to be baptized to get to Heaven and, until the Magisterium
finally gets around to censuring it as heresy explicitly, he claims it as
a viable option, right? Wrong!</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Is it even possible that the Church remain forever
"silent on an exception" to the Faith? If so, She would have failed in the
divine mission entrusted her by Jesus Christ, and thus turned Our Lord
into either a liar or one who was impotent. For, one of the fundamental
reasons for the Church's existence is that of proclaiming aloud the Truth,
and "from the housetops" (<i>Luke 12:3</i>) - which can only mean "all
things whatsoever" Christ taught and commanded (<i>Matthew 28:20</i>).
Therefore, if there were ultimate silence on this "exception" of the
Laisneyites, then the Church has been silent for almost 2000 years on a
matter of Divine Revelation which concerns our eternal life and death.
Consequently, the Laisneyite position can only appear to be that the
Church has failed in her mission. The Laisneyite position as stipulated
here is precisely this - </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Since the definition of the dogma that "absolutely
nobody" is exempt of the guilt of Original Sin; and since this dogma lacks
an explicit exception for Our Lord and Lady (even though it is obvious
that one must exist); therefore, the defined dogma that all men must be
baptized sacramentally, though lacking an explicit exception,
<i><b>must</b></i>, in fact, have one. But this is a Non-Sequitur, and
does not necessarily follow. Lack of positive statement (i.e. the
unbaptized can be saved) does not of necessity negate its opposite (i.e.
no one unbaptized can be saved). In egregious error, they mistakenly posit
that it does. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Put it another way: Though silence on an exception is
not a negation of it, neither is such silence an acceptable or even
logical proof of its positive existence. When an attorney goes to court,
he always brings evidence to support his case, but in this topsy-turvy
Wonderland World of the Modernist heresy, preachers of error expect to win
their case on the basis of <i><b>lack</b></i> of such evidence. If the
Laisneyites were truly honest in their theological presentation, they
would be compelled to admit that scarcity of manifest proof can hardly be
accepted conclusively <i><b>either </b></i>as lack of fact
<i><b>or</b></i> existence of a contradictory fact in the real world.
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Truth is independent of evidence, even the total lack
or positive demonstration thereof. For example, a man may be charged with
murder in a shooting spree, but the inability of the police to locate the
gun, <i><b>equally</b></i> as well as the fact that the murderer was
actually caught with the smoking weapon in his hand, is not always enough
to convince us of the truth of his guilt. But the <i><b>positive
</b></i>discovery of the smoking gun in the man's hand is far-and-away
more persuasive to a jury than the <i><b>negative</b></i> situation in
which the police were simply unable to locate the murder weapon. The
Laisneyites are making a lack of evidence into a demonstrably positive
proof that their heresy is authentic Church doctrine, and this is a
significant error in Right Reason.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">It is true that we likewise have no visual proof
whatever that Jesus abides in the Blessed Sacrament; nonetheless, we
profess what we are taught by the explicit definitions of the one true
Faith, not by our senses, our science, or any conceivable forensic
testimony - nor by any <i><b>lack</b></i> thereof. To say that silence
from the Tabernacle is "not a negation" of the Real Presence cannot, by
any stretch of the imagination mean that such a lack is therefore a
positive proof that Jesus <i><b>is</b></i> there. We believe that He is
present because we have infallible definitions to substantiate the
Scripture which tells us that this is so, and not for any theological
<i><b>failure</b></i> on our part to locate such a positive
proof.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">The argument that alleged reticence on the part of the
Magisterium in condemning baptism-of-desire-for-salvation thus serves to
prove that it is true must demand, in all justice, that it face off
against its contradictory counterpart - that Canon of Trent which demands
water baptism for all who are to be saved. And, in the face of magisterial
silence, theological dispute, and/or documentary inadequacy, must we not
as children of the Church hold what has always been taught factually and
definitively by Divine Revelation concerning the necessity of the
Sacrament of Baptism - that it is indispensably requisite for the
salvation of all souls? Must not the Catholic Faith which has come down to
us in immutable Tradition play its part in what we believe, even if it
"only" an explicitly positive witness as compared to "the silence of a
negative"? In brief, are Catholics required to believe what has been
clearly and infallibly <i><b>taught</b></i> or what has not yet been
expressly and infallibly <i><b>condemned?</b></i></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Are not the real speculators - those who theorize that
persons who left this earth unbaptized can nonetheless be be admitted to
the Beatific Vision - defying in fact what Catholics of all ages have
traditionally held concerning the universal requirement of the sacrament
for the achievement of its divine effects? Are we realistically expected
to hold and preach what has <i><b>failed</b></i> to have been handed down
infallibly and <i><b>never</b></i> defined explicitly, or rather what has
genuinely been revealed once and for all time as Catholic truth in the
matter?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">The necessity of water baptism for eternal happiness
is absolute and universal from the aspect of being both De Fide and of
being the constant Tradition, scriptural and patristic, of the Catholic
Faith. Anyone who begins to expostulate against the actual reception of
the sacrament by way of allowing undefined exceptions has clearly departed
from Divine Revelation and commenced to speculate theologically on that
which has come down to us as being part and parcel of the true Faith by
holding up to the faithful his own private additions or subtractions as
<i><b>equal</b></i> to the Word of God professed by the Magisterium.
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">And, since we have no infallible decree of such an
exception but <i><b>do </b></i>possess more than one infallible
declaration to the contrary, we are consequently obliged to profess as
salvific the Sacrament of Water alone - precisely as we do liturgically
each Sunday in the <i>Creed</i>, when we "confess <i><b>one
</b></i>baptism for the remission of sins." For there is but "One Lord,
one Faith, one Baptism," as St. Paul insisted to his Ephesians
(<i>4:5</i>) and, as we have seen, we acclaim this precise Profession at
Holy Mass each and every Sunday and Holy Day in the <i>Nicene Creed</i>.
Indeed, it is proclaimed even more explicitly in the Spanish vernacular
<i>Novus Ordo</i> Mass: "I confess <i><b>only</b></i> one baptism."
Because of this precision in matters of Faith, the Ecumenical Council of
Vienne defined infallibly for us in the 14th Century (Dz 482) that ~
</span></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><i><b>
</b></i><p><i><b><span style="font-family: Arial;">All</span></b></i><span style="font-family: Arial;"> the faithful <i><b>must</b></i>
profess only <i><b>one</b></i> Baptism which regenerates in Christ
<i><b>all</b></i> the baptized, just as there is one God and one
Faith. We believe that this Sacrament, celebrated in
<i><b>water</b></i> and in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit, is necessary for children and adults alike for the perfect
remedy of <i><b>salvation</b></i>. </span></p></blockquote></blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Had St. Thomas Aquinas lived only another thirty-seven
years (he would have been eighty-six years old), he would have been
<i><b>compelled</b></i> to relinquish his error that Sanctifying Grace
alone is sufficient for salvation. For, inasmuch as Vienne defined
infallibly that every one of the faithful must profess <i><b>only</b></i>
that baptism which is bestowed as a sacrament in the medium of water,
there simply can exist no other "baptism" worthy of the name by which a
man can be brought to eternal salvation. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Thus, "the Sacrament of Baptism can be said to exist,"
declares <i>the Catechism of the Council of Trent</i>, "only when we
<i><b>actually</b></i> apply the water to someone by way of ablution while
using the words appointed by Our Lord." That this profession refers solely
to the sacrament, and not to sentimental speculations which parade as
sacraments, can readily be seen in Christ's own dictum: "Have the Faith of
God!" (<i>Mark 11:22</i>) which Faith patently teaches us that there can
be only "One Baptism" (<i>Ephesians 4:5</i>), not the "three baptisms" of
which Fr. Laisney speaks. This is the sacrament which Jesus Christ
preached in water, for He preached no other - and those who do, regardless
of their protestations, their theological acumen, or their disdain for
simplistic little children, are inescapably guilty of "private
interpretation" (<i>II Peter 1:20</i>) of a Scripture (<i>John 3:5</i>)
sufficiently clear to the man in the pew.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Therefore, to suggest that the unbaptized constitute
an unspoken "exception to the rule" because we allegedly possess no paper
trail to prove otherwise, is not only shoddy scholarship, poor research,
and illogic in action, but also a downright caricature of all human
rationality. Recall the time the cartoon character Calvin declared to his
pet tiger, Hobbes, "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent
life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to
contact us." This is the perfect non-sequitur! It simply does not follow
that, just because we possess no facts to prove something, it can be
deemed necessarily conclusive nor even conjecturable. </span></p>
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">This principle is important to remember so as not to
be deceived by a frequent technique of the Feeneyites. They accumulate
quotes on the general necessity of baptism as if these quotes were
against baptism of desire. The very persons they quote hold explicitly
the common teaching on baptism of desire!</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote></span>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">In precisely the same way, Fr. Laisney holds up to us
the authority of St. Cyprian, whose testimony on the Sacrament of Baptism
he himself then repudiates as official witness to the Catholic Faith (just
check out his End Note no.2). Likewise, Fr. Laisney frequently produces
quotations taken from a book called <i>The Church Teaches</i> (TCT), which
contains not only the genuine article when it comes to infallible decrees,
but also heretical errors purposely slipped in here and there by its
Jesuit compilers, including the hateful and </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">heretical Protocol Letter of Cardinal Marchetti-Selvaggiani
considered by the Laisneyites as a definitive argument against the Faith
of Fr. Feeney. This utterly assinine and heretical "Letter of the Supreme
Congregation of the Holy Office" was even included in Fr. </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">Heinrich Josef Dominicus </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Denzinger's <i>Enchiridion Symbolorum</i> in
1963.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Father Laisney and I both cite copiously from this
<i>Handbook of the Creed</i> compiled originally by Fr. Heinrich Josef
Dominicus Denzinger (Dz), the thirtieth edition of which was revised and
edited by none of than Fr. Karl Rahner, SJ, certainly one of the most
notorious and diabolical arch-heretics who ever disgraced our day, and who
took great care to insert several non-infallible private presumptions and
speculations into his own version of Denzinger. However, although Satan is
"a liar and the father thereof" (<i>John 8:44</i>), even "the devils
believe and tremble" (<i>James 2:19</i>) and can therefore be forced,
during exorcism for instance, to profess the truth. Not even heretics are
wrong <i><b>all</b></i> the time! And, when they speak the truth, we can
use their own words against them in other areas.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">But can any Church official, Father, Doctor, or
theologian presuming to speak for the Church <i><b>ever</b></i> contradict
himself? Popes or Councils defining infallibly cannot, of course, but a
Pontiff and his Council preaching privately and without calling on the
virtue of infallible definition <i><b>can</b></i> - and has, rather often.
Church History demonstrates that Ecumenical Councils have condemned Popes
as heretical (<i>Constantinople III</i>,<i> 681</i>), and that Popes have
in turn condemned Ecumenical Councils as heretical (<i>Chalcedon</i>,<i>
451</i>). </span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Pope Honorius I was condemned by Pope St. Martin I in
the Lateran Council of 649, and by the Council of Constantinople III in
681, for refusing to define true Catholic dogma against a satanic
controversy over the Monothelite heresy, a form of Monophysitism. Pope St.
Agatho "The Miracle-Worker" (elected Pontiff at the age of 103), presiding
over this latter Ecumenical Council, specifically censured Honorius as a
"profane, treacherous, impious heretic" for his ambiguity and hesitance in
defending the proper notion of the Incarnation. Two years later, Pope St.
Leo II publicly confirmed this condemnation of poor Honorius, as did Pope
St. Benedict II in another two years. Thus, Honorius came to be
anathematized by the Council of Trullo, the Council of Toledo, the Second
Council of Nice in plenary session, an Ecumenical Council, four canonized
Pontiffs, by the Divine Office (read by all priests) until the eighteenth
century, as well as falling under the publicly-vowed anathema taken by all
Popes at their coronation for the next three hundred years!</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">In the year 451, the Ecumenical Council Chalcedon
drafted thirty "Dogmatic Canons," and all except one were formally
approved St. Leo the Great, and ultimately proclaimed to the waiting world
of Catholics. The solitary item which St. Leo refused to ratify was the
notorious <i>Canon 28</i>, which would have made the Patriarch of
Constantinople a secondary Pope! Incredibly, the bishops of Constantinople
attempted this identical ploy on three subsequent Pontiffs, but to no
avail. Providentially, Pope St. Leo had unmasked their specious duplicity,
and thus only twenty-nine of the Canons of Chalcedon can actually be
considered part of the Faith. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Again, in 1445, Pope Eugene IV was careful to approve
only those portions of the Ecumenical Council Constance which preserved
the rights of the papacy, for in the Fifth Session it had ruled that a
Council could depose a Pope. It was later reconvened at Basle but
disbanded by order of the Pope within five months, then re-authenticated
as "Ecumenical" two years later. Four years of sessions intervened before
the Holy Father transferred the Council to Ferrara, whereupon the bishops
remaining at Basle went publicly into schism and elected the last of the
anti-Popes in the history of the Church, Felix V. It was the
<i>periti</i>, presiding as theological experts for these bishops at
Basle, who had only that very year condemned St. Joan of Arc to the stake.
Meanwhile, Pope Eugene transferred the sitting members of this Council
once more to Florence, and ultimately removed it to Rome for its final two
years, where it was successfully. This Ecumenical Council, which had
commenced at Constance in 1414 and gone through five separate venues,
finally adjourned in the year 1445.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">This damning and counter-damning could
<i><b>never</b></i> have taken place had the ecclesial authorities in
question made strict use of the Virtue of Infallibility granted by God to
His Church. All of which serves to demonstrate positively that
proclamations of a doctrinal nature by councils are never binding on the
Church unless they specifically <i><b>define</b></i> dogmas of Faith or
Morals, and are confirmed and universally promulgated <i>as such</i> by
our Holy Father the Pope. In the event that the decree of a Pope or a
Council lacks this status, it consequently lacks the necessary note of
magisterial authenticity which alone can be considered infallible and
binding on all members of the faithful.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Therefore, with these precedents
as our guides, why may not any Catholic employ infallible citations and
ignore non-in-fallible statements to the contrary, no matter if expressed
by the most prestigious luminaries on Vatican hill? We are soldiers of
Christ in a Church <i><b>militant</b></i>, and we therefore have the right
and the God-given duty to choose only the strongest of our weapons when
going into battle, even if they come out of an arsenal that has otherwise
produced a mixed bag.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">For instance, the same can be
said for the vagaries of the New Catholic Catechism and even the
deplorable ambiguities of Vatican Council II. As Fr. Richard O'Connor
explains in <i>The Homiletic and Pastoral Review</i> in its July, 1981
issue ("How Binding is Vatican II?"): "What is more important is to make
clear the kind of assent demanded of the faithful. What this means, as
Pope John Paul II never tires of emphasizing when referred to Vatican II,
is that it is to be interpreted in the light of Tradition, of other
Councils, and papal Encyclicals; and, where found to be in conflict with
these, <i><b>disregarded</b></i>."</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Catholics therefore dismiss and
disregard as inadmissible the testimony of any authority whose words
contradict that which has always been held by the faithful the world over.
</span><span style="font-family: Arial;">Clement XIII concludes that none of the faithful
should have "extraordinary opinions proposed to them, not even from
Catholic doctors; instead, they should listen to those opinions which have
the most certain criteria of Catholic truth:
<i><b>universality</b></i>,<b> <i>antiquity</i></b>, and<b>
<i>unanimity</i></b>" (<i>In Dominico Agro</i>), and Pope John Paul II has
only recently reiterated this truth. The position of the Laisneyites fall
flat on each and every count: It is neither world-wide, apostolic, nor
held by all Catholics from the very beginning. Worse, it literally
contravenes Divine Revelation as found in Holy Scripture.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Saint Thomas Aquinas assures us
that "argument from authority, based on Divine Revelation, is the
strongest" (<i>Summa Theologica </i>I, Q1, art.8, ad 2), and Divine
Revelation has never let us down. It does not, however, support the
Laisneyites in their contention that any conceivable non-water "baptisms"
can get you to Heaven. Hence, if "the very persons we quote hold
explicitly the common teaching on baptism of desire," this in no way
connotes that they are, in this instance, repeating what has infallibly
come down to us in Divine Revelation, but are giving us merely their own
private opinions. And there exists no such thing as a "common teaching" in
the corpus of Catholic Faith at all! If there were, it would be Catholic,
not common. Theologians can get together and concoct anything they like
but, until it is taught explicitly by the Church, it remains mere
speculation on their part. And the Church has <i><b>never </b></i>taught
that a man can get to Heaven on baptism of desire or blood without the
actual and personal reception of baptism of water.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">These quotes affirming the
general necessity of baptism do not refer exclusively to baptism by
water, nor do they exclude baptism of blood and/or of desire. They are
to be understood "in the same sense and in the same words" as the
Catholic Church has always understood them, which means to include
baptism of blood and/or of desire along with that of water.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Father Laisney wishes to impose
on you his pretention that the Catholic Church has "always understood"
water baptism to mean non-water baptism, and consequently <i><b>no</b></i>
salvation outside the Church to mean <i><b>some</b></i> salvation outside
the Church. If this were truly the sense in which the Church had genuinely
understood the doctrines of baptism and salvation, She would have let us
know it with egregious clarity by this late stage in the game.
</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">This mistaken notion (of what the
Church really means when She teaches) is a trademark technique of the
Laisneyites. It is also a frequent gambit for heretics to accuse
traditionalists of precisely the very strategies they themselves profess,
and by means of which they deviously hope to make proselytites of the
faithful. On the contrary, "we have the mind of Christ" <i>(I Corinthians
2:16</i>), when we simply preach His literal Word, not words from the
minds of Modernists. And it was Jesus Christ Himself who solemnly
declared: "<i><b>Amen</b></i>, <i><b>amen</b></i>, I say unto thee: Unless
one be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he <i><b>cannot</b></i>
enter into the kingdom of God" (<i>John 3:5</i>). "What further need have
we of witnesses? We have heard it ourselves from His own mouth!" (<i>Luke
22:71</i>).</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">This solemn expression of a
double <i>Amen</i> by Our Lord is prologue to a formal stipulation of an
infallible prerequisite for salvation, veritably reminiscent of future and
forthcoming decrees from Popes and Councils of the Church, who so often
initiate their infallible proclamations with expressions such as "We
define, declare, and pronounce," or "The Holy Catholic Church believes,
preaches, and teaches," and so forth. Such sworn pronouncements likewise
bespeak the "mind of Christ" (<i>I Corinthians 2:16</i>) on the subject of
the incontrovertible necessity of the Sacrament of Baptism for eternal
salvation. Furthermore, as Father James O'Kane assures us: </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The word <i>water</i> in this
text (<i>John 3:5</i>) has always been understood by the Fathers of
the Church in the literal sense, and the Council of Trent has
anathematized those who, with Calvin, distort its meaning by taking it
metaphorically. There can be no doubt, therefore, that the meaning of
Our Savior's words, "to be born again of water," is simply "to be
regenerated by Baptism," and this is declared necessary to salvation.
Moreover, the expression implies that it is necessary, not merely as a
fulfillment of a precept is necessary because its voluntary omission
would be a sin (<i>necessitate precepti</i>), but that it is
absolutely necessary as a means positively conducing to salvation, so
that without it salvation could not be attained, even though its
omission were involuntary <i>(necessitate media</i>). This is shown by
the universality of the form "Nisi quis" [unless
<i><b>everyone</b></i>], by which it extends to all. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p align="right"><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;"><i>Rubrics of the
Roman Ritual</i>, Dublin: Duffy & Co., 1922, p.60</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">It is very interesting to note at
this point that the Canon of Trent which stipulates the necessity of
sacramental baptism for salvation begins with these very same words -
<i><b>Nisi Quis</b></i>. Permit a brief consideration of the language of
Holy Scripture here. The baptismal requirement for salvation as usually
given us here from St. John's Gospel is "Unless a <i><b>man</b></i> is
born again ..." Technically, this is a somewhat poor production from the
Douay-Rheims. Saint John wrote in Greek, of course, and in that ancient
idiom the expression is rendered <i><b>Tis</b></i>, which is translated in
any reputable Greek lexicon as:</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Every man</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Any person</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Any man at all</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Any person whatsoever</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Every man whomsoever</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">"Tis," then, is in the Greek of
St. John an indiscriminate pronoun, not restricting itself in any way to
any specific individual, but denoting any and all men without distinction.
This expression was produced by St. Jerome in the only translation of Holy
Scripture ever authorized by the Roman Catholic Church, the old Latin
Vulgate, as "quis" - which is rendered in all reputable Latin dictionaries
as "anything, anything at all."</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The Tis and Quis of the matter,
therefore, mean simply "anyone at all" or "everyone" without distinction
or restriction to any determinate person, age, class, or gender. To
emphasize the transparent literalness of these dramatic words, St.
Augustine translates them: "<i><b>Whoever</b></i> is not born again" (in
his famous <i>Forgiveness And Just Deserts of Sins</i>). Even The New
American Bible has it "<i><b>No one</b></i> can enter the kingdom of God
without being born of water and Spirit" (notice that the editors leave out
the word "again" - maybe the official translator was out to lunch that
day). Nevertheless, that God allows no solitary exception to the Rule of
Water is therefore the declared testimony of witnesses both ancient and
modern. Patrick Kenrick, who sat as Archbishop of Baltimore before the
advent of that city's dreadful catechism, assures us in his <i>Treatise on
Baptism</i> that: </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The term <i>Tis</i> has
already been shown to imply anyone, and to regard every member of the
human family. <i>Tis</i> - "anyone" - is the most general word that
could be used, and there is nothing in the context of <i>John 3:5</i>
to restrict it.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<p><i><b> </b></i></p><i><b>
</b></i></span><i><b></b></i><p><i><b><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">So why does Fr.
Laisney?</span></b></i><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Lack of Proper Thomistic
Theology Is the Root of the Error of the Feeneyites. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Is this the same St. Thomas who argued
that the Mother of God was conceived in sin?</span></p>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">To remedy the errors of
Modernism, St. Pius X ordered the study of St. Thomas Aquinas's
philosophy and theology. A book like <i>Desire and Deception</i>, 10
authored and published by Feeneyites, is very dangerous for its
opposition to St. Thomas. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Pardon me, but since when is it
"very dangerous" to oppose St. Thomas Aquinas, the scholar whom his
fellow-classmate, St. Bonaventure (also a Doctor of the Church),
complained of being "the father of all heresies"? (</span><span style="font-family: Arial;"><i>The Final Conclave</i>, Fr. Malachi Martin, NY: Pocket
Books, 1978, p.393</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">). Is St. Thomas,
then, to be followed religiously (as though infallible) or studiously (for
what he has to offer that squares with what <i><b>is</b></i> infallible)?
</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Let us hear St. Pius X: "We will and strictly ordain
that scholastic philosophy be made the basis of the sacred sciences. And
let it be clearly understood above all things that when We prescribe
scholastic philosophy We understand chiefly that which the Angelic
Doctor has bequeathed to us. They cannot set aside St. Thomas,
especially in metaphysical questions, without grave disadvantage."11 In
obedience, we must consider the sacramental theology of St. Thomas
Aquinas.</span></p></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Well, now. Father Laisney has jumped from the approval
of St. Thomas in matters of Metaphysics (which is a branch of Philosophy),
to giving <i>carte</i> <i>blanche</i> to his Sacramental Theology! And is
this papal approval "in metaphysical questions" universal? Does it apply
to <i><b>all</b></i> the theology of St. Thomas Aquinas? Isn't Thomas the
scholar whose philosophy led him to deny the Immaculate Conception
itself?</span></p>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Please re-examine the many errors of St. Thomas as
catalogued earlier, and tell me why we should <i><b>not</b></i> be opposed
to swallowing his thinking whole! In "prescribing the scholastic
philosophy" of St. Thomas, did our Canonized Pontiff (1) thereby assure us
that Thomas was infallible in all matters of Sacramental Theology? (2)
that he never made a mistake at all, even in his Metaphysical Philosophy?
This is precisely what the Laisneyites would have you
believe!</span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">Eighteen Pontiffs in thirty-eight Bulls praised the
teaching of St. Thomas; and, when Pope Leo XIII introduced into Canon Law
the stipulation that the theology taught in the Church was to follow that
of Thomas, he specified (twice therein) that in general it was his
methodology, doctrine, and principles, not his every argumentation,
speculation, nor conclusion which were so vital and sound. In fact, if St.
Thomas had more carefully followed his own principles, he could scarcely
have made as many mistakes in his Sacramental Theology as he did. As Nobel
Laureate François Mauriac explains in his magnificent mediation called
<i>Holy Thursday - </i></span></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">No <i><b>human</b></i> philosophy can claim to be
Catholic philosophy. Inasmuch as it is a human doctrine, Thomism is
not a dogma; for, any truth which became a dogma was already contained
in Revelation. Such a truth should not be identified with ... the
formulas of Saint Thomas Aquinas. But the pressing, almost imperious
invitation of the Church [<i>to study St. Thomas</i>] must be enough
for the faithful to have recourse to the writings of the Angelic
Doctor ... Hence, we have reverential recourse to the writings of St.
Thomas without granting that they represent true Catholic doctrine or
philosophy when they veer from that Divine Revelation which has come
down to us from the last of the Apostles in the year
99.</span></p><span style="color: black;"></span></blockquote></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">He [St. Thomas] distinguishes
three elements in each sacrament: </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">1) the exterior sign, called
<i>sacramentum tantum</i> - sacrament itself signifying and producing the
other two elements. This exterior sign is composed of matter such as
water, and form such as the words of the sacrament. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">2) An intermediate reality,
called <i>sacramentum et res</i> - sacrament and reality, which, in the
case of baptism, is the character. This intermediate reality is both
signified and produced by the exterior sign and further signifies and
produces the third element. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">3) The ultimate reality, <i>res
sacramenti</i> the (ultimate) reality of the sacrament, which is the
sacramental grace, i.e., sanctifying grace, as source of further actual
graces to live as a child of God, as soldier of Christ, etc.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Surely, all Catholics can
appreciate the writings of St. Thomas (if such Catholics are not too
"simplistic" and have enough advanced degrees); for he is not really easy
to understand. Saint Paul was another such theologian, and our very first
Canonized Pontiff said of him: "in all his epistles ... are certain things
hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrestle with, as
they also do with the other Scriptures, to their own destruction" (<i>II
Peter 3:15</i>). I am not sure that St. Peter would have considered St.
Thomas Aquinas any easier to understand than St. Paul, just as I am not
certain how unstable Fr. Laisney's argument here might sound to you - but
the above schema on the Sacrament of Baptism seems far removed from the
patently simple command of <i>John 3:5</i>, doesn't it?</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Besides, we must remember that we
are listening here to what Fr. François Laisney <i><b>says</b></i> that
Thomas means, and if Thomas is in error, why believe either him
<i><b>or</b></i> his interpreter? It has been clearly demonstrated that
St. Thomas cannot be considered perfectly Catholic in some of his
utterances; therefore, how can we take Fr. Laisney's position on St.
Thomas's utterances as Gospel Truth? As the old Indian saying has it: "Ali
Baba will go bail for Abou Rah, but who will go bail for Ali Baba?"
</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Moreover, we should always bear
in mind that St. Thomas, like all saints, was canonized <i><b>not</b></i>
for his theological acumen nor philosophical expertise, nor indeed for any
single one of his writings (which he quit in disgust, calling them nothing
but "chaff"), but for his Heroic Virtue. I pray that, somehow, the
Laisneyites will likewise discard their worthless chaff and become
likewise Canonizable for such virtue.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">A sacrament may be valid but
not fruitful. To be valid the exterior sign needs valid matter, form,
intention and the proper minister. If these are present, then it always
signifies and produces the second element. To be fruitful, there must be
no obstacle. Therefore, baptism in an heretical church, if done with
proper matter, form, and intention, gives the character of baptism but
does not give sanctifying grace. The person thus remains with original
sin and actual sins. He has not become a child of God. Baptism is thus
deprived of its ultimate effect, the most important one, because of the
obstacle of a false faith, i.e., of heresy. In the same way, baptism in
a Catholic Church of a person attached to his sin, for example, a person
who has stolen and refuses to render that which he stole, places an
obstacle which deprives his baptism of its ultimate effect, that is,
sanctifying grace.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Who, then, is left? Ah yes, the
catechumen runover by a Greyhound bus. Now, what makes you think
<i><b>this</b></i> catechumen merited the <i><b>ultimate</b></i> effect of
salvation which can come <i><b>only</b></i> by way of the Character and
the Grace in tandem? If a man dies on his way to the baptismal font,
wouldn't it look suspiciously as though God had already judged him as
reprobate? It is much more likely that God didn't want him to receive the
Character - which can be bestowed <i><b>solely</b></i> in sacramental
Baptism - and thus go <i><b>deeper</b></i> into the fires of Hell.
Remember, too, the words of St. Augustine (Sermon 27:6):</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<p> </p>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">How many rascals are saved by
being baptized on their deathbeds? And how many sincere catechumens
die unbaptized, and are thus lost forever? When we shall have come
into the sight of God, we shall behold the equity of His justice. At
that time, no one will say: "Why did He help this one, and not that
one? Why was one led by God's direction to be baptized while the
other, though he lived properly as a catechumen, was killed in a
sudden disaster and not baptized?" Look for rewards, and you will find
nothing but punishments!</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<p> </p></span></blockquote></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">No wonder St. John Chrysostom
lamented those who died unbaptized. As Patriarch of Constantinople, he
declared: "It is obvious that we must grieve for our catechumens should
they depart this life without the saving grace of Baptism." Obvious, that
is, to all but the Laisneyites who believe the Almighty cannot handle a
runaway bus. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">It is a fact that one can go to
hell despite having the character of baptism. Yet, we know there are
saints in heaven, such as the saints of the Old Testament (Abraham,
David, etc.) who do not have the character of baptism.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">How does anyone know this for
sure? How can Fr. Laisney proclaim that the saints of the Old Testament
lacked the Character unless it has been Divinely Revealed? And if Divinely
Revealed, where in any Church document is it proclaimed? The logical truth
is that it is just as certain to say that all the saints who died
sanctified in the Old Law did, in fact, receive the Character of Christ,
not by receiving the Sacrament of Baptism (although certain Fathers of the
Church actually argued that they did), but in a manner proportionate to
their spiritual and unembodied state at the time Our Lord descended to
their place of containment in the Limbo of the Fathers on Good Friday
afternoon. Perhaps they were awaiting not only his sacrificial death on
the cross (which opened the gates of Heaven for them and for all men who
would cooperate with His grace), but also to be Marked by Him (in a
non-sacramental manner befitting their spiritual state at that time) as
members of His Mystical Body. After all, it seems sufficiently clear from
Holy Scripture itself that this Body is the <i><b>only</b></i> means of
getting back to Heaven. Jesus declared: "<i><b>No one</b></i> has gone up
into Heaven except Him Who came down from there, the Son of Man" (<i>John
3:13</i>).</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">We must all become Jesus Christ
to be saved; we must all "be made partakers of the Divine Nature" of God
Himself (<i>II Peter 1:4</i>) in Grace, but we must <i><b>also</b></i>
become Marked and "made partakers of <i><b>Christ</b></i>" (<i>Hebrews
3:14</i>) by becoming actual members of His Body. It is for this reason
St. Augustine assures us that, in Heaven, "there shall be only
<i><b>one</b></i> Christ, loving <i><b>Himself</b></i>" (<i>Epistle to
Parthos</i>., PL 35:2055). How can any soul become the one and only Christ
unless he is marked and Characterized as such? And now, in the New
Covenant, we know definitively that the Character of Christ is bestowed
<i><b>exclusively</b></i> in the actual reception of sacramental water
baptism.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">But nobody, however, dying with
sanctifying grace goes to hell, says the Council of Trent. Contrariwise,
nobody dying without sanctifying grace goes to heaven.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">It would be proper for Fr.
Laisney to cite us the precise source from Trent upon which he makes this
assertion. The fact is, <i><b>all</b></i> the saints of the Old Covenant
(a) died in Grace, yet (b) went to Hell. Saint Joseph died and went
straight to Hell! They all went to a place designated, both in Scripture,
Tradition, and <i>The Apostles' Creed</i> as "Hell." </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">And as for his final statement,
it is not true either. Several Saints in the New Law have raised souls
from the dead who died in mortal sin. Saint John Bosco raised did so
twice, in the case of two of his Oratory students, to hear their
confessions of <i><b>mortal</b></i> sins. Many of those who died as pagans
were raised for Baptism; in fact, many who died in Sanctifying Grace but
without Baptism were raised to receive the Sacrament, such as King Echu
O'Neill of Ireland by St. Patrick, and the slave-girl, Augustina, by St.
Peter Claver in Colombia, here in our own hemisphere.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Astoundingly, Saint Athanasius,
Father and Doctor of the Church, writes that St. James the Greater,
Apostle to Spain, "recalled to life Peter, the son of the prophet Urias
(<i>Jeremias 26:20</i>), and ordained him the first Bishop of Braga<i><b>,
six hundred years after his death</b></i>." Again, as Church law
(currently, Canon 1024) demands: "no one but a baptized male can be raised
to Holy Orders." Therefore, it must be said that this man was brought
alive out of the Old Testament specifically for sacramental baptism. As we
know, there is no problem of "time" with God, for our notion of time is
meaningless to One Who is eternally Pure Act. Time keeps things from
happening all-at-once for us creatures; but for God everything
<i><b>is</b></i> all-at-once. Thus, we behold saints justified in His
grace who were:</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Conceived in grace, such as Our
Lady Mary.<br />Conceived in sin, but born in grace, as was John the
Baptist.<br />Conceived and born in sin, but who died in grace without
baptism, such as St. Joseph and the saints of the Old Law.<br />Conceived
and born in sin, but died in grace with baptism, like those of the New
Testament. And ..<br />Conceived and born in sin, but died in grace without
baptism, and then were later</span><span style="color: black;"> </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">raised from the dead in order to be
baptized.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">So what point is Father trying to
make with the above statements, except to insist on his speculation that a
man can die justified, but without Baptism, and still go to Heaven? -
despite the clear and infallible definitions of the Church
contrariwise!</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">For the third element of
baptism, i.e., the infusion of sacramental grace, the necessity of
baptism for salvation is absolute.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">This is perfect
self-contradiction. Note that Father Laisney here states in literal effect
that "for ... the infusion of sacramental grace, the necessity of baptism
... is absolute." Yet, he has already defined sacramental grace as
Sanctifying Grace (see no.3 above). Therefore, he is inescapably saying
that you absolutely have to be baptized for grace and salvation. However,
his fundamental error is that he says you can "be baptized" without
<i><b>actual </b></i>reception of the Sacrament of Baptism in order thus
to be saved. If this were true, a man could consequently become a Catholic
without actually becoming a Catholic; he could have steak and potatoes by
desire without having them in fact. You could receive Matrimony by Desire
and Holy Orders of Blood and ... but why go on? </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The young St. Stanislaus Kostka
is a case in point. When he lay dying in his Jesuit noviate, he openly
lamented the fact that he had never been confirmed. The rector reassured
him that the desire for the Sacrament of Confirmation was sufficient! For
what? Certainly neither for the Character nor the special Sacramental
Grace received <i><b>only</b></i> in actual reception of the sacrament!
Stanislaus was noted for a love of God so overpowering that his breast
literally burned with fevered palpitations, so much so that even today
there still stand statues showing him with damp cloths at his breast.
Nevertheless, Holy-Communion-by-Desire was never sufficient for this
teenaged Polish nobleman; <i><b>twice</b></i> angels came and administered
the Eucharist to him - once even in an abandoned Lutheran church! Ask
yourself - which is preferable, that a man receive Jesus
<i><b>actually</b></i> in Holy Communion, or that he merely be granted the
Sanctifying Grace of that Sacrament? That he eat the Body and Blood of God
in reality or only in moderate reality? Maybe the angels sent by God to
communicate St. Stanislaus knew more about what was necessary than his
rector - or even Fr. François Laisney! </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Our Lord Jesus said: "Amen, amen,
I say to you: Unless you <i><b>eat</b></i> My flesh and
<i><b>drink</b></i> My blood, there is no <i><b>life</b></i> in you"
(<i>John 6:54</i>). If this Life is not Sanctifying Grace, and if
maintaining it for any length of time does not normally require the actual
reception of His Body and Blood in Holy Communion, then why in the world
did He immediately add: "My flesh is meat <i><b>indeed</b></i>, and My
blood is drink <i><b>indeed</b></i>" (<i>John 6:56</i>)? Jesus never said:
"Amen, and in all formality, I assure you that unless you earnestly desire
to receive Me you cannot stay in the State of Grace," for this would
necessitate a continuous non-stop bestowal by God Himself of a grace which
He intends from all eternity <i><b>never to fulfill in you!</b></i>
</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">And when was Our Lord ever heard
to say: "My flesh is truly meat, but only by desire; and My blood is
genuine blood, but only if you decide to desire it"? By selecting only a
single effect of a sacrament and making it stand for the entirety of the
sacrament, the Laisneyites not only offended Logic, but have also
effectually doubled the number of sacraments instituted by Jesus Christ.
The Church has never taught this! On the contrary, Trent defined that
there are only seven sacraments. You either receive them, or you do not.
You have either been baptized (and the sacrament absolutely necessitates
the application of water), or you remain unbaptized. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">There is absolutely no salvation
outside the Body of Christ, even for those who would like to become
Catholics by desire. If you can "receive baptism" without actually
receiving it, then you could "become Catholic" without actually becoming
Catholic, or "become married" without bothering to post the bans. Trent
declared infallibly that the "Church exercises judgment on no one who has
not first entered it through the gateway of baptism" (Session 14, ch.2)
and that "by the laver of baptism we are made members of Christ's own
body. (Dz 895).</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">To argue that a man can be
"within" the Church by mental desire and yet "outside" the Church in
physical fact is a denial in Logic of the Principle of Identity (or
Non-Contra-diction), in which a thing cannot be true and false at the same
time. Were the "eight souls saved by water" (<i>I Peter 3:20</i>) in the
days of Noah <i><b>inside </b></i>or<i><b> outside</b></i> the Ark? Were
all the rest of humanity saved by their earnest desire and fervent wish
that they could be "within" the Ark of Noah? Every single thing that
subsisted upon the earth perished! </span><span style="font-family: Arial;"><i>Genesis</i>
(7: 21-23) clearly states:</span></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">And all flesh was destroyed that moved upon the
earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beasts, and of all creeping
things that creep upon the earth: and all men. And all things wherein
there is the breath of life on the earth died. God destroyed all the
substance that was upon the earth, from man even to beast and the
creeping things and fowls of the air; and they were destroyed from the
earth. And Noah alone remained, and they who were with him
<i><b>in</b></i> the Ark. </span></p><span style="color: black;"></span></blockquote></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Consequently, Fathers of the
Church such as St. Gregory of Nyssa declared: "You are
<i><b>outside</b></i> Paradise, O Catechumen! You share the exile of
Adam!" (<i>Patrologiæ Græcæ </i>417c). The position of the Laisneyites
therefore follows the self-contradiction of utter insanity. If words have
any meaning left at all, and if the doctrine of infallibility means what
it must to the Roman Catholics, then the clear definition of the
infallible dogma of salvation by Pope Eugene IV in the Bull "Cantata
Domino" issued at the Seventeenth Ecumenical Council of the Roman Catholic
Church must end their sophomoric silliness:</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The most holy Roman Church
firmly believes, professes, and preaches: that none of those existing
<i><b>outside</b></i> the Catholic Church - not only pagans, but also
Jews and heretics and schismatics - can have a share in eternal life,
but that they will go into everlasting fire prepared for the Devil and
his angels, unless before death they are joined to Her; and that so
important is the unity of this ecclesiastical Body that only those
abiding <i><b>within</b></i> this unity can profit by the Sacraments
of the Church unto salvation, and that they alone can receive an
eternal reward for their fasts, their almsgiving, and their other
works of Christian piety and duties of a Christian soldier. No one,
let his almsgiving be as great as it may be, no one, even if he pour
out his blood for the name of Christ, can be saved unless he abide
<i><b>within</b></i> the bosom and unity of the Catholic
Church.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">So. Whom shall we believe? Eugene
IV or Frank Laisney?</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">This third element is found in
each of the "three baptisms," and even more perfectly in baptism of
blood than in baptism of water, as is the constant teaching of the
Church. Hence the common teaching on the necessity of Baptism 12
includes the "three baptisms."</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">A) Pope Eugene IV defines
infallibly that a man cannot be saved outside the Church "even if he pour
out his blood for the name of Christ." Father Laisney says he can.
</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">B) Pope Eugene IV declares
infallibly that no soul on earth "can profit by the Sacraments of the
Church unto salvation" outside the Church. Father Laisney claims they can
and, indeed, this is the most fundamental aspect of his teaching.
</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">C) Pope Eugene IV proclaims
infallibly that what he says is what "the most holy Roman Church firmly
believes, professes, and preaches," and Fr. Laisney offers us "the common
teaching of theologians."</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Surely, this is as simple as ABC.
Doesn't it strike you as the least bit ironic that Fr. Laisney is
presented as the theological representative of a Society founded by an
Archbishop who publicly <i><b>renounced</b></i> and
<i><b>repudiated</b></i> the Decree on Ecumenism of the recent Vatican
Council? The Laisneyites are filled with the spirit of ecumenism, for it
is based on the "common teaching" that non-Catholics can go to Heaven
simply by virtue of their "good will." </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">If Marcel Lefebvre is now in
Heaven (as we are all permitted to hope), do you believe that he would
agree with Pope Eugene IV or with his modernist spokesman, Fr. François
Laisney?</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The necessity of the exterior
element (#1 above) of baptism, i.e., the sacrament itself, is relative
to the third element as the only means at our disposal to receive the
third element, that is, living Faith.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Again, self-contradiction in
action. Father Laisney has already admitted (in #1 above) that "This
exterior sign is composed of matter such as water, and form such as the
words of the sacrament." He now declares that this "exterior element of
baptism, i.e., the sacrament itself, is ... the only means at our disposal
to receive the third element," an element he has defined as Sanctifying
Grace, which alone and in turn produces a living Faith. If "water and
words" constitute our "only means" to receive this Grace, and thus bring
our Faith to life, why does he feel constrained to add that these are the
only means "at our disposal"? Precisely because he is attempting to
demonstrate that God has other ways <i><b>not</b></i> at "our disposal.".
It must be asked, therefore - What sort of God bleeds to death on a cross
in order to give us sacraments as our only means of salvation if He has a
"back-up" remedy, just in case His Scenario No.1 doesn't pan out? Last I
heard, God <i><b>cannot</b></i> make a mistake. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The Laisneyites are saying, in
effect, "the sacraments are nice to have around, but who really needs them
when the chips are down?" This is <i><b>not</b></i> good theology; in
point of fact it results in calling God an impotent liar.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The sacrament itself is "...the
sacrament of faith; without faith no one has ever been justified," says
the Council of Trent (<i>TCT 563</i>). See how the Council of Trent
clearly sets the absolute necessity on the third element, i.e. living
faith, faith working through charity?</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote><i><b>
</b></i></span><i><b></b></i><p><i><b><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">No</span></b></i><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">. No, we do not,
Father. We see <i><b>you</b></i> making this assertion, but not Trent. The
Council "clearly sets the absolute necessity"of the Faith for
Justification, and not the other way around! Trent is defining infallibly
(and not as a mere "common teaching of theologians") that one
<i><b>cannot</b></i> get into the State of Sanctifying Grace without the
Catholic Faith. Possession of the true Faith, then, is <i><b>one</b></i>
of the requirements for the <i>votum</i> necessary for justification in
advance of actual reception of water baptism, precisely as defined by
Trent in several places. It is not Grace, then, which brings about "living
faith, faith working through charity." It is Faith which makes that
charity work!</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">One finds the same distinction
in the Holy Scripture, in St. John's Gospel (<i>chap. 3</i>). That which
is absolutely necessary is the new birth, that is, the infusion of new
life, sanctifying grace, the life of God in us. Five times Our Lord
insists on the necessity to be reborn, "born of the Spirit."</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">In fact, Our Lord speaks in
<i>John</i> <i>Chapter 3</i> of being "born" eight times, but who's
counting? The fact is, Father has gone completely overboard here in
Begging the Question. It is <i><b>he</b></i> (not Our Lord) who defines
the new birth produced in sacramental baptism as "the infusion of new
life, sanctifying grace, the life of God in us." To be born again is not
to come into Grace, but into Jesus. The rebirth of Baptism (which takes
place <i><b>solely</b></i> in the actual reception of the Sacrament
itself) makes and marks us as an <i>Alter Christus</i> - Another Christ -
and, if we have Grace, a <i><b>living</b></i> Christ. If, for example, a
Protestant receives a valid Baptism, he is still-born. He comes into
possession of the Character of Christ rather like the dead body of Jesus
in the tomb. He is eternally branded with the "appearance" of Jesus,
whether or not he <i><b>ever</b></i> lives the life of Grace, just as a
Catholic once in Grace might now be in Hell. To be reborn into new life in
the Sacrament of Baptism, then, can only mean to have both the Mark of
Jesus <i><b>and</b></i> the Life of Jesus. And these two - the Character
of Baptism and Sanctifying Grace - are the only absolute requirements
necessary for admission to bliss.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The water is mentioned only
once as the means for that rebirth, the only means at our
disposal.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Since water is admitted by Fr.
Laisney to be "the <i><b>only</b></i> means at our disposal,"
<i><b>once</b></i> should be enough! But shall we belittle and disparage
the innocence of water as our solitary means of being inserted into the
Body of Christ, and thus saved, merely because Sanctifying Grace appears
to be mentioned more often? Gluttony is not mentioned in the Ten
Commandments nor the Assumption of Our Lady in the <i>Apostles'</i>
<i>Creed </i>at all. Shall we argue, then, that they are frivolous and
optional considerations simply because they seem to lack the "importance"
of other doctrines in the corpus of the Catholic religion? </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black;"> </span></p><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">This is not meant to limit
God's power. He can infuse this new life (justification) even without
water, as he did to Cornelius (<i>Acts 10</i>). </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The history of Cornelius, his
followers and family, demonstrates the <i><b>obligation </b></i>of
receiving water baptism, even for those on whom God the Holy Ghost has
already lavished His most grace-filled manifestations. "Can anyone forbid
water," demands our first Pope, "so that these who have received the Holy
Ghost as well as we should not be baptized?" (<i>Acts 10:47</i>). Can
<i><b>anyone</b></i> - even Fr. Laisney and his followers? Indeed, can
even God Himself? Does it limit God's power by binding Himself to His own
sacraments? Yes, and He enjoys and infinite delight in doing so. Must we
not say that God has limited Himself in the Holy Sacrament of the altar
exclusively to bread and wine? Can Father Laisney consecrate coke and
cornbread?</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">But let us ask ourselves - is it
indeed possible that Almighty God can be tied, hand and foot, like some
mighty Samson (whose story, by the way, is the classic type and symbol of
this very truth!). So much is God bound to the wishes of His Church that
the Church on earth rules over Heaven itself. Our Lord declared to His
ministers: "What you bind on</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">earth is bound also in Heaven!"
(<i>Matthew 16:19</i>). Therefore, God is truly <i><b>bound</b></i>. What!
Can it be? "The Lord obeying the voice of a man!" (<i>Joshua 10:14</i>).
</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Yes. God is pre-eminently bound
by His own arrangements and promises and sacramental system; and we know
by Faith that "He cannot deny Himself" (<i>II Tim.2:13</i>). "God cannot
do that which is against the Faith! He cannot do what is against Truth!"
cries St. Ambrose (<i>Commentary on Luke</i>). Saint Alphonsus Maria
Liguori adds: "God 'will have all men to be saved, and to come to the
knowledge of truth' (<i>II Timothy 2:4</i>); therefore, God has bound
Himself to provide for <i><b>all</b></i> the means necessary to reach that
truth and that salvation on <i><b>His</b></i> terms" (<i>The Great Means
of Salvation</i>, p.124). And His terms have been spelled out definitively
and infallibly by His Church. The Laisneyites <i><b>cannot</b></i> claim
as much for their "common opinion of theologians."</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">There is an appalling confusion
in the writings of the Feeneyites when they deal with the sacramental
character and with what they refer to as "fulfilled/unfulfilled
justice." Their confusion regards the second and third elements (see
above) of the sacramental theology of the Catholic Church.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">These elements are described by
Fr. Laisney himself as the Character of the Sacrament of Baptism and
Sanctifying Grace (see above, no's. 2 & 3). These two ingredients
constitute absolutely the most fundamental requirements for our eternal
salvation, as has been demonstrated. For anyone to "confuse" them can only
mean that they have equated them as being identical; yet, both Fr. Laisney
and I have been careful to point out that they are not only separate, but
distinct. A Protestant can be validly baptized into the Character of
Christ, but never into the Grace of Christ, just as a validly-baptized
Catholic will go to Hell for being Marked yet mortally sinful. The two
requirements are neither confusable nor mutually identical; but both must
be possessed in order to go to Heaven. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">What Fr. Laisney refers to as
"fulfilled/unfulfilled justice" must refer incipiently to those words of
Our Lord Jesus Christ to St. John the Baptist, when He said of water
baptism: "Thus it becomes us to <i><b>fulfill</b></i> all justice"
(<i>Matthew 3:15</i>); for, all the sacraments and washings of the Old
Dispensation brought nothing to "fulfillment." The Sanctifying Grace of
the Old Law itself did not bring man to the fulfillment of his eternal
destiny of being saved. As Jeremias lamented, "the harvest is over, the
summer is ended, and we are <i><b>not</b></i> <i><b>saved!</b></i>" (<i>8:
20</i>). All the souls to be saved out of the Old Covenant had been
harvested, the summer of their days had come to an end, and yet not a
single one of them came into the Vision of God at their deaths, neither
Jeremias nor any of the other patriarchs and prophets canonized by Jesus
Christ Himself (<i>Luke 13:28</i>). No, not even St. Joseph, the Patron of
the Universal Church!</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Likewise, over four centuries
after God "spoke to Moses face-to-face, as to a friend" (<i>Genesis
33:11</i>) "Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him unto justice;
and he was called the friend of God" as well (<i>James 2:23</i>). Here,
then, we behold the extent of Old Law justice - it rendered men friends of
God. Nonetheless, it remained inherently handicapped - unfulfilled,
imperfect - since "the Law brought <i><b>nothing</b></i> to perfection"
(<i>Hebrews 7:19</i>). In fact, under the New Dispensation, "there is
indeed a setting aside of the former commandment, because of the weakness
and unprofitableness thereof" (<i>Hebrews 7:18</i>). </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Friendship with God in the Old
Law, even the most sublime therefore, did not accomplish the ultimate
design of the Almighty, but represented only a vague and distant
way-station, a preparation for "the better gifts" (<i>I Corinthians
12:31</i>) - those awesome "things to come" (<i>Hebrews 10:1</i>) through
the incarnate mediation of Jesus Christ. Like Moses before him, who was
permitted "to see the land with his eyes, but not to pass over to it"
(<i>Deuteronomy 34:4</i>), Abraham, although justified and graced as an
adopted son and heir of Heaven, had as yet no inheritance in the Promised
Land of salvation - "No, not the pace of a foot; however, God promised to
give it to him in possession" (<i>Acts 7:5</i>).</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">God thus promises salvation to
all "who persevere unto the end" in justice (<i>Mark 13:13</i>); for, "the
just man, if he be prevented by death, shall be at rest" (<i>Wisdom
4:7</i>). Does this mean, as the Laisneyites contend, that the
<i><b>only</b></i> thing required for salvation is to die in the justice
of Sanctifying Grace? By no means! It merely signifies that God will get
His absolutely necessary sacrament of water baptism to those who die in
Justice in the New Covenant of Grace, even if He has to provide for it by
miracle. Thus, as St. Bernard writes, "the remedy of Baptism has been made
accessible to <i><b>everyone</b></i>, <i><b>everywhere</b></i>"<i>
(Epistle to Hugh of St. Victor</i>; II:6). Consequently, St. Robert
Bellarmine, like Ss. Bernard and Thomas a Doctor of the Church, writes
(<i>On Baptism</i>, Book 1, Chapter 4): </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">There once was the heresy of
the Pelagians, saying that Baptism was not necessary for the remission
of Original Sin but only for the attainment of Heaven. But our
heretics, more audacious than the Pelagians, deny that Baptism is
necessary, not <i><b>only</b></i> for the remission of sin, but also
for the attainment of the kingdom of Heaven. However, those who
imagine that there is another remedy besides Baptism openly contradict
the Gospel, the Councils, the Fathers, and the consensus of the
universal Church. <i><b>God provides Baptism for</b></i> <i><b>all His
Elect</b></i>.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Thus, St. Teresa of Avila wrote
in her glorious <i>Way of Perfection </i>(No.19): "I feel sure that
<i><b>no one</b></i> will fail to receive this living water, unless they
cannot keep to the path." Consequently, Pope Paul VI declared: "If we, for
whatever reason, deny the <i><b>absoluteness</b></i> of God's law
concerning the necessity of water baptism for salvation, or any other
defined dogma, then we too excommunicate ourselves by our heresy from
Paradise, the Church" (Allocution <i>On the Fifth Anniversary of the
Closure of Vatican Council II</i>). </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Have I been overly-strict or
"rigoristic" in assessing the Laisneyite position as heretical? Dare we
deem it anything less? Their argumentation is downright
<i><b>sinful!</b></i> Venerable Pope Pius declared that we must "hold
firmly to our Catholic doctrine - <i><b>one</b></i> baptism. To try and
inquire further is <i><b>sinful</b></i>" (Dz 1647). </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Dare one add with St. Pius X,
as the cause of their error, a certain pride that makes them more
attached to their novelty than to the age-old teaching of the popes,
fathers, doctors, and saints?</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">It has been proven that the
absolute necessity for the actual reception of sacramental water baptism
for the attainment of the kingdom of God in Heaven is the "age-old
teaching of the popes, fathers, doctors, and saints." Bear in mind that
the word "prove" in English means to demonstrate the validity of a
position. It can only be argued that such demonstration has been
sufficiently provided - at least, for those of good will, and for those
who are <i><b>truly</b></i> humble.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">But ask yourself at this
juncture. Is the doctrine of the <i><b>absolute</b></i> necessity of water
baptism to be called "the age-old teaching of the Popes, Fathers, Doctors,
and saints" - or is it, as Fr. Laisney & Co. pretend, merely a
"novelty"? </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Conclusion - "Brethren, the
will of my heart, indeed, and my prayer to God, is for them unto
salvation. For I bear witness, that they have a zeal of God,13 but not
according to knowledge" (<i>Romans 10:1-2</i>). How much I wish and pray
that, relinquishing their error concerning baptism of desire and blood,
they might embrace the whole of the Catholic Faith. Their error
caricatures the Catholic Faith and gives easy weapons to the enemies of
dogma!</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">In this, Fr. Laisney and I agree
wholeheartedly. In fact, this is my daily prayer that they "they might
embrace the <i><b>whole</b></i> of the Catholic Faith." Otherwise, they
simply cannot have it <i><b>at all</b></i>. The word "Catholic" derives
from the Greek <i>kata-holos</i>, "completely whole." And no one realizes
how incomplete they are more than the Laisneyites.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">"Not knowing the justice of God
[interior sanctifying grace of justification by living faith] and
seeking to establish their own [exterior belonging to the Church by
exterior sacraments], [they] have not submitted themselves to the
justice of God (cf. <i>Romans 10:3</i>).</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">True Catholics at all times
submit themselves to the justice of God. It's simply that we must also
hold that justice alone is only <i><b>one</b></i> of the requirements with
which we must go to Judgment, and is therefore <i><b>in</b></i>
<i><b>itself</b></i> and <i><b>all by itself</b></i> insufficient for
eternal salvation.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">We must defend the Catholic
Faith, the absolute necessity of interior sanctifying grace as
inseparable from true faith, hope and charity, and the necessity of the
exterior sacraments "re aut voto in reality or at least in desire" as
taught by the Council of Trent.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
<p><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">That the Sanctifying Grace bestowed in
the sacraments can indeed be had by what Fr. Laisney here erroneously
terms "desire" is no valid argument that the <i><b>other</b></i> important
effects of certain Sacraments can be had by it. Again, Begging the
Question.</span></p>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">In this time of confusion in
the teaching of the Church we must hold fast to the unchangeable
teaching of the Tradition of the Church, believing what the Church has
al-ways believed and taught "in the same meaning and the same words,"
not changing one iota to the right or to the left, for falling from the
Faith on one side or the other is still falling from the true Faith,
"without faith no one has ever been justified" (<i>Council of Trent, TCT
563</i>).</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">What a wonderful profession of
Catholic Faith! If only it applied to the Laisneyites!</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Let us pray that Our Lord Jesus
Christ may give them the light to see and the grace to accept the
age-old teaching of our holy Mother the Church by her popes, fathers,
doc-tors and saints, and that, correcting themelves, they may serve the
Church rather than change her doctrine.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">And thus, we go to our eternal
reward hoping the same for Father François Laisney and all his followers!
<i>Amen</i>.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">... There follow Fr. Laisney's
references from his original article.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">NOTES:</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">1 Letter no. 73 (21) <i>to
Jubaianus</i> in 256.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">2 Having received an invalid
baptism outside the Church, and being received into the Church without
being at least re-baptized under condition. It was a hypothetical case at
the time of St. Cyprian (in this was he in error) but it probably happens
in some cases today, due to the laxity when receiving
converts.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">3 Denzinger, <i>The Sources of
Catholic Dogma</i>, 1800, Vatican I, de fide.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">4 "Baptism of the Spirit" is
another name for baptism of desire, by the grace of the Holy Ghost; De
Baptismo, cap. 1.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">5 In the very decree <i>Cantate
Domino</i> to the Armenians so often quoted by the Feeneyites (Dz
712).</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">My brother went to New York in
1985 and made a million dollars in the garment district. Actually, it
was't New York, it was in Chicago. And it wasn't my brother, it was my
uncle. Also, it wasn't in 1985, but 1975. And he didn't make a million
dollars, he lost a million. And it wasn't in garments, it was in a
delicatessen. Other than that, you had it right!</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The Decree <i>Cantata Domino</i>
is spelled with an <i><b>a</b></i>, not an <i><b>e</b></i>; it is found
not in Dz 712, but in Dz 714; and it was not to the Armenians, but to the
Jacobites (in fact, the two decrees were promulgated at the Council of
Florence two-and-a-half months apart). Other than this, Father Laisney is
correct. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">And, in saying that it is "often
quoted by the Feeneyites" goes without saying, for the simple reason that,
like all good Catholics, the Feeneyites hold to every iota, jot, and
tittle of every infallible declaration ever promulgated by the
Magisterium. In fact, this decree is just as De Fide as that mentioned by
Fr. Laisney in No.3 above. In further fact, this decree of Pope Eugene IV
is an <i>Ex Cathedra</i> definition of the Supreme and Extraordinary
Magisterium of the Catholic Church, whereas the proclamation of Vatican
Council I in note 3, although infallible, is not.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Other than that, Fr. Laisney had
it right.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">6 <i>Mancipia</i>, July 1998,
p.3.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">7 <i>Mancipia</i>, July 1998,
p.2.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">8 Session VI, Chapter 16, Dz
809.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">9 For instance, in regards of a
sick person in the hospital who cannot accomplish the precept of assisting
at Mass on Sundays and feast days, his will to fulfil the third
commandment is sufficient (<i>Summa Theologica </i>IIIa, Q.68, A.2, ad
3).</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<blockquote>
<hr />
</blockquote>
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Sufficient for what, it must be
asked? It doesn't get him to Mass; however, his will to fulfill his
obligation when sick in bed certainly nullifies any sin on his part.
Father Laisney argues that, in this, "God takes the will as the fact. This
means that God accepts the intention as equivalent to the actual"
attendance at Mass! (see above). Is the negative aspect of nullifying sin
genuinely as profitable as positively <i><b>going</b></i> to Mass and
<i><b>actually</b></i> receiving Our Lord in Holy Communion? Is a negative
as good as a positive? </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Taking the will for the fact can
get one into a lot of hot water, theologically. Try getting married "by
will" and not "in fact" and see what both God and the local police think
when they find you committing adultery with your "wife." Remember - God
Himself tells us that the baptism in the New Testament denotes being
"born, <i><b>not </b></i>of the will of the flesh <i><b>nor</b></i> of the
will of man" (<i>John 1:13</i>). </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">10 Is it through ignorance, or
by projecting his preconceived ideas, that the author claims that the
Council of Florence "passed non-Thomist decrees" (p.47)? Now to claim,
as in <i>Desire and Deception</i>, that <i>Cantate Domino</i> rejects
baptism of blood is simply to ignore that the passage in question is a
quote of St. Fulgentius, who, in the very same book from which that
quote is taken, explicitly teaches baptism of blood. Council Fathers
never quote a Father of the Church against the mind of such holy
authors.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">All truth is of the Holy Ghost,
while all errors (even if made "through ignorance") derive either from the
Devil or from man himself. Why should a Pontiff, defining infallibly and
<i>Ex Cathedra</i> as in <i>Cantata</i> <i>Domino</i>, <i><b>not</b></i>
avail himself of the truths found in writings of the Fathers, Doctors, and
Saints of the Church? We are guaranteed that the infallible de-clarations
of the Pope are absolutely true and consequently from God; we have
<i><b>no</b></i> such guarantee of every word of even the most brilliant
and holy Father, Doctor, or Saint of the Church. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">In this, the Popes perform their
God-given duties as the very fishers of men the Redeemer called them to be
(<i>Mark 1:17</i>). They thus rule over "</span><span style="font-family: Arial;">the
kingdom of heaven [which] is like to a net cast into the sea, and
gathering together of all kinds of fishes; which, when it was filled, they
drew out, and sitting by the shore, they chose out the good into vessels,
but the bad they cast forth" (<i>Matthew 13:47-48</i>). </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">11 <i>Pascendi</i>, Sept. 8,
1907.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">12 As in the Council of Trent,
Canons on the Sacrament of Baptism, Canon 5: "If anyone says that
baptism is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation: let him be
anathema" (Dz 861, TCT 691). Canon 2 (Dz 858, TCT 688) does not deal
with the necessity of baptism, but with the nature of the sacrament. It
defines that real water, oat symbolic, is of the nature of the
sacrament: "If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary
in baptism, and therefore interprets metaphorically the words of Our
Lord Jesus Christ, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy
Spirit (<i>John 3:5</i>): let him be anathema." Water, real water,
belongs to the first element of sacrament, the exterior sign. Thus one
sees clearly the sophism of the Feeneyite pamphlet where it is written:
"to terms of a syllogism we have the infallible major premise: baptism
is necessary for salvation and the infallible minor premise: true and
natural water is necessary for baptism, and the infallible conclusion.
true and natural water is necessary for salvation." Here one finds a
classical error of logic: the middle term "baptism" is not taken in the
same acceptation in the major and the minor. The major applies
absolutely to the third element of baptism, <i>res sacramenti</i>, the
ultimate reality of the sacrament, i.e., the new birth, the new life of
sanctifying grace, which is found in the "three baptisms." It applies
only relatively to the first element of baptism as explained above. The
minor deals only with the first element of baptism, <i>sacramentum
tantum</i>, of which the matter is real water and not symbolic water, as
some Protestants were saying.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Father Laisney here has his
metaphors mixed, inasmuch as there is no error in logic involved at all.
Canon 2 of Trent is from their decree on the <i><b>Sacrament</b></i> of
Baptism, not in the least on any such theological configurations
cluttering up the mind of the Laisneyites as <i>res sacramenti </i>or
<i>sacramentum tantum</i>, which never entered into any word of any
Tridentine proclamation. Therefore, the syllogism not only holds true, but
is perfect in its presentation -</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">The <i><b>Sacrament</b></i> of
Baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation.<br />True and natural water
is absolutely necessary for the <i><b>Sacrament</b></i> of
Baptism.<br />True and natural water is therefore absolutely necessary for
salvation.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><blockquote><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">13 The very saints the
Feeneyites offer for admiration and imitation in their publications
themselves taught baptism of desire! St. Alphonsus, and certainly all
the holy Redemptorists after him is the most forceful in favor of
baptism of desire, saying that it is de fide that there are some men
saved also by the baptism of the Spirit.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<hr />
</span></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">To make such a "certain"
statement, Father would have had in truth to have read every single book,
prayer, hymn, and sermon published by every single Redemptorist since the
late 18th Century. Does anyone in his right mind believe that he
<i><b>has? </b></i>Nevertheless, the dogmas which constitute that which is
<i>De</i> <i>Fide</i> <i>Catholica</i> are <i><b>not</b></i> subject to
majority vote. </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
</span><p><span style="color: black;"></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">Bear in mind that, during the
Arian heresy of the 4th Century (during which </span><span style="font-family: Arial;">all
but five heroic Catholic bishops in the entire world fell to this
diabolical perversion), it was Saint Athanasius who, virtually alone among
all the hierarchy of the Church championed the true Faith, wrote: "Even if
Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful,
<i><b>they</b></i> are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ."
Venerable Anna Katherine Emmerich declared that: </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial;">"If there were left upon earth but <i><b>one</b></i>
Catholic, he would <i><b>be</b></i> the one, universal Church, the
Catholic Church, the Church of Jesus Christ against which the gates of
Hell shall never prevail." </span><span style="color: black;"></span></p><span style="color: black;">
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">In these days of rampant heresy, conceived in the mind
of Satan to deceive, if possible, even the Elect, let us hold fast to the
doctrines which can conclusively been demonstrated to have been held
always by Catholics the world over. As St. Vincent of Lerins warns us from
over fifteen hundred years ago - </span></p>
</span></span><blockquote><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: black;">
</span></span><blockquote><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: black;"></span>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial;">It never was, is, or shall be lawful for Catholic
Christians to teach any doctrine except that which they received once
and for all time; and it always was, is, and shall be their duty to
condemn those who do. Moreover, in the Church herself every possible
care must be taken to hold fast to that Faith which has been believed
<i><b>everywhere</b></i>,<i> <b>always</b></i>,<i> <b>and by
everyone</b></i>. For, that is truly Catholic which comprehends all
universality. He is a true and genuine Catholic who loves the truth of
God, who loves the Church, who loves the Body of Christ, who esteems
divine religion and Catholic Faith above everything: above the
authority, the regard, the genius, the eloquence, the philosophy of
every man whatsoever. He is a genuine Catholic who continues steadfast
and is founded in the Faith, who resolves to believe those things, and
<i><b>only</b></i> those things, which he is certain the Catholic
Church has held <i><b>universally</b></i> and from ancient times. It
is therefore an indispensable obligation for all who are eager to
prove themselves true sons of Holy Mother the Church to adhere to the
Faith of the Fathers, to preserve it, to die for it; and, on the other
hand, to detest the profane novelties of profane men: to dread them,
to harass them, and to attack
them.</span></p></span></blockquote></blockquote><span style="color: black;">
</span><p align="center"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><strong></strong></span></p></a><p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica;"></span></span> </p></td></tr></tbody></table></center></div><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica;">
<p><img height="1" src="https://salbert.tripod.com/Ecclesia Militans The Errors of the Laisneyites!_files/serv.gif" width="1" />
</p>
<div></div>
<img alt="1" height="1" src="C:\WINNT\Profiles\user\DESKTOP\Ecclesia Militans The Errors of the Laisneyites!_files\serv(1).gif" width="1" /> </span>
<p></p>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-48199901306373107992023-01-01T02:56:00.004-08:002023-01-01T02:56:58.948-08:00The Catholic Dogma -- Book by Rev. Michael Müller, C.SS.R<p> </p><p>
</p><div class="top-anchor"></div>
<div class="toolbar-container scrolled" id="toolbar">
</div><div class="container" dir="ltr" lang="undefined" style="--line-height: 1.6em;">
<div class="header reader-header reader-show-element">
Full book found here</div><div class="header reader-header reader-show-element"><a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Contents.html">http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Contents.html</a><br />
<div class="domain-border"></div>
<h1 class="reader-title">The Catholic Dogma - Contents</h1>
<div class="credits reader-credits"></div>
<div class="meta-data">
<div class="reader-estimated-time" data-l10n-args="{"range":"3–4","rangePlural":"other"}" data-l10n-id="about-reader-estimated-read-time" dir="ltr"><br /></div>
</div>
</div>
<hr />
<div class="content">
<div class="moz-reader-content reader-show-element"><div class="page" id="readability-page-1"><p> The Catholic Dogma<br />
<span> by Rev. Michael Müller, C.SS.R</span></p><div>
<p>"<b>Extra Ecclesiam Nullus omnino Salvatur</b>." <br />"<i>Out of the Church there is positively no Salvation</i>." - Fourth Lateran Council, 1015</p>
<p>"<b>Error, cui non resistur, approbatur; et Veritas, cum minime defensatur</b>."<br />"<i>Not to oppose erroneous Doctrine is to approve of it, and not to defend at all true Doctrine is to suppress it</i>.<i>"</i> - Innocent III.</p>
<p><b><a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/index.html">Index</a></b><br />
<b><a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Preface.html">Preface</a></b><br />
<b><a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-I.html">Chapter I</a>.</b> Introductory<br />
<b><a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-II.html">Chapter II</a>.</b> The Infallible and only True Guide to Heaven<br />
<b><a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-III.html">Chapter III</a>.</b> The Great Revolt Against Christ<br />
<b><a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-IV.html">Chapter IV</a>.</b> Dishonesty of His Impudence Bishop Coxe<br />
<b><a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V.html">Chapter V</a>.</b> Refutation of the False Assertions of Rev'ds Sir Oracle, Cronin and Young.<br />
</p>
<blockquote>
<p><b><u><a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-I.html">Chapter V - PART I.</a><br />
</u></b><br />
<i><b>There is no salvation out of the Church.</b></i></p>
<p><a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-I.html#S.%20O.%20BEGINS%20TO%20COMMENT">§
1. S.O begins to comment on some answers, contained in our little work,
"Familiar Explanation of Christian Doctrine," (first edition)</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-I.html#S.%20O.%20CONTINUES%20TO%20SPEAK">§ 2. S.O. continues to speak ex cathedra.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-I.html#S.%20O.%20EXAMINES%20AND%20EXPLAINS">§ 3. S.O. examines and explains the question and answer, "Have Protestants any faith in Christ? A. They never had.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-I.html#WHAT%20CATHOLIC%20FAITH%20IS">§ 4. What Catholic faith is.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-I.html#WHAT%20PROTESTANT%20BELIEF">§ 5. What Protestants' belief in Christ is.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-I.html#MORE%20FALSE%20ORACLES">§ 6. More false oracles of Sir Oracle.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-I.html#S.%20O.%20DECLARES%20TRUTH">§ 7. S.O. declares truth to be rant and abuse.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-I.html#S.%20O.%20CONTINUES%20TO%20DECLARE">§ 8. S.O. continues to declare false what is true.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-I.html#S.%20O.%20DECLARES%20WHOLLY">§ 9. S.O. declares wholly untrue what he cannot understand.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-I.html#S.%20O.%20AVOWS">§ 10. S.O. avows that our conclusion is correct, but tells more d--d lies.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-I.html#S.%20O.%20DECLARES%20THAT%20THE%20FINAL">§
11. S.O. declares that the final sentence of the Eternal Judge, "I know
you not--Depart from me, etc." will fall, not on Protestants, but only
on bad Catholics; but from his own words it is proved that Protestants,
too, are included in that sentence.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-I.html#S.%20O.%20DECLARES%20THE%20HONEST">§ 12. S.O. declares the honest life of Protestants a standing reproach to bad Catholics.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-I.html#S.%20O.%20's%20PHARISAICAL">§ 13. S.O.'s. pharisaical language.</a><br />
</p>
<p><b><u><a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html">Chapter V - PART II.</a></u></b></p>
<p><i><b>Those who live in heresy without being guilty of the sin of heresy.</b></i></p>
<p><a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#NATURAL%20LAW">§ 1. Natural Law.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#THE%20WRITTEN%20LAW">§ 2. The written Law.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#THE%20NEW%20LAW"> § 3. The New Law or the Law of Grace.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#CONSCIENCE%20IN%20GENERAL"> § 4. Conscience in general.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#KINDS%20OF%20CONSCIENCE"> § 5. Kinds of conscience:</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#The%20right%20or%20true%20conscience">1. The right or true conscience.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#The%20certain%20conscience"> 2. The certain conscience.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#There%20is%20also%20the%20timorous"> 3. The timorous or tender conscience.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#The%20doubtful%20conscience"> 4. The doubtful conscience.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#The%20lax%20conscience"> 5. The lax conscience.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#The%20perplexed%20conscience"> 6. The perplexed conscience.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#The%20scrupulous%20conscience"> 7. The scrupulous conscience.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#The%20erroneous%20or%20false%20conscience"> 8. The erroneous or false conscience.</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#HAVING%20EXPLAINED%20WHAT%20CONSCIENCE%20IS">§
6. What heretics are not guilty of the sin of heresy -- Refutation of
Rev. A. Young's erroneous doctrine on divine faith of material heretics.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#INVINCIBLE%20OR%20INCULPABLE%20IGNORANCE"> § 7. Invincible or inculpable ignorance neither saves nor damns a person.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#HOW%20ALMIGHTY%20GOD%20LEADS"> § 8. How Almighty God leads to salvation those who are inculpably ignorant of the truths of salvation.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#THOSE%20WHO%20SINCERELY%20SEEK"> § 9. Those who sincerely seek the true religion.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#S.%20O.%20on%20Confession"> § 10. S.O. on confession.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#S.%20O.%20POINTS%20OUT%20THE%20ROAD"> § 11. S.O. points out the road to heaven for heathen and Protestants of every denomination.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#S.%20O%20GIVES%20US%20CREDIT%20FOR%20OUR%20CORRECT"> § 12. S.O. gives us credit for our correct doctrine in a way very dishonorable to himself.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#S.%20O.%20AS%20CATECHIST"> § 13. S.O. as Catechist.</a><br />
<a href="http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/Chapter-V_Part-II.html#LIBERALISM."> § 14. Liberalism condemned by the Church.</a></p>
</blockquote>
</div></div></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div aria-owns="toolbar"></div>
</div>
CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-26581044640774328382022-08-01T04:09:00.003-07:002022-08-01T04:09:25.318-07:00Karl Rahner and the Unspoken Framework of (Much of) Modern Theology - OnePeterFive<p>
</p><div class="top-anchor"></div>
<div class="toolbar-container" id="toolbar">
</div><div class="container" dir="ltr" lang="en-US" style="--line-height: 1.6em;">
<div class="header reader-header reader-show-element">
<a class="domain reader-domain" href="https://onepeterfive.com/karl-rahner-modern-theology/">onepeterfive.com</a>
<div class="domain-border"></div>
<h1 class="reader-title"><br /></h1>
<div class="credits reader-credits">Peter Kwasniewski, PhD</div>
<div class="meta-data">
<div class="reader-estimated-time" dir="ltr"><br /></div>
</div>
</div>
<hr />
<div class="content">
<div class="moz-reader-content reader-show-element"><div class="page" id="readability-page-1"><div><p>Charles Coulombe’s interesting remark in a <a href="https://onepeterfive.com/hyperpapalism-body-politic/">recent article</a>
that Pius XII, for all his intransigence against dogmatic modernism,
allowed Father Karl Rahner, S.J., to be the editor of the prestigious
Denzinger prompted me to take up the question of Rahner’s theology and
the immense influence it has had on modern Catholic discourse. His
influence is such that it is no longer even felt or perceived as such,
but has successfully created an atmosphere, a set of implicit
assumptions, a mental miasma within which many theologians and students
work without even realizing that it is Rahnerian rather than Catholic.
Just as for many centuries nearly every work of theology and
spirituality bore the unmistakable imprint of St. Thomas—whether he was
expressly cited or not—so too, the unmistakable imprint of the Jesuit of
Innsbruck is to be found nearly everywhere, including in authors who
are styled “conservative.”<a name="_ftnref1">[1]</a></p>
<p>Inevitably, a figure of Rahner’s magnitude, who published dozens of
volumes of dense material, is not someone it is easy to summarize, and I
offer the following “big picture” fully recognizing that it will lack
nuance. However, I am convinced there <em>is </em>a big picture at work;
that we can accurately identify what it is; and that it is sufficient
for assessing his impact and raising critical questions about it. Every
thinker has certain guiding ideas that coalesce around a few major
themes, and if one can find out what those are, one has a sort of “key”
to the rest.</p>
<span><a name='more'></a></span><p>The
revolutionary nature of Rahnerian theology can be seen only against the
backdrop of a traditional account of Christian doctrine. If one had to
attempt a summary of the traditional account in one paragraph, it would
go something like this.</p>
<p>God, Who is three Persons in one nature, created man in order to
bring him to eternal happiness in union with Himself. The first man,
Adam, was entrusted with the supernatural gifts necessary for arriving
at this union, and he was supposed to pass them on to all his
descendants. By sinning against God, Adam lost these supernatural gifts,
and passed down his sin to his descendants instead, so that each of us
is born with a <em>real guilt</em>, although not a <em>personal</em>
guilt. Since we could not save ourselves, the second Person of the
Trinity took on a human nature and became a man, known as Jesus Christ,
and offered His life as a sacrifice for all men. Anyone who puts faith
in this sacrifice and follows Christ’s directions on how to incorporate
himself into that sacrifice can be saved from Adam’s sin and from his
own sins, and can arrive at eternal happiness in union with God.</p>
<h3>Rahner’s Big Idea</h3>
<p>Rahner takes one new idea and places it at the very center of
Christianity. This is the idea of the “transcendental experience.” It is
hard to grasp exactly what he means by this, but one can give some
impression of it at least. While all creatures are limited and finite,
man is the only creature who can reflect on his limitations and
finitude; in so reflecting on them, he transcends them, reaching out
beyond his limitations to the “transcendent,” to the Unknown Beyond
which calls him and urges him to move beyond his limitations. The
Unknown Beyond, the “term of transcendence,” is what Christians call
God. And since a man operates within his limitations in every action he
does, then every action of a man has the transcendental implicitly
within it, simply waiting for the man to reflect and make it explicit;
hence God (Who is that Unknown Beyond discovered in a transcendental
experience) is the implicit horizon of every human action.</p>
<p>Although a man may not fully understand what the Unknown Beyond is
calling and urging him to, it is in fact God’s call to the beatific
vision. So a man’s fundamental duty in life is to respond to the call to
transcendence, and seek union with the Beyond which is at the same time
utterly Beyond and intimately close as the horizon of his every action.
<strong>If a man does this, he is saved.</strong></p>
<h3>Rahner’s Reinterpreted Christianity</h3>
<p>Since this
call to transcendence, which is a necessary part of man’s very nature,
is now the fundamental problem of salvation, it is obvious that the
basic doctrines of Christianity need to be “reinterpreted.”</p>
<p>First and foremost, the doctrine of original sin simply has to go, because <em>it</em>
claims to be the fundamental problem of salvation. So Rahner says that
original sin is not something passed on biologically, by the act of
begetting—that idea is a kind of mythology—but rather a tainting of our
actions by all the history which has gone before us. For example,
suppose that I inherit millions from my father who got the millions
dishonestly. No matter what I do with the millions, even if I give it to
charity, my deed is tainted by the fact that the millions were
ill-gotten. Similarly, if I buy a banana at the grocery store, suppose
that the banana farmers were evil men, and that those who profit from
the banana sales are evil men: their previous evil deeds taint my action
of buying the banana, even if I am unaware of them. These are all
examples of original sin. The biblical account claiming that the first
human beings had already begun to taint the deeds of their descendants
is not really an account based on history but rather a reasonable
inference from the current state of things: if this is how things are
today, the biblical author reasoned, then this must be how things were
at the beginning. This is Rahner’s version of original sin.</p>
<p>Next, the Incarnation must be reinterpreted. It can no longer be seen
as God coming down from above to pay a debt we were unable to pay. So
instead we emphasize that in the Incarnation, God is perfectly united
with man. Jesus is an example of a man who perfectly responded to God’s
call to transcendence, and lived in union with the Beyond. (It seems to
me that Rahner would very much like to be Nestorian in this regard, but
finds himself unable to do so in the face of such clear Church teachings
against Nestorianism. So instead, he insists that Christ’s divinity,
although we have to acknowledge it, should be downplayed in favor of his
humanity.)</p>
<p>In particular, the crucifixion must be reinterpreted. It is entirely
wrong to see the crucifixion as a “sacrifice” which “merits” our
salvation, even though this way of describing it is found in a secondary
way in Scripture. Rather, in the crucifixion, Christ perfectly
responded to the call to transcendence—more perfectly than any other man
has ever responded or will ever respond—thus perfectly carrying out
what every man is called to by his nature. By knowing Christ’s response
and recognizing ourselves in it, we can share in Christ’s perfect
response. The crucifixion is thus a “<em>Real symbol</em>” of our salvation.</p>
<p>It is now
evident that since all men everywhere at all times experience at least
implicitly the call to transcendence, it follows that all men everywhere
at all times are at least <em>implicitly</em> receiving a revelation of
the inner essence of Christ’s crucifixion. So if a man responds to the
call, he is living out the essence of Christianity, and can be called an
“anonymous Christian.” There is tremendous advantage to explicit
Christianity, of course, because recognizing oneself in the Gospel
account of Christ’s Incarnation and crucifixion is greatly helpful in
fully responding to the call to transcendence; but it is not necessary
to be explicitly Christian.</p>
<p>Given this, it is not hard to see that all sincere Christians, no
matter what their denominations, are living out the essence of
Christianity. It becomes clear that, as Vatican II pointed out, there is
a hierarchy of truths, some of them more important than others; and, in
particular, the fundamental problem of seeking transcendence is more
important than all the other doctrines. Hence, Rahner called for the
immediate institutional unity of all Christians, regardless of their
particular doctrinal differences.</p>
<h3>Rahner’s Trinity</h3>
<p>Although logically Rahner’s ideas about the Trinity belong earlier in
this essay, it seemed to me that putting his Trinitarian ideas in their
logical place would have disrupted the flow of the above presentation.
Basically, that Unknown Beyond which presents itself to every reflecting
man presents itself precisely <em>as</em> the Beyond, and the
traditional teachings about the Trinity represent an attempt to state
something about the inner life of the Beyond—an absurd thing to attempt.
Hence Rahner emphasizes that one must think about the Trinity in terms
of the “economic” Trinity: God as creator is the Father; God as
incarnate savior is the Son; and God as impelling grace within us is the
Holy Spirit. (Again, as we saw before in regard to his Nestorianizing
Christology, so too in Trinitarian theology it seems Rahner would like
to be a Modalist.<a name="_ftnref2">[2]</a>
Let us not forget that a characteristic of Modernists is to be
sympathetic to the early heresies that were condemned by the Church.</p>
<h3>Rahner’s Repudiation of Christianity</h3>
<p>The synthesis I have presented above is my own interpretation of
clues and emphases and downplays in Rahner’s work; he himself might well
have rejected my presentation as inaccurate and indeed he would have
rejected it if only for political and rhetorical reasons. Purveyors of
heresy rarely wish to be known as such, preferring rather to ride the
coattails of orthodoxy. But there is no doubt that Rahner does say,
quite clearly, that the transcendental experience is the fundamental
idea in all of his theology, and it is clearly true that his famous
oddities of doctrine suddenly snap together into a monolithic synthesis
if one takes the fundamental idea as the key to a reinterpretation of
Christian doctrine. If what I have said is right about Rahner, then he
is not just heretical about this or that teaching, but rather,
systematically non-Christian, inasmuch as he undermines dogmatic
Christianity at its foundation.</p>
<div><p>Advertisement - Continue Reading Below</p></div><p>It is only
fair to make a few standard disclaimers. I am not calling into question
Karl Rahner’s personal commitment to or good will in living the
Christian faith as he (wrongly) understood it. His <a href="http://natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives2/1997d/121997/121997a.htm">22-year secret Platonic romance</a>
with a widow and two-time divorcee, the German novelist Luise Rinser—a
romance that would generate some 4,000 letters between 1962 and
1984—shows that, however confused he may have been, he remained faithful
to his vow of celibacy and to a religious concepton of life. He may
have had the best intentions in the world for endeavoring to recast
Christianity from the ground up, presumably for the benefit of that most
puzzling of creatures, “Modern Man,” in whose name the entire liturgy
was also uprooted, inverted, and transmogrified. Rahner appears all his
life to have wished to be a “son of the Church” and said many things—for
example, in his debate against Hans Küng—that do fall squarely into the
Tradition of the Church.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, I feel all the more confident in presenting this
summary critique when even so fashionable and controversial a theologian
as (quondam Jesuit) Hans Urs von Balthasar sharply critiques Rahner in a
substantially similar way to the foregoing: one need only consult
Balthasar’s <em>The Moment of Christian Witness</em>, section III, 3, as well as the fifth essay in his <em>New Elucidations</em>
entitled “The Religion of Humanity and the Religion of Jesus Christ.”
Balthasar first defines the central thrust of the Enlightenment as “the
change from a theocentric to an anthropocentric viewpoint,” which, “for
religion… means the change from a positive historical religion to a
religion valid for man in general, who is essentially religious.”<a name="_ftnref3">[3]</a> This leads to the view that</p>
<blockquote><p>Positive dogmas, based on history, are <em>transcendentally </em>outlined
in human nature. Affirming them, man always affirms at least his own
being as well. And since the religious human being is essentially
seeking union between himself and God, all the world religions and other
world views could be <em>christologies on the search</em>… [H]enceforth
every form of positive historical religion is reducible, and must more
and more become reducible, to a human religion… The two models of
religious universality are incompatible: Jesus’ absolute claim—“No one
knows the Father except the Son”—cannot be subordinated to an
“intrinsically good” human nature that of itself (despite obscurities,
despite Kant’s “radical evil”) knows the truth and can come to possess
it.<a name="_ftnref4">[4]</a></p></blockquote>
<p>Balthasar then runs through a number of dogmas that would have to be
“reinterpreted” (just as we said earlier), of which the following
example may suffice (note that the italics here are phrases taken
verbatim from Rahner):</p>
<blockquote><p>[T]he view that Jesus, in our stead, died for our sins…is <em>in the last analysis unthinkable</em>. Since <em>all true salvation can be thought of as happening only in the exercise of the individual’s own freedom </em>(the word “self-redemption” is altogether meaningful), and since on the other hand <em>God cannot be made to change his mind</em>, the Cross can be nothing other than the supreme <em>quasi-sacramental sign </em>that God has always been reconciled [to man].<a name="_ftnref5">[5]</a></p></blockquote>
<p>It is but one step from there to universalism in both senses: there
is, when all is said and done, only one religion, however much we in our
human weakness and prejudice diversify its expressions and fight over
them due to a lack of metaphysical and psychological penetration; and
there can be no talk of damnation, since the divine spark in all of us
must return to God. The immense indebtedness of Jorge Mario Bergoglio to
Karl Rahner should be obvious. The Abu Dhabi statement, the Abrahamic
House, the remarks on hell to Scalfari—in general, the interreligious
and eschatological vagueness, together with the language of, and
concrete associations with, proponents of a new world order—cannot but
remind us of Rahner’s new interpretation of humanity, religion, and
salvation.</p>
<p>Even though the essay in <em>New Elucidations </em>is
a sustained critique of Rahner from start to finish, quoting him
copiously in the form of italicized phrases, the only direct assault on
Rahner <em>by name</em> comes in a solitary footnote at the very end.<a name="_ftnref6">[6]</a> In this note Balthasar becomes quite direct, and I endorse his sentiments a hundredfold:</p>
<blockquote><p>I do not by any means claim to have presented (or
“exposed”) Rahner’s central intention here; it is evident that as a
Catholic theologian his thought is more subtle and differentiated. But
despite all the retardant insertions, formal basic structures still
emerge. Thus it seemed beneficial to single out certain statements—after
digging them out of their thick protective packing—in order to show
that by their own dynamics they ‘lead where you do not want to go,’
namely, towards a ‘transcendent unity of religions,’ as the newly edited
work of Frithjof Schuon says: ‘This transcendental unity is to be
effected purely spiritually, without betraying any individual form. The
contrasting elements of these forms no more impair the one, universal
unity than the contrast between the colors hinders the transmission of
the one, colorless light.’<a name="_ftnref7">[7]</a></p></blockquote>
<p>Whatever we may think of other aspects of Hans Urs von Balthasar’s
theology, here he is undoubtedly in the right. Karl Rahner leads to
where we do not want to go—right out of dogmatic, confessional, salvific
Christianity, out of the traditional faith of the Catholic Church, and
into the empty, howling byways of the Modernists’ interior “religious
sense,” subjective experiences, and pseudo-mysticism, the labyrinth that
stems from self and leads to self, however draped in splendors borrowed
from conventional religious language. The triune God, Light, <em>Logos</em>,
Life, and Love, calls us in Christ Jesus, by His bloodied Cross and
bodily Resurrection, by the sevenfold sacramental stream, out of that
dark labyrinth into His eternal glory.</p>
<p><i>An earlier version of this essay contained a slighting remark
about a recent work by David Bentley Hart, which was falsely claimed to
exhibit sympathy for Arianism. The remark was unjust and has been
removed, with apologies to Dr. Hart.</i></p>
<p><a name="_ftn1">[1]</a> Naturally,
much of the theology world is definitely “post-Rahner,” in the sense of
having abandoned even the tenuous ties to Tradition that one finds
there. One need only look at CTSA conferences to see the dissolution of
theology into an enterprise of politically-woke, hyper-modernist,
historically-revisionist-and-relativist babble.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn2">[2]</a> Rahner’s <em>Grundaxiom </em>is: “the ‘economic’ Trinity is the ‘immanent’ Trinity and the ‘immanent’ Trinity is the ‘economic’ Trinity” (<em>The Trinity</em>, trans. Joseph Donceel [New York: Crossroad Publishing, 1997], 22). Notice that he says “is,” not that the economic <em>manifests </em>and <em>continues</em> the immanent.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn3">[3]</a> Hans Urs von Balthasar, <em>New Elucidations</em>, trans. Sister Mary Theresilde Skerry (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1986), 75.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn4">[4]</a> Balthasar, 76–77.</p>
<div><p><br /></p></div><p><a name="_ftn5">[5]</a> Balthasar, 80–81.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn6">[6]</a> Never underestimate footnotes! Maritain, for example, refutes Kant’s <em>Critique of Judgement </em>in a footnote to his work <em>Art and Scholasticism.</em></p>
<p><a name="_ftn7">[7]</a> Balthasar, 86–87. For some critical thoughts of my own about Schuon and the “perennialist” school, see <a href="https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/how-the-theism-of-aquinas-differs-from-theism-in-the-marketplace-of-ideas/">this article</a>.</p>
<p><a rel="nofollow" title="Printer Friendly, PDF & Email"><img alt="Print Friendly, PDF & Email" class="moz-reader-block-img" src="https://cdn.printfriendly.com/buttons/printfriendly-button.png" /></a></p></div></div></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div aria-owns="toolbar"></div>
</div>
CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-13391759663727472702022-07-09T14:42:00.004-07:002022-07-09T14:42:57.706-07:00Explaining the Faith - Freemasonry: Meaning and Mission<p> <span class="style-scope yt-formatted-string" dir="auto">What is Freemasonry and why does the Catholic Church condemn it? Is it justified or a misunderstanding? Join Fr. Chris Alar as he gives the history and meaning behind this secret society and what their defined mission actually is. </span></p>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4kgfzlwAnig" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-79435770936383819502022-07-09T14:40:00.006-07:002022-07-09T14:40:51.504-07:00Roe v. Wade<p> We can only praise God for the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Not much else to say. Mary Immaculate Queen Triumph and Reign !! <br /></p>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-30070053484428918982022-05-23T08:38:00.000-07:002022-05-23T08:38:04.222-07:00Saint Ambrose and Valentinian<p> from <a class="domain reader-domain" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20040211232655/http://catholicism.org/TTAS/chapter_9g.htm#ambrose">web.archive.org</a> <span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The whole fascinating story is well documented in the book by </span><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20040211163059/catholicism.org/TTAS/contents.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Bro. Robert Mary, “Father Feeney and The Truth About Salvation”, </span></a></span><span face="Arial, Arial, Helvetica"><b></b></span></p><p><b><br /></b></p><b>
</b><p>An often used example of a candidate for supposed "baptism of
desire" was the young Roman Emperor, Valentinian II, a catechumen who, at the age of
twenty, was assassinated in the year 392. He had planned to be baptized in Milan by his
dear friend, Saint Ambrose. The memorial oration delivered by the Saint is constantly
cited as a "proof" that the early Church believed in "baptism of
desire." The quote from the oration usually begins with these words:</p>
<blockquote>
<span size="2"></span><p><span size="2">But I hear you grieve because he did not receive the
Sacrament of Baptism . . .</span></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Let us stop Saint Ambrose at this point and reflect on what he just
said. All of the faithful assembled for the memorial service are grieved. Why are they
grieved? Saint Ambrose says they are grieved because there is no evidence that the
Emperor, a known catechumen, had been baptized before his death. But if "baptism of
desire" was something contained in the "Deposit of Faith" and part of the
Apostolic doctrine, why would they be grieved? Did not Valentinian earnestly desire
Baptism?<br /><br /></p><span><a name='more'></a></span>
<p>These faithful were grieved because they had been taught, and therefore
believed, that "unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot
enter the kingdom of God." Their teacher was their Bishop, Saint Ambrose. In his
written commentary on Baptism, Ambrose stated without equivocation:</p>
<blockquote>
<span size="2"></span><p><span size="2">One is the Baptism which the Church administers: the
Baptism of water and the Holy Ghost, with which catechumens need to be baptized . . . Nor
does the mystery of regeneration exist at all without water, for "Unless a man be
born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom." Now, even the
catechumen believes in the cross of the Lord Jesus, with which he also signs himself; but,
unless he be baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, he
cannot receive remission of his sins nor the gift of spiritual grace. (<i>De Mysteriis</i>,
From the Divine Office)</span></p>
</blockquote>
<p>However, the fact remains that Saint Ambrose seems to contradict the
above words when, in the funeral oration, he asks, "Did he not obtain the grace which
he desired? Did he not obtain what he asked for?"And then concludes, "Certainly,
because he asked for it, he obtained it."</p>
<p>Is this final statement by Saint Ambrose conclusive proof that he
believed also in "baptism of desire," thus contradicting what he stated in <i>De
Mysteriis</i>?</p>
<p>No, we do not think it is conclusive proof. And we are not alone in
that opinion. Father Jacques Paul Migne (died l875), one of the great authorities on
patrology in the last century, maintains that Saint Ambrose was not proposing a new
doctrine on Baptism. Father Migne writes: "From among the Catholic Fathers perhaps no
one insists more than Ambrose on the absolute necessity of receiving Baptism, in various
places, but especially in Book II <i>De Abraham</i>; Sermon 2 <i>In Psal</i>; and the book
<i>De Mysteriis</i>." And that Saint Ambrose meant the sacrament of Baptism with
water is made abundantly clear in all of his writings, as the above quote from <i>De
Mysteriis</i> demonstrates. However, just exactly what he meant by his words at the
funeral, we may never know, but we are, certainly, legitimately permitted to assume that
it was not his intention to contradict, in an emotionally charged eulogy, what he had
written with much thought and precision in <i>De Mysteriis</i> and elsewhere.</p>
<p>Father Laisney says that we have no right to make such assumptions. We
disagree! Not only do we have the right, we have the duty to use our God-given faculty of
reason — the power of comprehending and inferring — which is vital if we are to
arrive at the truth of these controverted matters. Despite his protests, we will continue
to look at all the evidence available in these reputed examples of baptism by desire or
blood, our only purpose being to learn the whole truth.</p>
<p>So we say this: Neither Saint Ambrose, nor anyone else other than
Almighty God, could ever say with absolute certainty that Valentinian had never been
baptized. The year was 392, 79 years after the Edict of Milan. By this time, Christians in
the Empire must have been a great majority, for just two years later Theodosius I, emperor
in the East, declared Christianity to be the Faith of the Empire, and 30 years later the
emperor Theodosius II declared that there were hardly any pagans left in his dominions.
When Valentinian marched to Vienne for a showdown with a disloyal aide, Arbogast, a pagan
Frank who had usurped imperial authority in Gaul, he was assassinated, apparently in
Vienne.</p>
<p>Certainly it is safe to assume that he, the Emperor, embarked on this
mission to Vienne, some 200 miles distance from Milan, not alone, but in the company of an
armed guard of considerable size, perhaps even an army. And in that guard or army would
have been many Christians, most of whom would have known of Valentinian’s resolve to
be baptized, for it was no secret, and any one of whom could have baptized him before he
died.</p>
<p>But if this had not happened, if Valentinian, in fact, had not been
baptized by a soldier, Bishop Ambrose — with a faith in God that can move mountains
— could still have found it appropriate to console the assembled mourners with these
reassuring words: "Did he not obtain what he asked for? Certainly, because he asked
for it, he obtained it." These words would not have been a "false"
assurance to worried catechumens, as our critic contends, but, rather, a confirmation by
the Holy Bishop of his total faith in the promise of Christ: "Ask, and it shall be
given you; seek, and you shall find; knock, and it shall be opened to you."</p>
<p>Here is how we would explain this incident: Valentinian was asking,
seeking and knocking for the sacrament of Baptism. He was prevented by a sudden,
unexpected death from receiving it <i>solemnly</i> at the hands of his Bishop. But no
death is ever "sudden" or "unexpected" to God. If Valentinian was a
worthy catechumen, as Ambrose believed he was, God got the saving waters to him somewhere
and sometime before he died. Thus, with total confidence in Divine Providence, Ambrose
could say: "Certainly, . . . he obtained it," for this is exactly what Father
Leonard Feeney would have said had Valentinian been his catechumen!</p>
<p></p>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-69354076978072942402022-03-30T18:32:00.003-07:002022-05-18T17:01:19.496-07:00Was the Fatima Consecration Valid?<p>Here is a good discussion of the Fatima consecration. We at Catholic Vox think it was properly done. Only time will tell if it was. Obviously it was not done properly before because there was no dramatics conversion of Russia. <br /></p><br /><br /><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/jtICv4za04A" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-11212065494114911092021-10-17T11:45:00.004-07:002022-06-15T18:39:37.980-07:00Why do we have abortion in this country?<p> </p><div><div dir="auto"><div class="ecm0bbzt hv4rvrfc e5nlhep0 dati1w0a" data-ad-comet-preview="message" data-ad-preview="message" id="jsc_c_5v"><div class="j83agx80 cbu4d94t ew0dbk1b irj2b8pg"><div class="qzhwtbm6 knvmm38d"><span class="d2edcug0 hpfvmrgz qv66sw1b c1et5uql lr9zc1uh a8c37x1j keod5gw0 nxhoafnm aigsh9s9 d3f4x2em fe6kdd0r mau55g9w c8b282yb iv3no6db jq4qci2q a3bd9o3v b1v8xokw oo9gr5id hzawbc8m" dir="auto"><div class="kvgmc6g5 cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><br /></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">1. Bishop Bannon--if no one goes to hell why is it so bad?<br /><br /></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">2. Denial of the DOCTRINE of Limbo. Yes. I said DOCTRINE.</div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">If there is no Limbo then all of these children go to heaven and their mothers and fathers can repent later. </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">According to the Council of Lyons and Florence anyone dying in only Original Sin immediately goes to hell-- but of a different punishment. The punishment was always the theological debate, NOT Limbo's existence. <br /><br /></div><span><a name='more'></a></span></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Council of Lyons II “…The souls of those who die in mortal sin or with ORIGINAL SIN ONLY, HOWEVER, IMMEDIATELY DESCEND TO HELL, TO BE PUNISHED WITH DIFFERENT PUNISHMENTS…-- (Denzinger 464)<br /><br /></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Council of Florence: “…Moreover, the souls of those who depart in actual mortal sin or IN ORIGINAL SIN ONLY, DESCEND IMMEDIATELY INTO HELL BUT TO UNDERGO PUNISHMENTS OF DIFFERENT KINDS.— (Denzinger 693)</div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Augustine and many others said that infants that die before baptism suffer mild torment. While Aquinas and most since Aquinas said that they suffered the loss of the Beatific vision.<span><!--more--></span><br /><br />Also if Limbo is not a doctrine then how could Augustine write:<br /><br /><b>St. Augustine, Letter to Jerome, 415:</b> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> “Anyone who would say that even
infants who pass from this life without participation in the Sacrament
[of Baptism] shall be made alive in Christ TRULY GOES COUNTER TO THE
PREACHING OF THE APOSTLE AND CONDEMNS THE WHOLE CHURCH, where there is
great haste in baptizing infants because it is believed without doubt
that there is no other way at all in which they can be made alive in
Christ.” (Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 3:1439) <br /><br />So to deny Limbo is to deny the Apostolic Faith. This is what Augustine taught.<br /><br /></div><span><!--more--></span></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">How is it people use Aquinas against us for denying BoD, but at the same time reject Limbo, which Aquinas held, with Augustine? And if Aquinas accepted Limbo then he must have thought Baptism was necessary for salvation, as did Augustine in his later years after rethinking his position on BoD after the Pelagian heresy.<br /><br />This is why the council Council of Florence, <span class="d2edcug0 hpfvmrgz qv66sw1b c1et5uql lr9zc1uh a8c37x1j keod5gw0 nxhoafnm aigsh9s9 d3f4x2em fe6kdd0r mau55g9w c8b282yb iv3no6db jq4qci2q a3bd9o3v b1v8xokw oo9gr5id hzawbc8m" dir="auto">Pope Eugene IV, </span>Session 11, Feb. 4, 1442, taught de fide: <br /><br />
“Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often
take place, WHEN NO HELP CAN BE BROUGHT TO THEM BY ANOTHER REMEDY <span style="color: #cc0000;"><b><span>than
through the sacrament of baptism, through which they are snatched from
the domination of the Devil [original sin] and adopted among the sons of
God,</span></b></span> it advises that holy baptism ought not be deferred for forty or
eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people…”
(Denz. 712)<br /><br />Don't you see the evil of abortion? If Aquinas is right and it is the highest part of hell and the only thing they suffer is the loss of the beatific vision, living a natural paradise, BUT still excluded from seeing God. This is even graver than murder, which can only deprive one of life, but abortion deprives them of eternal life. If Augustine is correct then they sentence their offspring to an eternity of torment.<br /><br />Either way it is a scandal and horrific crime.<br /><br /><b>Pope Martin V, Council of Constance, Session 15, July 6, 1415 -
Condemning the articles of John Wyclif - Proposition 6:</b><br /><br /> <b><span style="color: #2b00fe;">“Those who
claim that the children of the faithful dying without sacramental
baptism will not be saved, are stupid and presumptuous in saying this.”</span></b>-
<span style="color: red;"> CONDEMNED </span>(Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Vol. 1, p. 422.)<br />
(Unfortunately, this proposition is not found in Denzinger, John Wyclif was anathematized for this assertion.)<br /></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><br />Pope St. Siricius, 385, [Concerning the necessity of baptism] :<br /><br />“Therefore
just as we declare that respect for the Easter sacrifice [Paschal time]
should not be lessened in the case of any person, in like manner we wish
help to be brought WITH ALL SPEED TO CHILDREN WHO BECAUSE OF THEIR AGE
CANNOT YET SPEAK, AND TO THOSE WHO IN ANY EMERGENCY ARE IN NEED OF THE
WATER OF HOLY BAPTISM,<span style="color: red;"> lest it should lead to the destruction of our
souls </span>IF, BY REFUSING THE WATER OF SALVATION TO THOSE WHO DESIRE IT,
EACH OF THEM, WHEN TAKING LEAVE OF THIS WORLD, SHOULD LOSE BOTH THE
KINGDOM AND LIFE. Indeed whoever suffers the peril of shipwreck, an
enemy attack, the danger of siege or desperation resulting from some
bodily infirmity, and so asks for what in their faith<span style="color: red;"> is their only
help</span>, let them receive at the moment of their request <span style="color: red;">the reward of
regeneration <span style="color: black;">[sacramental baptism]</span> that they beg for</span>. This much should suffice for my
digression on this subject; <b><span style="color: red;">now let <span style="font-size: large;">all priests</span> who do not wish to be
wrenched from the firmly-fixed rock of the apostles, on which Christ
built his universal church, hold fast to the aforesaid rule.” </span></b>(Latin
found in Denzinger-Schonmetzer, Latin Edition, 1962, no. 184; an English
Translation found in The Christian Faith, Sixth Revised and Enlarged
Edition, Staten Island, NY: Alba House, 1996, p. 540.) </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Pope Sixtus V in his Constitution Effrænatam (1588) on abortion: <br />
<br />
“For who would not detest a crime as execrable as this — a crime whose
consequence is that not just bodies, but — still worse! — even souls,
are, as it were, cast away? The soul of the unborn infant bears the
imprint of God's image! It is a soul for whose redemption Christ our
Lord shed His precious blood, a soul capable of eternal blessedness and
destined for the company of angels! WHO, THEREFORE, WOULD NOT CONDEMN
AND PUNISH WITH THE UTMOST SEVERITY THE DESECRATION COMMITTED BY ONE WHO
HAS EXCLUDED SUCH A SOUL FROM THE BLESSED VISION OF GOD? Such a one has
done all he or she could possibly have done to prevent this soul from
reaching the place prepared for it in heaven, and has deprived God of
the service of this His own creature.” <br />
(also not in the Denzinger)</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> <span class="d2edcug0 hpfvmrgz qv66sw1b c1et5uql lr9zc1uh a8c37x1j keod5gw0 nxhoafnm aigsh9s9 d3f4x2em fe6kdd0r mau55g9w c8b282yb iv3no6db jq4qci2q a3bd9o3v b1v8xokw oo9gr5id hzawbc8m" dir="auto">And
this doctrine was held all the ways until the 1950's when there was an
attack on this doctrine by Modernists. They said it was "a theory."<br /><br /></span><br /><span class="d2edcug0 hpfvmrgz qv66sw1b c1et5uql lr9zc1uh a8c37x1j keod5gw0 nxhoafnm aigsh9s9 d3f4x2em fe6kdd0r mau55g9w c8b282yb iv3no6db jq4qci2q a3bd9o3v b1v8xokw oo9gr5id hzawbc8m" dir="auto">The Holy Office (now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) in 1958 provided as follows:<br />
<br />
</span><div><span style="font-size: large;"><b><span style="color: #2b00fe;">"The practice has arisen in some places of
delaying the conferring of Baptism for so-called reasons of
convenience or of a liturgical nature--<u>a practice favored by some
opinions, <span style="color: red;">lacking solid foundation, </span>concerning the eternal salvation
of infants who die without Baptism.</u><br /></span></b></span>
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><br />
Therefore this Supreme Congregation, with the approval of the Holy
Father, warns the faithful that infants are to be baptized as soon as
possible. . . . Pastors and preachers are exhorted to urge the
fulfillment of this obligation." (Apostolicae Sedis, L, 114)<br /><br /><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;">Unfortunately many have been duped at the expense of children's souls.</span></span><br /></span></b></span></div></div></div></span></div></div></div></div></div><div aria-label="Write a comment" class="oo9gr5id lzcic4wl jm1wdb64 l9j0dhe7 gsox5hk5 mdldhsdk ii04i59q notranslate" contenteditable="true" data-outline-editor="true" role="textbox" spellcheck="true"><p class="hcukyx3x oygrvhab cxmmr5t8 kvgmc6g5"><br /></p></div>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-69636647399948992022021-09-20T08:16:00.021-07:002022-06-15T18:36:51.412-07:00Feeneyites are Mean<p>
</p><div class="post">
<div class="inner" id="msg_756030">There is a usual slur
that we are uncharitable. This is leveled in general against "Feeneyites" (i.e. Catholics who believe the Church's dogmatic
definitions). Granted there will always be zealots who are overcomed by emotions and the importance of an issue, and they lose patience. But that is not an argument against the validity of their position. The actual fact is, we "Feeneyites" receive way more hatred than we give out.<br /><br />We at Catholic Vox have tried to be as charitable in language as best we can. "Do unto others as you would have done to you." But when dealing with truth and error, those in error will take offense that we say they are wrong. <br /><br />Although we at Catholic Vox don't consider ourselves technically Feeneyites. Many Feeneyites do not hold that BoD (Baptism of Desire) is heretical, neither did
Father Feeney himself.<span><a name='more'></a></span> We at Catholic Vox think BoD is heretical, but also think it is open to debate at the present time. Fr. Feeney clearly characterized his rejection of BoD
as his theological opinion-- but a strong one at that.<br /><br />Many defenders of EENS can get angry because of the importance of the topic. Most who defense of
"BoD" ended up claiming that pagans, atheists and heretics could be saved.
EENSers have a number of
dogmatic Church definitions which clearly and unequivocally teach that
heretics and pagans cannot be saved. This whole blog is full of these teachings. <br /><br />Many attempting to defend
"BoD" end up de facto rejecting those dogmas or else applying a
Modernist "hermeneutic"(evolution of dogma/doctrine) and refusing to accept dogmas according to
the meaning with which they were originally defined. <br /><blockquote><b>Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Sess. 3, Chap. 2 on Revelation, 1870, de fide:</b><br /> <span style="color: #2b00fe;">“Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, <u><b>which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be a recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding</b>.</u>”</span>[Denzinger 1800]</blockquote> In our opponents defense
of BoD, they actually do slide into heresies, like Pelagianism (saved by good works) or Gnosticism (God has secret ways to save), or even the denial
of Trent's dogmatic teaching that the Sacraments are necessary for
salvation (saying they are "normative" and not "necessary"). St. Pius X answered that Catholics must
unequivocally and unambiguously accept that infidels are damned, not that <b>'well, somehow if they are "good" they can be saved.'</b>--which is a form of Pelagianism. <br /><br /> Pope St. Pius X, Acerbo Nimis (# 2), April 15, 1905:<br /><span style="color: #2b00fe;">“And so Our Predecessor, Benedict XIV, had just cause to write: ‘We declare that a great number of those who are condemned to eternal punishment suffer that <b>everlasting calamity because of ignorance of those mysteries of faith which must be known and believed in order to be numbered among the elect.</b>’”</span>[The Papal Encyclicals, Vol. 3 (1903-1939), p. 30]<br /><br />We've
told people repeatedly that if they want to believe in BoD as St.
Thomas, St. Robert Bellarmine, and St. Alphonsus defined it--
pertaining only to those who have the bare minimums required for
CATHOLIC faith (belief in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation) [St. Robert
limited it strictly to Catechumens since they belonged in a sense
already to the VISIBLE Church.], We can tolerate you, but you need to defend your position with doctrine and dogma or other authoritative teachings. But
if you try to tell us that a "Hindu in Tibet" can be saved, as he is--without the Catholic Faith...well, yeah we'll call
that out for heresy every single time.<br /><br />Nor would a "Feeneyite" say
that you're definitely "damned to hell" even if you believe in one of these
objectively heretical interpretations of BoD, due to the fact of the confusion of the times, the spread of this error, many
are confused on this subject (even Archbishop Lefebvre). You may be in a material heresy but not formal. We leave that up to the mercy of God. But When one holds material heresy it leads to serious sins one does know. Even if you are not responsible for the material heresy, you are breaking with the Truth which will lead to some bad effects. <br /><br /></div><span><!--more--></span>
</div>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-27250193615436733752021-08-16T19:24:00.001-07:002021-08-16T19:24:13.055-07:00Bishop Joseph Strickland good man follows Christ<p> The dogma EENS is really just "follow Christ--there is no other way to the Father, i.e. Salvation"<br /></p>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0Fq9ROWVHv4" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-67973772796732387942021-07-18T05:10:00.005-07:002021-07-18T05:10:37.060-07:00 History of the Boston "Heresy" Case (echoes of Fr. Altman)<p>[ editor: We have noticed thing going missing on the internet. We were fortunate to be on the net when things were still open and free so learning the history of the Fr. Feeney Case was fairly easy. So to save from obscurity, the perceptive from Fr. Feeney's point of view. <br /><br />What is happening to Fr. Altman is very similar to what happened to Fr. Feeney but no one was aware, as Fr. Feeney was, that the liberals had taken over many parts of the Church. Below is an except from the book : "Fr. Feeney and the Truth About Salvation" by Bro. Robert Mary. We would also recomend another book "They Fought the Good Fight" by Br. Thomas Mary Sennott]<br /> <br />
</p>
<div class="toolbar-container scrolled" id="toolbar">
</div><div class="container" dir="ltr" style="--line-height: 1.6em;">
<div class="header reader-header reader-show-element">
<a class="domain reader-domain" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20040211231425/http://catholicism.org/TTAS/chapter_2.htm">web.archive.org</a>
<h1 class="reader-title">The Compromisers</h1></div>
<hr />
<div class="content">
<div class="moz-reader-content reader-show-element"><div class="page" id="readability-page-1"><div>
<span face="Arial, Arial, Helvetica"><span size="3"><p>"Outside the Church there is no
salvation" is a solemnly defined dogma which has always been believed and taught by
the Church. Were this not so, it could never have been defined <i>ex cathedra</i> in the
first place, for no Pope can define a novelty, a truth not taught by the Church from the
beginning. But it has been ignored and/or denied many times throughout the history of the
Church. The Orthodox churches of the East and the hundreds upon hundreds of Protestant
sects in the West stand as living testimonials to such denials.</p>
<p>But it was not until the middle of the last century that an organized
attack on the dogma from within the Church began to take form. The attackers were
traitorous Catholics who, unlike their Orthodox and Protestant forebears, did not
voluntarily leave the Church but stayed within to do their undermining in secret. These
subversives were the fruit of the social, philosophical and theological upheaval of the
eighteenth century known as the Masonic French Revolution. Their goal was to subvert the
Church. They were exposed and condemned as "modernists" by Pope Saint Pius X,
but then they merely burrowed more deeply underground and waited for their time to come.
Eventually, as they rose higher and higher in the leadership echelons of the Church, their
insidious doctrinal teachings produced many, many well-meaning but misguided dupes. These
we call Catholic liberals.<br /><br /></p><span><a name='more'></a></span>
<p>By 1940, Catholic liberalism was firmly entrenched in the Church. Its
sentimental, muddle-headed thinking had already made heavy inroads among clergy and laity
alike. It was during that year that a prominent Catholic laywoman, Catherine Goddard
Clarke, sought the permission of the then-Archbishop of Boston, William Cardinal
O’Connell, to establish an educational oasis of Catholic truth close to the renowned
secular universities that dominated the area. The Cardinal readily agreed to the project,
admonishing Mrs. Clarke to "teach the Faith without compromise," and cautioning
her to remain independent of the universities lest it appear that he encouraged Catholics
to attend them.</p>
<p>Thus, Saint Benedict Center came into existence in 1940 at the corner
of Bow and Arrow Streets in Harvard Square, Cambridge, Massachusetts.</p>
<p>At that time, few were the true Catholics, like Cardinal
O’Connell, who saw the grave dangers to the Faith posed by Catholic liberalism.
Prominent among those few was the Jesuit, Father Leonard Feeney. Father came to Saint
Benedict Center in l942. Within a short time, he was appointed Spiritual Director by the
archdiocese and with the approval of the Jesuit Order. In her book, <i>The Loyolas and the
Cabots</i>, Sister Catherine, M.I.C.M. (Catherine Clarke) has this to say about
Father’s thinking in those early years:</p>
</span><blockquote><span size="3">
</span><span size="2"><p>Father Feeney had despaired of doing anything
about Catholic liberalism until he was at the Center for several years. When so much
became clear to us about the state of a world which would permit the dropping of the atom
bomb on Japan; when the boys came back to study and found in every class, practically, the
same philosophy which had brought on the war; when we came to the realization that we must
speak out no matter who was hurt or whose sense of expediency was outraged, — Father
knew that we at last saw the problem. And when Father had, finally, strong and holy men
and girls (become so under his direction) who were as eager as he was to work for the
Truth, then he knew that something could be done about it.</p>
<p>He changed, then, from the "poet priest" his admirers had
known . . . . He became instead the thundering, fighting missionary who, warring in the
name of the Wonderful Mediatrix of All Graces, God’s Mother, filled students with a
love for God which sent them into all the churches around for daily Mass, which led them
to spend their spare time studying the Scriptures and the Doctors, which fired them to
make sacrifices so heroic that they left homes, parents, prestiges — to face
disgrace, ignominy and persecution.</p>
</span><span size="3">
</span></blockquote><span size="3">
<p>By the Fall of 1947, it was no secret that Father Feeney was teaching
the Catholic Faith with no compromise whatsoever, and with magnificent results. The Center
was packed with intent listeners at every weekly lecture, particularly Father’s
Thursday night session; conversions were multiplying rapidly; vocations to the religious
life were being discovered with increasing frequency; and disenchanted students were
leaving Harvard and other secular universities in the area in growing numbers — much
to the irritation of these same universities. Liberal Catholics were being embarrassed by
such unabashed "triumphalism" on the part of the Center. So, pressure began to
be exerted on the Jesuits and the Archbishop of Boston to put the lid on Father Feeney and
to remove him from the archdiocese.</p>
<p>What follows is a chronological outline of the key events leading up to
and including the betrayal of Father and the Center, and, most importantly, the
foundational dogma of the Catholic Church — <i>Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus</i>. (For
a thorough description of these tragic events, the reader is referred to Catherine Goddard
Clarke’s book, <i>The</i> <i>Loyolas and The Cabots</i>.)</p>
<b><p>Fall, 1947</p>
</b><p>Father John Ryan, S.J., head of the Adult Education Institute of
Boston College, speaking to Dr. Fakhri Maluf (now Brother Francis, M.I.C.M., but at that
time a professor in the Philosophy Department of the college and the regular Tuesday night
lecturer at Saint Benedict Center): "I do not agree with Father Feeney’s
doctrine on salvation outside the Church."</p>
<p><b>May, 1948</b> </p>
<p>Father Stephen A. Mulcahy, S.J., Dean of the College of Arts and
Sciences of Boston College, speaking to Mr. James R. Walsh of the Center, asked him <b>not</b>
to teach what the Dean termed: "Father Feeney’s doctrine that there is no
salvation outside the Church."</p>
<b><p>August 8,1948 </p>
</b><p>Ten short months after a visit to the Center, during which he
addressed a packed house and lavishly praised Father Feeney and the Center for the great
work being done, Archbishop Cushing stated in a speech at Milton, Massachusetts: "I
cannot understand any Catholic who has any prejudice whatsoever against a Jew or other
non-Catholic. If there is any Catholic organization harboring such prejudices, I will
assume the responsibility of remedying it. A Catholic cannot harbor animosity against men,
women or children of another creed, nationality or color. . . .some of the finest
benefactors to the Boston Catholic Archdiocese are non-Catholics."</p>
<p>We add a parenthetical observation: As he admitted later, the
Archbishop was not a theologian. Apparently, during the ten months after his visit, some
person or persons succeeded in convincing him that the Church’s teaching on salvation
was a prejudiced, bigoted dogma. He did not understand that to try to convert Jews and
non-Catholics to the One True Faith is the greatest of charity.</p>
<b><p>August 25, l948 </p>
</b><p>In a letter from Father J.J. McEleney, S.J., Provincial of the New
England Province of the Society of Jesus, Father Feeney was suddenly and unexpectedly
ordered to report to Holy Cross College in the Diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts. He was
to report on September 8th. This was a highly unusual transfer order, for Father had
already been assigned to Saint Benedict Center for the year from July, 1948 to July, 1949.
He immediately requested a meeting with his Father Provincial. The most important comments
during their conversation were these:</p>
<p><i>Fr. Feeney</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"What is the point of my being changed?"</p>
<i>
</i></blockquote><i>
</i><p><i>Fr. McEleney</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"Higher authorities."</p>
<i>
</i></blockquote><i>
</i><p><i>Fr. Feeney</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"What is being objected to in what I am doing?"</p>
<i>
</i></blockquote><i>
</i><p><i>Fr. McEleney</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"Your doctrine."</p>
<i>
</i></blockquote><i>
</i><p><i>Fr. Feeney</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"My doctrine on what?"</p>
<i>
</i></blockquote><i>
</i><p><i>Fr. McEleney</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"I’m sorry, we can’t go into that."</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The reader will note that it was this admission by his Provincial, that
he was being transferred in order to silence his preaching of an infallibly defined
Catholic dogma, that later resolved Father Feeney’s conscience problem regarding
obedience to the transfer order. It confirmed his decision not to obey the order. As a
priest, his first obligation was to defend the Faith.</p>
<p><b>December 2, l948</b> </p>
<p>Dr. Maluf was summoned for an interview with Father William L. Keleher,
S.J., President of Boston College. The subject matter of the interview was Father
Feeney’s resistance to the transfer order (on the grounds that it had become a
conscience matter for him —the priority of doctrine over discipline) and a strong
protest letter which students of the Center had sent to Father McEleney. Parts of the
conversation follow:</p>
<p><i>Fr. Keleher</i>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>"The occasion for my calling you today is the question of Saint
Benedict Center, which is getting to be a matter of great concern to the authorities
here.This measure, you see, did not proceed from Father McEleney, but from the Bishop, and
we are anxious to keep in harmony with diocesan authorities."</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Dr. Maluf</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"But the ultimate origin of this order did not proceed from the
Bishop or the Archbishop. . . . It is fairly common knowledge at Harvard that certain
people connected with Harvard were dissatisfied with the Center."</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Fr. Keleher</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"Then you think that there are politics behind this measure?"</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Dr. Maluf</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"I have no doubt whatsoever about it."</p>
<i>
</i></blockquote><i>
</i><p><i>Fr. Keleher</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"I have the highest respect for Father Feeney, and I have always
been edified by his exemplary life . . . . I believe that the work of Saint Benedict
Center is the work of God. It has given to our Order not merely in quantity a large number
of vocations, but some vocations of whom the whole Jesuit Order is extremely proud. . . .
Father Feeney came to me at the beginning of this situation and I would have liked to do
something except that I could not agree with his doctrine on salvation. . . . . He kept
repeating such phrases as ‘There is no salvation outside the Catholic
Church.’"</p>
<i>
</i></blockquote><i>
</i><p><i>Dr. Maluf</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"The doctrine that there is no salvation outside the Church is a
defined dogma."</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Fr. Keleher</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"I have never gone into the theology of it but I know that not
merely our department of Religion here at Boston College, but also the theologians at St.
John’s Seminary and Weston College disagree with Father Feeney’s doctrine on the
salvation of non-Catholics."</p>
</blockquote>
<b><p>January, 1949 </p>
</b><p>When Dr. Maluf was dismissed from the faculty of the Graduate
School, he went to the office of the Dean, Father George A. O’Donnell, S.J., to ask
the reason:</p>
<p><i>Fr. O’Donnell</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"I am going to be frank with you, Fakhri. You are teaching a
doctrine which is not in agreement with the doctrine of the majority of theologians at the
present time in this area."</p>
<b>
</b></blockquote><b>
</b><p><b>April 13,1949</b> (Wednesday of Holy Week) </p>
<p>As a result of a letter they had sent to Father Jean Baptiste Janssens,
General of the Society of Jesus, in which they charged Boston College with teaching heresy
contrary to the infallible definitions of the Popes, Dr. Maluf, James R. Walsh and Charles
Ewaskio were summoned to appear before Father Keleher. Here are the highlights of the
meeting:</p>
<p><i>Fr. Keleher</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"I have written to you in connection with the letter you sent to
the General. . . . I have received instructions . . . that the signatories of that letter
be presented singly before a board . . . and be asked certain questions by me. . . . You
will merely be asked to retract your statements and, in case you refuse to do that, your
connection with Boston College will be severed as of this moment."</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Dr. Maluf</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"If it is a question of retracting those three statements in our
letter to the General, I, on my part, can tell you that I am not capable of doing
that."</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Mr. Walsh</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"And neither am I."</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Mr. Ewaskio</i>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>"And neither am I."</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Dr. Maluf</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"Are you definitely giving us the alternative of retracting those
statements or of being fired?"</p>
<i>
</i></blockquote><i>
</i><p><i>Fr. Keleher</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"Yes, I am."</p>
<i>
</i></blockquote><i>
</i><p><i>Dr. Maluf</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"All right. You have taken the measure, and you take
responsibility for it."</p>
</blockquote>
<p><b>April 14, l949</b> (Holy Thursday) </p>
<p>Father Keleher issued a statement to the press explaining the dismissal
of the professors which read, in part:</p>
</span><span size="2"></span><blockquote><span size="2">
<p>They continued to speak in class and out of class on matters contrary
to the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church, ideas leading to bigotry and
intolerance.</p>
<p>Their doctrine is erroneous and as such could not be tolerated at
Boston College. They were informed that they must cease such teaching or leave the
faculty.</p>
</span><span size="3"><b>
</b></span></blockquote><span size="3"><b>
</b><p><b>April 16, l949</b> (Holy Saturday) </p>
<p>Father Feeney issued a statement to the press in which he defended the
three professors, plus a fourth, David Supple, who was a teacher at Boston College High
School.</p>
<p><b>April 18, l949</b> (Easter Monday) </p>
<p>Without any warning, Archbishop Cushing silenced Father Feeney and
placed the Center under interdict. The decree read as follows:</p>
</span><span size="2"></span><blockquote><span size="2">
<p>Rev. Leonard Feeney, S.J., because of grave offense against the laws of
the Catholic Church, has lost the right to perform any priestly function, including
preaching and teaching religion.</p>
<p>Any Catholics who frequent St. Benedict’s Center, or who in any
way take part in or assist its activities forfeit the right to receive the Sacrament of
Penance and Holy Eucharist.</p>
</span><span size="3">
</span></blockquote><span size="3">
<p>Subsequent to this betrayal of Father Feeney and the most fundamental
dogma of the Church, Archbishop Cushing scandalized every soul in the Boston Archdiocese
with this flippant public proclamation: "No salvation outside the Church? <i><b>Nonsense!
</b></i>"</p>
<p>Many Catholics in the traditionalist camp — priests and laymen
alike — have, in the past, publicized their preconceived notion that the controversy
involving Father Feeney was merely a matter of his "over-reacting" in attempting
to defend the dogma "outside the Church there is no salvation," thus, he went to
the extreme of denying "baptism of desire" and "baptism of blood."
Therefore, the Church had to silence him and, ultimately, excommunicate him for his
obstinacy.</p>
<p>What we have related above shows clearly how wrong that pre-conceived
notion is. Father Feeney’s insistence that there is no salvation outside the Church
— that was the crux of the controversy!</p>
<p>When the four professors were fired from Boston College in 1949 for
teaching "ideas leading to bigotry and intolerance," were they fired because
they rejected "baptism of desire?" No! They were fired because they were
teaching <i>Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus</i>.</p>
<p>When Father Feeney defended the four professors publicly, he was
silenced by Archbishop Cushing. Did the Archbishop silence Father for rejecting
"baptism of desire?" No! He silenced Father and interdicted Saint Benedict
Center because they were preaching — much to the dismay of the Harvard establishment
— the Church’s uncompromising dogma on salvation.</p>
<p>When Archbishop Cushing, a former B’nai B’rith
Man-of-the-Year, burst forth in ecumaniacal fervor to an approving audience: "No
salvation outside the Church? Nonsense!", was he concerned about "baptism of
desire?" Of course not!</p>
<p>For the record: Father Feeney’s position on "baptism of
desire" and "baptism of blood" was first published in his book, <i>Bread of
Life</i>, in October, 1952. That was three and one-half years after the doctrinal dispute
had erupted in the Archdiocese of Boston with the firing of the professors, the silencing
of Father and the interdicting of the Center!</p>
<p>The reader will notice that, despite the continuous assertions by the
Jesuits at Boston College that they did not agree with the defined dogma on salvation, and
despite the fact that Father’s teaching of this dogma was obviously at the heart of
the entire controversy, not once did any of his antagonists dare accuse him of heresy.
Instead, when his conscience would not permit him to accept an order, the obeying of which
would have been a tacit denial of doctrine, they simply ignored his conscience problem,
refused to give him a hearing on that problem, and high-handedly insisted on obedience
"or else." In all of Father’s subsequent dealings with the hierarchy, this
false principle of discipline (obedience) having a higher priority than doctrine was the
order of the day.</p>
<p>Archbishop Cushing silenced Father for "grave offense against the
laws of the Church," and not for "teaching a doctrine which is not in agreement
with the doctrine of the majority of theologians at the present time in this area,"
as the Jesuits themselves had identified the issue. The Archbishop was careful not to name
"doctrine" as the real issue.</p>
<p>When, on October 10, 1949, Father was dismissed from the Jesuit Order,
the notice of dismissal stated the cause as "a crime of serious and permanent
disobedience," not the fact that Father did not agree with the "majority of
theologians at the present time in this area." The Jesuits, too, were careful not to
name "doctrine" as the real issue.</p>
</span></span><p><span face="Arial, Arial, Helvetica"><span size="3">And when, finally, in February, 1953, Father was excommunicated by a
decree of the Holy Office, it was "on account of grave disobedience of Church
Authority." Even the Holy Office would not name "doctrine" as the real
issue.<br /><br /></span></span>
</p>
<div class="container" dir="ltr" style="--line-height: 1.6em;"><div class="header reader-header reader-show-element"><h1 class="reader-title">The "Excommunication"</h1>
<div class="meta-data">
<div class="reader-estimated-time" dir="ltr"><br /></div>
</div>
</div>
<hr />
<div class="content">
<div class="moz-reader-content reader-show-element"><div class="page" id="readability-page-1"><div>
<span face="Arial, Arial, Helvetica"><span size="3"><p>On August 8, 1949 — almost four
months after the silencing of Father Feeney — the Holy Office issued a document, a
letter addressed to the Archbishop of Boston and signed by Cardinal Marchetti-Selvaggiani,
known as Protocol No. 122/49.<b>*</b></p><b>
</b><p>On September 3, 1949, this Protocol was published in part in <i>The
Pilot</i>, the official news organ of the Archdiocese of Boston. Three years later, on
September 4, 1952, it was published in full in <i>The Pilot</i> under cover of an
explanatory memorandum from Archbishop Cushing.</p>
<p>On September 24, 1952, three weeks after its publication in full, the
Center addressed a letter to Pope Pius XII in which it protested: "This Protocol is
substantially defective in that it contains heresy insofar as it states that one can be
saved under certain conditions outside the Roman Catholic Church and without personal
submission to the Roman Pontiff. It is formally defective in that it was never published
in the <i>Acta Apostolicae Sedis</i> and consequently is without any binding effect as an
act of the Holy See."**</p>
</span><hr />
<b><span size="1"></span></b><p><b><span size="1"></span><span size="2">* </span></b><span face="Times New Roman" size="2">According to the Catholic Dictionary, a Protocol is a
"preliminary memorandum in negotiations, serving as basis for final agreement."</span><span size="1"></span></p><span size="1">
</span><span size="2"></span><p><span size="2"><b>**</b> </span><span face="Times New Roman" size="2">The <i>Acta
Apostolicae Sedis</i> is a monthly publication established as the official journal of the
Holy See. Decrees and decisions published therein are thereby officially promulgated and
made effective.</span><span size="2"></span></p><span size="2">
</span><hr />
<span size="3"><p>Public reaction to the initial publication of parts of
the Protocol letter in <i>The Pilot</i> of September 3, 1949, was predictable. <i>The
Worcester Telegram</i>, for instance, ran a typical headline:</p>
<p><strong>Vatican Rules Against Hub Dissidents</strong><br />
Holds No Salvation Outside Church Doctrine To Be False</p>
<p>Similar headlines and follow-up stories in papers throughout the
country produced not one protesting "peep" from the chanceries of the United
States. This was 1949; the Pope was Pius XII, yet not one bishop spoke out in defense of a
solemnly defined dogma of the Catholic Church! What a scandal to Catholics and
non-Catholics alike! And what proof that this severe weakness in doctrinal teaching
existed in the seminaries of America since at least the later decades of the nineteenth
century!</p>
<p>As usual, the long, detailed letter to the Holy Father dated September
24, 1952, went unanswered. But one month later, in a letter from Cardinal Pizzardo of the
Holy Office dated October 25, 1952, Father Feeney was summoned to Rome:</p>
</span><blockquote><span size="3">
</span><span size="2"><p>The . . . Holy Office has been obliged repeatedly
to make your teaching and conduct in the Church the object of its special care and
attention, and recently, after having again carefully examined and calmly weighed all the
evidence collected in your cause, it has found it necessary to bring this question to a
conclusion.</p>
<p>However, His Holiness . . . has decreed that, before any other measure
be carried into effect, you be summoned to Rome for a hearing. Therefore, . . . you are
hereby ordered to proceed to Rome forthwith and there to appear before the Authorities . .
. of the Holy Office as soon as possible.</p>
</span><span size="3">
</span></blockquote><span size="3">
<p>On October 30, 1952, Father sent a respectful reply to the Cardinal
requesting a statement of the charges being made against him — as required by Canon
Law. On November 22, 1952, Cardinal Pizzardo sent a terse reply:</p>
</span><blockquote><span size="3">
</span><span size="2"><p>Your letter of 30th October clearly shows that
you are evading the issue . . . You are to come to Rome immediately where you will be
informed of the charges lodged against you. . . . If you do not present yourself . . .
before the 31st December this act of disobedience will be made public together with the
canonical penalties.</p>
<p>N.B. . . . The Apostolic Delegate has been authorized to provide for
the expenses of your journey."</p>
</span><span size="3">
</span></blockquote><span size="3">
<p>On December 2, 1952, Father responded, repeating his request for a
statement of charges and quoting Canon Law to prove that he had a right to receive such a
statement:</p>
</span><blockquote><span size="3">
</span><span size="2"><p>Your Eminence seems to have misconstrued my
motives in replying to your letter of October 25, l952. I had presumed that your first
letter was to serve as a canonical citation to appear before your Sacred Tribunal. As a
citation, however, it is fatally defective under the norms of Canon l715 especially in
that it did not inform me of the charges against me. This canon requires that the citation
contain at least a general statement of the charges. Under the norms of Canon 1723 any
proceedings based on a citation so substantially defective are subject to a complaint of
nullity.</p>
</span><span size="3">
</span></blockquote><span size="3">
<p>On January 9, 1953, came another terse reply from the Cardinal:</p>
</span><blockquote><span size="3">
</span><span size="2"><p>In reply to your letter of the 2nd Dec. 1952
asking for further explanations, . . . the Holy Office communicates to you herewith the
orders received from His Holiness, that you are to present yourself to this Congregation
before the 31st January 1953, under pain of excommunication incurred automatically (<i>ipso
facto</i>) in case of failure to present yourself on the date indicated. This decision of
His Holiness has been made after the arrival of the latest documents from St. Benedict
Center.</p>
</span><span size="3">
</span></blockquote><span size="3">
<p>This letter from the Holy Office deserves special comment. Cardinal
Pizzardo here exhibits an odd eagerness to condemn Father Feeney. He threatens Father with
excommunication if he does not present himself by January 31st. This he has the authority
to do. However, he has no authority to threaten anyone with an <i>ipso facto</i>
excommunication unless it be for an obstinate disregard of Divine or ecclesiastical law.</p>
<p>There is no ecclesiastical law the compliance or non-compliance with
which would make it possible for an order to be given requiring that a priest must come to
Rome by such and such a date — or else! Therefore, by not presenting himself to the
Holy Office by January 31st, Father Feeney committed no crime meriting an <i>ipso facto</i>
excommunication. What he did do — that is, in the external forum of the Church —
was provide a reason for an unjust and (as later events proved) heretical tribunal to
excommunicate him juridically.</p>
<p>No tribunal is necessary for an <i>ipso facto</i> excommunication. The
deed of the culprit, in itself (<i>eo ipso</i>), places him outside the Church, not only <i>in
foro externo</i> (if the act is publically known), but <i>in foro interno</i> (his very
conscience accusing).</p>
<p>But the offense alleged against Father Feeney — not obeying a
summons — provided matter for a court, or a judge, to weigh. The matter was judged
and, prescinding from any extenuating circumstances or prior canonically-valid
protestations by the accused, found to be a serious infraction. Then, the judge —
according to the only verifying witness, the Notary Marius Crovini — passed sentence
and excommunicated Father Feeney.</p>
<p>According to the Church’s own canons distinguishing two types of
excommunication, Father Feeney could not be excommunicated <i>ipso facto</i> (<i>latae
sententiae</i>, i.e., the sentence having been carried out) because his action did not
fall under the category of crimes meriting such an automatic expulsion. However, Father
could be excommunicated <i>ab homine</i> (by a judge), and that public form of
excommunication is called <i>ferendae sententiae</i> (of the sentence that must be carried
out). Under the former type of sentence there is always intrinsic guilt, for the sin is
intrinsic in the very nature of the act. However, in the latter type of sentence, for
legal validity, there must be some questionable matter of doctrine or discipline against
which the accused has been inculpated. Even then the external judgment of guilt passed by
the tribunal remains a human judgment, and binds only the Church militant, not the court
of heaven. And even this imposition on the Church militant can be prudently and
respectfully disregarded if the excommunicant is innocent and the salvation of souls
warrants certain readjustments along the normal path of hierarchical obediences.</p>
<p>In other words, just as in the sacrament of Confession, the power of
the keys is not arbitrary. It is a prescribed power, which can only have efficacy if
certain conditions are met. And those conditions depend on the sincerity of the recipient.
God will not forgive the impenitent, even if such a one confesses his sins truthfully. And
God will not withdraw His grace from one who is unjustly, though — <i>in foro externo
</i>— validly, excommunicated. And, finally, God is not bound by any other word than
His own Word.</p>
<p>On January 13, 1953, Father sent a long and strong letter to the
Cardinal protesting the following:</p>
<p>a) Violation of the "secrecy of the Holy Office" in leaking
their correspondence to the public press.</p>
<p>b) The Cardinal’s repeated threats of imposing penalties without
either accusations or proceedings, as required by the Sacred Canons and the common law of
the Church.</p>
<p>c) The dissemination of Protocol 122/49 as a doctrinal pronouncement of
the Holy See, knowing it was never published in the <i>Acta Apostolicae Sedis.</i></p><i>
</i><p>Father ended this last communication to Cardinal Pizzardo with a
statement of righteous indignation:</p>
</span><blockquote><span size="3">
</span><span size="2"><p>I very seriously question both the good faith and
the validity of any attempt to excommunicate me because I dared to call the substance of
this decree to your attention, and because I dared to insist on my rights under it in both
my letters of October 30 and December 2, 1952.</p>
</span><span size="3">
</span></blockquote><span size="3">
<p>On February 13, 1953, the Holy Office issued a decree declaring Father
Feeney "excommunicated." It read as follows:</p>
</span><span size="2"></span><blockquote><span size="2">
<p>Since the priest Leonard Feeney, a resident of Boston (Saint Benedict
Center), who for a long time has been suspended from his priestly duties on account of
grave disobedience of Church Authority, being unmoved by repeated warnings and threats of
incurring excommunication <i>ipso facto</i> [sic], has not submitted, the Most Eminent and
Reverend Fathers, charged with safeguarding matters of faith and morals, in a Plenary
Session held on Wednesday, 4 February 1953, declared him excommunicated with all the
effects of the law.</p>
<p>On Thursday, 12 February 1953, Our Most Holy Lord Pius XII, by Divine
Providence Pope, approved and confirmed the decree of the Most Eminent Fathers, and
ordered that it be made a matter of public law.</p>
<p>Given at Rome, at the Headquarters of the Holy Office, 13 February
1953. </p>
<p>Marius Crovini, Notary</p>
<p>AAS (February 16, 1953) Vol. XXXXV, Page 100</p>
</span><span size="3">
</span></blockquote><span size="3">
<b><p>The Appeal to Pope Pius XII</p>
</b><p>Father Leonard Feeney never doubted for one moment that he was
doing God’s will in all the actions he took in defense of the salvation dogma. Let
the hierarchy do what they will, this priest of Our Lady was ready and willing to follow
her Son to his own crucifixion outside the walls of the city. Like Saint Peter and Saint
Paul, Father knew that he too could be cast out of the synagogue. An excommunication, even
one passed by a pope, is not protected by the charism of infallibility. It is a
disciplinary power that can be, and at times has been, abused.</p>
<p><i>In foro interno</i>, Father’s conscience was never disturbed.
However, <i>in foro externo</i>, he felt obliged to issue a public protest against the
unjustness of the excommunication, and — perhaps in an effort to upset the
complacency of the perpetrators — he also called attention to the many glaring
canonical defects that were recurrent throughout his entire ordeal, leading up to and
including the decree of excommunication itself. On July 16, 1953, Saint Benedict Center,
writing in Father’s name, sent a letter of appeal to the Pope in which these defects
were pointed out. It was sent to the Holy Father through the then Pro-Secretary of State
for Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs, Monsignor Giovanni Battista Montini (later Pope
Paul VI). It read, in part, as follows:</p>
</span><blockquote><span size="3">
</span><span size="2"><p>2. Because the first interest of the Slaves of
the Immaculate Heart of Mary is the preservation of the Faith, we have been reluctant to
make any formal representations to the Holy See concerning any secondary matters relating
to our activities. Your Excellency is well aware that the first obligation of every
Catholic is to defend with his lifeblood every doctrine of his Holy Faith. In doing this,
he has the assurance both of his own salvation, and even if persecuted by fellow
Catholics, of his ultimate vindication by the Church. The lives of the saints amply
demonstrate this. Many of the saints were vilified, interdicted, excommunicated, and even
martyred by those of their own Faith. We refer specifically to Saints Athanasius, Ignatius
of Constantinople, Alphonsus Ligouri, John the Baptist de la Salle, Thomas of Hereford,
Thomas a’Becket, Joan of Arc, John Fisher and Thomas More.</p>
<p>While our duty is clear, and we are encouraged in its performance by
the example of these great saints, and also while we have the unfailing consolation of
knowing that we will never be abandoned by our Holy Mother the Church, it is necessary in
the interest of justice and for the avoidance of grave scandal to communicate with the
Holy See formally and directly concerning many matters which concern us.</p>
<p>3. Foremost, therefore, in our minds, is the matter of the purported
decree of excommunication of Father Leonard Feeney. We hereby enter a Complaint of Nullity
against this purported decree of excommunication, which was dated February 13, 1953. . . </p>
</span><span size="3">
</span></blockquote><span size="3">
<p>The appeal then went on to cite the breaches of the legal procedure
which the Church’s own laws require her prelates to follow in the promulgation of an
excommunication <i>ferendae sententiae</i>.</p>
<p>No answer was ever received to this Complaint of Nullity. But all the
charges made in the letter were amply verified by the use made of the
"excommunication" in the press. To give one example, a widely circulated
dispatch dated March 1, 1953, originating with the National Catholic Welfare Conference,
had this to say:</p>
</span><blockquote><span size="3">
</span><span size="2"><p>The excommunication decree was issued February
13, and officially published in the <i>Acta Apostolicae Sedis</i> on February 16, which
gives a full review of the former Jesuit’s case and of his recalcitrance in refusing
to accept the warnings of the Holy See. . .</p>
</span><span size="3">
</span></blockquote><span size="3">
<p>The fact is that neither the decree of February 13, nor the <i>Acta</i>
of February 16, contains the slightest hint of a "review of the former Jesuit’s
case." But the press had transmitted to the world the very message which the
modernists wanted transmitted: It is unwise to profess the doctrine "Outside the
Church there is no salvation." And the press also unanimously agreed that Rome had
spoken and that the case had been disposed of.</p>
</span></span><p><span face="Arial, Arial, Helvetica"><span size="3">Thus, the forces of Anti-Christ proved their ascendancy in the world of
today by placing the most important dogma of the Church under a cloud, using for this
purpose the very machinery of Holy Church herself.</span></span></p>
</div></div></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
</div>
<p>
</p>
<div class="toolbar-container" id="toolbar">
</div><div class="container" dir="ltr" style="--line-height: 1.6em;">
<div class="header reader-header reader-show-element">
<a class="domain reader-domain" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20040210114622/http://www.catholicism.org/ttas/chapter_4.htm">web.archive.org</a>
<h1 class="reader-title">The "Reconciliation"</h1>
</div>
<hr />
<div class="content">
<div class="moz-reader-content reader-show-element"><div class="page" id="readability-page-1"><div face="Arial, Arial, Helvetica"><span size="3"><p>After the vilification of our Order and
the "excommunication" of Father Feeney, we were forced into some twenty years of
"exile." In 1958 we moved to Still River, Massachusetts, in the Diocese of
Worcester. Sister Catherine died in 1968. It was now 1972. During those years the forces
of liberalism had made enormous headway inside the Church. Nevertheless, they still
clearly considered our Order a serious obstacle. For, about this time we were becoming
uneasy over indications that secret negotiations between certain ranking prelates and
several members of the Order had been taking place. When the alarming rumors reached
Father Feeney’s ears, he repeatedly forbade any members to have any dealings with the
hierarchy without his expressed approval.</p>
<p>The willingness, of what had grown by now to be a majority of the
Brothers, to establish a reconciliation with the hierarchy greatly disturbed the loyal
community of sisters living in Saint Anne’s House, and the by now minority faction of
loyal brothers still residing with the others in Saint Thérèse House.</p>
<p>Brother Hugh found the climate of betrayal too much to bear. In 1972,
along with several younger brothers, he vacated Saint Thérèse House and, on the same
property, built a new home for any of the brothers who wished to continue the doctrinal
battle without compromise. Father Feeney, too worn down by ill health to join them, and
too fatherly to admit at this stage that any of his spiritual children would actually
betray him, remained at Saint Thérèse House.</p>
<p>Brother Francis, who initially had given his own home in Cambridge to
help house the once indefatigable young apostles of our Crusade, wished Brother Hugh well,
but insisted on staying with the Brothers of Saint Thérèse House, where he hoped to
rekindle any sparks of loyalty he could find. That hope, however, was sadly defused. It
became clear that he and Brother Hugh would have to continue on alone. Father Feeney
blessed them both with the words: "Do whatever it takes to save the Crusade!"</p>
<p>By August 23, 1972, it was evident that Father had been disobeyed and
that our suspicions had been well founded. On that day our Crusade was insidiously
compromised by the disloyal faction. For that was the day on which Auxiliary Bishop
Lawrence Riley of Boston, accompanied by Father Richard J. Shmaruk, quietly arrived at
Saint Thérèse House. Father did not know the purpose of their visit, and no members of
the other houses at the Center were aware that it was taking place.</p>
<p>The members of the House, including Father, met with their guests in
the spacious front room. To edify his visitors, Father had all members recite, in unison,
a memory drill on the important dates in the history of the world. Then, by
prearrangement, one of the sisters suggested that they recite the creeds of the Church,
one of which is the Athanasian Creed. Father enthusiastically agreed. And presto! The
unsuspecting Father Feeney was "back in the Church!"</p>
<p>Now, the Athanasian Creed begins with these words:</p>
<blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<span size="2"><p>Whosoever wishes to be saved, before all things it is
necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and
undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly . . . </p>
</span>
</blockquote>
<span size="3"><p>So, Father was "back in the Church" by
professing the very doctrine for which he was "put out!"</p>
<p>Or at least the preliminary step in that direction had been taken. But,
of course, this mysterious "reconciliation" was every bit as spurious as the
earlier "excommunication."</p>
<p>One year later, we learned that all had been approved and that it would
soon be publicized that Father Feeney had "returned to the fold," evidently
having renounced his former stand. For this reason, we published on September 17, 1973,
and widely distributed, a message from Father Feeney and the Center to our fellow
Catholics. It reiterated our firm position on the doctrine and closed, saying:</p>
</span><blockquote><span size="3">
</span><span size="2"><p>. . . Some individuals, with no authorization to
represent our Institute, are now seeking by devious means to compromise our Crusade. We
wish to inform our spiritual fathers and our fellow Catholics there can be no compromise.
We still profess the same Faith, out of which no one at all can be saved, as we did a
quarter of a century ago.</p>
</span><span size="3">
</span></blockquote><span size="3">
<p>Six months later, in March of 1974, the defection from the Crusade was
finally consummated by the disloyal faction when its compromising members individually
made a formal submission to Bishop Bernard Flanagan of Worcester. Press releases
announcing the supposed reconciliation of Father Feeney and the Center subsequently
appeared on September 26, 1974. That was one year after Father emphatically denounced
those who were seeking to compromise our Crusade through their devious machinations with
the liberal hierarchy.</p>
<b><p>One Bishop’s "Dead Horse"</p>
</b><p>News accounts concerning these events repeatedly referred to
letters from Rome, purportedly written in connection with our case. Normally, such
correspondence should have been sent to Father Feeney as the Superior of the Order. But
Father had received nothing more than rumors. He therefore authorized two loyal members to
obtain whatever documentation was available from Bishop Flanagan, Ordinary of the
Worcester Diocese. Brother Francis and Brother Hugh (since deceased) called on the Bishop.
When asked the purpose of their visit, the following discussion ensued:</p>
<p><i>Brother Hugh</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>We were sent by Father. We read in the papers that letters have been
sent from Rome in connection with our case. We would like, if possible, to see all the
documents that pertain to Saint Benedict Center and to Father Feeney.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Bishop Flanagan</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Let me first explain to you how this whole thing started and how I got
involved in it. There was a bishops’ meeting about two years ago, and Cardinal
Medeiros mentioned that he would like to see the Father Feeney case disposed of. He was
anxious to send a statement to Rome saying that Father’s health was not too good and
that he would hate to have him die apparently outside the Church. I expressed my
enthusiastic approval of this policy.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>At this point, let us give the law and tradition of the Church in such
matters, in the classic expression of Pope Saint Innocent I, who stated: "Communion
once broken off cannot be renewed until the persons concerned give proof that the reasons
for which communion was broken off are no longer operative." We continue Bishop
Flanagan’s remarks:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We sent a statement to Rome. The response came back: "Yes, by all
means." The only requirement was that Father should make a profession of Faith.
Bishop Lawrence Riley then went to the Center with Father Shmaruk. Father was very happy
to say all the Creeds that you have. He was willing to recite every single Creed. And that
was all that was required. And, now, is there any possibility for everyone to get
together? Would you be willing also to do what the group at Saint Thérèse House have
already done?</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Brother Hugh</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>We intend to come out this year stronger than ever in defense of the
Doctrine. Would you, as our Ordinary, oppose that?</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Bishop Flanagan</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>That Doctrine is now a dead horse. Let’s be practical. <i>The
whole spirit after Vatican II is against it</i>. You are talking about a dead horse. That
thing is dead. Let’s bury it.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Brother Francis</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>We feel now more than ever the necessity of upholding the Doctrine,
precisely because of what has been happening to the Church since Vatican II.</p>
<i>
</i></blockquote><i>
</i><p><i>Brother Hugh</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>If we come out stronger than ever and spread the Doctrine throughout
the country, would you be against that? What agreement have the Brothers of Saint
Thérèse House made?</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Bishop Flanagan</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The understanding is that they will not talk about it. The
understanding is that it is a dead horse and we will forget all about it.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Brother Hugh</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>As the Ordinary, would you do something about it?</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Bishop Flanagan</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Well, as I said, the understanding is that they will not publicly talk
about the Doctrine. There are other things in the Church we recommend very strongly. They
can preach devotion to Mary. They can be a conservative group in the Church. We need a
conservative group in the Church.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Then the Bishop opened his folder and showed the documents. He could
not provide copies to be brought to Father because of the confidential nature of the
letters! One was from the Holy Office regarding Father, indicating that on account of his
"age and infirmity" they were willing to lift the censures. The other document
concerned the brothers of Saint Thérèse House who were to be received back into the
Church individually.</p>
<blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Brother Hugh</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>What about Sister Catherine and the four brothers who have died? Did
they die outside the Church?</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Bishop Flanagan</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Oh, no. The only one excommunicated was Father Feeney. We don’t
quite know why it was done, but Father Feeney was on the record excommunicated <i>nominatim</i>.
The most you could say of the rest was that they were under interdict. Notice that the
account about the reconciliation says: ". . . from any censures they may have
incurred." The phrasing was deliberate.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Brother Francis</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>But why, then, did they have to make a profession of Faith? And why did
they have to promise silence on a dogma defined <i>ex cathedra</i> by the popes? When the
letter of Marchetti-Selvaggiani became known to us, we all — including the group from
Saint Thérèse House — signed a statement denouncing it as heretical and scandalous.
Did they have to withdraw that statement?</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Bishop Flanagan</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>In the Church today a latitudinarian attitude prevails. Some are
questioning the Real Presence, the Virgin Birth, the Trinity, the Infallibility of the
Pope, without being put out of the Church.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Brother Francis</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Is this the traditional concept of Catholic orthodoxy? You allow people
to question the Trinity? We say that if we are truly in heresy, we should be
excommunicated. We want to hold the Catholic Truth; we do not want to be one extreme
balancing another. Are we Catholics or Hegelians?</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Bishop Flanagan</i>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>To return to the Marchetti-Selvaggiani letter, it has become part of
the teaching of the Church. You find it in Denzinger [a compilation of doctrinal documents
of different grades of authority].</p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Brother Francis</i>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The Marchetti-Selvaggiani letter is far below the authority of the
doctrine it nullifies. The Holy Father spoke recently of something he called the
"auto-demolition of the Church." Well, here is a perfect example of that abuse
— the use that was made of that scandalous document by the liberal theologians.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In concluding, the Brothers told His Excellency that we of the Order
are not conscious of having done anything that puts us outside the Church. Any gesture of
submission on our part would only mean admission that we have been wrong in our doctrinal
stand. We are faithful Catholics who have never done other than our duty to defend the
Faith. We are obedient to all those who hold authority over us whenever they act within
the bounds of that authority as constituted by God.</p>
</span></span></div><p><span face="Arial, Arial, Helvetica"><span size="3"><span size="3">This meeting took place on October 18, 1974.</span></span></span></p></div></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
</div>
<p><br /><span face="Arial, Arial, Helvetica"><span size="3"></span></span></p>
</div></div></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
</div>
CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-73482202367978011302021-07-01T08:09:00.002-07:002021-07-01T08:09:21.383-07:00COALITION FOR CANCELED PRIESTS <p> Hopefully this will be a counter reformation to the revolution that has happened inside the Church.<br /><br /><a href="https://canceledpriests.org/">https://canceledpriests.org/</a></p><p>Here is an interview by Alpha News with one of the consultants of the organization, <span class="style-scope yt-formatted-string" dir="auto">Fr. John Lovell.</span><br /><br /><br /></p><p>
</p><p></p><p></p><p><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NEf4mAC9ZYM" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe><br /><br />These priest are just experiencing what Fr. Feeney experienced so many years ago but had no means like the internet to do much.<br /><br />Fr. Feeney was just preaching a long held dogma, but was never able to give a defense of himself.<br /><br /></p><span><a name='more'></a></span><span><!--more--></span><span><!--more--></span>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-3212340815059565822021-06-30T12:50:00.004-07:002021-06-30T12:50:40.594-07:00 #StandWithAltman Rally in White Bear Lake, MN, June 22Worth watching finally the bishops may have met an opposition they can't beat. <br /><br /><br /><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/xqM9o8U4rPA" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-44553883448964431862021-06-19T14:02:00.002-07:002021-09-20T08:40:25.108-07:0055 USCCB Cowards Who Don't Love Jesus<p>We would say more than that. All the bishops are cowards. Other bishops should be calling out the other bishops. We need courageous bishops from a small dioceses calling out the Washington and other cardinals. Will it cause division? Yes. <br />Is it necessary ? Yes.Will he be attacked? Yes. <br />Will he lose his office? Probably.<br />But they would save their soul. <br />Even the "good bishops" are in danger of losing their souls.<br /><br /></p><p>Timothy Gordon calls these men out with righteous anger. There is a little salty language but it is to be expected with such a crime. <br /><br /><br /></p><br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BQh_tjhoPHY" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-18074214129850064232021-05-24T13:51:00.001-07:002021-05-24T13:51:32.698-07:00Fr. Altman asked to resign.<p> Fr. Altman was asked to resign for saying no Catholic can be a Democrat or vote for one. Interview with Taylor Marshall. They touch on a lot of hot button issues and we think Taylor is understanding EENS is key to the crisis. <br /><br /><br /></p>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4-pmuwp-9r4" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-64791169466912867352021-05-19T12:08:00.000-07:002021-05-19T12:08:15.145-07:00Ralph Martin - Who Should Be Receiving Communion? (Not just a question for politicians)<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/w6QJSp5BKIU" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-62630419450436601282021-05-17T13:52:00.047-07:002022-05-23T08:42:27.401-07:00Helping Michael Lofton on No Salvation Outside the Church<p><br /><br /><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1IEz3uV3zII" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe><br /><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IEz3uV3zII" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></a></span></p><p>[editor: This is one of the more thorough articles dealing with EENS. Many of the points have been adressed in other articles. We tried to tie together alot of threads.]<br /><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IEz3uV3zII" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></a></span></p><p dir="ltr" id="docs-internal-guid-0edb0c40-7fff-7b3b-c462-93599403e0b4" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IEz3uV3zII" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We were made aware of Mr Lofton’s YouTube channel and he seems to be an up and coming Catholic Utuber.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Here he is attempting to tackle the Dogma : Outside the Church There is No Salvation. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He says he is hesitant to address it. Maybe because some who oppose the liberal interpretation of this long held dogma, can be a little feisty. </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He does seem confused on his position. The whole time he supports the liberal understanding. But in the end he seems confused, he says implicit "Baptism" of Desire can save; but, then he says "it is rare." Claiming BoD is rare is how we got here, saints letting this "rare" thing slide. This "small" loophole eventually becomes Rahner/Barron universalism.<br /><br />We do commend Mr. Lofton for attempting to do as thorough a job as he has. Although we think he has missed many points of those who hold a strict view of the Dogma.<br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We think he is of good Will. But he needs to study the strict understanding better. Aquinas made it a point to know the other side's position thoroughly.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We can appreciate his problem. We were in the same position many years ago. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We were discouraged from reading the “Feeneyite” position. (Although we are not technically Feeneyites, i.e. followers of Fr. Feeney, we do sympathize with his doctrinal position.)</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He says in the opening of his presentation, this is not an exhaustive study, but is one of the best from a Conservative Catholic, most run away from the topic. So we see him seeking truth. We think this topic is at the heart of almost all the problems in the Church today. <br /> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We wonder if he knows that a </span><a href="http://www.catholicism.org/downloads/Peter_Vere_SBC.pdf" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">strict understanding</span></a></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">is acceptable by the Church?<br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He stresses that we are to understand The Dogma (EENS) as the Church understands it. The dogmas are the way the Church understands it.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The Church’s position is the 3 dogmatic statements :</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">* </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">no one at all</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> is saved.” </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215. </span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n400" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger 430</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">)</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">*</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “With Faith urging us we are forced to believe and to hold the one, holy, Catholic Church and that, apostolic, and we firmly believe and simply confess this Church </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">outside of which there is no salvation nor remission of sin</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">… We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302. </span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n400" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger, 468-469.</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">)</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">* “The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441. </span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n700" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger 714.</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">)</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br />He was probably taught in the Cardinal Newman school of developments. Most who follow Newman have never read his book on Development. It is rife with serious errors.<br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This “Development of Doctrine” method, which he is using, we have seen before, especially with conservative Catholics. They apply an “evolution of dogma” (although they will deny this), as taken from Bl. Cardinal Newman-- in his so-called “Development of Doctrine Essay”. We have treated Newman’s errors here on this blog in </span><a href="http://catholicvox.blogspot.com/search/label/Usual%20Suspects-Cardinal%20Newman" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">depth</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, in a number of articles.<br /><br />There can be distictions, but never at the expemse of how it was understood when defined.<br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This method, Newman's, takes what is the most current or recent position of theologians, or papal writings, which are fallible, as the light we view defined dogma and the Apostolic Faith. When in actual fact we should use the exact opposite method--what is Apostolic and ancient.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Defined dogma is the light we should view all other teachings-- subjecting them to the light of Faith, as defined by the Church. Yes there are </span><a href="https://catholicism.org/the-three-levels-of-magisterial-teaching.html" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">even levels</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> of Managerial documents, the lower being seen in light of the higher. A dogmatic definition is the highest and, well, definitive, by definition. That is the way we should understand it.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It is also important to say that the issue at hand is MEMBERSHIP in the Church. While there is ample documentation of who is, or is not, IN the Church, it has not been defined as such, so to exclude “Baptism” of Desire or “Baptism” of Blood. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">There are many murky statements by saints, and popes, that can add grey to a relatively clear teaching. Alas, we are in a desperate situation in the Church, Her worst crisis in history--confusion has reigned over this topic of EENS. </span></span></p><span><a name='more'></a></span><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">-----------------------------------------------------</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">THE ANCIENT CHURCH</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mr. Lofton rightly opens with scripture as the foundation of the dogma:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">John 3:5</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Or as many translations have it:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This is a good place to start. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">When Jesus says in scripture “Amen, Amen” or “Truly, Truly” he is saying something very important and we should pay attention.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He correctly says that Jn 3:5 has been traditionally understood to be Sacramental Baptism, but we would also mention, it is taught in councils as such, we have treated this topic </span><a href="https://catholicvox.blogspot.com/2009/03/watering-down-water.html" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">here link</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">. E.g:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ: <u>"Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn. 3:5)</u>: let him be anathema.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(Council of Trent Canon 2, "On Baptism;" </span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n800" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denz. 858</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">)</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He also correctly says, Christ makes it clear to enter the kingdom of God one needs to be Sacramentally Baptized. </span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Agreed.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Then he makes a mistake, by equating the Kingdom of God with Heaven.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The Church is the Kingdom of God, here on earth --the church militant; the Church is also partly in Purgatory--the church suffering and partly in Heaven--the church triumphant. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Here on earth the Kingdom is a “mixed” state that grows in the world with both “weeds”- evil people, and “wheat”- holy people, until the harvest when Christ comes as judge.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Jesus introduces most of his parables with the “Kingdom of God” or the “Kingdom of Heaven”:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Matthew 13:24-30</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field.</span><a href="http://biblehub.com/matthew/13-25.htm" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away…” </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">At the end Jesus says: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned. But gather the wheat into my barn.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">But since the topic is, “who is saved?” here on earth, if one does not mention the “Kingdom” as the Church, then that is a rather large oversight.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We can see how he could make this error, some saints say “Kingdom of Heaven” to mean the beatific vision. But, on this topic, it is crucial to be accurate on what we are discussing-- salvation. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Sacramental Baptism makes one a member of the Kingdom of God, (the Catholic Church) making it possible for us to enter heaven. One becomes a member, or better yet, an adopted son of God through Baptism, by the reception of the sacramental Seal of Baptism (</span><a href="https://catholicvox.blogspot.com/search/label/apologetics-%20Sacramental%20Seal" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">covered in depth here</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">) for example:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Hermas, 140 A.D.:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“… before a man bears the name of the Son of God, he is dead. But when he receives the seal, he puts mortality aside and again receives life. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The seal, therefore, is the water. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">They go down into the water dead, and come out of it alive.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 1: 92.]</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This is very important, because we can only enter Heaven by being grafted into Christ, as sons of God (Romans 11:17) we must also retain Sanctifying Grace to inherit heaven. But whether we enter heaven or not we remain sons of God, because of the Seal, in heaven or in hell. This is why we Baptize with caution, making sure that the person will be brought up in the Faith, because </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">one suffers more in hell with the Seal of sonship.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Dr. Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Membership in the Church, p. 309:</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“3. Among the members of the Church are not to be counted: a) The unbaptized… The so-called blood Baptism and the Baptism of desire, it is true, replace Baptism by water (sic) in so far as the communication of grace is concerned, BUT DO NOT EFFECT INCORPORATION INTO THE CHURCH </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[editor:which is the Seal]</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">… Catechumens are not to be counted among the members of the Church… The Church claims no jurisdiction over them </span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n800" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(D 895)</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">. The Fathers draw a sharp line of separation between Catechumens and ‘the faithful.’”</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Dr. Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, p. 309]</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Next Mr. Lofton quotes Justin Martyr, from St. Justin’s </span><a href="https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">First Apology, par. 46</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“We have been taught that Christ is the first-born of God, and we have declared above that He is the Word(Logos) of whom every race of men were partakers; and those who lived reasonably are Christians, even though they have been thought atheists; as, among the Greeks, Socrates and Heraclitus, and men like them”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Justin makes the argument here that the teachings of Christians are according to reason. And in a sense, those who love truth are in a way Christian. But right knowledge is only one necessary feature of salvation; one needs Sanctifying Grace, and a life corresponding to that Grace--- since Pentecost, incorporation into Christ is only by the Seal of Baptism. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We don’t think St. Justin is preaching a form of Pelagianism-- man by his knowledge and virtuous life can be saved without Christ, which is condemned as heresy. He was working in a polemical style..</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Could one of the great philosophers have been in a situation of the saints of the old testament? Doubtful (Plato for example, as great as he was, was a homosexual, which is a sin against the natural law). This is why Christ came; we needed a savior, and the Grace to do good and avoid sin. Even the saints of the old testament failed. Moses couldn’t enter the promised land; David, a man after God’s own heart, who was a murderer and committed adultery; Solomon for all his wisdom worshiped false gods….etc..</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We wish for mercy on all, but since we lack so many details of ancient pagans, it is wrong to speculate.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quadem:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“...but, as long as we are on earth, weighed down by this mortal mass which blunts the soul, let us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, there is ‘one God, one faith, one baptism’ [Eph. 4:5];</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Denzinger 1647]</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Especially if it undermines what we DO know. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The fact remains that God has revealed that all who wish to be saved must believe the Catholic Faith, and be Sacramentally Baptized. We believe that God will make sure that souls of good Will, will hear His voice, and receive the Catholic Faith. This should not be hard for a Catholic to accept. He makes bread His body.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He miraculously sent St. Philip in Acts 8:27 to the eunuch; miraculously revealed Himself to St. Paul (Acts 9:3-19); and St. Cornelius (Acts 10); God not only worked these miracles, but corrected those of good will who were only baptized in John’s baptism and not by the correct formula-- by the Holy Spirit. (Acts 19:3-5)</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mr. Lofton is doing a historical account, which can be useful, but what he is setting up is a psychology of persuasion-- an evolution of dogma concept. We wouldn’t accuse him of being deceitful. He thinks this is the proper way, since he was taught in post Vatican II theology.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">While it is useful to know the historical context, we should be focused on the dogmatic statements, and why they are true.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He seems to gear his whole talk to show that EENS dogmas are NOT true. Even though he is not denying the dogmas directly, and giving lip service to believing them. He is in essence “disproving” them. </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pius X in Lamentabili Sane, July 3, 1907-#24</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #3333ff; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> The exegete who constructs premises from which it follows that dogmas are historically false or doubtful is not to be reproved </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #3333ff; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">as long as he does not directly deny the dogmas themselves</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #3333ff; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> .--- </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">condemned</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #3333ff; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius10/p10lamen.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Link]</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></a></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He goes through a list of Church Fathers, which we will address, but let us first address the whole topic in general, by a non Feeneyite theologian. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Fr. Jurgens, a Church Fathers expert, seems confused that the consensus of the Fathers makes Sacramental Baptism absolute, with no exceptions:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Fr. William Jurgens:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “If there were not A CONSTANT TRADITION in the Fathers that the Gospel message of ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirithe cannot enter into the kingdom of God’ IS TO BE TAKEN ABSOLUTELY, it would be easy to say that Our Savior simply did not see fit to mention the obvious exceptions of invincible ignorance and physical impossibility. BUT THE TRADITION IN FACT IS THERE; AND IT IS LIKELY ENOUGH TO BE FOUND SO CONSTANT AS TO CONSTITUTE REVELATION.”[Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 3, pp. 14-15 footnote 31]</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Fr. Jurgens is honest enough to admit the truth, although he seems to not accept it. Mr. Lofton we hope will also see the truth of this Sacred Tradition, and not cling to the traditions of men--”Baptism” of Desire (BoD) and “Baptism” of Blood (BoB). [editor: we put “Baptism” in quotes because neither are real Baptism, they are metaphorically “Baptism.”] </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">In 1546, the Council of Trent issued a decree prohibiting people from interpreting Scripture “contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Julius III, Council of Trent,</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Fourth Session (8 April 1546)</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Decree Concerning the Edition and Use of the Sacred Books</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“No one . . . shall interpret... sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which holy mother Church . . . hath held and doth hold; </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers”</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We need consistency. How could the absolute necessity of Sacramental Baptism be so clear, as to be constituted as Divine Revelation by the Fathers, but BoD and BoB are still true?</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">As Mr. Lofton will show there are a few supposed exceptions by great Catholic thinkers, but no Church Father is infallible, most make some mistakes. That is why we need to take them as a whole and the consistent consensus. As pointed out above by Trent and Fr. Jurgens.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Let's return to Mr. Lofton’s presentation. He next quotes St. Cyprian. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Cyprian, To Jubaianus (254AD)</span><a href="https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/050672.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Epistle 72 </span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Catechumens who suffer martyrdom before they have received Baptism with water are not deprived of the Sacrament of Baptism. Rather, they are baptized with the most glorious and greatest Baptism of Blood…”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Cyprian is a mixed bag. He is the first writer of “Outside the Church there is No Salvation,” but at the same time he denied the validity of Baptism performed by those outside the Church. This was infallibly condemned by Pope Steven. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Let’s examine this passage. While teaching baptism of blood, notice that St. Cyprian makes a significant error in the same sentence. He says:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“catechumens who suffer martyrdom before they have received Baptism are not deprived of the</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Sacrament of Baptism.” </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This is completely wrong, even from the point of view of the “baptism” of blood/desire advocates. All “baptism” of desire and blood ( BoD or BoB) advocates readily admit that neither is a sacrament, because neither confers the indelible character/seal of the Sacrament of Baptism. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Hence, even the staunchest advocates of “baptism” of blood would admit that St. Cyprian’s statement here is wrong. Therefore, in the very SENTENCE in which St. Cyprian teaches the error of “baptism” of blood, he makes a significant error in explaining it – he calls it “the Sacrament of Baptism.” What more proof is necessary to demonstrate to the BoDers that the teaching of individual fathers is not infallible and does not represent the universal Sacred Tradition and can even be dangerous, if held obstinately?</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He jumps into “Invincible Ignorance.” While there is a place for this in theology, it doesn’t have a place in salvation. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Conservative Catholics present a strawman of EENSers, that one cannot be punished for NOT joining the Church, if <br /><br />a) one didn’t know it existed or <br /><br />b) didn’t know they needed to join it. (Ironically this second point-- no one knows because it isn’t preached, But this is a strawman of the Feeney position).</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Of course, no one would be condemned for not knowing they needed to join the Church, if they hadn’t a way to know about it. That is not the problem. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Conservative and liberal Catholics stress this point. Creating a strawman argument, because they are so SHOCKED anyone would believe what is dogmatically taught.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Jesus came to give us Sanctifying Grace, so we CAN be saved. Without this Grace, available only in the Church, we are not capable of salvation. Our state is already fallen and condemned, just with Original Sin, but we also fall into sins we already know are wrong, when we are outside the Church, thus building up a resistance to the Actual (Helping) Grace that God sends to lead us to His Church.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Thomas Aquinas, Sent. III, 25, Q. 2, A. 2, solute. 2:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “If a man should have no one to instruct him, God will show him, unless he culpably wishes to remain where he is.”</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Again even if they only have Original Sin:</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Council of Lyons II:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“…The souls of those who die in mortal sin or with original sin only, however, immediately descend to hell, TO BE PUNISHED WITH DIFFERENT PUNISHMENTS…-- </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> (Denzinger 464)</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, de fide:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “…Moreover, the souls of those who depart in actual mortal sin or in original sin only, descend immediately into hell BUT TO UNDERGO PUNISHMENTS OF DIFFERENT KINDS.” </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(Denzinger 693)</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mr. Lofton also seems to imply that those who hold to a strict understanding of The Dogma, don’t accept that grace can be had outside the Church. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Of course there is grace for those outside the Church, but it is </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">not salvific grace,</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> it is helping grace, which leads them to seek God and finally union with Him, in the Church. Invincible ignorance neither saves nor damns a person.<br /><br />St Augustine, 395:AD <span style="color: #2b00fe;">“… God does not forgive sins except to the baptized.” </span>[Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 3: 1536]<br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mr. Lafton also makes some good distinctions between formal and material heresy. Material heretics are functioning at a minimum of help for salvation. Many Catholics are lost to hell, and they have at their disposal all the sacraments. Are we to believe those living outside the Church are at an equal advantage? Doubtful.<br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">SAVED BY PARENTS FAITH??</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He then [23 minute mark] quotes a Church Father, St. Prosper of Aquitaine, to the effect that the parents can provide the desire for their child’s “Baptism” of Desire.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This theory was condemned in Trent, and is well explained by a Doctor of the Church, that will be used by Mr. Lofton for his support of BoD and the Liberal understanding of EENS.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">As St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori states:<b> </b></span><b><span style="color: #073763;"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Calvin says that infants born of parents who have the faith are saved, even though they should die without Baptism. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">But this is false: for David was born of parents who had the faith, and he confessed that he was born in sin. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This was also taught by the Council of </span><a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/trent/fifth-session.htm" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Trent in the Fifth Session, number Four</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[link]</span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">: there the fathers declared that </span><span style="color: #20124d;"><i><u><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial; font-variant: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">infants dying without Baptism, although born of baptized parents, are not saved, and are lost,</span></u></i></span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><span style="color: #20124d;"><i> </i></span>not on account of the sin of their parents, but for the sin of Adam in whom all have sinned” </span></span></b><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(Explanation of Trent , Duffy Co., 1845, p.56). See our </span><a href="https://catholicvox.blogspot.com/search/label/apologetics--%20Limbo" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Defense of Limbo</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Thus, a child cannot be damned to Hell Fire for its parents’ actual sins or lack of Faith, nor saved by its parents’ virtues or devout Faith.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">WHAT ABOUT THE GOOD THIEF?</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Let us return to a point he makes with St. Augustine just a few minutes before this [20:23 mark]. He brings up the Good Thief as an example of BoD --a theory that Augustine himself repudiated in later life (anti-pelagian) . Saying that he didn’t know if the Good Thief may have been baptized or not. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We say, the Good Thief, cannot be used as an example of “baptism” of desire primarily because the Good Thief died under the Old Law, not the New Law; he died before the Law of Baptism was instituted by Jesus Christ after the Resurrection. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The Good Thief was a circumcised Jew, so it constitutes no argument against the necessity of receiving the Sacrament of Baptism for salvation, since circumcision was the Old Covenant “Baptism,” according to St. Paul.<a href="https://biblehub.com/colossians/2-11.htm" target="_blank">(Col. 2:11) </a></span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">In fact, when Our Lord said to the Good Thief, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“This day you will be with Me in paradise,”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Jesus was not referring to heaven, but actually to “Hell” (a.k.a.Limbo of the Fathers). As Mr. Lofton well knows, no one entered Heaven until after Our Lord did, after His Resurrection, understood by most theologians to be Ascension Thursday. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">On the day of the Crucifixion, Christ descended into “Hell”, as the Apostles’ Creed says. He did not descend to the Hell of the damned, but to the place in Hell called the Limbo of the Fathers, the waiting place of the just of the Old Testament, who could not enter Heaven until physically led by the Savior into heaven. (This is why we need to be baptized.The requirements for salvation have slightly changed. He cannot lead us physically into heaven, because when He returns, in a non-sacramental way, He comes as Judge; not Savior. So we need to be IN CHRIST through Sacramental Baptism.)</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">1 Peter 3:18-19- </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Christ also died once for our sins… In which also coming he preached to those spirits that were in prison…”</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">To further prove the point that the Good Thief did not go to Heaven on the Day of the Crucifixion, there is the fact that on Easter Sunday, when Mary Magdalene met the Risen Lord, He told her, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Do not touch Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father.” </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">John 20:17- </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“[On the Day of the Resurrection] Jesus saith to her; Mary. She turning, saith to him; Rabboni, (that is to say, Master). Jesus saith to her; </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Do not touch me, for I have not yet ascended to my Father</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">…”</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Our Lord hadn’t even yet ascended to Heaven on the Sunday of the Resurrection. It is therefore a fact that Our Lord and the Good Thief were not in Heaven together on Good Friday; they were in the Limbo of the Fathers, the prison described in 1 Peter 3:18-19. Jesus called this place “paradise” because He would be there with the just of the Old Testament. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So, as St. Augustine later admitted, he erred in trying to use the Good Thief as an example for his point. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This proves again that only the dogmatic teachings of the popes are infallible, as well as the universal and constant Sacred Tradition of the Church. But St. Augustine himself in many, many places affirms the universal Sacred Tradition of the Apostles, that no one is saved without the Sacrament of Baptism; and, in fact, he denied the concept that a catechumen could be saved without the Sacrament of Baptism by his desire for it numerous times:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St Augustine, 395:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“… God does not forgive sins except to the baptized.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 3: 1536]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Augustine, 412:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> <span style="color: #073763;">“… the Punic Christians call Baptism itself nothing else but salvation… Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the Churches of Christ hold inherently that </span></span><span style="color: #073763;"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">without Baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the Kingdom of God</span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">or to salvation and life eternal</span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">? This is the witness of Scripture, too.”</span></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 3: 1717 ]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Augustine, 391:</span><b><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“When we shall have come into His [God’s] sight, we shall behold the equity of God’s justice. Then no one will say:… ‘Why was this man led by God’s direction to be baptized, while that man, though he lived properly as a catechumen, was killed in a sudden disaster, and was not baptized?’ </span><span style="color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Look for rewards, and you will find nothing except punishments.”</span></span></b><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 3: 1496]</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Here we see St. Augustine completely rejecting the concept of baptism of desire. Nothing could be more clear. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He says that God keeps sincere catechumens alive until their baptism, and that those who look for rewards in such unbaptized catechumens, who have unfortunately died, will find nothing but punishments. St. Augustine even makes it a special point to affirm that the Almighty doesn’t allow unbaptized catechumens to be killed except for a reason. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Those who say that St. Augustine held to "baptism" of desire are, therefore, simply not being complete with the facts. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">They</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> should add</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> the qualification that he many times rejected the idea, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">and was </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">on both sides of the issue.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Thus, the only father that the “baptism” of desire advocates can clearly quote in favor of the concept (Augustine) actually denied the concept of "baptism" of desire many times.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Augustine:</span><b><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“If you wish to be a catholic, do not venture to believe, to say, or to teach that </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"they whom the Lord has predestinated for baptism can be snatched away from his predestination, or die before that has been accomplished in them which the Almighty has predestined."</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> There is in such a dogma more power than I can tell assigned to chances in opposition to the power of God, by the occurrence of which casualties that which He has predestined is not permitted to come to pass. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It is hardly necessary to spend time or earnest words in cautioning the man who takes up with this error against the absolute vortex of confusion into which it will absorb him</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, when I shall sufficiently meet the case if I briefly warn the prudent man who is ready to receive correction against the threatening mischief.”</span></b><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(On the Soul and Its Origins, </span><a href="https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15083.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Book III. ch.13 )</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Here we see St. Augustine again affirming the apostolic truth that no one enters Heaven without Sacramental Baptism and again he explicitly denies the concept of baptism of desire, by denying that any catechumen can be freed from sin without baptism. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">All of this shows that “baptism” of desire is not the universal Sacred Tradition of the Apostles; rather, the exact opposite of the universal Tradition of the Apostles and Fathers – i.e. that no catechumen can be saved, without water baptism. </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It does get exhausting pointing out the errors of Conservative Catholics. Like Protestants, they just keep using the same tired arguments. One thing Pope Francis has helped us with, is, NOT taking the pope to be some kind of divine prophet. Conservatives have been scandalized by his heresies, or apparent heresies, but we EENSers have dealt with this reality a long time ago. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">AQUINAS AND IMPLICIT FAITH</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mr. Lofton next tries to set up that Aquinas’ speculation on implicit faith of pagans, before Christ; can be smuggled in with implicit faith for non believers today. Both are speculative theories, and weak ones too. He quickly adds that Aquinas didn’t hold that implicit faith in the New Testament can save you, as an aside. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">To pass over such an important point from one, Aquinas, who BoD advocates use to their advantage so often, is sad. BoDers never show, Aquinas either contradicts himself on this point, or is just inconsistent. </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">His nonchalantly throws in the New World was a big problem, because ‘churchmen thought the Gospel had already been preached to the whole world.’</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> This is just not true. Yes, some were troubled, by the implications of the New World, but as Father Brian Harrison, O.S., S.T.D, a learned pontifical university theologian points out to the </span><a href="https://catholicvox.blogspot.com/2012/07/over-years-strict-understanding-of.html" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Wanderer,</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> who made the same mistake: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1c4587; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><b><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1c4587; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1c4587; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Historically</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1c4587; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, it really isn’t credible to suggest that Catholic bishops and the Pope in 1442 thought that everyone on earth by that time “had heard and had understood the Gospel message.” Remote parts of northeast Europe were then still being evangelized; educated Catholics knew that down in Africa there were unreached tribes; the previous two centuries had seen both peaceful and warlike contact between Europeans and the Mongols, Chinese, and other large Asian populations whom educated Europeans knew had never been thoroughly — or, in some cases even partly — reached by Catholic missionaries. In other words, the discovery of the New World 50 years after the Council didn’t change the European Catholic perspective nearly as much as you (following Sullivan?) claim it did.”</span></span></b></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">AQUINAS AND “BAPTISM” OF DESIRE</span></span></p></blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[30 minute,mark] He talks about how Aquinas held to a “Baptism” of Desire. He seems to be so happy about this? </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Even though it is contrary to the overwhelming evidence in the early Church. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It is understandable that people can be confused on this issue, because St. Bernard and St. Thomas Aquinas made “Baptism” of Desire their own position based on passages in St. Augustine, and the ambiguous one in St. Ambrose, this caused hosts of theologians in the middle ages and down to our day to subsequently adopt “Baptism” of Desire out of deference to their great learning (particularly St. Thomas’), making it seem De Fide, i.e. dogmatically proclaimed.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Nevertheless, even Aquinas can make mistakes.The Catholic Church recognizes infallibility in no saint, theologian, or early Church father. It is only a pope operating with the authority of the Universal Magisterium--believed always and everywhere, that can clarify the issue.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Pope Pius XII, <a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12human.htm" target="_blank">Humani Generis</a> (# 21), Aug. 12, 1950:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “This deposit of faith our Divine Redeemer has given for authentic interpretation not to each of the faithful, not even to theologians, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">but only to the Teaching Authority of the Church.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">’”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">And Aquinas also holds that God would provide the means (Sacramental Baptism?) to those who desired it. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Thomas Aquinas, De Veritate, 14, A. 11, ad 1: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Objection- </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“It is possible that someone may be brought up in the forest, or among wolves; such a man cannot explicitly know anything about the faith. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Thomas replies- “</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It is the characteristic of Divine Providence to provide every man with what is necessary for salvation… provided on his part there is no hindrance. In the case of a man who seeks good and shuns evil, by the leading of natural reason, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">God would either reveal to him through internal inspiration what had to be believed, or would send some preacher of the faith to him…</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Could Aquinas have been mistaken on his BoD position? Or did he change his mind, since he advocated implicit faith, but then later only explicit faith can save? Or was he just being inconsistent? We don’t know nor do we need to, since the deposit of the Faith is not the Summa, as great as it is.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Thomas repeatedly and unambiguously refuted the heresy that “invincible ignorance” saves. He affirmed that explicit faith in the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation is absolutely necessary. </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “After grace had been revealed, both the learned and simple folk are bound to EXPLICIT FAITH IN THE MYSTERIES OF CHRIST, chiefly as regards those which are observed throughout the Church, and publicly proclaimed, such as the articles which refer to the Incarnation, of which we have spoken above.” </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Pt. II-II, Q. 2., A. 7]</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">And the fact that no one, above the age of reason, who wishes to be saved can be saved without a knowledge and belief in the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">WHAT ABOUT THE DISCOVERY OF THE NEW WORLD??</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mr.Lofton next brings up the discovery of the New World, but any confusion of the salvation of natives of the New World was dealt with pretty swiftly-- at least for the Church.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (formerly known as The Holy Office) under Pope Clement XI responded to a question in the missions in Canada, that a missionary must, before baptism, explain the Trinity and the Incarnation as absolutely necessary mysteries to an adult who is at the point of death.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Response of the Holy Office to the Bishop of Quebec, Jan. 25, 1703:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Q. Whether a minister is bound, before baptism is conferred on an adult, to explain to him all the mysteries of our faith, especially if he is at the point of death, because this might disturb his mind. Or, whether it is sufficient, if the one at the point of death will promise that when he recovers from the illness, he will take care to be instructed, so that he might put into practice what has been commanded him.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“A. A promise is not sufficient, but a missionary is bound to explain to an adult, even a dying one who is not entirely incapacitated, the mysteries of faith which are necessary by a necessity of means, as are especially the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation.”[</span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n1300" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger 1349a]</span></a></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p></blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Another question was posed at the same time and answered the same way.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Response of the Holy Office to the Bishop of Quebec, Jan. 25, 1703:</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Q. Whether it is possible for a crude and uneducated adult, as it might be with a barbarian, to be baptized, if there were given him only an understanding of God and some of His attributes… although he does not believe explicitly in Jesus Christ.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“A. A missionary should not baptize one who does not believe explicitly in the Lord Jesus Christ, but is bound to instruct him about all those matters which are necessary, by a necessity of means, in accordance with the capacity of the one to be baptized.”</span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n1300" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Denzinger 1349b]</span></a></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p></blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">While the Holy Office is not infallible, the above teaching is the opposite of the liberal interpretation of the Letter to Boston concerning Fr. Lenard Feeney.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So how do we reconcile this? We hope to further on.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The belief in the Trinity and Incarnation is absolutely necessary for salvation, for all those above the age of reason; this is also the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas (as already quoted above--Summa Pt. II-II, Q. 2., A. 7); Pope Benedict XIV and Pope St. Pius X.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Again Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica clearly teaches explicit Faith is necessary: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “And consequently, when once grace had been revealed, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">all were bound to explicit faith</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> in the mystery of the Trinity.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[link:</span><a href="https://www.newadvent.org/summa/3002.htm#article8" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Pt. II-II, Q. 2., A. 8</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Benedict XIV, Cum Religiosi (# 1), June 26, 1754:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“We could not rejoice, however, when it was subsequently reported to Us that in the course of religious instruction preparatory to Confession and Holy Communion, it was very often found that these people were ignorant of the mysteries of the faith, even those matters </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">which must be known by necessity of means</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">; consequently they were ineligible to partake of the Sacraments.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[link:</span><a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/ben14/b14cumre.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The Papal Encyclicals</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Benedict XIV, Cum Religiosi (# 4):</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“See to it that every minister performs carefully the measures laid down by the holy Council of Trent… that confessors should perform this part of their duty whenever anyone stands at their tribunal </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">who does not know what he must by necessity of means know to be saved…”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[link:</span><a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/ben14/b14cumre.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The Papal Encyclicals</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Those above the age of reason who are ignorant of these absolutely necessary mysteries of the Catholic Faith – these mysteries which are a “necessity of means” – cannot be numbered among the elect, as Pope St. Pius X confirms:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope St. Pius X, Acerbo Nimis (# 2), April 15, 1905:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“And so Our Predecessor, Benedict XIV, had just cause to write: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">‘We declare that a great number of those who are condemned to eternal punishment suffer that everlasting calamity because of ignorance of those mysteries of faith</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> which must be known and believed in order to be numbered among the elect.’”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[link:</span><a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius10/p10chdoc.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The Papal Encyclicals</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">For those who believe that explicit Faith in Christ and the Trinity is NOT necessary, (which is “the Catholic Faith” if defined in terms of its simplest mysteries) must change their position and align with Catholic dogma. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">There is no other name whereby a man is saved other than the Lord Jesus (Acts 4:12). They must firmly hold this so they themselves can possess the Catholic Faith and profess it. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">UNAM SANCTAM </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[34 minute mark] Mr Lofton quotes Unam Sanctam, dealing with being subject to the Pope. There are actually </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">two infallible statements</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> in this document. He failed to mention the FIRST which is: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302, de fide:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“...</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">we firmly believe and simply confess</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> this Church outside of which there is no salvation NOR REMISSION OF SIN…”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[link</span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n400" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger, 468-469.</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">]</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This infallible statement from Unam Sanctum would seem to at least cast doubt on BoD-- those outside the Church, receiving remission of their sins. We will be covering true membership in the Church later; right now we are just conterpointing his presentation.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mr. Lofton does quote the SECOND infallible statement of Unam Sanctam,(BTW much to his credit he does quote the infallible statements on EENS, most of our other protagonists do not bother, so hats off to him for this):</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302, de fide:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“...Furthermore, we declare, say, define, and proclaim to every human creature that they </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">by absolute necessity</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> for salvation are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br />[link</span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n400" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger 468-469</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> the translation of “absolute necessity” was dropped from the linked site. But this translation is found in a real book that cannot be altered like the Internet.--- Denzinger, The Sources of Catholic Dogma, B. Herder Book. Co., Thirtieth Edition, 1957, 468-469. Mr. Lofton’s translation has “matter of necessity”. Isn’t it strange how dogmatic statements linked to EENS seem to undergo many translation “adaptations”?? ]</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He seems to not understand that Sacramental Baptism makes one subject to the Pope. As long as one is Baptized in Water, and receives the Sacramental Seal, that person is subject to the Pope. So far as there is no active rejection of the Pope by the Sacramentally Baptized person, then they are understood to be subject to the Pope. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This is why infants are subject to the Roman Pontiff. They put no obstacle of their Will to the Grace of the Sacrament, i.e. Baptism. </span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Notice that Pope Boniface VIII did not declare that every human creature must </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">know </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">the Roman Pontiff, but that every human creature </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">must be subject</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> to the Roman Pontiff. Infants become subject to the Roman Pontiff by their baptism into the one Church of Christ, of which the Roman Pontiff is the head on earth, as His vicar. Infants put no opposition of the Will.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Leo XIII, Nobilissima (# 3), Feb. 8, 1884:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“The Church, guardian of the integrity of the Faith – which, in virtue of its authority, deputed from God its Founder, has to call all nations to the knowledge of Christian lore, and which is consequently bound to </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">watch keenly over the teaching and upbringing of the children </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">placed under its authority by baptism…</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[ link: </span><a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/leo13/l13cfn.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The Papal Encyclicals</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">] </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Children are placed under the authority of the Church by baptism. Thus, by their baptism they are made subject to the Roman Pontiff, since the Roman Pontiff possesses supreme authority in the Church (First Vatican Council, de fide). This proves that baptism is </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">actually the first component</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> in determining whether or not one is subject to the Roman Pontiff, and a member of the Church.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">If one has not been baptized, then one cannot be subject to the Roman Pontiff, because the Church exercises no judgment (i.e., jurisdiction) over anyone who has not entered the Church through the Sacrament of Baptism (de fide-- see below):</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Julius III, Council of Trent, On the Sacraments of Baptism and Penance, Sess. 14, Chap. 2, de fide:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “… since THE CHURCH EXERCISES JUDGMENT ON NO ONE WHO HAS NOT PREVIOUSLY ENTERED IT BY THE GATE OF BAPTISM. For what have I to do with THOSE WHO ARE WITHOUT (1 Cor. 5:12), says the Apostle. It is otherwise with those of the household of the faith, whom Christ the Lord by the laver of baptism has once made ‘members of his own body’ (1 Cor. 12:13).”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[link:</span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n900" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger 895</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It is not possible, therefore, to be subject to the Roman Pontiff without receiving the Sacrament of Baptism, since the Church (and the Roman Pontiff) cannot exercise judgment (jurisdiction) over an unbaptized person (de fide, Trent). And since it is not possible to be subject to the Roman Pontiff without the Sacrament of Baptism, it is not possible to be saved without the Sacrament of Baptism, since every human creature must be subject to the Roman Pontiff for salvation (de fide, Boniface VIII).</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">These teachings are so clear; they only become confusing when one tries to do an ad hoc for “Baptism” of Desire.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">COUNCIL OF FLORENCE (Cantate Domino)</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mr. Loton then goes on to quote the Council of Florence :</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, de fide:</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">only for those who abide in it </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ,</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[</span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n700" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger 714</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">---we will include again a hard copy footnote because the original translation of “abide” has been changed to “remaining.” This is a slight difference but we just want to be thorough. --Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Vol. 1, p. 578]</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He says he believes “Cantate Domino,” and then pivots so as to undermine the whole point of the definition. He brings up the invincible ignorance argument again. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We don’t understand how he can do this?? Pagans were covered in the definition. The natives in the New World were pagans. How is this not clear??</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">There has been an attack on the Dogma EENS for a long time. The argument that Mr. Lofton is using on this point was condemned by Pius XII:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis (#27), 1950:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “Some say they are not bound by the doctrine, explained in Our Encyclical Letter of a few years ago, and based on the sources of revelation, which teaches that the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">SOME REDUCE TO A MEANINGLESS FORMULA</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> the necessity of belonging to the true Church in order to gain eternal salvation.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Link: </span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n2300" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger 2319</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">---again a slightly different translation in the site linked. We used the hard copy translation.---The Papal Encyclicals, Vol. 4 (1939-1958), p. 179 ]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">THE PROBLEM OF METHODOLOGY</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">By trying to defend BoD, Mr. Lofon is really undermining the credibility of the Church. When something is clearly taught definitively-- Modernists say: “we really don’t know what that means.” We don’t think he is a modernist. but he has drunk from their kool-ade.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Also, is the way he understands it, the way the Council of Florence understood it? </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">God in his providence, regardless of scientific discoveries, saw fit to define EENS before the New World was discovered. Was God mistaken?</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">And we now have a definitions from the First Vatican Council speaking about the “development of doctrine”:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Sess. 3, Chap. 2 on Revelation, 1870, de fide:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church HAS ONCE DECLARED; and there MUST NEVER BE A RECESSION FROM THAT MEANING under the specious name of a deeper understanding.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[</span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n1800" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger 1800</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">]</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">And again:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Sess. 3, Canons on Faith and Reason, #3, 1870, de fide:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">given the advancement of knowledge</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is DIFFERENT FROM THAT WHICH THE CHURCH HAS UNDERSTOOD and understands: let him be anathema.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This definition from the First Vatican Council is critically important for dogmatic purity, because the primary way the Devil attempts to corrupt Christ’s doctrines is by getting men to recede (move away) from the Church’s dogmas, as they were once declared. </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We deal with people who attempt to explain away the clear meaning of the definitions on, “Outside the Church There is No Salvation” all the time, by saying, “you must not understand it so literally; one must see a deeper meaning.” What they really mean is that you must understand dogmas in a way different from what was defined and declared. And this is precisely what the First Vatican Council condemns. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It condemns moving away from the understanding of a dogma which the Church has once declared to a different meaning, under the specious (false) name of a “deeper understanding.”</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Modernists twist the words of dogmatic formulas to be just a private interpretation. And wring it of all its meaning and power.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope St. Pius X, Lamentabile, The Errors of the Modernists, July 3, 1907, #22:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“The dogmas which the Church professes as revealed are not truths fallen from heaven, but they are a kind of interpretation of religious facts,</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> which the human mind by a laborious effort prepared for itself.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">”- </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Condemned</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Link:</span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n2200" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger 2022</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope St. Pius X, Lamentabile, The Errors of the Modernists, July 3, 1907, #54:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“The dogmas, the sacraments, the hierarchy, as far as pertains both to the notion and to the reality, are </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">nothing but interpretations</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">and the evolution of Christian intelligence</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, which have increased and perfected the little germ latent in the Gospel.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">- Condemned</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Link </span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n2000" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger 2054</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Dogmas of the faith, like “Outside the Church There is No Salvation”, are truths fallen from heaven; they are not interpretations. To accuse one who adheres faithfully to these truths (fallen from heaven), of engaging in “private interpretation” is erroneous.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The very point of a dogmatic DEFINITION is to DEFINE precisely and exactly what the Church means by the very words of the formula. If it does not do this by those very words in the formula or document, then the Church has failed in its primary purpose – to define – and was pointless and worthless. </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Anyone who says that we must interpret or understand the meaning of a dogmatic definition, in a way which contradicts its actual wording, is denying the whole point of the Chair of Peter, Papal Infallibility and dogmatic definitions.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Also, Mr. Lofton insists that infallible DEFINITIONS must be interpreted by non-infallible statements (e.g., by non infallible magisterial documents, theologians, catechisms, etc.) he is denying the whole purpose of the Chair of Peter. He is subordinating the dogmatic teaching of the Chair of Peter (truths from heaven) to the re-evaluation of fallible human documents, thereby inverting their authority, perverting their integrity, and denying their purpose. </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (#7), Aug. 15, 1832: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“… nothing of the things appointed ought to be diminished; nothing changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved both as regards expression and meaning.” </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[</span><a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/greg16/g16mirar.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The Papal Encyclicals</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">]</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Thus, there really shouldn’t be a “strict” or “loose” interpretation of “Outside the Church There is No Salvation”, as many of the liberals like to insist on, but there should be only what the Church has once declared. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">But for the sake of discussion we will indulge this language, only so we can at least have a debate.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Another thing Mr. Lofton seems do is to dwell on each definitional point to the exclusion of the whole of the theology and definitions. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He says Florence doesn’t say how one enters the Church, as a member, in this particular definition,“Cantate Domino,”-- this is true-- BUT the same council DID say how one becomes a member of the Church:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22, 1439, de fide:</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Holy baptism</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> And since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘UNLESS WE ARE BORN AGAIN OF WATER AND THE SPIRIT, WE CANNOT,’ AS THE TRUTH SAYS, ‘ENTER INTO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN’ [John 3:5]. The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Link:</span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n700" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger 696</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">NOT JOINING THE CHURCH?</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[36:45 minute mark] He again brings up the strawman argument that people are condemned FOR NOT JOINING the Church if they didn’t know it was necessary. We already covered this above.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">No one has a right to salvation; it is a gift from God. The reason we needed a savior was for the very fact all are going to hell, the Massa Damnata, on account of Original Sin, or personal mortal sins.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Without the help of the Sacraments one cannot be saved, since the source of sanctifying Grace is Sacramental Baptism. One does not need to receive all of the Sacraments, but at LEAST one-- Sacramental Baptism. Vatican I explains:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council I, Sess. 2, Profession of Faith, de fide:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “I profess also that there are</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> seven sacraments </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">of the new law, truly and properly so called, instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ and </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">necessary for salvation,</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> though each person </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">need not receive them all.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">” </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Vol. 2, p. 803]</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Vatican I infallibly define here that “the sacraments” as such (i.e., the sacramental system as a whole) is necessary for man’s salvation. They are not “NORMATIVE”, but necessary. Not “the privileged way”, but necessary. But it explains not all seven sacraments are necessary for each individual. Again it doesn’t say normative, which would allow exceptions.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-right: -36pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Every man must receive at least one sacrament to be saved; otherwise, “the sacraments” as such (i.e. the sacramental system) couldn’t be said to be necessary for salvation. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We covered this point already above. (This is the problem of reacting to videos they tend to jump around)</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[37:49] Mr. Lofton points out a theological speculation of implicit faith and invincible ignorance, from Spain, in the 1500’s. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Yes, there were problems in evangelizing the New World, but invincible ignorance does not save. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mr. Lofton again brings up the strawman argument, that pagans are condemned for not joining the Church, when they could not know about it, or that the Faith has been badly presented by the evangelizing Catholic, and adding to this an unvirtuous example, that many natives remained unconvinced about the necessity of becoming Catholic.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We already covered this above but we will address it again more thoroughly here.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Yes there seemed to have been a movement in the Spanish Salamanca, Dominicans and Jesuits in the mid 1500’s, to say that implicit faith was enough. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Fr. Melchior Cano OP, in 1547, from Salamanca, proposed that implicit faith could suffice for </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">justification </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(technically not salvation)</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">among unevangelized pagans, like the American Indians.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">However, Cano kept within the limits set by the Council of Florence, by insisting that “implicit justification” needed to be ‘upgraded’ to the explicit Faith before death. If this did not happen, the native would fall into sin and lose sanctifying grace, thus being lost to hell. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Robert Bellarmine adopted essentially the same position as Cano, about 25 years later. It seems ‘Explicit Faith’ is what St. Robert meant by a “greater light of faith,” further needed by an “implicitly justified pagan” to enter heaven--- this “light'' could only logically be an ‘Explicit Faith,’ in the Trinity, and the Incarnation--death and resurrection, i.e. the “light”-- an explicit knowledge of Christ. There is nothing else it could mean, without contradicting Florence.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Though “implicit faith” was all the rage in the mid 1500’s and 17th century, it was answered by the Holy Office, as we addressed it above, but for convenience we will repost it here:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Holy Office, Pope Clement XI,</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Response of the Holy Office to the Bishop of Quebec, Jan. 25, 1703:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Q. Whether a minister is bound, before baptism is conferred on an adult, to explain to him all the mysteries of our faith, especially if he is at the point of death, because this might disturb his mind. Or, whether it is sufficient, if the one at the point of death will promise that when he recovers from the illness, he will take care to be instructed, so that he might put into practice what has been commanded him.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“A. A promise is not sufficient, but a missionary is bound to explain to an adult, even a dying one who is not entirely incapacitated, the mysteries of faith which are necessary by a necessity of means, as are especially the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation.”</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Another question was posed at the same time and answered the same way.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Response of the Holy Office to the Bishop of Quebec, Jan. 25, 1703:</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Q. Whether it is possible for a crude and uneducated adult, as it might be with a barbarian, to be baptized, if there were given him only an understanding of God and some of His attributes… although he does not believe explicitly in Jesus Christ.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“A. A missionary should not baptize one who does not believe explicitly in the Lord Jesus Christ, but is bound to instruct him about all those matters which are necessary, by a necessity of means, in accordance with the capacity of the one to be baptized.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p></blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">But are we saying there was a development of doctrine by the Holy Office? No.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It was already well established in the Universal Ordinary Magisterium-i.e “believed always and everywhere”, until Augustine, Bernard, and Aquinas muddied the waters.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">In fact, in the solemn profession of faith of Pope Pelagius I, from an epistle addressed to King Childebert, which was shortly afterwards repeated in the epistle, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"Vas electionis,</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">" addressed to the whole Church in the year 557, affirming the doctrine that on judgment day, God will hand over to the punishment of hell, all of the wicked, who he says consist of those, who either </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">did not know the way of the Lord,</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">or, having known it, abandoned it.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Pelagius I, Profession of Faith, 557 AD, de fide:</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: white; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"....the wicked, however, remaining by choice of their own with vessels of wrath fit for destruction[ Rom. 9:22], </span><span style="background-color: white; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">WHO EITHER DID NOT KNOW THE WAY OF THE LORD,</span><span style="background-color: white; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> OR KNOWING IT LEFT IT WHEN SEIZED BY VARIOUS TRANSGRESSIONS, He will give over by a very just judgment to the punishment of eternal and inextinguishable fire, that they may burn without end. This, then, is my faith and hope, which is in me by the gift of the mercy of God, in defense of which blessed PETER taught [cf.1 Pet 3:15] that we ought to be especially ready to answer everyone who asks us for an accounting."</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[link :</span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n200" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger 228a</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> ]</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"></span></blockquote><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So we see both are condemned- culpable and inculpable. In other words, it is proposed as de fide by Pope Pelagius to the whole Church, that a pagan or atheist etc...ignorant of the Christian Gospel at death does not in any way diminish the certainty that they will be damned. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mr. Lofton goes on to quote Belgian theologian Albert Pigge (or Pighi) in 1542, who speculated that Muslims could be saved. How far are these BoDers willing to stretch the dogma of EENS? They won’t seem happy until it is twisted and drained of any meaning. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">They seem to know no limits, and give lip-service to the dogma ‘Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus.’</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Reformulating it as “Extra Ecclesiam nullus est” (“Outside the Church . . . nobody is!”)</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He seems to instinctually realize his position doesn’t make any sense, because he renounces Karl Rahner later in the video, but with no real good reasons. But the crack of BoD in the dike of the Faith--EENS, always turns into a flood-- Universal Salvation. Bishop Barron is just another example.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The non-Sacrementally-Baptized are NOT members of the Church and are not subjects of the Pope. (covered above in Unam Sanctam)</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Even St. Alphonsus Liguori, who (mistakenly) accepted “Baptism” of Desire as dogmatically taught in Trent says all Muslims are lost: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> St. Alphonsus Liguori, Sermons (c. +1760):</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “How many are born among the </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">pagans, among the Jews, among the </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mohometans </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">and heretics</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, and all are lost.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Sermons of St. Alphonsus Liguori, Tan Books, 1982, p. 219]</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Islam rejects, among many other dogmas, the Divinity of Jesus Christ, and the Trinity, as taught by the Holy Office, as necessary for pagans. Its followers are outside the pale of salvation, so long as they remain Muslims. BoDers will quote a saint or pope but neglect to see that that same saint or pope disagrees with many parts of the BoDer's premise.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This makes sense because all those who support BoD are inconsistent and contradict themselves.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[42:44 minute mark]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">THE COUNCIL OF TRENT</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This is where the BoDers think:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“ Aha! We have a dogmatic council on our side--case closed!!” </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">They simply ignore the EENSers position-- three EENS dogmatic statements (Fourth Lateran Council, Unam Sanctam, and Council of Florence), numerous popes and saints and Fathers of the Church; they ignore that Florence, which condemns pagans; they will quote St. Alphonsus Liguori to prove BoD, but ignore St. Alphonsus when he condemns Muslims (as quoted above).</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It is unfortunate that St. Alphonsus, for all his great learning, and writing, was mistaken on Trent, and like St. Aquinas, has set in motion an error that many follow blindly without examination. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Let’s address the Council Trent. Here is the key passage quoted by BoDers:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Sess. 6, Chap. 4:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “In these words there is suggested a description of the justification of the impious, how there is a transition from that state in which a person is born as a child of the first Adam to the state of grace and of adoption as sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ our savior; indeed, this transition, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">once the gospel has been promulgated, CANNOT TAKE PLACE WITHOUT the laver of regeneration or a desire for it, AS IT IS WRITTEN: Unless a man is born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God (John 3:5).”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Denzinger 796;Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Vol. 2, p. 672]</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mr. Loton has used a good translation of the above passage-- thank you.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The critical phrase, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“this transition, once the gospel has been promulgated, cannot take place</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> without</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> the laver of regeneration or a desire for it.” </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This has often mistranslated phase changes “without” to “except through”:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #741b47; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“this transition, once the gospel has been promulgated, cannot take place </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #741b47; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">except through</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #741b47; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> the laver of regeneration or a desire for it…”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This mistranslation of the Latin word </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“sine” (without) </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">– which is found in the original Latin [ the Latin found in Enchiridion Symbolorum edited by Denzinger, Latin Edition, 1937, no. 796]– to change “sine” to “except through” alters the meaning of the passage to favor the error of “baptism” of desire, making it seem like either can be effective.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This is important to keep in mind because this mistranslation is still being used all the time by “baptism” of desire apologists, including publications of the SSPX. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> But as most scholars know the word “or'' can oftentimes mean “and” when preceded by a negative clause.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">For example : “One cannot play baseball WITHOUT a bat or a ball”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Both are necessary to play baseball. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Trent is stressing the need for the “desire to receive” the sacrament.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Why? Because if one remembers, Trent was called to combat Protestantism, and at that time Protestants (Luther and Calvin) denied Free Will.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(Also the Spanish had a liking for forced baptisms. They did it in Spain and at times in the New World. For a Baptism to be valid, one needs to have no opposition, i.e. desire)</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">To twist this small use of the word, “desire,” used throughout Trent, as “defining” BoD is an abuse of hermeneutics, even if it is the great St. Alphonsus.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Also, how does it make sense that the council of Trent is defining BoD, and says nothing of “Baptism” of Blood? It is in fact stressing the opposite:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“AS IT IS WRITTEN” Jn. 3:5 [</span><a href="https://catholicvox.blogspot.com/2009/03/watering-down-water.html" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">link</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">] </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">which</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">would normally mean-- to be taken literally. When one wants to make a point he points to the definition and says: “That is what is written”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">As we have seen above this is how the Church Fathers believed it. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Again if the council were “defining” BoD why would it reference canon 5 on baptism?:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Can. 5 on the Sacrament of Baptism, Sess. 7, 1547, de fide:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“If anyone says that baptism [the sacrament] is optional, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">that is, not necessary for salvation</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[</span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n800" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger 861</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">]</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mr. Lofton has misunderstood, but at first seems to understand. He says the council is saying Sacramental Baptism is necessary for salvation. Then applies what he learned about BoD, and separates desire from the sacrament.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">ST. ALPHONSUS LIGUORI</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Alphonsus: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Thus it is of faith (de fide) that men are saved even by the baptism of fire, according to c. Apostolicam, de pres. non bapt. and the Council of Trent, Sess. 6, Chap. 4, where it is said that no one can be saved without the laver of regeneration or the desire for it.” </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(St. Alphonsus, Moral Theology, Volume V, Book 6, n. 96)</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Alphonsus is not infallible. No saint of theologian is. </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Augustine held that it was “de fide” that unbaptized infants suffer the fires of Hell and St. Cyprian held that it was de fide that heretics cannot validly baptize. Both were wrong.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">If one is going to propose that a belief is DE FIDE, then one needs to prove it is Apostolic. You can quote saints and popes all day long but can the BoDer show it was held always and everywhere?</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">No Church Father held BoD, except Augustine, who later repudiated it. In fact, as Fr. Jurgen showed above, there is almost a unanimous consensus of the Church Fathers holding to the absolute necessity of it.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Augustine never brought up his teacher, Ambrose, to forward his theory of BoD. (as most BoDers do) Ambrose’s sermon used by BoDers is weak. Ambrose when teaching in theological treatises held to an absolute necessity for the Sacrament of Baptism. This appears dishonest from BoDers, to not bring this up too, although to Mr. Lofton’s credit he didn’t use Ambrose.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Ambrose, 387 A.D.:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“… no one ascends into the kingdom of heaven except through the Sacrament of Baptism .”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 2: 1323]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> St. Ambrose, 387 A.D.:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.’ No one is excepted: not the infant, not the one prevented by some necessity.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 2: 1324]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Ambrose, De mysteriis, 390-391 A.D.:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“You have read, therefore, t</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">hat the three witnesses in Baptism are one: water, blood,</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> and the spirit; and if you withdraw any one of these, the Sacrament of Baptism is not valid. For what is water without the cross of Christ? A common element without any sacramental effect. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Nor on the other hand is there any mystery of regeneration without water:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> for ‘unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.’ [John 3:5] </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Even a catechumen believes in the cross of the Lord Jesus, by which also he is signed; but, unless he be baptized </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, he cannot receive the remission of sins nor be recipient of the gift of spiritual grace.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 2: 1330]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Ambrose’s “De mysteriis” paraphrased by St. Pope Leo the Great in his DOGMATIC letter to Flavian, not found in the Denzinger:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope St. Leo the Great, dogmatic letter to Flavian, Council of Chalcedon, 451:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Let him heed what the blessed apostle Peter preaches, that sanctification by the Spirit is effected by the sprinkling of Christ’s blood (1 Pet. 1:2)… It is He, Jesus Christ, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">who has come through water and blood, not in water only, but in water and blood.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> And because the Spirit is truth, it is the Spirit who testifies. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">For there are three who give testimony</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> – </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Spirit and water and blood. And the three are one</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">. (1 Jn. 5:4-8) IN OTHER WORDS, THE SPIRIT OF SANCTIFICATION AND THE BLOOD OF REDEMPTION AND THE WATER OF BAPTISM. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">THESE THREE ARE ONE AND REMAIN INDIVISIBLE.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> NONE OF THEM IS SEPARABLE FROM ITS LINK WITH THE OTHERS.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Vol. 1, p. 81]</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">And if there is confusion, in the sense that the title of a document does not grant infallibility, Pope St. Gelasius clarifies it; that this entire document is infallible. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope St. Gelasius, Decretal, 495:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “Also the epistle of blessed Leo the Pope to Flavian… if anyone argues concerning the </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">text of this one even in regard to one iota,</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> and does not receive it in all respects reverently, let him be anathema.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Denzinger 165]</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Ambrose and Pope Leo defined that in justification, the Spirit of Sanctification and the Blood of Redemption cannot be separated from the Water of Baptism. Thus, there can be no sanctification by the Spirit or the Blood without the </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Sacrament of Baptism. They are ONE.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">BoDers are continually trying to separate sanctification from the sacramental waters.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mr. Lofton throws in the argument from silence. That many of the theologians have not been condemned who propose the BoD theory. But this is not a valid approach. The issue is clouded and needs to be discussed. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Much like the Immaculate Conception, Don Scotus was tolerated and Aquinas’ position was also tolerated and more popular. It wasn’t till many centuries later that clearity was restored. Aquinas was never condemned for wrong speculation.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">But often “Feeneyites” are not even allowed to debate. When the internet first started, Catholic forums forbade EENS discussions.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We were kicked out of Catholic Answers Forums because we won every debate.We were not uncharitable. If you hold a strict view of EENS (which is an acceptable position according to</span><a href="http://www.catholicism.org/downloads/Peter_Vere_SBC.pdf" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> CDF</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">) your books will not be published, you will not be invited to speak or teach. The whole political machine of the Church is turned against you. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Meanwhile heretical personages are allowed free reign, like Fr. Martin. Ignatius Press has no problem publishing a heretical tome on universalism, by Von Balthazar, with introduction by an equal erring Bishop Barron.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So how is this an honest debate?</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Robert Bellarmine</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">When saints attempt to explain speculative things that are not clearly taught by the Church, they are bound to make mistakes. So Catholics must not follow St. Robert in his difficult attempt to explain "baptism" of desire. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He was clearly confused by it:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Robert Bellarmine, De Ecclesia Militante:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Concerning catechumens there is a GREATER DIFFICULTY, because they are faithful [have the faith] and can be saved if they die in this state, and yet outside the Church no one is saved… THE CATECHUMENS ARE IN THE CHURCH, THOUGH NOT IN ACTUAL FACT, yet at least in resolution, therefore they can be saved…”</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[De Ecclesia Militante, Book III, Ch. 3, opera omnia, Naples 1872, p. 75; ]</span></span></p></blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Why is he confused? Because Bellarmine defined the Church as precisely as he could and BoD was not a possibility. His definition is considered a classic:</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Robert Bellarmine (16th century): De Ecclesia Militante:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"The Church is one, not twofold, and this one true [Catholic] Church is the assembly of men UNITED IN THE PROFESSION OF THE SAME CHRISTIAN FAITH AND IN THE COMMUNION OF THE SAME SACRAMENTS, under the rule of legitimate pastors, and in particular, that of the one Vicar of Christ on earth, the Roman Pontiff. First part excludes all infidels, those who were never in the Church such as Jews, Turks, and pagans, or those who once were in it and later fell away, like the heretics and apostates. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">THE SECOND PART EXCLUDES THE CATECHUMENS</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> and excommunicated, SINCE THE FORMER ARE NOT ADMITTED TO THE SACRAMENTS and the latter are excluded from them…"</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[De Ecclesia Militante, Book III, Ch. 2, opera omnia, Naples 1872, p. 75]</span></span></p></blockquote><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Bellarmine’s “difficulty” in attempting to explain the fallible position that catechumens can be saved,(as opposed by Agustine above) when catechumens are excluded from the sacraments of the Church by his own definition; is simply because the idea that an unbaptized person can be part of the Church is found nowhere in any council or statement from the Infallible Magisterium.</span></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><br /><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">As we have shown above both Ambrose and Pope Leo the Great disagree with Bellarmine. Sanctification and membership cannot be gotten without Sacramental Baptism. Even Ott says that catechumens are not members of the Church.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><blockquote><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Fr. Ludwig Ott:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“3. Among the members of the Church are not to be counted: a) The unbaptized… The so-called blood Baptism and the Baptism of desire, it is true, replace Baptism by water (sic) in so far as the communication of grace is concerned, BUT DO NOT EFFECT INCORPORATION INTO THE CHURCH… Catechumens are not to be counted among the members of the Church… </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The Church claims no jurisdiction over them</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> (D 895). The Fathers draw a sharp line of</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> separation between Catechumens and ‘the faithful.’”</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Dr. Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, p. 309]</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p></blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Liguori also says BoD does not give the Sacramental Seal, i.e. Incorporation into the Church, thus they are not incorporated into the Church and are not members:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Alphonsus Liguori:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“As the Council of Trent says (Sess. 14, Chap. 4), it takes the place of the latter with regard to the remission of the guilt, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">but does not imprint a character</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> nor take away all the debt of punishment.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(St. Alphonsus, Moral Theology, Volume V, Book 6, n. 96)</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“… he that confirmeth us with you in Christ, and that hath anointed us, is God: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Who also hath sealed us</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, and given the pledge of the Spirit in our hearts.” </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(2 Cor. 1:21-22)</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Gregory Nyssa, c. 380 A.D.:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Make haste, O sheep, towards the sign of the cross</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> and the Seal [Baptism] which will save you from your misery!</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Patrologiae Cursus Completus: Series Graecae, 46:417b, Fr. J.P. Migne, Paris: 1866]</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Cyril of Jerusalem, 350 A.D.:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“He says, ‘Unless a man be born again’ – and He adds the words ‘of water and the Spirit’ – he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. He that is baptized with water, but is not found worthy of the Spirit, does not receive the grace in perfection. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Nor if a man be virtuous in his deeds, but does not receive the seal by means of the water,</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> shall he enter into the kingdom of heaven? </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">A bold saying, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">but not mine; for it is Jesus who has declared it.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 1: 810a.]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. John Chrysostom, 392 A.D.:</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Weep for the unbelievers; weep for those who differ not a whit from them, those who go hence without illumination, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">without the seal!</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> … </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">They are outside the royal city…. with the condemned. ‘</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Amen, I tell you, if anyone is not born of water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”</span></span><br /><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[ Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 2: 1206; The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1905, Vol. XIII, p. 197. ]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So we see the Seal and Sacramental Baptism are one; and that this seal is not given in BoD as almost all BoDers agree. We also know from Unam Sanctam that there is NO remission of sins OUTSIDE the Church.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So how can BoD save? Ambrose and Leo the Great, say you cannot separate the Grace and the Water; St. Alphonsus says they receive no seal; the Fathers say the seal, baptism and salvation are one. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">GRACE OUTSIDE THE CHURCH</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mr. Lotfton shows he doesn’t understand our position very well. He again insinuates and insults us that we are Jansanists, and we think that no grace is given outside the Church. We have already covered this above.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Of course we believe that graces are given outside the Church; they are just not salvific. And if he thinks graces are salvific, outside the Church, he is denying the dogma, because he is saying “Grace” outside the church is salvific. In other words, that there IS salvation outside the Church.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He mentions he doesn’t necessarily agree with Bellarmine. ??? He doesn’t explain why. We think he sees problems with the BoD position, but has no where to go. Will he be ostracized by his friends at Catholic Answers? You bet !! </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Karl Keating is fanatically opposed to any position on EENS other than the liberal one. He will not debate the topic, but will work to destroy anyone who opposes him. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">How is it that Catholic Answers has no problem with Bishop Barron, nor the heresies published by Ignatius Press--”Dare We Hope ”?</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><b><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">IMPLICIT FAITH vs EXPLICIT FAITH</span></b><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Let’s return to Mr. Lofton. He continues to talk about implicit faith and explicit faith. Suarez cites St. Aquinas as his support on this, but Aquinas says that explicit faith is necessary, since pentecost:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Thomas, Summa Theologica:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “After grace had been revealed, both the learned and simple folk are bound to EXPLICIT faith in the mysteries of Christ, ”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Pt. II-II, Q. 2., A. 7]</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This line of thinking, of implicit faith without Sacramental Baptism, leads to the error of belonging to the “Soul of the Church” and not to the Body. This was popularized with Cardinal Newman and others of the 19th century. This idea is rampant today and is held by multitudes of “traditionalists.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">There is a misunderstanding of the true meaning of the term “Soul of the Church.” The “Soul of the Church” is the Holy Spirit, it lives in the Mystical Body--the Church-- It is not an invisible extension of the mystical body which includes the unbaptized.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Two popes clarified this. </span></span><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Leo XIII</span></span> quotes </span></span><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Pius XII</span></span> in Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“… Leo XIII, of immortal memory in the Encyclical, “Divinum illud,” [expressed it] in these words: ‘Let it suffice to state this, that, as Christ is the Head of the Church, the Holy Spirit is her soul.’”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Denzinger 2288]</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Therefore, to teach that one can be saved without belonging to the Body is to teach that one can be saved without belonging to the Church, since the Church is a Body and the Soul dwells in the Body.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Leo XIII,</span><a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/leo13/l13satis.htm" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Satis Cognitum</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> (# 3), June 29, 1896:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “For this reason the Church is so often called in Holy Writ a body, and even the body of Christ… </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">From this it follows that those who arbitrarily conjure up and picture to themselves a hidden and invisible Church are in grievous and pernicious error...</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> It is assuredly impossible that the Church of Jesus Christ can be the one or the other, as that man should be a body alone or a soul alone. The connection and union of both elements is as absolutely necessary to the true Church as the intimate union of the soul and body is to human nature. The Church is not something dead: it is the body of Christ endowed with supernatural life.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/leo13/l13satis.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[The Papal Encyclicals</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, Vol. 2 (1878-1903), p. 388]</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The denial of the union of the Church’s Body and Soul leads to the heresy that the Church is invisible, which was condemned by Popes Leo XIII (above), Pope Pius XI,</span><a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius11/p11morta.htm" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Mortalium Animos</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> (# 10), Jan. 6, 1928; Pope Pius XII, </span><a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12mysti.htm" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mystici Corporis Christi</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> (# 64), June 29, 1943.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Pius XI,</span><a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius11/p11morta.htm" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Mortalium Animos</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> (# 10), Jan. 6, 1928:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“For since the mystical body of Christ, in the same manner as His physical body, is one, compacted and fitly joined together, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">it were foolish and out of place to say that the mystical body is made up of members which are disunited and scattered abroad</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">whosoever therefore is not united with the body is no member of it, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">neither is he in communion with Christ its head.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Pius XII, </span><a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12mysti.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mystici Corporis Christi</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> (# 64), June 29, 1943.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“From what We have thus far written and explained, Venerable Brethren, it is clear, We think, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">how grievously they err who arbitrarily claim that the Church is something hidden and invisible…”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">FR. JUAN de LUGO-- father of Rahnerism</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mr. Lofton brings up Fr. Juan De Lugo, S.J., who back in 1646 was already anticipating Rahner’s ‘anonymous Christians’ theory. Is it any wonder why the Jesuits are the worst heretical community in the Church? Mr. Lofton had reservations about Bellarmine but says nothing about the radical nature of De Lugo?</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">De Lugo’s theory is so ludicrous, do we need to address it? He says Jews and Muslims can be saved, even though the council of Florence says the exact opposite.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Mr. Lofton says that de Lugo was never condemned, btw neither has Rahner, nor Kung for that matter.(Kung was forbidden to teach but never formally excommunicated). This is an argument from silence. But the Church through the centuries is constantly putting out fires of heresy that are immediate problems. This kind of speculation seemed harmless to most, so it never got the attention it should have.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">But when the Council Fathers spoke of “Jews”, they had in mind the religious, not the ethnic. And the meaning they attached to that word was indisputably those persons who profess Judaism.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">As Vatican I has declared the meaning that the Church first held must be retained:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Sess. 3, Canons on Faith and Reason, #3, 1870, de fide:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is DIFFERENT FROM THAT WHICH THE CHURCH HAS UNDERSTOOD and understands: let him be anathema.”</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">.[</span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n1800" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Denzinger 1818]</span></a></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">POPE PIUS IX-- INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It is interesting how BoDers never tire of quoting Pius IX in two cases that are a little obscure.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Even theologians of the times fought back against the false interpretation of Pius IX. Father Michael Müller, C.Ss.R. at that time, wrote a lengthy defense for Pius IX and against Invincible Ignorance being salvific. </span><a href="https://catholicvox.blogspot.com/2010/12/invincible-or-inculpable-ignorance.html" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Link here]</span></a></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We have dealt with this argument before in depth. </span><a href="https://catholicvox.blogspot.com/2009/03/venerable-pope-pius-ix-and-invincible.html" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Link Here]</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Needless, to say Pope Pius IX holds there is salvation for the ignorant where they are, is wrong; he says that God will send “lights”--i.e. missionaries and Baptism to them. He is following what Aquinas says.:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">St. Thomas Aquinas, Sent. II, 28, Q. 1, A. 4, ad 4: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“If a man born among barbarian nations, does what he can, God Himself will show him what is necessary for salvation, either by inspiration or sending a teacher to him.”</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">In </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Singulari Quidem</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> to the Bishops of Austria, Pius IX offers no qualifications to the phrase</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> "except with the excuse of invincible ignorance,"</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> as he did in </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Singulari Quadam</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> fifteen months earlier, and as he will do in</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Quanto Conficiamur Moerore </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">seven and one-half years later. We may certainly assume that this was not an intended omission by the Holy Father. And we remind the reader again that there was no engagement here of his grace of infallibility.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">BoDers almost never quote this part of the allocution.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quadem:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“For, in truth, when released from these corporeal chains, ‘we shall see God as He is’ (1 John 3:2), we shall understand perfectly by how close and beautiful a bond divine mercy and justice are united; but, as long as we are on earth, weighed down by this mortal mass which blunts the soul, let us hold most firmly that, in accordance with </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Catholic teaching, there is ‘one God, one faith, one baptism’ [Eph. 4:5]; it is</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> unlawful</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> to proceed further in inquiry.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><a href="https://patristica.net/denzinger/#n1600" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Denzinger 1647</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">]</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pius IX here is saying these things seem to be unclear-- HOW can God bring those outside the Church to be in it? </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">When Pius IX say that there is not GOOD HOPE for those dying outside the Church, He is insinuating that Divine Grace leads those outside the Church to enter the Church; but we must not presume that outsiders don’t need Sacramental Baptism or missionaries. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The error that non-Catholics can be saved by “invincible ignorance” wasn’t really a problem before the 1800's, since the teaching of Catholic Tradition that no one can be saved who is ignorant of the Gospel was quite clear and maintained by most. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> But thanks to the growing modernism in the 1800’s, combined with the liberals’ hijacking of Pope Pius IX’s weak statements, the heretical theory of salvation for the invincibly ignorant exploded, and became the belief of many priests in the latter half of the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This has culminated in our situation today, with almost 100% of Catholics, even traditionalists (SSPX), believing that Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, etc. can be saved - if they are good people--i.e. Pelagianism (which Protestants accuse Catholics of--salvation by works) We can thank the heretical idea of salvation for the “invincibly ignorant” for this. </span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /><br /><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">FR.FEENEY AND THE PROTOCOL LETTER 122/49</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This can be a complicated topic. We are dealing with dogma, canon law, politics, moral and sacramental theology. </span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We have dealt with this topic in depth [</span><a href="https://catholicvox.blogspot.com/search?q=PROTOCOL" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Link</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">] But let's put it into perspective. Doctrinally it is insignificant. It was a private letter from two Vatican Cardinals to an Arch-bishop in Boston. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It was never published in </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Acta Sanctae Sedis (AAS)</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">. On 23 May 1904 the AAS was declared an organ of the Holy See to the extent that all documents printed in it were considered "authentic and official". Thus if not found there, it was not considered official.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So we must hold that this letter, regardless of its fame, is still of a dubious nature. It was never in Latin (official language of the Church especially for official Vatican documents, before Vatican II) Karl Rahner translated it into Latin and put it in the Denzinger (conflict of interests?), which gave it a sense of “dogmatic importance”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">In reality, the Letter, while it is certainly open to the ‘implicit faith’ thesis, it also remains open to the contrary ‘explicit faith’ thesis.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The expression “implicit desire for the Church” clearly does not mean the same thing as “implicit faith in Christ”. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">While there may be some of the Baptized that are of good will, such as St. Josaphat of Ukraine, who said of himself that he was always Catholic, though brought up in a schismatic church. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Pius XI, Ecclesiam Dei, Encyclical on St. Josaphat, Nov. 12, 1923,#9:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“OUR SAINT [JOSAPHAT] WAS BORN OF SCHISMATIC PARENTS BUT WAS VALIDLY BAPTIZED AND RECEIVED THE NAME OF JOHN. FROM HIS EARLIEST YEARS HE LIVED A SAINTLY LIFE. Although he was much impressed by the splendors of the Slavic liturgy, he always sought therein first and foremost the truth and glory of God. Because of this, and not because he was impressed by arguments, EVEN AS A CHILD HE TURNED TOWARDS COMMUNION WITH THE ECUMENICAL, THAT IS, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. OF THIS CHURCH HE ALWAYS CONSIDERED HIMSELF A MEMBER BECAUSE OF THE VALID BAPTISM WHICH HE HAD RECEIVED. What is more, he felt himself called by a special Providence to re-establish everywhere the holy unity of the Church.”</span></span></p></blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Pius XI says here in </span><a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius11/p11eccle.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Ecclesiam Dei </span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">that St. Josaphat was born of Eastern Schismatic parents in an area which was separated from the Chair of Peter, but Josaphat accepted the Papacy implicitly anyway. St. Josaphat was validly baptized as an infant (and thus became a Catholic). As he grew up, he attended the Eastern Schismatic Slavic liturgy with his parents, but was still a Catholic and even “saintly” according to Pope Pius XI. He was a Catholic, even though he was attending a schismatic church building, because he had not obstinately embraced the Eastern Schism by rejecting the Papacy.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">His baptism as an infant made him a member of the Church (and subject to the Roman Pontiff) and he did not cease to be a member, unless he obstinately embraced schism or heresy, which he did not, even though he was attending a schismatic church with his parents. This is a precise articulation of our position on when the baptized children of heretics become schismatics and/or heretics: it is not at the age of reason, but when they obstinately embrace schism or heresy.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This is what could be meant by Fr. Harrison’s “desire for the Church” which may be in line with the strict understanding of the dogma. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Fr. Brian Harrison, a pontifical theologian, takes the approach that draws the line at Sacramental Baptism. [</span><a href="http://catholicvox.blogspot.com/2021/05/father-feeney-and-implicitum-votum.html#more" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Link here</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">] BoDers, on the other hand like Mr. Lofton, have no lines. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Fr. Harrison’s thesis is the most liberal we could accept. Saying all the Sacramentally Baptized are in some way connected to the Church, until they obstinately embrace schism/heresy.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">But the Letter to Boston is usually read to mean the Church says there is salvation outside the Church. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Protocol 122/49 is not an infallible or binding teaching of the Catholic Church. Protocol 122/49 was not signed by Pope Pius XII either, and has the authority of a correspondence of two Cardinals (Marchetti-Selvaggiani who wrote the letter, and Cardinal Ottaviani who also signed it) to one archbishop-- Cushing of Boston – which is none. The letter, in fact, and to put it simply, is fraught with problems, and ambiguity. Immediately after the publication of Protocol 122/49, The Worcester Telegram Newspaper ran a typical headline:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"VATICAN RULES AGAINST HUB DISSIDENTS – [Vatican] Holds No Salvation Outside Church Doctrine To Be False</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"<br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[Bro. Robert Mary, Father Feeney and The Truth About Salvation, p. 21]</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></blockquote><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">No defense of the Dogma was made by any American Bishop, including Fulton Sheen, who was friends with Fr. Feeney. Remember this was the time of John Kennedy running for President. American bishops have rarely had a backbone.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Feeney’s position at that time had nothing to do with BoD. That would come later. His keen mind analyzing what just took, place, in his supposed </span></span><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"excommunication," for proclaiming a defined dogma? Forced him to </span></span>study primary sources and documents of the Church and the Fathers, he saw inconsistencies with BoD.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Fr. Feeney (and his few followers) was a modern day Athanasius-- defending Church dogma against the world. This Athanasius unfortunately was not a bishop. His power was trivial in the Church bureaucracy. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Fr. Feeney died reconciled to the Church. He was never asked to recant his position. His funeral mass was celebrated by the bishop of Worcester. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The whole fascinating story is well documented in the book by </span><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20040211163059/catholicism.org/TTAS/contents.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Bro. Robert Mary, “Father Feeney and The Truth About Salvation”, </span></a></span><p></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Where Mr. Lofton and other BoDers go off track is saying “implicit Faith’ is enough for salvation. What Fr. Harrison (who we don’t necessarily endorse, but is at least trying to do theology--working within the framework of dogmatic teachings) is saying one needs an EXPLICIT Faith-- in the Trinity and Jesus as Lord and Savior, but an IMPLICIT desire for the Church--doing what God wills, and also Sacramental Baptism.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We will need a dogmatic council to work this out. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">VATICAN II AND EENS</span></span></p><hr /><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Many use Vatican II to say that non-Catholics can be saved. When we say non-Catholics we will limited it for now for the sake of argument to the non-sacramentally-baptized and/or without explicit Faith in Jesus as Lord and Savior.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Let us look at the full paragraph of Vatican II :</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[BTW In the footnote of this section of Vatican II, in paper book form, the letter concerning Father Feeney is appended (Protocol Letter 122/49), but minus the phrase which treats of "implicit" desire's acceptability before God. Abbot Jerome Theisen, O.S.B., in his book, The Ultimate Church and the Promise of Salvation, comments on this deletion in the text: "The suppression of the votum implicitum is probably due to disenchantment with the term, especially since it was used indiscriminately to describe the situation of both separated Christians and the "unevangelized" in their diverse relations to the Roman Catholic Church." Furthermore, this "footnote" did not appear in the Relationes --- the reports which accompanied the official schemata. Evidently, it was added later by a peritus. Our consciences are not bound to a footnote that is not even part of the actual Constitution --- a footnote, btw, that also does not even contain the objectionable phrase which strict EENSers had as their main problem. (We are indebted to the scholarly research of Brother Thomas Mary Sennott. whose unpublished manuscript, "The Father Feeney Case", contains this revealing information.)]</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Vatican II;</span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Lumen Gentium 16</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God.(18*) In the first place we must recall the people to whom the testament and the promises were given and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh.(125) On account of their fathers this people remains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts He makes nor of the calls He issues.(126); But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Mohamedans, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things,(127) and as Saviour wills that all men be saved.(128) Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.(19*) Nor does Divine Providence deny the </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">helps</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(20*) She knows that it is given by Him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life. But often men, deceived by the Evil One, have become vain in their reasonings and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, serving the creature rather than the Creator.(129) Or some there are who, living and dying in this world without God, are exposed to final despair. Wherefore to promote the glory of God and procure the salvation of all of these, and mindful of the command of the Lord, "Preach the Gospel to every creature",(130) the Church fosters the missions with care and attention.”</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Draw your attention to the above quote:</span></span></p></blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"Whatever truth is found among them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel."</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Notice it says a preparation for the Gospel.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So, a person of good will involved in invincible ignorance can indeed be saved, but not where he is. The Council continues:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[it is to such persons that the Church] "...to promote the glory of God and procure the salvation of all such men... painstakingly fosters her missionary work."</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So the Council is saying that these people outside the Church receive graces (Actual Grace aka Helping Grace) to follow these inspirations to the Church. They need to hear the Gospel that is why the Church works so hard at evangelization and procure their salvation! </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">To understand it otherwise would be to go against the WHOLE continuity of the Faith. Even the arch-liberal Fr. Karl Rahner, S.J. is honest enough to admit this: </span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> "...we have to admit...that the testimony of the Fathers, with regard to the possibility of salvation for someone outside the Church,</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> is very weak.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Certainly </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">even the ancient Church knew that the grace of God can be found also outside the Church</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> and even before Faith. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">But the view that such divine grace can lead man to his final salvation without leading him first into the visible Church, is something, at any rate, which met with very little approval in the ancient Church.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">For, with reference to the optimistic views on the salvation of catechumens as found in many of the Fathers, it must be noted that such a candidate for baptism was regarded in some sense or other as already 'Christianus', and also that</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">certain Fathers, such as Gregory Nazianzen and Gregory of Nyssa deny altogether the justifying power of love or of the desire for baptism.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Hence it will be impossible to speak of a consensus dogmaticus in the early Church regarding the possibility of salvation for the non-baptized, and </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">especially for someone who is not even a catechumen</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> In fact, even St. Augustine, in his last (anti-pelagian) period, no longer maintained the possibility of a baptism by desire. "</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br />(Rahner, Karl, Theological Investigations, Volume II, Man in the Church, Translated by Karl H. Kruger, pp.40,41, 57 Or. 40, 23 (PG 36, 3890), 58 'Sermo contra dilationem Baptismi' (PG 46, 424), 59 Cf. Fr. Hoffmann, Der Kirchenbegriff des hl. Augustinus (Munich 1933), pp.221 sqq., 381 sqq., 464 sqq., New York, The Seabury Press, 1975.)</span></span></p></blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Is Vatican II saying in the quotes above that there is salvation outside the Church? No, because that would be a heresy. This teaching in Vatican II must be understood in continuity of all the Church teachings something like this:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #351c75; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #351c75; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">' yes, all of human history is part of God's plan, which may allow people to fall into sin and infidelity even though sin is not God's active Will he allows it and it is part of His world plan of salvation. God will save those outside the Church by their response to Actual Graces which He sends them, which leads them to the Sacrament of Baptism and membership in the Catholic Church.'</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Vatican II states:</span></span></p></blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation (Actual Grace) to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace (Actual Grace) strive to live a good life.""</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">In other words:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #351c75; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #351c75; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">' Those of good will by doing the best they can, by God's Providence, and by their response to the Actual Graces He sends, will be led to join his Church.'</span></span></blockquote><p></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So even though someone is not a Catholic we should treat all of them with respect and love because they are made in the image of God and God loves them and ALL having the potential, by God Providence, of entering the Church before they die, either by inspiration or receiving an Angel</span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2010&version=49;" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(Acts 10:4)</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">or a teacher to them.</span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+8:26-40" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(Acts 8: 26)</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> so they may receive the Sacrament of Baptism, thus entering the Church'</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Remember Sanctifying Grace is not possible for those outside the Church:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"Pope Pius XII</span><a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius12/P12MYSTI.HTM" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">MYSTICI CORPORIS CHRISTI</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">--"On the Mystical Body of Christ," 1943; #57:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"Finally, while by His grace He provides for the continual growth of the Church, He [ the Holy Spirit] yet refuses to dwell through sanctifying grace in those members that are wholly severed from the Body."</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">And only the Baptized are members of the Church”</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, 1943; # 22:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Actually only those are to be numbered among the members of the Church who have received the laver of regeneration ( i.e. Sacrament of Baptism) and profess the true faith.”</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">And the Council of Trent agrees that only the Baptized are members:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Julius III,</span><a href="http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct14.html" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Council of Trent, on the Sacraments of Baptism and Penance</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, Sess. 14, Chap.II:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"The Church exercises judgment on no one who has not previously entered it by the gate of baptism. For what have I to do with those who are without (1 Cor. 5:12), says the Apostle. It is otherwise with those of the household of the faith, whom Christ the Lord by the laver of baptism has once made ‘members of his own body’ "</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The Catechism, under a topic heading, The Necessity of Baptism, teaches the following:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">#1257-"The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.59 He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.60 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.61 </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude;</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> 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."</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The Catechism is honest enough by saying:"The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude." This is a fact. Our Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation</span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%203:3-5" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(John 3:3-5)</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them</span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2016:15-16&version=9;" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(Mark 16:15,16.)</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and for those who have not heard it--both.</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So there is good reasons to remain skeptical about these theories.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">God has not informed us of His response in these matters. Therefore, we must believe and act only according to </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">what we do know</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, with certainty. He has taught us dogmatically through His Church the necessity of Baptism:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The Council of Trent;SESSION THE SEVENTH,Canons on Baptism:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">CANON II.-If any one saith, that true and natural water is not of necessity for baptism, and, on that account, wrests, to some sort of metaphor, those words of our Lord Jesus Christ; Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost; let him be anathema.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">CANON V.-If any one saith, that baptism is free, that is, not necessary unto salvation; let him be anathema.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Any theorizing beyond certain teachings, is wrong, for we are then probing into the unrevealed realm of God's Providence and Mercy, much like the predestination controversy. That being said we are sure, absolutely sure, that membership in the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Fr. William Jurgens a conservative who supports "Baptism of Desire," agrees with liberal Rahner that explicit membership by baptism was the unanimous agreement of the Fathers and seems a little confused as to why the excuse for ignorance was missing, but he honestly states:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“If there were not a constant tradition in the Fathers that the Gospel message of ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost he cannot enter into the kingdom of God’ </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">is to be taken absolutely, it would be easy to say that Our Savior simply did not see fit to mention the obvious exceptions of invincible ignorance and physical impossibility. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">But the tradition in fact is there; and it is likely enough to be found so constant as to constitute </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">revelation.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">---- Fr. William Jurgens (A major researcher of the Father's of the Church)-- "The Faith of the Early Fathers", Vol. 3, pp. 14-15 footnote 31.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So two theologians, one an arch-liberal and the other "orthodox" conservative Catholic seem to agree the sacrament of Baptism and Church membership was considered absolute by the Church Fathers.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Another thing is that the Church has always required orthodox faith for membership and salvation:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Paul VI, Second Vatican Council, AD GENTES---ON THE MISSION ACTIVITY OF THE CHURCH, # 7:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"Therefore though God in ways known to Himself</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> can lead those inculpably ignorant </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">of the Gospel to find that faith </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">without which it is impossible to please Him</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> (Heb. 11:6), yet a necessity lies upon the Church (1 Cor. 9:16), and at the same time a sacred duty, to preach the Gospel. And hence missionary activity today as always retains its power and necessity."</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So Vatican II, says that without Faith it is impossible to please him. Does this sound like what we usually hear about the invincibly ignorant? Is it any kind of Faith like New Agers use the word, or a concrete creed? According to scripture and tradition it is a concrete creed of all that Jesus taught.</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Athanasian Creed </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">states:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith..."</span></span></p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /><br /><br /><br /></span><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Leo XII,</span><a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo12/l12ubipr.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Ubi Primum</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">#14. May 5, 1824:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“It is impossible for the most true God, who is Truth itself, the best, the wisest Provider, and the Rewarder of good men, to approve all sects who profess false teachings which are often inconsistent with one another and contradictory, and to confer eternal rewards on their members… by </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">divine faith we hold one Lord, one faith, one baptism</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">… This is why we profess that there is no salvation outside the Church.”</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Gregory XVI,</span><a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Greg16/g16mirar.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Mirari Vos</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">#13. Aug. 15, 1832:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“With the admonition of the apostle, that ‘there is one God, one faith, one baptism’ (Eph. 4:5), may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that ‘those who are not with Christ are against Him,’ (Lk. 11:23) and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore, ‘without a doubt, they will perish forever,</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(Athanasian Creed)."</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Gregory XVI,</span><a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Greg16/g16summo.htm" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Summo Iugiter Studio</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, 1832:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">#5."You know how zealously Our predecessors taught that very article of faith which these dare to deny, namely </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">the necessity of the Catholic faith and of unity for salvation.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> The words of that celebrated disciple of the apostles, martyred St. Ignatius, in his letter to the Philadelphians are relevant to this matter: "Be not deceived, my brother; if anyone follows a schismatic, he will not attain the inheritance of the kingdom of God." Moreover, St. Augustine and the other African bishops who met in the Council of Cirta in the year 412 explained the same thing at greater length: "Whoever has separated himself from the Catholic Church, no matter how laudably he lives, will not have eternal life, but has earned the anger of God because of this one crime: that he abandoned his union with Christ."</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Let us give the last word to this same pope and encyclical of happy memory. He shows that there was already a movement to destroy the belief in the dogma "no salvation outside the Church" that he felt compelled by passion to defend this dogma:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Pope Gregory XVI, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Summo Iugiter Studio</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, May 27, 1832,#2, on no salvation outside the Church:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Finally some of these misguided people attempt to persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only in the Catholic religion, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">but that even heretics may attain eternal life</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">… You know how zealously Our predecessors taught </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">that article of faith which these dare to deny</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, namely the necessity of the Catholic faith and of unity for salvation… </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Omitting other appropriate passages</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> which are almost numberless in the writings of the Fathers</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, We shall praise St. Gregory the Great who expressly testifies that </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">THIS IS INDEED THE TEACHING OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> He says: ‘</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">all who are outside of her will not be saved</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">.’ Official acts of the Church proclaim the same dogma. Thus, in the decree on faith which Innocent III published with the synod of Lateran IV, these things are written: ‘</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">There is one universal Church of all the faithful outside of which no one is saved</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">.’ </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Finally the same dogma is also expressly mentioned in the profession of faith proposed by the Apostolic See, not only that which all Latin churches use, but also that which… other Eastern Catholics use. We did not mention these selected testimonies because We thought you were ignorant of that article of faith and in need of Our instruction. Far be it from Us to have such an absurd and insulting suspicion about you.But We are so concerned about this serious and well known dogma, which has been attacked with such remarkable audacity, that We could not restrain Our pen from reinforcing this truth with many testimonies.”</span></span></p></blockquote><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 18pt; margin-top: 18pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: blue; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">In conclusion, “Baptism” of Desire is a cancer in the Church. While She worked to treat other more obvious ailments to the Mystical Body of Christ, BoD grew. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Brian Kelly sums up the disease in his great article :</span><a href="https://catholicism.org/has-the-church-changed-its-teaching-on-no-salvation-outside-the-church.html" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Has the Church Changed Its Teaching on No Salvation Outside the Church?</span></a></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">He writes:</span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“From one loophole, many will be spawned — salvation can be achieved from explicit baptism of desire to implicit baptism of desire, <br /><br />from implicit baptism of desire to explicit rejection of Christ and baptism, <br /><br />from rejection of Christ to the implicit “anonymous Christian” who espouses explicit atheism. <br /><br />There you have it: inclusivity to the total exclusion of exclusivity.”<br /><br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">We hope this article is helpful.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span></span></p>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-92049560391468676172021-05-02T15:12:00.018-07:002021-05-04T09:38:55.919-07:00Father Feeney and the Implicitum Votum Ecclesiae- (the implicit desire for the Church) Part I
<div class="toolbar-container scrolled" id="toolbar">
</div><div class="container" dir="ltr" style="--line-height: 1.6em;">
<div class="page" id="readability-page-1"><h1 class="reader-title"></h1><div class="credits reader-credits">by Fr. Brian W. Harrison OS<br />emeritus professor of theology at<br /> the Pontifical Catholic University of Puerto Rico </div><p><b>Part A. Who Is In Fact ‘Outside The Church’?<br /><a href="http://catholicvox.blogspot.com/2021/05/father-feeney-and-implicitum-votum.html#more">[link to part 2]</a><br /></b></p>
<p><b>Introduction</b></p>
<p>It is now over sixty years since the so-called “Boston Heresy Case”
involving Fr. Leonard Feeney (1897-1978) shook the U.S. Church and sent
more than a few tremors round other parts of the Catholic world. The
case eventually influenced the doctrinal teaching of Vatican Council
II’s principal document, the 1964 Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, <i>Lumen Gentium.</i>
Dealing with the prospects for eternal salvation of those who are
sincerely unaware of the truth of Catholicism, the Council references a
rather low-key<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref1">1</a></b></small></sup>
censure of Feeney’s doctrine, sent fifteen years earlier by the
Vatican’s Holy Office to Archbishop (later Cardinal) Richard Cushing of
Boston.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref2">2</a></b></small></sup></p>
<p>The key point in this doctrinal ruling was that the ancient dogmatic formula, “No salvation outside the Church (<i>Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus</i>)”,
must not be understood to exclude from salvation all those who die as
non-Catholics (that is, without consciously professing the Roman
Catholic faith). The reason is that some of these persons, the Holy
Office affirmed, developing Pope Pius XII’s teaching several years
earlier in the 1943 Encyclical <i>Mystici Corporis</i>,<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref3">3</a></b></small></sup>
may in fact be joined to the true Church by a link – seemingly tenuous,
but sufficient for salvation – that consists in a merely implicit and
unconscious desire (<i>implicitum votum Ecclesiae</i>) to enter the Catholic fold. This desire, however, will have to be such as includes supernatural acts of faith and charity.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref4">4</a></b></small></sup></p>
<p>In spite of Vatican II’s footnote confirming this Holy Office
decision, the controversy which flared as a result of Fr. Feeney’s
severe interpretation of the aforesaid dogma has never really been laid
to rest. At least, not in the United States, where small but convinced
and articulate groups of Catholics continue to defend and propagate
Feeney’s distinctive teaching. This can be adequately summarized in the
following proposition postulating two requirements for reaching eternal
life:</p>
<p><b>To reach eternal salvation, it is necessary (though not sufficient): (a) to have been baptized sacramentally<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref5">5</a></b></small></sup>; and (b) to die sincerely professing the Catholic faith and one’s own personal submission to the Roman Pontiff.</b></p>
<p>Most of those who adopt this position are, however, rather less insistent and uncompromising about <b>(a)</b> than they are about <b>(b).</b> That is, most would say (as Fr. Feeney himself did after 1952) that <i>in their personal opinion</i>
there is no such thing as a saving ‘baptism of desire’ or ‘baptism of
blood’; but that they would not condemn as certainly unorthodox the
contrary opinion, to wit, the consensus of approved theologians and
papally-endorsed catechisms over the last thousand years to the effect
that these two substitutes for sacramental baptism can certainly be
sufficient for salvation in determined circumstances. It seems that in
recent debates over “Feeneyism” in traditional Catholic circles, the
lion’s share of the cut-and-thrust has been devoted to issue <b>(a)</b> – that is, to arguing for or against the validity of ‘baptism of desire’ and ‘baptism of blood’,<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref6">6</a></b></small></sup>
– even though, for Feeney’s followers, this has usually been the more
‘negotiable’ of the two key issues. The present essay, in focusing
attention on <b>(b)</b>, will seek to redress the balance somewhat.</p>
<p>While most Catholic traditionalists<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref7">7</a></b></small></sup>
do not agree with Feeney’s distinctive doctrine, those who do include,
amongst others, communities of male and female religious in New England
and California operating in a certain institutional continuity with Fr.
Feeney’s ‘Saint Benedict Center’ (hereafter ‘SBC’), which was
originally located near Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
The canonical status of these defenders of the rigorist understanding
of ‘the salvation dogma’ varies. One or two such groups – not
institutionally connected at all with the SBC communities – are at least
materially schismatic, since they not only denounce various Vatican II
teachings as heretical, but also deny that any of the post-conciliar
Popes has been a true Successor of Peter. Others are canonically
regularized or at least tolerated by Church authority. For the two-part
doctrinal thesis placed in bold type above, while not in accord with the
Church’s contemporary magisterium,<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref8">8</a></b></small></sup>
has never been formally condemned as contrary to infallible Church
teaching, and (presumably for that reason) is not being treated by the
Vatican as an offence that excludes one from membership in the Church,
or even from reception of the Sacraments.</p>
<p>This writer’s participation in many written and oral discussions over
the years has left him with the impression that while only a minuscule
proportion of Catholics accept Fr. Feeney’s thesis regarding ‘the
salvation dogma’, very few of the remaining vast majority are well
equipped to refute it. If they are aware of it at all, they most often
dismiss it out of hand as being so obviously narrow-minded and
incredible in the modern ecumenical age that it is not even worth two
minutes’ serious consideration. I myself tended to take that attitude
until a decade or so ago. Then, as a theology professor, I started to
receive requests for help from one or two other priests who were being
besieged by anxious lay people primed with ‘Feeneyite’ literature. These
priests frankly admitted their uncertainty as how best to help reassure
such perplexed Catholics that the arguments found in such literature
are fallacious. The fact is, Fr. Feeney was definitely no fool. He had
by the 1940s developed a reputation as one of America’s most brilliant
and learned Jesuits, and for that reason was seen as well equipped to
defend the faith at the liberal intellectual hub of the nation: Harvard
University and its vicinity. Thus it is that those few modern mainstream
Catholics who take time out to read carefully the case presented by
Feeney and his present-day followers are often taken aback to find
themselves much more challenged than they expected to be.<br /><br /></p><span><a name='more'></a></span>
<p>For instance, many modern Catholics assume that Feeney adopted the
shocking view – clearly incompatible with explicit magisterial teaching
from the time of Blessed Pope Pius IX onwards – that some people,
including some who have never even heard of the Catholic Church, will be
punished eternally by God for failing to comply with a divine command
of which they are inculpably and invincibly ignorant. That is so
flagrantly unjust that even a child would realize an all-good and
merciful God could never act thus, right? Right, indeed. However, on
reading what Feeney and his supporters actually say, one finds that this
is a mere caricature of their position. They do not claim that those
who die invincibly ignorant of Catholic truth will be sent to Hell <i>as a punishment for failing to join the true Church</i>. Rather, they say, all such invincibly ignorant persons will always in fact die with <i>other</i> unrepented mortal sins, committed with full knowledge and consent, on their conscience; and it will be for <i>those</i> sins that they are damned.</p>
<p>In the view of certain Catholics with a laudable desire to be strong
papal loyalists, it would really not matter too much even if the
magisterium <i>had</i> in fact contradicted itself over whether
non-Catholics can be saved. I am referring here to those who incline
toward a kind of naïve magisterial positivism, according to which we
should all treat as certainly true, and thus as at least <i>de facto</i> infallible, whatever happens to be <i>the latest</i>
doctrinal statement to emanate from Rome, regardless of who said it and
regardless of the forum, type of document, and choice of words in which
it was presented. Heedless of the teaching of Vatican II itself,<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref9">9</a></b></small></sup>
such folks – often deficient in their formal theological training but
now able to attract large audiences via Internet blogs and other modern
media – tend to place on the same level of authority, for all practical
purposes, ecclesiastical statements of quite varying degrees of
weightiness. These can range all the way from pronouncements of an
ecumenical Council down to isolated and unemphatic statements in minor
post-conciliar papal allocutions, together with any statement that
emanates from any Vatican dicastery, or is proposed in the <i>Catechism of the Catholic Church</i>,<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref10">10</a></b></small></sup>
or is found even in one of those recent papal theological treatises and
book-length interviews which expressly disclaim any kind of magisterial
authority. The default position for this sort of simplistic
conservatism is basically that if someone in the modern Vatican said it
or approved it, it’s true – and you’d better believe it! <i>Roma locuta est</i>!
But (we may ask) what if it seems incompatible with the previous
magisterium? “No problem!” – we will be assured. “Don’t you know that’s
called ‘development of doctrine’? If there’s some real incompatibility,
that just means the old pre-conciliar teaching is now superseded by the
new one. We faithful Catholics must simply change step doctrinally when
Holy Mother Church herself changes step!” (It was of course fundamental
for Bl. John Henry Newman, who pioneered the theology of doctrinal
‘development’, that any <i>genuine</i> development must always be in harmony with, never contrary to, the Church’s already-existing, traditional doctrine.)</p>
<p>Well now (we might wonder), if the old teaching, taught for century
after century, turned out to be so unreliable, why should we feel very
confident that a new and contradictory teaching ‘superseding’ it will be
<i>more</i> reliable? But (leaving that problem aside for the moment)
Fr. Feeney and his disciples will now in any case press our modern
magisterial positivists a little harder by asking how they will handle
the situation if the old teaching fulfilled the requirements laid down
by Vatican II itself (<i>LG</i> 25) for <i>infallible</i> – not just
‘authentic’ – doctrine? As, for instance, when the Pope and all the
bishops, in a solemn profession of faith, propose something to be
“firmly believed, professed and taught” by all Catholics? How about the
following doctrinal assertion, for example, laid down in precisely those
terms by the Ecumenical Council of Florence in 1442, in its Bull of
Union for the Copts and Ethiopians, <i>Cantate Domino</i>?</p>
<p>None of those situated outside the Catholic Church – not only pagans
but also Jews, heretics or schismatics – can become sharers in eternal
life, but will go to the eternal fire ‘prepared for the devil and his
angels’ (Mt. 25: 41) unless they become attached to her before the end
of their life.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref11">11</a></b></small></sup></p>
<p>By this point in the discussion, the modern mainstream Catholic
(positivist or otherwise) will often be feeling a certain uneasiness,
but will often reply along the lines that while, of course, we can never
<i>deny</i> the dogma that “outside the Church there is no salvation”, we must now <i>interpret</i>
it rather differently from the way our forefathers did, so as to
mitigate its severity to some extent. His adversary, however, will
certainly not concede defeat at this point, and will be quick to quote
the doctrine – one which will come as a puzzling surprise to many
mainstream Catholics, but was nevertheless infallibly defined by Vatican
Council I – that Catholic dogmas <i>simply cannot be</i>
‘reinterpreted’ in this way. The Council declared, “If anyone shall say
that, in accordance with the progress of science, it can happen that
dogmas proposed by the Church must be given a meaning different from
that which the Church has understood and still understands, let him be
anathema”.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref12">12</a></b></small></sup> </p>
<p>In this case (our ‘Feeneyite’ friend will continue) we are looking at the dogma “<i>Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus</i>”.
And we learn from Florence that the meaning according to which “the
Church has understood” (and therefore “still understands”) this dogma is
that <i>no one</i> who dies as a pagan,<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref13">13</a></b></small></sup>
Jew, heretic or schismatic can be saved. Now, what many mainstream
Catholics are saying these days is, in effect, that “in accordance with
the progress of science” – in this case psychological, historical,
sociological and anthropological science – we now know that many
wonderful and good people go right through life and die as totally
sincere pagans, Jews, Muslims and non-Catholic Christians, and so simply
could not be doomed to eternal torment by a good and merciful God.
Therefore (says Mr. Mainstream) we must now <i>reinterpret</i> those four apparently harsh dogmatic words, “<i>Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus</i>”, so as to allow that at least <i>some</i>
who die as pagans, Jews, heretics or schismatics can in fact be saved.
But surely (Mr. Feeneyite will conclude triumphantly) this benign
“reinterpretation” of the dogma is a clear case of changing its
previously accepted <i>meaning</i>! And that is precisely what is anathematized by Vatican I.<br /><br /></p><span><!--more--></span>
<p>This is usually the point in the discussion at which it is Mr.
Mainstream, rather than his adversary, who pulls out of the argument
with a perplexed shrug of the shoulders. If he does not himself start to
harbor gnawing doubts as to whether Fr. Feeney was perhaps right after
all, in spite of the seemingly gloomy prospect his doctrine presents, he
will turn his own attention to other matters, dismissing the problem as
one to which someone else – maybe some orthodox post-conciliar theology
professor? – can no doubt find a satisfactory solution. Perhaps he will
actually refer the matter to one of those post-conciliar theology
professors, asking for help. That is precisely how the issue started
turning up intermittently in my own Inbox; and after several years I did
not feel I could responsibly shrug it off by postponing it
indefinitely, or by trying to shunt the problem still further down (or
up) the line. </p>
<p><b>I. What was right, and what was wrong, in Fr. Feeney’s teaching?</b></p>
<p>So, rather than pass the buck, I shall bite the bullet. I will
consider in this essay whether contemporary magisterial teaching,
including John Paul II’s express negation of Fr. Feeney’s thesis,<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref14">14</a></b></small></sup>
can be read in a ‘hermeneutic of continuity’ with the severe teaching
of Pope Boniface VIII and the Council of Florence, understanding this
medieval teaching <i>in the same sense</i> as that intended by its authors and promulgators. </p>
<p>I believe it can be read thus, but not if we go by what seems to be
the most popular interpretation of the 1949 Holy Office Letter, the
Vatican II documents, the <i>Catechism of the Catholic Church</i>, and John Paul II’s <i>Redemptoris Missio</i>.
All of these modern magisterial documents are inconclusive if we search
them for an unambiguous answer to the following question: <b>Is salvation possible for those who die not just as non-Catholics, but as <i>non-Christians</i></b>?
That is, can someone reach eternal life who dies without any explicit
belief in Jesus Christ as God and Savior? While these modern magisterial
documents stop short of answering this question clearly, it cannot be
denied that what they say, in conjunction with what they significantly
fail to say, leans in the direction of an affirmative answer. However,
after much study and reflection, I myself have come to think – in accord
with the teaching of St. Thomas – that the correct answer to this
question must be negative. And Leonard Feeney of course agreed with the
Angelic Doctor on that point.</p>
<p>This raises the question of to what extent Fr Feeney’s stern (and
therefore unpopular) views may have been well founded. It seems only
fair to precede my criticism of his position by calling to mind certain
points on which I think he was right. First, he deserves credit for
protesting vigorously against the rising tide of indifferentism, which
is now even more widely diffused than it was in his time. An apparently
large majority of professing Catholics now see no urgent need at all to
persuade or exhort others to join the original and true Church of Jesus
Christ; for they appear to hold that those of any religion or none will
reach Heaven by nothing more than just being sincere and decent-living
folks. Our modern funerals – with white vestments expressing liturgical
jubilation – take on the air of instant canonization ceremonies for all
deceased Catholics, practicing or non-practicing, orthodox or dissident.
The pains of Purgatory are ignored or glossed over, while Hell (if one
believes in it at all) is presumed to be reserved for only a few
monsters of iniquity: maybe the occasional Hitler, Stalin, drug lord or
mafia don. Fr. Feeney certainly deserves praise for his loud and clear
protest against that sort of mentality, especially in this age wherein a
one-sided emphasis on ecumenism and interreligious dialogue has very
often overshadowed good old-fashioned apologetics and evangelization. </p>
<p>Not many Catholics, however, apart from Fr. Feeney’s avowed
disciples, will feel inclined to join me in the second accolade that I
would award him – at least, not before reading my reasons for granting
it, which – who knows? – may perhaps change some minds. I refer here to
the vote of thanks which I think the late paladin of Saint Benedict
Center deserves for his firm belief and insistence that nobody who dies
as a <i>non-Christian</i> – that is, without at the very least an
explicit (although perhaps only rudimentary) belief in the Trinity and
in Jesus Christ as the Incarnate Lord and Redeemer – can be saved. As
mentioned above, I have in recent years come to agree with this
classical Thomistic teaching. However, to defend this thesis, which is
now very unpopular (because at first sight shockingly pessimistic), and
which some Catholics, indeed, are quick to pronounce contrary to modern
magisterial teaching, would require another complete essay.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref15">15</a></b></small></sup> </p>
<p>The rest of this one will be dedicated to a different aspect of
Feeney’s position, namely, what he taught about the eternal destiny of
those dying as non-Catholic Christians, including those who have been
validly, sacramentally, baptized. Here again, for the reader’s
convenience, are his two main controversial doctrinal claims:</p>
<p><b>To reach eternal salvation, it is necessary (though not
sufficient): (a) to have been baptized sacramentally; and (b) to die
sincerely professing the Catholic faith and one’s own personal
submission to the Roman Pontiff. </b></p>
<p>We have already explained in the Introduction that this essay will
not address systematically the denial of ‘baptism of desire’ implied by
claim <b>(a)</b>. Enough ink has already been spilled over that issue, and so we shall turn instead to examine claim <b>(b)</b>. This was always Fr. Feeney’s main bone of contention, and the one which prompted the 1949 Holy Office <i>Letter</i> to the Archbishop of Boston. </p>
<p>As is evident, the interpretation of ‘<i>Outside the Church, no salvation</i>’ expressed in <b>(b)</b>
means not only that all who die as non-Christians go to the eternal
fire, but also that the same grim fate awaits all those, no matter how
apparently devout, who die as professing Protestant, Eastern Orthodox,
and other non-Catholic Christians, even if they are validly baptized.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref16">16</a></b></small></sup> It was this thesis that the Holy Office was censuring when it insisted that an “implicit desire for the Church” – <i>implicitum votum Ecclesiae</i>
– can sometimes be sufficient for the salvation not only of persons who
never during their life formally enter the Church (i.e., who are
neither raised Catholic nor ever ritually received into her fold as
converts), but also of those who die without even consciously or
explicitly <i>intending</i> to become Catholics and submit to the Pope. Here is the main passage of the <i>Letter</i> that Feeney objected to:</p>
<p> [In order] that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always
required that he be actually incorporated into the Church as a member,
but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by will and
desire. However, this need not always be explicit, as it is in
catechumens; for when a person is handicapped by invincible ignorance,
God accepts also an <i>implicit</i> desire, so called because it is
included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his
will to be conformed to the will of God.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref17">17</a></b></small></sup></p>
<p>It can readily be seen that Fr. Feeney’s requirement <b>(b)</b>, as we have formulated it above, does not rule out as unavailing for salvation an <i>explicit</i>
“will and desire” for the Church – for instance, on the part of a dying
person who was validly baptized in a Protestant denomination and who
wants to become a Catholic, but has no opportunity to go through the
process of formal reception into the Church by a priest, complete with
sacramental confession and first Communion. For it is clearly possible
to profess the Catholic faith sincerely, and to make an inward
commitment to be obedient to the Pope, prior to any such formal and
sacramental reception; and Feeney would by no means have classified such
a person as being “outside the Church” and doomed to Hell simply
because these external (ceremonial and liturgical) procedures could not
be carried out prior to death. But where he certainly drew a sharp line
in the sand was in reaction to the Vatican’s insistence that even an <i>implicit</i>
desire for the Church – a disposition excluding any conscious intention
or desire whatsoever to accept distinctively Catholic doctrines or
submit to the Pope – could be sufficient for salvation. He was never
able to see how someone with that sort of disposition could plausibly or
fairly be described as being located anywhere other than “outside the
Church” – <i>extra Ecclesiam</i>– and therefore, according to the dogma, heading toward perdition. </p>
<p>Leonard Feeney therefore boldly branded this Holy Office teaching on the <i>implicitum votum Ecclesiae</i> as heretical. My purpose in this paper is to show that he was mistaken in doing so.</p>
<p><b>II. Defining our terms</b></p>
<p>In order to explain more completely my disagreement with Fr. Feeney, I
will need to define the relevant terms as clearly as possible. The key
expression needing clarification in this discussion is of course “<i>Extra Ecclesiam</i>”. (There is little or no controversy among Catholics as to what is meant by “<i>nulla salus</i>”.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref18">18</a></b></small></sup>) What exactly does it mean to be “outside the Church”? Or, more precisely, what did the <i>Fathers of Florence</i> mean by this expression, since it is <i>their</i>
meaning, according to Vatican I’s anathema-laden definition, which must
forever be maintained as the only true meaning of the dogma. SBC
advocates<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref19">19</a></b></small></sup>
often seem to assume that its meaning is self-evident, and so do not
trouble to spell it out. One who does, however (although only in
passing), is the late Brother Robert Mary, a tertiary (lay) member of
SBC’s Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. He tells us that “Father
Feeney was preaching a defined dogma of the Church: the absolute
necessity of <i>visible membership</i> in the visible Church for salvation”.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref20">20</a></b></small></sup>
Neither of the words “visible” or “membership”, however, occurs in the
Florentine exposition of the dogma. The author has added them on his own
initiative, assuming them to be obviously understood and intended by
the Council. But once we begin to inquire a little more closely as to
what, in the minds of the Florentine Fathers, are the <i>necessary and sufficient conditions</i> for being situated “outside the Church”, it soon becomes apparent that Bro. Robert Mary’s assumption is very questionable. </p>
<p>Indeed, so is another related assumption that appears to be taken for
granted in SBC writing, namely, that every human person, at any given
moment, is either inside or outside the Church. At first sight that
seems to be just plain common sense; but I shall argue that in fact, the
authentic tradition of the Church recognizes, at least implicitly, a
third and intermediate status. Using an analogy with a physical church
building, we can consider the plan of a great basilica such as St.
Peter’s in Rome. When you pass from the square between the enormous
stone columns of the façade you find yourself in a large portico, in
front of the massive doors that lead into the nave of this mighty
temple. Now, while you are standing in the portico, are you <i>inside</i> or <i>outside</i>
St. Peter’s Basilica? The truth is that neither alternative accurately
describes your position. You can’t really be said to be either inside or
outside the Basilica, because its boundaries are not officially defined
with sufficient sharpness for such a clear-cut judgment to be made.
Likewise, one can be in a spiritual situation that is really neither
“inside” nor “outside” the Church founded by Christ. From now on I shall
refer to such persons as being located <i>in porticu Ecclesiae</i> – in the portico of the Church. And the reality of this intermediate ‘portico’ situation has an important logical consequence: <b>the maxim “outside the Church there is no salvation” does not imply, as it seems to at first sight, that “only <i>inside</i> the Church <i>is</i> there salvation”.</b></p>
<p>Now, being “inside” the Church clearly means being one of her <i>members</i>.
So let us consider this concept of “membership” in the Church. What
exactly does it mean? And is it in fact an “absolute necessity . . . for
salvation”? Significantly. the words “member” or “membership” occur
nowhere in the relevant passage of <i>Cantate Domino</i>. However, there
can be no doubt that the Florentine Fathers, along with the Church in
all ages, understood that a necessary condition of membership in the
Church during the present life<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref21">21</a></b></small></sup> is having received sacramental baptism – baptism of water. Pius XII, in his encyclical <i>Mystici Corporis</i> of 1943, confirmed this in giving an authoritative definition of what membership in the Church involves: </p>
<p>The only persons really to be included among the members of the
Church are those who have received the washing of regeneration, who
profess the true faith, and who have neither separated themselves
wretchedly from the unity of the Body nor been cut off from her by
legitimate authority for the commission of grave offences.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref22">22</a></b></small></sup></p>
<p>This coincides with another classical account of what membership in
the Church, that is, fully belonging to her, consists of. St. Robert
Bellarmine defines the true Church as:</p>
<p>. . . the congregation of men bound together by the profession of the
same Christian Faith, and by the communion of the same Sacraments,
under the rule of the legitimate pastors and especially under the one
Vicar of Christ in earth, the Roman Pontiff. From this definition it can
easily be ascertained which men belong to the Church and which do not.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref23">23</a></b></small></sup></p>
<p>Bellarmine goes on to point out that in virtue of the second element
in the above definition (“communion of the same Sacraments”),
“catechumens and excommunicates are excluded [from “belong[ing] to the
Church”], because the former are not [yet] admitted to the communion of
the Sacraments and the latter have been cut off from them”.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref24">24</a></b></small></sup> In line with the same constant Tradition, Vatican Council II affirms “the necessity of the Church <i>which men enter through baptism as through a door</i>”.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref25">25</a></b></small></sup>
(Once again, the analogy with St. Peter’s Basilica is helpful: only
when you pass through those giant doors at the inner side of the portico
are you truly <i>inside</i> the Basilica.)</p>
<p>Since this is the constant, ancient Catholic faith, it is clear that,
for Pope Eugene IV and the Fathers of Florence, catechumens, who had
not entered that ‘door’ of the Church which is baptism, could not be
“included among [her] members”. </p>
<p>But does this mean that the Council of Florence judged all catechumens to be <i>extra Ecclesiam exsistentes</i>
– “situated outside the Church”? If so, then it would be teaching that
all who die as catechumens are certainly destined for the eternal fire,
for this is precisely the fate infallibly proclaimed by the Council for
all those who die <i>extra Ecclesiam</i>. But it would in fact be
totally implausible to attribute such a severe teaching to the Council
of Florence. By the time the Council met, there had been a consensus for
many centuries that the desire for baptism on the part of a catechumen,
if informed by theological faith and charity, will be sufficient for
salvation if he/she dies unexpectedly before being able to receive the
sacrament. Even more assuredly would a ‘baptism of blood’ save a
catechumen who was martyred under persecution.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref26">26</a></b></small></sup>
This was already the common, approved teaching of theologians,
including such great doctors as St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Bonaventure.
Indeed, Pope Innocent II, three centuries before Florence, in an
official response to the Bishop of Cremona, had replied “without
hesitation”, citing two great Fathers and Doctors, Saints Augustine and
Ambrose, to the effect that desire for baptism could be sufficient to
save.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref27">27</a></b></small></sup>
Then, in 1206, Innocent III responded to an inquiry from another bishop
as to whether a certain Jew was validly baptized who, in danger of
death, had tried to administer the sacrament to himself. While replying
in the negative, the Pope affirmed that if such a Jew had died
immediately after such an attempt, he would nevertheless be saved
“because of faith of the sacrament” (<i>propter sacramenti fidem</i>), even though he had not truly received “the sacrament of faith” (<i>fidei sacramentum</i>).<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref28">28</a></b></small></sup> And in the century after Florence, the <i>Catechism of the Council of Trent</i>,
promulgated by the authority of Pope St. Pius V, was to teach that, in
regard to adults preparing for baptism, the Church does not regard the
administration of this sacrament as being so urgent as in the case of
newly-born infants, because:</p>
<p>. . . should any sudden accident render it impossible for adults to
be cleansed in the saving water, their intention and determination to
receive it, and their repentance from their previous ill-spent life,
will suffice them to grace and justification.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref29">29</a></b></small></sup></p>
<p>Given this context of long-standing, unanimous pre- and
post-Florentine theological and magisterial teaching in favor of
‘baptism of desire’, it is clear that the Fathers of this Council must
be presumed to have accepted this doctrine. The conclusion that they did
so is corroborated by their own text: for catechumens are conspicuous
by their absence from the Council’s list of those designated as being <i>extra Ecclesiam</i>.
If the Fathers of Florence had wished to stigmatize such persons as
being “outside the Church”, then that list, logically, should have read:
“not only pagans but also Jews, heretics, schismatics <i>and catechumens</i>”.
For this last group plainly does not fall into any of the previous four
categories of persons who are said to be “outside the Church”.</p>
<p>The conclusion is clear. The Council of Florence certainly does not accept catechumens as being <i>inside</i> the Church – that is, as her <i>members</i>,
persons who have ‘entered’ her and fully belong to her. But it is
equally clear that the Council does not judge catechumens to be <i>outside</i>
the Church, for that would imply they are all destined for the fires of
Hell if they die while in their catechumenal state, and the Florentine
Fathers neither believed nor taught that. <b>In other words, the Fathers were tacitly accepting and implying the existence of the intermediate condition we are calling <i>in porticu Ecclesiae – neither inside nor outside</i> the Church.</b> Being sacramentally unbaptized, therefore, is not a sufficient condition for being located <i>extra Ecclesiam</i>. Nor is it a necessary condition, since many validly baptized persons, namely, heretics and schismatics, are indeed <i>extra Ecclesiam</i>, as the Florentine profession of faith itself asserts.</p>
<p>However, it is clear that, for Florence, being in the state of sin is
indeed a necessary condition for being outside the Church. For only
those dying without sanctifying grace (and therefore without charity)
will be excluded from Heaven; and the Council declares that all those
dying outside the Church will be excluded from Heaven. On the other
hand, the lack of sanctifying grace and charity is certainly not a <i>sufficient</i>
condition for being outside the Church; for many of her baptized
members – orthodox and practicing Roman Catholics – commit mortal sins
and so lose grace without thereby placing themselves <i>extra Ecclesiam</i>.</p>
<p><b>III. What does it mean to be ‘outside the Church’?</b></p>
<p>Let us present these thoughts, and other related considerations, in
the schematic form of a list of questions-and-answers that seek to
discover <i>what constitutes</i> being “outside the Church” (in the
sense that excludes from salvation)? What, according to Catholic
theology, are the necessary and sufficient conditions for being ‘<i>extra Ecclesiam</i>’?</p>
<p><b>1. Being unbaptized?</b> This is clearly not a <i>necessary</i> condition of being in this unfortunate state, since baptized persons can also be outside the Church. But neither is it <i>sufficient</i>;
for after initial doubts and disputes among the Fathers, the ordinary
magisterium has taught clearly since medieval times that salvation is
possible for catechumens and other unbaptized folks who <i>desire</i> baptism. But their salvation would be impossible, according to the dogma we are studying, if they were outside the Church.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref30">30</a></b></small></sup> <i>So this (the state of being sacramentally unbaptized) is neither necessary nor sufficient for being ‘extra Ecclesiam’.</i></p>
<p><b>2. Being in the state of original or mortal sin (i.e., lacking supernatural charity)?</b>
This is certainly not a sufficient condition; for many persons in
mortal sin remain within the Church. On the other hand, if you <i>are</i>
outside the Church – and so, according to the dogma, are excluded from
Heaven if you die at that moment – you certainly lack charity. For
nobody dying with sanctifying grace and the charity that goes with it
will be excluded from Heaven. <i>So this (being in the state of sin) is necessary, but not sufficient, for being ‘extra Ecclesiam’.</i></p>
<p><b>3. Lacking supernatural faith?</b> This is not necessary, because
formal schismatics and excommunicated persons can be outside the Church
while retaining the theological virtue of faith. However, since the
Church is first and foremost the community of the Christian <i>faithful</i> – the <i>Christifideles</i> – anyone who <i>lacks</i> the virtue of faith (whether culpably or inculpably) is certainly outside that community. <i>This is sufficient, but not necessary, for being ‘extra Ecclesiam’.</i></p>
<p><b>4. Being <i>visibly</i> unconnected (sacramentally or sociologically) to the Church’s organized structures?</b>
Not sufficient, because Catholic teaching has explicitly recognized
ever since the third century that infants validly baptized in, and being
raised in, heretical/schismatic communities are at least for a few
years members of the true Church – although not <i>visibly</i> so. While
a theologian will say they are Catholic, a sociologist would classify
them as non-Catholic; for they are plainly and visibly part of the
Methodist, Episcopalian, Greek Orthodox (or whatever) community where
their parents take them to church. Indeed, I know a leading SBC member
who also acknowledges that <i>adult</i> oriental Christians living in
areas far away from Constantinople during the initial period after the
formal East-West schism of 1054 would not really have been <i>extra Ecclesiam</i>
if they were unaware that the churches they continued to attend were
now part of a new denomination whose leaders had separated it from Rome.
So this lack of a visible, organizational, connection to the Catholic
Church is not in itself sufficient to place you outside of her. Nor is
it necessary, because occult formal heretics and apostates, who <i>secretly</i>
lack the supernatural virtue of faith, are really (in God’s sight)
outside the Church even though they remain visibly (‘materially’) within
her, perhaps hypocritically participating in – or even administering –
the sacraments. <i>This is neither necessary nor sufficient for being ‘extra Ecclesiam’.</i></p>
<p><b>5. Being unentitled to receive the (post-baptismal) sacraments?</b> No, this is an effect, not a cause, of being outside the Church.</p>
<p><b>6. Lacking an explicit will to be subject to the Roman Pontiff?</b> Not necessary, because a person excommunicated for certain offences could still have such a will. Neither is such a lack <i>sufficient</i>
in itself to put you outside the Church. After all, baptized Catholic
babies and inadequately catechized Catholics – children or adults – can
lack this explicit will; yet not only are they not <i>outside</i> the Church; they are fully <i>inside</i>
her, as true members. (The Holy Office ruled in 1703 that missionaries
may baptize adults in danger of death provided they believe explicitly
at least in the Trinity and Incarnation, i.e., even if they haven’t yet
learned about the papacy.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref31">31</a></b></small></sup>) <i>This too is neither necessary nor sufficient for being ‘extra Ecclesiam’.</i></p>
<p>Now, I believe Fr. Feeney would have agreed – at least at the time of the 1949 Holy Office censure<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref32">32</a></b></small></sup>
– with my evaluation of the above six conditions and dispositions. But
he would have parted company with me about the seventh, which touches
the point the Holy Office was then most concerned about: </p>
<p><b>7. Having an explicit will <i>not</i> to be subject to the Roman Pontiff?</b>
This is not necessary as a condition for being outside the Church, for
the same reason disposition #6 above is not necessary. But Fr. Feeney
and his SBC supporters would claim that this disposition, which
characterizes nearly all non-Catholics,<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref33">33</a></b></small></sup> is certainly <i>sufficient</i> to put you <i>extra Ecclesiam</i>.
Now, while at first sight this claim may appear plausible, or even
obviously true, things are not really so clear-cut. For a conscious,
explicit and habitual disposition not to submit to the Pope can in
itself be psychologically quite compatible with (though of course it is
not always accompanied by) an <i>implicit</i> habitual disposition to submit to the Pope. </p>
<p>Here, I believe, we have finally unearthed the root of the
discordance between Leonard Feeney’s view and the recently developed
teaching of the Church’s magisterium. His unduly gloomy prognosis
regarding the eternal destiny of all who die with an explicit will to
remain independent of papal authority derives, I would suggest, from his
failure to appreciate that this <i>explicitly</i> negative attitude is not in itself incompatible with a true, though implicit and unconscious – will to <i>accept</i> papal authority wholeheartedly. <i>This
implicit disposition necessarily exists in the heart of every believer
in the Trinity and Incarnation who is explicitly, sincerely and
habitually disposed to obey Jesus Christ wholeheartedly, even if,
through anti-Catholic literature, preaching, catechesis or upbringing,
that person has been misled into believing honestly that Christ is in
fact telling his disciples to disregard the Pope’s claim to be his Vicar
on earth.</i> This disposition #7 can therefore sometimes be very close
to #6; for in both cases we’re talking about persons who would be
willing to submit to the Roman Pontiff consciously and explicitly <i>if they knew</i> that Christ himself wants them to do so. The difference is that the poorly catechized Catholics discussed in #6 are true <i>members</i>
of the Church while the sincere non-Catholic Christians contemplated
here in #7 are not. In any case, we may conclude (in this case without
Fr. Feeney’s agreement) that disposition #7 is <i>neither necessary nor sufficient as a condition for being outside the Church.</i> While it is clear that nobody thus disposed can be <i>inside</i> the Church (<i>intra Ecclesiam</i>), some who are thus disposed can be <i>in porticu Ecclesiae</i> rather than <i>extra Ecclesiam</i>. For how could we plausibly presume that <i>everyone</i> with this attitude to papal authority is in mortal sin despite <b>(a)</b> being validly baptized, <b>(b)</b> believing with supernatural faith in the Trinity and Incarnation, and <b>(c)</b>
being explicitly and wholeheartedly disposed to obey every precept of
Christ? And as we have seen (cf. #2 above), being in the state of
mortal sin is, for adults, a necessary condition of being <i>extra Ecclesiam</i>: nobody in the state of grace is outside the Church.</p>
<p>Does this mean the 1949 <i>Letter</i> is implying that at least some non-Christian theists – Jews, Muslims, etc. – may also be located <i>in porticu Ecclesiae</i> rather than <i>extra Ecclesiam</i>? Some might maintain that it would be arbitrary and inconsistent to stop short at affirming <i>only</i>
the thesis of the italicized sentence in the previous paragraph. They
might argue that the Holy Office’s appeal to an underlying ‘good will’
logically implies a similar but much broader thesis in which the words
“every believer in the Trinity and Incarnation” in that sentence are
replaced by “every believer in God”, with the words “Jesus Christ” and
“Christ” likewise being replaced simply by “God”. In truth the Holy
Office does not imply this kind of ‘big tent’ ecclesiology. But neither
does it reprobate, implicitly or explicitly, that ecclesiology. Rather,
it tacitly leaves the question open for further discussion. This is
clear from the fact that the <i>Letter</i> goes on to teach that not every kind of <i>implicitum votum Ecclesiae</i>
is salvifically efficacious, but only that which is informed by the
theological virtue of charity and accompanied by supernatural faith.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref34">34</a></b></small></sup>
And whether any non-Christian can in fact possess these theological
virtues is a separate and rather complex question which the Holy Office
does not address in this document.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref35">35</a></b></small></sup></p>
<p><b>8. Having an explicit <i>and culpable</i> will not to be subject to the Roman Pontiff?</b>
Here, finally, we can return to agreement with Feeney and the SBC by
virtue of the two words that distinguish #7 from #8. Even though having
the latter disposition is plainly not <i>necessary</i> as a condition of
being outside the Church (for there are other defects that will produce
the same result), it is most certainly a <i>sufficient</i> condition.
And Fr. Feeney would of course be the first to agree. Indeed, on this
point, the harmony is already transparent between the two councils,
Florence and Second Vatican. The latter, in explaining the dogma <i>Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus</i>, affirms: “Those could not be saved who, <i>knowing that</i>
the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ,
would refuse either to enter her [i.e., submit to the Roman Pontiff] or
remain in her”.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref36">36</a></b></small></sup> In short, disposition #8 <i>is not necessary, but is indeed sufficient, for being outside the Church and, therefore, on the road to perdition.</i></p>
<p>The above eight-point analysis should make it clear enough that, contrary to what we might have expected <i>a priori</i>,
it is not immediately obvious what exactly the traditional magisterium
meant by being ‘outside the Church’. Our enquiry has shown that the
position assumed tacitly by the Council of Florence in regard to
catechumens is a chink, as it were, in Fr. Feeney’s armor. It punctures a
hole in his iron-clad dichotomy, namely, his claim that, according to
the traditional magisterium, all who are not <i>members</i> of the Church – i.e., baptized Roman Catholics in good standing – are ipso facto <i>outside</i>
of her fold (and, for that reason, on the road to damnation). And once
it is recognized that Tradition admits, at least implicitly, the
existence of an intermediate condition that is neither ‘inside’ nor
‘outside’ the Church, the way has been opened logically for the more
recent doctrinal development – legitimate (we would argue) and in
substantial continuity with Tradition – which allows us to assign not
only catechumens, but certain other non-members of the Church as well,
to this theological locality we are calling the ‘portico’ of the Church.
In short, the seed that has grown into Vatican II’s category of persons
in “partial communion” with the Church had already been sown quietly at
Florence.</p>
<p>Our analysis has also shown that there are two <i>sufficient</i> conditions for being <i>extra Ecclesiam</i>: <b>1)</b> a lack (whether culpable or inculpable) of supernatural faith; and <b>2)</b>
an explicit and culpable will not to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.
(Each of these two dispositions can exist either independently or
together with the other.) Also, we have seen that there is one (and only
one) <i>necessary</i> condition for being <i>extra Ecclesiam</i>,
namely, lack of supernatural charity. A logically equivalent way of
stating these conclusions is to say that all who are outside the Church
lack charity, while all who lack theological faith, along with all
schismatics who retain faith while culpably refusing subjection to the
Roman Pontiff, are outside the Church.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref37">37</a></b></small></sup> </p>
<p>It is worth remarking, finally, that the foregoing discussion helps
us to see that being truly separated from the Church of Christ – being
outside her in the sense that excludes from salvation – is essentially
an <i>inner spiritual condition</i> (though of course it can be
outwardly manifested with words and deeds). It’s not something that any
sociologist can easily and reliably discover empirically, using a simple
yes-or-no question in an opinion poll. (“Excuse me, Sir/Ma’am: Are you a
Roman Catholic?”) For some who answer ‘Yes’, even without consciously
lying, will in God’s sight and in objective reality be outside the
Church, namely, those who have lost supernatural faith, or who refuse to
allow papal authority any impact on their own behavior, but who still
identify to some extent with Catholicism for merely natural reasons
(social convenience, family or cultural tradition, nostalgia, etc.).
Conversely, some of those who truthfully answer ‘No’ to our opinion poll
question will not really be outside the Catholic Church. Some of these
explicit nay-sayers, unbeknown to themselves, will actually be <i>in porticu Ecclesiae</i> rather than <i>extra Ecclesiam.</i></p>
<center><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/5962985019203888701/1800577718761664902">[link to part 2]</a><br /></center>
<hr />
<h2>Endnotes</h2>
<p><a name="_ftn1">1</a> Although approved by Pope Pius XII, the <i>Letter</i> was never published in the <i>Acta Apostolicae Sedis</i>.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn2">2</a> Cf. note 19 to <i>Lumen Gentium</i>, 16. This 1949 Holy Office <i>Letter</i> is also referenced in no. 847 of the <i>Catechism of the Catholic Church.</i></p>
<p><a name="_ftn3">3</a> Cf. Denzinger (Dz) 2290, found in the more recent Denzinger-Schönmetzer (DS) as no. 3821.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn4">4</a> Cf. DS 3869-3872. This Holy Office <i>Letter</i> is not included in any earlier edition of Denzinger.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn5">5</a>
Fr. Feeney’s position eventually became still more rigorous than that
for which he was censured by Rome in 1949. From 1952 until his death he
no longer held that “baptism of desire” could be sufficient for
salvation, even in the case of a catechumen who dies during preparation
for sacramental baptism with an explicit desire and intention to join
the Roman Catholic Church. As regards “baptism of blood” – the violent
death of a catechumen who voluntarily sacrifices his life for love of
Christ and the faith during persecution – Feeney and his followers do
not exactly deny that this would be sufficient for salvation. Rather,
they deny that such a thing has ever happened <i>in fact</i>, or ever <i>could</i>
happen. They argue that God’s Providence will infallibly see to it that
any catechumen with such heroic faith and charity will always receive
the waters of baptism prior to being slain by the persecutor. This of
course requires them to explain away all testimonies of catechumens
being martyred before baptism as historically unreliable, and in fact
false. In the case of Fr. Feeney himself, this post-1952 severity
regarding baptism – cf. (a) in our main text above – was held as a
personal opinion, which he said he would be prepared to renounce if the
Church expressly passed judgment against it. He consistently maintained,
however, that the denial of requirement (b) above is heresy.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn6">6</a> Cf., for instance, Thomas A. Hutchinson, <i>Desire and Deception: Is the Church Necessary</i>? (Arcadia, CA: Charlemagne Press, 1994); Fr. François Laisney, <i>Is Feeneyism Catholic? The Catholic Meaning of the Dogma ”Outside the Church There Is No Salvation”</i> (Kansas City, MO: Angelus Press, 2001); Bro. Robert Mary, M.I.C.M Tert., <i>Father Feeney and the Truth About Salvation: a Critique of His Critics</i> (Richmond, NH: Saint Benedict Center, 1995).</p>
<p><a name="_ftn7">7</a> The word <i>traditionalist</i>
is being used here, in accordance with its usual contemporary sense, to
designate those believers who are distinguished from other Catholics by
their dissatisfaction with official, as well as unauthorized, changes
introduced into the Church as a result of Vatican Council II, and in
particular, by their marked preference for the traditional Latin Mass
(now called the “extraordinary form” or <i>usus antiquior</i>, of the Roman Rite) over the post-conciliar reformed Roman liturgy (the “ordinary form” or <i>novus ordo</i>).</p>
<p><a name="_ftn8">8</a>
Pope John Paul II, in an authoritative statement that is more
explicitly ‘anti-Feeney’ than those found in either the Catechism or the
conciliar texts, teaches in the Encyclical <i>Redemptoris Missio</i>
that salvation “is not granted only to those who explicitly believe in
Christ and have entered the Church” (art. 10). While this clearly
contradicts both of the propositions <b>(a)</b> and <b>(b)</b> in bold
type above, it does not contradict the following shorter proposition:
“Salvation is granted only to those who explicitly believe in Christ”.
While the latter thesis has also been very much out of favor in recent
times, it expresses the view of nearly all the Fathers, St. Thomas
Aquinas, many other approved theologians over the centuries, and (both
last and least) the present writer. It is compatible with John Paul II’s
assertion in <i>RM</i>, 10, because the falsity of proposition <b>P</b>, “Only those who fulfill conditions A <b>and</b> B are saved”, does not imply the falsity of <b>P<sup><small>1</small></sup></b>, “Only those who fulfill condition A are saved”. For the falsity of <b>P</b>
might be due exclusively to its being mistaken in asserting that one
must always fulfill B in order to be saved – something which <b>P<sup><small>1 </small></sup></b>does not assert. </p>
<p><a name="_ftn9">9</a> <i>Lumen Gentium</i> states that in assessing the weight or binding force of statements made even by the Roman Pontiff when he is not speaking <i>ex cathedra</i>,
we must, in order to discern correctly his “mind and intention”, take
into account such factors as “the character of the documents in
question, . . . the frequency with which a certain doctrine is proposed,
[and] the manner in which the doctrine is formulated” (art. 25).</p>
<p><a name="_ftn10">10</a> In the Apostolic Constitution <i>Fidei Depositum</i>, John Paul II declares the <i>Catechism</i> to be a "<i>firma regula</i>" for teaching the faith (<i>Catechismus Catholicae Ecclesiae</i>, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1997, p.5). The standard English version translates <i>firmam regulam</i>
as “a sure norm”. But “sure” is virtually synonymous with “certain”,
which in turn suggests infallibility or a 100% guarantee of always being
right. Neither classical nor ecclesiastical Latin dictionaries give
“sure” or “certain” as one of the meanings of <i>firmus</i>. A less
‘absolute’ adjective such as “reliable” or “trustworthy” would be a
better translation, since that would leave room for the possibility of
there being a few debatable or questionable statements among the <i>Catechism’s</i> 2865 articles. In his little book <i>Introduction to the Catechism of the Catholic Church</i>, then-Cardinal
Joseph Ratzinger considered the question of the CCC’s doctrinal
authority and pointed out that, as an essentially pastoral document – a
compendium of <i>already-existing</i> Catholic doctrine – it does not
have the inherent authority to hand down new magisterial judgments:
"The individual doctrines which the Catechism presents receive no other
weight than that which they already possess" (p. 26). It follows that
any doctrinally <i>novel</i> affirmation that may be found in the <i>CCC</i>
(such as the statement in #1261 encouraging us to hope for the
salvation of infants who die without baptism) should not be seen as a
new intervention of the authentic magisterium that would require the
assent of all Catholics.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn11">11</a> “<i>[Sacrosancta
Romana Ecclesia] firmiter credit, profitetur et praedicat, ‘nullos
extra catholicam Ecclesiam exsistentes, non solum paganos’, sed nec
Iudaeos aut haereticos atque schismaticos, aeternae vitae fieri posse
participles; sed in ignem aeternum ituros, ‘qui paratus est diabolo et
angelis eius’ [Mt 25: 41], nisi ante finem vitae eidem fuerint aggregati</i>” (Dz 714 = DS 1351). A footnote in Denzinger indicates that Council is citing the above words “<i>nullos . . . paganos</i>” from a work by St. Fulgentius of Ruspe, a 6th-century North African Father of the Church.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn12">12</a> Dz 1818 = DS 3043.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn13">13</a> “Pagans” were evidently understood here to include Muslims, according to common 15th-century Christian terminology. </p>
<p><a name="_ftn14">14</a> Cf. note 8 above.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn15">15</a> Briefly, my position is not that the <i>implicit</i>
faith in the Savior which sufficed for salvation before the coming of
Christ suddenly lost this saving efficacy after his coming. Rather, I
would argue that after the promulgation of the Gospel at Pentecost,
implicit faith simply became extinct. That is, God no longer infuses the
theological virtue of faith – a supernatural gift that goes beyond a
merely natural knowledge of God – in a form that produces merely
implicit acts of faith in the Redeemer. Rather, every act of theological
faith is now an explicit and conscious act of faith in Jesus Christ.
(Cf. Jn 17: 3: “This is eternal life: to <i>know</i> you, the only true God, <i>and Jesus Christ</i>
whom you have sent.”) I do not see how the contrary thesis can honestly
be reconciled with the infallible Florentine teaching that <i>all</i> pagans and Jews are outside the Church and so are damned if they die as pagans and Jews. For if <i>some</i>
of them had an implicit supernatural faith in Christ despite their
explicit adherence to a non-Christian religion or philosophy, it would
simply not be true to classify <i>all</i> of them as being outside the
Church. But (it will be objected) does this not imply, intolerably, the
certain damnation of all the countless millions of unevangelized people
round the world who have lived and died after Pentecost, but before
missionaries reached their lands? No, it does not imply that. Modern
clinical observations and countless recent testimonies of ‘near-death
experiences’ are teaching us that people can appear to bystanders to be
totally unconscious or even dead (with zero brain activity registering
on hospital instruments) while in fact they were in fact consciously
undergoing very vivid and sometimes life-changing experiences. Such
evidence is a remarkable reminder that Almighty God is perfectly
capable, in a dying person’s last moments, of bestowing upon him/her
graces and illumination that enable a saving act of explicit and
repentant Christian faith (‘baptism of desire’) that may well be
completely undetectable to bystanders at the deathbed. This should not
be confused, of course, with the idea of “deathbed conversions” on the
part of religiously indifferent loose-livers who have knowingly but
carelessly been living gravely sinful lives. Sound spiritual writers
have long warned us that the true last-minute repentance of such
habitually immoral and presumptuous souls is an extraordinary grace that
is probably quite rare. Rather, we are talking here principally about
persons who have hitherto been in invincible ignorance of Gospel truth,
but who have persevered to the end in striving to seek truth and follow
the natural law in accord with their own conscience (cf. Rom. 2: 14-16).
Even before receiving faith and justification, such persons will have
been “not far from the kingdom of God” (Mk 12: 34).</p>
<p><a name="_ftn16">16</a>
Nevertheless, a certain nuance is needed here. My understanding is
that Fr. Feeney and his followers would exempt from the second part of
requirement <b>(b)</b> – the need for personal submission to the Roman
Pontiff – not only children who die before attaining a sufficient use of
reason, but also such older persons as might die before having had a
chance to learn enough about the existence and claims of the Roman
Pontiff to be capable of making any conscious and responsible decision
either to comply with those claims or to reject them. To take an
obvious example, I am sure that no follower of Fr. Feeney would claim
that the defectively catechized slaves baptized by St. Peter Claver
would all go to Hell for failing to recognize papal authority. We read
that this holy priest, zealous for the salvation of the many captives
constantly arriving from Africa at the port of Carthagena, would usually
have time only to give these wretched folk rudimentary catechesis about
the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Savior’s redemptive death and
resurrection. If they indicated belief in these basics of the Gospel and
showed repentance from sin, he would then baptize them. But they would
then usually be sold off and taken away from the port before there was
time for any further catechesis. (See also Part B, section III, 6, over
note 31.) Allowing for the salvation of St. Peter Claver’s slave
converts, however, logically raises the question, for Fr. Feeney’s
supporters, as to whether another similarly situated slave, catechized
identically and validly baptized by, say, a Methodist or Lutheran rather
than a Catholic missionary, could also be saved? It would surely be
implausible to say that, of two people who die with identical spiritual
dispositions, one will go to Heaven and the other to Hell just because
the latter had the misfortune to be evangelized and baptized by the
‘wrong’ sort of missionary. But if Fr. Feeney’s disciple concedes that
both slaves go to Heaven, he thereby also concedes in principle that
some adults can be saved who (using words in their normal, accepted
sense) die as Methodist or Lutheran Christians rather than Roman
Catholics. </p>
<p><a name="_ftn17">17</a> “<i>Quandoquidem
ut quis aeternam obtineat salutem, non semper exigitur, ut reapse
Ecclesiae tamquam membrum incorporetur, sed id saltem requiritur, ut
eidem voto et desiderio adhaereat. Hoc tamen votum non semper explicitum
sit oportet, prout accidit in catechumenis, sed ubi homo invincibili
ignorantia laborat, Deus quoque implicitum votum acceptat, tali nomine
nuncupatum, quia illud in ea bona animae dispositione continetur, qua
homo voluntatem suam Dei voluntati conformem velit</i>” (DS 3870). </p>
<p><a name="_ftn18">18</a>
This writer has, however, read a theological proposal to ‘develop’
(reinterpret?) the concept of “salvation” itself by broadening it to
include the natural happiness of Limbo. It is argued that this would
enable us to harmonize the new <i>Catechism</i>’s allowance of hope for the “salvation” of unbaptized infants (cf. <i>CCC</i>,
#1261) with the traditional Catholic doctrine that they are certainly
excluded from the beatific vision. We would then, in effect, have a
kind of division into first- and second-class salvation. The main
trouble with this proposed solution to the problem in question is that
the Council of Florence has defined that the souls of those dying with
original sin only (souls which could only be those of unbaptized
infants), also “go down <i>to Hell</i>”: “<i>Diffinimus . . . Illorum autem animas, qui in actuali peccato mortali <b>vel solo originali decedunt, mox in infernum descendere</b></i>
(Dz 691, 693 = DS 1302, 1306, emphasis added). And it would seem
confusing, and possibly unorthodox, to try to redefine Limbo,
traditionally understood to be the ‘edge’ or ‘border’ of Hell, as being
in effect the ‘edge’ or ‘border’ of Heaven. Indeed, this proposed
development of doctrine would involve the strange-sounding claim that
one can attain “salvation” and be in “Hell” at the same time.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn19">19</a>
I shall avoid in the rest of this essay the pejorative terms
“Feeneyism” and “Feeneyite” for those who subscribe to the Saint
Benedict Center doctrinal thesis summarized in bold type in the
Introduction and in section I above. For such labels are of course as
annoying to those with whom I wish to be in dialogue here as the label
“Lefebvrist” is to those of the Society of St. Pius X and their
supporters.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn20">20</a> Bro. Robert Mary, <i>op.cit</i>., p. 219 (emphasis added). (See note 6 above for first reference.)</p>
<p><a name="_ftn21">21</a>
All Catholics are agreed that in Heaven there are now many saints – at
the very least, those righteous souls who lived and died before the
promulgation of the New Law of Christ at Pentecost – who were never
baptized.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn22">22</a> “<i>In
Ecclesiae autem membris reapse ii soli annumerandi sunt, qui
regenerationis lavacrum receperunt veramque fidem profitentur, neque a
Corporis compage semet ipsos misere separarunt, vel ob gravissima
admissa a legitima auctoritate seiuncti sunt</i>” (Dz 2286 = DS 3802).</p>
<p><a name="_ftn23">23</a> Cited in Robert Mary, <i>op. cit</i>., p. 145.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn24">24</a> <i>Ibid.</i></p>
<p><a name="_ftn25">25</a> <i>Lumen Gentium</i>, 14 (emphasis added).</p>
<p><a name="_ftn26">26</a>
Some theologically naïve traditionalists claim that ‘baptism of blood’
for catechumens is actually ruled out by the same paragraph of the
Florentine profession of faith when it affirms that even those “who shed
their blood for Christ” will not be saved if they die outside the unity
of the one Church. But of course, this claim begs the very question at
issue, namely, whether catechumens <i>are in fact</i> “outside the
Church”. It is clear from the literary context, and from the safe
assumption that the Fathers of Florence accepted the centuries-old
Catholic consensus in favor of baptism of blood, that those they refer
to here are not <i>catechumens</i> who are killed out of hatred for Christ, but <i>schismatics and heretics</i>
who are killed for that reason. For if the latter sacrifice their lives
without contrition for their culpable rejection of Catholic faith
and/or unity, their apparently laudable and salvific death will in
reality be motivated by pride or some other merely natural motive,
rather than supernatural charity. While we might think that such a
scenario seems psychologically improbable, its possibility in principle
is recognized by St. Paul, whose words the Florentine Fathers no doubt
had in mind here: “And if I should distribute all my goods to feed the
poor, and if I should deliver my body to be burned, and have not
charity, it profiteth me nothing” (I Cor. 13: 3).</p>
<p><a name="_ftn27">27</a> Cf. Epistle <i>Apostolicam Sedem</i> (c. 1140), Dz 388 = DS 741).</p>
<p><a name="_ftn28">28</a> Cf. Epistle <i>Debitum Officii Pontificalis</i>, August 28, 1206 (Dz 413 = DS 788).</p>
<p><a name="_ftn29">29</a> Part II, Ch. II, Q. 35. The <i>Catechism</i>
here implicitly rejects Fr. Feeney’s post-1952 reading of Trent, to
wit, his subtle but implausible view that while the Council undeniably
allows a desire for baptism to be sufficient for <i>justification</i>, it does not allow that such desire can suffice for <i>eternal salvation</i>.
He claimed that if a catechumen dies before baptism, that very fact
should be seen as evidence that, while he may at an earlier stage have
been justified (in the state of grace) through his desire for the
sacrament, he certainly lost that grace by committing some new mortal
sin which remained unrepented at death. It is true that the <i>Catechism</i>
here speaks of the intention to receive baptism as sufficient for
“grace and justification”, rather than for “salvation”; but the authors
are clearly taking it for granted that the catechumen’s state of grace
can last until death even without his ever receiving the sacrament. For
the “sudden accident” they speak of – one which renders reception of the
sacrament “impossible” – is obviously a <i>fatal</i> accident. And if
they had agreed with Fr. Feeney’s position, they would plainly not have
been teaching – as they do here – that the baptism of catechumens is a
less urgent matter than that of infants.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn30">30</a>
Often heard coming from Fr. Feeney’s more theologically deficient
disciples is an appeal to the Council of Trent’s fifth canon on baptism,
which they mistakenly think teaches that the desire for baptism can
never be sufficient for salvation. The canon asserts, “If anyone shall
say that [sacramental] baptism is optional (<i>liberum</i>), that is,
not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema” (Dz 861 = DS 1618).
Such folks misunderstand this canon, neglecting the crucial word
“optional”. The canon anathematizes only those radical Protestants who
were saying that true (sacramental) baptism is not necessary for
salvation <i>in any sense at all</i>, not even by necessity of precept
(cf. Part B, note 49). In other words, the anathema is aimed only at the
Socinians and others who were saying that baptism is ‘free’ or
‘optional’ in the same way the sacrament of marriage is: i.e., that
each Christian has the right to choose freely whether to receive it or
not.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn31">31</a> Cf. Dz 1349 = DS 2380-2381. Cf. also note 16 above.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn32">32</a>
As we have noted (cf. note 5 above), Feeney from 1952 onward departed
further from common Church teaching by arguing against ‘baptism of
desire’. So from that time onward he would not have agreed with our
thesis (cf. #1 above) that being sacramentally unbaptized is not a
sufficient condition for being outside the Church.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn33">33</a>
In order to avoid possible confusion, it seems opportune to recall and
emphasize that the term “non-Catholic” is not being used here, and
should never be used, as a <i>synonym</i> for “one who is outside the
Catholic Church” in the theological sense intended by the Council of
Florence. Rather, we are using “non-Catholic” in that ‘sociological’ or
publicly verifiable sense in which the term is commonly understood today
by those of any religious belief or none, i.e., as designating a person
who <i>does not profess</i> to be a Roman Catholic, and who, therefore,
is not joined to the Church in any visible or empirically detectable
way. Clarity in the use of terms here is vital, because whether all
non-Catholics (as we have just defined them) <i>are in fact</i> “outside the Church” in the sense intended in the dogma “<i>extra Ecclesiam nulla salus</i>”
is precisely the central point at issue between Fr. Feeney and SBC
Catholics on the one hand, and recent explicit magisterial teaching on
the other.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn34">34</a> Cf. DS 3872.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn35">35</a> See also note 8 and the second paragraph of section I above. Saying that an implicit <i>desire for the Church</i> can be sufficient for salvation by no means implies that a implicit <i>faith in Christ</i>
is both possible and sufficient for salvation. If, as I would argue
(cf. note 15 above), God, since Pentecost, no longer enables any merely
implicit supernatural acts of faith in Christ, then the only implicit <i>desire for baptism</i> that suffices for salvation (cf. <i>Catechism of the Catholic Church</i>,
#1260) will be that of those who by the moment of death have reached
perfect contrition and an explicit faith in Christ, but are still
inculpably ignorant of our Lord’s’ command that his followers be
baptized.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn36">36</a> <i>Lumen Gentium</i> #14 (emphasis added), quoted in <i>Catechism of the Catholic Church</i>, #846, under the heading “Outside the Church there is no salvation”.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn37">37</a>
Apart from these, the only persons truly outside the Church will be
those who retain both supernatural faith and a habitual will to remain
subject to the Pope, but who have committed with full imputability one
or more sins punished by the Church with excommunication, and have
neither been validly absolved of these offences in the confessional nor
have repented of them extra-sacramentally with perfect contrition. Every
other human being will be either <i>intra Ecclesiam</i> or <i>in porticu Ecclesiae.</i></p><br /></div><div class="content">
</div>
<div>
</div>
</div>
CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-18005777187616649022021-05-02T15:12:00.017-07:002021-05-04T09:38:33.228-07:00Father Feeney and the Implicitum Votum Ecclesiae- (the implicit desire for the Church) Part 2
<div class="toolbar-container scrolled" id="toolbar">
</div><div class="container" dir="ltr" style="--line-height: 1.6em;"><div class="content"><div class="moz-reader-content reader-show-element"><div class="page" id="readability-page-1">by Fr. Brian W. Harrison OS<br />emeritus professor of theology at<br /> the Pontifical Catholic University of Puerto Rico <br /><a href="http://catholicvox.blogspot.com/2021/05/father-feeney-and-implicitum-votum_2.html" target="_blank">[link to part 1]</a><br /><p><b>Part B. Reading <i>Cantate Domino</i>, <i>Unam Sanctam</i>, and the 1949 <i>Letter</i><br />
in a Hermeneutic of Continuity</b></p>
<p><b>IV. Who are the “heretics” and “schismatics” Florence refers to?</b></p>
<p>In Part A of this essay we have elucidated and articulated more
precisely the principal point of conflict between the distinctive
Feeney-SBC thesis and the magisterium’s explicit teaching since the
1940s. Both sides agree that no one can be saved outside the Church; but
they are not in full agreement as to <i>what the conditions are</i> for being outside the Church. Specifically, <b>SBC affirms, and the contemporary magisterium denies (albeit implicitly), that all those with an explicit and conscious will <i>not</i> to be subject to the Roman Pontiff are outside the Church</b>
(cf. section IV, #7 above). Our remaining task in this study is one
which might look rather daunting: we need to show that the contemporary
magisterium’s position on this point does not contradict the relevant
infallible pronouncements of the Council of Florence and Pope Boniface
VIII. </p>
<p>Now, Fr. Feeney and his SBC followers would probably say that I am
trying to ‘square the circle’ here, so that my efforts to harmonize the
medieval magisterial statements with the 1949 <i>Letter</i> are
inevitably doomed to failure. Specifically, they would most likely claim
that I am hoist on my own petard in trying to defend the sufficiency
for salvation of an “implicit desire for the Church” in the hearts of
non-Catholic Christians – persons who by definition <i>explicitly refuse</i>
submission to the Roman Pontiff. For I have already admitted that we
can never, on pain of Vatican I’s anathema, give a new and different
meaning to the words of any Catholic dogma. But (my SBC critics are
likely to argue) the words “heretics” and “schismatics” in the
Florentine profession of faith were certainly understood by the
15th-century Fathers of that Council to include all separated Eastern
Christians as well as the pre-Reformation ‘Protestants’ of their day
(Hussites, Waldensians, Lollards, and other sectarians). There was no
benign ecumenical talk back then of such folks being our “separated
brethren”! Therefore (my critics will conclude) the Council of Florence,
in consigning to the eternal fire all those dying as “heretics” and
“schismatics”, included among these sons of perdition <i>all</i> persons who die professing membership in any non-Catholic community whatsoever, that is, all who die with an <i>explicit</i> will <i>not</i>
to be subject to the Roman Pontiff. If this conclusion is correct, the
very idea that a non-Catholic’s “implicit desire” for the Church could
be sufficient for his or her salvation is heretical. And that is
precisely the grave charge leveled boldly by Leonard Feeney at the 1949
Holy Office <i>Letter</i>.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref1">1</a></b></small></sup></p>
<p>To answer this objection, we must distinguish carefully between: <b>(a)</b> a judgment as to the definition of the word “heretic” (or “schismatic”); and <b>(b)</b> a judgment as to whether a particular person or group under consideration <i>comes under</i> that definition. Judgment <b>(a)</b> is about <i>what is meant</i> by the sins of heresy and schism respectively, and is, as such, <i>doctrinal</i> in character. But <b>(b)</b> is about <i>who</i>, among the individuals and groups we may be observing and assessing, should be judged (or at least presumed) <i>guilty</i>
of those sins. It is therefore not a doctrinal judgment, but rather, a
prudential judgment about a question of contingent fact. Now, in order
to comply with Vatican I’s insistence that the original meanings of
Catholic dogmas must always be retained, we need only retain the same
judgment <b>(a)</b> as was made by the Fathers of Florence. That is, we
must retain their own ‘job description’ of a heretic or a schismatic,
but not necessarily their practical, prudential judgment as to who in
fact fits that description.<br /><br /></p><span><a name='more'></a></span>
<p>So what <i>did</i> the Florentine Fathers understand by the term <i>heretic</i>?
Neither their document nor any other magisterial statement of that era
includes a formal definition of the word. But we can safely assume that
they, like most of their learned Catholic contemporaries, would have
wanted to follow the two authorities who at that time were generally
considered the greatest doctors of the Church: St. Augustine and St.
Thomas Aquinas. The latter teaches that heresy is the sin, springing
from a bad motive (“pride or covetousness”), of one who “intends to
assent to Christ” (i.e., wants to be a Christian), but who “corrupts
Christian faith” by adhering obstinately to his own false opinion on a
certain matter instead of accepting the real teaching of Christ proposed
by the Church.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref2">2</a></b></small></sup>
Equally important for our purposes, however, is the fact that Thomas
goes on to cite Augustine, in a passage later enshrined in the <i>Decretals</i>,
as an authority endorsing his own view that the simple fact of holding –
and even defending – a false doctrine is not sufficient to make one a
heretic, no matter how grievous the error may be; for it is precisely
the conscious, obstinate and presumptuous pitting of one’s own doctrinal
judgment against that of the authority established by Christ that
constitutes this sin:</p>
<div><p>As Augustine says (Ep. xliii), and we find it stated in the <i>Decretals</i> (<i>xxiv</i>, qu. 3, can. <i>Dixit Apostolus</i>),
“By no means should we accuse of heresy those who, however false and
perverse their opinion may be, defend it without obstinate fervor, and
seek the truth with careful anxiety, ready to mend their opinion when
they have found the truth”, because, to wit, they do not make a choice
in contradiction to the doctrine of the Church.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref3">3</a></b></small></sup> </p></div>
<p>Now, is it really plausible today to assert or presume that, of all
the hundreds of millions of professing Orthodox, Anglican, Protestant
and other non-Catholic Christians around the world, there are <i>none</i> who hold and defend their erroneous beliefs “without obstinate fervor”? <i>None</i>
who “seek the truth with careful anxiety, ready to mend their opinion
when they have found the truth”? But the moment we admit there <i>are</i> such sincere truth-seekers among their ranks, we are admitting they are <i>not</i>
“heretics” in the sense we must presume the Fathers of Florence gave to
that word. Similar considerations will apply in determining what they
meant by “schismatics”. For St. Thomas (again, relying on the authority
of Augustine) emphasizes that the sin of schism consists in a
“rebellious” act, by which one “<i>obstinately scorns</i> the commandments of the Church and refuses to submit to her judgment”.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref4">4</a></b></small></sup> The <i>Catechism of the Council of Trent</i>,
which in the next century simply resumed the centuries-long ordinary
magisterial teaching which we must assume was also that of the
Florentine Fathers, also stresses <i>rebelliousness</i> against <i>known</i>
authority as an essential element in both schism and heresy. It does so
with a striking military analogy: among those “excluded from the pale
of the Church,” says the <i>Catechism</i>, are “heretics and
schismatics, because they have severed themselves from the Church, nor
do they belong to the Church any more than deserters belong to the army
from which they have deserted”.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref5">5</a></b></small></sup>
But how realistic is it to classify those Protestant, Anglican or
separated Eastern Christians who have never in their life been <i>aware</i>
of the Catholic Church’s God-given authority, much less actively served
under her banner, as having “severed themselves” from the Church,
thereby becoming ‘deserters’ from her ranks?</p>
<p>At this point, however, our SBC friends may insist that this
unawareness doesn’t get these non-Catholics off the hook. They will
point out that in the very passage of the <i>Summa</i> wherein St
Thomas, citing Augustine, accepts that not all who hold and defend
heretical doctrines are really heretics, the Angelic Doctor is quick to
add that “if anyone were to obstinately deny [such doctrines] <i>after they had been defined by the authority of the universal Church</i> – an authority which resides chiefly in the Sovereign Pontiff – he would be deemed a heretic”.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref6">6</a></b></small></sup> “But this,” my critics will argue, “is precisely what all Protestants and other non-Catholic Christians in fact <i>do</i>!
They know very well there is a Pope in Rome who expects his teaching to
be obeyed; but they simply do not accept his authority to teach <i>them</i>,
and so obstinately continue to deny or doubt many things that popes
have defined to be true. So all Protestants do qualify as heretics
according to St. Thomas’ criteria (which Harrison is attributing,
reasonably enough, to the Fathers of Florence). The only baptized people
holding opinions contrary to revealed truth who do <i>not</i> qualify as heretics are therefore sincerely mistaken <i>Catholics</i>, that is, believers who already accept with docility the teaching <i>authority</i> of the Pope, and so are ready to correct their views once they realize these have been ruled out by the Holy Father.” </p>
<p>Now, this looks at first sight like a pretty powerful objection. And
we must admit that it has been found persuasive not just by Fr. Feeney
and his disciples, but by many other Catholics, including saints and
approved theologians, prior to the twentieth century. “Feeneyism”
scarcely began with Father Feeney! And it seems to have been strongly
insinuated in the canon law of Holy Mother Church herself, who for
centuries (right up till 1983, in fact) <i>called</i> all non-Catholic Christians “heretics” or “schismatics”, and treated them as such in her legislation.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref7">7</a></b></small></sup> </p>
<p>However, the objection can be answered – and the modern magisterium
thus defended from the charge of heresy – by taking into account the
distinction we mentioned above between the two kinds of judgment made by
Aquinas and the Fathers of Florence: the doctrinal judgment <b>(a)</b> as to the definition of “heretic” and “schismatic”, and the prudential judgment of fact <b>(b)</b>
as to who fitted that definition. I concede that the said medieval
Church authorities probably did regard all adult members of non-Catholic
communities as true heretics and schismatics, and as therefore being <i>extra Ecclesiam</i> and on the road to perdition. But I insist at the same time that since this was a <b>(b)</b>-type judgment on their part, we can disagree with it – especially in trying to assess the status of <i>today’s</i> non-Catholics – without falling foul of Vatican I’s anathema against changing the original meaning of any Catholic dogma.</p>
<p>In fact, it is not too difficult to understand why those mediaeval
Church authorities were more ready than most of us are today to discern
sinful “obstinacy” and “rebelliousness” – and, therefore, true heresy
and schism – in the attitude of baptized non-Catholics as such. For the
authority of the Catholic Church (and thus, of the Pope) to settle
religious disputes was, during those “Ages of Faith”, such a huge,
central, and fundamental feature of the whole prevailing world-view and
culture that it must have seemed – and perhaps in reality was –
difficult for anyone baptized and raised in such a culture to cast off
that authority in completely good faith. It must have seemed – and
perhaps was – reasonable to assume that any such dissident would hear
deep-down murmurings of conscience accusing him of sinful pride and
rebelliousness in pitting his own judgment against the august authority
that the whole surrounding culture sternly and constantly reminded him
was the voice of God on earth. </p>
<p>After all, rejecting papal authority in favor of one’s own individual
judgment was a perfect recipe for religious anarchy. And in medieval
Christendom it was much easier to see that fact – and also to see that
such anarchy is thoroughly undesirable – than it is in modern Western
society. Desensitized after several centuries spent under a
socio-political umbrella that shelters multiple coexistent Christian
denominations, we have now, as a society, baptized this chaotic anarchy
with the bland name of “religious pluralism”, and have come to see it as
an instance of normal and healthy progress, rather than of pathological
decline from the revealed norm of a Catholic polity that recognizes the
kingship of Christ. (After all, isn’t such ‘pluralism’ a cornerstone of
democracy and a guarantee of individual liberty?) Those of us who are
converts to the faith<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref8">8</a></b></small></sup>
can testify from experience that for modern Protestants right across
the liberal-evangelical-fundamentalist spectrum, the co-existence of
many Christian denominations or “churches”, while theoretically
acknowledged as falling short of the biblical ideal of Christian unity,
is for practical purposes taken for granted as something normal, natural
and inevitable – pretty much like the co-existence of many different
countries, languages, styles of music, or ice cream flavors. From that
perspective it is precisely “Rome” that appears as the renegade – the
black sheep in the Christian fold – by virtue of her “arrogant” claim to
be the one and only true Church. </p>
<p>And let us recall the full radicality of this Protestant critique. It
is not that the Southern Baptists (let us say) object to the aforesaid
claim simply because they consider their own denomination, rather than
“Rome”, to be the one true Church. That would basically be the same kind
of objection that many claimants to this or that national throne have
made over the centuries against rival claimants: “It is not you, but I,
who am the rightful king!” No, the Protestant position cuts much deeper.
It is like objecting to someone’s claim to the throne of England on the
grounds that <i>no such throne exists</i>! It’s like protesting that anyone at all who claims to be England’s rightful ruler is <i>ipso facto</i>
an impostor and potential tyrant whose pretensions must be firmly
resisted! For the common position now shared by Protestants is precisely
that <i>no</i> single Christian denomination may claim to be <i>the</i>
Church founded by Christ, and, therefore, that no leader of any one
denomination may dare claim the authority to make doctrinal or governing
decisions that bind all Christians. Rather, it is said, each
denomination should respectfully recognize many (or even all) of the
others as being true, that is, real, “churches”, and so limit itself to
making the modest claim of being <i>preferable</i> to the others in one
way or another – for instance, by virtue of possessing what it believes
is a better understanding of Scripture. In other words, the different
organized “churches”, according to this ecclesiology, are seen as being
in this respect pretty much like banks, schools, cars, brands of
toothpaste, or any other sorts of commodities and services. It is
considered legitimate to promote one or other as being of <i>better quality</i>
than the rest; but just as it would be outrageous and beyond the pale
for Wells Fargo to claim seriously that none of its competitors is truly
a bank, or for General Motors to claim that nobody else makes real
automobiles, or for Colgate ads to proclaim that what you’ll get in
tubes of other brands is not just inferior toothpaste but <i>fake</i>
toothpaste – so Protestants right across the liberal-conservative
spectrum consider it theologically outrageous and beyond the pale for
any single Christian denomination (read: Roman Catholicism) to claim
that it is the one and only real Church.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref9">9</a></b></small></sup> </p>
<p>Now, pre-Reformation churchmen like Aquinas and the Fathers of
Florence would have seen this sort of pluralistic, ‘multi-church’
ecclesiology not only as manifest heresy, but as something approaching
lunacy. For they saw what should always be obvious to Christians (but
now, sadly, is not), namely, that denying the existence of <i>any</i>
earthly authority empowered to make final and binding decisions for the
one Church of Christ (including interpretations of Scripture) was just
as plainly a recipe for religious anarchy as denying the existence of
England’s throne would have been for civil anarchy. To help us
appreciate how natural it was for our medieval Catholic forebears to be
highly skeptical that any Christian could in good conscience reject
papal authority altogether, we need only reflect on how skeptical we
ourselves would be about the sincerity of anyone who today claimed
‘conscientious objection’ against one of the authorities that our
society still believes are legitimate and necessary. For instance, who
among us would take seriously a baseball player or cricketer who, not
content to lodge a complaint about some particular decision of an
umpire, boldly proclaimed his “sincere belief” that <i>no</i> umpire’s decision should <i>ever</i>
be binding, since it is (in his opinion) “presumptuous” for any one man
ever to try and “impose” his own judgment on the players in the field?
And would we not all roll our eyes dismissively at any man who
“sincerely” insisted not just that the latest Supreme Court decision is
in his opinion unjust, but that <i>no</i> court in the nation should be
considered ‘supreme’ over others, or be so “arrogant” and “autocratic”
as to claim the final and binding word in any legal dispute?</p>
<p>In short, the medieval European situation was one in which it seemed
obvious to just about everybody that there was, and could only ever be,
one single and visibly organized Church of Christ. So it seemed equally
obvious that no Christian could reasonably expect to be regarded as
sincere and in good conscience if he challenged in its entirety the
authority of the Roman Pontiff, the only possible guarantor of the
Church’s visible unity. </p>
<p>Today, however, the social and cultural situation in the former
Christendom is radically different. As we have noted above, centuries of
increasing religious pluralism have made it entirely credible – indeed,
morally certain – that there are indeed many non-Catholic Christians
(believers, on God’s authority, in at least the Trinity and Incarnation)
whose doctrinal errors and separation from the Church’s unity are <i>not</i>
due to a sinfully proud, scornful, obstinate, or rebellious attitude.
Therefore, good-willed modern non-Catholics of this sort do not fit the
Council of Florence’s ‘job description’ of heretics and schismatics. But
that in turn means the Council has abstained from teaching that such
folks are <i>extra Ecclesiam</i>. On the other hand, not being <i>members</i> of the Church, neither are they <i>intra Ecclesiam</i>.
So it makes sense to see them as being in that same kind of ‘portico’
situation – neither inside nor outside – in which the Florentine Fathers
were already tacitly locating catechumens. In the light of these
considerations, we can see as a harmonious development of the Florentine
teaching, not as a contradiction of it, the Church’s recent
recognition, in magisterial statements beginning in the 1940s, that even
some who explicitly <i>deny</i> papal authority can nevertheless be linked to the Church by an <i>unconscious</i> or <i>implicit</i> desire which is sufficient for their salvation.</p>
<p><b>V. Pope Boniface VIII on submission to the Roman Pontiff</b></p>
<p>Finally, we need to consider whether the 1949 Holy Office <i>Letter</i> and other relevant statements of the modern magisterium are also compatible with Boniface VIII’s <i>ex cathedra</i> teaching in the Bull <i>Unam Sanctam</i> (<i>US</i>) of 1302. I accept that <i>US</i>,
like any magisterial document dealing with human behavior, must indeed
be interpreted literally – for such documents do not belong to any kind
of poetic, fictional or ‘symbolic’ literary genre – and also that it may
not be given a sense different from that which Boniface himself
intended. But I do not agree with Fr Feeney and the SBC that a literal
reading of <i>US</i>, any more than of <i>Cantate Domino</i>, requires
us to see all non-Catholic Christians as being outside the Church and on
the road to Hell. Its true literal meaning may not be obvious at a
first and superficial reading, especially if the reader fails to take
into account the historical and literary context of the declaration. </p>
<p>What Boniface “declares, proclaims, and defines” is that “for every human creature (<i>omni humanae creaturae</i>), it is altogether necessary for salvation to be subject to the Roman Pontiff (<i>subesse Romano Pontifici . . . omnino esse de necessitate salutis</i>”).<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref10">10</a></b></small></sup> The relevant point for present purposes, I would argue, is that Pope Boniface himself is <i>intending</i> to include in his teaching the possibility of a merely implicit “subjection” or “submission” to the Roman Pontiff. </p>
<p>Let me elaborate. Boniface VIII was obviously aware that the
expression “every human creature” includes small children, who, as he
knew perfectly well, cannot yet know or will anything at all with
respect to the Roman Pontiff. However, if they are validly baptized, the
infused supernatural <i>habits</i> of faith and charity make these children <i>implicitly</i> and potentially subordinate to the Successor of Peter: they predispose such a child to consciously <i>act</i>
in obedience to all revealed precepts, including those concerning the
Pope, as soon as he or she can learn and understand the obligation to do
so. Moreover, since Boniface was presumably not following St. Cyprian’s
ancient error (rejected by the magisterium a thousand years earlier),
he would have accepted that even infants validly baptized in heretical
and schismatic communities are likewise implicitly subject/subordinate
to his authority as Peter’s Successor. In <i>Unam Sanctam</i> he does
not of course address the question of how long this implicit disposition
will last once the child born and baptized into these non-Catholic
communities reaches the age of reason. (When that moment arrives, the
child will certainly begin – as indeed will the children of <i>Catholic</i>
parents prior to being adequately catechized – in a state of inculpable
ignorance regarding his/her duty to obey the Pope in religious
matters.) </p>
<p>Now, since Boniface’s <i>ex cathedra</i> definition, literally and
correctly understood, already includes in principle the sufficiency for
salvation of a merely implicit subjection to the Pope, the way was left
open for the doctrinal development expressed in the twentieth-century
magisterial documents which allow for the possibility of this merely
implicit subjection on the part of adults as well as infants. For, as we
have already argued,<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref11">11</a></b></small></sup> there is not necessarily any relevant difference between children and adults in this respect.</p>
<p>A short personal testimony may serve to illustrate the point here. I
am a convert from Protestantism, brought up in a strongly Calvinist,
anti-Catholic family and social environment. In making my first
confession at age 26, prior to being received into the Church, I had
plenty to confess, but did not mention among my sins my previous lack of
subjection to the Roman Pontiff. That was because I was not conscious
before God of any culpability in that respect. Ever since early
adolescence I had had a basic knowledge of who the Pope was and of the
fact that he and his Church demanded the subjection of all Christians to
his authority. And so, as a young Presbyterian who had practically
never heard or read anything good about the Pope and his religion, I
certainly had at that stage a conscious, explicit and habitual will <i>not</i>
to be subject to his authority. But as soon as I became convinced,
after several years of intermittent reading and praying on this subject,
that I needed to subject myself to the Pope, and that failure to do so
would be mortally sinful disobedience to Christ himself, I took steps to
join the Catholic Church. I don’t believe I ever sinfully resisted the
Holy Spirit’s promptings during my journey of faith. For in my earlier
youth it simply never even crossed my radar screen that the papal
so-called ‘Antichrist’ – any more than Buddha or Krishna or Mohammed –
could possibly have any claim on my allegiance. I really think I was
then invincibly ignorant in that regard.</p>
<p>Finally, it is also worth noting the historical and literary context of the definition at the end of <i>US</i>, that is, of the Pope’s insistence on the “absolute” or “utter” necessity for salvation of this subjection (<i>omnino . . . de necessitate salutis</i>). Bearing in mind this context, we can discern that what the Pope has first and foremost in mind is the necessity <i>of precept</i> to that effect, even though his words could also extend to the idea of a necessity of <i>means</i> as regards an at least implicit subjection.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref12">12</a></b></small></sup>
The whole controversy with King Philip IV of France which prompted this
document arose from the king’s insistence that, as head of a Catholic
state, his will could justly prevail over that of the Pope in certain
matters involving the Church in his own country. Boniface affirms in the
second-last paragraph of <i>US</i>:</p>
<p>For this [papal] authority, although it is given to man and is
exercised by man, is not human, but rather divine, and has been given by
the divine Word to Peter himself and to his successors in Christ. The
Lord acknowledged Peter to be a firmly grounded rock, telling him
personally, “Whatsoever you shall bind”, etc. (Mt 16: 19). <i>Therefore whoever resists this power so ordained by God “resists the order of God Himself</i>”(<i>Rom</i>.
13: 2) unless, like a Manichaean, he pretends that there are two
origins – which We judge false and heretical, because, as Moses
testifies, God created heaven and earth “in the beginning”, not “in the
beginnings” (Gen. 1: 1)<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref13">13</a></b></small></sup> </p>
<p>In the light of this, and of the whole preceding controversy, it is apparent that what is uppermost in Boniface’s mind, in the <i>ex cathedra</i> definition that directly follows the above words, is to emphasize to Philip that he is under a <i>grave moral obligation to obey the Pope’s commands</i>,
i.e., he is under a ‘necessity of precept’ to do so, under pain of
losing salvation. For willful and obstinate resistance to the Roman
Pontiff, as God’s chief representative, is in effect resistance to God
Himself. And why is this particularly relevant to the present
discussion? Because while a just precept, like a just law, can <i>objectively</i>
oblige whole populations subject to the jurisdiction of the legislator,
so that no member thereof can justly claim a right to be <i>exempt</i> from the demands of that precept, it engenders a real <i>subjective</i> moral obligation of obedience for any given person or group in that population only when it has been <i>duly communicated</i> to that person or group. That is: <b>(a)</b> when these subjects recognize (or have no reasonable excuse for <i>not</i> recognizing) the legitimate jurisdiction over themselves of the commanding authority; and <b>(b)</b>
when they have been informed about the precept being imposed by said
authority and understand its content – or at least, have been given a
reasonable motivation and opportunity to learn and understand it. For of
course, one can never be morally blameworthy for failing to obey a
precept of divine or human positive law<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref14">14</a></b></small></sup> when one is invincibly ignorant of its legitimacy, existence, or content. </p>
<p>The relevance of this to our discussion should now be clear. For the
Catholic but insubordinate Philip was certainly not ‘invincibly
ignorant’ of the revealed truth regarding the Pope’s supreme
jurisdiction in ecclesiastical matters. On the contrary, the Pope
himself was personally hammering it home to him. Yet he was stubbornly
resisting Boniface’s injunction to stop violating the rights of the
Church in France. <i>That</i> is the kind of insubordination Boniface
was targeting as endangering eternal perdition, not a lack of (explicit)
subjection to the Roman Pontiff arising from invincible ignorance of
the divine authority given by Christ to Peter’s successors. Reading
between Pope Boniface’s <i>ex cathedra</i> lines, as it were, we can
almost hear him add a fuller explanation of what he meant: “Submission
to the Roman Pontiff is altogether necessary for salvation for every
human creature, <b><i>including</i></b> [thumping his fist] <b><i>Catholic kings and emperors! They’re not exempt!</i></b>” Actually, it is entirely possible that a necessity of precept is the <i>only</i> kind of “necessity for salvation” that Boniface VIII had in mind in <i>US</i>. However, even if he also meant to teach that submission to the pope is “absolutely necessary” as a <i>means</i> of salvation, his tacit acknowledgment that an <i>implicit</i>
submission could in some cases be sufficient to fulfill that necessity
is enough to guarantee the substantial continuity of his infallible
definition with the modern magisterial statements that might at first
seem incompatible with it.</p>
<p>The corollary of what has just been said is that we should <i>not</i> read between Pope Boniface’s lines, as Feeney/SBC theology seems to do, the following thesis: “<b><i>Conscious and explicit</i></b> submission to the Roman Pontiff is altogether necessary for salvation for every human creature, <b><i>including those adults who are invincibly ignorant of the Pontiff’s divinely bestowed authority! They’re not exempt!</i></b>”
Nothing, probably, was further from Boniface’s mind at that moment, in
the thick of his politico-religious duel with the French monarch, than
passing judgment on the spiritual state and destiny of people visibly
outside the Church’s structures who might be invincibly ignorant of the
Pope’s revealed role and privileges. We should always be very cautious
about reading into magisterial pronouncements answers to questions which
they did not intend to address. </p>
<p><b>Conclusion</b></p>
<p>I hope the reflections in this essay on <i>Cantate Domino</i> and <i>Unam Sanctam</i>
may help some of Father Feeney’s followers to see how these infallible
magisterial interventions can and should be interpreted in harmony with
the 1949 Holy Office <i>Letter</i>, which in turn has now been ‘upgraded’ by being referenced in <i>Lumen Gentium</i> and the <i>Catechism of the Catholic Church</i>.
Even if I have some success in this objective, however, I know from
previous friendly discussions with SBC leaders that they will still be
likely to insist that, even supposing the older and more recent
magisterial documents can theoretically be harmonized, there remains a
practical and pastoral urgency that <i>extra Ecclesiam nulla salus</i> be
taught loud and clear. And I think they are right. For whatever else may be said, one is entitled to be much more <i>confident</i>
of reaching Heaven when in possession of the fullness of revealed truth
and the sacramental means of grace. And it also remains true that there
is an absolute, objective and grave necessity <i>of precept</i>,
deriving from Christ’s expressed will for all his followers to be united
in the Church he founded, for all human beings to become Catholics.
Accordingly, the SBC, in fidelity to Fr. Feeney’s example, will no doubt
continue to insist on this precept at a time when indifferentism, and
an excessive emphasis on dialogue at the expense of conversion, are
endangering so many souls. </p>
<p>Rather than constantly taking the easy and guaranteed-non-offensive
option of blandly assuring non-Catholics that the Church today
recognizes their sincerity and good faith, and presumes (of course!)
that they are on the road to salvation in whatever religion they happen
to profess at present, I think we need rather more of the ‘up-front’
evangelistic approach which the SBC has inherited from Fr. Feeney. It’s
an approach reminiscent of those old World War I recruiting posters from
which an elderly gentleman in a starred-and-striped top hat eye-balls
the viewer head-on, and points a huge finger straight out at him over
the caption, “<b><i>Uncle Sam wants YOU!</i></b>” Perhaps we should be
communicating rather more directly to our Protestant, lapsed Catholic
and non-Christian brethren the unequivocal message that “<b><i>Jesus Christ wants YOU to be a Roman Catholic!</i></b>”
If we did so rather more boldly, I suspect that the spiritual fruits
would be very considerable, with a harvest of souls that would truly
give glory to God.<sup><small><b><a name="_ftnref15">15</a></b></small></sup>
Whatever Leonard Feeney’s theological and prudential mistakes may have
been, his enduring legacy will far outweigh them if it animates a new
generation of Catholics to proclaim that message “from the housetops”.<br /></p><p><a href="http://catholicvox.blogspot.com/2021/05/father-feeney-and-implicitum-votum_2.html" target="_blank">[link to part 1]</a><br /></p>
<hr />
<h2>Endnotes</h2>
<p><a name="_ftn1">1</a>
In spite of what most would consider persuasive evidence to the
contrary, Feeney could never bring himself to believe that this document
carried the personal endorsement of Pius XII. (This pope was himself
the head of the Holy Office.)</p>
<p><a name="_ftn2">2</a> Cf. <i>Summa Theologiae </i>(<i>ST</i>), IIa IIae, Q. 11, arts. 1 and 2.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn3">3</a> <i>ST</i>, IIa IIae, Q. 11, art. 2, ad 3 (emphasis added).</p>
<p><a name="_ftn4">4</a> <i>ST</i>, IIa IIae, Q. 39, art. 1, ad 2 (emphasis added).</p>
<p><a name="_ftn5">5</a> I, X, VIII.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn6">6</a> <i>ST</i>, IIa IIae, Q. 11, art. 2, ad 3 (emphasis added).</p>
<p><a name="_ftn7">7</a> In the 1917 <i>Code of Canon Law</i>, c. 2316 states that “one who participates in religious activities with heretics (<i>communicat in divinis cum haereticis</i>),
contrary to what is laid down in c. 1258, is suspect of heresy”. Canon
1258 in turn asserts, “The faithful are not permitted to attend or
participate in the religious acts of non-Catholics (<i>in sacris acatholicorum</i>) in any active way whatsoever.” It is thus clear that the <i>Code</i>
is applying the term “heretics” to non-Catholic Christians in general.
By the early twentieth century, of course, it was commonly presumed that
those born and raised in Protestant and other non-Catholic
denominations were in many or most cases only material, not formal,
heretics. And even in earlier centuries when such folks were more likely
to be deemed true (i.e., formal and culpable) heretics, this was still –
as is argued in the main text – a presumption about a matter of
contingent fact, not a doctrinal judgment as such.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn8">8</a>
I have the impression that nearly all who follow Fr. Feeney’s
understanding of ‘the salvation dogma’ – at least, nearly all the
prominent and articulate advocates of that position – are ‘cradle
Catholics’, as he was. The only well-known exception at present is the
former Presbyterian minister Gerry Matatics. But since he is an avowed
sedevacantist, our SBC brethren, far from recognizing Mr. Matatics as
‘one of their own’, would probably deem him <i>extra Ecclesiam</i> as a schismatic. My own understanding is that sedevacantists, in denying the papal <i>status</i>
of the post-conciliar occupants of the Vatican’s Apostolic Palace, are
certainly in material schism. For they openly and totally reject the
authority of the man who is in fact Peter’s Successor. But if at the
subjective level they are fully sincere in their denial, they would not
appear to be true (i.e., formal) schismatics. For you are guilty of
schism (and so put yourself <i>extra Ecclesiam</i>) only when you rebelliously withdraw your submission from the man <i>you yourself know</i> is Christ’s Vicar on earth. But in cases where said denial itself springs culpably from presumption and pride, and so is <i>not</i>
fully sincere, such sedevacantists will be true schismatics. To many of
us, it does indeed seem presumptuous and proud for a Catholic to
categorize all the men recently elected to the See of Peter as true
heretics, i.e., as obstinate dissenters from truths which <i>they know</i>
the Church proposes as divinely revealed. But only God, of course, can
judge their degree of guilt or innocence in that regard. On the other
hand, if we are talking about the status of sedevacantist communities as
such, rather than that of their individual members, it seems perfectly
correct to speak of them without scruple or qualification as
“schismatic”. For since a community, unlike an individual, has no
conscience that might be subjectively inculpable, what matters here is
the community’s objective and publicly professed relationship with the
man whom the world in general recognizes as being the head of the Roman
Catholic Church. (The more nuanced variety of sedevacantism that is now
often known as ‘sedeprivationism’ would need separate analysis. But that
would take us too far afield from the topic of the present essay.)</p>
<p><a name="_ftn9">9</a>
Some readers (at both the traditionalist and liberal ends of the
theological spectrum) will be sure to object at this point that the
Church of Vatican II no longer <i>claims</i> to be “the one and only real Church”. They will appeal above all, of course, to the endlessly discussed statement in <i>Lumen Gentium</i>
#8 that the Church founded by Jesus Christ “subsists in” (rather than
simply “is”) the Catholic Church under Peter’s successor. I mention this
‘anti-traditional’ interpretation of the said conciliar text mainly
just to acknowledge its existence and to register my disagreement with
it: for an adequate defense of a ‘hermeneutic of continuity’ in
understanding this text would require another full paper. However, we
may note briefly that the post-conciliar magisterium itself rejects this
claim of doctrinal discontinuity. In the Congregation for the Doctrine
of the Faith’s document, <a href="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070629_responsa-quaestiones_en.html">“<i>Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine of the Church</i>”</a> (June 29, 2007), the answer to Q. 2 includes the following statement: “In number 8 of the Dogmatic Constitution <i>Lumen gentium</i>
‘subsistence’ means this perduring, historical continuity and the
permanence of all the elements instituted by Christ in the Catholic
Church, in which the Church of Christ is concretely found on this
earth.” In other words, “subsists in” means essentially the same thing
as “is” – but within the historical and diachronic, rather than abstract
and synchronic, perspective that the context calls for. The Council can
be accurately paraphrased as saying in <i>LG</i> #8 that <i>the same
Church as was founded two thousand years ago continues to exist now,
with all the elements Christ gave to it, as the Catholic Church under
Peter’s successor.</i> (When Christ founded the Church, of course, it didn’t go by the <i>name</i>
“Catholic”, which we don’t find in documents dating before the early
second century; and Peter himself, rather than one of his successors,
was its earthly leader.) </p>
<p><a name="_ftn10">10</a> Dz 469 = DS 875.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn11">11</a> Cf. Part A, section III, #6 and #7, also note 16.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn12">12</a> Theologians distinguish between the concepts of <i>necessity of precept</i> and <i>necessity of means</i>.
The first refers to a moral “necessity” (that is, duty or obligation). I
am under a ‘necessity of precept’ to do something when a superior
authority (divine or human) lawfully <i>commands</i> me to do it. The second concept refers simply to what one needs as a means of attaining a certain end, and so is <i>per se</i>
morally neutral. For instance, we need a plane or ship by a ‘necessity
of means’ in order to cross the Atlantic. In that case the necessity is
absolute, because nobody can swim the Atlantic. However, there can be a
necessity of means that is relative, not absolute. For instance, one
normally needs to buy a ticket as a means of being admitted to a cinema
to watch a movie. But this necessity is not absolute, for if the owner
of the cinema is your friend he may let you in free. Catholic theology
regards sacramental baptism as being necessary for salvation by a
necessity of precept (it’s commanded by Christ) and also by a necessity
of means. But the latter necessity is only relative; for when the
sacrament is impossible before death, God will dispense from the need
for it in the case of those who are otherwise adequately disposed for
salvation.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn13">13</a> Dz 469 = DS 874, emphasis added.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn14">14</a> . . . as distinct from natural law, which of course does not include the obligation to be subordinate to the Roman Pontiff.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn15">15</a>
Once again, a corroborative personal testimony may be useful. During
the months of 1971-1972 when I was struggling, with much prayer, reading
and reflection, over the decision whether to enter the Church, more
than one well-meaning Catholic acquaintance, imbued with the new and
heady “spirit of Vatican II”, blandly advised me just to “follow my
conscience”. One even advised me to become an Anglican, since that, he
suggested, would be for me a “congenial” mid-way position between
Catholicism and the Calvinism of my upbringing. I was living in Papua
New Guinea at the time and had occasion to share these reflections and
suggested options with the late Archbishop Virgil Copas of Port Moresby.
This fine missionary prelate, himself a Father of Vatican II, did not
share that alleged “spirit” of the Council. He told me, kindly but
bluntly, “Brian, I am sure Our Lord would want you to join the Church he
himself founded.” These uncompromising words from a Successor of the
Apostles remained fixed in my mind and definitely helped me to make the
decision to become a Catholic.</p><br /></div></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
</div>
CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-72565965124342028112021-04-29T13:35:00.003-07:002021-04-29T13:35:53.402-07:00Taylor Marshall, Bishop Barron, Karl Rahner and Salvation <p> I guess we should be happy for the fame of Bishop Barron no one has caused this reaction in the American Church on the topic of Salvation, since Fr. Feeney; except Fr. Feeney was defending Christ, and Bishop Barron is abandoning Him. I really like how Taylor was able to be strong and firm, but also kind to Bishop Barron. <br /><br />Taylor also read The Council of Florence, seldom heard in Catholic circles even conservative ones. Taylor really nails the problem with Karl Rahner--excellent explanation. It is hard to get anyone to clearly take on Karl Rahner. <br /><br />Karl Rahner was the one who edited the Denzinger and put in it the letter to the Bishop of Boston regarding Fr. Feeney, even though it was never published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis. Rahner also moved the statement of Pope Zosimus on Salvation of infants to a footnote, thus undermining the doctrine of Limbo. <br /><br />Karl Rahner has always weakened the need of membership in the Church for Salvation. He was honest enough to state it openly-- that Church Fathers would have rejected that:<br /><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="color: #330099;"><span style="color: #330099;">"...we have
to admit...that the testimony of the Fathers, with regard to the
possibility of salvation for someone outside the Church, is very weak.
Certainly even the ancient Church knew that the grace of God can be
found also outside the Church and even before Faith. <span style="font-weight: bold;">But
the view that such divine grace can lead man to his final salvation
without leading him first into the visible Church, is something, at any
rate, which met with very little approval in the ancient Church.</span> <br />
<br />
For, with reference to the optimistic views on the salvation of
catechumens as found in many of the Fathers, it must be noted that such a
candidate for baptism was regarded in some sense or other as already
'Christianus', and also that <u>certain Fathers, such as Gregory
Nazianzen and Gregory of Nyssa deny altogether the justifying power of
love or of the desire for baptism.</u> <br />
<br />
He<u>nce it will be impossible to speak of a consensus dogmaticus in the
early Church regarding the possibility of salvation for the
non-baptized, and <b><i>especially for someone who is not even a catechumen</i></b>.</u> <span style="font-weight: bold;">In fact, even St. Augustine, in his last (anti-pelagian) period, no longer maintained the possibility of a baptism by desire. "</span></span>(Rahner,
Karl, Theological Investigations, Volume II, Man in the Church,
Translated by Karl H. Kruger, pp.40,41, 57 Or. 40, 23 (PG 36, 3890), 58
'Sermo contra dilationem Baptismi' (PG 46, 424), 59 Cf. Fr. Hoffmann,
Der Kirchenbegriff des hl. Augustinus (Munich 1933), pp.221 sqq., 381
sqq., 464 sqq., New York, The Seabury Press, 1975.)</span> <br />
</span><br /><br />It is hard to excuse Bishop Barron's ignorance. I hope the push back on his recent sermon will finally help him to see his mistake.<br /><br /><br /></p>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rCmFcAeK0R4" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-64682940418624512292021-04-28T21:27:00.004-07:002021-04-28T21:29:09.031-07:00Fr. Mark Goring and EENS<p> Father Mark Goring seems to be a good priest. He wants to follow Jesus in all he teaches without compromise. He has challenged Bishop Barron in no uncertain terms using scripture. Again he is a charismatic Catholic, but unlike Ralph Martin, he doesn't make the compromise ('some people are saved outside the Church--though few') of BoD at least not in this video. <br /><br />Please pray for him because I don't think he realizes he has just touched Satan in the Church right in the pupil of his eye. This is the center of the crisis. The Dogma ( EENS) is like the hair of Samson in the Church. Once it is proclaimed without compromise, we will see a revival of the Faith.<br /></p>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/HSyY3kqpOeg" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-55753227075767114512021-04-19T10:39:00.009-07:002021-04-23T10:02:58.798-07:00A Church in Crisis--with Ralph Martin<p> Here is two part interview with Ralph Martin. He is approaching EENS from a different point of view. He is using pure scripture to make his point. Much like <a href="https://catholicvox.blogspot.com/2011/05/whether-salvation-can-be-had-without.html" target="_blank">Bishop Hay</a> did way back when. <br /></p><p>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4DeeBs92q2k" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wD6Tam7FALs" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe></p>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-53628041238890472412021-04-18T01:30:00.002-07:002021-04-18T02:25:59.159-07:00Do People Go To Hell ?—discussion with Ralph Martin <p> Discussion of the resurgence of Modernism in the Church. While these guys are afraid to call out the corruption directly in Rome it is a step in the right direction for those who still won't admit there is a problem. <br /><br />I think Charismatics may be possible allies in the quest for pure doctrine. Trads are more clear on the topic but are afraid of contradicting St. Thomas or bishop Lefeve. Charismatics are more willing to follow scripture, no matter what.
<br /><br />I regret Scott Hahn doesn't come out more clearly but I think he is attempting to overcome evil with good, with his St. Paul Institute. <br /><br />But time is getting short. These Conservative Catholics need to be more forceful and clear. <br /><br /><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/iIAM-4fsM0Q" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe></p>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DmtFYHmbRto" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-21675331604103107312020-12-22T16:46:00.005-08:002020-12-28T07:47:12.198-08:00Pope Benedict XVI<p><br /></p>
<div class="bbWrapper"><b><span style="font-family: arial;"><span style="font-size: large;">In an interview with Avvenire, March 6, 2016 - Pope Benedict XVI truthfully said: <br />
"The missionaries of the 16th century were convinced that the unbaptized
person is lost forever. After the Second Vatican Council, this
conviction was definitely abandoned . . . . Why should you try to
convince the people to accept the Christian faith when they can be saved
without it?"</span></span></b></div>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5962985019203888701.post-41280690153438828072019-11-11T09:42:00.000-08:002019-11-11T10:30:07.990-08:00What is Nouvelle théologie? Beware of Priests in Neckties! (Rahner, Küng, De Lubac) w Tim FlandersTaylor Marshall has been doing great job exposing the present crisis. This a really great discussion about Nouvelle Théologie, which was a rebranding of Modernism. He and his guest get to the heart of the problem without many rabbit trails, so a layman can understand it. They stay focused on the theology. Worth your time to listen.<br />
<br />
<br />
We have only two regrets.<br />
<br />
<br />
The first is they praised Dietrich von Hildebrand, and rightly so, because he got so much right. But we wished they would have pointed out his major error on marriage. Von Hildebrand taught, with his wife, that the primary end of marriage is unitive, or at least equal to procreation and rearing of children. This was condemned by Pius XI.<br />
<br />
<br />
"Alice Von Hildebrand says that her husband believed that the Church’s position on the procreation and education of children as the primary end of marriage diminished the value of the interpersonal and unitive aspects of marriage, and that it was timely and necessary to introduce a corrective to remedy the situation" (<a href="https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/f024ht_Hildebrand_Engel.htm" target="_blank">The Phenomenology of von Hildebrand and His Novel Teaching on Marriage</a>)<br />
<br />
<br />
Pope Pius XI clearly cites the 1917 Code of Canon Law formulation based on the writings of Saint Thomas and Saint Augustine - “The primary end of marriage is the procreation and the education of children.”(<a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius11/p11casti.htm" target="_blank">Casti Connubii--On Christian MarriagePope Pius XI - 1930. #17)</a><br />
<br />
<br />
The second point that was disappointing is no reference is ever made to the dogma No Salvation Outside the Church or to Fr. Feeney or even the other defenders of The Dogma of the Faith, such as Orestes Brownson, and Bishop Hay.<br />
<br />
It seems Marshall is willing to defend Bishop Marcel Lefebvre, but sees a third rail with Fr. Feeney. Lefebvre for all his good, has a very weak understanding of the Dogma EENS.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, p. 216:<br />
“Evidently, certain distinctions must be made. Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.), but not by this religion. There may be souls who, not knowing Our Lord, have by the grace of the good Lord, good interior dispositions, who submit to God...<b>But some of these persons make an act of love which<i><u> implicitly</u></i> is equivalent to baptism of desire.</b> It is uniquely by this means that they are able to be saved.” [Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, Angelus Press, 1997, p. 216] (Implicit Baptism of Desire is covered on this site<a href="https://catholicvox.blogspot.com/2011/05/taking-jesus-as-lord-and-savior-is-this_31.html" target="_blank"> here.)</a></blockquote>
<br />
So while this is a very fruitful discussion, and in essence they proclaimed the necessity of Sacramental Baptism; they fell short of proclaim the Dogma EENS in its fullness. And even if they have issues with certain points of Fr. Feeney, the problems of Lefebvre and von Hildebrand don't seem to stop them from praising the courage of those men.<br />
<br />
Never the less, we see the Holy Spirit is moving, and opening up the truth. This video is really worth listening to, one of the best analysis of the theological problems that lead us to our present crisis.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Wo4aKdOr1bM" width="560"></iframe>CFT Catholics for truthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258176914774024454noreply@blogger.com