Baptism of Desire: Avoiding the Red Herrings on a Nearby Thread
(01-29-2012, 03:53 AM)Gregory I Wrote:
(01-29-2012, 03:10 AM)Parmandur Wrote:
(01-29-2012, 01:45 AM)Gregory I Wrote: Yes, he does a fair Job. In fact, as I showed on the other thread, He maintained that the Necessity of WATER BAPTISM was absolute for every person who was to be saved.

But of course, you deny that...Heaven knows why. :eyeroll:

That you think what you just said contradicts Baptism of Desire demonstrates that you haven't understood the issue adequately.  There is no contradiction, and insisting there is one does not prove it, particularly as it flies in the face of the clear historical teaching of the Church.

Historical my foot! From the 12th century onward in spurts to the 16th century where it took off in Force due to Jesuit Casuistry HARDLY constitutes the Historical teaching of the church. And by the way, you keep treating saints as though they speak on behalf of the Church. They don't. Only a Pope does. So please stop calling it a Church teaching when the Church has never taught it. You cannot point to any point of time in history and say "Here is where the Roman Catholic Church officially taught the truth that Baptism of Desire is a truth revealed by God and must be believed by all the faithful."

It doesn't exist. If it did, I would know it, and i would believe it.

Oh really?  What about St. Pius V or St. Pius X?  Do those Popes count?  How about Ven. Pius XII, who excommunicated Fr. Feeney, even if not officially for his novel teachings?

Your view of Church history is skewed, if you think Scholastics and 16th century Jesuits are bad guys.  That's the Lutheran line, doncha know? :LOL:
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Baptism of Desire: Avoiding the Red Herrings on a Nearby Thread - by Parmandur - 01-29-2012, 04:03 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)