I was precise, but you're not paying attention.
You have argued that baptism is a necessity of means for salvation.
Lionel:
Necessity of means and pecept are meaningless to me since I cannot judge any such case - and neither can you. We do not know of any such person who has been saved or will be saved according to necessity of means or precept.
So I have not argued that the baptism of water is a necessitty of means.
Every one needs the baptism of water to remove Original sin.So there are no known exceptions in 2014.
______________________________
Canon law clearly and unambiguously states otherwise, "OR AT LEAST IN DESIRE is necessary"
Baptism is a necessity of precept, not of means.
Lionel:
The Catechism of the Catholic Church says all need the baptism of water for salvation(CCC 1257) and so does Vatican Council II (AG 7).
If the Code of Canon Law the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1257) is saying that there are exceptions, known in the present times, then it is a factual mistake. Since we do not and cannot know of any exceptions.
______________________________
Trent says the same thing. Pope St. Pius X says the same thing. And so have all the rest, but you have twisted it into meaning a hypothetical only, but its not hypothetical. It's a fact!
Lionel:
So please give me the citation where the Council of Trent or Pope Pius X says that the baptism of desire is visible in the present times to be an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.You are unable to cite any such text.
If the Code of Canon Law or some other Church document infers this then it is a factual mistake. It is a fact of life that we cannot see or know someone saved with the baptism of desire or according to the necessity of precept or means , or invincible ignorance(LG 16), a ray of the Truth(NA 2) etc. This is an objective error.
______________________________
The literal interpretation is not what you're saying. It's what the Church says by way of catechism and law.
Lionel:
CCC 1257 says God is not limited to the Sacraments and also God is limited to the Sacraments. The Magisterium ihere is confusing .
When the Magisterium says God is not limited to the Sacraments it is an objective error since the norm is the Sacrament of Baptism and you and I do not know of any exceptions. So how can 'the Church' say God is not limited to the Sacraments?
This objective error was first made in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which criticized Fr.Leonard Feeeny and the St. Benedict Center .The Letter was using irrational Cushingism.
-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment