Roman

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@badatcatholic @CatholicLukas @__Isabella__007 @ColleenEldrach1 @1Friarminor But the BOD crowd claim we're outside the Church. The current results of BOD: rejection of Christ by implicit desire, which is a rejection of Christ and the entire Gospel, all because of a sentimental weakness that non-Catholics are saved; there is salvation outside the Church.

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@badatcatholic @CatholicLukas @__Isabella__007 @ColleenEldrach1 @1Friarminor Please investigate what it means to be a formal heretic. Correct, I am not calling Pius XII or you a formal heretic. Explain in detail how infallibility works and why it is relevant or not. Do you agree that many popes at times have said or written things that are not infallible?

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@ColleenEldrach1 @badatcatholic @CatholicLukas @__Isabella__007 @Zachspeare @maccabeanpapist @1Friarminor I see, no problem. He admits aut means or, so that part is not his position. True, 1000 years teaching BOD salvation without water baptism is a very long time. Could you send his entire long thread to a Latin reader and they can explain his errors. I am sure it won't take long.

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@ColleenEldrach1 @badatcatholic @CatholicLukas @__Isabella__007 @Zachspeare @maccabeanpapist @1Friarminor You mentioned Trent infallibly taught BOD. I have heard that. Could you show where that is? This @1Friarminor has been posting a lot on this since Feb 1. Can you please explain what is incorrect in the Latin in his long thread. Thanks for your help.

https://t.co/Q7rfqHlpAn

[Saint Francis @1Friarminor]

Trent 6.4 means adults must desire baptism, because without their will the sacrament isn't valid. Yet infants can't will. If the council meant either one alone will suffice, it would falsely define an adult baptism is valid without desire.

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@ColleenEldrach1 @badatcatholic @CatholicLukas @__Isabella__007 @Zachspeare @maccabeanpapist @1Friarminor Yes, you're right it's too broad. But catechisms contain mistakes and are subordinate to infallible councils. BOD is bad because when the salvation door is cracked open at all to the non-faithful, who are only the baptized, it can only end where we are now: A denial of Christ.

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@badatcatholic @CatholicLukas @__Isabella__007 @ColleenEldrach1 @Zachspeare @maccabeanpapist @1Friarminor I am not calling Pius or you a heretic. I am saying the Church infallibly defined baptism as absolute in multiple places. Circumstances have allowed people to accept BOD because saints speculated on it. The problem is once the door is open wide like today Christ is not necessary.

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@badatcatholic @CatholicLukas @__Isabella__007 @ColleenEldrach1 @Zachspeare @maccabeanpapist @1Friarminor Who cares? That is the point of papal infallibility: to separate papal errors from infallible truth. Vatican I is specific. Infallibly, how is one made a member of the Church, receive faith, hope, and charity, and receive the mark of Christ on his soul?

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@badatcatholic @CatholicLukas @__Isabella__007 @ColleenEldrach1 @Zachspeare @maccabeanpapist @1Friarminor Not according to Mystici Corporis. But what he personally believed is not a part of papal infallibility. Popes made mistake after mistake for centuries. The dogma of infallibility is all that matters. Trent, Florence, Chalcedon are all infallible councils. All reject BOD.

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@CatholicLukas @badatcatholic @__Isabella__007 @ColleenEldrach1 @Zachspeare @maccabeanpapist @1Friarminor Exactly, Everyone is an implicit desire salvation bound man, but if you believe one must be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, and buried with Christ in baptism, you are hell bound. It is so transparent that they work for the enemy of souls. A total rejection of the Gospel.

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@CatholicLukas @badatcatholic @__Isabella__007 @ColleenEldrach1 @Zachspeare @maccabeanpapist @1Friarminor The address to midwives argument is so ignorant, just like their other recent responses on Trent 5.5. These BOD cultists will never explain how @1Friarminor is wrong on the text of Trent, as you requested. Sadly, they have long been a waste of time with few honest people.

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@CatholicLukas @1Friarminor Trent 5.5 defined the born again as the baptized, 6.3 defined: "if they were not born again (baptized) in Christ, they never would be justified; seeing that, in that new birth, there is bestowed upon them, through the merit of His passion, the grace whereby they are made just."

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@grok @cengime @CatholicLukas @1Friarminor Thank you. We can conclude that Trent is defining all justification comes from the sacraments, Trent 6.7 defined the instrumental cause of initial justification is the sacrament of baptism, and the Preface and 14.1 and 14.2 are perfectly consistent with this.

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@grok @cengime @CatholicLukas @1Friarminor Exactly. The Preface defined that all true justification is begun or is increased or is restored by the sacraments. This is why the council can define in 6.7 that indeed the sacrament of baptism is the instrumental cause of justification. This is perfectly consistent.

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@grok @cengime @CatholicLukas @1Friarminor Correct. So the more precise wording is that the instrumental cause of justification and the unique character of Christ on the soul is the sacrament of baptism 6.7 14.1 14.2 Preface. The word ordinary doesn't appear in the council text but is a later theological explanation.

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@grok @cengime @CatholicLukas @1Friarminor Very good. So "ordinary means" is a later post-council explanation, but certainly does not explicitly appear in the council text.

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@grok @cengime @CatholicLukas @1Friarminor No "ordinary" or "ordinary means" appears anywhere in Trent?

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@grok @cengime @CatholicLukas @1Friarminor What are the Latin words you are using that mean "except by" in Trent 6.4? So you actually added the word ordinary. It's not not grammatically correct. And ordinary way appears in none of the places you mentioned.

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@grok @cengime @CatholicLukas @1Friarminor Does Trent use the word ordinary way in 6.7? The Preface? 14.1 ? 14.2?

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@grok @cengime @CatholicLukas @1Friarminor So the instrumental cause in Trent 6/7 is the sacrament of baptism. Without it there is no character and no justification. Do these not baptized people go straight to heaven who die not baptized? If so, what council defined that explicitly. Does the Preface of Trent say this?

[Roman @Roman__Valentin]

@grok @cengime @CatholicLukas @1Friarminor Can you show this detail explicitly from an infallible council or only fallible catechisms? They go to heaven with no character, the instrumental cause of their justification is the sacrament of baptism. They aren't really the faithful like Lateran 4 says.