Author Topic: Baptism changes our Origin  (Read 457 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline An even Seven

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1672
  • Reputation: +671/-464
  • Gender: Male
Baptism changes our Origin
« on: November 26, 2017, 11:38:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Pope St. Leo the Great,SERMON XXI: ON THE FEAST OF THE NATIVITY, Part 4: "The strong one is bound by his own chains, and every device of the evil one recoils on his own head. When the prince of the world is bound, all that he held in captivity is released. Our nature cleansed from its old contagion regains its honourable estate, death is destroyed by death, nativity is restored by nativity: since at one and the same time redemption does away with slavery, regeneration changes our origin, and faith justifies the sinner.



    I thought this was an important quote to point out by the Pope. Baptism changes our origin. We are no longer from the Devil, we are of God. Baptism changes our spiritual make-up and who we are. This is the indelible mark that is imprinted on us in Baptism that distinguishes us from those who don't have Baptism. This is completely lacking even in Catechumens who desire Baptism. 

    Matthew 15:9 And in vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines and commandments of men.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12387
    • Reputation: +6435/-1026
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Baptism changes our Origin
    « Reply #1 on: November 26, 2017, 01:37:47 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • I completely agree.  IMO, one of the most harmful effects of BoD theory is that it disparages the meaning and the value of the Sacramental character.  So in heaven you have some people with it and some without ... as if it serves no other purpose than to be a non-repeatability marker for the Sacrament and perhaps a badge of honor.  No, the seal IMPRINTS on souls the very image and likeness of God the Son so that God recognizes us as His sons in the spirit of adoption, so that we can then take part in the inner family life of the Holy Trinity and thus the beatific vision.  It is THIS SEAL which gives the soul SUPERNATURAL FACULTIES, the very ABILITY to have SUPERNATURAL charity, faith, and hope ... as supernatural virtue is not within the natural capabilities of the human soul but are an add-on ... via the character.  Church Fathers wrote extensively about the SEAL.  THEN ... in Holy Orders the image and likeness of Our Lord become imprinted even more clearly in the soul ... allowing the subject to act IN PERSONA CHRISTI.  Just as the seal or character is an essential element of Holy Orders, so I argue that it's also essential to Baptism.  I believe that those who have Baptism of Desire can attain to a certain level of justification and a certain remission of their sins but that only those who have the Baptismal Character can experience the beatific vision.  Both Baptism and Holy Orders, though in different degrees, make the soul ontological into an image of God the Son.


    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5929
    • Reputation: +3610/-202
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Baptism changes our Origin
    « Reply #2 on: November 26, 2017, 02:13:21 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Indeed, Baptism changes our nature. Once baptized, our soul are no longer enemies of God, but is freed from Satan’s domination. The Council of Florence in Cantata Domino teaches that through the sacrament of Baptism "we are snatched from the domination of the Devil and adopted among the sons of God". In Baptism the merits of Christ are applied to the soul, making it born- again in Christ; as it was defined at the Council of Florence: "through Baptism we are spiritually reborn".

    The concept of being truly "reborn" again, leaving the old man behind, and putting on a new regenerated man, is also seen in the teachings of the Council of Trent, Decree on Original Sin:

    Quote
    God hates nothing in the regenerated because there is no condemnation for those truly buried with Christ by means of Baptism into death but putting off the old man and putting on the new man which was created according to God are made innocent, without stain, pure, guiltless and beloved sons of God.
    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.

    Offline Merry

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 195
    • Reputation: +103/-41
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Baptism changes our Origin
    « Reply #3 on: November 26, 2017, 06:41:49 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • While you all are together on this thread - your opinion would be quite useful and most appreciated here.

    I have an acquaintance who is having the following Canon - particularly #2 - thrown up by some liberals as proof of baptism of desire.  Other things are being mentioned as well, but this Canon one of them.  What is to be thought concerning #2?  


    1917 Code of Canon Law – Canon 1239
     §1. Ad sepulturam ecclesiasticam non sunt admittendi qui sine baptismo decesserint.
      §2. Catechumeni qui nulla sua culpa sine baptismo moriantur, baptizatis accensendi sunt.
      §3. Omnes baptizati sepultura ecclesiastica donandi sunt, nisi eadem a iure expresse priventur.

     
    1.     Those who die without baptism are not to be afforded ecclesiastical burial.
    2.     Catechumens who, through no fault of their own die without baptism are to be reckoned as baptized.
    3.     All baptized are to be given ecclesiastical burial unless they are expressly deprived of same by law.


    On another point, if Card. Gasparri had anything to do with the 1917 code, this translation and/or promulgation, could he not have tampered with it? Was he not suspected as being a Mason?  Many thanks.
    If any one saith that true and natural water is not of necessity for baptism, and on that account wrests to some sort of metaphor those words of Our Lord Jesus Christ, "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost...,"  Let Him Be Anathama.  -COUNCIL OF TRENT Sess VII Canon II “On Baptism"

    Offline Lastdays

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 488
    • Reputation: +67/-114
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Baptism changes our Origin
    « Reply #4 on: November 26, 2017, 07:22:59 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • While you all are together on this thread - your opinion would be quite useful and most appreciated here.

    I have an acquaintance who is having the following Canon - particularly #2 - thrown up by some liberals as proof of baptism of desire.  Other things are being mentioned as well, but this Canon one of them.  What is to be thought concerning #2?  


    1917 Code of Canon Law – Canon 1239
    §1. Ad sepulturam ecclesiasticam non sunt admittendi qui sine baptismo decesserint.
      §2. Catechumeni qui nulla sua culpa sine baptismo moriantur, baptizatis accensendi sunt.
      §3. Omnes baptizati sepultura ecclesiastica donandi sunt, nisi eadem a iure expresse priventur.

     
    1.     Those who die without baptism are not to be afforded ecclesiastical burial.
    2.     Catechumens who, through no fault of their own die without baptism are to be reckoned as baptized.
    3.     All baptized are to be given ecclesiastical burial unless they are expressly deprived of same by law.


    On another point, if Card. Gasparri had anything to do with the 1917 code, this translation and/or promulgation, could he not have tampered with it? Was he not suspected as being a Mason?  Many thanks.
    No doubt that masons were in the highest places of the Church for some time before the 1917 Code of Canon Law. One was almost Pope in 1903 (Card. Rampola). He would have been had not been for a veto. In the long version of the St. Michael prayer (1886) Pope Leo XIII said that the enemies of the Church were already in the Holy Place itself and had their hands on the "most sacred possessions of the Church". Surely then, they had the ability to tamper with documents or at least highly influence the translations of important documents found in Catechisms, Encyclicals etc. Here is the part of the St. Michael prayer I am referring to...

    "These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the spouse of the immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on her most sacred possessions. In the Holy Place itself, where the See of Holy Peter and the Chair of Truth has been set up as the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be scattered."

    You can also tell your liberal friends the the Code itself says its not infallible (Canon 1). It only applies to the Latin Church. You can also tell them that there is no tradition of Catechumens who died before receiving the sacrament of Baptism being "reckoned as baptized". In fact the practice according to Catholic tradition just the opposite...

    The Catholic Encyclopedia, “Baptism,” Volume 2, 1907: “A certain statement in the funeral oration of St. Ambrose over the Emperor Valentinian II has been brought forward as a proof that the Church offered sacrifices and prayers for catechumens who died before baptism.  There is not a vestige of such a custom to be found anywhere… The practice of the Church is more correctly shown in the canon (xvii) of the Second Council of Braga (572 AD):  ‘Neither the commemoration of Sacrifice [oblationis] nor the service of chanting [psallendi] is to be employed for catechumens who have died without baptism.’”

    I hope this helps.
    Catholic Encyclopedia – Heresy, 1913: The Pope himself, if notoriously guilty of heresy, would cease to be Pope because he would cease to be a member of the Church.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12387
    • Reputation: +6435/-1026
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Baptism changes our Origin
    « Reply #5 on: November 27, 2017, 08:54:53 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • While you all are together on this thread - your opinion would be quite useful and most appreciated here.

    I have an acquaintance who is having the following Canon - particularly #2 - thrown up by some liberals as proof of baptism of desire.  Other things are being mentioned as well, but this Canon one of them.  What is to be thought concerning #2?  


    1917 Code of Canon Law – Canon 1239
    §1. Ad sepulturam ecclesiasticam non sunt admittendi qui sine baptismo decesserint.
      §2. Catechumeni qui nulla sua culpa sine baptismo moriantur, baptizatis accensendi sunt.
      §3. Omnes baptizati sepultura ecclesiastica donandi sunt, nisi eadem a iure expresse priventur.

     
    1.     Those who die without baptism are not to be afforded ecclesiastical burial.
    2.     Catechumens who, through no fault of their own die without baptism are to be reckoned as baptized.
    3.     All baptized are to be given ecclesiastical burial unless they are expressly deprived of same by law.


    On another point, if Card. Gasparri had anything to do with the 1917 code, this translation and/or promulgation, could he not have tampered with it? Was he not suspected as being a Mason?  Many thanks.

    This Canon Law means nothing more than that "Catechumens are to be given ecclesiastical burial."  It makes no statement beyond that.  There's one Commentary on the Code that people often slap in there with this quote which claims that this is tantamount to a doctrinal statement that Catechumens can be saved.  That's false.

    Let's look at the Canon.  It says that only the baptized are to receive ecclesiastical burial.  But, then, for the purposes of this canon only, catechumens are to be considered baptized.  All this is saying is that in subsequent points, the term "baptized" refers to "baptized and catechumens" ... instead of the law having to stipulate "baptized and catechumens" every single time.  It's just legalistic technical shorthand.  So, for instance, #3 then while only speaking of "the baptized" ALSO applies to catechumens based on #2 before it.  So, for Catechumens also, they could be expressly denied by law.

    This is NOT a doctrinal statement that Catechumens have BoD.

    So what are the implications of ecclesiastical burial?  Does it necessarily mean that the person being buried was saved?  No, of course not.  Does ecclesiastical burial even imply that they could be saved or just merely that the Church recognizes a catechumen as somehow one of her own and the Church prays for him?  This Canon does seem to leave it open for the faithful to HOPE for the salvation of catechumens.  In other words, the Church continues to leave the possibility (and possibility of BoD) OPEN.  But that is all, and nothing more can be inferred from this.

    PRIOR Church law was the opposite, that Catechumens were refused ecclesiastical burial.

    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1467
    • Reputation: +845/-333
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Baptism changes our Origin
    « Reply #6 on: November 27, 2017, 09:11:30 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    PRIOR Church law was the opposite, that Catechumens were refused ecclesiastical burial.
    Church law for 1916 years! If the New Canon Law means they go to heaven, then they must have changed the law of 1916 years that catechumens go to hell. The liberals can't have it both ways, ignoriong 1916 years and shining a light on the 1917 canon law.
    The Vatican II church - Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962

    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Mat 24:24

    Offline Merry

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 195
    • Reputation: +103/-41
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Baptism changes our Origin
    « Reply #7 on: November 27, 2017, 08:27:31 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yes - thank you all.  And the fact that before 1917 it was never allowed for catechumens to have Catholic burial, just shows how the Modernists are at work here.  We must remember that the liberal bishops of the United States were the ones introducing BOD and BOB into the Baltimore Catechism.  Pope Leo's condemnation of Americanism had to do with the American bishops liberalizing the Faith.  As he said, the Catholic Faith taught in the US must be the same as that taught in the rest of the world.  The Irish Penny catechism had no mention of BOB/BOD, neither did the catechism used in the US before the Baltimore Catechism (St. John Neumann's catechism).  The Code of Canon Law book is, in itself, NOT infallible.  Some of the statements in it MAY be infallible ones - and if they are that is usually indicated via footnote.

       
    If any one saith that true and natural water is not of necessity for baptism, and on that account wrests to some sort of metaphor those words of Our Lord Jesus Christ, "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost...,"  Let Him Be Anathama.  -COUNCIL OF TRENT Sess VII Canon II “On Baptism"


    Offline An even Seven

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1672
    • Reputation: +671/-464
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Baptism changes our Origin
    « Reply #8 on: November 29, 2017, 10:16:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    St. John Vianney, Catechetical Instructions, Ch. 9 on the Priesthood: "If I were to meet a priest and an angel, I should salute the priest before I saluted the angel. The latter is the friend of God; but the priest holds His place. St. Teresa kissed the ground where a priest had passed. When you see a priest, you should say, "There is he who made me a child of God, and opened Heaven to me by holy Baptism; he who purified me after I had sinned; who gives nourishment to my soul."

    According to St. John, Heaven is only open to us once we are Baptized.


    Quote
    St. John Vianney, Catechetical Instructions, Ch. 13 on Grace: " What have we done to deserve to be born in the Catholic religion, while so many souls are every day lost in other religions? What have we done to deserve to be baptised, while so many little children in France, as well as in China and America, die without Baptism? What have we done to deserve the pardon of all the sins that we commit after the age of reason, while so many are deprived of the Sacrament of Penance? "

    Matthew 15:9 And in vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines and commandments of men.

    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5929
    • Reputation: +3610/-202
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Baptism changes our Origin
    « Reply #9 on: November 29, 2017, 10:34:53 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • We must remember that the liberal bishops of the United States were the ones introducing BOD and BOB into the Baltimore Catechism.  Pope Leo's condemnation of Americanism had to do with the American bishops liberalizing the Faith.  As he said, the Catholic Faith taught in the US must be the same as that taught in the rest of the world.  The Irish Penny catechism had no mention of BOB/BOD, neither did the catechism used in the US before the Baltimore Catechism (St. John Neumann's catechism).
    This ^^^^

    In the year of 1917, the masonic forces of Liberalism had already began infiltrating the Church a few decades before.  Baltimore Cathechism dates 1885. Pius IX controversial statement promoting the novelty of invincible ignorance, 1863. It is as if starting the second half of the XIX century, the revolutionary forces diluting EENS became really sucessful in promoting false doctrines around it.
    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.

    Offline JPaul

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3552
    • Reputation: +3503/-214
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Baptism changes our Origin
    « Reply #10 on: November 30, 2017, 08:09:10 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • And the SSPX promoting these ideas throughout the Church of the remnant.


    Offline happenby

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1540
    • Reputation: +703/-738
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Baptism changes our Origin
    « Reply #11 on: November 30, 2017, 09:32:09 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Ok guys, I was looking at these three canons in Latin and decided to translate using Google (as inadequate as that is).  I'm not sure this adds up because this turns the whole notion of canon 2 upside down.  But it follows, that within the context of the first canon, that the second canon cannot technically translate to what it is suggested, namely that catechumens are reckoned or counted as baptized.  Here's the translation as normally written.

    2.     Catechumens who, through no fault of their own die without baptism are to be reckoned as baptized.

    Rather, this is the translation I got from Google:

    The catechumens who through no fault of them die without being baptized are counted.

    Counted?  Counted as what?  Why are translators inserting extra words "as baptized"? Does that even follow? Let's look at the preceding canon to see what might be happening here. 

    1.     Those who die without baptism are not to be afforded ecclesiastical burial.

    So, canon two follows the first canon, which tells us that those who die without baptism are not to be afforded ecclesiastical burial. Then it says catechumens who die without being baptized are counted.  That means catechumens are counted in the same way as the first canon says of the unbaptized and also not afforded ecclesiastical burial. This is the exact opposite of what many translators are handing out for our consumption.

    This maintains the integrity of canons and tradition, rightly puts the blame on a false translation and maintains the necessity of Baptism. 




    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12387
    • Reputation: +6435/-1026
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Baptism changes our Origin
    « Reply #12 on: December 01, 2017, 12:11:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Google is wrong:

    Catechumeni qui nulla sua culpa sine baptismo moriantur, baptizatis accensendi sunt.

    Catechumens who through no fault of their own die without baptism, are to be counted among the baptized.

    "baptizatis" is the baptized missing from Google.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12387
    • Reputation: +6435/-1026
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Baptism changes our Origin
    « Reply #13 on: December 01, 2017, 12:13:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This maintains the integrity of canons and tradition, rightly puts the blame on a false translation and maintains the necessity of Baptism.

    That would be too easy.

    Offline happenby

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1540
    • Reputation: +703/-738
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Baptism changes our Origin
    « Reply #14 on: December 01, 2017, 12:21:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That would be too easy.
    It would wouldn't it. Not to be difficult, are we absolutely certain baptizitas is in the original? There are discrepancies in the VII documents. For instance some say, "many are saved" others say "may be saved" when talking about unbelievers. I'd rather find all discrepancies than base my beliefs on tricky dicks. Antoher reason I ask is because I lifted the Latin from this thread.

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16