Author Topic: Baptismofdesire.com (Read 53999 times)

Mortalium · « **Reply #30 on:** April 22, 2013, 05:06:50 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

The post will not format properly so I will simply answer without quoting your post above.

This topic is about salvation without the sacrament which, regardless of whatever else has been taught or whoever taught it - that the sacrament of baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation has already been infallibly defined so we can rest assured that there is no way around the necessity of it for salvation.

That "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" is also a teaching of the fathers of the Church - i.e. the "magisterium". As the name itself testifies, the "Baptism of Desire" is the mother of all "good intentions".

There is no salvation outside the Church means what it says - or it means nothing, the sacrament of Baptism is the only way one enters the Church - this has also been defined infallibly - so all other teachings and theological opinions must wholly submit to that which is infallible - "and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding." - Vatican Council 1

Didn't you used to be in favor of BOD/BOB?

Mortalium · « **Reply #31 on:** April 22, 2013, 05:14:25 PM »

Quote from: saintbosco13

Canon Law (1917) states to the contrary. Do you disagree with it?

“Baptism, the door and foundation of the Sacraments, in fact or at least in desire necessary unto salvation for all, is not validly conferred except through the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words.” (Canon 737).

“Those who have died without baptism are not to be given ecclesiastical burial. Catechumens who die without baptism through no fault of their own are to be counted among the baptized.” (Canon 1239)

That is totally self-contradictory.

First it says "Baptism, the door and foundation of the Sacraments, in fact or at least in desire necessary unto salvation for all, is not validly conferred except through the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words."

So Baptism in fact or "in desire" is necessary unto all for salvation, but then it says "is not validly conferred except through the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words."

So baptism is necessary and is not validly conferred except through the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words. But "baptism of desire" is precisely this: baptism without the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words.

That is a contradiction.

Stubborn · « **Reply #32 on:** April 22, 2013, 05:47:39 PM »

Quote from: Mortalium

Quote from: Stubborn
The post will not format properly so I will simply answer without quoting your post above.

This topic is about salvation without the sacrament which, regardless of whatever else has been taught or whoever taught it - that the sacrament of baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation has already been infallibly defined so we can rest assured that there is no way around the necessity of it for salvation.

That "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" is also a teaching of the fathers of the Church - i.e. the "magisterium". As the name itself testifies, the "Baptism of Desire" is the mother of all "good intentions".

There is no salvation outside the Church means what it says - or it means nothing, the sacrament of Baptism is the only way one enters the Church - this has also been defined infallibly - so all other teachings and theological opinions must wholly submit to that which is infallible - "and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding." - Vatican Council 1

Didn't you used to be in favor of BOD/BOB?

My definition of BOD was that God can save whomever He wishes at any time by whatever means He chooses to use -in the case of all who are predestined for heaven - including the unbaptized and sincere catachumen who unknowingly is about to die who desires to be baptized, he will get that which he desires because it is necessary - God will provide him the sacrament.

But even though other saints and doctors and theologians have taught various different theories of BOD, the Church has always taught - and infallibly so, that we cannot get to heaven outside the Church hence with out the sacrament.

Stubborn · « **Reply #33 on:** April 22, 2013, 05:58:20 PM »

Quote from: Mortalium

Quote from: saintbosco13
Canon Law (1917) states to the contrary. Do you disagree with it?

“Baptism, the door and foundation of the Sacraments, in fact or at least in desire necessary unto salvation for all, is not validly conferred except through the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words.” (Canon 737).

“Those who have died without baptism are not to be given ecclesiastical burial. Catechumens who die without baptism through no fault of their own are to be counted among the baptized.” (Canon 1239)

That is totally self-contradictory.

First it says "Baptism, the door and foundation of the Sacraments, in fact or at least in desire necessary unto salvation for all, is not validly conferred except through the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words."

So Baptism in fact or "in desire" is necessary unto all for salvation, but then it says "is not validly conferred except through the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words."

So baptism is necessary and is not validly conferred except through the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words. But "baptism of desire" is precisely this: baptism without the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words.

That is a contradiction.

Yes it is contradictory - and as you so aptly pointed out - obviously so.
To paraphrase Fr. Wathen:

"Everybody in favor of BOD who writes or comments on this subject explains the doctrine by explaining it away.............. He begins by affirming the truth of the dogma, and ends by denying it-while continuing to insist vigorously that he is not doing so."

Mortalium · « **Reply #34 on:** April 22, 2013, 06:03:55 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

My definition of BOD was that God can save whomever He wishes at any time by whatever means He chooses to use -in the case of all who are predestined for heaven - including the unbaptized and sincere catachumen who unknowingly is about to die who desires to be baptized, he will get that which he desires because it is necessary - God will provide him the sacrament.

But even though other saints and doctors and theologians have taught various different theories of BOD, the Church has always taught - and infallibly so, that we cannot get to heaven outside the Church hence with out the sacrament.

That is a miraculous baptism, not baptism of desire. In the latter you supposedly don't receive the sacrament but are saved by its desire, that's the whole concept.

bowler · « **Reply #35 on:** April 22, 2013, 06:15:31 PM »

Quote from: saintbosco13

Quote from: Stubborn
That website should have the below snip right at the top.............

So simple and easy, indeed, did the Lord Jesus make the sign of the Sacrament, it is altogether pointless to argue for the fictitious forms referred to as "baptism of blood," and "baptism of desire."
Should anyone desire baptism, all he needs to do is ask someone to baptize him. Anyone!

You completely misunderstand what baptism of desire is. Yes, if I knew what baptism was and I desired it, I would just go ask to receive it. But baptism of desire refers to someone who knows nothing about baptism because he has never been educated about the true faith. Let's say a person on a remote island for instance. A person in such a situation who knows nothing about baptism but yet believes there is a God, wanting to fulfill all that God wants of him to be saved, and has perfect contrition for his sins, implicitly desires the Sacrament he knows nothing about. Pope Pius IX and Pope Pius X clearly speak of this.

If that information came from the website, then the website is in error, for the premise of what you wrote is wrong, that "baptism of desire refers to someone who knows nothing about baptism because he has never been educated about the true faith".

Here's the Explanation of the Baltimore Catechism Concerning the Salvation of Non-Catholics originally published in 1891
by Rev. Thomas L. Kinkead
from Lesson 11: On the Church
121. Q. Are all bound to belong to the Church?

A. All are bound to belong to the Church, and he who knows the Church to be the true Church and remains out of it, cannot be saved.

Anyone who knows the Catholic religion to be the true religion and will not embrace it cannot enter into Heaven. If one not a Catholic doubts whether the church to which he belongs is the true Church, he must settle his doubt, seek the true Church, and enter it; for if he continues to live in doubt, he becomes like the one who knows the true Church and is deterred by worldly considerations from entering it.

In like manner one who, doubting, fears to examine the religion he professes lest he should discover its falsity and be convinced of the truth of the Catholic faith, cannot be saved.

Suppose, however, that there is a non-Catholic who firmly believes that the church to which he belongs is the true Church, and who has never—even in the past—had the slightest doubt of that fact—what will become of him?

If he was validly baptized and never committed a mortal sin, he will be saved; because, believing himself a member of the true Church, he was doing all he could to serve God according to his knowledge and the dictates of his conscience. But if ever he committed a mortal sin, his salvation would be very much more difficult. A mortal sin once committed remains on the soul till it is forgiven. Now, how could his mortal sin be forgiven? Not in the Sacrament of Penance, for the Protestant does not go to confession; and if he does, his minister—not being a true priest—has no power to forgive sins. Does he know that without confession it requires an act of perfect contrition to blot out mortal sin, and can he easily make such an act? What we call contrition is often only imperfect contrition—that is, sorrow for our sins because we fear their punishment in Hell or dread the loss of Heaven. If a Catholic—with all the instruction he has received about how to make an act of perfect contrition and all the practice he has had in making such acts—might find it difficult to make an act of perfect contrition after having committed a mortal sin, how much difficulty will not a Protestant have in making an act of perfect contrition, who does not know about this requirement and who has not been taught to make continued acts of perfect contrition all his life. It is to be feared either he would not know of this necessary means of regaining God’s friendship, or he would be unable to elicit the necessary act of perfect contrition, and thus the mortal sin would remain upon his soul and he would die an enemy of God.

If, then, we found a Protestant who never committed a mortal sin after Baptism, and who never had the slightest doubt about the truth of his religion, that person would be saved; because, being baptized, he is a member of the Church, and being free from mortal sin he is a friend of God and could not in justice be condemned to Hell. Such a person would attend Mass and receive the Sacraments if he knew the Catholic Church to be the only true Church.

I am giving you an example, however, that is rarely found, except in the case of infants or very small children baptized in Protestant sects. All infants rightly baptized by anyone are really children of the Church, no matter what religion their parents may profess. Indeed, all persons who are baptized are children of the Church; but those among them who deny its teaching, reject its Sacraments, and refuse to submit to its lawful pastors, are rebellious children known as heretics.

I said I gave you an example that can scarcely be found, namely, of a person not a Catholic, who really never doubted the truth of his religion, and who, moreover, never committed during his whole life a mortal sin. There are so few such persons that we can practically say for all those who are not visibly members of the Catholic Church, believing its doctrines, receiving its Sacraments, and being governed by its visible head, our Holy Father, the Pope, salvation is an extremely difficult matter.

I do not speak here of pagans who have never heard of Our Lord or His holy religion, but of those outside the Church who claim to be good Christians without being members of the Catholic Church.

from Lesson 14: On Baptism
154. Q. Is Baptism necessary to salvation?

A. Baptism is necessary to salvation, because without it we cannot enter into the kingdom of Heaven.

Those who through no fault of theirs die without Baptism, though they have never committed sin, cannot enter Heaven neither will they go to Hell. After the Last Judgment there will be no Purgatory. Where, then, will they go? God in His goodness will provide a place of rest for them, where they will not suffer and will be in a state of natural peace; but they will never see God or Heaven. God might have created us for a purely natural and material end, so that we would live forever upon the earth and be naturally happy with the good things God would give us. But then we would never have known of Heaven or God as we do now. Such happiness on earth would be nothing compared to the delights of Heaven and the presence of God; so that, now, since God has given us, through His holy revelations, a knowledge of Himself and Heaven, we would be miserable if left always upon the earth. Those, then, who die without Baptism do not know what they have lost, and are naturally happy; but we who know all they have lost for want of Baptism know how very unfortunate they are.

Think, then, what a terrible crime it is to willfully allow anyone to die without Baptism, or to deprive a little child of life before it can be baptized! Suppose all the members of a family but one little infant have been baptized; when the Day of Judgment comes, while all the other members of a family—father, mother, and children—may go into Heaven, that little one will have to remain out; that little brother or sister will be separated from its family forever, and never, never see God or Heaven. How heartless and cruel, then, must a person be who would deprive that little infant of happiness for all eternity—just that its mother or someone else might have a little less trouble or suffering here upon earth.

157. Q. How many kinds of Baptism are there?

A. There are three kinds of Baptism: Baptism of water, of desire, and of blood.

158. Q. What is Baptism of water?

A. Baptism of water is that which is given by pouring water on the head of the person to be baptized, and saying at the same time, “I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.”

159. Q. What is Baptism of desire?

A. Baptism of desire is an ardent wish to receive Baptism, and to do all that God has ordained for our salvation.

“Ardent wish” by one who has no opportunity of being baptized—for no one can baptize himself. He must be sorry for his sins and have the desire of receiving the Baptism of water as soon as he can; just as a person in mortal sin and without a priest to absolve him may, when in danger of death, save his soul from Hell by an act of perfect contrition and the firm resolution of going to confession as soon as possible....

160. Q. What is Baptism of blood?

A. Baptism of blood is the shedding of one’s blood for the faith of Christ.

Baptism of blood, called martyrdom, is received by those who were not baptized with water, but were put to death for their Catholic faith. This takes place even nowadays in pagan countries where the missionaries are trying to convert the poor natives. These pagans have to be instructed before they are baptized. They do everything required of them, let us suppose, and are waiting for the day of Baptism. Those who are being thus instructed are called Catechumens. Someday, while they are attending their instructions, the enemies of religion rush down upon them and put them to death. They do not resist, but willingly suffer death for the sake of the true religion. They are martyrs then and are baptized in their own blood; although, as we said above, blood would not do for an ordinary Baptism even when we could not get water; so that if a person drew blood from his own body and asked to be baptized with it, the Baptism would not be valid. Neither would they be martyrs if put to death not for religion or virtue but for some other reason—say political.

161. Q. Is Baptism of desire or blood sufficient to produce the effects of Baptism of water?

A. Baptism of desire or of blood is sufficient to produce the effects of the Baptism of water, if it is impossible to receive the Baptism of water.

Jehanne · « **Reply #36 on:** April 22, 2013, 07:42:58 PM »

Quote from: bowler

[Suppose, however, that there is a non-Catholic who firmly believes that the church to which he belongs is the true Church, and who has never—even in the past—had the slightest doubt of that fact—what will become of him?

If he was validly baptized and never committed a mortal sin, he will be saved; because, believing himself a member of the true Church, he was doing all he could to serve God according to his knowledge and the dictates of his conscience.

Makes me wonder if we are doing Protestants, Orthodox, etc., a disservice by proclaiming the Gospel to them. After all, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing, and if we told a Protestant that he/she should come into full communion with the One True Church, could we be causing that person to sin? On the other hand, if we just left that person where he/she was, then perhaps salvation would be easier for him/her if we simply did not tell that individual too much about the Catholic faith?

Mortalium · « **Reply #37 on:** April 22, 2013, 08:10:11 PM »

Quote from: Jehanne

Makes me wonder if we are doing Protestants, Orthodox, etc., a disservice by proclaiming the Gospel to them. After all, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing, and if we told a Protestant that he/she should come into full communion with the One True Church, could we be causing that person to sin? On the other hand, if we just left that person where he/she was, then perhaps salvation would be easier for him/her if we simply did not tell that individual too much about the Catholic faith?

Exactly. The whole idea of "invincible ignorance" is so heretical and illogic that it baffles me to think how people actually believe in it and then even worse, dare to assert it as true doctrine. Incredible.

The whole thing is pure baloney. Supposed "invincibly ignorant" people making "implicit desires" about things they have no idea about and on top of that being saved? Baloney!

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #38 on:** April 22, 2013, 08:19:42 PM »

Quote from: Mortalium

Quote from: Jehanne

Makes me wonder if we are doing Protestants, Orthodox, etc., a disservice by proclaiming the Gospel to them. After all, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing, and if we told a Protestant that he/she should come into full communion with the One True Church, could we be causing that person to sin? On the other hand, if we just left that person where he/she was, then perhaps salvation would be easier for him/her if we simply did not tell that individual too much about the Catholic faith?

Exactly. The whole idea of "invincible ignorance" is so heretical and illogic that it baffles me to think how people actually believe in it and then even worse, dare to assert it as true doctrine. Incredible.

The whole thing is pure baloney. Supposed "invincibly ignorant" people making "implicit desires" about things they have no idea about and on top of that being saved? Baloney!

Tell that to Pius IX.

Mortalium · « **Reply #39 on:** April 22, 2013, 08:29:32 PM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan

Quote from: Mortalium
Quote from: Jehanne

Makes me wonder if we are doing Protestants, Orthodox, etc., a disservice by proclaiming the Gospel to them. After all, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing, and if we told a Protestant that he/she should come into full communion with the One True Church, could we be causing that person to sin? On the other hand, if we just left that person where he/she was, then perhaps salvation would be easier for him/her if we simply did not tell that individual too much about the Catholic faith?

Exactly. The whole idea of "invincible ignorance" is so heretical and illogic that it baffles me to think how people actually believe in it and then even worse, dare to assert it as true doctrine. Incredible.

The whole thing is pure baloney. Supposed "invincibly ignorant" people making "implicit desires" about things they have no idea about and on top of that being saved? Baloney!

Tell that to Pius IX.

Tell that to Fr. Mueller, Fr. William Faber, Bishop George Hay, St. Thomas, St. Augustine, St. Leonard of Port Maurice, and pretty much ANY Saint and Doctor of the Church who had anything to say on the matter. In fact they all taught the exact OPPOSITE of what the salvation heretics teach on this matter.

Michael Muller and others even defended Pius IX's statements and said he did NOT teach what liberals think he taught.

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #40 on:** April 22, 2013, 08:37:36 PM »

Quote from: Mortalium

Quote from: Mithrandylan
Quote from: Mortalium
Quote from: Jehanne

Makes me wonder if we are doing Protestants, Orthodox, etc., a disservice by proclaiming the Gospel to them. After all, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing, and if we told a Protestant that he/she should come into full communion with the One True Church, could we be causing that person to sin? On the other hand, if we just left that person where he/she was, then perhaps salvation would be easier for him/her if we simply did not tell that individual too much about the Catholic faith?

Exactly. The whole idea of "invincible ignorance" is so heretical and illogic that it baffles me to think how people actually believe in it and then even worse, dare to assert it as true doctrine. Incredible.

The whole thing is pure baloney. Supposed "invincibly ignorant" people making "implicit desires" about things they have no idea about and on top of that being saved? Baloney!

Tell that to Pius IX.

Tell that to Fr. Mueller, Fr. William Faber, Bishop George Hay, St. Thomas, St. Augustine, St. Leonard of Port Maurice, and pretty much ANY Saint and Doctor of the Church who had anything to say on the matter. In fact they all taught the exact OPPOSITE of what the salvation heretics teach on this matter.

Michael Muller and others even defended Pius IX's statements and said he did NOT teach what liberals think he taught.

Careful not to start with the strawmen.

Pius IX taught:

"There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments (Quanto Conficiamur Moerore, no 7)."

Is he a heretic? Or is there a secret, hidden meaning where he means something opposite of what he wrote?

saintbosco13 · « **Reply #41 on:** April 22, 2013, 08:50:22 PM »

Quote from: Mortalium

Quote from: saintbosco13
Canon Law (1917) states to the contrary. Do you disagree with it?

“Baptism, the door and foundation of the Sacraments, in fact or at least in desire necessary unto salvation for all, is not validly conferred except through the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words.” (Canon 737).

“Those who have died without baptism are not to be given ecclesiastical burial. Catechumens who die without baptism through no fault of their own are to be counted among the baptized.” (Canon 1239)

That is totally self-contradictory.

First it says "Baptism, the door and foundation of the Sacraments, in fact or at least in desire necessary unto salvation for all, is not validly conferred except through the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words."

So Baptism in fact or "in desire" is necessary unto all for salvation, but then it says "is not validly conferred except through the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words."

So baptism is necessary and is not validly conferred except through the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words. But "baptism of desire" is precisely this: baptism without the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words.

That is a contradiction.

There is no contradiction. You need to understand that Baptism of water is the Sacrament, and Baptism of desire and blood are NOT the Sacraments....they only supply the grace of the Sacrament in rare cases.

Read this text from the article on Baptism in the Catholic Encyclopedia from early 1900s:

X. SUBSTITUTES FOR THE SACRAMENT
"The Fathers and theologians frequently divide baptism into three kinds: the baptism of water (aquæ or fluminis), the baptism of desire (flaminis), and the baptism of blood (sanguinis). However, only the first is a real sacrament. The latter two are denominated baptism only analogically, inasmuch as they supply the principal effect of baptism, namely, the grace which remits sins. It is the teaching of the Catholic Church that when the baptism of water becomes a physical or moral impossibility, eternal life may be obtained by the baptism of desire or the baptism of blood."

saintbosco13 · « **Reply #42 on:** April 22, 2013, 08:58:57 PM »

Quote from: Mortalium

Quote from: Jehanne

Makes me wonder if we are doing Protestants, Orthodox, etc., a disservice by proclaiming the Gospel to them. After all, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing, and if we told a Protestant that he/she should come into full communion with the One True Church, could we be causing that person to sin? On the other hand, if we just left that person where he/she was, then perhaps salvation would be easier for him/her if we simply did not tell that individual too much about the Catholic faith?

Exactly. The whole idea of "invincible ignorance" is so heretical and illogic that it baffles me to think how people actually believe in it and then even worse, dare to assert it as true doctrine. Incredible.

The whole thing is pure baloney. Supposed "invincibly ignorant" people making "implicit desires" about things they have no idea about and on top of that being saved? Baloney!

You need to learn your faith my friend. Look at the quotes from Pope Pius IX and St. Pope Pius X on baptismofdesire.com. They plainly speak of invincible ignorance.

magdalena · « **Reply #43 on:** April 22, 2013, 09:15:11 PM »

O the depth of the riches of the wisdom and of the knowledge of God! How incomprehensible are his judgments, and how unsearchable his ways!
Romans 11:33

Baptise your children and advise others to do the same. Now shall we talk about Limbo?

Jehanne · « **Reply #44 on:** April 22, 2013, 09:29:45 PM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan

Quote from: Mortalium
Quote from: Mithrandylan
Quote from: Mortalium
Quote from: Jehanne

Makes me wonder if we are doing Protestants, Orthodox, etc., a disservice by proclaiming the Gospel to them. After all, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing, and if we told a Protestant that he/she should come into full communion with the One True Church, could we be causing that person to sin? On the other hand, if we just left that person where he/she was, then perhaps salvation would be easier for him/her if we simply did not tell that individual too much about the Catholic faith?

Exactly. The whole idea of "invincible ignorance" is so heretical and illogic that it baffles me to think how people actually believe in it and then even worse, dare to assert it as true doctrine. Incredible.

The whole thing is pure baloney. Supposed "invincibly ignorant" people making "implicit desires" about things they have no idea about and on top of that being saved? Baloney!

Tell that to Pius IX.

Tell that to Fr. Mueller, Fr. William Faber, Bishop George Hay, St. Thomas, St. Augustine, St. Leonard of Port Maurice, and pretty much ANY Saint and Doctor of the Church who had anything to say on the matter. In fact they all taught the exact OPPOSITE of what the salvation heretics teach on this matter.

Michael Muller and others even defended Pius IX's statements and said he did NOT teach what liberals think he taught.

Careful not to start with the strawmen.

Pius IX taught:

"There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments (Quanto Conficiamur Moerore, no 7)."

One could read Pope Pius IX's words as teaching that the Holy Spirit would reveal the explicit truths of the Catholic faith to such individuals. That is how Fr. Mueller read things. Remember, also, that the First Vatican Council came after Pope Pius IX's two Magisterial statements on "invincible ignorance," and that Council stated the following:

Quote

First Vatican Council -- Chapter 3 On faith

7. And so faith in itself, even though it may not work through charity, is a gift of God, and its operation is a work belonging to the order of salvation, in that a person yields true obedience to God himself when he accepts and collaborates with his grace which he could have rejected.

9. Since, then, without faith it is impossible to please God and reach the fellowship of his sons and daughters, it follows that no one can ever achieve justification without it, neither can anyone attain eternal life unless he or she perseveres in it to the end.

13. So it comes about that, like a standard lifted up for the nations, she both invites to herself those who have not yet believed, and likewise assures her sons and daughters that the faith they profess rests on the firmest of foundations.

14. To this witness is added the effective help of power from on high. For, the kind Lord stirs up those who go astray and helps them by his grace so that they may come to the knowledge of the truth; and also confirms by his grace those whom he has translated into his admirable light, so that they may persevere in this light, not abandoning them unless he is first abandoned.

15. Consequently, the situation of those, who by the heavenly gift of faith have embraced the Catholic truth, is by no means the same as that of those who, led by human opinions, follow a false religion; for those who have accepted the faith under the guidance of the Church can never have any just cause for changing this faith or for calling it into question.

This being so, giving thanks to God the Father who has made us worthy to share with the saints in light let us not neglect so great a salvation, but looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith, let us hold the unshakable confession of our hope.