Some folks have questions about how what I've said harmonizes with the Papal Bull of Pope Eugene IV (Cantate Domino) which says that not even Christian martyrs who die outside the visible confines of the Roman Catholic Church can be saved, despite their blood-shedding and persevering confession of Christ.
Love this. I'm not going to lie though, people that have the audacity to claim something like the 21 Coptic Martyrs of Libya are damned because they didn't do the "Catholicism" are a bold kind of special. It makes me wonder about western thinking a lot of days.
Reminder that before it was ended early due to war, Vatican I (one) was going to adopt a dogmatic statement affirming basically what this article describes and what Vatican II eventually described (the explicit desire, or invincible ignorance + implicit desire). You can find the text online. It was never officially adopted, but does show the mind of the council Fathers at the time.
The end of this is another "tu qouque," for which you've become famous. I'm not Orthodox or Protestant, so that tired line of thought doesn't do anything for me.
You say that the "difficulty" can be resolved easily, but that isn't relevant. If two statements are actually contradictory, you can always resolve the contradiction by choosing to misrepresent one or the other. This is the "gymnastics" that people are referring to.
The question, then, is the degree to which you have to misrepresent the text and intent behind Cantante Domino (lie) for your argument to work.
Cantate doesn’t treat of the question if Martyrs. Your application seems outside the intention of the bull. A papal bull is not a teaching it’s a document related to teaching.
Long before the council of Florence the Church already taught that Baptism of blood (martyrdom for Christ) can supply what sacramental baptism ordinarily confers.
Love this. I'm not going to lie though, people that have the audacity to claim something like the 21 Coptic Martyrs of Libya are damned because they didn't do the "Catholicism" are a bold kind of special. It makes me wonder about western thinking a lot of days.
Reminder that before it was ended early due to war, Vatican I (one) was going to adopt a dogmatic statement affirming basically what this article describes and what Vatican II eventually described (the explicit desire, or invincible ignorance + implicit desire). You can find the text online. It was never officially adopted, but does show the mind of the council Fathers at the time.
Really good! Thank you for that.
The end of this is another "tu qouque," for which you've become famous. I'm not Orthodox or Protestant, so that tired line of thought doesn't do anything for me.
You say that the "difficulty" can be resolved easily, but that isn't relevant. If two statements are actually contradictory, you can always resolve the contradiction by choosing to misrepresent one or the other. This is the "gymnastics" that people are referring to.
The question, then, is the degree to which you have to misrepresent the text and intent behind Cantante Domino (lie) for your argument to work.
this is like saying Christ and the Catholic Church are in disagreement over the following:
"Unless a man eat the flesh of the Son of Man, he has not life in him."
Please elaborate, I'm not sure what you mean.
Cantate doesn’t treat of the question if Martyrs. Your application seems outside the intention of the bull. A papal bull is not a teaching it’s a document related to teaching.
Long before the council of Florence the Church already taught that Baptism of blood (martyrdom for Christ) can supply what sacramental baptism ordinarily confers.
Oh come on, Erick — stop that. Stay tuned to when Eric does a special on Anglican having cooties.