Poll: Baptizing children without without their parent's permission is
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
15
0%
0 0%
14
0%
0 0%
12
0%
0 0%
Total 0 vote(s) 0%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Baptizing children without without their parent's permission?
#51
(11-16-2011, 04:26 PM)piabee Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:25 PM)dan hunter Wrote: Unlike you I have no desire to stir up trouble.

LOL

Bad cop.
Reply
#52
(11-16-2011, 04:25 PM)Servire Deo Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:24 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:03 PM)Servire Deo Wrote: I've already read that. St. Alphonsus was in error and was not infallible.

Oh, and you are?  LOL

In error or infallible?

The implication is that your opinion is somehow superior to a Sainted Doctor of the Church.  On what grounds?  And by what right do you judge the Baltimore Catechism of being heretical?
Reply
#53
(11-16-2011, 05:23 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:25 PM)Servire Deo Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:24 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:03 PM)Servire Deo Wrote: I've already read that. St. Alphonsus was in error and was not infallible.

Oh, and you are?  LOL

In error or infallible?

The implication is that your opinion is somehow superior to a Sainted Doctor of the Church.  On what grounds?  And by what right do you judge the Baltimore Catechism of being heretical?

Because I can back my opinion up with infallible dogma from the Chair of St. Peter. Catechisms have never been infallible, you do know that, right?
Reply
#54
(11-16-2011, 05:37 PM)Servire Deo Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 05:23 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:25 PM)Servire Deo Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:24 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:03 PM)Servire Deo Wrote: I've already read that. St. Alphonsus was in error and was not infallible.

Oh, and you are?  LOL

In error or infallible?

The implication is that your opinion is somehow superior to a Sainted Doctor of the Church.  On what grounds?  And by what right do you judge the Baltimore Catechism of being heretical?

Because I can back my opinion up with infallible dogma from the Chair of St. Peter. Catechisms have never been infallible, you do know that, right?

By all means, back your opinion up, if you can.
Reply
#55
(11-16-2011, 05:42 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 05:37 PM)Servire Deo Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 05:23 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:25 PM)Servire Deo Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:24 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:03 PM)Servire Deo Wrote: I've already read that. St. Alphonsus was in error and was not infallible.

Oh, and you are?  LOL

In error or infallible?

The implication is that your opinion is somehow superior to a Sainted Doctor of the Church.  On what grounds?  And by what right do you judge the Baltimore Catechism of being heretical?

Because I can back my opinion up with infallible dogma from the Chair of St. Peter. Catechisms have never been infallible, you do know that, right?

By all means, back your opinion up, if you can.

That BoB and BoD are heresies? That'll derail the thread even further.

But OK. I have somewhere to go, so I'll come back later.
Reply
#56
St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica Third Part, Question 68, Article 2 Wrote:Objection 1. It seems that no man can be saved without Baptism. For our Lord said (John 3:5): "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." But those alone are saved who enter God's kingdom. Therefore none can be saved without Baptism, by which a man is born again of water and the Holy Ghost.

Objection 2. Further, in the book De Eccl. Dogm. xli, it is written: "We believe that no catechumen, though he die in his good works, will have eternal life, except he suffer martyrdom, which contains all the sacramental virtue of Baptism." But if it were possible for anyone to be saved without Baptism, this would be the case specially with catechumens who are credited with good works, for they seem to have the "faith that worketh by charity" (Galatians 5:6). Therefore it seems that none can be saved without Baptism.

Objection 3. Further, as stated above (1; 65, 4), the sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation. Now that is necessary "without which something cannot be" (Metaph. v). Therefore it seems that none can obtain salvation without Baptism.

On the contrary, Augustine says (Super Levit. lxxxiv) that "some have received the invisible sanctification without visible sacraments, and to their profit; but though it is possible to have the visible sanctification, consisting in a visible sacrament, without the invisible sanctification, it will be to no profit." Since, therefore, the sacrament of Baptism pertains to the visible sanctification, it seems that a man can obtain salvation without the sacrament of Baptism, by means of the invisible sanctification.

I answer that, The sacrament or Baptism may be wanting to someone in two ways. First, both in reality and in desire; as is the case with those who neither are baptized, nor wished to be baptized: which clearly indicates contempt of the sacrament, in regard to those who have the use of the free-will. Consequently those to whom Baptism is wanting thus, cannot obtain salvation: since neither sacramentally nor mentally are they incorporated in Christ, through Whom alone can salvation be obtained.

Secondly, the sacrament of Baptism may be wanting to anyone in reality but not in desire: for instance, when a man wishes to be baptized, but by some ill-chance he is forestalled by death before receiving Baptism. And such a man can obtain salvation without being actually baptized, on account of his desire for Baptism, which desire is the outcome of "faith that worketh by charity," whereby God, Whose power is not tied to visible sacraments, sanctifies man inwardly. Hence Ambrose says of Valentinian, who died while yet a catechumen: "I lost him whom I was to regenerate: but he did not lose the grace he prayed for."

Reply to Objection 1. As it is written (1 Samuel 16:7), "man seeth those things that appear, but the Lord beholdeth the heart." Now a man who desires to be "born again of water and the Holy Ghost" by Baptism, is regenerated in heart though not in body. thus the Apostle says (Romans 2:29) that "the circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not of men but of God."

Reply to Objection 2. No man obtains eternal life unless he be free from all guilt and debt of punishment. Now this plenary absolution is given when a man receives Baptism, or suffers martyrdom: for which reason is it stated that martyrdom "contains all the sacramental virtue of Baptism," i.e. as to the full deliverance from guilt and punishment. Suppose, therefore, a catechumen to have the desire for Baptism (else he could not be said to die in his good works, which cannot be without "faith that worketh by charity"), such a one, were he to die, would not forthwith come to eternal life, but would suffer punishment for his past sins, "but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire" as is stated 1 Corinthians 3:15.

Reply to Objection 3. The sacrament of Baptism is said to be necessary for salvation in so far as man cannot be saved without, at least, Baptism of desire; "which, with God, counts for the deed" (Augustine, Enarr. in Ps. 57).
Reply
#57
(11-16-2011, 05:49 PM)Servire Deo Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 05:42 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 05:37 PM)Servire Deo Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 05:23 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:25 PM)Servire Deo Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:24 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:03 PM)Servire Deo Wrote: I've already read that. St. Alphonsus was in error and was not infallible.

Oh, and you are?  LOL

In error or infallible?

The implication is that your opinion is somehow superior to a Sainted Doctor of the Church.  On what grounds?  And by what right do you judge the Baltimore Catechism of being heretical?

Because I can back my opinion up with infallible dogma from the Chair of St. Peter. Catechisms have never been infallible, you do know that, right?

By all means, back your opinion up, if you can.

[b]That BoB and BoD are heresies? That'll derail the thread even further.[/b]

But OK. I have somewhere to go, so I'll come back later.

Yes, you should really start a new thread on it.
More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com/

Go thy ways, old Jack;
die when thou wilt, if manhood, good manhood, be
not forgot upon the face of the earth, then am I a
shotten herring. There live not three good men
unhanged in England; and one of them is fat and
grows old: God help the while! a bad world, I say.
I would I were a weaver; I could sing psalms or any
thing. A plague of all cowards, I say still.
Reply
#58
(11-16-2011, 04:34 PM)Servire Deo Wrote:
(11-16-2011, 04:25 PM)dan hunter Wrote: I was only trying to help a fellow serviceman get to heaven.

I thought you're Canadian.
But I was in the service as a Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
"On Duke, On you huskies!"
Reply
#59
Caution: Scriptorium is a heretic:

"A dying child does need to be baptized the ordinary way. A permitted theological opinion is that they can be baptized through desire if it is impossible to baptize them with water, which would be extremely rare, right?"

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Session 11, Feb. 4, 1442, ex cathedra: “Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, when no help can be brought to them by another remedy than through the sacrament of baptism, through which they are snatched from the domination of the Devil [original sin] and adopted among the sons of God, it advises that holy baptism ought not be deferred for forty or eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people…” (Denz. 712)

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, On Original Sin, Session V, ex cathedra:  “If anyone says that recently born babies should not be baptized even if they have been born to baptized parents; or says that they are indeed baptized for the remission of sins, but incur no trace of the original sin of Adam needing to be cleansed by the laver of rebirth for them to obtain eternal life, with the necessary consequence that in their case there is being understood a form of baptism for the remission of sins which is not true, but false: let him be anathema.” (Denz. 791)

Pope St. Innocent, 414 A.D.: “But that which Your Fraternity asserts the Pelagians preach, that even without the grace of Baptism infants are able to be endowed with the rewards of eternal life, is quite idiotic… But those who defend this for them without rebirth seem to me to want to quash Baptism itself, when they preach that infants already have what is believed to be conferred on them only through Baptism.” (Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 3: 2016.)
Reply
#60
There is some Pope (Benedict the something, I think. Can't find it right now) who had a decree which said there are two opinions about baptizing babies against parent's wishes: the Thomistic, and the, well, not-so-Thomistic. He didn't condemn either one, but said baptizing them is contrary to the custom of the Church (but not all "traditions" low-cased are unchangeable). I don't know about children in danger of death however.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)