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

Author Topic: Holy Office Condemnation of "Rewarder God" theory  (Read 1297 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bodeens

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1153
  • Reputation: +528/-109
  • Gender: Male
Re: Holy Office Condemnation of "Rewarder God" theory
« Reply #15 on: September 17, 2021, 10:42:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Which one are you defending here Sean?



    There are two levels of cognitive dissonance that most BoD diehards hold so it is hard for them to resolve. They either take the first horn of the dilemma and admit it's Pelagian or deny it's Pelagian and push the dilemma back one step and have to ask if +ABL's formulation (or whatever theologian they defer to) is Pelagian or not. They can keep this recursion going so they never have to talk about Pelagianism.
    "We dare not even start to hope until the Faith, the true Faith, and its revealed content, are secured in our minds. Only in terms of Faith do we dare to hope."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11238
    • Reputation: +7579/-2346
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Office Condemnation of "Rewarder God" theory
    « Reply #16 on: September 17, 2021, 11:03:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I just as soon have another flat earth discussion, than compete with the demonic stamina of the Feeneyites.
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-


    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11855
    • Reputation: +4615/-737
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Office Condemnation of "Rewarder God" theory
    « Reply #17 on: September 17, 2021, 11:20:19 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • and I mentioned it in practically every thread on "BOD". In fact, it is now my first question to any person that starts a thread on BOD. Someone started a thread a few days ago, and the first reply came from me, see below, and it ended the thread. They never answer, they just go away.



    Which one are you defending here Sean?
    Aaaand he's outta here...another one bites the dust......

    I just as soon have another flat earth discussion, than compete with the demonic stamina of the Feeneyites.
    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2581
    • Reputation: +1388/-435
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Office Condemnation of "Rewarder God" theory
    « Reply #18 on: September 17, 2021, 11:30:17 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • :facepalm:

    Uhm, no, it's not.  Would you take a look at the actual thread title, Sean?  This has nothing to do with Baptism of Desire.  It's about whether someone can be saved without explicit belief in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation.  Most theologians have held that this explicit faith is required for salvation, including St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Alphonsus.

    In other words, prescinding from the question of BoD, is a person even a candidate for BoD, i.e. is the person capable of having supernatural faith, without explicit faith in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation?

    So, you have it exactly backwards.  It's Baptism of Desire which is irrelevant to this particular thread.

    Spot on! Thank you! And as you know, I do believe in BOD.
    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 DecemRationis

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1125
    • Reputation: +314/-87
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Office Condemnation of "Rewarder God" theory
    « Reply #19 on: September 17, 2021, 12:33:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Responses of the Holy Office under Pope Clement XI, 1703:
    Q. Whether a minister is bound, before baptism is conferred on an adult, to explain to him all the mysteries of our faith, especially if he is at the point of death, because this might disturb his mind. Or, whether it is sufficient, if the one at the point of death will promise that when he recovers from the illness, he will take care to be instructed, so that he may put into practice what has been commanded him.
    Resp. A promise is not sufficient, but a missionary is bound to explain to an adult, even a dying one who is not entirely incapacitated, the mysteries of faith which are necessary by a necessity of means, as are especially the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation.
    Q.  Whether it is possible for a crude and uneducated adult, as it might be with a barbarian, to be baptized, if there were given to him only an understanding of God and some of His attributes, especially His justice in rewarding and in punishing, according to this passage of the Apostle "He that cometh to God must believe that he is and that he is a rewarder' [Heb . 11:23], from which it is inferred that a barbarian adult, in a certain case of urgent necessity, can be baptized although he does not believe explicitly in Jesus Christ.
    Resp. A missionary should not baptize one who does not believe explicitly in the Lord Jesus Christ, but is bound to instruct him about all those matters which are necessary, by a necessity of means, according to the capacity of the one to be baptized.”


    Yes, well, I believe the Holy Office condemned heliocentrism as heresy.


    How'd that work out?

    Non enim omnes qui ex Israel sunt, ii sunt Israelitae (Roman 9:6)


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8313
    • Reputation: +4913/-1510
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Holy Office Condemnation of "Rewarder God" theory
    « Reply #20 on: September 17, 2021, 12:40:34 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.
    The Council of Trent, in its decree on justification, is very clear that one must be properly disposed in order to be justified.  This would apply to both baptism and BOD. 
    .
    Prior to the above canon, Trent explains what it means to be properly disposed:
    .
    Quote
    CHAPTER VI.
    The manner of Preparation.
    Now they (adults) are disposed unto the said justice, when,

    .
    1.  [Belief in Christ and the Trinity and knowledge of baptism] excited and assisted by divine grace, conceiving faith by hearing, they are freely moved towards God, believing those things to be true which God has revealed and promised, -and this especially, that God justifies the impious by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus;
    .
    2. [contrition for sins] and when, understanding themselves to be sinners, they, by turning themselves, from the fear of divine justice whereby they are profitably agitated, to consider the mercy of God, are raised unto hope, confiding that God will be propitious to them for Christ's sake; and they begin to love Him as the fountain of all justice; and are therefore moved against sins by a certain hatred and detestation, to wit, by that penitence which must be performed before baptism:
    .
    3.  [vow/promise to receive baptism and amendment of life] lastly, when they purpose to receive baptism, to begin a new life, and to keep the commandments of God. Concerning this disposition it is written; He that cometh to God, must believe that He is, and is a rewarder to them that seek Him; and, Be of good faith, son, thy sins are forgiven thee; and, The fear of the Lord driveth out sin; and, Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost; and, Going, therefore, teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; finally, Prepare your hearts unto the Lord.

    Comment:  Notice that the underlined text above, about God being a "rewarder" to them that seek Him, that sounds awfully similar to the modernist heresy of the "rewarder God".  It seems the modernists pulled out this phrase from Trent and tried to explain how "implicit faith" can save.  But they ignore all of the other conditions, and the proper disposition required, in order for one to be justified.  Salvation by a "rewarder God", when ignoring all the other requirements, makes a mockery of the Catholic Faith.