You cannot say that the magisterium at Baltimore made a mistake in the Baltimore Catechism, even though you know that no one in Baltimore could have seen or known a baptism of desire case in real life.

Anyone and everyone that we might meet would be taught the rigorist formula of EENS. There are no exceptions to what we can teach and Baptism of Desire, Baptism of Blood and Invincible Ignorance are completely irrelevant to teaching and living totally in the EENS mode.

Lionel:

But you still say there is a baptism  of desire without the baptism of water. So you contradict yourself.

You cannot say that the magisterium at Baltimore made a mistake in the Baltimore Catechism, even though you know that no one in Baltimore could have seen or known a baptism of desire case in real life.

You also do not know any saint who has said that BOD cases were visible or personally known to them, persons  who were saved with BOD and without the baptism of water.

Then when I say that I accept BOD only with the baptism of water you are not willing to accept this.

______________________________

What happened in the Church at the time of the letter of 1949 is for a separate discussion that can bear no fruit until we get this issue of known/unknown behind us along with explicit/implicit.

Lionel:

The issue of known/unknown, explicit/ implicit baptism of desire is at the centre of your interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and Vatican Council II and you still do not want to discuss it.

_____________________________

 The known/unknown is easy or at least it should be for we can not possibly know that all souls in heaven have physically been baptized with water for that is totally in God's domain.  The explicit/implicit for me is also simple.

Lionel:

Yes it is simple. I agree we cannot know if there is a soul in Heaven, baptised or not baptised with water.So the magisterium has made a mistake when it inferred that the baptism of desire and blood, and being saved in invicible ignorance( of the Gospel through no fault of their own) refers to known cases without the baptism of water.

They did not know any such case and yet they taught that there were people in Heaven without the baptism of water.

________________________________

 It is you that continually bash by name many of the Popes, Saints, catechisims as being wrong.

Lionel:

The saints, popes and catechisms before the Baltimore Catechism were not wrong.It is liberal theologians who interpret them using the  irrational premise ( baptism of desire cases are personally visible on earth) and irrational inference ( these 'known' cases are exceptions to the old ecclesiology), who were wrong.These theologians interpretation , accepted by the contemporary magisteriu, are  a rupture with the old intepretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus. You also make the same error.

_________________________________

  I continually mention the Saints, Popes and councils of centuries past because if you were consistent in your positions you would have to go after them also for the contemporary Church professed the same thing.

Lionel:

The contemporary Church is a break with St. Robert Bellarmine, St.Francis Xavier, St. Francis of Assisi and numerous others, who affirmed the strict intepretation  of the dogma EENS. So I criticize the contemporary magisterium for their irrational reasoning  which produces heresy.This heresy is politically acceptable to the Left, who represent Satan in many of their political aims and policies.In conscience I cannot support this.

_________________________________

 What you are correct about is that the catechesis of what the church still believes is NOT taught correctly by the greatest majority of clerics and lay Catholics.

Lionel:

They say the baptism of desire excludes the baptism of water as if they could know. You make the same error.

You tell me that you accept EENS in its strict sense but then also say there is a baptism of desire without the baptism of water, which you accept.You do not see the contradiction.

_______________________________

 Baptism of Desire and Baptism of Blood were taught throughout the centuries and by those very names.

Lionel:

Yes and they are accepted. However you have no right to interpret the saints( St.Charles Borromeo etc) by using an irrational premise and inference, like the liberal theologians at Boston during the time of Fr.Leonard Feeney. This is also the approach of the FSSP priests in your diocese.

_______________________________

  The Church has clearly defined the conditions for BOB and BOD.

Lionel:

The Church has always considered them as hypothetical cases.

The liberal theologians consider then de facto, known cases, objectively visible.

The magisterium of the past considered them as theoretical cases, known to God.

The contemporary magisterium considers them objective cases, known to us humans.

The contempory magisterium has placed BOD in Vatican Council II when it is a theoretical case.It then interprets them as objective cases, known to us humans. So Vatican Council II emerges as a rupture with the dogma EENS, the old ecclesiology and the old understanding of ecumenism and salvation of  non Catholics.

When will you discuss these 'conditions' ?

__________________________________

  There have been countless souls throughout the centuries that were catechumens who died BEFORE receiving the waters of Baptism.

Lionel:

Countless ? Do you know of any one of them? 

_________________________________

  There have been countless souls who converted to Catholicism through BOB before receiving physical water of Baptism.

Lionel:

Can you name one of them? Then explain how could it be known that they were exceptions to the dogmatic teaching which says all need to be formal members of the Catholic Church for salvation?

___________________________________

 Many of these Saints were named by the Church and so we DO KNOW that as far as the Church was concerned they entered Heaven without the physical waters while on Earth and are explicit examples.

Lionel:

How could 'the Church' ( contemporary magisterium) know or see or physically name St.Emerentiana as being in Heaven without the  baptism of water? Does 'the Church' also say that a  particular person, had this '20-20' vision to see St.Emerentiana or St.Victor etc, in Heaven without the baptism of water? So, this gifted person in the Church, made this official announcement in 'the Church'?

______________________________________

 The Church, you and I can not know if they were baptized with water miraculously by God after their death.

Lionel :

Since we cannot know how can you say that 'the Church' and you know of countless persons saved with BOD and without the baptism of water?

-Lionel Andrades