Salvation of Unbaptized

[gorman64]

LilyM:

Not you nor anyone can possibly rightly claim with any certainty that infants or anyone lacks sufficient use of reason to make justifying acts

LilyM:

The Church can and does make these claims however…She also requires that you submit your intellect to those claims:

Do you accept that the Church in her extraordinary and ordinary magisterium can make such judgments?

I think it is de fide that infants cannot have actual faith. See Denz. 869:

Trent Canons on the Sacrament of Baptism Can. 13. If anyone shall say that infants, because they have not actual faith, after having received baptism are not to be numbered among the faithful, and therefore, when they have reached the years of discretion, are to be rebaptised, or that it is better that their baptism be omitted than that they, while not believing, by their own act be baptized in the faith of the Church alone: let him be anathema.

The Council of Trent, confirmed by the Pope , issued the above anathema. Do you think you are free to reject or dismiss it?

- or else that others cannot make those justifying acts on behalf of the child as they do at baptism.

First of all, a sponsor does not make a justifying act for the baptised infant…the infant is being baptised. It is the sacrament itself that washes away the original sin…not the answers made on behalf of the infant by the sponsers.

One cannot make a justifying act for another. If you have some source that says they can…then please produce it.

And no, you cannot be your own source.

Gorman

 

[MTD]

IF I said he owed us salvation that would be a different story, it would indeed be presumption and so one. That’s not what I’m saying, not nearly.

That’s the most I’ve ever said on the subject - I never said we’re owed salvation, merely that we’re owed an option or choice in regards to our eternal destination. That’s not stretching into presumption of salvation!

Isn’t saying that God owes us the choice of regaining the supernatural life the same as saying that God owes us the Redemption? How can you say that God owes us the choice of making use of the Redemption if He didn’t even owe us the Redemption in the first place? Isn’t that a contradiction?

Maria

 

[LilyM]

---

Actually no—God does not owe us even forgiveness. He could just as well terminate us with the blink of an eye. He forgives --because he wants to forgive.

By you saying God “owes” us—you have put Him in our debt—He has become our subject—who now has an obligation to provide us with options and/or a say in our salvation.

You have put us above God.

And yet you still walk out of that confessional assuming you’re forgiven, no??? You go on to receive communion at your next mass for instance (assuming you haven’t mortally sinned since), no? Then you’ve indeed told God when and where to forgive you - how to do his job - although by implication. And acted on the assumption that he’s done so.

Besides which - he saves whoever he wants to save because he wants to save 'em! And he’s said that he desires the salvation of all, just as he desires to forgive all.

Look, when I use the word ‘owe’ I don’t seriously mean that he’s under any obligation to us, rather that it is consistent with his known attributes of omnibenevolence, omnipotence and mercy as well as faithfulness.

 

[jmcrae]

Isn’t saying that God owes us the choice of regaining the supernatural life the same as saying that God owes us the Redemption? How can you say that God owes us the choice of making use of the Redemption if He didn’t even owe us the Redemption in the first place? Isn’t that a contradiction?

Maria

Obviously God doesn’t “owe” anybody anything.

However, if God in His mercy freely gives those who never had a choice during their lives a free choice to make at the moment of death, this is no guarantee that they will all make the wisest choice. Indeed, they might all freely choose to go to Hell - we simply have no way of knowing.

 

[Walking_Home]

And yet you still walk out of that confessional assuming you’re forgiven, no??? You go on to receive communion at your next mass for instance (assuming you haven’t mortally sinned since), no? Then you’ve indeed told God when and where to forgive you - how to do his job - although by implication. And acted on the assumption that he’s done so.

Besides which - he saves whoever he wants to save because he wants to save 'em! And he’s said that he desires the salvation of all, just as he desires to forgive all.

Look, when I use the word ‘owe’ I don’t seriously mean that he’s under any obligation to us, rather that it is consistent with his known attributes of omnibenevolence, omnipotence and mercy as well as faithfulness.

---

Wrong again----He told us how to seek forgiveness—we follow what He said. He is doing His job—whether we show up or not.

Yes he desires the salvation of all—but He does not save us without us. We co-operate with Him in this life —for the next.

You didn’t seriously mean God owed us–you said it twice.

Again—you are putting God on the spot–because of His attributes.

 

[LilyM]

LilyM:

The Church can and does make these claims however…She also requires that you submit your intellect to those claims:

Do you accept that the Church in her extraordinary and ordinary magisterium can make such judgments?

Woah woah woah - please reread that canon - it’s saying that infants CAN be validly baptised EVEN THOUGH they lack actual faith. It’s the belief that infant baptism is ineffectual that is being anathematised here.

So the intellectual capabilities or actual faith of an infant is actually irrelevant in regard to the baptism of said infant. Implies that whatever capabilities they may have are possibly (note carefully that I said possibly) sufficient for baptism even by desire alone.

First of all, a sponsor does not make a justifying act for the baptised infant…the infant is being baptised. It is the sacrament itself that washes away the original sin…not the answers made on behalf of the infant by the sponsers.

But what IS ‘the sacrament itself’? Certainly no-one is baptised by the mere following of the form of baptism alone. Otherwise every actor who’s ever played Jesus and every child actor who’s ever played in a baptism scene in a movie has been unintentionally baptised.

And the formal ceremony is not always required either - hence the notions of baptism of blood and desire when it is impossible to perform the actual ritual.

So the minister of baptism - either the parent or the priest or paramedic who’s baptising that child - forms the intention that makes the ceremony sacramental, yes?

I trust the current Catechism is good enough a source on this, if not when it states that we can hope for salvation for unbaptised babies :

1256 *In case of necessity, anyone, even a non-baptized person, with the required intention, can baptize58 , by using the Trinitarian baptismal formula. **The intention required is to will to do what the Church does when she baptizes. **The Church finds the reason for this possibility in the universal saving will of God and the necessity of Baptism for salvation.59 *

So why cannot an angel or saint or Christ or God the Father himself, if any of these wish the child to be cleansed of their original sin, form the same intent? And is the ceremony itself necessary if the requisite intent is there? We know that the ritual of Confession isn’t if Perfect Contrition and intent to confess are present.

There seems to be an awful lot that we’re uncertain of, and that’s why the Catechism allows us to hope!

 

[LilyM]

---

Wrong again----He told us how to seek forgiveness—we follow what He said. He is doing His job—whether we show up or not.

Yes he desires the salvation of all—but He does not save us without us. We co-operate with Him in this life —for the next.

You didn’t seriously mean God owed us–you said it twice.

Again—you are putting God on the spot–because of His attributes.

He didn’t say we needed to confess to a priest, although he gave power to forgive and retain sins to priests.

And we know that if our confession is insincere - for example we deliberately withhold a mortal sin - then even His promise is invalid, and the words of absolution the priest pronounces are ineffective. He never directly said ANYTHING about that!

I’m not putting God on any spot - there are many places in the Bible where he declares and shows himself and is declared by others to be unchanging and steadfast in his attributes of love and mercy.

 

[paramedicgirl]

And so are you, in a sense, every time you go to Confession. You think, if you don’t say and Church Teaching doesn’t say, that He owes you forgiveness because you’ve contritely and honestly confessed your sins to a priest.

You certainly assume to a greater or lesser degree that he has forgiven you, no? For example, that you’re worthy of receiving communion? Isn’t that telling him that he ‘owes’ you something? Namely forgiveness and the state of grace?

Revealed truth - as expressed in the current Catechism and the teaching of our present Holy Father and his predecessor, and many others besides - is that there IS hope for salvation for the unbaptised.

And it is certainly scriptural (and hence also revealed truth) that God desires heaven for all His children, whom he cherishes as a mother her child as Isaiah says.

Lily, you are the first person I have ever head say that God owes us anything. It seems so presumptuous to me, to think that Almighty God, by whose grace we live and breathe, would ever owe us anything,. We are His creatures, and we are nothing without Him. It never would have dawned on me in a million years to think that God owed me the grace He freely gives when I attend the Sacrament of Confession.

 

[Walking_Home]

He didn’t say we needed to confess to a priest, although he gave power to forgive and retain sins to priests.

And we know that if our confession is insincere - for example we deliberately withhold a mortal sin - then even His promise is invalid, and the words of absolution the priest pronounces are ineffective. He never directly said ANYTHING about that!

I’m not putting God on any spot - there are many places in the Bible where he declares and shows himself and is declared by others to be unchanging and steadfast in his attributes of love and mercy.

---

I am sure the protestants will be happy to hear that.

 

[LilyM]

Lily, you are the first person I have ever head say that God owes us anything. It seems so presumptuous to me, to think that Almighty God, by whose grace we live and breathe, would ever owe us anything,. We are His creatures, and we are nothing without Him. It never would have dawned on me in a million years to think that God owed me the grace He freely gives when I attend the Sacrament of Confession.

As I said, ‘owes’ is too strong a word for it really. I do tend towards dramatic exaggeration sometimes, and apologise for any offence I may have caused.

You know, I just keep thinking of the Bible passages about ‘God is faithful to his word’, ‘God is faithful to his promises’ ‘His faithful love endures forever’. And God’s faithfulness is infinite, more dependable than the most reliable machine you could hope to invent.

So when he says he desires the salvation of all, when he says he will give to whoever asks and open the door to whoever knocks, when he says he provides for us more than the sparrows and the flowers in the field, and that he remembers us even if our own mothers forget us …

can’t help but think that doesn’t square with not giving everyone a chance at salvation.

And when you think of it, we call our relationship with God the new Covenant, yes? The old covenant (between God and Abraham) definitely involved promises on God’s side (for land and descendants for Abraham) as well as on Abraham’s. And Moses called God out on it when he threatened to destroy the Israelites.

Did it all of a sudden become a completely one-sided bargain in the New Testament? I’m not so sure … Jesus spells out, for example, for the rich young man ‘if you would have eternal life … keep the commandments’. Sounds a bit like a bargain to me.

 

[paramedicgirl]

As I said, ‘owes’ is too strong a word for it really. I do tend towards dramatic exaggeration sometimes, and apologise for any offence I may have caused.

You know, I just keep thinking of the Bible passages about ‘God is faithful to his word’, ‘God is faithful to his promises’ ‘His faithful love endures forever’. And God’s faithfulness is infinite, more dependable than the most reliable machine you could hope to invent.

So when he says he desires the salvation of all, when he says he will give to whoever asks and open the door to whoever knocks, when he says he provides for us more than the sparrows and the flowers in the field, and that he remembers us even if our own mothers forget us …

can’t help but think that doesn’t square with not giving everyone a chance at salvation.

But the Church is a guarantee of salvation only for those who obey it. We cannot expect salvation to be given freely if we do not study our religion and practice it. We must *earn *our salvation. It is presumptuous to expect otherwise.

 

[LilyM]

But the Church is a guarantee of salvation only for those who obey it. We cannot expect salvation to be given freely if we do not study our religion and practice it. We must *earn *our salvation. It is presumptuous to expect otherwise.

Oh, no disputing that. Of course there are those who through no fault of their own lack any opportunity to study or practice our Catholic faith … yet God never claims to love these less or desire their salvation less

 

[Walking_Home]

I think it is part of our fallen human nature—to want more. God created the universe and us. God the Son died for us. He left us the Church and the sacraments—a way to salvation.

Yet—we want more. We say God —with all your mercy–how can these infants–not be in heaven. You are the merciful God after all—do something.

 

[LilyM]

I think it is part of our fallen human nature—to want more. God created the universe and us. God the Son died for us. He left us the Church and the sacraments—a way to salvation.

Yet—we want more. We say God —with all your mercy–how can these infants–not be in heaven. You are the merciful God after all—do something.

How can you say he left the Church and the sacraments - this great way of salvation that it is - to those who have never heard of the Church or the sacraments though??? Or never had any option to make use of them, through no choice or doing of their own???

I’m not wanting more opportunities for myself or those of us who DO know of them and are thus bound to make use of them. I’m wanting the same opportunity for those who don’t.

 

[paramedicgirl]

Oh, no disputing that. Of course there are those who through no fault of their own lack any opportunity to study or practice our Catholic faith … yet God never claims to love these less or desire their salvation less

I think we are are all familiar with the teaching of the Church on that: That one who remains outside the Church through no grave fault of their own, not knowing it is the true Church, can be saved by making means of the grace which God gives them.

I think, in reading over your posts, that this is what you are maintaining that God provides for unbaptized infants. The issue is, though, that baptism is required to enter heaven. We have not had any success reconciling this teaching with the state of the unbaptized.

 

[LilyM]

I think we are are all familiar with the teaching of the Church on that: That one who remains outside the Church through no grave fault of their own, not knowing it is the true Church, can be saved by making means of the grace which God gives them.

I think, in reading over your posts, that this is what you are maintaining that God provides for unbaptized infants. The issue is, though, that baptism is required to enter heaven. We have not had any success reconciling this teaching with the state of the unbaptized.

Hence the uncertainty. And that would be why the Church says, and I concur, that we can’t know their fate but can always hope :yup:

I think I’ll leave it at that, or I’ll cogitate myself into a brain meltdown :hypno:

 

[The_Iambic_Pen]

We must *earn *our salvation.

Let us hope the anti-Catholic Protestants don’t get a hold of statements like this…

 

[paramedicgirl]

Let us hope the anti-Catholic Protestants don’t get a hold of statements like this…

Are you saying that salvation is a free gift that we can expect at the end of our lives? I believe the anit-Catholic protestants might agree with that.

 

[InLight247]

Why not forget what “the protestants” say and follow the teaching of the Church? The Catholic Church is the Mystical Body of Christ.

I completely agree Catholic Church is the mystical body of Christ and Catholic Church is the one true Church. And this Church should not be divided.

But don’t you agree Protestants are still our brothers and sisters in Christ? Luther created his own denomination from this true Church. They lost many precious traditions and dogma.They are like a son strayed, but still belong to the family. I don’t think they have no salvation because they are not Catholic.

I don’t think you’ve been reading this thread very carefully. I don’t believe anyone has really disputed this…the issue is those who cannot make justifying acts because they lack the use of reason.

I did not read the thread word by word, but I do get the main point.I am giving the example to explain that even a person who is able to reason but did not choose Jesus and get baptized, because our God is so merciful, they still may have a last chance to be saved. The baptism of infant is a different story. If they are not baptized and died, they would be too young to make any choice at the last moment. Therefore, it is important for infants to be baptized so their original sins are wiped out.

I agree that we do not know with absolute certitude the disposition of another’s soul. However we can know with moral certitude. We must avoid the trap of saying that because we do not have absolute certitude we do not have certitude. Or because there are cases we cannot know about, that we can never know about any cases at all.

I agree with this.
My point is since only God can judge a person’s soul, and God wants all to be saved, what we ought to do is to live a life pleasing to God, and do our best to lead others to the truth. As for the fate of non-baptized, let’s be hopeful for them and leave the final result into God’s hands.

God bless!

 

[The_Iambic_Pen]

Are you saying that salvation is a free gift that we can expect at the end of our lives? I believe the anit-Catholic protestants might agree with that.

I am just saying the word “earn” could imply, to an outside observer, that Catholics believe they earn their salvation by their own effort. This is not true, of course, and I don’t think you believe this.

God bless!