Posted on 05/13/2005 1:15:36 PM PDT by NYer
Done with your nonsense?
You personify "nonsense." No need to continue.
Ahem....schnookems, there was no need for you to even start.
Your worthless posts are the typical stuff that cowards thrive on. You drop your bird droppings and then won't engage in a civil discussion to back up your junk.
Come back when you get two things: some backbone and some knowledge to debate with. It's obvious you have neither.
Read Psalm 50 (the Miserere). I'm not sure where you got this doctrine, but it is not the one I learned when I embraced Catholicism. If you honestly do not know that something is a mortal sin, God would spare you the eternal penalty for it, but that does not change the fact that it is a mortal sin. However, every human after Adam (except, of course, for Our Lord and His Blessed Mother) has been conceived with the stain of Original Sin on his soul, and must receive absolution through Baptism. No one is innocent, and thus God does not owe it to any of us to give us a shot at Salvation--it is by His grace alone that we can enter heaven.
That, incidently, is precisely why abortion is so horrific: it deprives those poor victims of any chance for Baptism and therefore the Kingdom. Of course the Church holds out hope that God, by His mercy, may allow these young souls to find rest in limbo--but that is not dogma, and it is just a hope that we hold. If anyone should die with Original or Mortal Sin on his soul, all we can say is God have mercy on him.
Baptism by water, blood, or desire.
It's the "desire" part that confounds Mark.
Exactly! Not to mention all those embryos that sit frozen on a shelf. I heard somewhere that abortion is a "sacrament" to satanists. What pure evil, to deny souls baptism.
Well, infants can undergo Baptism of Blood, but not Baptism of Desire, as they are unable to use reason. But from what I understand, Baptism of Despire must come from a strong, undying wish to serve God first. With communication technology being what it is in this day and age, I find it unlikely that such a seeker, ardently searching for God and truth, would not be led to the Catholic Church or at least a Protestant congregation (where he would in all likelihood be baptized).
In any event, Mark's point was that proselytism is still necessary, and with no recognizably "Christian" cultural and demographic space in the modern world, it is as critical as ever.
One can only hope that God might in His mercy would command His angels to baptize those poor children.
Yes.
And with that you yield the moral high ground, terra firma of reason and all pretence of logic. Are you correct??? I don't think so but it is possible to be irrational, uninformed and still be correct about something but do not expect to win many people to your side. I see you and all NO Catholics as fellow Catholics, I do not condemn you but if you are going to engage in slander (or even the possibility of slander) you need to be prepared to defend your position or shut up. You have just proven that you are not the man for that task.
There are many people in the Catholic Church that are sympatric to SSPX but are concerned about Pope John Paul II statement regarding them and so they stay away. They do not claim to know so they chose the route that seems safest to their thinking. Then there are many Catholics that dislike everything SSPX stands for but they also do not claim to know their faith well enough to attack them so they keep their mouth closed. Both groups simply state this is what I understand and rely on their trust in their local Bishop. They do not go out of their way to slander. Both have more good sense, even in their lack of information than you do. They know they can not defend nor attack SSPX based on their understanding and in doing so they show greater wisdom than .... well for that see Proverbs 17.12 http://drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=22&ch=17&l=12&f=s#x
Re: "Baptism by water, blood, or desire. It's the "desire" part that confounds Mark."
I do not reject Baptism of desire. You can not claim that from my post unless you read more into them than there is there to justify such a conclusion. In fact I do not remember any of our conservation dealing specifically with that aspect.
Baptism of desire is my only hope for all my Protestant loved ones who have already passed. I cling to that hope with all my being and it is in regard to that very doctrine that I have been saying the Magnificent prayers of Saint Bridget. Because I hope.
Where you get that presumption in regard to me I do not know but speaking on matters that you have too little information seems to be a habit.
Perhaps your slamming of JPII should be considered "fraternal slamming?"
Get serious, Mark. I don't have the time to find the correspondence from the Vatican which clearly stated that SSPX clergy are excommunicated--but it's there.
As to your confusion over redemption--you would be well-advised to grant the Pope the faint possibility that he actually KNOWS more doctrine, dogma, and theology than you do.
Heh... check out Dave Armstrong's [weak] attempt to mitigate the horror of that action: http://web.archive.org/web/20030604152818/http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ394.HTM.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.