Saint Francis
3K posts
@1Friarminor
Roman Catholic "The most holy sacraments of the Church, through which all true justification begins, or being begun is increased, or being lost is restored."
The Prepositional Trap (Cum + Ablative Gerundive) The argument rests on separating the mental intention (proponunt vitam novam) from the physical sacrament. The Clause: ...cum baptismo suscipiendo proponunt...
Trent 6.6 baptism is absolute: Ante/Repentance is before baptism. Denique/finally closes the preparation (BOD) phase. Baptism is the final step. CUM..SUSCIPIENDO/Prepositional tie. New life is instituted only by receiving water. Desire is "before" justification not instead of.
Pope Siricius A.D. 385 proves water baptism is absolute, because without it, one loses the kingdom and life: "Lest the destruction of our souls be at stake if, the salutary font being denied to those seeking it, someone departing from the world loses both the kingdom and life."
St. Alphonsus said: BOD does not remove all temporal punishment, but Trent Session 5 Canon 5 defines all who are baptized "born again" have nothing delaying their entry into heaven, so BOD alone can't constitute being "born again" as Trent defines. BOD isn't a full substitute.
The instrumental/sacramental cause-Florence: "Since the holy Trinity is the principal cause from which baptism has its power and the minister is the instrumental cause who exteriorly bestows the sacrament." Combined/external minister/cause/sacrament=instrumental cause= Trent 6.7
Trent 14.2 adds: "The Church exercises judgment on no one who has not entered through the sacrament of baptism." The unbaptized are outside--not members, not incorporated. The entire section agrees with the Preface on Justification and Trent 6.7.
Trent session 14 on penance, especially 14.1 and 14.2 read from the beginning, are clearly speaking of only the already sacramentally baptized. This is the context for what follows. So all true justification, as the Justification Preface says, comes through the sacraments alone.
Also, all true justification is not separated from the sacraments, especially baptism: Trent's Preface to the Decree on Justification: "The most holy sacraments of the Church, through which all true justification begins, or being begun is increased, or being lost is restored."
For additional confirmation that the sacrament of baptism is not separated from faith, one can find more references here: Gildersleeve #614 and Pinkster #13.33.
To continue: Allen and Greenough #306 "A relative (pronoun) generally (typically/standard) agrees...with an appositive or predicate noun in its own clause *rather than with an antecedent of different gender or number."* The sacrament of baptism is not separated from faith.
All of these points together make the meaning clear: The negation "sine qua" applies to that unified referent: without this instrumental cause-- the sacrament of baptism which is the sacrament of faith--no one was ever justified.
The logical and semantic antecedent of "qua" remains the main noun phrase sacramentum baptismi (the instrumental cause explicitly named), as modified by the appositive.
Relative pronouns frequently take the gender/number of a predicate noun or appositive term rather than the strict antecedent. This is not a mistake; it is normal syntax when the predicate carries the semantic weight (here, faith is the defining characteristic of the sacrament).
"Quod est sacramentum fidei" is a non-restrictive appositive clause (explanatory renaming). It defines "sacramentum baptismi" as "the sacrament of faith." Such clauses treat the whole phrase as a single semantic unit--baptism is the sacrament of faith, not two separate things.
Qua referring to only faith isn't correct. "Quod est sacramentum fidei" (which is the sacrament of faith) is the appositive clause--it renames or defines baptism as inherently the "sacrament of faith," fusing the two concepts into one ontological whole. This is correct Latin.
This thread: the instrumental cause of justification is the sacrament of baptism, stacked in Latin combined: the instrumental cause/sacrament of baptism/faith-no justification/causation outside the sacrament. qua refers to faith in a single place, but same causation/ontology.
In this thread I am arguing that the instrumental cause of justification is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith. And that justification is not separated from this instrumental cause. Trent concludes that without the instrument of baptism no one is justified.
1. The Absolute Negative Exclusion Is Stronger Than Saying "Only"The key sentence in Trent Session 6, Chapter 7 is:"instrumentalis item sacramentum baptismi, quod est sacramentum fidei, sine qua nulli umquam contigit iustificatio."
