How do you compel someone to be Christian?

[SyCarl]

This is a canon from the Council of Trent. Is this still binding, and if so how are people to be compelled to live Christian lives?

CANON XIV.-If any one saith, that those who have been thus baptized when children, are, when they have grown up, to be asked whether they will ratify what their sponsors promised in their names when they were baptized; and that, in case they answer that they will not, they are to be left to their own will; and are not to be compelled meanwhile to a Christian life by any other penalty, save that they be excluded from the participation of the Eucharist, and of the other sacraments, until they repent; let him be anathema.
history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/trentall.html

 

[HashemEchad]

This is a canon from the Council of Trent. Is this still binding, and if so how are people to be compelled to live Christian lives?

That’s a good question!

I do know that in Catholicism, baptism has the effect of being a permanent sacrament, one that, once performed, cannot be removed. Maybe they are referring to the permanence of the sacrament.

 

[kage_ar]

Someone once said “Let your light so shine before men that they will see your good works and glorify my Father, who is in Heaven”.

 

[ralphinal]

This is a new one on me. At first I thought that it refers to those who refuse Confirmation. Baptism is a requirement for all other sacraments, Confirmaiton is for two other ones. As noted, Baptism leaves a permanent mark on the Souk and cannot be undone. Same with Confirmation.

However, it seems more to do with the concept of a re-baptism type event, where they are questioning those who have been Baptised. The penalty is for the one asking the quesiton, not the one leaving the faith. The only way that I can think to compell someone is to withhold sacraments until they repent.

I will have to seek other (name removed by moderator)ut. I’ll get back to you on this.

 

[ralphinal]

This is a canon from the Council of Trent. Is this still binding, and if so how are people to be compelled to live Christian lives?

And it went click.

I hope that I am reading this correctly. If I am, I think that this is it:

If anyone teaches that the adults that were baptised as children should be questioned about their faith, and they say “not interested,” and are to be left alone and no removed from the sacraments, they are an anathema.

In other words, if they say they want out, they are out.

I might be wrong, though. I am not used to that language.

 

[Pug]

This is a canon from the Council of Trent. Is this still binding, and if so how are people to be compelled to live Christian lives?

To my knowledge it ought to still be binding. In regard to what it means, that I am not sure. I find these negative statements frustrating, and prefer positive statements in combination with negative statements. Other portions of Trent come with both positive and negative, but not that session. The canons on baptism are not directly preceded by paragraphs of explanation. It occurs to me that they may mean that penalties besides barring from the sacraments are possible. Perhaps they mean penalties like not being buried in a certain cemetery or losing monies that the Church is paying them (a benefice or Church position), or no longer being allowed to be a cleric or to teach doctrine in Catholic schools.

I do know that the Church does mean that baptism isn’t something that waits to be ratified until the person is older. Baptism just is. It happened. You can’t unbaptize yourself.

Sometimes it helps to know the controversies of the time. Then, knowing what they were responding to, one can better grasp the extent of what they meant. History is hardly my field, though.