The Council of Florence infallibly taught:
But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains. (Florence, Sixth Session, 6 July 1439.)
This is an "infallible" and hence unchangeable teaching which everyone has to believe.
So infants who died without being baptized went to hell. This was originally a teaching of St. Augustine.
According to Catholicism, unbaptized infants go to hell.
Moderator: Moderators
-
Divine Insight
- Savant
- Posts: 18070
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
- Location: Here & Now
- Been thanked: 19 times
Post #2
It seems to me that the only rational way to understand this is to recognize the true nature of these religious dogmas.
Clearly this religion makes every attempt to condemn everyone who doesn't join this religion and do precisely as it says.
1. All men are sinners without exception.
2. Everyone needs to be saved through Christ.
3. Our religious institution represents "The Body of Christ".
4. Therefore you either come to us and do as we say, or you will be excommunicated from "The Body of Christ".
5. By the way, even your babies are sinners, and if you don't bring them to us to be baptized they will surely go to hell.
See? It's just a way to make certain that absolutely no one escapes the authority of this religious cult.
These kinds of dogmas are basically screaming, "Man-made Cult Here!".
What kind of a benevolent loving God would cast babies into hell simply because their parents didn't take them to a church to be baptized?
The fallacy of these religious cults is being shoved in our faces with such clear bright red flags. Yet so many people over the course of history have been intimated by this cult and have joined it and support it to avoid certain damnation.
The fact that it's a cult that preys on the fear of being condemned to hell is so obvious.
Clearly this religion makes every attempt to condemn everyone who doesn't join this religion and do precisely as it says.
1. All men are sinners without exception.
2. Everyone needs to be saved through Christ.
3. Our religious institution represents "The Body of Christ".
4. Therefore you either come to us and do as we say, or you will be excommunicated from "The Body of Christ".
5. By the way, even your babies are sinners, and if you don't bring them to us to be baptized they will surely go to hell.
See? It's just a way to make certain that absolutely no one escapes the authority of this religious cult.
These kinds of dogmas are basically screaming, "Man-made Cult Here!".
What kind of a benevolent loving God would cast babies into hell simply because their parents didn't take them to a church to be baptized?
The fallacy of these religious cults is being shoved in our faces with such clear bright red flags. Yet so many people over the course of history have been intimated by this cult and have joined it and support it to avoid certain damnation.
The fact that it's a cult that preys on the fear of being condemned to hell is so obvious.
[center]
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]
-
ttruscott
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 11064
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
- Location: West Coast of Canada
- Been thanked: 3 times
Post #3
I contend that Baptism has no magical effect at all on a person's salvation because 1. men of faith were saved for centuries without baptism through faith. 2. we are not enslaved by a new Christian law once we were redeemed from the weight of the Jewish law. 3. John the Baptiser was filled with the holy Spirit while in the womb, where I suspect he was not yet baptised.
PCE Theology as I see it...
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
-
brianbbs67
- Guru
- Posts: 1871
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:07 am
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 2 times
Post #4
Mikvah or Baptism(as we call it) has been a symbolic ritual for purity and cleansing of sins.
That's what John the Baptist was offering. Not new. Something as old as history as far as I can tell. It was so important to the Hebrews, that it was the first thing built when settling an area or erecting a temple, nowadays, as the orthodox still do.
Not in anyway required for babies(innocents) or even good people who don't believe. Even a Pope, once said that an atheist who was a good person and lived that way, would not be denied heaven.
Here is the Wiccanpedia's take. I know not a good source in general, but his one appears ok.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikveh
That's what John the Baptist was offering. Not new. Something as old as history as far as I can tell. It was so important to the Hebrews, that it was the first thing built when settling an area or erecting a temple, nowadays, as the orthodox still do.
Not in anyway required for babies(innocents) or even good people who don't believe. Even a Pope, once said that an atheist who was a good person and lived that way, would not be denied heaven.
Here is the Wiccanpedia's take. I know not a good source in general, but his one appears ok.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikveh
Post #5
First off just because t council of Florence is an ecumenical council does not mean all that is contained in it is dogma. All specific topics covered must be ratified by the Pope. The Catholic church never taught infallibily that un- baptized infants go to hell.
Re: According to Catholicism, unbaptized infants go to hell.
Post #6I don't believe this Council, convened as a rival Council was operating in Basle, offered infallible teaching. We have discussed this many times. I think the Church view would certainly be that the enactments were not binding.polonius.advice wrote: The Council of Florence infallibly taught:
But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains. (Florence, Sixth Session, 6 July 1439.)
I agree that it was taught that unbaptized babies went to Limbo, a part of hell. I have since learned that this was traditionally accepted, but was never dogma. It seems sensible to let the successors of St. Peter decide on what is sacrosanct and what is not. It is curious that outsiders would want to impose strictures on the internal rulings of the RC Church.
-
OnceConvinced
- Savant
- Posts: 8969
- Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 10:22 pm
- Location: New Zealand
- Has thanked: 50 times
- Been thanked: 67 times
- Contact:
Post #7
What about adding 4 also: It's simply just a silly religious ritual; a symbolic act and how can a symbolic act have any power on its own?ttruscott wrote: I contend that Baptism has no magical effect at all on a person's salvation because 1. men of faith were saved for centuries without baptism through faith. 2. we are not enslaved by a new Christian law once we were redeemed from the weight of the Jewish law. 3. John the Baptiser was filled with the holy Spirit while in the womb, where I suspect he was not yet baptised.
Society and its morals evolve and will continue to evolve. The bible however remains the same and just requires more and more apologetics and claims of "metaphors" and "symbolism" to justify it.
Prayer is like rubbing an old bottle and hoping that a genie will pop out and grant you three wishes.
There is much about this world that is mind boggling and impressive, but I see no need whatsoever to put it down to magical super powered beings.
Check out my website: Recker's World
-
RightReason
- Under Probation
- Posts: 1569
- Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
- Been thanked: 16 times
Post #8
[Replying to ttruscott]
**************
The Catechism of the Catholic Church says: God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments. [1257]
The above quote is often misstated and misinterpreted. The misstatement or misquote involves taking away the first part of the assertion (God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism), and asserting only the last part (God is not bound by his sacraments). Both parts of the quote are true, but each part sheds light on the other.
The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. [CCC 1257]
God cannot change His mind. He is unchanging infinite perfection. Since God decided to bind salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, that cannot change. Salvation is irrevocably tied to the sacrament of Baptism. It is absolutely necessary for salvation. Why then does the CCC also assert that God is not bound by his sacraments?
This Baptism of blood, like the desire for Baptism, brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament. [CCC 1258]
God has also decided to offer salvation by the baptisms of desire and of blood, which are not in themselves sacraments. Now this might seem like a contradiction: Baptism is necessary for salvation. Salvation is bound to the Sacrament of Baptism. But some persons are baptized and saved apart from the Sacrament.
The solution to this apparent contradiction is the understanding that the power of the baptisms of desire and of blood is solely and entirely from their relationship to the formal Sacrament of Baptism. The baptism of desire is a desire, explicitly or implicitly, for the formal Sacrament.
God is not bound by His Sacraments, in the sense that He has always offered salvation by baptism of desire or of blood, and not only by a baptism of water. But no salvation is found apart from the Sacrament of Baptism because the baptisms of desire and of blood derive their effectiveness from the formal Sacrament. And any of the three forms of baptism can confer the state of grace, which is absolutely necessary at death for salvation.
Similarly, there is no salvation outside the Church. Yet persons who are formally outside the Church can still be saved, by being implicitly inside the Church by the state of grace.
https://ronconte.wordpress.com/2016/04/ ... f-baptism/
Uummm . . . . God can do what He wants. He is the lawmaker. So, it is His right if He makes a new law " like the mandatory requirement of Baptism for salvation (as is clear in Scripture), He can grandfather in those who lived prior to this clause. That doesnt mean in Baptism we dont receive what you might refer to as a magical effect sanctifying grace " we do indeedI contend that Baptism has no magical effect at all on a person's salvation because 1. men of faith were saved for centuries without baptism through faith. 2. we are not enslaved by a new Christian law once we were redeemed from the weight of the Jewish law. 3. John the Baptiser was filled with the holy Spirit while in the womb, where I suspect he was not yet baptised.
**************
The Catechism of the Catholic Church says: God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments. [1257]
The above quote is often misstated and misinterpreted. The misstatement or misquote involves taking away the first part of the assertion (God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism), and asserting only the last part (God is not bound by his sacraments). Both parts of the quote are true, but each part sheds light on the other.
The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. [CCC 1257]
God cannot change His mind. He is unchanging infinite perfection. Since God decided to bind salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, that cannot change. Salvation is irrevocably tied to the sacrament of Baptism. It is absolutely necessary for salvation. Why then does the CCC also assert that God is not bound by his sacraments?
This Baptism of blood, like the desire for Baptism, brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament. [CCC 1258]
God has also decided to offer salvation by the baptisms of desire and of blood, which are not in themselves sacraments. Now this might seem like a contradiction: Baptism is necessary for salvation. Salvation is bound to the Sacrament of Baptism. But some persons are baptized and saved apart from the Sacrament.
The solution to this apparent contradiction is the understanding that the power of the baptisms of desire and of blood is solely and entirely from their relationship to the formal Sacrament of Baptism. The baptism of desire is a desire, explicitly or implicitly, for the formal Sacrament.
God is not bound by His Sacraments, in the sense that He has always offered salvation by baptism of desire or of blood, and not only by a baptism of water. But no salvation is found apart from the Sacrament of Baptism because the baptisms of desire and of blood derive their effectiveness from the formal Sacrament. And any of the three forms of baptism can confer the state of grace, which is absolutely necessary at death for salvation.
Similarly, there is no salvation outside the Church. Yet persons who are formally outside the Church can still be saved, by being implicitly inside the Church by the state of grace.
https://ronconte.wordpress.com/2016/04/ ... f-baptism/
Post #9
First off just because t council of Florence is an ecumenical council does not mean all that is contained in it is dogma. All specific topics covered must be ratified by the Pope. The Catholic church never taught infallibily that un- baptized infants go to hell.
-
RightReason
- Under Probation
- Posts: 1569
- Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
- Been thanked: 16 times
Post #10
[Replying to post 7 by OnceConvinced]
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 'The sacraments are efficacious signs of grace, instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church, by which divine life is dispensed to us' (#1131). ... This means that according to Catholic teachings, sacraments do what they say they do.
Against all innovators the Council of Trent declared: "If anyone say that the sacraments of the New Law do not contain the grace which they signify, or that they do not confer grace on those who place no obstacle to the same, let him be anathema" (Sess. viii, can.vi). "If anyone say that grace is not conferred by the sacraments ex opere operato but that faith in God's promises is alone sufficient for obtaining grace, let him be anathema" (ibid., can. viii; cf. can. iv, v, vii)
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13295a.htm
The Church does not teach that Baptism is simply a symbolic act.What about adding 4 also: It's simply just a silly religious ritual; a symbolic act and how can a symbolic act have any power on its own?
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 'The sacraments are efficacious signs of grace, instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church, by which divine life is dispensed to us' (#1131). ... This means that according to Catholic teachings, sacraments do what they say they do.
Against all innovators the Council of Trent declared: "If anyone say that the sacraments of the New Law do not contain the grace which they signify, or that they do not confer grace on those who place no obstacle to the same, let him be anathema" (Sess. viii, can.vi). "If anyone say that grace is not conferred by the sacraments ex opere operato but that faith in God's promises is alone sufficient for obtaining grace, let him be anathema" (ibid., can. viii; cf. can. iv, v, vii)
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13295a.htm
