This is THE FAITH by Canon Francis Ripley

  • Thread starter Thread starter chrisb
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

chrisb

Guest
Grace and Peace,

I recently purchased This is THE FAITH by Canon Francis Ripley.

I would like to hear individual’s thoughts concerning it and ask if it carries weight (i.e. authority) in the modern (i.e. Post-Vatican II) Roman Catholic Church?

Peace and God Bless.
 
chrisb said:
Grace and Peace,

I recently purchased This is THE FAITH by Canon Francis Ripley.

I would like to hear individual’s thoughts concerning it and ask if it carries weight (i.e. authority) in the modern (i.e. Post-Vatican II) Roman Catholic Church?

Peace and God Bless.
Click to expand...
I’ve heard a lot of good things about that book. After reading some very positive reviews, I purchased a number of copies for members of my extended famly who are not Catholic.

I have a copy myself, but have only read sections of it. From what I have read, it does appear to be very thorough yet easy to understand. I would recommend it.
 
This is an excellent book for learning/teaching the Catholic faith. I reccomend it for everyone 🙂
 
Caesar said:
This is an excellent book for learning/teaching the Catholic faith. I reccomend it for everyone 🙂
Click to expand...
I second that. I bought it a couple of years ago and I go back and re-read it often. It’s a wonderful book to read cover to cover, but also to have on the shelf when you have a question about a particular topic.
 
My RCIA class gave everyone of the students a copy when I converted several years ago. As a seminarian, I highly recommend the book. 👍
 
The only complaints I’ve heard about it are from the way far out sedevacantists, but I don’t think they like anything.
 
Excellent book. I got it a couple of months ago and along with my Baltimore Catechism, I can find an answer to anything Catholic I need to, and get a traditional, orthodox answer. Outstanding!
 
I highly recommend it and have given several copies away.

My only dissatisfaction is with the “Invincible Ignorance” section since I believe that the Fr. Feeney position of Baptism of Desire and or Blood to take effect will actually be accompanied with a gratuitous miracle of actual Baptism is the most orthodox.

But until that issue gets settled dogmatically by the Magisterium I believe that latitude should be given in the light of prudence.
 
GerardP said:
I highly recommend it and have given several copies away.

My only dissatisfaction is with the “Invincible Ignorance” section since I believe that the Fr. Feeney position of Baptism of Desire and or Blood to take effect will actually be accompanied with a gratuitous miracle of actual Baptism is the most orthodox.

But until that issue gets settled dogmatically by the Magisterium I believe that latitude should be given in the light of prudence.
Click to expand...
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought Baptism of Desire and Blood are de-fide, due to the infallible teachings of the ordinary magisterium.
 
GerardP said:
I highly recommend it and have given several copies away.

My only dissatisfaction is with the “Invincible Ignorance” section since I believe that the Fr. Feeney position of Baptism of Desire and or Blood to take effect will actually be accompanied with a gratuitous miracle of actual Baptism is the most orthodox.

But until that issue gets settled dogmatically by the Magisterium I believe that latitude should be given in the light of prudence.
Click to expand...
Grace and Peace,

Could you explain this to me a bit further?

Thanks and God Bless.
 
chrisb said:
Grace and Peace,

Could you explain this to me a bit further?

Thanks and God Bless.
Click to expand...
Basically he holds to the Feeneyite position which espouses the rejection of baptism of desire and baptism of blood, and requires that one must be a formal member of the Church to be saved. This Is The Faith holds to the view that a person may be saved by implicit baptism of desire if they are invincibly ignorant of the Church and the Gospel and live according to the natural law ie: free from mortal sin at the time of death.
 
SemperFidelis said:
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought Baptism of Desire and Blood are de-fide, due to the infallible teachings of the ordinary magisterium.
Click to expand...
I believe this is a pious belief based on theological speculation. Even the statements of the various Popes don’t speak in absolutes as if B.O.B. and B. O.D. are part of revelation. Quite the opposite is actually present in dogmatic definitions.
 
SemperFidelis said:
Basically he holds to the Feeneyite position which espouses the rejection of baptism of desire and baptism of blood, and requires that one must be a formal member of the Church to be saved.
Click to expand...
I’ll speak for myself thank you. The Feeney position does not reject the absolute necessity of water as being required for the Baptismal character needed to get to Heaven.

“Formal member” of the Church is a nice vague term that is thrown around to make it sound like someone must be in a Church registry or get envelopes.

Basically it means sanctifying grace must be present.
 
I learned so much from this book. I would suggest getting the audio book and putting it on an iPod or MP3 player.

You can get the audio book from TAN %between%
 
GerardP said:
I’ll speak for myself thank you. The Feeney position does not reject the absolute necessity of water as being required for the Baptismal character needed to get to Heaven.

“Formal member” of the Church is a nice vague term that is thrown around to make it sound like someone must be in a Church registry or get envelopes.

Basically it means sanctifying grace must be present.
Click to expand...
Sorry to speak for you, but he asked a question regarding the Feeneyite position and I felt obliged to give a definition that many give regarding that position. I meant to add that I was not speaking for you, but that I was giving my interpretation of the Feeneyite position, so I apologize for failing to add that in my post. However I do not want to get in another BoD/BoB vs. Feeneyism argument, so I will just say that This Is The Faith holds to the position that Baptism of Desire/Blood is de fide. Regarding the OP, If this does not suit your theology, then you will have a hard time finding a Catechism that does, as all of these Catechisms have references to Baptism of Desire:

-Catechism of the Council of Trent
-Catechism of St. Thomas Aquinas
-Catechism of St. Pius X
-Douay Catechism
-The Baltimore Catechisms
-CCC
 
SemperFidelis said:
Sorry to speak for you, … I meant to add that I was not speaking for you, but that I was giving my interpretation of the Feeneyite position, so I apologize for failing to add that in my post.
Click to expand...
That’s okay. Sorry if I came off as terse.
However I do not want to get in another BoD/BoB vs. Feeneyism argument, so I will just say that This Is The Faith holds to the position that Baptism of Desire/Blood is de fide.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Except for that one point, I think the Ripley book is excellent.
Regarding the OP, If this does not suit your theology, then you will have a hard time finding a Catechism that does, as all of these Catechisms have references to Baptism of Desire:
Click to expand...
-Catechism of the Council of Trent
-Catechism of St. Thomas Aquinas
-Catechism of St. Pius X
-Douay Catechism
-The Baltimore Catechisms
-CCC
Click to expand...
I would agree with you on this but it is interesting that not all of those Catechisms agree on the nature and boundaries of what B. or Desire or Blood actually means. If I recall, the St. Pius X catechism talks about one being “on the way of salvation” which sort of skirts the whole issue and instead leaves a definitive answer to God and allows the reader not to worry overmuch.

It’s the Baltimore that does the greatest disservice by presenting three Baptisms of equal weight doctrinally. But that was written as the heresy of Americanism was catching on.

But in general I like all of those catechisms with the exception of the CCC which I think is laced with modernist influenced language. Even Cardinal Schonborn recommended that people still read the Trent Catechism as he said, “It has so many beautiful things in it. No one has forbade anyone from reading it.”
 
I just ordered 10 copies of this book to give out people that I know are inquiring about the faith. I hope it’s as good as you all say it is. I plan to read a copy myself before giving it out, but I trust those on here as well.

Pace e Bene
Andrew
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top