How can you presume to know who will be saved with the baptism of blood ( martrydom) and without the baptism of water in future or this year?

MRyan:

Moving on.

Lionel Andrades wrote:

”Mryan” wrote:
2. Lionel wrote: "VCII dos not does not state that we personally know or can know in future any one saved without the baptism of water and Catholic Faith". Actually, we do know of several saints martyred in the baptism of blood without benefit of the sacrament of baptism. That the Church includes these narratives in her liturgical texts is proof enough that she holds the baptism of blood as a true doctrine.

In the future?

Of course not, though we may presume so, just as we cannot know with any certainty those adults who will be saved in the future by water baptism, though we may presume so. So what is the point?

 

Lionel:

How can you presume to know who will be saved with the baptism of blood ( martrydom) and without the baptism of water in future or this year?

Regarding baptism of water, the Church tells us that the baptism of water is needed for salvation.

______________________________

Lionel Andrades wrote:Does Vatican Council II say that these cases are known to us personally or that they will be saved without the baptism of water in future? These are the two important points for there to be an exception to the traditional interpretation of the dogma according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.

MRyan:

Do any of the Church’s salvation dogmas say that these cases of salvation for baptized adults are known to us personally, or that they will be saved [known cases] with the baptism of water in future?

Lionel:

The Church dogmas on exclusive salvation tell us all need to convert into the Church. Since you allege that the baptism of desire and blood is an exception, implying you personally know some exceptions, I remind you that these cases are not known to you or me.

Th fact that the dogma does not mention exceptions, which you consider exceptions, only proves the point I am making here.

______________________________

MRyan:

Don’t you see, Lionel, the inherent fallacy at work in your question? The Church, it is true, does not know of any means other than the sacraments that can assure salvation, provided the right dispositions are present (a state of grace), without being able to tell us WHO these adults are (short of canonization). She can tell who the baptized are, but not that they are in fact saved. She can tell us who the catechumens are, and claim them as her own, but she insists that the obligation to be baptized remains, and she makes no claim to the certainty of salvation either before or after baptism (in adults).

Lionel:

There are no known exceptions to the dogma. The Church does not name any. Neither can you name any.

________________________________

Lionel Andrades wrote:

MRyan wrote:3. And the fact that "VCII dos not does not state that we personally know [in the present] or can know in future any one saved without the baptism of water and Catholic Faith" is entirely irrelevant,

Yes. Since the issue is, 'Are there exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma?' There are none.

MRyan:

Properly understood, there are no exceptions, we can agree.

Lionel:

There are no exceptions to the dogma. We agree. Good. You are saying that the baptism of desire is not relevant or an exception to the dogma!? .

-Lionel Andrades

 

http://catholicforum.forumotion.com/t1273-vatican-council-ii-interpreted-without-the-irrational-premise-the-sspx-could-affirm-this#9742