The Fifth Lateran Council

by **Admin** Tue Mar 05, 2013 1:08 pm

This decree from the Fifth Lateran Council, the 18th ecumenical Council of the Catholic Church, should end any discussion on the need for personal submission to the Roman Pontiff for eternal life:

We desire this matter to be brought to its proper conclusion. We are proceeding on the strength of the many citations issued by us and our said predecessor Julius, and of the other things mentioned above which are so notorious that they cannot be hidden by any excuses or evasions, as well as in virtue of our pastoral office. We are supplying for each and every defect, both of law and of fact, if perchance any happen to exist in the above. We judge and declare, from our certain knowledge and from the fullness of apostolic power, with the approval of the same sacred council, by the contents of the present document, that the aforesaid Pragmatic Sanction or corruption, and its approbations however issued, and each and every decree, chapter, statute, constitution or ordinance that is included, or even inserted, in any way in the same and has been published by others, as well as the customs, expressions and uses, or rather abuses, in any way resulting from it and observed until the present, have been and are of no force or value. In addition, for a more extensive safeguard, we revoke, make void, abrogate, quash, annul and condemn that same sanction or corruption of Bourges and its approval, whether expressed or tacit, as said above, as well as each and every thing of whatever nature included or even inserted in it, and we judge, declare and will them to be considered as of no effect, revoked, made void, abrogated, quashed, annulled and condemned. Moreover, since subjection to the Roman pontiff is necessary for salvation for all Christ's faithful, as we are taught by the testimony of both sacred scripture and the holy fathers, and as is declared by the constitution of pope Boniface VIII of happy memory, also our predecessor, which begins Unam sanctam, we therefore, with the approval of the present sacred council, for the salvation of the souls of the same faithful, for the supreme authority of the Roman pontiff and of this holy see, and for the unity and power of the church, his spouse, renew and give our approval to that constitution, but without prejudice to the declaration of pope Clement V of holy memory, which begins Meruit.

by Lionel A Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:47 am

since subjection to the Roman pontiff is necessary for salvation for all Christ's faithful, as we are taught

How can we be faithful with respect to the following :

There are two ways of looking at those saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance(and being faithful to the magisterial texts)A
1.They are known only to God and are possibilities AND ALSO
2. They are exceptions to the dogma which says all need to be visible members of the Church for salvation.

B.
1.They are known only to GOd and are possibilities AND
2. They are not exceptions to anything.

Another way of saying the same thing is:-

A
1.They are (visible)known only to God and are possibilities AND ALSO
2. They are (visible )exceptions to the dogma which says all need to be visible members of the Church for salvation.

B.
1.They are (visible) known only to God and are possibilities AND
2. They are not (physically visible) exceptions to anything.(since they are invisible).

by **Admin** Wed Mar 06, 2013 10:05 am

Lionel,

As I am sure that you know and agree with, one can be a visible member of the Catholic Church and yet still end-up going to eternal Hell. So, the "trick" is to end one's life in a state of sanctifying grace, as opposed to mortal sin or "original sin alone."

Of course, if we begin with the premise that no one is created by the One and Triune God solely for the ultimate purpose of being condemned to everlasting punishment, then we must conclude that every human being, without exception, "has a shot" at eternal life. Of course, people and circumstances can get in the way of this, such as miscarriages, parents who neglect to baptize their kidos, as well as our own choices. We are, however, ultimately judged on that last category alone, but at the same time, none of us has a "right" to Heaven, and as the Triune God is "not bound to disturb the general order to provide for the particular order," infants who end this life without sacramental Baptism are, at least in some circumstances, justly excluded from Heaven, for which they never any right to begin with.

As for those who survive infancy and seek God, we must conclude that He, out of His infinite love, is certainly capable of giving those individuals the means to embrace, of their own free wills, the particular graces which He, through the merits of His One and Only Son, Jesus Christ, bestows upon the World. Whether one is a "card carrying" Catholic or not is irrelevant, as long as one ends his/her life "in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church."

Just as we cannot see the salvation beyond anyone whom Holy Mother Church has canonized, so, too, we cannot see the damnation of anyone either, whether they are "card carrying" Catholics or not.

by Lionel A Fri Mar 08, 2013 5:53 am

since subjection to the Roman pontiff is necessary for salvation for all Christ's faithful, as we are taught

How can we be faithful with respect to the following :
There are two ways of looking at those saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance(and being faithful to the magisterial texts

1.They are known only to God and are possibilities AND ALSO
2. They are exceptions to the dogma which says all need to be visible members of the Church for salvation.

AND ALSO

would be a contradtion of magisterial texts.

Would you know how?

B.
1.They are known only to GOd and are possibilities AND
2. They are not exceptions to anything.

This would be in agreement with magisterial texts and the dogma itself.

Another way of saying the same thing is:-

A
1.They are (visible)known only to God and are possibilities AND ALSO
2. They are (visible )exceptions to the dogma which says all need to be visible members of the Church for salvation.

The following would be in agreement with your theology.
B.
1.They are (visible) known only to God and are possibilities AND
2. They are not (physically visible) exceptions to anything.(since they are invisible).

.

by **Admin** Fri Mar 08, 2013 8:24 am

Lionel,

What would you say if I made the assertion that there were no exceptions, period!? That is, to go to Heaven, one must be a visible member of the Catholic Church. "No exceptions," even those which are known only to the One and Triune God. What would you say to that?

by Lionel A Fri Mar 08, 2013 9:41 am

What would you say if I made the assertion that there were no exceptions, period!?

I would qualify it and say there are no known exceptions, period.

That is, to go to Heaven, one must be a visible member of the Catholic Church.

I would agree with you here.

"No exceptions," even those which are known only to the One and Triune God. What would you say to that?.

Your sentence is contradictory. You are saying that there are no exceptions and also saying even those which are known to God.

by **Admin** Fri Mar 08, 2013 10:07 am

Lionel A wrote:
What would you say if I made the assertion that there were no exceptions, period!?

I would qualify it and say there are no known exceptions, period.

That is, to go to Heaven, one must be a visible member of the Catholic Church.

I would agree with you here.

"No exceptions," even those which are known only to the One and Triune God. What would you say to that?.
Your sentence is contradictory. You are saying that there are no exceptions and also saying even those which are known to God.

No, it is not, because the omnipotent One and Triune God "does not know" of any "exceptions" due to the fact that there are no exceptions.

by Lionel A Fri Mar 08, 2013 11:27 am

No, it is not, because the omnipotent One and Triune God "does not know" of any "exceptions" due to the fact that there are no exceptions..

due to the fact that there are no exceptions..

However there could be the baptism of desire followed with the baptism of water.

There could be a person with a good conscience saved who also receives the baptism of water.

There could be a person saved with the baptism of desire without the baptism of water as a possibility known only to God.

There could be a person with a good conscience saved without the baptism of water as a possibility known only to God.

God is not limited to the Sacraments as a possibility so in an extraordinary case known only to Him he could save a person without the Sacrament of baptism ?

We know of cases of people who died without the baptism of water and God did not condemn to Hell but sent them back to earth to be baptised with water by the saints.

This was against the norm. They should have been sent to Hell.
May be God had some information which we did not.

by **Admin** Fri Mar 08, 2013 11:43 am

So, if I assert, as a theological opinion, that there are no souls in Heaven who lack the character of sacramental Baptism, am I a heretic?

by Lionel A Sat Mar 09, 2013 4:13 am

due to the fact that there are no exceptions..

We agree that there are no exceptions.Known or unknown.

We agree that the baptism of desire is invisible to us. So it is not an exception.
So even if there was someone saved with the baptism of desire (with or without the baptism of water) it would not be an exception.

So when I say there are no known exceptions I mean there are no exceptions in our reality.
If God did save someone with the baptism of desire it is not visible to us, so it is not relevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

If you consider the baptism of desire as being visible, if you imply it, then it is important if God knows of any such case, if there exists any such case in potential etc. Since even if there exists any such case in potential, it would be an exception.

by **Admin** Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:48 am

You didn't answer my question:

So, if I assert, as a theological opinion, that there are no souls in Heaven who lack the character of sacramental Baptism, am I a heretic?

by Lionel A Sat Mar 09, 2013 3:21 pm

So, if I assert, as a theological opinion, that there are no souls in Heaven who lack the character of sacramental Baptism, am I a heretic?

I also believe as a theological opinion that there are only Catholics in Heaven.
I assume they are all there with the baptism of water.

If there are aren't any there with the baptism of water, they would in some way still be Catholic for God to finally allow them to be there.However this is an 'if'.

Heretic ?

Only if, known to God, there are visible cases in Heaven of those saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance is there confusion, otherwise we agree that every one needs to be a visible member of the Church in 2013 for salvation and there are no exceptions.

by **Admin** Sat Mar 09, 2013 5:18 pm

If I am asserting what I am, as a theological opinion, then, of course, I am, by implication, admitting that I could be wrong. Of course, this was the whole impetus behind Father Feeney writing The Bread of Life, to eliminate confusion with respect to BoB/BoD. If everyone who attains Heaven, the Beatific Vision, ends his/her with the character of sacramental Baptism, then there is no confusion.

by Lionel A Sun Mar 10, 2013 9:01 am

If everyone who attains Heaven, the Beatific Vision, ends his/her with the character of sacramental Baptism, then there is no confusion.

to eliminate confusion with respect to BoB/BoD.

Even if as a possibility there is a case of the baptism of desire etc it does not contradict the teaching on the need for sacramental baptism for all, since the baptism of desire is not an exception.

If there was one visible case known to us and then if someone is in Heaven without the baptism of water, then it would be confusing.

Confusion arises when we assume that the baptism of desire is not invisible but visible to all of us and so is an exception.

by **Admin** Sun Mar 10, 2013 9:15 am

You agree, don't you, that Father Feeney, in his The Bread of Life, resolved any and all of these "paradoxes"? If everyone who attains Heaven, the Beatific Vision, ends this life with the character of sacramental Baptism, then the visible/invisible dichotomy which you propose is really quite superfluous. Agreed?

by Lionel A Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:10 am

If everyone who attains Heaven, the Beatific Vision, ends this life with the character of sacramental Baptism,

Every one on earth needs to receive sacramental baptism to attain the Beatific Vision in Heaven. We do not know any exceptions in 2013.

Since the baptism of desire etc are not visible to us they are not exceptions to the dogmatic teaching that 'every one on earth needs to receive sacramental baptism to attain the Beatific Vision in Heaven. '

So if there is someone in Heaven without the baptism of water it will not be an exception or issue.
If there is someone in Heaven without the baptism of water it would mean God chooses it . God can also do what is necessary to make the person a Catholic with the necessary purity of soul.

the visible/invisible dichotomy which you propose is really quite superfluous.

The visible/invisible dichotomy is necessary since you could be assuming that there is no soul in Heaven,( known to God only), saved with the baptism of desire and without the baptism of water , since this case is visible and so would be an exception to the dogma.

by **Admin** Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:16 am

Lionel A wrote:The visible/invisible dichotomy is necessary since you could be assuming that there is no soul in Heaven,( known to God only), saved with the baptism of desire and without the baptism of water , since this case is visible and so would be an exception to the dogma.

I am asserting, as a theological opinion, that everyone in Heaven will have the character of sacramental Baptism. No exceptions whatsoever. If such is, indeed, the Truth, then the whole Baptism of Desire and/or Baptism of Blood issue is moot. Do you agree?

by Lionel A Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:37 am

I am asserting, as a theological opinion, that everyone in Heaven will have the character of sacramental Baptism. No exceptions whatsoever.
Yes all who are in Heaven one assumes are with the baptism of water and Catholic Faith.

If such is, indeed, the Truth, then the whole Baptism of Desire and/or Baptism of Blood issue is moot. Do you agree?.

The baptism of desire and baptism of blood are not exceptions or an issue.

by **Admin** Mon Mar 11, 2013 3:08 pm

Okay, we agree (I hope!). However, what you assume, I assert. If everyone in Paradise, without any exceptions whatsoever, has the character of sacramental Baptism, then everyone in Heaven will, before the end of this life, have been joined to the Church of Jesus Christ, which is the Catholic Church.

by Lionel A Tue Mar 12, 2013 4:29 am

Okay, we agree (I hope!). However, what you assume, I assert. If everyone in Paradise, without any exceptions whatsoever, has the character of sacramental Baptism, then everyone in Heaven will, before the end of this life, have been joined to the Church of Jesus Christ, which is the Catholic Church..

We have agreed that all need Catholic Faith and the baptism of water for salvation in 2013 and there are no known exceptions, known or unknown.

The issue is the baptism of desire. Do you agree that it is invisible to us and so not an exception to the dogma.

So even if there is someone in Heaven with the baptism of desire it would not be an exception to every one in 2013 needing to convert into the Church. ?

by **Admin** Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:47 am

Lionel,

I assert that there are no exceptions -- absolutely, positively none -- that there is NO ONE in the Kingdom of Heaven who lacks the character of sacramental Baptism, whether they desired it or not (e.g., infants).

Why is this such a difficult concept to understand?

by Lionel A Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:29 am

I assert that there are no exceptions -- absolutely, positively none -- that there is NO ONE in the Kingdom of Heaven who lacks the character of sacramental Baptism,

Is the baptism of desire an exception ?

by Lionel A Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:32 am

I assert that there are no exceptions -- absolutely, positively none -- that there is NO ONE in the Kingdom of Heaven who lacks the character of sacramental Baptism,

I assert that there are no exceptions even if in Heaven there is someone saved without the baptism of water and with the baptism of desire it is not an exception.

by **Admin** Tue Mar 12, 2013 11:47 am

Lionel A wrote:
I assert that there are no exceptions -- absolutely, positively none -- that there is NO ONE in the Kingdom of Heaven who lacks the character of sacramental Baptism,

Is the baptism of desire an exception ?

No, absolutely not. Why would it be?

by Lionel A Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:09 pm

So even if there was a baptism of desire case in Heaven it would not be an exception ?

by Sponsored content

The Fifth Lateran Council

The Fifth Lateran Council

Subjection to the Roman pontiff is necessary for salvation

Re: The Fifth Lateran Council

In agreement with your theology

Re: The Fifth Lateran Council

That is, to go to Heaven, one must be a visible member of the Catholic Church.

Re: The Fifth Lateran Council

We have read on the SBC website of persons who have died and who have returned to be baptized with water. They were not condemned as the others.

Re: The Fifth Lateran Council

We agree that there are no exceptions.Known or unknown.

Re: The Fifth Lateran Council

I also believe as a theological opinion that there are only Catholics in Heaven

Re: The Fifth Lateran Council

Confusion arises when we assume that the baptism of desire is not invisible but visible to all of us and so is an exception.

Re: The Fifth Lateran Council

So if there is someone in Heaven without the baptism of water it will not be an exception or issue.

Re: The Fifth Lateran Council

The baptism of desire and baptism of blood are not exceptions or an issue.

Re: The Fifth Lateran Council

The issue is the baptism of desire. Do you agree that it is invisible to us and so not an exception to the dogma

Re: The Fifth Lateran Council

Is the baptism of desire an exception ?

If in Heaven there is someone saved without the baptism of water and with the baptism of desire it is not an exception.

Re: The Fifth Lateran Council

Re: The Fifth Lateran Council

Re: The Fifth Lateran Council