Monday, November 4, 2024

Contending For The Faith---Part 33

 

In St. Jude 1:3, we read, "Dearly beloved, taking all care to write unto you concerning your common salvation, I was under a necessity to write unto you: to beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints." [Emphasis mine]. Contending For The Faith is a series of posts dedicated to apologetics (i.e.,  the intellectual defense of the truth of the Traditional Catholic Faith) to be published the first Monday of each month.  This is the next installment.

Sadly, in this time of Great Apostasy, the faith is under attack like never before, and many Traditionalists don't know their faith well enough to defend it. Remember the words of our first pope, "But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect..." (1Peter 3:16). There are five (5) categories of attacks that will be dealt with in these posts. Attacks against:
  • The existence and attributes of God
  • The truth of the One True Church established by Christ for the salvation of all 
  • The truth of a particular dogma or doctrine of the Church
  • The truth of Catholic moral teaching
  • The truth of the sedevacantist position as the only Catholic solution to what has happened since Vatican II 
In addition, controversial topics touching on the Faith will sometimes be featured, so that the problem and possible solutions may be better understood. If anyone had suggestions for topics that would fall into any of these categories, you may post them in the comments. I cannot guarantee a post on each one, but each will be carefully considered.

The Church Dogma of Purgatory
The month of November is dedicated to the souls in Purgatory. The Vatican II sect tells the world there is no Hell (or if there is no one goes there). If so, why care about a temporary place of punishment, less worrisome than Hell? Vatican II sect clergy hardly ever discuss Purgatory or offer prayers for the deceased. Members of the sect make no use of indulgences for themselves or the departed. This post will explain the Church's teaching concerning Purgatory and indulgences. 

I take no credit for the content of this post. I have taken the information from the approved theologians, most notably, Tanquerey, Pohle, Ott, and Davis--as well as other approved sources. 

What is Purgatory?
The souls of the just who leave this world in the state of sanctifying grace are deserving of Heaven. However, if a soul has unremitted venial sins, or temporal punishments that remain after sins are forgiven, they are not pure enough to see God. Nothing undefiled can enter into Heaven, therefore, Purgatory is where those souls go to expiate any venial sins and/or temporal punishments. The Council of Trent infallibly defined the existence of Purgatory:

Whereas the Catholic Church, instructed by the Holy Ghost, has from the Sacred Scriptures and the ancient tradition of the Fathers taught in Councils and very recently in this Ecumenical synod that there is a purgatory, and that the souls therein are helped by the suffrages of the faithful, but principally by the acceptable Sacrifice of the Altar. (Emphasis mine).

Whereas before death a soul can cleanse itself by freely choosing to suffer for its sins, and can gain merit for this suffering, a soul in purgatory can not so choose and gains no merit for the suffering and no increase in glory. Rather, it is cleansed according to the demands of Divine Justice. Where is Purgatory to be found in the Sources of Revelation?

The Holy Bible
The Old Testament
Deuteronomy 34:8:And the children of Israel mourned for him in the plains of Moab thirty days: and the days of their mourning in which they mourned for Moses were ended.

The Jewish understanding of these practices was that the prayers freed the souls from their painful state of purification, and expedited their journey to God.

Baruch 3:4: O Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, hear now the prayer of the dead of Israel, and of their children, that have sinned before thee, and have not hearkened to the voice of the Lord their God, wherefore evils have cleaved fast to us.

Baruch asks the Lord to hear the prayers of the dead of Israel. Prayers for the dead are unnecessary in Heaven and unnecessary in Hell. These dead are in Purgatory.

2 Maccabees 12: 43-46: And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachms of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection, (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,) And because he considered that they who had fallen asleep with godliness, had great grace laid up for them. It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.

Here is a very direct reference to Purgatory. Prayer for the dead in Hell and in Heaven is useless. Nor is there loosening (remission) of sins in either Heaven or Hell. Martin Luther himself realized there was no getting around this so he removed this Book from the Canon of Scripture. 

New Testament

1 Corinthains 3: 10-15: According to the grace of God that is given to me, as a wise architect, I have laid the foundation; and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid; which is Christ Jesus. Now if any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble: Every man's work shall be manifest; for the day of the Lord shall declare it, because it shall be revealed in fire; and the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is. If any man's work abide, which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work burn, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.

Works are judged after death and tested by fire. Some works are lost, but the person is still saved. St. Paul is referring to the state of purgation called Purgatory. The venial sins (bad works) that were committed are burned up after death, but the person is still brought to salvation. This state after death cannot be Heaven (no one with venial sins is present) or Hell (there is no forgiveness and salvation).

"... if any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.” The phrase for “suffer loss” in the Greek is “zemiothesetai.” The root word is “zemioo” which also refers to punishment. The construction “zemiothesetai” is used in Exodus 21:22 and Proverbs 19:19 which refers to punishment (from the Hebrew “anash” meaning “punish” or “penalty”). Hence, this verse proves that there is an expiation of temporal punishment after our death, but the person is still saved. This cannot mean Heaven (there is no punishment in heaven) and this cannot mean Hell (the possibility of expiation no longer exists and the person is not saved).

St. Jude 1:23: But others save, pulling them out of the fire. And on others have mercy, in fear, hating also the spotted garment which is carnal.

The people who are saved are being snatched out of the fire. People are already saved if they are in Heaven, and there is no possibility of salvation if they are in Hell. These people are being led to Heaven from Purgatory.

Apocalypse 3:17-18:  I counsel thee to buy of me gold fire tried, that thou mayest be made rich; and mayest be clothed in white garments, and that the shame of thy nakedness may not appear; and anoint thy eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. Such as I love, I rebuke and chastise. Be zealous therefore, and do penance.

Christ refers to this fire as what refines into gold those He loves if they repent of their sins. This is in the context of after death because Jesus, speaking from Heaven, awards the white garment of salvation after the purgation of fire (both after death).

Sacred Tradition

St. John Chrysostom (d. 407) –  Not in vain was it decreed by the Apostles that in the awesome mysteries remembrance should be made of the departed. They knew that here there was much gain for them, much benefit. For when the entire people stands with hands uplifted, a priestly assembly, and that awesome sacrificial Victim is laid out, how, when we are calling up God, should we not succeed in their defense? But this is done for those who have departed in the faith, while even the catechumens are not reckoned as worthy of this consolation, but are deprived of every means of assistance except one. And what is that? We may give alms to the poor on their behalf. (Homily #4 Philippians – Patrologia Graeca 66.295) 

St. Augustine of Hippo (d. 430) – There is an ecclesiastical discipline, as the faithful know, when the names of martyrs are read aloud in that place at the Altar of God, where prayer is not offered for them. Prayer, however, is offered for other dead who are remembered. For it is wrong to pray for a martyr, to whose prayers we ought ourselves be commended. (Sermo 159.1).

But by the prayers of the Holy Church, and by the salvific sacrifice, and by the alms which are given for their spirits, there is no doubt that the dead are aided, that the Lord might deal more mercifully with them than their sins would deserve. For the whole Church observes this practice which was handed down by the fathers: that it prays for those who have died in the communion of the body and blood of Christ, when they are commemorated in their own place in the sacrifice itself; and the sacrifice is offered also in memory of them, on their behalf. If, then, works of mercy are celebrated for the sake of those who are being remembered, who would hesitate to recommend them, on whose behalf prayers to God are not offered in vain? It is not at all to be doubted that such prayers are of profit to the dead; but for such of them as lived before their death in a way that makes it possible for these things to be useful to them after death.  (Sermo 172.2)

Temporal punishments are suffered by some in this life only, by some after death, by some both here and hereafter; but all of them before that last and strictest judgment. But not all who suffer temporal punishments after death will come to eternal punishments, which are to follow after that judgement. (City of God, Book 21-Ch. 13)

St. Gregory the Great (d. 604) – Peter: ‘Desirous I am to be informed, whether we ought to believe that after death there is any fire of Purgatory‘. Gregory: ‘But yet we must believe that before the day of judgment there is a Purgatory fire for certain small sins: because our Savior saith, that he which speaketh blasphemy against the holy Ghost, that it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come.66 Out of which sentence we learn, that some sins are forgiven in this world, and some other may be pardoned in the next: for that which is denied concerning one sin, is consequently understood to be granted touching some other. 

But yet this, as I said, we have not to believe but only concerning little and very small sins, as, for example, daily idle talk, immoderate laughter, negligence in the care of our family (which kind of offences scarce can they avoid, that know in what sort sin is to be shunned), ignorant errors in matters of no great weight: all which sins be punished after death, if men procured not pardon and remission for them in their lifetime: for when St. Paul saith, that Christ is the foundation: and by and by addeth: And if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble: the work of every one, of what kind it is, the fire shall try. If any man’s work abide which he built thereupon, he shall receive reward; if any mans work burn, he shall suffer detriment, but himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.

For although these words may be understood of the fire of tribulation, which men suffer in this world: yet if any will interpret them of the fire of Purgatory, which shall be in the next life: then must he carefully consider, that the Apostle said not that he may be saved by fire, that buildeth upon this foundation iron, brass, or lead, that is, the greater sort of sins, and therefore more hard, and consequently not remissible in that place: but wood, hay, stubble, that is, little and very light sins, which the fire doth easily consume. Yet we have here further to consider, that none can be there purged, no, not for the least sins that be, unless in his lifetime he deserved by virtuous works to find such favor in that place. (Dialogues – Book 4, Ch 39)

Indulgences: Profiting the Living and the Dead

The word Indulgence is derived from Indulgere (Latin) which conveys the idea of sweetness in one's dealings with others. From the etymology, Indulgere could be applied to a mother's love for her child, the cancellation of a debtor's obligation by the creditor, or in this case, God's pardon of the repentant sinner.  The 1917 Code of Canon Law has this to say about indulgences in Canon 911, "Let all highly prize indulgences, or the remission of sin before God of the temporal punishment due to sins already forgiven as to guilt, which remission the ecclesiastical authority grants out of the treasure of the Church, and applies to the living by way of absolution, to the departed by way of suffrage." 

 This definition in the Code has several factors to be examined:
  • The negative element
  • The positive element
  • The value of indulgences and their source
  • The gaining of an indulgence
Each factor will now be examined.

The Negative Element

 All actual sins impart a double wound on the soul. The first is called reatus culpae, which is the wound of guilt. This occurs when you turn away from God and towards creatures. As a result, you forfeit (either partially or completely) your divine friendship with God which consists in having sanctifying grace in your soul. Those unfortunate enough to incur mortal sin, turn totally away from God, lose sanctifying grace completely and are worthy of Hell. Those who commit venial sin, only partially turn their allegiance from God, and it lessens (but does not extinguish) sanctifying grace. Hence, those guilty of venial sin only are not worthy of Hell.

 The second wound is called reatus poenae, or liability to punishment. According to the Angelic Doctor, St. Thomas Aquinas, mortal sin is an aversion from God, and venial sin is a turning toward creatures but not completely away from God. Therefore, mortal sin is a complete rebellion against God and deserves eternal punishment. Venial sin is not absolute rebellion and is deserving of a temporary punishment only.

Since mortal sin is both complete rebellion against God, and contains the lesser included offense of turning towards creatures over God, it merits not only an eternal punishment, but a temporal one as well, just like venial sin (See Summa Theologica, III, q. 84, art. 4). The guilt of mortal sin can only be removed either by Confession or an Act of Perfect Contrition cum voto (with desire and resole to go to Penance as soon as you can). The guilt of venial sin can be removed not only in Confession or perfect contrition, but also by hearing Mass devoutly, receiving Holy Communion with fervor, and pious use of Sacramentals. 

Indulgences remove the temporal punishment due after the guilt of sin has been eradicated. 

The Positive Element

 In certain cases both guilt and punishment can be remitted, but this is not the usual case except in the Sacrament of Baptism, where the soul of the person just baptized is rendered completely acceptable to God and can enter Heaven immediately. In its Decree on Original Sin, the Council of Trent declares, "For in those who are born again God hates nothing, because there is no condemnation to those who are truly buried together with Christ by baptism unto death, who walk not according to the flesh, but, putting off the old man and putting on the new one who is created according to God, are made innocent, immaculate, pure, guiltless and beloved of God, heirs indeed of God, joint heirs with Christ; so that there is nothing whatever to hinder their entrance into heaven." 

The rule is the opposite outside of Baptism. The Council of Trent infallibly declared:

CANON XII.--If any one saith, that God always remits the whole punishment together with the guilt, and that the satisfaction of penitents is no other than the faith whereby they apprehend  that Christ has satisfied for them; let him be anathema.

CANON XV.--If any one saith, that the keys are given to the Church, only to loose, not also to bind; and that, therefore, priests act contrary to the purpose of the keys, and contrary to the institution of Christ, when they impose punishments on those who confess; and that it is a fiction, that, after the eternal punishment, has, by virtue of the keys, been removed, there remains for the most part a temporal punishment to be discharged; let him be anathema.

Therefore, indulgences are good works by which we can remove some or all of the temporal punishment due to forgiven sins. Where does the power of these good works to remove sin come to us? Through "the treasure of the Church." By reason of the Hypostatic Union (the Divine and human natures of Christ united in the one Person of God the Son), the smallest act of Christ was of infinite value and could satisfy Divine Justice for the sins of the world. The incredible number of hardships and tortures Our Lord endured was thereby superabundant, but not wasted. These merits as well as those of the Blessed Mother and the saints are applied in later generations for the remission of our temporal penalties that remain after sin is forgiven. The One True Church ALONE is the dispenser of indulgences; She alone has Divine Authority.

When the wretched heretic Martin Luther dared to deny the treasury of the Church, he was excommunicated by a real Pope, Leo X, in the Apostolic Decree Exsurge Domine. He declared the following teaching of Luther condemned and heretical:

17. The treasures of the Church, from which the pope grants indulgences, are not the merits of Christ and of the saints.

The Value of Indulgences

There are numerous accounts in the lives of the saints which inform us that one instant in Purgatory (where those with temporal punishments must suffer before gaining entrance to Heaven) is more painful than many years of suffering on Earth. Who wouldn't want to expiate their temporal punishments here rather than hereafter? 

Indulgences may be either partial or plenary. A plenary indulgence expiates all temporal punishment, while a partial indulgence remits just some. When a prayer has a number of days or years ascribed to it (e.g., an indulgence of 300 days) that doesn't mean 300 days come off your time in Purgatory, rather it means so much remission is gained by that indulgenced prayer (or pious work) as would have been gained by 300 days of penance during the era of public penitential discipline. 

 A plenary indulgence is gained by performing the proscribed work of the Church; however, if any venial sin remains, the plenary indulgence cannot be completely received since there is still the guilt of actual sin. In such case, the plenary indulgence becomes partial. According to Canon 926, "It is to be understood that a plenary indulgence is granted in such a way that if one cannot gain it in plenary form, nevertheless one gains it partially according to the dispositions one has."

As to the source of what may be indulgenced, the pope alone, as the Vicar of Christ on Earth, has the primary and supreme power over the granting of indulgences. 

The Gaining of a Plenary Indulgence

 There are seven requirements to gain an indulgence:

1. One must have the right intention of gaining the indulgence.

2. The good work prescribed (prayer, stations of the cross, etc) must be carried out faithfully and not substantially altered in any way. 

3. One must be baptized, not excommunicated, and in the state of sanctifying grace (at least at the completion of the prescribed work). 

4. Holy Communion must be worthily received within eight (8) days of the completion of the prescribed work.

5. Prayers must be vocal, the lips must move and the words mouthed at least silently. Mental prayer does not suffice. 

6. You must make a good Confession eight (8) days before or after the day on which you would gain the indulgence (fulfill the prescribed work). However, you must still be in the state of sanctifying grace on the day you complete the prescribed work.

7. You must pray for the pope's intentions. This does not mean a particular person who is pope, or that you can't gain indulgences in a time of sedevacante. "The Pope's Intention" comprises what any true pope would want:
  • the exultation of Holy Mother Church
  • the propagation of the One True Faith
  • the uprooting of heresy
  • the conversion of sinners
  • peace and concord among Christian nations
  • the other needs of Christianity
 N.B. You can apply an indulgence to yourself or to a departed soul, but not to another living person! For a partial indulgence, only numbers 1, 2, and 3 above apply. 

(The above on indulgences was gathered from theologian Davis, Pastoral and Moral Theology, 3: 428-433. Also from theologian Hagedorn, General Legislation on Indulgences, CUA Press, [1924] I give full acknowledgement and credit to their works ). 

Conclusion
Purgatory is a dogma of the faith, so often misunderstood by Catholics and non-Catholics alike. Know your faith and defend it against the attacks of Protestants and Vatican II sect Modernists. Always remember that in this time of Great Apostasy, we must stay as close to God as possible. By making use of indulgences for ourselves we can do this by purifying our souls. By applying them to the faithful departed we can hasten their entrance into Heaven and gain saints in Heaven praying for us and our salvation. 

71 comments:

  1. I knew a priest who was ordained before Vatican 2 (and who is now deceased) who, when he celebrated the Novus Ordo service, always mentioned those he called "our friends the souls in purgatory". Other priests didn't. This shows that this priest, although converted to the Novus Ordo, still believed in purgatory and indulgences. The V2 sect has jettisoned all that because it professes universal salvation. For Bergoglio and his gang, everyone goes to Heaven, even "good atheists", sodomites, heretics and pagans. Today, when a person dies (even if he committed suicide or was euthanized), he is entitled to a beautiful funeral where his life is celebrated with the secular music he loved. It's almost like a canonization ! It's forgetting that when we leave this life, we'll have to account for all our actions, not just the good ones.

    I return to the recitation of the Rosary, which I have neglected and too often neglect. Pray for the soul of this priest I knew who went to Judgment on Christmas Eve 2018 (Fr. Joseph Boies). May God hasten the end of the Church's eclipse and give us good and holy priests !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Simon,
      May Fr. Boies have repented and died in the state of grace! I will remember him in my prayers.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Thanks ! I didn't know that Pope Leo XIII had dedicated the month of November to the souls in purgatory. It's a wonderful opportunity to pray and mortify ourselves for them, while the secular world is already celebrating Christmas. It's a way of completing our purgatory here on earth and shortening its duration in the afterlife.

      Delete
  2. I heard a great sermon by a traditional priest yesterday on the subject. He mentioned how a soul went to Purgatory and how he did not pray for the souls in Purgatory in this life. His punishment in Purgatory was not being able to receive the benefits of prayers being offered for him and that they instead went to somebody else until his time was up according to God's justice.

    That story along with a few others he talked about are an important reminder that we need not just think about praying for the souls in Purgatory in November but every day. It's a spiritual work of mercy and a supreme act of charity and probably one of the easiest things anybody can do. Just make sure you're in the state of grace before doing so.

    Lee

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lee,
      That's sage advice, my friend!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. It sure is. But if you are in mortal sin don't restrain yourself from praying for anything laudable including the poor souls. No prayer is wasted even if it is not applied until you get back in a state of sanctifying grace. Right?

      Delete
    3. John Gregory,
      "Always do what's laudable" is a truism! And, yes, good works revive when you return to the state of grace.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    4. If you are in mortal sin all the more reason to pray for your own conversion (to the state of grace) through perfect contrition of the sacrament of confession

      Delete
    5. And for perseverance in the state of sanctifying grace unto the end.

      Delete
  3. What about the Caticle of Zacharias from St. Luke, '... To perform mercy to our fathers...,

    ReplyDelete
  4. In not a feeneyite and I believe that the 1917 canon law is infallible law but is there any way of interpreting the Roman catechism to not be teaching delayed ensoulment

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon10:36
      Please see my post:
      https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2024/02/the-dimonds-ensoulment-and-baptism-of.html

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. I have read it before, it is very long, can you show my specifically where you write about whether the Roman catechism, Not the UOM in general but the roman catechism can be interpreted differently regarding Delayed ensoulment, and are Catholics still allowed to believe in it since the dogma of the Immaculate Conception and that the rational soul is the form of the body have been proclaimed? If so can we believe this about the Blessed Mother? (could one interpret the dogma as meaning from th instance of her second conception (infusion of a rational, not merely vegetative or sensitive soul))?

      Delete
    3. @anon9:57
      Theologian Carrol explains that the Immaculate Conception refers to the creation ex nihil of Mary's soul in the state of grace, as Original Sin is a deprivation of same. Hence, Mary would be Immaculately Conceived from the first instant of her conception when Her soul was infused in her body---even if that did not occur immediately upon fertilization.

      Please understand I cannot always go and find specific sections of posts. You can read it for yourself. My time is limited with work and family.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    4. I respect that,
      Just one more question, how would we square delayed ensoulment with “the rational soul is the form of the body”
      God bless

      Delete
    5. @anon6:24
      You exist apart from your body after death until the resurrection. Mary's Immaculate Conception resides in the soul. That the soul needs a body conceded; that the body cannot be separate from the soul, but the soul must always reside there, denied.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    6. Thank you, plus I should add that in delayed ensoulment the body does have a soul, just a vegetative and then sensitive one.

      God bless and thank you for your time

      Delete
  5. Paul j Glenn in his book ethics declares that there is no absolutely best form of government while while technically true is followed by no mention of monarchy. He doesn’t even mention that monarchy is in theory at least the ideal form. And he is used by the CMRI to teach seminarians?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon10:46
      Theologian Glenn is orthodox. Simply because you disagree with how he treated a topic in no way makes it "deficient."

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. I don't disagree with Theologian Glenn . He left an important detail out. I was wrong in being so vocally critical of approved church theologians

      Delete
  6. Introibo can you respond to this

    https://www.reddit.com/r/CatholicApologetics/comments/1ce1ihj/sedevacantism/

    I know it’s very low hanging fruit but people apostatise due to this stuff

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon12:24
      It's very superfluous fluff posing as a "definitive refutation" of sedevacantism. I will refer to a post I've written on each major so-called "refutation:"

      1. No Modernist Theology was taught: See my post
      https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2024/07/catholic-to-certain-degree-heretical.html

      2. The Novus Bogus:
      See https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2021/03/mass-destruction.html

      3. Religious Freedom:
      See https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2019/03/separation-of-sanity-and-state.html

      4. Universal Acceptance:
      See https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2019/03/separation-of-sanity-and-state.html

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  7. Introibo

    How do you personally think we will get a new pope?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon1:04
      I'm not sure we ever will. The end times may be at hand.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. if these arent the end times i dont even want to think what the actual end times will be like, but maybe we may get a "pope in exile" during the final persecution?

      Delete
  8. Here the acting industry shows its true colours

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVEPGTdxvYM

    “Good evening godless sodomites”

    I bet they all go through some perverted ritual to even get the job

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon12:42
      I didn't hear that in the clip (maybe I missed it?) but it doesn't surprise me at all (unfortunately).

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Ah no I sent you the wrong clip here it is - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZu63SqFd38

      Delete
    3. I think I may have sent the wrong clip a second time 😑 here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZu63SqFd38

      Delete
  9. are the WillingShepards group at sacred heart church in boston MA real dominicans? they work with +Morello (Requiescat in pace) group.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon$:26
      I don't know. If any of my readers know, please comment here.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  10. Can someone please answer these questions? What happens to babies who died in utero like St Margaret Clitherow's when she was martyed? Also, those who repent of abortion can gain heaven but their lost children cannot?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon6:26
      It is permissible to believe that unborn infants of martyrs receive Baptism of Blood. According to theologian Dyer, at the Council of Trent "On the discussion regarding Baptism, the great theologian Cardinal Cajetan, proposed that infants in the womb could be saved by the desire of their (Catholic) parents. He reasoned thus: "In [the womb] the infant is capable of receiving Baptism of Blood; if a child yet enclosed in the womb of his mother could receive death for Christ, he would be a martyr as are the Holy Innocents. It is then reasonable to admit that the faith of his parents could produce the same result..." (See "Limbo: Unsettled Question," pg. 141).

      Children murdered by abortion will go to Limbo and enjoy natural (not supernatural) happiness. Yes, anyone who sincerely repents of any sin can be forgiven and gain Heaven---including mothers who murder their children by abortion. I like to think that those aborted children (at least some of them) would have been persons that would have been damned had they been born, and God in His Infinite Mercy spared them. I understand it doesn't SEEM fair, but God's ways are not ours.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Wasn’t cajetan’s theory condemned?

      Delete
    3. Remember nobody deserves the beatific vision

      Delete
    4. Even in a state of original justice

      Delete
    5. @anon1:38
      As to BOD for unborn infants, not directly, but it is not the majority opinion. As for BOB, it is the majority teaching.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  11. CLEMENT VI 1342-1352

    550 The Satisfaction of Christ, the Treasure of the Church,

    Indulgences *

    [From the Bull of jubilee, "Unigenitus Dei Filius," Jan. 25, 1343]

    The only begotten Son of God . . . "made unto us from God, wisdom, justice, sanctification and redemption" [1 Cor. 3], "neither by the blood of goats or of calves, but by His own blood entered once into the holies having obtained eternal redemption" [Heb. 9:12]. "For not with corruptible things as gold or silver, but with the precious blood of His very (Son) as of a lamb unspotted and unstained He has redeemed us" [cf.1 Pet. 1:18-19], who innocent, immolated on the altar of the Cross is known to have poured out not a little drop of blood, which however on account of union with the Word would have been sufficient for the redemption of the whole human race, but copiously as a kind of flowing stream, so that "from the soles of His feet even to the top of His Head no soundness was found in Him" [ Is. 1:6]. Therefore, how great a treasure did the good Father acquire from this for the Church militant, so that the mercy of so great an effusion was not rendered useless, vain or superfluous, wishing to lay up treasures for His sons, so that thus the Church is an infinite treasure to men, so that they who use it, become the friends of God [ Wis. 7:14].
    551 Indeed this treasure . . . through blessed Peter, the keeper of the keys of heaven and his successors, his vicars on earth, He has committed to be dispensed for the good of the faithful, both from proper and reasonable causes, now for the whole, now for partial remission of temporal punishment due to sins, in general as in particular (according as they know to be expedient with God), to be applied mercifully to those who truly repentant have confessed.

    552 Indeed, to the mass of this treasure the merits of the Blessed Mother of God and of all the elect from the first just even to the last, are known to give their help; concerning the consumption or the diminution of this there should be no fear at any time, because of the infinite merits of Christ (as was mentioned before) as well as for the reason that the more are brought to justification by its application, the greater is the increase of the merits themselves.

    /cited from Denzinger

    ReplyDelete
  12. Can you respond to mike bizzaro’s attack on Pope Benedict XV
    https://www.gods-catholic-dogma.com/section_20.html
    I know you already made a post but it answered only the first two accusations, can you also do the same for Pius xi and Pius xii

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon1:10
      I did so respond to his attacks on Popes Pius XI and XII.
      I amply demonstrated that he purposely twists text and leaves words out to make it read differently. He is a disturbed man and a liar. I do not have time to write more than I already do.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Vacancy pushers and feeneyites all seem to be very passionate. If only they would just come to the truth.

      Delete
  13. If Elias returns, could he restore the carmelite order? Does he have that authority?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon6:22
      Speculative question to which I have not givenany thought and have no answer.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  14. Introibo:

    What do you think of Benedict XV(Giacamo della Chiesa), reigned from 1914-1922?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon7:59
      He was a good pope, but was naïve as to the dangers of Modernism and backed off what Pope St. Pius X began.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  15. Please offer some encouragement to somebody who has tried for years to receive traditional sacraments, but keeps getting denied.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is tragic. I'm very sorry for you.
      Is this because this person cannot attend Mass regularly (health, money, transportation issues, distance?) and won't be welcome as an on and off churchgoer? Sorry to put it this way but some don't seem to realize this is no longer the 1950s when you had a parish church at every street corner.
      I would recommend getting in touch with the SSPV and explaining your situation to them. One of their priests might be able to visit with you once in a while.

      Pray a lot for God's solution to this sad situation.
      God Bless You

      Delete
    2. The person got up in the middle of the night and managed to get to the chapel one Sunday for Mass, after a journey of hours, including walking. The person observed the dress code. They spoke to the priest who basically told them not to come back until they could get more money so that they could come on their own more regularly. This would be very difficult. The person had little money and has physical health issues, and can't even go anywhere some days. The person lives near chapel members, but does not dare get a ride from them.

      Delete
    3. @anon3:48
      Horrific. The priest who did this is a disgrace. Contact a Traditionalist priest of SSPV or CMRI and see if they can come to her once a month (at least).

      I’ll be praying for her.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  16. The person who has been denied sacraments does not want to get sacraments from a group that they disagree with.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon8:31
      While she must follow her conscience, I would ask her to reevaluate her position. There will be disagreement in the Great Apostasy, but unless for a most serious reason, she should not deny herself the sacraments.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. It is a serious reason. The person's conscience. They don't want to pretend to agree with a group they can barely tolerate, and have many disagreements with, JUST to get sacraments.

      Delete
  17. i found another vatican 2 heresy

    "God Predestines no one to hell"

    compare that to the de fide statement on reprobation, according to Theologian Ott

    "God, by an eternal resolve of His Will, predestines certain men, on account of their foreseen sins, to eternal rejection."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon7:22
      Understood in the Catholic sense that it is not Calvinistic "I send you to Hell, just because" but rather "On account of their foreseen sins" (for which they are responsible and could have done otherwise).

      You seen obsessed with predestination, and there are many more pressing things of which we need be concerned.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. I am not obsessed with predestination the problem is that nobody believes in it. Ask anyone and they will condemn it as a Calvinist heresy. I did not accuse Catholics. I accused the novus Ordo, and rightly so because if they want to issue a so called catechism they better not use such ambiguity which, at its plain interpretation is heresy. This just proves sedevacantism.

      You seem to be obsessed with minimising the doctrine of predestination, there may be other more important things but the dogma of predestination is one of the most complex and rich tenants of the faith. And Is quite frankly grossly neglected.

      Anyway I will keep quiet

      God bless

      Delete
  18. How did the Avignon papacy exist if it did not have the ‘romanitas’ am I missing something?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon9:33
      I'm missing something: the relevancy this question has to this post. I don't mind asking questions off topic, but a lot of these seem way out there, and I think they come from the same person.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  19. On baptism of desire and invincible ignorance

    Those who are invincibly live up to their will be given the faith by interior inspiration, an angel coming to preach to them or a priest coming to preach to them. Otherwise they will be damned.
    
    
    Baptism of desire is simply church teaching, you can’t get around it. It is found in the catechism of Trent and in the infallible code of canon law. All the theologians teach it and many teach that it is De Fide. Baptism of desire is not an eight sacrament any more than perfect contrition is one, yet that supplies for confession
    
    but you seem to be focusing on implicit desire
    
    That requires faith, which is only given to infants by the sacrament of baptism. As for adults, implicit desire to join the church does not apply to protestants (Novus ordos included), atheists, unbaptised infants, eastern schismatics, buddhists, Muslims etc because they don’t have faith, which invincible ignorance does not supply for, if they are truly sincere God will give them the faith. An example of implicit desire is.
    
    a. A catechumen has reached the age of reason, he wants to join the church, but has not yet learned about the sacrament of baptism
    
    b. A man raised in the woods/a remote island has been given the faith (at a bare minimum the existence of God, Eternal retribution, The Trinity, The Incarnation on the authority of God revealing) by interior inspiration and follows his conscience, yet he does not know of the existence of the Catholic Church, he is not a member of a sect (Protestant etc VERY IMPORTANT POINT), He makes an act of Faith, Hope and Charity.
    
    example a should serve no difficulty to anyone, i think one could interpret Suprema Haec Sacra as not meaning example b but the 20th century theologians already taught it, yet it would seem in my opinion to be safe to reject example b as a way to interpret suprema haec sacra, but also safe to hold point b.
    
    
    Now I will explain the modernist conception of it, this is likely what you are fighting, and this is an error which unfortunately seems to be pushed by many people even sedevacantists.
    
    A man raised in the woods/a remote island, he does not know about Catholicism, he is a member of a Protestant sect, which is all he knows, he follows his conscience. He has implicitly desired to become a catholic and will go to heaven if he dies
    
    This error is refuted by Bishop George Hay (https://archive.org/details/inquiry-bishop-george-hay) and Fr Michael Müller (http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Catholic_Dogma/index.html) who tell us such a case is impossible as it would make God contradict his promises, yet this is what the modernists want us to think invincible ignorance and implicit baptism of desire is and they are dead wrong.
    Continued below

    ReplyDelete
  20. Continued
    A modernist may object that this (the error i gave example of) is what Baltimore catechism 4 teaches but we must interpret it as saying that they will be given the faith by interior inspiration because
    
    1. When they reached the age of reason by accepting the heresies of their false religion they repudiated their faith which was infused into them at baptism
    2. It is an approved catechism of the same church which promoted the works of bishop hay.
    3. The church teaches that it is necessary for salvation to have faith
    
    nor does pius ix teach this
    he teaches that the invincibly ignorant are exempt from the guilt of the sin of ignorance, not that they will be saved in their ignorance. For they will be damned for other sins actual or original. He teaches they can be saved by the light of divine grace. If this does not mean interior inspiration he wouldn’t have mentioned light.
    
    In summary
    
    1. Baptism of desire is infallible teaching and likely de fide, it is not an eight sacrament
    2. Implicit baptism of desire does not apply do non Catholics
    3. The invincibly ignorant will not be saved if they die without faith, but if they are sincere they will be taught the faith, and hold it explicitly
    4. There is no such thing as a baptised Protestant who is invincibly ignorant, dies and goes to heaven
    5. Faith is absolutely necessary for salvation
    6. so is membership in the Catholic Church, at least ‘in voto’
    
    God bless

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon11:10
      You are in one of the "four degrees of Feenyism" by denying implicit BOD.

      Your summary:
      1.Baptism of desire is infallible teaching and likely de fide, it is not an eight sacrament

      Reply: It is de fide and not an eighth sacrament.

      2. Implicit baptism of desire does not apply to non Catholics

      Reply: Sure it does. The Protestant who knows nothing else does not reject FORMALLY the Catholic faith. It is possible to receive the infusion of faith and grace. Notice I wrote "possible"-- not "will definitely receive"

      3. The invincibly ignorant will not be saved if they die without faith, but if they are sincere they will be taught the faith, and hold it explicitly

      Reply: BOD is the infusion of faith. The invincibly ignorant who die without faith did not receive BOD.

      4. There is no such thing as a baptized Protestant who is invincibly ignorant, dies and goes to heaven

      Reply: That it MAY NOT have happened, CONCEDED; that it CANNOT HAPPEN, Denied.

      The Church teaches #5 and #6

      See my post:
      https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2021/12/four-degrees-of-feeney.html

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Introibo, I do not deny implicit desire. I taught it

      a. A catechumen has reached the age of reason, he wants to join the church, but has not yet learned about the sacrament of baptism
      
      b. A man raised in the woods/a remote island has been given the faith (at a bare minimum the existence of God, Eternal retribution, The Trinity, The Incarnation on the authority of God revealing) by interior inspiration and follows his conscience, yet he does not know of the existence of the Catholic Church, he is not a member of a sect (Protestant etc VERY IMPORTANT POINT), He makes an act of Faith, Hope and Charity.

      As to your responses to my summary

      1. I wholeheartedly agree, I just didn’t want to say it because I found some theologians (Ott for example) who didn’t think so
      2. The point still stands, that “Protestant” would be a catholic. For those people they would need to be given the faith before any implicit desire to join the church is given, this is assuming they had lost the faith by adhering to Protestantism when they attained reason, contrary to the virtue infused into their soul.
      3. Agreed
      4. I do Not deny it will happen that an invincibly ignorant Protestant is made a catholic by implicit desire - but first he would have to be given the faith. I deny that Implicit BOD can happen before the faith is given, I also argue that an invincibly ignorant Protestant who follows his conscience will be informed of the error of Protestantism

      in conclusion I do not deny Implicit BOD, I deny faithless BOD. And so do you.

      In summary

      1. BoD Explicit and implicit are de fide
      2. One must be in the body of the church in voto at least implicitly
      3. One must have faith to be saved
      4. There is not a Protestant, who remaining Protestant has faith (here is where we likely disagree, but if I am teaching heresy by this, correct me because I do not know of a single theologian, pope cleric etc who taught that Protestants as Protestants have faith, if there is one please show me and I will submit, for now I will stick with fr Michael muller and bishop hay)
      5. Invincible ignorance neither saves nor damns, but it does except one of the sin of ignorance
      6. Those invincibly ignorant people who follow their conscience will be lead to at least implicit BOD but first they will be Given the faith by interior inspiration, this is what the Baltimore catechism 4 is talking about.
      7. Fr. Leonard Feeney was an excommunicated heretic whose doctrine leads souls to eternal hell through its dissent and heresy. He was likely also a Gallican heretic.
      God bless

      Delete
    3. Two more things

      1. In my reply I accidentally called Feeney fr, which while he was a valid priest is not to be used for him any more than for Luther mea cuppa

      2. Your four degrees of Feeney article seems to be mistyped, you were talking about implicit desire, and yet mentioned implicit faith. The sentence is incoherent if it wasn’t a mistake since you seem to be switching topics, you should change that if you are able to (if it is possible to edit blog posts, I do not run a blog so I wouldn’t know).

      God bless

      Delete
    4. Also the idea I called a modernist error was that nothing happened between God and the invincibly ignorant Protestant, but rather he was in the exact same state as when he reached the age of reason and accepted Protestantism. He was not given any divine light of grace of interior inspiration of the catholic faith. But he still went to heaven, that is anonymous Christianity, the word Protestant could have been substituted by Muslim, atheist, agnostic, pagan, Buddhist, eastern schismatic etc

      Delete
    5. @anon7:24 and above
      The way you explain it now is orthodox, except faith can be infused WITH grace just prior to the moment of death. As to my post "implicit faith" was sometimes used by theologians to denote an implicit desire for faith.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  21. Eastern schismatics do not believe in The Trinity

    Let me explain

    Each person of The Trinity is distinguished from the other by personal opposing relations. The Father is the relation of paternity, The Son is the relation of filiation and The Holy Spirit is The Person of Passive Spiration (This is not passivity in God but rather being spirated), but you might raise the objection that then should there not be a person of active spiration, who spirates The Holy Spirit, but the answer is that this is not the case because the relation of Active Spiration is Not Personal but rather had by The Father and The Son, so it is Not a Personal opposing relation. But say that, as the eastern schismatics claim that the Filioque was not true, then Active Spiration would become a personal relation, meaning that there would be a Fourth person of The Trinity, but this is obviously heresy and false. This is why the eastern schismatics believe in The Trinity about as much as an arian or a tritheist - they don’t. Not to mention how their essence energy distinction leads to composition in God which leads to atheism (because it would mean God was caused, which would mean he is not God).

    God bless

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon11:59
      Interesting, but somewhat of a stretch to include on a post re: Purgatory.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  22. Eastern schismatic nicene creed if they were honest

    “i believe in the 17 or 23 or 24* national ceasaropapist** autocephalous churches”

    * depending on if they recognise miaphysites and nestorians or not
    ** their supposed patriarchs have been appointed by Muslim sultans before

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon11:59 & 12:11
      This is connected to Purgatory (the subject of the post) .........how???


      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Eastern schismatics reject purgatory

      Delete
    3. @anon7:25
      True, but rather a stretch, don't you think? They reject Original Sin, as properly understood, but that's not exactly a direct tie-in to Purgatory.

      ---Introibo

      Delete