Baptism of Desire: Avoiding the Red Herrings on a Nearby Thread
#50
(01-17-2012, 07:05 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(01-17-2012, 06:59 PM)yablabo Wrote: Your own words are contradictory on this issue.  If we are to believe the theologians under pain of mortal sin, it does not make us heretics to disbelieve them...  To be an heretic one must either deny or doubt in an obstinate fashion what must be believed by divine and Catholic faith (after Baptism, of course).  This means that articles of divine and Catholic faith are bound upon us under pain of major excommunication...not minor excommunication as mortal sin accomplishes. 

However, it is totally irrational to interpret the infallible by the fallible...which makes the words of the theologians no more than guides in this matter to a better understanding, but not binding upon us beyond pious assent due to their assumed credibility.  When it happens that theologians present notions contradicting or contrary to what we must believe by divine and Catholic faith, such as the necessity of Baptism, then we are bound to reject what they say on that matter totally and utterly.

If you don't believe me, fine.  You don't have to believe me.  Though, if you claim the name Catholic, then you must believe and assent to what Christ and His Magisterium teach...and the theologians are not part of that Magisterium.

-- Nicole

*sigh*

Father Cekada is right.  If you insist on seeing contradictions where there are none, there is no point to speaking with you.  The constant teaching of the Faith is that water Baptism is necessary, but that Baptism of Blood or Baptism of Desire can substitute by divine economy.  If you refuse to hear the teaching of the Church on this, good luck.

I know you will see no further use in discussing this with me, but I do find it compelling to point out more contradiction in your subsequent post:

The constant teaching of the Faith is that water Baptism is necessary, you say...

Then, you contradict that saying "water Baptism" is not necessary: "baptism of blood" or "baptism of desire" can substitute for "water Baptism" by divine economy...

This is hardly convincing...as contradiction cannot be held rationally.  Either something is necessary, or it is not.  By their infallible Magisterium, Our Lord and the Roman Pontiffs have laid out the teaching clearly on Holy Baptism: that it is necessary [period].  If you were to define the word necessary, you would see that it does not mean, as convention defines it, merely that which is beneficial.  Necessary means one of two things: that a travel along a specific path cannot be either begun or finished without this, or that once travel along a path to a specific end has begun unless this particular condition is met the end cannot be reached. 

Applying this notion of "necessary" to the application of Baptism, one can see that if the Church says it is necessary, that either the journey to salvation cannot be begun or finished without it...or that once the path is entered, journey to salvation cannot be finished without it.

To say that "desire" or action of grace on God's part is enough is a "Wickliff-ite" error. 

-- Nicole
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Baptism of Desire: Avoiding the Red Herrings on a Nearby Thread - by yablabo - 01-17-2012, 07:33 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)