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

Author Topic: Trinity/Incarnation vs. Rewarder God: Which is more likely to be correct?  (Read 1814 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matto

Re: Trinity/Incarnation vs. Rewarder God: Which is more likely to be correct?
« Reply #5 on: March 30, 2017, 11:27:15 AM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on March 30, 2017, 11:16:44 AM
Debatable.  Msgr. Fenton actually argued that SH did not have to be interpreted as siding with Rewarder God theory.
I know. I remember reading his opinion about that on the Te Deum Forum. But nearly everyone else thinks it taught otherwise and most people in the Church and the Novus Ordo interpreted it as teaching otherwise. And when I read it, it seems to me that it taught otherwise also.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Trinity/Incarnation vs. Rewarder God: Which is more likely to be correct?
« Reply #6 on: March 30, 2017, 11:48:46 AM »
Quote from: Matto on March 30, 2017, 11:27:15 AM
I know. I remember reading his opinion about that on the Te Deum Forum. But nearly everyone else thinks it taught otherwise and most people in the Church and the Novus Ordo interpreted it as teaching otherwise. And when I read it, it seems to me that it taught otherwise also.

That's why I said debatable.  We could add SH tentatively to category A.  Even then, the preponderance of evidence is in favor of B.  And SH's authority is pretty low ... not even "authentic" due to its failure to appear in AAS.  I consider it a fake and the handiwork of the same modernists who brought us the V2 revolution.
Logged

Offline Augustinus

Re: Trinity/Incarnation vs. Rewarder God: Which is more likely to be correct?
« Reply #7 on: March 30, 2017, 02:26:46 PM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on March 30, 2017, 11:48:46 AM
That's why I said debatable.  We could add SH tentatively to category A.  Even then, the preponderance of evidence is in favor of B.  And SH's authority is pretty low ... not even "authentic" due to its failure to appear in AAS.  I consider it a fake and the handiwork of the same modernists who brought us the V2 revolution.
I am not certain of this, but I don't think every Curial decision needs to be rendered part of the AAS, and they are binding on the laity simply as Curial decisions IIRC.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Trinity/Incarnation vs. Rewarder God: Which is more likely to be correct?
« Reply #8 on: March 31, 2017, 07:56:01 AM »
Quote from: Augustinus on March 30, 2017, 02:26:46 PM
I am not certain of this, but I don't think every Curial decision needs to be rendered part of the AAS, and they are binding on the laity simply as Curial decisions IIRC.

Not inherently, obviously, or by divine law.  But the reason for the Church law which specifies that all acts of the authentic Magisterium must appear here ... is precisely to avoid spurious or fraudulent garbage from being attributed to the Magisterium.  All signs are that SH was just such a fraud.  WHY would the Holy See fail to include this in AAS?
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Trinity/Incarnation vs. Rewarder God: Which is more likely to be correct?
« Reply #9 on: March 31, 2017, 07:59:03 AM »
bosco and Nado are rather silent about the question posed in this thread.  That's quite telling.

Given the support for the two positions, as outlined above (even if we throw SH into the mix), which would appear more likely to an independent objective observer?  Clearly the Church has failed to condemn as "wrong" the position that explicit faith in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation are necessary for salvation.  So, by Nadonian "logic", it must be right.  Be that as it may, you have the Church canonizing Doctors who taught this.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3
« previous next »