Yes, you clearly missed it, because you obviously have zero theological training and have not even the slightest competence to discuss such matters, much less to be blogging about them online.
The implications of the quote are obvious, if you can speak English and have basic analytical skills.
Again with the desperate false accusations. The actions of a defeated man.
Vatican I is saying that supernatural faith (as opposed to natural knowledge) REQUIRES (by definition) a supernatural object, i.e. one which can ONLY be known by revelation.
Feel free to tell me something I do not know.
This rules out saying that it's sufficient for supernatural faith to believe in a truth that can be known by natural reason (i.e. the existence of a rewarder God).
According to you. I am aware that the existence of God
can be deduced by reason alone. But this is also so in regards to His rewarding good and punishing evil? Can you show me where it is asserted that knowing God and rewards good and punishes evil is not a matter of supernatural faith and even if it was this would merely convince those on the fence to go with the majority opinion that we must also believe in the Incarnation and the Holy Trinity for BOB/D to be possible.
So how does this refute the infallible doctrine of BOB/D which you deny?