Author Topic: Pope St. Siricius rejects Baptism of Desire (Read 9000 times)

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #30 on:** March 12, 2021, 08:59:06 AM »

Quote

notice the Pontiff does not use the term "voto", which signifies a supernatural desire with contrition,

1. Oh, this is a new one on me. Trent never defines "voto", so you're making things up again. There is nowhere in Trent that says "voto" always includes "supernatural desire" with "contrition".
2. Where does Trent define "supernatural desire"? What does this even mean? You're making up things again.
3. Where does Trent talk about contrition in relation to voto?
4. Also, I like how you cleverly use the term "voto" after we repeatedly prove that there is a distinction between voto and desire. You're like a crafty politician who uses words and phrases that are popular, but you don't use them in the same way as the people.
.
.

Quote

but rather desiderantibus, which speaks of a mere natural desire.

.
Another lie from you. You've posted hundreds of quotes, which you claim are pro-BOD and they all use the word "desire" but when the pope uses the word, you say he's only speaking of natural desire. Trent is the ONLY source of pro-BOD which uses the term "voto" (which WE pointed out to you...you had never made this distinction before) and all other quotes/saints use "desire". But you dishonestly interpret Pope Siricius as meaning 'natural' desire, with no proof at all, except your personal agenda. Shame, shame, shame.
.
To define desidero - to desire or to want, to long, to wish for, to request, to require, to need
.
.

Quote

A mere natural desire, as everyone should know by now, as St. Thomas explains and even for that matter the Holy Office Letter mentions (when it says supernatural faith and supernatural charity are necessary for desire to be supernaturally efficacious) does not suffice to receive the Baptism of Desire. That should clear it up.

Here's where your theology is totally wrong. As 2Vermont points out, only a person who has been baptized and is in the state of grace can have supernatural faith/charity. It's impossible for a non-catholic to have "supernatural desire" because without supernatural grace, they can only desire God naturally. This is theology 101.
.

Quote

This is also a disciplinary decree, not a dogmatic definition.

B.S. Why? Because you say so? Just because it's not a dogmatic definition, doesn't mean it's only disciplinary. Something that is lower than a dogmatic decree (i.e. Trent commentary) is not simply disciplinary. It's not either-or. There's a wide swath of doctrinal levels of teaching below dogma.
.
Disciplinary decrees have to do with church law, legal questions, jurisdiction, rules of religious houses, etc. Pope Siricius' comments are related to doctrine, not discipline. They are not dogmatic but are part of the ordinary magisterium (i.e. like an encyclical). They are certainly of a higher authority than Trent commentary, because the former is from a pope, while commentary is from bishops/cardinals/theologians.
.
You really have no idea what you're talking about. Your lack of humility is proving your audacious stupidity.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #31 on:** March 12, 2021, 09:17:47 AM »

Quote

This is also a disciplinary decree, not a dogmatic definition.

Xavier,
To further prove your illogical fantasies, let's show more of your theological contradictions:
.
1. You say that Trent commentary is infallible.
2. You say that catechisms are infallible.
3. You say that we must believe what St Alphonsus' says is infallible.
.
But a statement directly from a pope on baptism/salvation is not infallible? Are you kidding me?
.
You dishonestly try to dodge this contradiction by saying it's not a "dogmatic definition", which is true, but according to you, non-dogmatic definitions (see above) can also be infallible. Contradictions, confusion and lies from you...

RomanTheo · « **Reply #32 on:** March 12, 2021, 10:36:38 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on March 11, 2021, 02:47:53 PM

Thus far, RomanTheo (Father Kramer) was the only one to attempt a response... See I think that Father Kramer was reading into this docuмent what his own believe is, that, yes we should baptized because there's no guarantee of their salvation by BoD.

I am not Fr. Kramer.

Tradman · « **Reply #33 on:** March 12, 2021, 10:45:36 AM »

Quote from: RomanTheo on March 12, 2021, 10:36:38 AM

I am not Fr. Kramer.

That's good, because Fr. Kramer plays the bod air guitar.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #34 on:** March 12, 2021, 11:24:17 AM »

Right, Pax, but not only that, but even if we grant the validity of his distinction, those with the votum are merely subset of those with a generic desire. You cannot have a votum for Baptism without also the natural "desire" for it. Oh, wait, check that, perhaps a Hindu in Tibet can somehow have this infused magical votum while never actually desiring Baptism. Of course, even that is based on their natural "desire" to do everything God wants. Yet the Pope says that EVERY SINGLE ONE of those is lost, including those among the "desirers" who happen also to have the "votum". Otherwise he would simply say "some" or "most" of them are lost.

Really the reason the Pope uses the Latin "desire" is because the term "votum" hadn't been introduced yet (this is an early docuмent). It does NOT mean "only natural desire" but is a broader term.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Pope St. Siricius rejects Baptism of Desire (Read 9000 times)

Pax Vobis

Re: Pope St. Siricius rejects Baptism of Desire

Pax Vobis

Re: Pope St. Siricius rejects Baptism of Desire

RomanTheo

Re: Pope St. Siricius rejects Baptism of Desire

Tradman

Re: Pope St. Siricius rejects Baptism of Desire

Ladislaus

Re: Pope St. Siricius rejects Baptism of Desire