CathInfo.com

Gregory,

I did not challenge BODers to start a thread to defend a BOD, what the heck kind of challenge would that be? BODers have only been defending the absence of baptism as being salvific the whole time already. In reality, by starting yet another thread defending a BOD, all you did was prove me to *still* be correct. That is not the goal here.

It's really very simple........I've pretty much accepted that after decades of arguing the issue, curing the BODers of their error is basically futile, just as is curing me of believing the Church teaches that salvation is possible without the sacraments. So we are never going to prove each other wrong with those same old debates - I think that much we actually can agree on.

So the goal here, *your* goal here is to prove me wrong - this same challenge is over over 2 years old and counting, and I am telling you right here and now that the *only way* you or any other BODer here will ever be able to finally prove me wrong, is to start a thread and champion defending the necessity of the sacraments unto salvation for the life of that thread.

Note that all I am asking is for BODers to do something which they already have done many times - start a thread. I am not challenging them do something anti-Catholic - quite the opposite, nor am I challenging them to jump off a cliff or run with the bulls or stand on their head. So how come no BODer has ever even attempted it yet?

I asked BODers to start a thread to defend the necessity of a sacrament, any sacrament at all. McCork said he was up for the challenge, but just not yet. I would think any and every Catholic would jump to start such a thread without hesitation!  - I say he'll *never* be up for it, and every day that goes by just keeps proving me *still* right and him *still* wrong. And yes, I am trying my best to bait any BODer into this thing SO I CAN BE PROVEN WRONG. But the nitwits just keep proving me right.

Because I believe a BOD is in their Lex Orandi, I maintain that it is an impossibility for any BODer to defend the necessity of the sacraments, which is why I challenged BODers  - I made the challenge WITH THE INTENTION THAT I HOPE TO BE PROVEN WRONG, which is why I said; "please prove me completely wrong by starting and participating in a thread in which you do the strictly Catholic thing and actually defend the necessity of the sacraments for the hope of salvation."

These are my terms Stubborn take them or leave them.

I've constantly challenged BoDers to change their heretical rhetoric, but they absolutely refuse to do so.

Trent teaches that the Sacraments are necessary for salvation and that Baptism in particular is absolutely necessary by a necessity of means.

Consequently, the theologians after Trent always spoke about BoD as involving the reception of Baptism in voto rather than as a mechanism for justification WITHOUT Baptism.  To state over and over ad nauseam, as the Cushingites do, that justification and salvation are possible WITHOUT the Sacrament of Baptism is absolutely slam-dunk heretical.  While most Cushingites would have you believe that Trent's major point of emphasis about the Sacraments is to teach BoD, it's absolutely the other way around.  Trent meant to define dogmatically the necessity of the Sacraments for salvation against the Prot heresies of the day which denied that.

Trent teaches that the SACRAMENT of Baptism is the INSTRUMENTAL CAUSE Of justification.  Some of the BoD theologians just felt that the instrumentality of the Sacrament could operate via the votum.  I disagree.  But none of them believed that the Sacrament was not necessary for salvation.