It is currently Tue Sep 17, 2019 2:32 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
 A Good Willed Person's Objection to BOD 
Author Message

Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 6:06 pm
Posts: 95
New post A Good Willed Person's Objection to BOD
I want to quote from a friend who evidently is talking with a Feeneyite:

Quote:
Well thank you --YOU just singlehandledly resolved the BOD question for me.

My theory is simply this---

St Robert, arguably one of the greatest Doctors of the Catholic Church, published his greatest work about soul of church in Paris in 1579

His ideas got incorporated into the Doauy Bible commentaries (published in 1582!!!) about bod and soul of church

Pius 12 condemned this soul of church invisible church theory in 1943--teaching there is NO invisible church and that soul of Church simply means "Holy Ghost". Pope Pius also expressly taught in that same encyclical that MEMBERSHIP in the BODY requires Sacramental baptism and he expressly mentions the absolute necessity of "water" in #22 as an essential element for membership in the body.

Thus--like Aquinas' error--Mary not immaculately conceived--such should have been simply expunged or the error footnoted ----yet it was not and nearly everyone continues to perpetuate this error to this day---but the elect shall not be fooled.

For me--i think I have a plausible explanation as to HOW error got into SOME catechisms (but not all) and also how St Alphonsus was also fooled.

Its all so simple because logically, our reason tells us that BOD can't be true, but for me--this clinches it.

And was not De Eclessia St Robert's "greatest work" according to Msgr Joseph Clifford Fenton in his book "The Catholic Church and Salvation" (1958) where Fr Fenton clearly says that St Robert made a mistake "serious misunderstanding")


Here was my response:

Monsignor Fenton teaches that Saint Robert Bellarmine did not make a mistake but was misunderstood.

The second half of your message:

Quote:
Thus--like Aquinas' error--Mary not immaculately conceived--such should have been simply expunged or the error footnoted ----yet it was not and nearly everyone continues to perpetuate this error to this day---but the elect shall not be fooled.

For me--i think I have a plausible explanation as to HOW error got into SOME catechisms (but not all) and also how St Alphonsus was also fooled.

Its all so simple because logically, our reason tells us that BOD can't be true, but for me--this clinches it.

And was not De Eclessia St Robert's "greatest work" according to Msgr Joseph Clifford Fenton in his book "The Catholic Church and Salvation" (1958) where Fr Fenton clearly says that St Robert made a mistake "serious misunderstanding")


Is incorrect.

Bellermine and Alphonsus were Latin scholars and did not misinterpret Trent. Let alone get "fooled" let alone proclaim their "error" as de fide! As Alphonsus did.

Quote:
Pius 12 condemned this soul of church invisible church theory in 1943--teaching there is NO invisible church and that soul of Church simply means "Holy Ghost". Pope Pius also expressly taught in that same encyclical that MEMBERSHIP in the BODY requires Sacramental baptism and he expressly mentions the absolute necessity of "water" in #22 as an essential element for membership in the body.


Neither Aquinas, Bellermine or Alphonsus would have disagreed with Pius XII in their day as they taught the same thing. They also taught that non-members can be saved within the Church.

Can someone please elaborate (and correct if necessary) my above comments and also respond to the above objector?


Wed Aug 27, 2014 7:13 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 6:06 pm
Posts: 95
New post Re: A Good Willed Person's Objection to BOD
What is mind-boggling to me is that this objective person, after talking with a feeneyite quite extensively has decided the Church has erred since 1582 by allowing BOD to be taught in her Bibles since that time. It is really quite incredible. When he asked me the question I thought it was in relation to Trent. Bellarmine did his great work on the Church 13 years after Trent was completed. I believe we can safely assume that Bellarmine both read and understood what Trent taught in regards to BOD, yet my friend decides, that no, Bellarmine erred, and the Church erred buy letting the official bible commentary teach error for 400 years. I'm not sure what other adjectives I could use other than "mind-boggling" and "incredible" to describe the situation, though I'm sure other adjectives could be used.


Tue Sep 02, 2014 12:58 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 6:06 pm
Posts: 95
New post Re: A Good Willed Person's Objection to BOD
The person I was referencing above posts here. It is amazing how far he has sunk since getting brainwashed by the feeneyites. He refers to me as the devil now for believing in BOB/D. He was not this way before. I wish someone here could help him. But if he won't believe Aquinas why would he believe John Lane.


Wed Oct 29, 2014 11:46 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 6:06 pm
Posts: 95
New post Re: A Good Willed Person's Objection to BOD
I was also trying to figure out whether the complete loss of charity comes with feeneyism alone or with all grave errors pertaining to doctrine? What is the link between feeneyism and a complete lack of charity with the additional benefit being the benefit of the most ignorant suddenly feeling compelled to inform those more qualified on the issue that they are wrong ad nauseum?


Wed Oct 29, 2014 12:51 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 100
New post Re: A Good Willed Person's Objection to BOD
Dear Mario,

In regards to your explianation of Pius XII encyclical. I believe you are entirely correct. Pius XII was adressing that one cannot be actually a member of Christ Church, have received Baptism or it's imprint, without receiving Baptism of Water hence clarifying Christ teaching of a visible Church. Baptism of desire only means one has the desire to become a true member, it does not substitute for the sacrament of Baptism, but only supplies in the case where Baptism is impossible to receive. For God in His infinite justice could never condemn a soul which truly desired to be in His Church but was not afforded the means to become an actual member. Yes it is true, men and the Church are limited by the means to salvation God has given them, i.e. the sacraments. But God has no limitations which do not contradict His very nature itself, so He is not limited nor His power restrained by the sacraments, the means, He has given to us to obtain salvation.

It is the similar to a perfect act of contrition. Most Feyenites even believe in a perfect act of contrition so perhaps your friend may be able to grasp the comparison. A perfect act of contrition allows one to obtain salvation despite having committed a Mortal sin ( which it is a dogma that one with a Mortal sin on his soul is damned) and not receiving confession in the case where it was impossible. Obviously if the individual had confession available and he said to himself "I don't need to go. I will just make a perfect act of contrition." this could not be a perfect act of contrition as it demonstrates a soul which is proud in its presumption both that it can make a perfect act of contrition, something we as the individual could never know as only God could know if we fulfilled the requirements to make it a perfect act of contrition, and a soul which haughtily rejects the commandment of God and His Church by refusing to use the means provided. Even if confession was not available and we made a perfect act of contrition, similar to baptism of desire, we as humans have no way of knowing with certainty that we have fulfilled the requirements. And a perfect act of contrition does not replace confession for it is not a sacrament. If at a later time confession were to become available, we would be obligated to go to receive the sacrament and confess all our sins. Hence like a perfect act of contrition, Baptism of Desire does not replace the sacrament of Baptism, Baptism of Water, but supplies in the case of the latter not being available.

While Feyenites are in the habit of throwing Doctors of the Church, theologians, and great saints under the bus, they need to adress the 1917 Code of Canon law, Canon 737 and Canon 1239.

Quote:
Canon 737-1
Quote:
Baptism, the gateway and foundation of the Sacraments, actually or at least in desire is necessary for all for salvation and is not validly conferred except by washing with true and natural water along the prescribed formula of words.


Quote:
Canon 1239-1/2
Quote:
1/ Those who die without baptism are not to be accorded ecclesiastical burial. 2/ Catechumens who through no fault of their own die without baptism are to be reckoned as baptized


Both of the above Canons clearly teach Baptism of Desire, and Canon Law by its very nature must be infallible in faith and morals. This infallibility is only theologically certain, hence a denial of it is not heresy but a mortal sin, but nevertheless it is absolutely true. For it is the logical conclusion of a society, The Catholic Church, being Holy and infallible which are both dogmas of faith. What society could be Holy, afford the means for salvation, if it allowed its members by its public and universal laws to believe in heresy or practice immorality? What society could be infallible if it taught publicly and everywhere a doctrine which was contrary to the faith? Absurd. Hence the Catholic Church, being infallible and Holy, must have universal laws which are pure in doctrine and secure in morals. A denial of this is tantamount to heresy and a serious sin, a mortal sin objectively. These laws and the Feyenite teaching are irreconcilable hence who must be right, the Feyenites or Holy Mother the Church. The Catholic Church is infallible, not the Feyenites, so I place my faith and trust in the spotless bride of Christ. Oh, and guess what, St. Alphonsus and St. Robert Belarmine, the Doctors of the Church have her for infallible support! But then again, the Feyenites have ...have...have... Brother Michael Diamond? And since when was he infallible?


Last edited by James Schroepfer on Wed Oct 29, 2014 9:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Wed Oct 29, 2014 12:54 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 6:06 pm
Posts: 95
New post Re: A Good Willed Person's Objection to BOD
Thank you for this. When my friend, or I guess former friend, since I am the devil to him now, asked me when Bellarmine wrote his famous work on the Church which taught BOD, I thought this would affirm him in this teaching in that it was written after the Council of Trent, therefore eliminating the idea that he wrote it before knowing what Trent taught. Then they force themselves to think that Holy Mother Church has allowed her officially approved Bibles to teach error since 1582! Really ?!?! Then Alphonsus was "fooled" on the issue. And Aquinas, he simply erred. These people actually swallow their own lies, they actually feel compelled to believe the above as if there is no other Catholic alternative and everyone else is simply stupid, "fooled" or "erroneous". It is one of those things I would never believe if I did not experience it myself.

These people are usually intelligent and sincere, if not studied in Catholic theology, they tend to know more than the average Joe-six-pack in the pew. But when the get the feeneyite disease all common-sense and logic goes out the window. They show the symptoms of a complete and irreversible brainwashing.


Wed Oct 29, 2014 1:13 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 6:06 pm
Posts: 95
New post Re: A Good Willed Person's Objection to BOD
Here is another example of what appeared to be a perfectly sane person being transmuted by the Feeneyite heresy, this should mean he will no longer post here or read anything on this site:

Quote:
Thank God you all believe in bod

U make it so easy for all of us to know who are the false brethren.

Jesus warned us about false teachers

Everyone can easily see there were no consensus among the Fathers, yet you falsely and boldly teach otherwise.

Jesus wants all of his elect to stay away from false brethren like you and stay home and keep His true Faith alive.

We elect can't be fooled by men like you--so take as many souls as u can to hell with you--you can't fool us.

So na na na na na na.


Wed Oct 29, 2014 1:45 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 100
New post Re: A Good Willed Person's Objection to BOD
Dear Mario,

Seeing your "friend's" reply is like deja vu all over again. All I can say is what a friend.

Quote:
Jesus warned us about false teachers


I think it would be good to humbly remind him we do not claim to be teachers, or at least I don't. I simply am repeating what I believe the teachers, such as St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Alphonsus, and Holy Mother the Church herself have taught. If we are in error, it certainly is in good faith and not something to make fun of or laugh at. A true friend would objectively try and correct me if I was wrong not gloat over my honest mistake.

Quote:
Everyone can easily see there were no consensus among the Fathers, yet you falsely and boldly teach otherwise.


Is he claiming the Doctors of the Church taught boldly false doctrine? These Doctors of the Church, who were more versed in the writings of the Fathers of the Church after spending their entire lives studying them and more knowledgeable on the subject than we could ever hope to be, are falsely asserting a doctrine which has no basis in their writings. Is there not a note of pride here in this accusation? Pride doth indeed come before the fall.

And if the Bible could contain error for the last 500 years, how do we know that all the encyclicals and Church documents from the very beginning do not contain any errors? How do we know what the evangelists and Fathers actually wrote? How do we know any infallible pronouncement was not changed or tampered with later? How do we know Pope Pius XII encyclical was not changed? Perhaps Arius change everything back in the 300's? Do the Feyenites have all the original documents? Absurd!

Quote:
Jesus wants all of his elect to stay away from false brethren like you and stay home and keep His true Faith alive


Last time I check the Church teaching, Christ wanted us to be fruitful members of His Church subject to the living magisterium. Although we may not know where the living magisterium is today, we do know for certain, the Feyenites are not it!!!! I don't remember the sermon on crawl in a cave and refuse to be a public witness to your faith or to help your neighbor, especially in instructing him in his ignorance. Perhaps I missed that one and someone can help me????

Quote:
We elect can't be fooled by men like you--so take as many souls as u can to hell with you--you can't fool us.


So now we wish, if BOD were to be a false doctrine, this to lead more souls to Hell? Is this person Catholic? What about love of neighbor and desiring, as does God, for all souls to obtain Heaven? Isn't that what a true Catholic desires? This response is very, very sad indeed. It also exemplifies the inordinate pride so often found in Traditional circles, something I have been very guilty of. We need to all pray to remain humble as this proud attitude of we are better than all the rest infects many traditional Catholics today, especially those who have been given the grace to understand this crisis better. How more effective would we be in opening the eyes of the Novus Ordo Catholics if we approached these subjects with true charity and humility?


Wed Oct 29, 2014 9:20 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 6:06 pm
Posts: 95
New post Re: A Good Willed Person's Objection to BOD
Dear James,

Thank you very much for the responses. I would post all the objections he gave me but I believe it would be a waste of time in regards to benefiting him. I believe many of us have encountered dogmatic sedeplenists who like the feeneyites simply cannot be rationalized with on the topic. The feeneyites I have directly encountered seem to have more hatred in them than the dogmatic sedeplenists though.

I'm sure my friend has read this thread. We can pray it can be a vessel for some actual graces that he will cooperate with whereby he starts trusting the Church more than his own intellect.

May God bless you and Mary keep you,
Mario


Thu Oct 30, 2014 11:59 am
Profile E-mail
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.