Author Topic: BoD Challenge -- Still Unmet (Read 3875 times)

Ladislaus · « **on:** September 24, 2013, 10:47:49 AM »

I have proposed this challenge multiple times to those who claim that the rejection of BoD for catechumens is heresy.

Demonstrate --

1) how BoD was uninimously taught by the Church Fathers (which would indicate that it was revealed) or
2) how BoD derives implicitly and necessarily from other revealed Catholic doctrines

Let us prescind for now from the claim that Trent taught BoD.

NO ONE has been able to demonstrate this. Consequently, BoD for catechumens remains nothing but a matter of speculative theology and simply cannot be dogma.

Just because more and more modern theologians happen to accept this, it means nothing, since the Church cannot have grown to a gradual awareness of a dogma over time, for nothing can be added to the Deposit of Revelation since the death of the Last Apostle.

With regard to 1), only St. Augustine floated the idea of BoD (I'm not speaking yet about BoB). St. Augustine himself later forcefully rejected the same idea. St. Gregory nαzιanzen explicitly rejected the notion. Show me this alleged "unanimous teaching" of the Fathers on the notion of BoD. It simply doesn't exist. Modern BoD proponents dishonestly cite a couple Father who believed in BoB as proofs for BoD, but several of these same Fathers reject BoD in the same sentence by saying that BoB is the ONLY "exception" to the necessity of water Baptism.

No one has yet to demonstrate point #2.

BoD is nothing but speculative theology based on the feeling that anything else just wouldn't be "fair". Father Peter Scott opens his promotion of BoD by stating that salvation is a FREE gift from God but then argues that God would be a "monster" if He were to refuse BoD. ??? That pseudo-theology argument from what seems just to us needs to be rejected out of hand. St. Augustine called it a "vortex of confusion" when rejecting BoD towards the later part of his life.

I demand REAL theology ... Thomistic syllogism from other dogmas to prove the existence of BoD as a dogma.

Cantarella · « **Reply #1 on:** September 24, 2013, 10:58:42 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

BoD is nothing but speculative theology based on the feeling that anything else just wouldn't be "fair". Father Peter Scott opens his promotion of BoD by stating that salvation is a FREE gift from God but then argues that God would be a "monster" if He were to refuse BoD. ??? That pseudo-theology argument from what seems just to us needs to be rejected out of hand. St. Augustine called it a "vortex of confusion" when rejecting BoD towards the later part of his life.

I demand REAL theology ... Thomistic syllogism from other dogmas to prove the existence of BoD as a dogma.

BoD is nothing but sentimental theology.

bowler · « **Reply #2 on:** September 24, 2013, 12:20:59 PM »

Outside of Nishant, there is nobody on CI that has the knowledge to be able to even begin to answer your question intelligently.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #3 on:** September 25, 2013, 08:58:04 AM »

I can practically hear the crickets chirping.

SJB · « **Reply #4 on:** September 25, 2013, 09:02:22 AM »

Who claimed it was heretical to deny?

Ladislaus · « **Reply #5 on:** September 25, 2013, 10:41:06 AM »

Quote from: SJB

Who claimed it was heretical to deny?

Not a few here at CathInfo have said as much, including multiple respondents of a poll which asked that question.

SJB · « **Reply #6 on:** September 25, 2013, 12:56:14 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Quote from: SJB
Who claimed it was heretical to deny?

Not a few here at CathInfo have said as much, including multiple respondents of a poll which asked that question.

I don't think the error is heresy, but it is still a serious error of the "dogmas only" adherents.

Stubborn · « **Reply #7 on:** September 25, 2013, 03:36:11 PM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: Ladislaus
Quote from: SJB
Who claimed it was heretical to deny?

Not a few here at CathInfo have said as much, including multiple respondents of a poll which asked that question.

I don't think the error is heresy, but it is still a serious error of the "dogmas only" adherents.

It is not a "dogmas only" issue. The real seriousness is that all of the different teachings about a BOD contradicts dogma and BODers side with that which contradicts dogma - while either insisting they are doing no such thing or that there is no contradiction. And so it goes.

SJB · « **Reply #8 on:** September 25, 2013, 03:55:24 PM »

Catholics typically learn from their catechisms and other approved sources. The catechism is an explanation of doctrine. What you are saying is ALL of the catechisms contain serious errors and even heresy.

Also, I've asked repeatedly here for a reference to a theologian who EXPLAINS the issue correctly. Unless one says ALL of the theologians are either wrong or silent on the issue (never commenting on this rather grave error), I don't see why some references are not forthcoming.

NOBODY ever noticed the contradiction. Impossible. There isn't any contradiction.

bowler · « **Reply #9 on:** September 25, 2013, 03:55:33 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

I have proposed this challenge multiple times to those who claim that the rejection of BoD for catechumens is heresy.

Demonstrate --

1) how BoD was unanimously taught by the Church Fathers (which would indicate that it was revealed)

Even if there was one or two Fathers that believed in BOD it would not make it "unanimously taught ", nevertheless, there was not one Father that believed it.

On the other hand John 3:5 was literally understood by the Fathers of the Church unanimously, it is a revelation.

Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. (John 3:5)

Fr. William Jurgens: “If there were not a constant tradition in the Fathers that the Gospel message of ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost he cannot enter into the kingdom of God’ is to be taken absolutely, it would be easy to say that Our Savior simply did not see fit to mention the obvious exceptions of invincible ignorance and physical impossibility. But the tradition in fact is there; and it is likely enough to be found so constant as to constitute revelation.”

2Vermont · « **Reply #10 on:** September 25, 2013, 04:06:33 PM »

Quote from: SJB

Catholics typically learn from their catechisms and other approved sources. The catechism is an explanation of doctrine. What you are saying is ALL of the catechisms contain serious errors and even heresy.

Agreed.

Apparently the Church has been in error/in heresy since even before Vatican II. Perhaps we can find something else along the way that is "error"....much like the Protestants did over and over again.

MyrnaM · « **Reply #11 on:** September 25, 2013, 04:08:58 PM »

Quote from: bowler

Even if there was one or two Fathers that believed in BOD it would not make it "unanimously taught ", nevertheless, there was not one Father that believed it.

On the other hand John 3:5 was literally understood by the Fathers of the Church unanimously, it is a revelation.

Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. (John 3:5)

Yes, Jesus did say that, and soon after promised the good thief from the cross, HEAVEN!

bowler · « **Reply #12 on:** September 25, 2013, 04:25:34 PM »

Quote from: MyrnaM

Quote from: bowler

Even if there was one or two Fathers that believed in BOD it would not make it "unanimously taught ", nevertheless, there was not one Father that believed it.

On the other hand John 3:5 was literally understood by the Fathers of the Church unanimously, it is a revelation.

Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. (John 3:5)

Yes, Jesus did say that, and soon after promised the good thief from the cross, HEAVEN!

You should not write on this thread unless you want to answer Ladislaus question. Don't change the subject, there's like 10 BOD threads by Lover of Truth, take your pick and go write in them.

bowler · « **Reply #13 on:** September 25, 2013, 04:28:51 PM »

Quote from: 2Vermont

Quote from: SJB
Catholics typically learn from their catechisms and other approved sources. The catechism is an explanation of doctrine. What you are saying is ALL of the catechisms contain serious errors and even heresy.

Agreed.

Apparently the Church has been in error/in heresy since even before Vatican II. Perhaps we can find something else along the way that is "error"....much like the Protestants did over and over again.

Don't throw away the baby with the bathwater. Ladislau is asking a simple question, let's not digress.

Matto · « **Reply #14 on:** September 25, 2013, 04:31:45 PM »

I don't think that anyone will be able to answer Ladislaus' question adequately. Ladislaus probably knows more about the Church fathers than anyone else here.