Wednesday, February 21, 2024

Baptism is Necessary, Don't Omit it For Yourself or Others

John 3:5 Mockers Stumped (1917 Code, Delayed Ensoulment, “Baptism Of Desire”) | 14 Febr. 2024

12:14 Excuse me, but those who believed in delayed ensoulment and celebrated at least since Alexander VI Dec 8th as "immaculate conception" (given that Her birth was Sept 8) would obviously have held TWO exceptions to delayed ensoulment. As the Son, so the Mother.

I think you can read this in St. Thomas Aquinas.

12:43, no, none of them did, they all held She was miraculously exempt, as also Her Divine Son.

13:26 Sancte Maxime, ora pro nobis!

That was a new argument for me.

14:23 Woywod and Smith ... if the marital age was raised from 14 / 12 to 16 / 14 already in 1917, they must have commented on this change.

Would you mind telling me what they considered about it?

It is an important issue for me, I think the 18 / 18 limit is doctrinally erroneous if considered as morally correct, and poses a danger to souls and to demographics. Souls involving both those of feti aborted when their mothers are considered "too young" to marry, which often happens, and those of teens suffering from delayed marriage in combination with prolonged obligatory usually mixed education and other occasions promoting sexual desire, like proms and by now "lite porn" (not so referred to) in lots of entertainment media.

It also causes a recruiting ground not just for shrinks, but also for people like the late Epstein.

So, I would be obliged for their comment!

15:43 -- dito for the comment on it by Peter Vidal SI.

20:57 Would you consider this could exonerate Wojtyla from being "legislating error" in CCC § 283, since CCC is only for the Western Rite?

This deference for modern science is not to be found in Jesus, Our Pascha, the current catechism for Byzantine Catholics.

Irrespectively of the fact you consider him an antipope for other reasons.

28:35 "excluding therefore the stumbling block of the new invention we must not Define or Proclaim one or two activities" (Honorius, to Sergius)
"However, this must be done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is, those favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure," (Pius XII, Humani Generis)

"excluding therefore the stumbling block of the new invention we must not Define or Proclaim one or two activities" (Honorius, to Sergius)
Refusal of some to accept Creation science, since, unlike the YEC position as such, it is new ...

Honorii consortes ...

23:25 As we know, this is widely used by FSSPX to argue one can recognise and resist one and the same man as pope and in select orders of his ...

Would you argue, as I do, St. Robert is speaking of sth like a "once only" resistance, if new orders are issued in the same sense, either they must be followed or the papacy denied?

32:44 Whether it was decree about Armenians or Copts, Eugene IV says that those dying without conversion cannot be saved.

Some have argued, this was a decree to a segment of the Church, even if issued at a universal council, therefore it was not infallible.

35:12 Obviously, the most direct meaning of "licet non omnibus" is as a reference to not all need to marry, not all need to be ordained to get saved.

But advocates of BOD would consider this phrase in Iniunctum nobis and Code of 1917 to involve at least a possible application to those who have no opportunity to get baptised before they die, but long for it.

39:48 CANON V.-If any one saith, that baptism is free, that is, not necessary unto salvation; let him be anathema.

Free or optional refers to a reasonable hope a man could have of getting saved without getting baptised.

It doesn't refer to steps to getting baptised being foiled.

The New Mass Lacks The “Mystery Of Faith” (Novus Ordo Modernists Refuted) | 22 Febr. 2024

1:44 Swedish and I think also Polish had a more literal translation.

"För er och för de många" / "For you and for the many" ...

10:53 With the bishop who ordained the priest who, in Buenos Aires, was witness to what seems pretty clearly to be a Eucharistic miracle, do you think the bishop had been consecrated before the change, or that this option was used?

No comments: