Quote from: Lover of Truth

Does anyone have a count on how many times Jesus stresses water compared to how many times He stresses believing without mentioning the necessity of water.  There is one famous time where He mentions water and obviously water is implied at the final commission where He commands His disciples, but how many times when speaking about what is necessary to be saved does He avoid the mention of water but rather stresses the need to believe, conversion of heart, being like little children, loving God and neighbor etc?  I'd be curious to know. (LOT uses self interpretation of scripture against Trent's dogmatic definition of  the term Born Again)

I know the Protestants are found of taking one verse and pitting it against countless others that disagree with their interpretation of that one verse.  The Feeneyites obviously do the same thing.  But I am interested in an actual statistic pertaining to Gospel verses on what is necessary for salvation. (LOT uses self interpretation of scripture against Trent's dogmatic definition of "Born Again", but yet accuses me of self interpreting scripture)

Additionally to the good willed people of the Feeneyite persuasion I would be curious to know if you: a:  Believe Jesus condemns to Hell some for sins they are not culpable of(strawman)



b:  If Augustine, Ambrose, Bernard, Aquinas, Trent, Bellarmine, Alphonsus, Pius IX, Pius XII, etc. misunderstood John 3:5. (LOT lies and inaccuracies about what the Fathers Augustine & Ambrose taught. Never a mention of any clear dogmas. Another end run)


If so, who can we look to?

If not, where does that leave us?

Again this is addressed to the honest and good-willed. (If you were honest and good willed you would not post all these end run  lies and inaccuracies) I am not really looking for responses that ignore the questions and or refrains from answering them honestly, dispassionately and objectively.  

I'm still waiting.  Perhaps bowler is taking my advice and avoiding topics that our out of his league as he has proven repeatedly with great impunity.  

Quote from: SJB

NO Catholic teaches or understands things the way you do, that's why you have a hatred for approved sources and catechisms.

Bowler, if you'd just show even one Catholic who understands what you say you understand, maybe you'd have at least a weak argument as to your orthodoxy.

Where do you assist at Mass? Do you assist at Mass? I've asked you this question before, and you'd dodged it repeatedly.

My comments in red:

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Does anyone have a count on how many times Jesus stresses water compared to how many times He stresses believing without mentioning the necessity of water.  There is one famous time where He mentions water and obviously water is implied at the final commission where He commands His disciples, but how many times when speaking about what is necessary to be saved does He avoid the mention of water but rather stresses the need to believe, conversion of heart, being like little children, loving God and neighbor etc?  I'd be curious to know. (LOT uses self interpretation of scripture against Trent's dogmatic definition of  the term Born Again)

I know the Protestants are found of taking one verse and pitting it against countless others that disagree with their interpretation of that one verse.  The Feeneyites obviously do the same thing.  But I am interested in an actual statistic pertaining to Gospel verses on what is necessary for salvation. (LOT uses self interpretation of scripture against Trent's dogmatic definition of "Born Again", but yet accuses me of self interpreting scripture)

Additionally to the good willed people of the Feeneyite persuasion I would be curious to know if you: a:  Believe Jesus condemns to Hell some for sins they are not culpable of(strawman)



b:  If Augustine, Ambrose, Bernard, Aquinas, Trent, Bellarmine, Alphonsus, Pius IX, Pius XII, etc. misunderstood John 3:5. (LOT lies and inaccuracies about what the Fathers Augustine & Ambrose taught. Never a mention of any clear dogmas. Another end run)


If so, who can we look to?

If not, where does that leave us?

Again this is addressed to the honest and good-willed. (If you were honest and good willed you would not post all these end run  lies and inaccuracies) I am not really looking for responses that ignore the questions and or refrains from answering them honestly, dispassionately and objectively.  

I'm still waiting.  Perhaps bowler is taking my advice and avoiding topics that our out of his league as he has proven repeatedly with great impunity.  

Go back to your sedevacates threads, where you can wing it since there is no precedent for our current situation. You can't wing it here.

St. Alphonsus Liguori's concept of how a person can be justified before receiving the sacrament of baptism, does not include the imprint the character of baptism, nor does this justification remit the full liability of punishment. Now, that is not being born again!

Trent declares that "So unless they are born again in Christ, they never would be justified".

Quote

Council of Trent, Sess. 6, Chap. 3: “But though He died for all, yet all do not receive the benefit of His death, but those only to whom the merit of His passion is communicated; because as truly as men would not be born unjust, if they were not born through propagation of the seed of Adam, since by that propagation they contract through him, when they are conceived, injustice as their own, So unless they are born again in Christ, they never would be justified, since in that new birth there is bestowed upon them, through the merit of His passion, the grace by which they are made just.”

Trent also teaches  that the grace of baptism, spiritual rebirth, being ‘born again’ provides not only justification and the remission of the guilt of sin, but also the remission of every punishment due to sin.

Quote

Council of Trent, Sess. 5, Original Sin, # 5, ex cathedra: “If any one denies, that, by the grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ, which is conferred in baptism, the guilt of original sin is remitted; or even asserts that the whole of that which has the true and proper nature of sin is not taken away; but says that it is only erased, or not imputed; let him be anathema. 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; so that there is nothing whatever to retard their entrance into heaven.”

What St. Alphonsus describes as his idea of how a person can be justified before receiving the sacrament of baptism is contrary to Trent.  He says that the "justification" of baptism of desire does not provide the grace of spiritual rebirth, of being born again, while Trent clearly says that to be justified everyone must be born again, a grace which includes the remission of every temporal punishment due to sin.