Author Topic: Baptism of Desire and of Blood (Read 2373 times)

Ladislaus · « **Reply #5 on:** July 06, 2016, 09:07:14 AM »

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Where have we taught one can be saved by implicit Faith?

Fancy yourself a teacher now, do you? Perhaps a Doctor title awaits you upon your canonization. But you have a little brushing up to do first -- you can start by learning what a syllogism is.

Stubborn · « **Reply #6 on:** July 06, 2016, 09:56:10 AM »

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Baptism of Desire and Blood
MATER DEI SEMINARY newsletter "Adsum" (January, 2004)

From the teachings of the Popes, the Council of Trent,
the 1917 Code of Canon Law, the Roman Martyrology,
Church Fathers, Doctors and Theologians of the Church

1. Council of Trent 1545-1563

Canons on the Sacraments in General: - (Canon 4):
"If anyone shall say that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation, but are superfluous, and that although all are not necessary for every individual, without them or without the desire of them (sine eis aut eorum voto), through faith alone men obtain from God the grace of justification; let him be anathema."

Decree on Justification - (Session 6, Chapter 4):
"In these words a description of the justification of a sinner is given as being a translation from that state in which man is born a child of the first Adam to the state of grace and of the 'adoption of the Sons' (Rom. 8:15) of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Savior and this translation after the promulgation of the Gospel cannot be effected except through the laver of regeneration or a desire for it, (sine lavacro regenerationis aut eius voto) as it is written: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter in the kingdom of God" (John 3:5).

Don't you think it is interesting that Trent begins Canon 4 by decreeing the condemnation with anathema, for anyone who shall say that the sacraments are not necessary for salvation?

Also of interest is that the decree on the "Justification of a sinner" somehow always gets misread as if it says, "Salvation of a sinner".

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #7 on:** July 06, 2016, 10:57:51 AM »

Notice how they don't answer the question? Where have we taught that you can be saved by implicit Faith. Instead the come up with accusations (look he proclaims himself a teacher so he can't be right) because the are more concerned with perception than reality. They are dishonest. Otherwise they would show where we teach implicit faith saves or admit we have not taught it.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #8 on:** July 06, 2016, 11:14:39 AM »

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Where have we taught that you can be saved by implicit Faith.

I will not answer your question until you stop claiming that you "teach" things. You used that word three times in your previous post. You have taught nothing ... if you don't count heresy.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #9 on:** July 06, 2016, 11:24:28 AM »

Please show me where I have taught that implicit faith saves. Will will never answer my question because it will make you look bad and you care more about perception than reality.