Re-Retraction

[In.Christo]

+J.M.J.+A.M.D.G.+H.M.O.U.+

Oh boy, I've really fallen flat on my face here.  Here is a link to a website explain my beliefs:

http://baptismofdesire.com/

[Greg]

If you add any more REs the title of your next post is going to sound like a Kraftwerk song.

[Michael Wilson]

Excellent.
Thank you for posting.

[Kreuzritter]

Anyone who claims that salvation is even possible for those who die without faith in Jesus Christ, which is simply "explicit faith", "implicit faith" not being actual faith at all, is not just a heretic but an Antichrist who preaches another gospel than that revealed by God and taught by the Apostles, which is salvation by faith.

The counter claim not only contradicts the New Testament but also flatly the 6th session of Trent, which declares in no uncertain terms that all justification is by faith and no man was ever saved without it:


CHAPTER VIII.

In what manner it is to be understood, that the impious is justified by faith, and gratuitously.

And whereas the Apostle saith, that man is justified by faith and freely, those words are to be understood in that sense which the perpetual consent of the Catholic Church hath held and expressed; to wit, that we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation, and the root of all Justification; without which it is impossible to please God, and to come unto the fellowship of His sons: but we are therefore said to be justified freely, because that none of those things which precede justification-whether faith or works-merit the grace itself of justification. For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace.

and

Of this Justification the causes are these: the final cause indeed is the glory of God and of Jesus Christ, and life everlasting; while the efficient cause is a merciful God who washes and sanctifies gratuitously, signing, and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance; but the meritorious cause is His most beloved only-begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when we were enemies, for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, merited Justification for us by His most holy Passion on the wood of the cross, and made satisfaction for us unto God the Father; the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which (faith) no man was ever justified;

You're just pathetic - de facto universalists and indifferentists by sophistry. But of course in your minds one can claim that one is not, just like one can have "faith" without having any actual faith in its necessary object, and one can have a "desire" without having any actual desire for its necessary object, just, I suppose, as one can see without seeing, hear without hearing, love without loving, or, in the case of you lot, think without thinking.



The Vatican 2 religion begins with the de facto denial of EENS by semantic sophistry, so you suckers can bitch and whine about false pope's and heresies of the council and invalid Sacraments all you like, but you all profess a heresy that is greater than any of the others professed by these popes or antipopes.

[Kreuzritter]

If you add any more REs the title of your next post is going to sound like a Kraftwerk song.

It's called "autism".

[Kaesekopf]

Anyone who claims that salvation is even possible for those who die without faith in Jesus Christ, which is simply "explicit faith", "implicit faith" not being actual faith at all, is not just a heretic but an Antichrist who preaches another gospel than that revealed by God and taught by the Apostles, which is salvation by faith.

The counter claim not only contradicts the New Testament but also flatly the 6th session of Trent, which declares in no uncertain terms that all justification is by faith and no man was ever saved without it:


CHAPTER VIII.

In what manner it is to be understood, that the impious is justified by faith, and gratuitously.

And whereas the Apostle saith, that man is justified by faith and freely, those words are to be understood in that sense which the perpetual consent of the Catholic Church hath held and expressed; to wit, that we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation, and the root of all Justification; without which it is impossible to please God, and to come unto the fellowship of His sons: but we are therefore said to be justified freely, because that none of those things which precede justification-whether faith or works-merit the grace itself of justification. For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace.

and

Of this Justification the causes are these: the final cause indeed is the glory of God and of Jesus Christ, and life everlasting; while the efficient cause is a merciful God who washes and sanctifies gratuitously, signing, and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance; but the meritorious cause is His most beloved only-begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when we were enemies, for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, merited Justification for us by His most holy Passion on the wood of the cross, and made satisfaction for us unto God the Father; the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which (faith) no man was ever justified;

You're just pathetic - de facto universalists and indifferentists by sophistry. But of course in your minds one can claim that one is not, just like one can have "faith" without having any actual faith in its necessary object, and one can have a "desire" without having any actual desire for its necessary object, just, I suppose, as one can see without seeing, hear without hearing, love without loving, or, in the case of you lot, think without thinking.



The Vatican 2 religion begins with the de facto denial of EENS by semantic sophistry, so you suckers can bitch and whine about false pope's and heresies of the council and invalid Sacraments all you like, but you all profess a heresy that is greater than any of the others professed by these popes or antipopes.

Someone disagrees with you (at 445).

[Kaesekopf]

Anyone who claims that salvation is even possible for those who die without faith in Jesus Christ, which is simply "explicit faith", "implicit faith" not being actual faith at all, is not just a heretic but an Antichrist who preaches another gospel than that revealed by God and taught by the Apostles, which is salvation by faith.

...

You're just pathetic - de facto universalists and indifferentists by sophistry. But of course in your minds one can claim that one is not, just like one can have "faith" without having any actual faith in its necessary object, and one can have a "desire" without having any actual desire for its necessary object, just, I suppose, as one can see without seeing, hear without hearing, love without loving, or, in the case of you lot, think without thinking.



The Vatican 2 religion begins with the de facto denial of EENS by semantic sophistry, so you suckers can bitch and whine about false pope's and heresies of the council and invalid Sacraments all you like, but you all profess a heresy that is greater than any of the others professed by these popes or antipopes.

It is against the Forum Rules to promote doctrines contrary to Catholic thought.  Any subsequent promotions of error will result in a ban per the ban schedule. 

[Kreuzritter]

Anyone who claims that salvation is even possible for those who die without faith in Jesus Christ, which is simply "explicit faith", "implicit faith" not being actual faith at all, is not just a heretic but an Antichrist who preaches another gospel than that revealed by God and taught by the Apostles, which is salvation by faith.

The counter claim not only contradicts the New Testament but also flatly the 6th session of Trent, which declares in no uncertain terms that all justification is by faith and no man was ever saved without it:


CHAPTER VIII.

In what manner it is to be understood, that the impious is justified by faith, and gratuitously.

And whereas the Apostle saith, that man is justified by faith and freely, those words are to be understood in that sense which the perpetual consent of the Catholic Church hath held and expressed; to wit, that we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation, and the root of all Justification; without which it is impossible to please God, and to come unto the fellowship of His sons: but we are therefore said to be justified freely, because that none of those things which precede justification-whether faith or works-merit the grace itself of justification. For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace.

and

Of this Justification the causes are these: the final cause indeed is the glory of God and of Jesus Christ, and life everlasting; while the efficient cause is a merciful God who washes and sanctifies gratuitously, signing, and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance; but the meritorious cause is His most beloved only-begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when we were enemies, for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, merited Justification for us by His most holy Passion on the wood of the cross, and made satisfaction for us unto God the Father; the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which (faith) no man was ever justified;

You're just pathetic - de facto universalists and indifferentists by sophistry. But of course in your minds one can claim that one is not, just like one can have "faith" without having any actual faith in its necessary object, and one can have a "desire" without having any actual desire for its necessary object, just, I suppose, as one can see without seeing, hear without hearing, love without loving, or, in the case of you lot, think without thinking.



The Vatican 2 religion begins with the de facto denial of EENS by semantic sophistry, so you suckers can bitch and whine about false pope's and heresies of the council and invalid Sacraments all you like, but you all profess a heresy that is greater than any of the others professed by these popes or antipopes.

Someone disagrees with you (at 445).

Nope. Not a word about necessity of faith in the Trinity and Incarnation there. Obviously, since this necessity is dogma, de fide et definitely. Try again, Chushingite. Try formulating an actual argument directed at my actual argument, which cites Tridentine dogma verbatim stating that faith is the basis of ALL justification and that NO MAN was ever saved without it. Extraordinary magisterium >> fallacious appeals to the authority of Thomas Aquinas (not that the citation of Thomas Aquinas has ANYTHING to do with the issue).

[GloriaPatri]

Anyone who claims that salvation is even possible for those who die without faith in Jesus Christ, which is simply "explicit faith", "implicit faith" not being actual faith at all, is not just a heretic but an Antichrist who preaches another gospel than that revealed by God and taught by the Apostles, which is salvation by faith.

The counter claim not only contradicts the New Testament but also flatly the 6th session of Trent, which declares in no uncertain terms that all justification is by faith and no man was ever saved without it:


CHAPTER VIII.

In what manner it is to be understood, that the impious is justified by faith, and gratuitously.

And whereas the Apostle saith, that man is justified by faith and freely, those words are to be understood in that sense which the perpetual consent of the Catholic Church hath held and expressed; to wit, that we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation, and the root of all Justification; without which it is impossible to please God, and to come unto the fellowship of His sons: but we are therefore said to be justified freely, because that none of those things which precede justification-whether faith or works-merit the grace itself of justification. For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace.

and

Of this Justification the causes are these: the final cause indeed is the glory of God and of Jesus Christ, and life everlasting; while the efficient cause is a merciful God who washes and sanctifies gratuitously, signing, and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance; but the meritorious cause is His most beloved only-begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when we were enemies, for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, merited Justification for us by His most holy Passion on the wood of the cross, and made satisfaction for us unto God the Father; the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which (faith) no man was ever justified;

You're just pathetic - de facto universalists and indifferentists by sophistry. But of course in your minds one can claim that one is not, just like one can have "faith" without having any actual faith in its necessary object, and one can have a "desire" without having any actual desire for its necessary object, just, I suppose, as one can see without seeing, hear without hearing, love without loving, or, in the case of you lot, think without thinking.



The Vatican 2 religion begins with the de facto denial of EENS by semantic sophistry, so you suckers can bitch and whine about false pope's and heresies of the council and invalid Sacraments all you like, but you all profess a heresy that is greater than any of the others professed by these popes or antipopes.

Someone disagrees with you (at 445).

Nope. Not a word about necessity of faith in the Trinity and Incarnation there. Obviously, since this necessity is dogma, de fide et definitely. Try again, Chushingite. Try formulating an actual argument directed at my actual argument, which cites Tridentine dogma verbatim stating that faith is the basis of ALL justification and that NO MAN was ever saved without it. Extraordinary magisterium >> fallacious appeals to the authority of Thomas Aquinas (not that the citation of Thomas Aquinas has ANYTHING to do with the issue).

You do realize that this is the forum owner you're calling a "Chushingite," right? Have some respect.

[Kreuzritter]

Anyone who claims that salvation is even possible for those who die without faith in Jesus Christ, which is simply "explicit faith", "implicit faith" not being actual faith at all, is not just a heretic but an Antichrist who preaches another gospel than that revealed by God and taught by the Apostles, which is salvation by faith.

...

You're just pathetic - de facto universalists and indifferentists by sophistry. But of course in your minds one can claim that one is not, just like one can have "faith" without having any actual faith in its necessary object, and one can have a "desire" without having any actual desire for its necessary object, just, I suppose, as one can see without seeing, hear without hearing, love without loving, or, in the case of you lot, think without thinking.



The Vatican 2 religion begins with the de facto denial of EENS by semantic sophistry, so you suckers can bitch and whine about false pope's and heresies of the council and invalid Sacraments all you like, but you all profess a heresy that is greater than any of the others professed by these popes or antipopes.

It is against the Forum Rules to promote doctrines contrary to Catholic thought.  Any subsequent promotions of error will result in a ban per the ban schedule. 

The dogma of the necessity of faith in the Jesus Christ for justification and salvation is not contrary to Catholic faith, you clown. It IS the Catholic faith and was believed unanimously by the Fathers and is the substance of the Athanasian Creed. Kindly stop your Antichrist allegations and sod off.

[Kreuzritter]

Anyone who claims that salvation is even possible for those who die without faith in Jesus Christ, which is simply "explicit faith", "implicit faith" not being actual faith at all, is not just a heretic but an Antichrist who preaches another gospel than that revealed by God and taught by the Apostles, which is salvation by faith.

The counter claim not only contradicts the New Testament but also flatly the 6th session of Trent, which declares in no uncertain terms that all justification is by faith and no man was ever saved without it:


CHAPTER VIII.

In what manner it is to be understood, that the impious is justified by faith, and gratuitously.

And whereas the Apostle saith, that man is justified by faith and freely, those words are to be understood in that sense which the perpetual consent of the Catholic Church hath held and expressed; to wit, that we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation, and the root of all Justification; without which it is impossible to please God, and to come unto the fellowship of His sons: but we are therefore said to be justified freely, because that none of those things which precede justification-whether faith or works-merit the grace itself of justification. For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace.

and

Of this Justification the causes are these: the final cause indeed is the glory of God and of Jesus Christ, and life everlasting; while the efficient cause is a merciful God who washes and sanctifies gratuitously, signing, and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance; but the meritorious cause is His most beloved only-begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when we were enemies, for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, merited Justification for us by His most holy Passion on the wood of the cross, and made satisfaction for us unto God the Father; the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which (faith) no man was ever justified;

You're just pathetic - de facto universalists and indifferentists by sophistry. But of course in your minds one can claim that one is not, just like one can have "faith" without having any actual faith in its necessary object, and one can have a "desire" without having any actual desire for its necessary object, just, I suppose, as one can see without seeing, hear without hearing, love without loving, or, in the case of you lot, think without thinking.



The Vatican 2 religion begins with the de facto denial of EENS by semantic sophistry, so you suckers can bitch and whine about false pope's and heresies of the council and invalid Sacraments all you like, but you all profess a heresy that is greater than any of the others professed by these popes or antipopes.

Someone disagrees with you (at 445).

Nope. Not a word about necessity of faith in the Trinity and Incarnation there. Obviously, since this necessity is dogma, de fide et definitely. Try again, Chushingite. Try formulating an actual argument directed at my actual argument, which cites Tridentine dogma verbatim stating that faith is the basis of ALL justification and that NO MAN was ever saved without it. Extraordinary magisterium >> fallacious appeals to the authority of Thomas Aquinas (not that the citation of Thomas Aquinas has ANYTHING to do with the issue).

You do realize that this is the forum owner you're calling a "Chushingite," right? Have some respect.

If he claims salvation is possible without faith in Christ, that's what he is. And if he claims that the strict interpretation of EENS is contrary to the Catholic faith, he is not only wrong but contradict Benedict XVI on its permissibility.

[PerEvangelicaDicta]

'cushingite" should no more be an insult than "feeneyite" - they are descriptives.

That said, as a 'feeneyite' myself, I understand your frustration Kreuzritter, and I know justice is where your anger is coming from.  But you are needed, so please don't get banned.  Kaes deserves respect as the forum owner/moderator.

It's so darned hard for those of us who are 'feeneyites' to properly convey the truth about Fr. Feeney. (and prohibited here on SD). Novus Ordo and trads are convicted in their fierce and unjust hatred of Fr. Feeney without debate.  What brought me to realization are his own words, from 2 excellent websites dedicated to the good father.  If anyone is interested, PM me.  (if that is permissible, Kaes?)

[Kaesekopf]

Anyone who claims that salvation is even possible for those who die without faith in Jesus Christ, which is simply "explicit faith", "implicit faith" not being actual faith at all, is not just a heretic but an Antichrist who preaches another gospel than that revealed by God and taught by the Apostles, which is salvation by faith.

...

You're just pathetic - de facto universalists and indifferentists by sophistry. But of course in your minds one can claim that one is not, just like one can have "faith" without having any actual faith in its necessary object, and one can have a "desire" without having any actual desire for its necessary object, just, I suppose, as one can see without seeing, hear without hearing, love without loving, or, in the case of you lot, think without thinking.



The Vatican 2 religion begins with the de facto denial of EENS by semantic sophistry, so you suckers can bitch and whine about false pope's and heresies of the council and invalid Sacraments all you like, but you all profess a heresy that is greater than any of the others professed by these popes or antipopes.

It is against the Forum Rules to promote doctrines contrary to Catholic thought.  Any subsequent promotions of error will result in a ban per the ban schedule. 

The dogma of the necessity of faith in the Jesus Christ for justification and salvation is not contrary to Catholic faith, you clown. It IS the Catholic faith and was believed unanimously by the Fathers and is the substance of the Athanasian Creed. Kindly stop your Antichrist allegations and sod off.

Banned for a day.

[Kaesekopf]

'cushingite" should no more be an insult than "feeneyite" - they are descriptives.

That said, as a 'feeneyite' myself, I understand your frustration Kreuzritter, and I know justice is where your anger is coming from.  But you are needed, so please don't get banned.  Kaes deserves respect as the forum owner/moderator.

It's so darned hard for those of us who are 'feeneyites' to properly convey the truth about Fr. Feeney. (and prohibited here on SD). Novus Ordo and trads are convicted in their fierce and unjust hatred of Fr. Feeney without debate.  What brought me to realization are his own words, from 2 excellent websites dedicated to the good father.  If anyone is interested, PM me.  (if that is permissible, Kaes?)

Much like geocentrism, I tolerated the Feeneyite discussion for some time, until Feeneyite assholes do... well, what Kreuzritter just got banned for. 

I'm more than fine with peaceable discussion on topics.  But, niche positions like geocentrists and Feeneyites are typically filled with people who can't control themselves or their posting, and go off the rails. 

[Gardener]

St. Cyprian (bold and title's mine)

Baptism of Blood
22. On which place some, as if by human reasoning they were able to make void the truth of the Gospel declaration, object to us the case of catechumens; asking if any one of these, before he is baptized in the Church, should be apprehended and slain on confession of the name, whether he would lose the hope of salvation and the reward of confession, because he had not previously been born again of water? Let men of this kind, who are aiders and favourers of heretics, know therefore, first, that those catechumens hold the sound faith and truth of the Church, and advance from the divine camp to do battle with the devil, with a full and sincere acknowledgment of God the Father, and of Christ, and of the Holy Ghost; then, that they certainly are not deprived of the sacrament of baptism who are baptized with the most glorious and greatest baptism of blood, concerning which the Lord also said, that He had "another baptism to be baptized with." But the same Lord declares in the Gospel, that those who are baptized in their own blood, and sanctified by suffering, are perfected, and obtain the grace of the divine promise, when He speaks to the thief believing and confessing in His very passion, and promises that he should be with Himself in paradise. Wherefore we who are set over the faith and truth ought not to deceive and mislead those who come to the faith and truth, and repent, and beg that their sins should be remitted to them; but to instruct them when corrected by us, and reformed for the kingdom of heaven by celestial discipline.

Baptism of Desire

23. But some one says, "What, then, shall become of those who in past times, coming from heresy to the Church, were received without baptism? "The Lord is able by His mercy to give indulgence, and not to separate from the gifts of His Church those who by simplicity were admitted into the Church, and in the Church have fallen asleep. Nevertheless it does not follow that, because there was error at one time, there must always be error; since it is more fitting for wise and God-fearing men, gladly and without delay to obey the truth when laid open and perceived, than pertinaciously and obstinately to struggle against brethren and fellow priests on behalf of heretics.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/050672.htm

NB: on the full text -- If St. Cyprian is speaking of the Baptism of heretics (in the full text) insofar as baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, who intended to do as the Church does, and who used proper matter (natural water), he was contradicted and such a teaching corrected by the Council of Trent, Session VII, Canon IV

CANON IV.-If any one saith, that the baptism which is even given by heretics in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, with the intention of doing what the Church doth, is not true baptism; let him be anathema.

http://www.thecounciloftrent.com/ch7.htm

If he was speaking of some other attempt at Baptism, a la a "spiritual" baptism or a baptism without correct form, he is absolutely correct. Example: Mormon "baptism" is invalid.

Now, I know what Feeney teaches on Catechumens who, having not been Baptized in the ordinary fashion, and died for the cause of Christ. He teaches that either an angel would baptize them with water (a novelty if there ever was one), or if not, they would not be saved. St. Cyprian calls such a position heretical.

And on the issue of Baptism of Desire, St. Cyprian is clear on the indulgence provided by Christ.

Feeney was, simply, a heretic -- if not formally, definitely materially. He, like most heresiarchs (for example, Luther), saw an abuse and ran with true doctrine into perversion of said doctrine in order to counter the perversion. This is not uncommon for those who refuse to be corrected by the Church.

You Feeneyites really need to rethink the following of a Jesuit when they disagree with the Saints and Church teaching, perverting the Saints' quotes, ignoring inconvenient arguments, and most of all, not listening to the Church. Even when they're the opposite of the Hawaiian Shirt wearing variety of Jesuits, they're still not good when they start getting novel. How many PhD's have led men to hell? Very rarely, I'd think, has a Jesuit been saved by his smarts. When St. Francis Xavier, St. Cyprian, St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, et al., all teach the same thing, perhaps... well, perhaps a cantankerous Irishman with a penchant for novelty, who was too smart for his own good, is not the best leader of one's spiritual viewpoint.

"Seen any Albigensians lately?"