Baptism of Desire: Avoiding the Red Herrings on a Nearby Thread
(01-26-2012, 06:25 PM)yablabo Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 04:53 PM)Parmandur Wrote: "By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,- as being a translation [transformation], from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the State of Grace, and of the adoption of the Sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Saviour. And this translation [transformation], since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire [in voto; votum Baptismi] thereof, as it is written - 'unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God' [John 3:5]" (Council of Trent, Session 6, Monday, January 13, 1547 A.D., Decree on Justification, Chapter IV)

You have been pointed here before, and how this has been interpreted by all the Doctors to mean Baptism of Desire.  Your continual refusal to read this in line with the Church is nothing other than rank Protestantism.  And believe me, I know Protestantism when I see it.

This is getting to the point of hilarity.  I ask for an explicit statement from Trent that "voto/votum baptismi" is salvific, and you give me a sentence saying that the "votum" of the laver of regeneration is a path by which the translation called Justification can be effected...  I hope that I'm not the only one who sees the failure in logic here.  A translation (Justification) is not equal to a state (habitual grace, or salvation) and therefore this falls short of fitting the bill.

Then you go on and say it's all in the interpretation by the Doctors, after you've already told me that it was taught explicitly at Trent?  Logic is made up of straight thinking from one premise to're jumping all over the place.

I do protest against the false rule of faith you are trying to push upon me and others, but I do not protest against that which is contained as found in Scripture and tradition, nor what the Church proposes to be divinely revealed whether in her solemn judgment or in her Ordinary and Universal Magisterium.

-- Nicole

As it has been said, "I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you."  If you don't see how Justification is salvific in nature, I don't know what you mean by the words.  It is not that anyone has had to explain this passage, but simply that St. Alphonsus and St. Robert Bellarmine have cited it as obviously teaching BoD, which it clearly does, and any child could see.  The problem isn't that this is "illogical" as you charge, but that you are making in error in judgement, which precedes logical processes.  You can't be convinced of the truth for, as Fr. Cekada has pointed out, you are not admitting Catholic principles of theology.  It is not that anyone is avoiding your questions, it is that your questions are malformed and ignorant.

Messages In This Thread
Re: Baptism of Desire: Avoiding the Red Herrings on a Nearby Thread - by Parmandur - 01-26-2012, 10:50 PM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)