I hear many people say that subsistit in in Lumen Gentium wasn't intentional. Is this true?

Did you mean to include all of the words quoted immediately above?

If so, how likely do you think it is that a word made it into such a docuмent, and has not been removed after 45 years?

FWIW, although you make mention of "many people",  I hope nobody makes such an irrational claim.

A great part of Pope Leo XIII's Satis Cognitum:

Another head like to Christ must be invented - that is, another Christ - if besides the one Church, which is His body, men wish to set up another. "See what you must beware of - see what you must avoid - see what you must dread. It happens that, as in the human body, some member may be cut off - a hand, a finger, a foot. Does the soul follow the amputated member? As long as it was in the body, it lived; separated, it forfeits its life. So the Christian is a Catholic as long as he lives in the body: cut off from it he becomes a heretic - the life of the spirit follows not the amputated member" (S. Augustinus, Sermo cclxvii., n. 4).

I think this goes along with the contradictions made by Vatican II and the conciliar Church's teachings.

Another head like to Christ must be invented - that is, another Christ - if besides the one Church, which is His body, men wish to set up another.

Protestants who don't belong to Christ's True Body and have invented a new Christ and a new head do not have the True Lord. Pope Benedict XVI said something relating to an "invented Christ":

A slogan that was popular some years back, "Jesus yes, Church no," is totally inconceivable with the intention of Christ. This individualistically chosen Jesus is an imaginary Jesus.

Without the Catholic Church, we are without the Christ. Without the Catholic Church, one's Jesus is an imposter and a false prophet that the real Jesus warns us of in The Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Matthew (Chapter 7):

15 Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

They come under the clothing of sheep, as the Lamb of God, but they are really the wolves of heresy, the wolves that take the sheep away from the flock and divide the sheep into 30,000 false flocks.

It happens that, as in the human body, some member may be cut off - a hand, a finger, a foot. Does the soul follow the amputated member? As long as it was in the body, it lived; separated, it forfeits its life.

The soul of the human body can be likened to the sanctifying Soul of Christ's Body which is the Holy Spirit. The sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit does not follow the amputated (excommunicated) members of the Body. Those "ecclesial communities" as Vatican II calls them do not have the Holy Spirit's sanctification because the soul doesn't follow an amputated body part.

These teachings of Pope Leo XIII were contradicted by Vatican II's teachings in Lumen Gentium:

This Church constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him, although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure.

[/quote]So the Christian is a Catholic as long as he lives in the body: cut off from it he becomes a heretic - the life of the spirit follows not the amputated member.

Christians who are not Catholic do not live in the Body. They are heretics if they are seperated from the Body and they don't receive the sanctifyication of the Holy Spirit unless they reunite themselves with the Body.

As I typed this, I was thinking about other Catholic teachings that subsistit in contradicts. It sounds like it also contradicts the Church's Tradition on "no salvation outside of the Church. Prior to Vatican II, there was no sanctification of the Holy Spirit outside of the Catholic Church, now there is? I now understand how subsistit in promotes the liberal Catholic, Modernist, and Protestant teaching of "universal salvation."

If any of what I typed is wrong, please correct me.

Thank you.

"Improved" post from ajpric...

A great part of Pope Leo XIII's Satis Cognitum:

Another head like to Christ must be invented - that is, another Christ - if besides the one Church, which is His body, men wish to set up another. "See what you must beware of - see what you must avoid - see what you must dread. It happens that, as in the human body, some member may be cut off - a hand, a finger, a foot. Does the soul follow the amputated member? As long as it was in the body, it lived; separated, it forfeits its life. So the Christian is a Catholic as long as he lives in the body: cut off from it he becomes a heretic - the life of the spirit follows not the amputated member" (S. Augustinus, Sermo cclxvii., n. 4).

I think this goes along with the contradictions made by Vatican II and the conciliar Church's teachings.

Another head like to Christ must be invented - that is, another Christ - if besides the one Church, which is His body, men wish to set up another.

Protestants who don't belong to Christ's True Body and have invented a new Christ and a new head do not have the True Lord. Pope Benedict XVI said something relating to an "invented Christ":

A slogan that was popular some years back, "Jesus yes, Church no," is totally inconceivable with the intention of Christ. This individualistically chosen Jesus is an imaginary Jesus.

Without the Catholic Church, we are without the Christ. Without the Catholic Church, one's Jesus is an imposter and a false prophet that the real Jesus warns us of in The Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Matthew (Chapter 7):

15 Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

They come under the clothing of sheep, as the Lamb of God, but they are really the wolves of heresy, the wolves that take the sheep away from the flock and divide the sheep into 30,000 false flocks.

It happens that, as in the human body, some member may be cut off - a hand, a finger, a foot. Does the soul follow the amputated member? As long as it was in the body, it lived; separated, it forfeits its life.

The soul of the human body can be likened to the sanctifying Soul of Christ's Body which is the Holy Spirit. The sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit does not follow the amputated (excommunicated) members of the Body. Those "ecclesial communities" as Vatican II calls them do not have the Holy Spirit's sanctification because the soul doesn't follow an amputated body part.

These teachings of Pope Leo XIII were contradicted by Vatican II's teachings in Lumen Gentium:

This Church constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him, although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure.

So the Christian is a Catholic as long as he lives in the body: cut off from it he becomes a heretic - the life of the spirit follows not the amputated member.

Christians who are not Catholic do not live in the Body. They are heretics if they are seperated from the Body and they don't receive the sanctifyication of the Holy Spirit unless they reunite themselves with the Body.

As I typed this, I was thinking about other Catholic teachings that subsistit in contradicts. It sounds like it also contradicts the Church's Tradition on "no salvation outside of the Church. Prior to Vatican II, there was no sanctification of the Holy Spirit outside of the Catholic Church, now there is? I now understand how subsistit in promotes the liberal Catholic, Modernist, and Protestant teaching of "universal salvation."

If any of what I typed is wrong, please correct me.

Thank you.

Thank you gladius_veritatis

ajpirc, you are having some good insights into these encyclicals and I think you have a good head on your shoulders. Keep on going with this, and I really think God is working in you. Imagine if everyone in the novus ordo modern VatII church started reading about history, about what Popes of the past church have written, and what the Church has always proclaimed prior to the major publications in Vatican II...  my eye grows a tear thinking of the beauty that could be in true unity of the real Faith.

Thanks gv for the editing of ajpirc's post too.

Thank you very much, PartyIsOver221.

If I posted that same thing over at Catholic Answers Forums, I'd probably be called a heretic. It's funny how they call Protestants our "seperated bretheren" because calling someone a heretic isn't the right thing to do, yet they'd call another Catholic a heretic for being traditional. They don't see anything wrong with someone being born into Protestantism, yet when someone is born into the SSPX, they call them schismatics? Very liberal views over there.

Salvete omnes!

Sorry for intruding upon this discussion. The phrase "subsistit in" was entered into the text of Lumen Gentium at the suggestion of Sebastiaan Tromp, SJ, a Dutch thomist theologian who was Card. Ottaviani's assistant at the Council and who assisted in drafting the schemata for the Council (which were subsequently abandoned).

Hope this helps.

As far as I know, heretics can confect valid baptisms, but they remain fruitless until the baptised person enters the fold of the Catholic Church.

Quote from: ajpirc

Quote from: ajpirc

Quote from: J.Paul

...there is no partial or imperfect communion with the Church...

This is also what confuses me. One enters the Church through Baptism, correct? Though a Protestant is outside of the Church, correct? How can a Protestant be baptized (enter into the Church), but still be outside of the Church?

I read on CAF earlier that Protestants are Catholics that don't know it and reject the Faith:

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=577765 (2nd post)

Could I get an answer for this, please?

Sorry, I didn't see the question.  Yes, anyone can do a valid baptism if he uses the proper form, water, and intends to do what the Church does.  And such a child would be a Catholic until the age of reason, when he chooses to remain in the Church or leave for a sect etc.

The sacrament of Baptism is a Catholic sacrament. That is to say, that it belongs to, and is the property of the true Church.

When it is used illicitly outside of the Catholic Church it is valid but unlawful.
It is the Catholic sacrament abused by heretics. On the other hand if an adult is Baptized into an heretical sect then the Baptism is invalid as that is against the will of the Church and means that the intention was not to do as the Church does. Hence the person remains outside of the Church.

The use of the true Catholic sacrament obviously Baptizes one (an infant) into the Catholic Faith. That is what they are speaking to.

This was what I was thinking. Even though one is baptized doesn't mean they are always and forever in Christ's true Church. Once someone is baptized, they enter into the Catholic Church; at the time that they profess heresy as true faith, they leave the Church. Would this be correct?