|
Post by rgrove on May 6, 2005 13:25:43 GMT -5
Interesting question: If you attempt to baptise someone that is of age who does not want to be baptised, would it be effective? From a credobaptist perspective Baptism is an outward sign of a already existing inward reality of having been born again (regeneration) where the individual now trusts in Christ for his salvation. If someone does not want to be baptised, this would seem to indicate a serious problem with their faith and they need a) more discipleship or b) a more serious examination by the elders of the church. Such an attitude towards the desires of one's Lord and Savior are not consistent with the profession "Jesus is Lord". I don't see this as an option for an RC catechumen, though. The CCC is fairly clear about the issue in the section on "Necessity of Baptism" here: www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a1.htm#VIYours In Christ, Ron
|
|
|
Post by rgrove on May 10, 2005 19:12:03 GMT -5
Here is the definition of Papal Infallability from Vatican I: www.vaxxine.com/pjm/vaticanI.htm9. Therefore, faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian faith, to the glory of God our savior, for the exaltation of the Catholic religion and for the salvation of the Christian people, with the approval of the Sacred Council, we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman Pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church, irreformable.
So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema. The Bishop of Rome does not need anyone's permission to declare dogma, but they aren't that arbitrary in practice. Vatican II also teaches these teachings must also be generally recognized as official teaching in the church. Please keep in mind that if you knowingly reject this teaching you are anathema. Vatican II only gets the "ignorant" separated brethren off the hook. And nothing gets an ex-Catholic like myself off the hook. I knew what I was rejecting when I rejected it. So it doesn't matter that I trust in Christ for my eternal salvation. I'm still damned according to RCC dogma unless I return to the RCC. Yours In Christ, Ron
|
|