Author Topic: What exactly does implicit faith means? (Read 5632 times)

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #75 on:** July 30, 2013, 02:19:50 PM »

Quote from: Cathedra

Quote from: Lover of Truth
Why the Feeneyites prefer the innocent to be damned I have not yet figured out. What is more troubling is that they insist on it with a vehemence.

I have wondered when they make this objection, viz., the "cruelty" objection.

Well then for that matter, you have to accuse God Himself for making such "strict" laws and "strict" requirements in the first place.

"Why did He create us if 99% of humanity would be damned? Why did he create us if the prospect of going to Hell would always be there?" etc. etc.

It's not about "being cruel" to "poor innocent people" or anything like that. The fact is that this is what the Church has dogmatically defined and this is what the Holy Scriptures say.

The problem is people going against what the Church defined in this matter and trying to make all kinds of exceptions and excuses so people can be saved without holding the Catholic Faith whole and undefiled and without even believing in Jesus.

You might as well object why are there any requirements at all to begin with.

You should make distinctions and not frase your posts like that, because no one is truly "innocent".

"For all have sinned, and do need the glory of God."

"What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath, fitted for destruction, that he might shew the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he hath prepared unto glory?"

Also, why are "innocent" babies who die without baptism not allowed to go to Heaven then? Who's more blameless than a baby?

Right! Like the pro "choicers" who say they are pro "choice" but do not say "I believe in the right of parents to have have their innocent and defenseless babies murdered". If they are so right why can't they word it as it is instead of putting a spin on it or avoiding the "negative" realistic aspect of their false teaching?

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #76 on:** July 30, 2013, 02:21:23 PM »

Quote from: Jehanne

Quote from: Lover of Truth
Does that mean that Pius V, Gregory XII, Augustine, Ambrose, Thomas Aquinas and many other saints, Doctors and Theologians were duped? It is a yes or no question.

No, but don't put words in their mouth, either. Did any of them ever teach that there were souls in Paradise who lack the character of sacramental Baptism? Consider this "hypothetical" canon:

Quote
If anyone says that there are no souls in Paradise who lack the character of sacramental Baptism, let him be anathema.

That is besides the point. The dogma is "No Salvation Outside the Church" not "No Salvation without the Character of Sacramental Baptism".

Cathedra · « **Reply #77 on:** July 30, 2013, 05:13:42 PM »

Quote from: Lover of Truth

If they are so right why can't they word it as it is instead of putting a spin on it or avoiding the "negative" realistic aspect of their false teaching?

That people who die in original sin only and without the Catholic Faith is a false teaching you say?

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #78 on:** July 31, 2013, 06:44:05 PM »

Quote from: Cathedra

Quote from: Lover of Truth
If they are so right why can't they word it as it is instead of putting a spin on it or avoiding the "negative" realistic aspect of their false teaching?

That people who die in original sin only and without the Catholic Faith is a false teaching you say?

You question on its face does not make sense. But I will try to guess what you are trying to say.

It is correct that anyone who dies with Original sin on his soul will be deprived of the Beatific Vision. There are no exceptions to this. But the second and third form of the one baptism (BOB/D) can cleanse the soul of Original Sin.

It is true that "desire" and or "invincible ignorance" by themselves save no one. One must have a supernatural faith for salvation to be possible. Actual graces, such as the grace to know by God's revelation that there is a God who both rewards good and punishes evil (and the Holy Trinity and Incarnation)is the gift of faith. If one dies without the theological virtue of faith he is deprived of the Beatific Vision no matter how much he desires to enter the Church, even if he is within the Church as a non-member.

Does that answer the question you were trying to ask?

Cathedra · « **Reply #79 on:** August 02, 2013, 12:05:18 AM »

Quote from: Lover of Truth

You question on its face does not make sense. But I will try to guess what you are trying to say.

It is correct that anyone who dies with Original sin on his soul will be deprived of the Beatific Vision. There are no exceptions to this. But the second and third form of the one baptism (BOB/D) can cleanse the soul of Original Sin.

It is true that "desire" and or "invincible ignorance" by themselves save no one. One must have a supernatural faith for salvation to be possible. Actual graces, such as the grace to know by God's revelation that there is a God who both rewards good and punishes evil (and the Holy Trinity and Incarnation)is the gift of faith. If one dies without the theological virtue of faith he is deprived of the Beatific Vision no matter how much he desires to enter the Church, even if he is within the Church as a non-member.

Does that answer the question you were trying to ask?

I wasn't talking about any of this.

What you were saying, the "cruelty" objection, suggested that those who die in original sin won't be condemned because they are "innocent."