eucharistandmission: Repost : There is no empirical evidence to suggest St Emerentiana is in Heaven without the baptism of water and so is an exception to EENS and the Nicene Creed

Thursday, July 26, 2018

Repost : There is no empirical evidence to suggest St Emerentiana is in Heaven without the baptism of water and so is an exception to EENS and the Nicene Creed

JANUARY 31, 2018

There is no empirical evidence to suggest St Emerentiana is in Heaven without the baptism of water and so is an exception to EENS and the Nicene Creed

Ann Barnhardt's view on St. Emerentiana is speculation.There is no empirical evidence to suggest that St. Emerentiana is in Heaven with the baptism of desire or baptism of blood and without the baptism of water.No one could see or meet a person in real life saved with the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and in invincible ignorance (I.I). So when there are no known cases of BOD, BOB and I.I then where is the proof that St.Emerentiana was an exception to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS)?

How could she be an exception to the dogmatic teaching on exclusive salvation in the Church and all needing 'faith and baptism' for salvation(Ad Gentes 7,Vatican Council II)?

The norm for salvation is 'faith and baptism', so how can it be said that St.Emerentiana is an exception to the norm?.

And if someone in the Church has declared that she is an exception then who is this person and who gave him or her the authority to make this statement?

The issue is not whether or not she is a saint butwhether she is in Heaven without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.We can accept in faith that she is a saint in Heaven but how can we accept in faith that St.Emerentiana is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Nicene Creed( I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins) ?

I accept the baptism of desire.For me it is always a hypothetical and speculative reference. It cannot be anything else. It cannot be visible like the baptism of water. The baptism of water can be seen and repeated.We cannot give any one the baptism of desire.
So we can only accept it as being theoretical. So how can a theoretical case be an exception to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus in real life in 2018,for example?

So I do not reject the baptism of desire, I repeat.It does not have to be the baptism of desire or extra ecclesiam nulla salus for me.It never was either-or. I affirm implicit for us baptism of desire along with the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS.The baptism of desire is not an issue for me as a Feeneyite(SeeFeeneyism according to Lionel Andrades
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/01/what-is-feeneyism.html )

Since the baptism of desire is accepted as a possibility, for me, the possibility will include the baptism of water. It would be the baptism of desire followed by the baptism of water in a way known only to God.

But with or without the baptism of water, the baptism of desire cannot be an exception or relevant to the dogma EENS as it was known,for example, to the missionaries and magisterium in the 16th century.Ann Barnhardt has made an objective mistake, the common one.To suggest someone in Heaven is saved with the baptism of desire and this personis an objective exception to the dogma EENS,violates the Principle of Non Contradiction.How can this person be in two places at the same time?
-Lionel Andrades

RELEVANT LABELS/ TAGS ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THIS BLOG (CLICK TO ACCESS)

Vatican Council II( premise free)(2)

Vatican Council II(Cushingite).(5)

Vatican Council II(Feeneyite)(8)

Vatican Council II(premise free)(2)

Vatican Council II(premise-free)(6)

Vatican Council II and EENS(2)

Vatican Council II but interpreted with two different theologies(2)

Vatican Council II Cushigite(1)

Vatican Council II Cushingite(1)

Vatican Council II Development(1)

Vatican Council II Feeneyite(4)