Baptism of Desire and Theological Principles by Fr. Cekada
#41
(12-29-2011, 05:22 PM)Scriptorium Wrote:
(12-29-2011, 05:11 PM)Stubborn Wrote: Missing mass is is a sin unless it cannot be helped. There is no such proviso with regards to salvation - IF YOU USE infallibly defined dogma. Per dogma infallibly defined, the teachings are quite clear that the sacrament is necessary for salvation.
IF YOU USE teachings of the OM then there is the proviso of BOD.

The two teachings contradict - it is that simple. If not, please show some definitive teaching that agrees with BOD.

Yes, you are being legalist. It's like saying all killing is wrong because "Thou shalt not kill". No nuance, no context. What about a car accident. Infallibly defined doctrine is not meant for us to just believe that, but to resolve doctrinal debates and/or confirm an already very strong consensus. It's like saying only believe what's in the Bible because that is "God-breathed".

That's completely not true. You are not reading what was declared, if you are reading what is de fide via the canon safeguarded from error by the Holy Ghost,  then you could not possibly agree that water is not an absolute necessity unless you do not believe it. 

Did Trent or did not Trent declare infallibly that real physical water is necessary for baptism in no uncertain words? - yes or no? (this is not a trick question Scriptorium)
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Baptism of Desire and Theological Principles by Fr. Cekada - by Stubborn - 12-29-2011, 05:32 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)