Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 100 101 [102] 103 104 ... 134

Author Topic: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?  (Read 55261 times)

0 Members and 9 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline trad123

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #505 on: June 01, 2023, 08:07:24 AM »
Quote from: SeanJohnson on June 01, 2023, 08:05:25 AM
Neither you, nor anyone else, has explained how, according to the Church, grace can be expelled from a soul without grave sin (or conversely, how those in the state of grace can be damned).


See the highlighted red portion I quoted above.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #506 on: June 01, 2023, 08:07:31 AM »
Quote from: trad123 on June 01, 2023, 07:58:56 AM
The habit of sanctity is lost by mortal sin, but the habit of faith, we are told, is lost by a positive act of infidelity or heresy. This is not strictly true; for the habit may be lost by the omission to elicit the act of faith, which neither is nor can be elicited out of the Catholic Church; for out of her the credible object, which is Deus revelans et Ecclesia proponens, (God revealing and the Church proposing for our belief) is wanting. Consequently, outside of the Church there can be no salvation for any one, even though baptized, who has come to the use of reason. The habit given in Baptism then ceases to suffice, and the obligation to elicit the act begins.

Thanks for finding a source.  THIS ^^^ is what I've been saying the entire time.  It requires understanding the definition of a virtue or a habit, and understanding how this habit is merely infused in someone without the use of reason, but for those with reason it requires an active act of faith.
Logged

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #507 on: June 01, 2023, 08:07:58 AM »
Quote from: SeanJohnson on June 01, 2023, 07:57:40 AM
You are repeating yourself, not answering the question.
No Sean, you have it exactly backwards.

The way this works is, you asked a question, I answered the question with Scripture, now it is your job to prove Scripture does not mean what it says.

Ever heard the expression "That's Bible?" Well, the answer I gave literally is, Bible.

So yes, I did indeed answer the question, it's just not the answer you want.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #508 on: June 01, 2023, 08:18:44 AM »
Quote from: SeanJohnson on June 01, 2023, 08:05:25 AM
Neither you, nor anyone else, has explained how, according to the Church, grace can be expelled from a soul without grave sin (or conversely, how those in the state of grace can be damned).

I’ll bow out of the thread until someone can do that, as the failure to do so is a glaring “concedo.”

Ah, so you're going to pick up your toys and leave.  Typical.  What a baby.  Father Mueller explains it in the citation provided by trad123.  You don't understand the nature / definition of a virtue or habit and how the infused supernatural virtue received at Baptism requires active cooperation from someone who has reached the use of reason.

You absolutely refuse to answer the question about how a baptized infant who reaches the age of reason as an atheist can be saved when the Church teaches that for adults explicit faith is required for supernatural faith (and therefore supernatural charity).  So instead you stomp away.  Your failure to answer this question is the "concedo".

You spent how long at the seminary and you don't understand what virtues and habits are and what their relationship to act is?
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #509 on: June 01, 2023, 08:22:02 AM »
Quote from: trad123 on June 01, 2023, 07:58:56 AM
But, continues the Rev. A. Young, “as I was a baptized Christian, I did not, neither could I, lose the capacity to make meritorious acts of divine faith, no matter whether I made them or not; no matter what I believed or disbelieved as I grew up; no matter whether I became a Protestant, Jєω, Mahomedan, or infidel. I will be a baptized Christian for all eternity, because the indelible mark of baptism cannot be taken out of my soul. In this case I was capable of making meritorious acts of divine faith."

What stupid and most absurd assertion this!

"Rev A. Young" here is SeanJohnson, and I concur with Father Mueller's assessment:  "What stupid and most absurd assertion this!"

Although at least this Rev. Young recognizes that the infused supernatural virtue entails a CAPACITY to make meritorious acts of divine faith.  As I said, virtues/habits are capacities or potencies or faculties, but they must in an adult be accompanied by ACTUAL acts of divine faith.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 100 101 [102] 103 104 ... 134
« previous next »