Comments from the blog Musings of a Pertinacious Papist
Lionel. You substitute your personal opinion for the Magisterium.
Lionel:
That we human beings cannot physically see any one in Heaven or on earth saved without the baptism of water is not a personal opinion. It is a fact of life.
You have not answered how could some one see or know St. Emerentiana was in Heaven without the baptism of water.
_______________________
Even when the Magisterium (such as the letter to Boston, signed by the great Roman, Ottaviano) explicates the doctrine of EENS
Lionel: It supports the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS in the first part while the second part of the letter contradicts the first part. The second part assumes that the baptism of desire etc refer to visible cases and so is relevant and an exception to traditional EENS supported in the first part of the Letter.
The Magisterium then accepted the irrational reasoning in the second part of the Letter and then contradicted the centuries old magisterium of the Church. So at one time the magisterium had to be wrong.
____________________________
you protest with your odd objection about this or that being visible or not visible but you never
Lionel: It is when you say that St. Emerentiana is in Heaven without the baptism of water that you infer that you or someone else in the Church could physically see persons in Heaven or on earth without the baptism of water. It is you who infer that a category of people in Heaven are visible to you. So I am compelled to make the visible-invisible distinction but you keep repeating the same error.
__________________________
- despite being repeatedly asked to - post anything from any Magisterial Document teaching that one has to see an example of baptism of desire, baptism of blood.
Lionel: I affirm the traditional interpretation of EENS and also invisible for us; hypothetical baptism of desire. I am able to affirm the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus , with no exceptions. This is something you and the magisterium cannot do since the baptism of desire is explicit for you. It is an objectively seen exception to all needing to convert into the Catholic Church in the present times.This is rationality for you.
______________________________
Now, you prolly think that St Emerentiana was baptised with water by an angel.
Lionel: There are only Catholics in Heaven and they are there with 'faith and baptism'(AG 7, LG 14).
__________________________
You, sir are a protestant and what you call breaks with tradition PRECEDED, (from a Doctor of the Church ;his is one of the four statutes on the Altar of the Chair of Peter inside St Peters but you think he is in error re Baptism of Desire) the definition you wildly misconstrue and do not understand.
Lionel: If any one infers that we can physically see and indentify people in Heaven without the baptism of water he is making an error.It is a factual error. It is an objective error which can be noted even by non Catholics.None of the Doctors of the Church made this error.St. Thomas and St. Augustine affirmed the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. If a pope or saint mentioned the desire of a catechuman to receive the baptism of water, but who dies before receiving it,that pope or saint ws still affirming the strict interpretation of EENS. Since this theoretical case of the catechuman is not relevant or an exception to EENS. Modern day liberal theologians wrongly made it relevant.
____________________________
OK, well, it is Lent and so there's that.
Lionel:
To imply that there are known exceptions to the dogma EENS ( even when you do not know of any ) is a lie, it is irrationality.It is heresy. It is a sin against the faith.Remember this in Lent. -Lionel Andrades
The magisteriuim is wrong to assume hypothetical cases( baptism of desire, invincible ignorance) are explicit and so are exceptions to EENS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/the-magisteriuim-is-wrong-to-assume.htmlIs not the theology taught by Dr.John Lamont in Australia approved by the Masons ? http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/is-not-theology-taught-by-drjohn-lamont.html
No denial from Archbishop Pozzo : CDF/Ecclesia Dei will not interpret Vatican Council II with the Feeneyite theology
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/no-denial-from-archbishop-pozzo.html
Abp.Guido Pozzo does not deny it : Ecclesia Dei/CDF use an irrationality and heresy to interpret Vatican Council II
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/abpguido-pozzo-does-not-deny-ecclesia.html
http://pblosser.blogspot.it/2016/03/disappointment-with-louis-bouyers.html
No comments:
Post a Comment