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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5

Author Topic: Holy Office Condemnation of "Rewarder God" theory  (Read 5771 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Holy Office Condemnation of "Rewarder God" theory
« Reply #5 on: September 17, 2021, 06:38:50 AM »
Quote from: SeanJohnson on September 17, 2021, 06:27:46 AM
This passage concerns those who may receive water baptism from a priest. 

It says nothing regarding whether those who die without water baptism can die implicitly baptized by desire.

The excerpt is irrelevant to the debate.

: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.
Logged

Offline SeanJohnson

Re: Holy Office Condemnation of "Rewarder God" theory
« Reply #6 on: September 17, 2021, 07:12:32 AM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on September 17, 2021, 06:38:50 AM
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. 

This statement is self-contradictory:

Those baptized implicitly by definition will not have explicit faith.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Holy Office Condemnation of "Rewarder God" theory
« Reply #7 on: September 17, 2021, 07:15:29 AM »
Quote from: SeanJohnson on September 17, 2021, 07:12:32 AM
This statement is self-contradictory:

Those baptized implicitly by definition will not have explicit faith.

You're confusing implicit desire with implicit faith ... a common problem that I once dedicated an entire thread to.
Logged

Offline SeanJohnson

Re: Holy Office Condemnation of "Rewarder God" theory
« Reply #8 on: September 17, 2021, 07:18:40 AM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on September 17, 2021, 07:15:29 AM
You're confusing implicit desire with implicit faith ... a common problem that I once dedicated an entire thread to.

No, it is you who are conflating the two, when you allege BOD is impossible without EXPLICIT FAITH.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Holy Office Condemnation of "Rewarder God" theory
« Reply #9 on: September 17, 2021, 07:29:06 AM »
Quote from: SeanJohnson on September 17, 2021, 07:18:40 AM
No, it is you who are conflating the two, when you allege BOD is impossible without EXPLICIT FAITH.

:facepalm:  That is not a conflation.  BoD is impossible without supernatural faith ... as all agree.  Question here is whether supernatural faith is possible without explicit faith in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation.

This is not something I am alleging.  This is the position of St. Thomas and St. Alphonsus ... which finds support in this citation from the Holy Office.

You've got everything exactly reversed and are begging the question.

You throw out the term "implicit Baptism of Desire" and imply that it's the same thing as implicit faith ... when they are two separate and distinct issues.  I'm a bit surprised at your lack of basic logic when you spent some time at STAS.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
« previous next »