Yes the council of Trent taught that you need both baptism or the desire for it. These two terms are not mutually exclusive. It’s not saying you can have one without the other. That would be heresy.
When I heard of BoD I didn't know who Fr. Feeney was, but BoD is not a thing, so you can call me a Feenyite or whatever because that is what all modernists usually do Trent does not teach BoD in fact it teaches that BoD is not real, if Trent teaches BoD please point out where it is taught because all I ever hear over and over and over again is one line! The one quote from those who do not understand grammar and how 'inclusive or works' , in fact it is also proven in mathematics in 'set theory' , you can ask any one of the AI models today as well and you will see for yourself This individual said nobody ever taught BoD was not real, well they are wrong, both Gregory Nazianzen and Gregory of Nyssa denied it altogether and St. Augustine, who originally believed it later recanted it Both Fr. Wathen and Malachi Martin denied it Karl Rahner argued against it And also please explain to me the "ex cathedra" declaration of Pope Eugene IV when he states that "No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church" - Bull Cantate Domino So as usual, all I ever hear is a lot of talk and no proof We know for a fact that 1. Baptism is one condition that is absolutely necessary for one to be saved 2. That the sacrament of baptism absolutely does not exist without water and this is clearly defined by Trent under the section providing the Definition of Baptism So given those 2, if you believe in BoD please explain what it is and what benefit it provides
Eugeniusz IV mówił o heretykach i schizmatykach.Przeciez to oni czesto umieraja z imieniem Chrystusa na ustach nadal trwajac w swojej herezji czy schizmie.To właśnie on przyłączył do Kościoła Katolickiego najwięcej odłączonych.
Although the doctrine of baptism of desire is true, it is not wise for the Church to be giving the impression that formal baptism is not required in order to be saved. The reigning generation of priests and bishops try to be "pastoral" by relaxing on doctrine, but when it comes to the crucial need for baptism, they want to "hold to the doctrine" even though preaching the need for formal baptism would be more pastoral. Sorry for being critical, but I don't think publicizing the doctrine of baptism of desire will save more souls. Again, we need to preach that formal baptism is the required norm for salvation.
Father Feeney was not excommunicated for doctrinal reasons. It was disciplinary. Being well aware of the proper proceedures of canon law, Fr. Feeney refused to go to Rome for a "trial" without being informed of the charges. He never had to "recant." He was simply asked to recite a creed of the Church, from which he chose the Athanasian Creed. Frank Sheed of the Catholic publishing house of Sheed & Ward, in his autobiography, made the point that Fr. Feeney was silenced, but never answered.
@John ...Mall Thank you for writing this comment: you are correct. And without water baptism, there is no entry into the one, true, Catholic and Apostolic Chruch: no Salvation. This is a dogma of the Church; no exceptions.
He was excommunicated due to HIS own teachings and refusing to decant what he taught, so you could say he was excommunicated as "disciplinary action" due to his views and teachings on false doctrine. Fr. Feeney chose his silence and was a very hardened man and continually taught errors and horrific ideas of Catholic religion. On baptism of desire, to say it is false is to say God is not merciful.
The Holy Office only deals with faith and morals, he was definitely excommunicated for heresy, he just so happened to be a disobedient heretic as well...
I was led to believe that these Saints whom you claim were not baptised were indeed baptised by people. I have not heard that they were baptised by angels. Gbu. + Monsignor Steven Hartley
Very good video. As long as BOD isn’t applied to active members of other religions I agree with it. But if anyone says people can be saved without supernatural faith, hope, and love of Christ by simply following the natural law to the best of their ability while still staying in a pagan faith that’s unjustifiable. That exact sentiment was rejected by Pope Gregory XVI. If you have natural means to know about and join the Catholic Church (I.e. the Internet or access to the Church) you can’t be incurable ignorant and need to join the Church or atleast specifically wish to do so while not professing a false religion. If you have no access to the internet or the Church then a bare minimum has to be belief in Christ and the gospel while not actively rejecting the Church (if they had any knowledge of it).
Acerbo Nimis On Teaching Christian Doctrine Pope Pius X - 1905 ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS X ON TEACHING CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE To the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, Bishops and other Ordinaries in Peace and Communion with the Apostolic See. Venerable Brethren, Health and the Apostolic Blessing. At this very troublesome and difficult time, the hidden designs of God have conducted Our poor strength to the office of Supreme pastor, to rule the entire flock of Christ. The enemy has, indeed, long been prowling about the fold and attacking it with such subtle cunning that now, more than ever before, the prediction of the Apostle to the elders of the Church of Ephesus seems to be verified: “I know that . . . fierce wolves will get in among you, and will not spare the flock.”[1] Those who still are zealous for the glory of God are seeking the causes and reasons for this decline in religion. Coming to a different explanation, each points out, according to his own view, a different plan for the protection and restoration of the kingdom of God on earth. But it seems to Vs, Venerable Brethren, that while we should not overlook other considerations, We are forced to agree with those who hold that the chief cause of the present indifference and, as it were, infirmity of soul, and the serious evils that result from it, is to be found above all in ignorance of things divine. This is fully in accord with what God Himself declared through the Prophet Osee: “And there is no knowledge of God in the land. Cursing and lying and killing and theft and adultery have overflowed: and blood hath touched blood. Thereafter shall the land mourn, and everyone that dwelleth in it shall languish.”[2] 2. It is a common complaint, unfortunately too well founded, that there are large numbers of Christians in our own time who are entirely ignorant of those truths necessary for salvation. And when we mention Christians, We refer not only to the masses or to those in the lower walks of life - for these find some excuse for their ignorance in the fact that the demands of their harsh employers hardly leave them time to take care of themselves or of their dear ones - but We refer to those especially who do not lack culture or talents and, indeed, are possessed of abundant knowledge regarding things of the world but live rashly and imprudently with regard to religion. It is hard to find words to describe how profound is the darkness in which they are engulfed and, what is most deplorable of all, how tranquilly they repose there. They rarely give thought to God, the Supreme Author and Ruler of all things, or to the teachings of the faith of Christ. They know nothing of the Incarnation of the Word of God, nothing of the perfect restoration of the human race which He accomplished. Grace, the greatest of the helps for attaining eternal things, the Holy Sacrifice and the Sacraments by which we obtain grace, are entirely unknown to them. They have no conception of the malice and baseness of sin; hence they show no anxiety to avoid sin or to renounce it. And so they arrive at life’s end in such a condition that, lest all hope of salvation be lost, the priest is obliged to give in the last few moments of life a summary teaching of religion, a time which should be devoted to stimulating the soul to greater love for God. And even this as too often happens only when the dying man is not so sinfully ignorant as to look upon the ministration of the priest as useless, and then calmly faces the fearful passage to eternity without making his peace with God. And so Our Predecessor, Benedict XIV, had just cause to write: “We declare that a great number of those who are condemned to eternal punishment suffer that everlasting calamity because of ignorance of those mysteries of faith which must be known and believed in order to be numbered among the elect.”
He was excommunicated due to HIS own teachings and refusing to decant what he taught, so you could say he was excommunicated as "disciplinary action" due to his public views and teachings on false doctrine. Fr. Feeney chose his silence and was a very hardened man and continually taught errors and horrific ideas of Catholic religion. On baptism of desire, to say it is false is to say God is not merciful.
II. Decree of Excommunication On February 13, 1953 a letter of excommunication was released, having no statement at all in it on doctrine, but had as its reason “grave disobedience of Church authority.” Though this letter was registered into the Acta, it is formally defective and thus invalid for the following reasons: 1. The letter lacked the seal of the Holy Office and/or of the tribunal and was only signed by a notary. In fact, it bore no seal at all. The purpose of a seal is precisely to show the genuineness of a document and its contents, and is required for validity. 2. The letter lacked the signature of the judge of the tribunal which issued it; where, for validity, the judgment of a court of record must have. 3. The decree was never properly communicated to the accused, which by law (and fairness) it must. It was first published in America in the newspapers. 4. Father Feeney’s summons to Rome was uncanonical. Therefore, the summons was null and the penalties resulting from it are void. Canon 1723: “Renders an uncanonical summons null.” Canon 1959: “Forbids penalties without a trial.” 5. There was never any canonical trial by a court concerning this case as proscribed by the disciplinary canons and decrees of the Council of Trent. Therefore, according to Canon Law, no valid penalties could result. 6. As allowed by Canon Law, Father Feeney sent a letter dated July 16, 1953, entering a “Complaint of Nullity” against the decree of excommunication, to the Holy Father. It was never answered. Not only was Father Feeney not given a fair hearing, he was given no hearing at all, though required by Canon Law. catholicism.org/father-feeney-fact-sheet.html
Water baptism is essential for salvation . The church has spoken on this right from the beginning. Our Lord was the first and from example. Baptism of desire may get you to limbo but short of heaven and the beatific vision
Father, I will go one better in response to your challenge in showing a theologian: Christ's own words. Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
I remember interacting with Fr. Benedict very fondly. He’s a very kind and gentle soul. I was blessed to know him.
And I had the pleasure of serving for him!! I should have added that! May God bless him and our other priests.
Thank you Fr.Hughes!🙏🏻
Thanks Father
Thanks!
One specific argument they will us is that at Trent, "baptism or it's desire" is a mis translation from Latin and it really says something else.
I need to look up Saint Emerenciana.
Yes the council of Trent taught that you need both baptism or the desire for it. These two terms are not mutually exclusive. It’s not saying you can have one without the other. That would be heresy.
no Baptism And desire AKA u cannot be forced
All the Feenyites come out in droves and they all sound the exact same in every combox.
What is Father's take on the argument from the Dimon Brothers?? God Bless. Hugh
When I heard of BoD I didn't know who Fr. Feeney was, but BoD is not a thing, so you can call me a Feenyite or whatever because that is what all modernists usually do
Trent does not teach BoD in fact it teaches that BoD is not real, if Trent teaches BoD please point out where it is taught because all I ever hear over and over and over again is one line! The one quote from those who do not understand grammar and how 'inclusive or works' , in fact it is also proven in mathematics in 'set theory' , you can ask any one of the AI models today as well and you will see for yourself
This individual said nobody ever taught BoD was not real, well they are wrong, both Gregory Nazianzen and Gregory of Nyssa denied it altogether and St. Augustine, who originally believed it later recanted it
Both Fr. Wathen and Malachi Martin denied it
Karl Rahner argued against it
And also please explain to me the "ex cathedra" declaration of Pope Eugene IV when he states that
"No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church" - Bull Cantate Domino
So as usual, all I ever hear is a lot of talk and no proof
We know for a fact that
1. Baptism is one condition that is absolutely necessary for one to be saved
2. That the sacrament of baptism absolutely does not exist without water and this is clearly defined by Trent under the section providing the Definition of Baptism
So given those 2, if you believe in BoD please explain what it is and what benefit it provides
baptism And desire AKA u cannot be forced these heretics are something else
Eugeniusz IV mówił o heretykach i schizmatykach.Przeciez to oni czesto umieraja z imieniem Chrystusa na ustach nadal trwajac w swojej herezji czy schizmie.To właśnie on przyłączył do Kościoła Katolickiego najwięcej odłączonych.
Although the doctrine of baptism of desire is true, it is not wise for the Church to be giving the impression that formal baptism is not required in order to be saved. The reigning generation of priests and bishops try to be "pastoral" by relaxing on doctrine, but when it comes to the crucial need for baptism, they want to "hold to the doctrine" even though preaching the need for formal baptism would be more pastoral. Sorry for being critical, but I don't think publicizing the doctrine of baptism of desire will save more souls. Again, we need to preach that formal baptism is the required norm for salvation.
Father Feeney was not excommunicated for doctrinal reasons. It was disciplinary. Being well aware of the proper proceedures of canon law, Fr. Feeney refused to go to Rome for a "trial" without being informed of the charges. He never had to "recant." He was simply asked to recite a creed of the Church, from which he chose the Athanasian Creed. Frank Sheed of the Catholic publishing house of Sheed & Ward, in his autobiography, made the point that Fr. Feeney was silenced, but never answered.
wrong
@John ...Mall Thank you for writing this comment: you are correct. And without water baptism, there is no entry into the one, true, Catholic and Apostolic Chruch: no Salvation. This is a dogma of the Church; no exceptions.
He was excommunicated due to HIS own teachings and refusing to decant what he taught, so you could say he was excommunicated as "disciplinary action" due to his views and teachings on false doctrine. Fr. Feeney chose his silence and was a very hardened man and continually taught errors and horrific ideas of Catholic religion. On baptism of desire, to say it is false is to say God is not merciful.
@@stephenmocko7365 You're wrong
The Holy Office only deals with faith and morals, he was definitely excommunicated for heresy, he just so happened to be a disobedient heretic as well...
I was led to believe that these Saints whom you claim were not baptised were indeed baptised by people. I have not heard that they were baptised by angels.
Gbu. + Monsignor Steven Hartley
CathInfo is gonna lose it when they see this
Very good video. As long as BOD isn’t applied to active members of other religions I agree with it. But if anyone says people can be saved without supernatural faith, hope, and love of Christ by simply following the natural law to the best of their ability while still staying in a pagan faith that’s unjustifiable. That exact sentiment was rejected by Pope Gregory XVI. If you have natural means to know about and join the Catholic Church (I.e. the Internet or access to the Church) you can’t be incurable ignorant and need to join the Church or atleast specifically wish to do so while not professing a false religion. If you have no access to the internet or the Church then a bare minimum has to be belief in Christ and the gospel while not actively rejecting the Church (if they had any knowledge of it).
Acerbo Nimis
On Teaching Christian Doctrine
Pope Pius X - 1905
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS X ON TEACHING CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE
To the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, Bishops and other Ordinaries in Peace and Communion with the Apostolic See.
Venerable Brethren, Health and the Apostolic Blessing.
At this very troublesome and difficult time, the hidden designs of God have conducted Our poor strength to the office of Supreme pastor, to rule the entire flock of Christ. The enemy has, indeed, long been prowling about the fold and attacking it with such subtle cunning that now, more than ever before, the prediction of the Apostle to the elders of the Church of Ephesus seems to be verified: “I know that . . . fierce wolves will get in among you, and will not spare the flock.”[1] Those who still are zealous for the glory of God are seeking the causes and reasons for this decline in religion. Coming to a different explanation, each points out, according to his own view, a different plan for the protection and restoration of the kingdom of God on earth. But it seems to Vs, Venerable Brethren, that while we should not overlook other considerations, We are forced to agree with those who hold that the chief cause of the present indifference and, as it were, infirmity of soul, and the serious evils that result from it, is to be found above all in ignorance of things divine. This is fully in accord with what God Himself declared through the Prophet Osee: “And there is no knowledge of God in the land. Cursing and lying and killing and theft and adultery have overflowed: and blood hath touched blood. Thereafter shall the land mourn, and everyone that dwelleth in it shall languish.”[2]
2. It is a common complaint, unfortunately too well founded, that there are large numbers of Christians in our own time who are entirely ignorant of those truths necessary for salvation. And when we mention Christians, We refer not only to the masses or to those in the lower walks of life - for these find some excuse for their ignorance in the fact that the demands of their harsh employers hardly leave them time to take care of themselves or of their dear ones - but We refer to those especially who do not lack culture or talents and, indeed, are possessed of abundant knowledge regarding things of the world but live rashly and imprudently with regard to religion. It is hard to find words to describe how profound is the darkness in which they are engulfed and, what is most deplorable of all, how tranquilly they repose there. They rarely give thought to God, the Supreme Author and Ruler of all things, or to the teachings of the faith of Christ. They know nothing of the Incarnation of the Word of God, nothing of the perfect restoration of the human race which He accomplished. Grace, the greatest of the helps for attaining eternal things, the Holy Sacrifice and the Sacraments by which we obtain grace, are entirely unknown to them. They have no conception of the malice and baseness of sin; hence they show no anxiety to avoid sin or to renounce it. And so they arrive at life’s end in such a condition that, lest all hope of salvation be lost, the priest is obliged to give in the last few moments of life a summary teaching of religion, a time which should be devoted to stimulating the soul to greater love for God. And even this as too often happens only when the dying man is not so sinfully ignorant as to look upon the ministration of the priest as useless, and then calmly faces the fearful passage to eternity without making his peace with God. And so Our Predecessor, Benedict XIV, had just cause to write: “We declare that a great number of those who are condemned to eternal punishment suffer that everlasting calamity because of ignorance of those mysteries of faith which must be known and believed in order to be numbered among the elect.”
He was excommunicated due to HIS own teachings and refusing to decant what he taught, so you could say he was excommunicated as "disciplinary action" due to his public views and teachings on false doctrine. Fr. Feeney chose his silence and was a very hardened man and continually taught errors and horrific ideas of Catholic religion. On baptism of desire, to say it is false is to say God is not merciful.
II. Decree of Excommunication
On February 13, 1953 a letter of excommunication was released, having no statement at all in it on doctrine, but had as its reason “grave disobedience of Church authority.” Though this letter was registered into the Acta, it is formally defective and thus invalid for the following reasons:
1. The letter lacked the seal of the Holy Office and/or of the tribunal and was only signed by a notary. In fact, it bore no seal at all. The purpose of a seal is precisely to show the genuineness of a document and its contents, and is required for validity.
2. The letter lacked the signature of the judge of the tribunal which issued it; where, for validity, the judgment of a court of record must have.
3. The decree was never properly communicated to the accused, which by law (and fairness) it must. It was first published in America in the newspapers.
4. Father Feeney’s summons to Rome was uncanonical. Therefore, the summons was null and the penalties resulting from it are void.
Canon 1723: “Renders an uncanonical summons null.”
Canon 1959: “Forbids penalties without a trial.”
5. There was never any canonical trial by a court concerning this case as proscribed by the disciplinary canons and decrees of the Council of Trent. Therefore, according to Canon Law, no valid penalties could result.
6. As allowed by Canon Law, Father Feeney sent a letter dated July 16, 1953, entering a “Complaint of Nullity” against the decree of excommunication, to the Holy Father. It was never answered. Not only was Father Feeney not given a fair hearing, he was given no hearing at all, though required by Canon Law.
catholicism.org/father-feeney-fact-sheet.html
Water baptism is essential for salvation . The church has spoken on this right from the beginning. Our Lord was the first and from example. Baptism of desire may get you to limbo but short of heaven and the beatific vision
Water Baptism or no Salvation
Father, I will go one better in response to your challenge in showing a theologian: Christ's own words.
Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.