Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 19

Author Topic: BoD and justification  (Read 34902 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Quo vadis Domine

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 4750
  • Reputation: +2897/-667
  • Gender: Male
Re: BoD and justification
« Reply #180 on: September 12, 2023, 05:24:45 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: AnthonyPadua on September 11, 2023, 09:19:21 PM
    It seems to have gone over your head.

    If BoD provides initial justification then it must remit all punishment for sins. If you say that BoD provides the graces of the sacrament then it must remit all guilt for sin overwise it contracts Trent.

    However St Alphonsus says that it DOES NOT remit all guilt. This is the contradiction.

    No where earlier did I bring up the sacramental character, which is actually another issue with the BoD nonsense. No character no heaven.

    If someone who is baptized and loses sanctifying grace by mortal sin and then regains it by the sacrament of penance, is he justified?
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2897/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: BoD and justification
    « Reply #181 on: September 12, 2023, 05:34:29 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on September 12, 2023, 12:06:48 AM
    Right.  And this is called Justification.  Nowhere does Trent talk about different types of Justification; there is only 1 type.  So *if* BOD provides justification, then all temporal punishment is removed.  Trent is very clear on the effects of Justification.

    Ladislaus seems to think that BOD (if it exists) must be considered the actual sacrament of baptism. This contradicts what we just agreed on.

     “Anthony of P.”, in the post above, seems to differentiate between justification and “initial justification”. This contradicts what you just wrote.

    If someone who is baptized and loses sanctifying grace by mortal sin and then regains it by the sacrament of penance, is he in the state of justification ?
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline AnthonyPadua

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2533
    • Reputation: +1302/-281
    • Gender: Male
    Re: BoD and justification
    « Reply #182 on: September 12, 2023, 06:35:10 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on September 12, 2023, 05:24:45 AM
    If someone who is baptized and loses sanctifying grace by mortal sin and then regains it by the sacrament of penance, is he justified?
    Trent's canon is about INITIAL justification. And BoD is only for initial justification, as the whole point of BoD is that the person did not receive the sacrament of baptism before their death.
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2897/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: BoD and justification
    « Reply #183 on: September 12, 2023, 06:50:27 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: AnthonyPadua on September 12, 2023, 06:35:10 AM
    Trent's canon is about INITIAL justification. And BoD is only for initial justification, as the whole point of BoD is that the person did not receive the sacrament of baptism before their death.

    I think you are misinterpreting Trent . This is the error Protestants make when they proof text Scripture.
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline AnthonyPadua

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2533
    • Reputation: +1302/-281
    • Gender: Male
    Re: BoD and justification
    « Reply #184 on: September 12, 2023, 07:34:04 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on September 12, 2023, 06:50:27 AM
    I think you are misinterpreting Trent . This is the error Protestants make when they proof text Scripture.
    Council of Trent, Sess. 6, Chap. 3: “… SO UNLESS THEY WERE BORN AGAIN IN CHRIST THEY WOULD NEVER BE JUSTIFIED…”

    Council of Trent, Sess. 5, Original Sin, # 5: “FOR, IN THOSE WHO ARE BORN AGAIN, there is nothing that God hates; because, there is no condemnation to those who are truly buried together with Christ by baptism into death; who walk not according to the flesh, but, putting off the old man, and putting on the new who is created according to God, are made innocent, immaculate, pure, guiltless, and beloved of God, heirs indeed of God, but joint heirs with Christ; in such a manner that absolutely nothing may delay them from entry into heaven."

    Read the caps. How do you think one is "born again"? Trent is very clear, if they weren't born again they would never be justified.

    Full quote
    Quote
    CHAPTER III.
    Who are justified through Christ.

    But, though He died for all, yet do not all receive the benefit of His [Page 32] death, but those only unto whom the merit of His passion is communicated. For as in truth men, if they were not born propagated of the seed of Adam, would not be born unjust,-seeing that, by that propagation, they contract through him, when they are conceived, injustice as their own,-so, if they were not born again in Christ, they never would be justified; seeing that, in that new birth, there is bestowed upon them, through the merit of His passion, the grace whereby they are made just. For this benefit the apostle exhorts us, evermore to give thanks to the Father, who hath made us worthy to be partakers of the lot of the saints in light, and hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the Kingdom of the Son of his love, in whom we have redemption, and remission of sins.

    Logged

    Online Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12635
    • Reputation: +8036/-2491
    • Gender: Male
    Re: BoD and justification
    « Reply #185 on: September 12, 2023, 08:13:59 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    Ladislaus seems to think that BOD (if it exists) must be considered the actual sacrament of baptism. This contradicts what we just agreed on.
    No, Ladislaus (and me, and others) is just pointing out what Trent says, that 'initial justification' can ONLY happen THRU the sacrament of baptism.  BOD is not the sacrament, but (if it exists) the grace it provides HAS to come from the sacrament (i.e. the desire of it).  Ergo, BOD can ONLY provide 'initial justification' (not the type of justification from another sacrament) because BOD only works because of the sacrament of baptism itself.

    Quote
    “Anthony of P.”, in the post above, seems to differentiate between justification and “initial justification”. This contradicts what you just wrote.

    If someone who is baptized and loses sanctifying grace by mortal sin and then regains it by the sacrament of penance, is he in the state of justification ?
    We're talking about BOD.  "Initial justification" is the only possible kind of grace related to baptism.

    Quote
    I think you are misinterpreting Trent . This is the error Protestants make when they proof text Scripture.
    No.  Baptism or BOD provides 'initial justification' because the person has never been justified before.  Trent clearly defines 'initial justification' as removing all sins/punishment
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 47122
    • Reputation: +27926/-5205
    • Gender: Male
    Re: BoD and justification
    « Reply #186 on: September 12, 2023, 08:51:56 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: AnthonyPadua on September 12, 2023, 06:35:10 AM
    Trent's canon is about INITIAL justification. And BoD is only for initial justification, as the whole point of BoD is that the person did not receive the sacrament of baptism before their death.

    Right.  Trent speaks of a second, as it were, RE-justification that can happen via the Sacrament of Confession, if one has lost the state of justification through mortal sin.  That entire chapter in Trent about Baptism is about initial jusitifcation, and the "They" would never have been justified had they not been reborn refers to the impious in that same chapter who are being translated from the fallen state of Adam (Original Sin) to justification, where as Confession is the translation (i.e. transition) from a state of actual sin to a state of justification.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 47122
    • Reputation: +27926/-5205
    • Gender: Male
    Re: BoD and justification
    « Reply #187 on: September 12, 2023, 08:56:46 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: AnthonyPadua on September 12, 2023, 07:34:04 AM
    Council of Trent, Sess. 6, Chap. 3: “… SO UNLESS THEY WERE BORN AGAIN IN CHRIST THEY WOULD NEVER BE JUSTIFIED…”

    Council of Trent, Sess. 5, Original Sin, # 5: “FOR, IN THOSE WHO ARE BORN AGAIN, there is nothing that God hates; because, there is no condemnation to those who are truly buried together with Christ by baptism into death; who walk not according to the flesh, but, putting off the old man, and putting on the new who is created according to God, are made innocent, immaculate, pure, guiltless, and beloved of God, heirs indeed of God, but joint heirs with Christ; in such a manner that absolutely nothing may delay them from entry into heaven."

    Read the caps. How do you think one is "born again"? Trent is very clear, if they weren't born again they would never be justified.

    Full quote

    Thanks for citing these.  Rebirth means starting from scratch, with a clean slate, a tabula rasa with regard to sin, as Trent teaches here.

    Session 5 is about Original Sin, and Session 6 is entirely about the translation from this fallen state of Adam (Original Sin) to a state of justification.  Rebirth does not apply to the Sacrament of Confession, as we can see here from Trent's definition.  It's more like a dead man coming back to life, like a Lazarus raised from the tomb, who came out with the stench and corruption of the decay that had already started.
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2897/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: BoD and justification
    « Reply #188 on: September 12, 2023, 09:34:37 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on September 12, 2023, 08:13:59 AM
    No, Ladislaus (and me, and others) is just pointing out what Trent says, that 'initial justification' can ONLY happen THRU the sacrament of baptism.  BOD is not the sacrament, but (if it exists) the grace it provides HAS to come from the sacrament (i.e. the desire of it).  Ergo, BOD can ONLY provide 'initial justification' (not the type of justification from another sacrament) because BOD only works because of the sacrament of baptism itself.
    We're talking about BOD.  "Initial justification" is the only possible kind of grace related to baptism.
    No.  Baptism or BOD provides 'initial justification' because the person has never been justified before.  Trent clearly defines 'initial justification' as removing all sins/punishment

    As I’ve said many times before, it is nearly *impossible* that not a single pope, theologian, canonist, nor saint caught this supposed error in the interpretation of Trent for 400+ years. 

    What is extremely more likely is that  a few laymen are misinterpreting the passage or misunderstanding that the “initial” justification, as you termed it, is only applicable to the actual sacrament of baptism, not to the graces that can be obtained from the desire of the sacrament. 

    You people are taking primary sources and interpreting them to fit your narrative. That’s not how the Church works. Now, if you have a single reference who agrees with your interpretation I would step back and say you possibly have a case.

    For example, I once held that BOD was de fide and you would be a heretic if you didn’t believe in it. When it was pointed out to me that there were a number of theologians who held that it wasn’t de fide, but carried a lessor censure for disbelieving it, I changed my position.
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Online Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12635
    • Reputation: +8036/-2491
    • Gender: Male
    Re: BoD and justification
    « Reply #189 on: September 12, 2023, 11:07:31 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    As I’ve said many times before, it is nearly *impossible* that not a single pope, theologian, canonist, nor saint caught this supposed error in the interpretation of Trent for 400+ years.
    I don't follow.  What "error" are you talking about?  Trent didn't err.  St Alphonsus would be the one that erred and he's not infallible, so not a major issue.

    There's no "consistent interpretation" of Trent for 400 years....that's the whole point in showing that St Alphonsus' explanation is different from Trent.

    Quote
    What is extremely more likely is that  a few laymen are misinterpreting the passage or misunderstanding that the “initial” justification, as you termed it, is only applicable to the actual sacrament of baptism, not to the graces that can be obtained from the desire of the sacrament. 
    :confused:  No, we're saying the exact opposite. 
    1.  The sacrament of baptism provides "initial justification".
    2.  If one desires the sacrament, then (according to BOD), they can obtain this "initial justification" prior to the reception of the sacrament.
    3.  You only get this "initial justification" one time.  That's what the word "initial" means - first time only.

    St Alphonsus' theory is that BOD provides a justification which is not 100% (i.e. that's why he says temporal punishment still remains).  His theory is contrary to Trent, which says that justification ONLY comes THRU the sacrament.  And the sacrament ONLY provides the "initial justification" which remits all punishment.

    So either Trent is right, or St Alphonsus is right.  Not both.
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2897/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: BoD and justification
    « Reply #190 on: September 12, 2023, 11:19:10 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on September 12, 2023, 11:07:31 AM
    I don't follow.  What "error" are you talking about?  Trent didn't err.  St Alphonsus would be the one that erred and he's not infallible, so not a major issue.


    There's no "consistent interpretation" of Trent for 400 years....that's the whole point in showing that St Alphonsus' explanation is different from Trent. 

    I wrote: “error in the interpretation”.  Of course Trent couldn’t contain error.

    Wrong, the consistent interpretation of Trent was belief in BOD. There is no getting around it. 
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Online Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12635
    • Reputation: +8036/-2491
    • Gender: Male
    Re: BoD and justification
    « Reply #191 on: September 12, 2023, 11:24:20 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

    • Quote
    Wrong, the consistent interpretation of Trent was belief in BOD. There is no getting around it. 
    :facepalm:  If Trent's BOD is not consistent with St Alphonsus' BOD...then there's no agreement.  Trent says BOD'ers go directly to heaven; St Alphonsus says purgatory.  How is that "consistent"? 
    Logged

    Online Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12635
    • Reputation: +8036/-2491
    • Gender: Male
    Re: BoD and justification
    « Reply #192 on: September 12, 2023, 11:27:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    What is extremely more likely is that  a few laymen are misinterpreting the passage or misunderstanding that the “initial” justification, as you termed it, is only applicable to the actual sacrament of baptism, not to the graces that can be obtained from the desire of the sacrament.
    1.  If you're arguing that BOD provides a DIFFERENT type of justification than the sacrament...where is this idea in Trent? 
    2.  How can BOD provide a different justification, if Trent (infallibly) declares that justification ONLY happens thru the sacrament?

    Sounds like pure speculation, then, and not a doctrine at all.
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2897/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: BoD and justification
    « Reply #193 on: September 12, 2023, 02:37:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on September 12, 2023, 11:24:20 AM
    :facepalm:  If Trent's BOD is not consistent with St Alphonsus' BOD...then there's no agreement.  Trent says BOD'ers go directly to heaven; St Alphonsus says purgatory.  How is that "consistent"?

    Ok, let’s leave aside Saint Alphonsus’ position on BOD/Purgatory for a bit and get back to what the real discussion is about.

    Do you admit that BOD was exclusively and consistently taught post Trent?
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Online Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12635
    • Reputation: +8036/-2491
    • Gender: Male
    Re: BoD and justification
    « Reply #194 on: September 12, 2023, 03:13:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

    • Quote
    Do you admit that BOD was exclusively and consistently taught post Trent?
    Absolutely not.

    1.  You're living proof there's not consistency because you can't explain the nature of justification via BOD and the details therein.
    2.  Trent didn't explain this, nor did it explain how the lack of the indelible mark affects a BOD'er, nor did it explain how a person could "self-baptize" via BOD while the idea of "self-baptizing" via the actual sacrament is invalid.
    3.  There are legitimately NO details regarding BOD that come from Trent.  None.  And the few saints/doctors that attempted to come up with details, contradict Trent.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 19
    « previous next »