Baptism of Desire: Avoiding the Red Herrings on a Nearby Thread
(01-31-2012, 08:43 PM)Gregory I Wrote:
(01-31-2012, 03:50 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(01-31-2012, 02:02 AM)Gregory I Wrote:
(01-30-2012, 03:57 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(01-30-2012, 10:05 AM)Gregory I Wrote: Does God command impossibilities?

Yea or Nay?

Of course not that is why baptism or the desire thereof are necessary for salvation.  As the Church teaches.

Ah, but you do err my friend. God did not COMMAND baptism of desire. Theologians have SPECULATED that it MAY be a way to SUPPLY water baptism. But his speculation only began SERIOUSLY LATE in the churches history; in the Scholastic era AFTER the era of the fathers; which scholastics are BOUND to interpret sacred scripture ACCORDING to the UNANIMOUS CONSENT of the Fathers.

Do you disagree?

Do the words of our Lord in John 3:5 constitute a Command?

Yay or Nay?

It's not a yes or no question.  Distinctions must be made, and you are failing to do so.

Then tell me:

If a person is Justified by BOD, in what sense do our Lord's words apply to Him? In a metaphorical sense?

Did our Lord issue a command in John 3:5 for those whom he meant it literally? But not for those who he foreknew would not receive it, and for whom he only meant the words metaphorically?

We are Catholics, not Protestants. We do not appeal to sola scriptura to prove our points. We appeal to the Scriptural meanings that only the magisterium of the Church has the authority to interpret.

But on that note, how would you respond to the command given by Our Lord in John 6:54? He even prefaces it with the words, "Amen, Amen, I say to you...," which the Church has always understood as Our Lord's most solemn means of teaching. Are you saying that it is heresy to think that baptized babies who have not yet consumed the Eucharist cannot have life in them? God set up the Church to tell us what it meant, so He did not spend hours qualifying all the theological nuances that He inspired the Church to teach. That is one of the many reasons we have the Church, which gave us the bible. It wasn't the other way around. Christ wasn't going to say, "Now when I say 'necessary,' you must understand the various types of necessity. There is metaphysical necessity, physical necessity, and moral necessity. These are then further divided into more subsections, such as necessity of means versus necessity of precept, and absolute necessity versus moral necessity. Let me tell you what they all mean and how they apply to every possible situation..."

No, that is what the Church is for. A word that is most closely translated as "necessary" in the English language is used by Our Lord to be unpacked by the theologians He would later inspire to do so.

The Church is the only authority to which we may appeal to know the meanings of Scripture. If we depart from what She has already interpreted (whether by the common consent of those charged with the authority to teach on Her behalf, by the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, or by the Extraordinary Magisterium itself) concerning the meanings of Scripture we become like Protestants picking and choosing what we want to believe and sifting through the magisterium.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Baptism of Desire: Avoiding the Red Herrings on a Nearby Thread - by INPEFESS - 02-01-2012, 05:05 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)