I already said it was necessary for the SACRAMENT of Baptism. BOD is not a Sacrament.

ON THE SACRAMENTS IN GENERAL

ON BAPTISM

CANON V.-If any one saith, that baptism is free, that is, not necessary unto salvation; let him be anathema.


Do you admit that you are saying that the sacrament of Baptism is not necessary unto salvation?

Quote from: MyrnaM

I already said it was necessary for the SACRAMENT of Baptism. BOD is not a Sacrament.

ON THE SACRAMENTS IN GENERAL

ON BAPTISM

CANON V.-If any one saith, that baptism is free, that is, not necessary unto salvation; let him be anathema.


Do you admit that you are saying that the sacrament of Baptism is not necessary unto salvation?

Again, I think that the Council of Trent is responding to Protestants here.  It is referring to those who do not believe the sacrament of baptism is necessary at all...ever.  It is referring to those who do not even recognize the Sacrament of Baptism.

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: MyrnaM

I believe water is absolutely necessary for the SACRAMENT of Baptism.  Because that is what the Church teaches.  
However............

CANON II.-If any one saith, that true and natural water is not of necessity for baptism, and, on that account, wrests, to some sort of metaphor, those words of our Lord Jesus Christ; Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost; let him be anathema.

Will you be the "any one" in the canon above and say water is not of necessity for BAPTISM?

LOT already said it - he thinks he's cute by trying to say that it is a necessity - but in the next breath he then turns around and weasels right back out of it.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this was directed at those who believed that being born again was symbolic (ie. a "metaphor").  Since this is just after the Protestant Reformation, I would assume this is specifically directed towards Protestants.  Also, I noticed the phrase "true and natural water".  This leads me to believe that this was a focus on the use of water vs any other liquid.

Yes, many people interpret dogma into meaning something that it does not say - and they don't try to qualify their exceptions by saying they're going out on a limb either. They assume an authority which they do not posses, take the sacrament and turn it into some sort of metaphor - all the while insisting they are doing no such thing.

Again, we are not permitted to add exceptions to Dogma - if the pope wanted to say it was directed only at prots and that any other liquid would void the sacrament, we *must* assume that is what he would have said.

The First Vatican Council specifically teaches that the canons mean exactly what they say.

Hence, too,that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church, and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.

You know Stubborn, the whole Council of Trent was about speaking the Truth in the face of Protestantism.  So, I think for you to suggest that these anathemas weren't primarily meant to combat the heresies du jour (Protestantism) is a bit disingenuous.

You know Stubborn, the whole Council of Trent was about speaking the Truth in the face of Protestantism.  So, I think for you to suggest that these anathemas weren't primarily meant to combat the heresies du jour (Protestantism) is a bit disingenuous.

Even IF the council was only directing the anathemas at the prots, which they weren't, the canons will remain true forever for everyone. That is because one of the Four Marks of the Church is Universal - It is universal in doctrine, for it teaches the same everywhere, and its doctrines are suited to all classes of persons.

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: 2Vermont

You know Stubborn, the whole Council of Trent was about speaking the Truth in the face of Protestantism.  So, I think for you to suggest that these anathemas weren't primarily meant to combat the heresies du jour (Protestantism) is a bit disingenuous.

Even IF the council was only directing the anathemas at the prots, which they weren't, the canons will remain true forever for everyone. That is because one of the Four Marks of the Church is Universal - It is universal in doctrine, for it teaches the same everywhere, and its doctrines are suited to all classes of persons.

Regarding Sacrament of Penance:

CANON VI.--If any one denieth, either that sacramental confession was instituted, or is necessary to salvation, of divine right; or saith, that the manner of confessing secretly to a priest alone, which the Church hath ever observed from the beginning, and doth observe, is alien from the institution and command of Christ, and is a human invention; let him be anathema

Does the Church teach that you must have the Sacrament of Confession for salvation in every circuмstance?  What about perfect contrition?

No, the Church does not teach that you must have the Sacrament of Confession for salvation in every circuмstance, She teaches as you quoted above, insult not intended, but - have you read it? She teaches that anyone who denies that sacramental confession is necessary to salvation is anathema.

As for perfect contrition, I think Fr. Feeney worded it best in his book The Bread of Life: ......But the very fact that the Church requires every mortal sin committed to be confessed, whether one is perfectly sorry for it or not, shows the Church has a maternal suspicion of this perfect act of love of God obtaining forgiveness apart from the Sacrament of forgiveness instituted by Christ.


How about you answering a question for a change................Why are you continually trying to insert exceptions into infallible teachings after you've been shown that per V1, we are not permitted to do that?


Incidentally, doesn't a BOD deny that sacramental confession is necessary to salvation?

Quote from: 2Vermont

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: 2Vermont

You know Stubborn, the whole Council of Trent was about speaking the Truth in the face of Protestantism.  So, I think for you to suggest that these anathemas weren't primarily meant to combat the heresies du jour (Protestantism) is a bit disingenuous.

Even IF the council was only directing the anathemas at the prots, which they weren't, the canons will remain true forever for everyone. That is because one of the Four Marks of the Church is Universal - It is universal in doctrine, for it teaches the same everywhere, and its doctrines are suited to all classes of persons.

Regarding Sacrament of Penance:

CANON VI.--If any one denieth, either that sacramental confession was instituted, or is necessary to salvation, of divine right; or saith, that the manner of confessing secretly to a priest alone, which the Church hath ever observed from the beginning, and doth observe, is alien from the institution and command of Christ, and is a human invention; let him be anathema

Does the Church teach that you must have the Sacrament of Confession for salvation in every circuмstance?  What about perfect contrition?

No, the Church does not teach that you must have the Sacrament of Confession for salvation in every circuмstance, She teaches as you quoted above, insult not intended, but - have you read it? She teaches that anyone who denies that sacramental confession is necessary to salvation is anathema.

As for perfect contrition, I think Fr. Feeney worded it best in his book The Bread of Life: ......But the very fact that the Church requires every mortal sin committed to be confessed, whether one is perfectly sorry for it or not, shows the Church has a maternal suspicion of this perfect act of love of God obtaining forgiveness apart from the Sacrament of forgiveness instituted by Christ.


How about you answering a question for a change................Why are you continually trying to insert exceptions into infallible teachings after you've been shown that per V1, we are not permitted to do that?


Incidentally, doesn't a BOD deny that sacramental confession is necessary to salvation?

You've missed the point.  The Council of Trent speaks of the Sacrament of Confession as necessary for salvation.  It does not mention the fact that the Church does teach perfect contrition and that the Sacrament of Confession is not always necessary for salvation (that there are exceptions despite the fact that you keep asserting that there are not....and telling others that they go against Church teaching by doing so).

I'm trying to show you that The Council of Trent was focusing on Protestant heresies.  It was not trying to lay out all of Church teaching.  It did not lay out the teaching for baptism of desire/blood for the same reason it did not lay out the teaching of perfect contrition.  These were not the issues of the day. Protestants denied the Sacraments as a whole....that was the issue....that was what the Church was focusing on.

Later catechisms (and one of them was only 80 years later) included more encompassing teachings such as perfect contrition and BOD/BOB.....exceptions that allow for God's mercy since the Church does not teach that God is bound by His Sacraments despite the fact that individual Catholics would like to believe otherwise.  Catechisms got more detailed.

Again, I am not trying to avoid answering YOUR question (so stop badgering me to answer it). I have repeatedly said that I don't know as much about this as others on this site (who seem to have responded to your queries in the past).  My only point here is that you're using the Council of Trent Catechism as the catechism that teaches ALL of the Faith (much like Protestants use the Bible as teaching ALL of the Faith).  I am merely showing you that it is not teaching ALL of the Faith.  Therefore, simply because something isn't there doesn't automatically mean that it is not teaching.

Here's a question:  Does the Council of Trent Catechism even state that it teaches ALL of the Faith?