Catholics and baptism: Coup de gras. A blow of fat

OK, if you haven't studied french you won't get the second pun. Time to sock catholics on baptism and salvation by faith.

FIRST. To tie in the lose ends what if one defines baptism as the first act of obedience representative of the grace received. Then to deny it, is to deny that the grace has been received. Or it is to deny one's sanctification arising out of true faith. A true believer will have nothing wrong with baptism but that doesn't mean it saves. Catholics have stated that a desire to be water baptised must be implicit to one's faith to be saved. Within this definition, what is required is only this desire from a newly regenerated heart. I say that this desire will not be rejected in such a heart following augustine. Furthermore, this heart will seek to put to death sin.

SECOND. The lavar of regeneration. What if one were to say that regeneration is the application of Christ's blood to cleanse a believer. This in itself would be a baptism of blood. It fills in what is asked for at Trent on both accounts. The grace itself and regeneration.

THIRD. Regeneration and union with christ, denoted by faith: may be said to fill in all the requirements for salvation prior to baptism. Faith is suffiecent. This true faith will not be superficial for I consider it to be present by an act of God. It will not resolutely reject the calls of sanctification including one of its first acts called baptism.

Let the argument be rather about who remains within salvation and if one can fall from grace within sanctificaion. Let us consider the second plank of justification/salvation for Catholics. It is for those who shipwrech their faith. *Cough*Everyone*Cough* I say this to imply that it has become their only form of justification outside of people on their deathbed and infants. To attribute it to man is to be pelagrian in this protestants eyes. Let us also move beyond the transformational model of justification into a protestant one.

It is easy to see why salvation follows the grace not the sacrement. If one places conversion and faith concurrent with the grace called regeneration. Let us also consider that this grace as suffiecent to bring about the desire for baptism as well as faith. It still holds that one becomes saved by catholic standards upon faith not baptism.

A miracle. Perhaps. I argue this is what protestants said when Luther trumpheted salvation by a faith that begins in an act of God. This faith is by grace alone, through faith alone, in christ alone, for God's glory alone, and by Catholocism alone (smirk smirk as I just proved). My new quote: "Catholic, God will hang the truth like an albatross around your neck with your very own theology. Until he drags you to calvary to behold christ by faith." by me.

I see Catholics confusing grace and the sacrement. I shall prove the two are separate. Why should I? the catholics already said they may be. It has happened before in 'extraordinary' circumstances of charity or by an act of God. The difference on sacrements is the fundamental source of all protestant 'truths' or heresies, besides rejection of papal authority. The rest was confused in the catholic system.