It says "unforeseen accident", not "unforeseen accidental death" or "accidental death".
It says "grace and righteousness", not "salvation" - which is why SBC correctly agrees with what it teaches. Again, when read as it is written, a BOD is never even hinted in Trent's catechism.
Note that "grace and righteousness" are strictly for the living.
Stubborn,
Brother Andre Marie had an episode on BOD on his Reconquest Radio show, Episode 109. He cites several good articles in his discussion, including Raymond Karem's original Reply to a Liberal Part III, also posted on catholicisim.org -
https://veritasradionetwork.com/reconquest-episode-109-catholic-considerations-on-baptism-of-desire/You know the history of this and the importance of Karam's article in
From the Housetops. In the article Karam says this:
"In answer to our third question, therefore, we shall say that, according to the majority of the Fathers and Doctors, baptism of the Holy Spirit, without the actual reception of Baptism of water, can be sufficient for salvation if the following five conditions are fulfilled . . ."
https://catholicism.org/rptal-part3.html#3.
Are you saying Brother Andre, or more broadly the SBC, disagrees with that?
I say they do not :
de jure it
could [Karam, "can be sufficient"] SAVE, but
de facto it doesn't happen.
DR
Topic: Do you agree with St. Benedict's Centre on both BOD and EENS? (Read 16784 times)