Bro.Thomas Augustine will still not answer if the baptism of desire cases are physically visible to us

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

Go down

Bro.Thomas Augustine will still not answer if the baptism of desire cases are physically visible to us

Post by Lionel A on Thu Mar 21, 2013 6:31 am

Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Bro.Thomas Augustine will still not answer if the baptism of desire cases are visible to us

November 7, 2012
Brother Thomas Augustine MICM clarification
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/11/brother-thomas-augustine-micm.html

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bro.Thomas Augustine will still not answer if the baptism of desire cases are physically visible to us

Post by Admin on Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:50 am

Lionel,

Brother Thomas Augustine does not reply to emails, at least mine. Just leave him alone. I don't think that he is going to like at all your berating him on the Internet. The SBC in Still River sell Father Feeney's The Bread of Life on their website and so I think that such is their position.

I would suggest writing Brother Andre Marie a hardcopy letter, but if he does not reply, don't be offended. Everyone's busy these days. If he does reply, he'll no doubt tell you what I have told you, that the Center's position is that everyone in Paradise will have the character of sacramental Baptism, no exceptions. I think that is what Brother Thomas Augustine will say, also. Perhaps you should delete your post from the Internet and take a trip to Still River instead? Go to Mass and then say "Hello" to one of the brothers there. I am sure that Brother Thomas Augustine can "work you in" at some point.

You need to "tone things down" quite a bit, Lionel, and stop confronting people in the external forum.

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

If he is saying that the baptism of desire etc is an exception to the dogma then he is implying that these cases are visible to us .

Post by Lionel A on Fri Mar 22, 2013 7:26 am

Brother Thomas Augustine does not reply to emails, at least mine.
He has replid to mine.

He would not answer the question : are those saved with the baptism of desire physically visible to us.

the Center's position is that everyone in Paradise will have the character of sacramental Baptism, no exceptions.

Does it mean that all who are saved with the baptism of desire are explicit, physically visible to us ?

If he is saying that the baptism of desire etc is an exception to the dogma then he is implying that these cases are visible to us .

Can I also believe that there could be someone in Heaven known only to God, saved with the baptism of desire and that this does not contradict Fr.Leonard Feeney who said that all in the present time needs faith and the baptism of water for salvation.






Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bro.Thomas Augustine will still not answer if the baptism of desire cases are physically visible to us

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 22, 2013 7:46 am

Lionels,

Angels are not physically visible to us; does that mean that they do not exist?

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Angels are not physically visible to us and in faith we know they exist. So also the baptism of desire

Post by Lionel A on Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:46 am

I thought I had answered this post but I cannot see it here.

Generally people do not say that angels are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They state that those saved with the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance are exceptions.

Angels are not physically visible to us and in faith we know they exist. So also the baptism of desire is not physically visible to us and in faith we know that these cases can exist.

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bro.Thomas Augustine will still not answer if the baptism of desire cases are physically visible to us

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:55 am

Lionel,

If people are saying that BoD/BoB are "exceptions" to EENS, then they are mistaken. The Council of Florence was quite clear on this point:

no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.

So, all must end their lives in the "bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." If such was true "then," then it is true "now".

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

This would also apply to Vatican Council II.

Post by Lionel A on Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:00 am

If people are saying that BoD/BoB are "exceptions" to EENS, then they are mistaken. The Council of Florence was quite clear on this point:

There are no exceptions in 2013.
There are no exceptions in 2013 since we cannot know there are exceptions.
Since the baptism of desire etc cannot be an exception since these cases are invisible to us.
So in its very nature the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are not exceptions.

This would also apply to Vatican Council II.
There are no exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II to the dogma nn salvation.

Would you agree ?

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bro.Thomas Augustine will still not answer if the baptism of desire cases are physically visible to us

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:40 am

Does it matter? I suppose it does, unless, you are a sede, but yes, Vatican II and the Council of Florence can be easily reconciled, especially, given the fact that Vatican II reaffirmed, explicitly, the decrees of the Council of Florence:

http://www.marycoredemptrix.com/the_center_review_toc.html

To an extent, Lionel, I think that you are "pounding on open doors," for if anyone says that there are visible exceptions to EENS, then unless they can name who these people are, their statements are self-contradictory, absurd, and meaningless, and I think that you should just ignore them.

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

If Vatican Council II is an exception to the dogma on salvation then would it mean that invincible ignorance etc (LG 16) are visible to us ?

Post by Lionel A on Fri Mar 22, 2013 12:18 pm

unless they can name who these people are, their statements are self-contradictory

Would this be your position with reference to Vatican Council II.

If Vatican Council II is an exception to the dogma on salvation then would it mean that invincible ignorance etc (LG 16) are visible to us.

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bro.Thomas Augustine will still not answer if the baptism of desire cases are physically visible to us

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 22, 2013 1:17 pm

I think that it's absurd to say that anyone is in a state of "invincible ignorance". Such is a tautology:

How could we know that what someone else does not know is due "through no fault of his own"?

So, no, the "invincibly ignorant" are not visible and it is both false and sinful to presume/assume that any non-Catholic is in such a state; we commit the supreme and ultimate injustice towards our fellow man when we make such assumptions.

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

So it is clear for you that those in invincible ignorance are not visible to you and to and so they cannot be an exception

Post by Lionel A on Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:25 am

So it is clear for you that those in invincible ignorance are not visible to you and to and so they cannot be an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

What about those saved with a good conscience (LG 16) and those saved 'in imperfect communion with the Church' and others with the 'seeds of the word' are they visible to you ?

So is Vatican Council II in agreement with Fr.Leonard Feeney and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Brother Andre Marie MICM has never mentioned that Vatican Council II is in agreement with the dogma

Post by Lionel A on Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:49 am

In the article of Brother Andre Marie MICM on Father Richard Williamson(now bishop) of the SSPX he never mentioned that if one holds that the baptism of desire is an exception, it indicates that these cases are visible to us.

Then he has never mentioned that Vatican Council II is in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
When Jeff Mirus cited Vatican Council II suggesting that there were exceptions to the dogma Bro. Andre Marie in his replies never mentioned that those cases could not be exceptions since they were not visible to us in the present times.

Neither was this point brought out by others at SBC NH.

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bro.Thomas Augustine will still not answer if the baptism of desire cases are physically visible to us

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 23, 2013 10:05 am

Lionel A wrote:So it is clear for you that those in invincible ignorance are not visible to you and to and so they cannot be an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

What about those saved with a good conscience (LG 16) and those saved 'in imperfect communion with the Church' and others with the 'seeds of the word' are they visible to you ?

So is Vatican Council II in agreement with Fr.Leonard Feeney and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?

They are not "an exception" period. The dogma of EENS is that there are no exceptions, visible or otherwise.

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

No traditionalist groups says that according to Vatican Council II there is no salvation outside the Church (AG 7,LG 14)

Post by Lionel A on Sun Mar 24, 2013 9:38 am

So you agree that there are no exceptions mentioned by the dogma and in real life we cannot see any exceptions or name them.

On the Catholicism.org website there are articles by Jeff Mirus who cites passages from Vatican Council II as exceptions. I have pointed out on my blog that he assumes implicit salvation is explicit.Invisible cases are visible.
Brother. Andre Marie in his replies never mentioned that those cases could not be exceptions since they were not visible to us in the present times.
So there are no exceptions in Vatican Council II to the dogma on salvation.

Last Wenesday Pope Francis told non Catholic religious leaders that they would have a dialogue based on Vatican Council II. No traditionalist groups says that according to Vatican Council II there is no salvation outside the Church (AG 7,LG 14) and there are no known exceptions.Unless the pope assumes that these 'exceptions' are vsible to him.

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bro.Thomas Augustine will still not answer if the baptism of desire cases are physically visible to us

Post by Admin on Sun Mar 24, 2013 10:24 am

Lionel,

Having these conversations with you I feel like I am beating a dead house. Unless Mirus, Pope Francis, et al., can name who these "exceptions" are, I think that you should drop it. Besides, as we have been through before, Vatican II and the CCC both reference the 1949 Holy Office Letter which stated "that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church." Ditto for Lumen Gentium, 51 affirmations of the "decrees of the Council of Florence."

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Could you call up the SBC ?

Post by Lionel A on Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:03 pm

Could you call up the SBC when possible and ask they for a statement on this ?

Are they willing to say Vatican Council II is in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bro.Thomas Augustine will still not answer if the baptism of desire cases are physically visible to us

Post by Admin on Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:54 pm

They are; no doubt about it, because they have been regularized and are in good standing with their Bishop, His Excellency, Robert J. McManus.

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Bishop Robert J.McManus or any of his Staff hs never affirmed the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

Post by Lionel A on Mon Mar 25, 2013 6:38 am

Neither has Bishop Robert J.McManus or any of his Staff said that they affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus or that the dogma is in agreement with Vatican Council II or that Vatican Council II supports Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Neither has the SBC at Still River, in the Diocese of Worcester.


Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bro.Thomas Augustine will still not answer if the baptism of desire cases are physically visible to us

Post by Lionel A on Mon Mar 25, 2013 10:29 am

I have read it before.

Neither has Bishop Robert J.McManus or any of his Staff said that they affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus or that the dogma is in agreement with Vatican Council II or that Vatican Council II supports Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Neither has the SBC at Still River, in the Diocese of Worcester.


Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

This is such a serious issue for the traditionalists and the SBC is keeping silent

Post by Lionel A on Mon Mar 25, 2013 12:25 pm

The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) is not accepting Vatican Council II since they assume it is a break with Tradition on the issue of other religions.

So the SSPX rejects Vatican Council II since they believe it is a break with the dogma on salvtion.

Should not the SBC mention that Vatican Council II is in agreement with extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the traditional teaching on other religions.

This is such a serious issue for the traditionalists and the SBC is keeping quiet if they really believe Vatican Council II supports the dogma.

Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bro.Thomas Augustine will still not answer if the baptism of desire cases are physically visible to us

Post by Admin on Mon Mar 25, 2013 12:52 pm

Lionel,

Please stop using all "red letters". And please read the following from Brother Thomas Mary Sennott:

I should also mention that when the Sisters of St. Anne were trying to get their status "regularized," they were asked through Bishop Harrington by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to "understand" the "Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston." My They Fought the Good Fight was still in manuscript at the time, but it had been read approvingly by both the bishop and the sisters. I suggested they use the following "understanding" of the "Letter" in my book:

"A reference to the "Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston" appears in an official footnote to Lumen Gentium (2,16)...The relevant passage of Lumen Gentium reads:

"'Those also can attain to everlasting life 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.'

"This passage of Lumen Gentium is similar to the "Letter" but with one significant difference. The phrase 'implicit desire' (votum implicitum) which was so objectionable to Father Feeney has been dropped...The relevant passage from Lumen Gentium continues:

"'...Nor does divine Providence deny the help necessary for salvation to those who without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God, but who strive to live a good life, thanks to His grace. Whatever goodness or truth is found among them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel (my emphasis TMS). She rewards such qualities as given by Him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life.'

"So a person of goodwill who is involved in invincible ignorance and has an implicit desire to be joined to the Church, may indeed be saved, but not where he is. Whatever truth or goodness is found in such a person is looked upon by the Church as a "preparation for the Gospel," and Lumen Gentium continues, it is to such persons that the Church 'to promote the glory of God and procure the salvation of all such men (emphasis mine), and mindful of the command of the Lord, 'Preach the Gospel to every creature' (Mk.16:16), ...painstakingly fosters her missionary work.'"(5)

This "understanding" was accepted by both Bishop Harrington and the Sisters, and on his next ad liminal visit to Rome the Bishop presented it to the Congregation. It was accepted, and the status of the Sisters was "regularized."

http://www.marycoredemptrix.com/laisneyism.html

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Even the Canon lawyer who wrote that report which you quote often did not know that the baptism of desire was never ever an exception

Post by Lionel A on Tue Mar 26, 2013 9:58 am

The status of the Sisters is not at issue here.
The point is they are not saying that Vatican Council II affirms the dogma and the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.

Probably because they have canonical status and want to keep it so they will not talk on this issue.

This is a very serious issue since the SSPX could be penalized by the new pope for rejecting Vatican Council II since for the SSPX the Council is a break with the dogma etc and the SBC is silent and not explaining things to them.

Also Popè Francis has said that inter religious dialogue must be based on Vatican Council II and the SBC does not state that the Council says outside the Church there is no salvation.

All this time in reports from SSPX priests and others it was never told to them that if anyone considers the baptism of desire etc as an exception to the dogma, it indicates that these cases are visible to him or her.

Even the Canon lawyer who wrote that report which you quote often did not know that the baptism of desire was never ever an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus and it was irrelevant to Fr.Leonard Feeney.


Lionel A

Posts : 253
Join date : 2013-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bro.Thomas Augustine will still not answer if the baptism of desire cases are physically visible to us

Post by Admin on Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:26 am

Lionel A wrote:[b]The status of the Sisters is not at issue here.

I very much disagree with this statement. If "Feeneyites" are in full communion with Rome, then the opinions expressed in the Bread of Life are valid (albeit, minor) theological opinions:

http://catholicism.org/our-status-in-the-church.html

Now, if Father Feeney's theological opinions turn out to be fact, then, everyone, in Paradise, will have the character of sacramental Baptism, at the very least since the Day of Pentecost; in which case, "Baptism of Desire" will have been nothing more than "desire of Baptism", and such will mean that you, Lionel, are "pounding on open doors."

Admin
Admin

Posts : 220
Join date : 2013-02-12

View user profile http://eens.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Bro.Thomas Augustine will still not answer if the baptism of desire cases are physically visible to us

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum