Masz jakieś dowody ku temu -czy to tylko Twoje prywatne mniemanie , dlatego ,ze siedzisz po uszy u obłudników Bractwa Św.Piusa X-go , którzy zdradzili ideały Tradycji i swojego założyciela abp.Lefevbre ( nie dotyczy jedynego prawdziwego biskupa z Bractwa Św. Piusa X-go -bp. Williamsona , którego bezpodstawnie i bezprawnie obłudnicy i pyszałki z Bractwa Św .Piusa X-go " demokratycznie " wyrzucili ze swojego grona ) ???
Jedyna " chorobą jaka nawiedziła ks .Michała Woźnickiego jest walka i pragnienie o przywrócenie prawdziwej Mszy Św.w rycie rzymskim nie tylko w swoim otoczeniu ,ale w każdym kościele katolickim . Wszyscy doskonale wiemy jak samotnie walczył z posoborowymi faryzeuszami i wilkami w owczych skórach pseudo -zakonnikami Salezjanami i jakich używali metod ,aby tego bogobojnego kapłana unicestwić o wyrzucić na bruk !
Jeśli rzuciłaś oskarżenie nie wskazując winy i dowodów na Twoje mniemania -to znaczy , że złamałaś8-me Przykazanie Boże . Wiec ,że jak napisano ;" kto łamie jedno z tych Przykazań lamie wszystkie " ! zatem internauci czekają na te " dowody " . dowody "

Pan jest heretykiem, a nie katolikiem.
Heretycy i moderniści sprzeciwiają się prawdzie, tak jak sprzeciwiają się Temu, który jest Prawdą (J 14:6)

List św. Pawła do Tytusa 3:10-11„Heretyka po pierwszym i drugim upomnieniu unikaj; Wiedząc, że taki człowiek jest przewrotny i grzeszy, i sam siebie osądza.”

Księga Koheleta 1:15
„Przewrótni z ciężkością bywają naprawieni, a głupich jest poczet nieprzeliczony.”

Drugi List św. Pawła do Tesaloniczan 2:10-11„Wśród całego zwodzenia nieprawości wobec tych, którzy giną, ponieważ nie przyjęli miłości prawdy, by zostali zbawieni. Dlatego Bóg zsyła im silne omamienie, tak że uwierzą kłamstwu..”

Dobry Łotr i Św. Niewiniątka

Pope Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra: “Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church. And since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,’ as the Truth says, ‘enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]. The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.”

This means that Our Lord Jesus Christ’s declaration that no man can be saved without being born again of water and the Holy Ghost is a literal dogma of the Catholic Faith.

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Can. 2 on the Sacrament of Baptism, Sess. 7, 1547, ex cathedra: “If anyone shall say that real and natural water is not necessary for baptism, and on that account those words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit’ [John 3:5], are distorted into some sort of metaphor: let him be anathema.”

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Can. 5 on the Sacrament of Baptism, Sess. 7, 1547, ex cathedra: “If anyone says that baptism [the sacrament] is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.”

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, On Original Sin, Session V, ex cathedra: “By one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death... so that in them there may be washed away by regeneration, what they have contracted by generation, ‘For unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God [John 3:5].”

Pope St. Zosimus, The Council of Carthage XVI, on Original Sin and Grace: “For when the Lord says: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he shall not enter into the kingdom of God’ [John 3:5], what Catholic will doubt that he will be a partner of the devil who has not deserved to be a coheir of Christ. For he who lacks the right part will without doubt run into the left.”

Pope Gregory IX, Cum, sicut ex, July 8, 1241, to Sigurd of Nidaros:
“Since as we have learned from your report, it sometimes happens because of scarcity of water, that infants of your lands are baptized in beer, we reply to you in the tenor of those present that, since according to evangelical doctrine it is necessary ‘to be reborn from water and the Holy Spirit’ (Jn. 3:5) they are not to be considered rightly baptized who are baptized in beer.”

Believe Dogma as it was once declared

There is only one way to believe dogma: as holy mother Church has once declared.

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Sess. 3, Chap. 2 on Revelation, 1870, ex cathedra: “Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be a recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding.”

This definition of the First Vatican Council is critically important for dogmatic purity, because the primary way the Devil attempts to corrupt Christ’s doctrines is by getting men to recede (move away) from the Church’s dogmas as they were once declared. There is no meaning of a dogma other than what the words themselves state and declare, so the Devil tries to get men to “understand” and “interpret” these words in a way that is different from how holy mother Church has declared them.

Many of us have dealt with people who have attempted to explain away the clear meaning of the definitions on Outside the Church There is No Salvation by saying, “you must understand them.” What they really mean is that you must understand them in a way different from what the words themselves state and declare. And this is precisely what the First Vatican Council condemns. It condemns their moving away from the understanding of a dogma which holy mother Church has once declared to a different meaning, under the specious (false) name of a “deeper understanding.”

Besides those who argue that we must “understand” dogmas in a different way than what the words themselves state and declare, there are those who, when presented with the dogmatic definitions on Outside the Church There is No Salvation, say, “that is your interpretation.” They belittle the words of a dogmatic formula to nothing other than one’s private interpretation. And this also is heresy.

Pope St. Pius X, Lamentabile, The Errors of the Modernists, July 3, 1907, #22:
“The dogmas which the Church professes as revealed are not truths fallen from heaven, but they are a kind of interpretation of religious facts, which the human mind by a laborious effort prepared for itself.”- Condemned

Pope St. Pius X, Lamentabile, The Errors of the Modernists, July 3, 1907, #54:
“The dogmas, the sacraments, the hierarchy, as far as pertains both to the notion and to the reality, are nothing but interpretations and the evolution of Christian intelligence, which have increased and perfected the little germ latent in the Gospel.”- Condemned

Dogmas of the faith, like Outside the Church There is No Salvation, are truths fallen from heaven; they are not interpretations. To accuse one who adheres faithfully to these truths fallen from heaven of engaging in “private interpretation” is to speak heresy.

The very point of a dogmatic DEFINITION is to DEFINE precisely and exactly what the Church means by the very words of the formula. If it does not do this by those very words in the formula or document (as the Modernists say) then it has failed in its primary purpose – to define – and was pointless and worthless.

Anyone who says that we must interpret or understand the meaning of a dogmatic definition, in a way which contradicts its actual wording, is denying the whole point of the Chair of Peter, Papal Infallibility and dogmatic definitions. He is asserting that dogmatic definitions are pointless, worthless and foolish and that the Church is pointless, worthless and foolish for making such a definition.

Also, those who insist that infallible DEFINITIONS must be interpreted by non-infallible statements (e.g., from theologians, catechisms, etc.) are denying the whole purpose of the Chair of Peter. They are subordinating the dogmatic teaching of the Chair of Peter (truths from heaven) to the re-evaluation of fallible human documents, thereby inverting their authority, perverting their integrity and denying their purpose.

Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (#7), Aug. 15, 1832: “… nothing of the things appointed ought to be diminished; nothing changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved both as regards expression and meaning.”

Thus, there is no “strict” or “loose” interpretation of Outside the Church There is No Salvation, as the liberal heretics like to emphasize; there is only what the Church has once declared.

Other Popes on Outside the Church There is No Salvation

In addition to the ex cathedra (from the Chair of Peter) proclamations of the popes, a Catholic must also believe what is taught by the Catholic Church as divinely revealed in her Ordinary and Universal Magisterium (Magisterium = the teaching authority of the Church).

Pope Pius IX, Vatican I, Sess. III, Chap. 3, ex cathedra: “Further, by divine and Catholic faith, all those things must be believed which are contained in the written word of God and in tradition, and those which are proposed by the Church, either in a solemn pronouncement or in her ordinary and universal teaching power, to be believed as divinely revealed.”

The teaching of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium consists of those doctrines which popes, by their common and universal teaching, propose to be believed as divinely revealed. For instance, in their common and universal teaching, approximately 10 popes have denounced the heretical concept of liberty of conscience and worship as contrary to revelation. A Catholic cannot reject that teaching. The teaching of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium can never contradict the teaching of the Chair of Peter (the dogmatic definitions), of course, since both are infallible. Thus, the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium does not actually have to be considered at all in regard to Outside the Church There is No Salvation, because this dogma has been defined from the Chair of Peter and nothing in the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium can possibly contradict the Chair of Peter. So beware of those heretics who try to find ways to deny the Church’s dogmatic teaching on Outside the Church There is No Salvation by calling fallible, non-magisterial statements which contradict this dogma, part of the “Ordinary and Universal Magisterium,” when they aren’t. This is a clever ploy of the heretics.

But the following quotations from many popes are reaffirmations of the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation. These teachings of the popes are part of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium – and are therefore infallible – since they reiterate the universal teaching of the Chair of St. Peter on the Catholic dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation.

Pope St. Gregory the Great, quoted in Summo Iugiter Studio, 590-604:
“The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved.”

Pope Innocent III, Eius exemplo, Dec. 18, 1208:
“By the heart we believe and by the mouth we confess the one Church, not of heretics, but the Holy Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church outside of which we believe that no one is saved.”

Pope Clement VI, Super quibusdam, Sept. 20, 1351:
“In the second place, we ask whether you and the Armenians obedient to you believe that no man of the wayfarers outside the faith of this Church, and outside the obedience to the Pope of Rome, can finally be saved.”

Pope St. Pius V, Bull excommunicating the heretic Queen Elizabeth of England, Feb. 25, 1570: “The sovereign jurisdiction of the one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside of which there is no salvation, has been given by Him [Jesus Christ], unto Whom all power in Heaven and on Earth is given, the King who reigns on high, but to one person on the face of the Earth, to Peter, prince of the Apostles... If any shall contravene this Our decree, we bind them with the same bond of anathema.”

Pope Leo XII, Ubi Primum (# 14), May 5, 1824:
“It is impossible for the most true God, who is Truth itself, the best, the wisest Provider, and the Rewarder of good men, to approve all sects who profess false teachings which are often inconsistent with one another and contradictory, and to confer eternal rewards on their members… by divine faith we hold one Lord, one faith, one baptism… This is why we profess that there is no salvation outside the Church.”

Pope Leo XII, Quod hoc ineunte (# 8), May 24, 1824: “We address all of you who are still removed from the true Church and the road to salvation. In this universal rejoicing, one thing is lacking: that having been called by the inspiration of the Heavenly Spirit and having broken every decisive snare, you might sincerely agree with the mother Church, outside of whose teachings there is no salvation.”

Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (# 13), Aug. 15, 1832: “With the admonition of the apostle, that ‘there is one God, one faith, one baptism’ (Eph. 4:5), may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that ‘those who are not with Christ are against Him,’ (Lk. 11:23) and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore, ‘without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate (Athanasian Creed).”

Pope Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio (# 2), May 27, 1832:
“Finally some of these misguided people attempt to persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only in the Catholic religion, but that even heretics may attain eternal life.”

Pope Pius IX, Ubi primum (# 10), June 17, 1847: “For ‘there is one universal Church outside of which no one at all is saved; it contains regular and secular prelates along with those under their jurisdiction, who all profess one Lord, one faith and one baptism.”

Pope Pius IX, Nostis et Nobiscum (# 10), Dec. 8, 1849: “In particular, ensure that the faithful are deeply and thoroughly convinced of the truth of the doctrine that the Catholic faith is necessary for attaining salvation. (This doctrine, received from Christ and emphasized by the Fathers and Councils, is also contained in the formulae of the profession of faith used by Latin, Greek and Oriental Catholics).”

Pope Pius IX, Syllabus of Modern Errors, Dec. 8, 1864 - Proposition 16: “Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation, and arrive at eternal salvation.”[xxxiii] – Condemned

Pope Leo XIII, Tametsi futura prospicientibus (# 7), Nov. 1, 1900: “Christ is man’s ‘Way’; the Church also is his ‘Way’… Hence all who would find salvation apart from the Church, are led astray and strive in vain.”

Pope St. Pius X, Iucunda sane (# 9), March 12, 1904: “Yet at the same time We cannot but remind all, great and small, as Pope St. Gregory did, of the absolute necessity of having recourse to this Church in order to have eternal salvation…”

Pope St. Pius X, Editae saepe (# 29), May 26, 1910: “The Church alone possesses together with her magisterium the power of governing and sanctifying human society. Through her ministers and servants (each in his own station and office), she confers on mankind suitable and necessary means of salvation.”

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos (# 11), Jan. 6, 1928: “The Catholic Church is alone in keeping the true worship. This is the fount of truth, this is the house of faith, this is the temple of God: if any man enter not here, or if any man go forth from it, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation.”

The Sacrament of Baptism is the only Way into the Church

The Catholic Church has always taught that receiving the Sacrament of Baptism is the only way into Christ’s Church, outside of which there is no salvation.

Pope Julius III, Council of Trent, On the Sacraments of Baptism and Penance, Sess. 14, Chap. 2, ex cathedra: “But in fact this sacrament [Penance] is seen to differ in many respects from baptism. For, apart from the fact that the matter and form, by which the essence of a sacrament is constituted, are totally distinct, there is certainly no doubt that the minister of baptism need not be a judge, since the Church exercises judgment on no one who has not previously entered it by the gate of baptism. For what have I to do with those who are without (1 Cor. 5:12), says the Apostle. It is otherwise with those of the household of the faith, whom Christ the Lord by the laver of baptism has once made ‘members of his own body’ (1 Cor. 12:13).”

This definition is particularly significant because it proves that only through water baptism is one incorporated into the Body of the Church. The significance of this will become clearer in the later sections where it is proven that Body membership is necessary for salvation.

Pope Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra: “Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church. And since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,’ as the Truth says, ‘enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]. The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.”

Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis (# 22), June 29, 1943: “Actually only those are to be numbered among the members of the Church who have received the laver of regeneration [water baptism] and profess the true faith.”

Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis (# 27), June 29, 1943: “He (Christ) also determined that through Baptism (cf. Jn. 3:5) those who should believe would be incorporated in the Body of the Church.”

Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei (# 43), Nov. 20, 1947: “In the same way, actually that baptism is the distinctive mark of all Christians, and serves to differentiate them from those who have not been cleansed in this purifying stream and consequently are not members of Christ, the sacrament of holy orders sets the priest apart from the rest of the faithful who have not received this consecration.”

The One Church of the Faithful

Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, Constitution 1, 1215, ex cathedra: “THERE IS INDEED ONE UNIVERSAL CHURCH OF THE FAITHFUL, outside of which nobody at all is saved, in which Jesus Christ is both priest and sacrifice.”

The first dogmatic definition from the Chair of Peter on Outside the Church There is No Salvation (from Pope Innocent III) taught that the Catholic Church is the one Church “of the faithful,” outside of which no one at all is saved. But who are “the faithful”? Can one who has not been baptized be considered part of “the faithful”? If we look to Catholic Tradition, the answer is a resounding “no.”

As many of you know, the Catholic Mass is divided into two parts: the Mass of the Catechumens (those preparing to be baptized) and the Mass of the Faithful (those baptized).

In the early Church, the unbaptized catechumens (i.e., those who had not received the Sacrament of Baptism) had to leave after the Mass of the catechumens, when the faithful professed the Creed. The unbaptized were not allowed to stay for the Mass of the faithful, because it is only by receiving the Sacrament of Baptism that one becomes one of the faithful. This is the teaching of Tradition.

Casimir Kucharek, The Byzantine-Slav Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom:
“In Canon 19 of the Synod of Laodicea (A.D. 343-381), for example, we read: ‘After the sermons of the bishops, the prayer for the catechumens is to be said by itself first; when the catechumens have gone out, the prayer for those who are doing penance; and after these… there should then be offered the three prayers of the faithful…’”

Here we see the 4th century Synod of Laodicea affirming the tradition that unbaptized catechumens were to depart from the Liturgy before the Mass of the Faithful began. And this distinction between the Mass of the Catechumens and the Mass of the Faithful was a staple in the ancient rites of the Catholic Church. Hence, Fr. Casimir Kucharek, in his large work on the Byzantine-Slav Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, says that the Liturgy of the Catechumens is “present in all Rites…” In other words, all of the ancient Catholic rites testified to the fact that no unbaptized person could be considered part of the faithful because they all dismissed unbaptized catechumens before the Mass of the Faithful began!

Hence Fr. Casimir Kucharek further writes:

“[St.] Athanasius mentions that they (catechumens) were not allowed to be present at the mysteries, while Cyril of Alexandria speaks of their departure before the more solemn parts of the service.”

The Catholic Encyclopedia acknowledges the same teaching of Tradition.

The Catholic Encyclopedia, “Faithful,” Vol. 5, p. 769: “St. Augustine (says): ‘Ask a man: are you a Christian? If he be a pagan or Jew, he will reply: I am not a Christian. But if he say: I am a Christian, ask him again: are you a catechumen, or one of the faithful?’”

In the third century, the early Church father Tertullian criticized the custom of certain heretics who disregarded this crucial distinction between the unbaptized and the faithful.

The Catholic Encyclopedia, “Catechumen,” Vol. 3, p. 430: “Tertullian reproaches the heretics with disregarding it; among them, he says, ‘one does not know which is the catechumen and which the faithful, all alike come [to the mysteries], all hear the same discourses, and say the same prayers.”

Finally, I will quote a prayer from the ancient Byzantine-Slav Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. The prayer was recited at the dismissal of the catechumens before the Mass of the Faithful began.

Byzantine-Slav Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Dismissal of the Catechumens: “Let us, the faithful, pray for the catechumens, that the Lord have mercy on them… Lord and God, Jesus Christ, as the salvation of mankind: look down upon your servants, the catechumens, who bow their heads before you. In due time make them worthy of the waters of regeneration, the forgiveness of their sins, and the robe of immortality. Unite them to your holy, catholic, and apostolic church, and number them among your chosen flock.”

Here we see that the ancient eastern rite liturgy of St. John Chrysostom makes a forceful distinction between the unbaptized (the catechumens) and the faithful. It confirms that because the catechumens are not baptized into the faithful, they are not forgiven their sins or united to the Catholic Church. The unbaptized do not belong to the one Church of the faithful. This is part of the ancient Catholic Faith. And obviously this fact is not proven to be part of the ancient Catholic Faith simply because an early Church father stated it – for a statement from a given early Church father doesn’t prove this definitively; but rather it is proven because the testimonies of the aforementioned saints are in perfect harmony with the clear teaching of Catholic liturgical worship, which divides the Mass of Catechumens from the Mass of the Faithful. It is, therefore, the teaching and rule of Catholic worship that no unbaptized person is to be considered part of the faithful. And this is why all who died without the Sacrament of Baptism were refused Christian burial everywhere in the universal Church since the beginning.

And because this was the universal rule of worship in the Catholic Church, it was the expression of the universal Faith and Tradition of the Catholic Church.

Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas (# 12), Dec. 11, 1925: “The perfect harmony of the Eastern liturgies with our own in this continual praise of Christ the King shows once more the truth of the axiom: Legem credendi lex statuit supplicandi. The rule of faith is indicated by the law of our worship.”

Therefore, it would be contrary to Tradition to assert that a person who has not received the Sacrament of Baptism is part of the faithful.

St. John Chrysostom (Hom. in Io. 25, 3), (4th Century):
“For the Catechumen is a stranger to the Faithful… One has Christ for his King; the other sin and the devil; the food of one is Christ, of the other, that meat which decays and perishes… Since then we have nothing in common, in what, tell me, shall we hold communion?… Let us then give diligence that we may become citizens of the city above… for if it should come to pass (which God forbid!) that through the sudden arrival of death we depart hence uninitiated [unbaptized], though we have ten thousand virtues, our portion will be none other than hell, and the venomous worm, and fire unquenchable, and bonds indissoluble.”

St. Ambrose, (4th Century) Bishop and Doctor of the Church:
“I shall now begin to instruct you on the sacrament you have received; of whose nature it was not fitting to speak to you before this; for in the Christian what comes first is faith. And at Rome for this reason those who have been baptized are called the faithful (fideles).”

This teaching of Tradition is why in the Traditional Rite of Baptism, the unbaptized catechumen is asked what he desires from holy Church, and he answers “Faith.” The unbaptized catechumen does not have “the Faith,” so he begs the Church for it in the “Sacrament of Faith” (Baptism), which alone makes him one of “the faithful.” This is why the Sacrament of Baptism has been known since apostolic times as “the Sacrament of Faith.”

Catechism of the Council of Trent, On Baptism – Effects of Baptism:
“… Baptism …. the Sacrament of faith….”

Catechism of the Council of Trent, On Baptism – Second Effect: Sacramental Character: “… Baptism… By it we are qualified to receive the other Sacraments, and the Christian is distinguished from those who do not profess the faith.”

Pope Clement VI, Super quibusdam, Sept. 20, 1351:
“… all those who in baptism have received the same Catholic faith...”

Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Session 6, Chap. 7 on Justification, ex cathedra:
“… THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM, WHICH IS ‘THE SACRAMENT OF FAITH… THIS FAITH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH APOSTOLIC TRADITION, CATECHUMENS BEG OF THE CHURCH BEFORE THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM, when they ask for ‘faith which bestows life eternal,’ (Rit. Rom., Ordo Baptismi).”

And with these facts in mind (that a catechumen “begs” for the faith because he isn’t part of the faithful), remember the definition of Pope Innocent III at the Fourth Lateran Council: “There is indeed one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which nobody at all is saved…” The original Latin reads: “Una vero est fidelium universalis ecclesia, extra quam nullus omnino salvatur…” The Latin words nullus omnino mean “absolutely nobody.” Absolutely nobody outside the one Church of the faithful is saved. Since the one Church of “the faithful” only includes those who have received the Sacrament of Baptism – as apostolic tradition, liturgical tradition and Church dogma show – this means that absolutely nobody is saved without the Sacrament of Baptism.

Subjection to the Church/Roman Pontiff

The second definition from the Chair of Peter on Outside the Church There is No Salvation came from Pope Boniface VIII in the Bull Unam Sanctam.

Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302, ex cathedra: “With Faith urging us we are forced to believe and to hold the one, holy, Catholic Church and that, apostolic, and we firmly believe and simply confess this Church outside of which there is no salvation nor remission of sin… Furthermore, we declare, say, define, and proclaim to every human creature that they by absolute necessity for salvation are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff.”

This means infallibly that every human creature must be subject to the Roman Pontiff for salvation. Obviously, this does not mean that one must be subject to an antipope for salvation, which is what we have today. It means that everyone must be subject to the true pope, if and when we have one.

But how are infants subject to the Roman Pontiff? This is a good question. Notice that Pope Boniface VIII did not declare that every human creature must know the Roman Pontiff, but that every human creature must be subject to the Roman Pontiff. Infants become subject to the Roman Pontiff by their baptism into the one Church of Christ, of which the Roman Pontiff is the head.

Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Canons of the Sacrament of Baptism, Canon 13: “If anyone says that children, because they have not the act of believing, are not after having received baptism to be numbered among the faithful, and that for this reason are to be rebaptized when they have reached the years of discretion; or that it is better that the baptism of such be omitted than that, while not believing by their own act, they should be baptized in the faith of the Church alone, let him be anathema.”
It’s a dogma that infants and others become subject to the authority of the Church when they enter the true Church by receiving the Sacrament of Baptism.

Pope Julius III, Council of Trent, On the Sacraments of Baptism and Penance, Sess. 14, Chap. 2, ex cathedra: “… since the Church exercises judgment on no one who has not previously entered it by the gate of baptism. For what have I to do with those who are without (1 Cor. 5:12), says the Apostle. It is otherwise with those of the household of the faith, whom Christ the Lord by the laver of baptism has once made ‘members of his own body’ (1 Cor. 12:13).”

Thus, by their baptism they are made subject to the Roman Pontiff, since the Roman Pontiff possesses supreme authority in the Church (First Vatican Council, de fide). This proves that baptism is actually the first component in determining whether or not one is subject to the Roman Pontiff. If one has not been baptized, then one cannot be subject to the Roman Pontiff, because the Church exercises judgment (i.e., jurisdiction) over no one who has not entered the Church through the Sacrament of Baptism (de fide).

It is not possible, therefore, to be subject to the Roman Pontiff without receiving the Sacrament of Baptism, since the Church (and the Roman Pontiff) cannot exercise judgment (jurisdiction) over an unbaptized person (de fide, Trent). And since it is not possible to be subject to the Roman Pontiff without the Sacrament of Baptism, it is not possible to be saved without the Sacrament of Baptism, since every human creature must be subject to the Roman Pontiff for salvation (de fide, Boniface VIII).

The Sacrament of Baptism is Necessary for Salvation

To further show that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation, I will quote numerous other infallible statements from the Chair of St. Peter.

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Sess. 7, Can. 5 on the Sacrament of Baptism, ex cathedra: “If anyone says that baptism [the Sacrament] is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.”

This infallible dogmatic definition from the Chair of St. Peter condemns anyone who says that the Sacrament of Baptism is not necessary for salvation. The Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for all for salvation, first of all, because, as the Council of Trent defines, all men (except the Blessed Virgin Mary) were conceived in a state of original sin as a result of the sin of Adam, the first man. The Sacrament of Baptism is also necessary for all for salvation because it is the means by which one is marked as a member of Jesus Christ and incorporated into His Mystical Body. And in defining the truth that all men were conceived in the state of Original Sin, the Council of Trent specifically declared that the Blessed Virgin Mary was an exception to its decree on Original Sin.[lix] But in defining the truth that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation, the Council of Trent made no exceptions at all.

Pope Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22, 1439: “Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church. And since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,’ as the Truth says, ‘enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]. The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.”

Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, Constitution 1, 1215, ex cathedra: “But the sacrament of baptism is consecrated in water at the invocation of the undivided Trinity – namely, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – and brings salvation to both children and adults when it is correctly carried out by anyone in the form laid down by the Church.”

Pope Benedict XIV, Nuper ad nos, March 16, 1743, Profession of Faith: “Likewise (I profess) that baptism is necessary for salvation, and hence, if there is imminent danger of death, it should be conferred at once and without delay, and that it is valid if conferred with the right matter and form and intention by anyone, and at any time.”

Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas (# 15), Dec. 11, 1925 : “Indeed this kingdom is presented in the Gospels as such, into which men prepare to enter by doing penance; moreover, they cannot enter it except through faith and baptism, which, although an external rite, yet signifies and effects an interior regeneration.”

We see here that one cannot enter the kingdom of Heaven without faith and the external rite of baptism (i.e., the Sacrament of Baptism).

Water is Necessary for Baptism and John 3:5 is literal

“JESUS ANSWERED: AMEN, AMEN, I SAY TO THEE, UNLESS A MAN BE BORN AGAIN OF WATER AND THE HOLY GHOST, HE CANNOT ENTER INTO THE KINGDOM OF GOD.” (JOHN 3:5)

The Catholic Church is the guardian and interpreter of the Sacred Scriptures. She alone has been given the power and authority to infallibly determine the true sense of the sacred texts.

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Sess. 3, Chap. 2 on Revelation, 1870:
“… We, renewing the same decree, declare this to be its intention: that, in matters of faith and morals pertaining to the instruction of Christian Doctrine, that must be considered as the true sense of Sacred Scripture which Holy Mother Church has held and holds, whose office it is to judge concerning the true understanding and interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures; and, for that reason, no one is permitted to interpret Sacred Scripture itself contrary to this sense, or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.”

But not every scripture is understood by the Catholic Church in the literal sense. For example, in Matthew 5:29, Our Lord Jesus Christ tells us that if our eye scandalizes us we should pluck it out, for it is better that it should perish than our whole body in Hell.

Matt. 5:29- “And if thy right eye scandalize thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee. For it is expedient for thee that one of thy members should perish, rather than thy whole body be cast into hell.”

But Our Lord’s words here are not to be understood literally. His words are spoken figuratively to describe an occasion of sin or something in life that may scandalize us and be a hindrance to our salvation. We must pluck it out and cut it off, says Our Lord, because it is better to be without it than to perish altogether in the fires of Hell.

On the other hand, other verses of scripture are understood by the Church in the literal sense. For example:

Matt. 26:26-28 “And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke: and gave to his disciples, and said: Take ye, and eat. This is my body. And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this. For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.”

When Our Lord Jesus Christ says in Matthew 26:26: “This is My Body,” and in Matthew 26:28: “This is My Blood,” His words are understood by the Catholic Church exactly as they are written, for we know that Our Lord Jesus Christ was indeed referring to His actual Body and Blood, not a symbol or a figure.

So the question is: How does the Catholic Church understand the words of Jesus Christ in John 3:5- Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God? Does the Catholic Church understand these words as they are written or in some other way? Does the Catholic Church understand these words to mean that every man must be born again of water and the Holy Ghost to be saved, as Our Lord says? The answer is clear: every single dogmatic definition that the Catholic Church has issued dealing with Our Lord’s words in John 3:5 understands them literally, exactly as they are written.

Pope Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra: “Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church. And since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,’ as the Truth says, ‘enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]. The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.”

This means that Our Lord Jesus Christ’s declaration that no man can be saved without being born again of water and the Holy Ghost is a literal dogma of the Catholic Faith.

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Can. 2 on the Sacrament of Baptism, Sess. 7, 1547, ex cathedra: “If anyone shall say that real and natural water is not necessary for baptism, and on that account those words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit’ [John 3:5], are distorted into some sort of metaphor: let him be anathema.”

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Can. 5 on the Sacrament of Baptism, Sess. 7, 1547, ex cathedra: “If anyone says that baptism [the sacrament] is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.”

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, On Original Sin, Session V, ex cathedra: “By one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death... so that in them there may be washed away by regeneration, what they have contracted by generation, ‘For unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God [John 3:5].”

Pope St. Zosimus, The Council of Carthage XVI, on Original Sin and Grace: “For when the Lord says: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he shall not enter into the kingdom of God’ [John 3:5], what Catholic will doubt that he will be a partner of the devil who has not deserved to be a coheir of Christ. For he who lacks the right part will without doubt run into the left.”

Pope Gregory IX, Cum, sicut ex, July 8, 1241, to Sigurd of Nidaros:
“Since as we have learned from your report, it sometimes happens because of scarcity of water, that infants of your lands are baptized in beer, we reply to you in the tenor of those present that, since according to evangelical doctrine it is necessary ‘to be reborn from water and the Holy Spirit’ (Jn. 3:5) they are not to be considered rightly baptized who are baptized in beer.”

Infants Cannot Be Saved Without Baptism

The teaching of the Catholic Church already cited shows that no one can be saved without the Sacrament of Baptism. Obviously, therefore, this means that children and infants also cannot get to Heaven without Baptism because they are conceived in a state of original sin, which cannot be removed without the Sacrament of Baptism. But this truth of the Catholic Church is denied by many people today. They look at the horrible tragedy of abortion – the millions of slaughtered children – and they conclude that these children must be headed to Heaven. But such a conclusion is heretical. The worst part of abortion is the fact that these children are barred from entrance into Heaven, not that they don’t get to live in this pagan world. Satan delights in abortion because he knows that these souls can never get to Heaven without the Sacrament of Baptism. If aborted children went straight to Heaven without the Sacrament of Baptism, as many today believe, then Satan wouldn’t be behind abortion.

The Church teaches that aborted children and infants who die without baptism descend immediately into Hell, but that they do not suffer the fires of Hell. They go to a place in Hell called the limbo of the children. The most specific definition of the Church proving that there is no possible way for an infant to be saved without the Sacrament of Baptism is the following one from Pope Eugene IV.

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Session 11, Feb. 4, 1442, ex cathedra: “Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, when no help can be brought to them by another remedy than through the sacrament of baptism, through which they are snatched from the domination of the Devil [original sin] and adopted among the sons of God, it advises that holy baptism ought not be deferred for forty or eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people…”

Pope Eugene IV here defined from the Chair of Peter that there is no other remedy for infants to be snatched away from the dominion of the devil (i.e., original sin) other than the Sacrament of Baptism. This means that anyone who obstinately teaches that infants can be saved without receiving the Sacrament of Baptism is a heretic, for he is teaching that there is another remedy for original sin in children other than the Sacrament of Baptism.

Pope Martin V, Council of Constance, Session 15, July 6, 1415 - Condemning the articles of John Wyclif - Proposition 6: “Those who claim that the children of the faithful dying without sacramental baptism will not be saved, are stupid and presumptuous in saying this.” - Condemned

This is a fascinating proposition from The Council of Constance. Unfortunately, this proposition is not found in Denzinger, which only contains some of the Council’s decrees, but it is found in a full collection of the Council of Constance. The arch-heretic John Wyclif was proposing that those (such as ourselves) are stupid for teaching that infants who die without water (i.e., sacramental) baptism cannot possibly be saved. He was anathematized for this assertion, among many others. And here is what the Council of Constance had to say about John Wyclif’s anathematized propositions, such as #6 above.

Pope Martin V, Council of Constance, Session 15, July 6, 1415: “The books and pamphlets of John Wyclif, of cursed memory, were carefully examined by the doctors and masters of Oxford University… This holy synod, therefore, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, repudiates and condemns, by this perpetual decree, the aforesaid articles and each of them in particular; and it forbids each and every Catholic henceforth, under pain of anathema, to preach, teach, or hold the said articles or any one of them.”

So those who criticize Catholics for affirming the dogma that no infant can be saved without the Sacrament of Baptism are actually proposing the anathematized heresy of John Wyclif. Here are some other dogmatic definitions on the topic.

Pope St. Zosimus, The Council of Carthage, Canon on Sin and Grace, 417 A.D.- “It has been decided likewise that if anyone says that for this reason the Lord said: ‘In my Father’s house there are many mansions’ [John 14:2]: that it might be understood that in the kingdom of heaven there will be some middle place or some place anywhere where the blessed infants live who departed from this life without baptism, without which they cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven, which is life eternal, let him be anathema.”

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, On Original Sin, Session V, ex cathedra: “If anyone says that recently born babies should not be baptized even if they have been born to baptized parents; or says that they are indeed baptized for the remission of sins, but incur no trace of the original sin of Adam needing to be cleansed by the laver of rebirth for them to obtain eternal life, with the necessary consequence that in their case there is being understood a form of baptism for the remission of sins which is not true, but false: let him be anathema.”

This means that anyone who asserts that infants don’t need the “laver of rebirth” (water baptism) to attain eternal life is teaching heresy.

Those who Die in Original Sin or Mortal Sin descend into Hell

As I have proven above, there is no possible way for children to be freed from original sin other than through the Sacrament of Baptism. This, of course, proves that there is no way for infants to be saved other than through the Sacrament of Baptism. So the following definitions merely affirm what has already been established: no child can possibly enter the kingdom of Heaven without receiving water baptism, but will rather descend into Hell.

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Letentur coeli,” Sess. 6, July 6, 1439, ex cathedra: “We define also that… the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go straightaway to hell, but to undergo punishments of different kinds.”

Pope Pius VI, Auctorem fidei, Aug. 28, 1794:
“26. The doctrine which rejects as a Pelagian fable, that place of the lower regions (which the faithful generally designate by the name of the limbo of the children) in which the souls of those departing with the sole guilt of original sin are punished with the punishment of the condemned, exclusive of the punishment of fire, just as if, by this very fact, that these who remove the punishment of fire introduced that middle place and state free of guilt and of punishment between the kingdom of God and eternal damnation, such as that about which the Pelagians idly talk” – Condemned as false, rash, injurious to Catholic schools.

Here Pope Pius VI condemns the idea of some theologians that infants who die in original sin suffer the fires of Hell. At the same time, he confirms that these infants do go to a part of the lower regions (i.e., Hell) called the limbo of the children. They do not go to Heaven, but to a place in Hell where there is no fire. This is perfectly in accord with all of the other solemn definitions of the Church, which teach that infants who die without water baptism descend into Hell, but suffer a punishment different from those who die in mortal sin. Their punishment is eternal separation from God.

Pope Pius XI, Mit brennender Sorge (# 25), March 14, 1937: “‘Original sin’ is the hereditary but impersonal fault of Adam’s descendants, who have sinned in him (Rom. v. 12). It is the loss of grace, and therefore eternal life, together with a propensity to evil, which everybody must, with the assistance of grace, penance, resistance and moral effort, repress and conquer.”

There is only One Baptism, Not Three

It is defined Catholic dogma that there is only one baptism. This is why the dogmatic Nicene Creed, historically professed every Sunday in the Roman Rite, reads: “I confess one baptism for the remission of sins.” And this dogma that there is one baptism for the remission of sins comes from Our Lord and the Apostles. It is affirmed by St. Paul in Ephesians 4:5: “One Lord, one faith, one baptism.” Could it be possible that there is more than one baptism for the remission of sins when Catholics have prayed and believed for 2000 years that there is only one? No.

Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas (# 12), Dec. 11, 1925: “The perfect harmony of the Eastern liturgies with our own in this continual praise of Christ the King shows once more the truth of the axiom: Legem credendi lex statuit supplicandi. The rule of faith is indicated by the law of our worship.”

Throughout history many popes have expressly reaffirmed this rule of faith: that there is only one baptism for the remission of sins.

The Nicene-Constantinople Creed, 381, ex cathedra: “We confess one baptism for the remission of sins.”

Pope St. Celestine I, Council of Ephesus, 431: “Having read these holy phrases and finding ourselves in agreement (for ‘there is one Lord, one faith, one baptism’ [Eph. 4:5]), we have given glory to God who is the savior of all…”

Pope St. Leo IX, Congratulamur Vehementer, April 13, 1053: “I believe that the one true Church is holy, Catholic and apostolic, in which is given one baptism and the true remission of all sins.”

Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302, ex cathedra: “One is my dove, my perfect one… which represents the one mystical body whose head is Christ, of Christ indeed, as God. And in this, ‘one Lord, one faith, one baptism’ (Eph. 4:5).”

Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, Decree # 30, 1311-1312, ex cathedra: “Since however there is for both regulars and seculars, for superiors and subjects, for exempt and non-exempt, one universal Church, outside of which there is no salvation, for all of whom there is one Lord, one faith, and one baptism…”

Pope Pius VI, Inscrutabile (# 8), Dec. 25, 1775: “… We exhort and advise you to be all of one mind and in harmony as you strive for the same object, just as the Church has one faith, one baptism, and one spirit.”

Pope Leo XII, Ubi Primum (# 14), May 5, 1824: “By it we are taught, and by divine faith we hold one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and that no other name under heaven is given to men except the name of Jesus Christ in which we must be saved. This is why we profess that there is no salvation outside the Church.”

Pope Pius VIII, Traditi Humilitati (# 4), May 24, 1829: “Against these experienced sophists the people must be taught that the profession of the Catholic faith is uniquely true, as the apostle proclaims: one Lord, one faith, one baptism (Eph. 4:5).”

Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (# 13), Aug. 15, 1832: “With the admonition of the apostle that ‘there is one God, one faith, one baptism’ (Eph. 4:5) may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever.”

Pope Leo XIII, Graves de communi re (# 8), Jan. 18, 1901: “Hence the doctrine of the Apostle, who warns us that ‘We are one body and spirit called to the one hope in our vocation; one Lord, one faith and one baptism…”

To say that there are “three baptisms,” as many unfortunately do, is heretical. There is only one baptism, which is celebrated in water (de fide).

Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, 1311-1312, ex cathedra: “Besides, one baptism which regenerates all who are baptized in Christ must be faithfully confessed by all just as ‘one God and one faith’ [Eph. 4:5], which celebrated in water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit we believe to be commonly the perfect remedy for salvation for adults as for children.”

Here Pope Clement V defines as a dogma that ONE BAPTISM must be faithfully confessed by all, which is celebrated in water. This means that all Catholics must profess one baptism of water, not three baptisms: of water, blood and desire. To confess “three baptisms,” and not one, is to contradict defined Catholic dogma. Did those who believe that there are three baptisms (water, blood and desire) ever wonder why countless popes have professed that there is only one baptism, and not a single one of them bothered to tell us about the so-called “other two”?

The Athanasian Creed

The Athanasian Creed is one of the most important creeds of the Catholic Faith. It contains a beautiful summary of a Catholic’s belief in the Trinity and the Incarnation, which are the two fundamental dogmas of Christianity. Before the 1971 changes in the Liturgy, the Athanasian Creed, consisting of 40 rhythmic statements, had been used in the Sunday Office for over a thousand years. The Athanasian Creed sets forth the necessity of believing the Catholic Faith for salvation. It closes with the words: “This is the Catholic Faith, which, except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.” The Athanasian Creed was composed by the great St. Athanasius himself, as the Council of Florence confirms.

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra:
“Sixthly, we offer to the envoys that compendious rule of the faith composed by most blessed Athanasius, which is as follows:
“Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.– But the Catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in the Trinity, and the Trinity in unity; neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance; for there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Spirit, their glory is equal, their majesty coeternal...and in this Trinity there is nothing first or later, nothing greater or less, but all three persons are coeternal and coequal with one another, so that in every respect, as has already been said above, both unity in Trinity, and Trinity in unity must be worshipped. Therefore let him who wishes to be saved, think thus concerning the Trinity.
“But it is necessary for eternal salvation that he faithfully believe also in the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ...the Son of God is God and man... This is the Catholic faith; unless each one believes this faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.”

The above definition of the Athanasian Creed at the ecumenical Council of Florence means that this creed qualifies as a pronouncement from the Chair of St. Peter (an ex cathedra pronouncement). To deny that which is professed in the Athanasian Creed is to cease to be Catholic. The Creed declares that whoever wishes to be saved needs to hold the Catholic Faith and believe in the Trinity and the Incarnation. Notice the phrase, “whoever wishes to be saved” (quicunque vult salvus esse).

This phrase is without question the product and inspiration of the Holy Ghost. It tells us that everyone who can “wish” must believe in the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation in order to be saved. This does not include infants and those below the age of reason, since they cannot wish! Infants are numbered among the Catholic faithful, since they receive the habit of Catholic Faith at the Sacrament of Baptism. But, being below the age of reason, they cannot make any act of faith in the Catholic mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation, an act which is absolutely necessary for the salvation of all above the age of reason (for all who wish to be saved). Is it not remarkable how God worded this infallible creed’s teaching on the necessity of belief in the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation in a way that would not include infants? The creed, therefore, teaches that everyone above the age of reason must have a knowledge and belief in the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation to be saved – no exceptions. This creed, therefore, eliminates the theory of invincible ignorance (that one above the age of reason can be saved without knowing Christ or the true Faith) and further renders those who preach it unable to profess this creed with honesty.

And the fact that no one who wishes to be saved can be saved without a knowledge and belief in the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation is the reason why the Holy Office under Pope Clement XI responded that a missionary must, before baptism, explain these absolutely necessary mysteries to an adult who is at the point of death.

Response of the Sacred Office to the Bishop of Quebec, Jan. 25, 1703:
“Q. Whether a minister is bound, before baptism is conferred on an adult, to explain to him all the mysteries of our faith, especially if he is at the point of death, because this might disturb his mind. Or, whether it is sufficient, if the one at the point of death will promise that when he recovers from the illness, he will take care to be instructed, so that he might put into practice what has been commanded him.
“A. A promise is not sufficient, but a missionary is bound to explain to an adult, even a dying one who is not entirely incapacitated, the mysteries of faith which are necessary by a necessity of means, as are especially the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation.”

Another question was posed at the same time and answered the same way.

Response of the Sacred Office to the Bishop of Quebec, Jan. 25, 1703:
“Q. Whether it is possible for a crude and uneducated adult, as it might be with a barbarian, to be baptized, if there were given him only an understanding of God and some of His attributes… although he does not believe explicitly in Jesus Christ.
“A. A missionary should not baptize one who does not believe explicitly in the Lord Jesus Christ, but is bound to instruct him about all those matters which are necessary, by a necessity of means, in accordance with the capacity of the one to be baptized.”

The dogma that belief in the Trinity and Incarnation is absolutely necessary for salvation for all those above the age of reason is also the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas, Pope Benedict XIV and Pope St. Pius X.

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica: “After grace had been revealed, both the learned and simple folk are bound to explicit faith in the mysteries of Christ, chiefly as regards those which are observed throughout the Church, and publicly proclaimed, such as the articles which refer to the Incarnation, of which we have spoken above.”[xciv]

Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica: “And consequently, when once grace had been revealed, all were bound to explicit faith in the mystery of the Trinity.”

Pope Benedict XIV, Cum Religiosi (# 1), June 26, 1754:
“We could not rejoice, however, when it was subsequently reported to Us that in the course of religious instruction preparatory to Confession and Holy Communion, it was very often found that these people were ignorant of the mysteries of the faith, even those matters which must be known by necessity of means; consequently they were ineligible to partake of the Sacraments.”

Pope Benedict XIV, Cum Religiosi (# 4):
“See to it that every minister performs carefully the measures laid down by the holy Council of Trent… that confessors should perform this part of their duty whenever anyone stands at their tribunal who does not know what he must by necessity of means know to be saved…”

Those above the age of reason who are ignorant of these absolutely necessary mysteries of the Catholic Faith – these mysteries which are a “necessity of means” – cannot be numbered among the elect, as Pope St. Pius X confirms.

Pope St. Pius X, Acerbo Nimis (# 2), April 15, 1905:
“And so Our Predecessor, Benedict XIV, had just cause to write: ‘We declare that a great number of those who are condemned to eternal punishment suffer that everlasting calamity because of ignorance of those mysteries of faith which must be known and believed in order to be numbered among the elect.’”

So let those who believe that salvation is possible for those who don’t believe in Christ and the Trinity (which is “the Catholic Faith” if defined in terms of its simplest mysteries) change their position and align it with Catholic dogma. There is no other name under all of heaven whereby a man is saved other than the Lord Jesus (Acts 4:12). Let them cease contradicting the Athanasian Creed and let them confess that knowledge of these mysteries is absolutely necessary for the salvation of all who wish to be saved. They must firmly hold this so they can themselves possess the Catholic Faith and profess this creed with honesty and as our Catholic forefathers did.

These essential mysteries of the Catholic Faith have been disseminated and taught to most by means of the Apostles’ Creed (which is given in the Appendix). This vital creed includes the central truths about God the Father, God the Son (Our Lord Jesus Christ – His conception, crucifixion, ascension, etc.) and God the Holy Ghost. It also contains a profession of Faith in the crucial truths of the holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins and the resurrection of the body.

Baptism of Blood and Baptism of Desire – Erroneous Traditions of Man

In this document, I have shown that the Catholic Church infallibly teaches that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation. I have also shown that it is only through receiving the Sacrament of Baptism that one is incorporated into the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation. I have also shown that the Catholic Church infallibly teaches that the words of Jesus Christ in John 3:5 – Amen, amen I say unto thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God – are to be understood literally: as they are written. This is the infallible teaching of the Church and it excludes any possibility of salvation without being born again of water and the Holy Ghost. However, throughout the history of the Church, many have believed in the theories called baptism of desire and baptism of blood: that one’s desire for the Sacrament of Baptism or one’s martyrdom for the faith supplies for the lack of being born again of water and the Holy Ghost. Those who believe in baptism of blood and baptism of desire raise certain objections to the absolute necessity of receiving the Sacrament of Baptism for salvation. So, in order to be complete, I will respond to all of the major objections made by baptism of desire and blood advocates; and in the process, I will give an overview of the history of the errors of baptism of desire and baptism of blood. In doing this I will demonstrate that neither baptism of blood nor baptism of desire is a teaching of the Catholic Church.

THE FATHERS ARE UNANIMOUS FROM THE BEGINNING

In the first millennium of the Church there lived hundreds of holy men and saints who are called “Fathers of the Church.” Tixeront, in his Handbook of Patrology, lists over five hundred whose names and writings have come down to us. The Fathers (or prominent early Christian Catholic writers) are unanimous from the beginning that no one enters heaven or is freed from original sin without water baptism.

In the letter of Barnabas, dated as early as 70 A.D., we read:

“… we descend into the water full of sins and foulness, and we come up bearing fruit in our heart…”

In 140 A.D., the early Church Father Hermas quotes Jesus in John 3:5, and writes:

“They had need to come up through the water, so that they might be made alive; for they could not otherwise enter into the kingdom of God.”

This statement is obviously a paraphrase of John 3:5, and thus it demonstrates that from the very beginning of the apostolic age it was held and taught by the fathers that no one enters heaven without being born again of water and the Spirit based specifically on Our Lord Jesus Christ’s declaration in John 3:5.

In 155 A.D., St. Justin the Martyr writes:

“… they are led by us to a place where there is water; and there they are reborn in the same kind of rebirth in which we ourselves were reborn… in the name of God… they receive the washing of water. For Christ said, ‘Unless you be reborn, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.’ The reason for doing this we have learned from the apostles.”

Notice that St. Justin Martyr, like Hermas, also quotes the words of Jesus in John 3:5, and based on Christ’s words he teaches that it is from apostolic tradition that no one at all can enter Heaven without being born again of water and the Spirit in the Sacrament of Baptism.

In his dialogue with Trypho the Jew, also dated 155 A.D., St. Justin Martyr further writes:

“… hasten to learn in what way forgiveness of sins and a hope of the inheritance… may be yours. There is no other way than this: acknowledge Christ, be washed in the washing announced by Isaias [Baptism]…”

In 180 A.D., St. Irenaeus writes:

“… giving the disciples the power of regenerating in God, He said to them: ‘Go teach all nations, and baptize… Just as dry wheat without moisture cannot become one dough or one loaf, so also, we who are many cannot be made one in Christ Jesus, without the water from heaven…Our bodies achieve unity through the washing… our souls, however, through the Spirit. Both, then, are necessary.”

Here we see again a clear enunciation of the constant and apostolic Tradition that no one is saved without the Sacrament of Baptism, from no less than the great apostolic father St. Irenaeus in the 2nd century. St. Irenaeus knew St. Polycarp and St. Polycarp knew the Apostle John himself.

In 181 A.D., St. Theophilus continues the Tradition:

“… those things which were created from the waters were blessed by God, so that this might also be a sign that men would at a future time receive repentance and remission of sins through water and the bath of regeneration…”

In 203 A.D., Tertullian writes:

“… it is in fact prescribed that no one can attain to salvation without Baptism, especially in view of that declaration of the Lord, who says: ‘Unless a man shall be born of water, he shall not have life [John 3:5]…”

Notice how Tertullian affirms the same apostolic Tradition that no one is saved without water baptism based on the words of Jesus Himself.

Tertullian further writes in 203 A.D.:

“A treatise on our sacrament of water, by which the sins of our earlier blindness are washed away … nor can we otherwise be saved, except by permanently abiding in the water.”

Baptism has also been called since apostolic times the Seal, the Sign and the Illumination; for without this Seal, Sign or Illumination no one is forgiven of original sin or sealed as a member of Jesus Christ.

“… he that confirmeth us with you in Christ, and that hath anointed us, is God: Who also hath sealed us, and given the pledge of the Spirit in our hearts.” (2 Cor. 1:21-22)

As early as 140 A.D., Hermas had already taught this truth – that Baptism is the Seal – which was delivered by the Apostles from Jesus Christ.

Hermas, 140 A.D.: “… before a man bears the name of the Son of God, he is dead. But when he receives the seal, he puts mortality aside and again receives life. The seal, therefore, is the water. They go down into the water dead, and come out of it alive.”

In the famous work entitled The Second Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, 120-170 A.D., we read:

“For of those who have not kept the seal of baptism he says: ‘Their worm shall not die, and their fire shall not be quenched.’”

St. Ephraim, c. 350 A.D.: “… we are anointed in Baptism, whereby we bear His seal.”

St. Gregory Nyssa, c. 380 A.D.: “Make haste, O sheep, towards the sign of the cross and the Seal [Baptism] which will save you from your misery!”

St. Clement of Alexandria, 202 A.D.:

“When we are baptized, we are enlightened. Being enlightened, we are adopted as sons… This work is variously called grace, illumination, perfection, washing. It is a washing by which we are cleansed of sins…”

Origen, 244 A.D.:

“The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants… there is in everyone the innate stains of sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit.”

St. Aphraates, the oldest of the Syrian fathers, writes in 336 A.D.:

“This, then, is faith: that a man believe in God … His Spirit …His Christ… Also, that a man believe in the resurrection of the dead; and moreover, that he believe in the Sacrament of Baptism. This is the belief of the Church of God.”

The same Syrian father further writes:

“For from baptism we receive the Spirit of Christ… For the Spirit is absent from all those who are …

.....Jak powiedział kiedyś kapłan o pewnym komuniście " zestarzał się w swojej nieprawości " - tak samo jak V.R.S. utknął na pewnym etapie poszukiwań i ktoś lub coś mu nie pozwala na dotarcie do całej Prawdy . Wszystkie swoje wpisy i kanony Kościoła przykleja do posoborowych faryzeuszy i wilków w owczych skórach -więc małe prawdopodobieństwo , aby zrozumiał gdzie jest prawdziwy Kościół i gdzie prawdziwi pasterze .
Zaczerpnę tutaj ze źródeł ks.Jacka Bałemby ; " KOŚCIÓŁ JEST TAM , GDZIE JEST PRAWDZIWA WIARA ! "

Pope Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra: “Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church. And since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,’ as the Truth says, ‘enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]. The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.”

This means that Our Lord Jesus Christ’s declaration that no man can be saved without being born again of water and the Holy Ghost is a literal dogma of the Catholic Faith.

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Can. 2 on the Sacrament of Baptism, Sess. 7, 1547, ex cathedra: “If anyone shall say that real and natural water is not necessary for baptism, and on that account those words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit’ [John 3:5], are distorted into some sort of metaphor: let him be anathema.”

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Can. 5 on the Sacrament of Baptism, Sess. 7, 1547, ex cathedra: “If anyone says that baptism [the sacrament] is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.”

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, On Original Sin, Session V, ex cathedra: “By one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death... so that in them there may be washed away by regeneration, what they have contracted by generation, ‘For unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God [John 3:5].”

Pope St. Zosimus, The Council of Carthage XVI, on Original Sin and Grace: “For when the Lord says: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he shall not enter into the kingdom of God’ [John 3:5], what Catholic will doubt that he will be a partner of the devil who has not deserved to be a coheir of Christ. For he who lacks the right part will without doubt run into the left.”

Pope Gregory IX, Cum, sicut ex, July 8, 1241, to Sigurd of Nidaros:
“Since as we have learned from your report, it sometimes happens because of scarcity of water, that infants of your lands are baptized in beer, we reply to you in the tenor of those present that, since according to evangelical doctrine it is necessary ‘to be reborn from water and the Holy Spirit’ (Jn. 3:5) they are not to be considered rightly baptized who are baptized in beer.”

Beware Of Heretical Priests Who Take The Sedevacantist Position But Deny The Salvation Dogma - vaticancatholic.com

O. Feeney był po właściwej stronie

“The truth is that almost all the priests, sedevacantist or otherwise, do not profess the Catholic faith on salvation. Some people are deceived by those priests because they are ‘traditional’ in numerous ways and they reject Vatican II. But that’s not good enough to be a Catholic. To be a Catholic you can’t just be liturgically traditional, accept some teachings of the Church, and reject the Vatican II sect. No, you must profess the Catholic faith whole and entire. You must profess all of the dogmas of the faith, including the Church’s teaching on salvation. (Sanborn also accepts and promotes the sinful birth control method of NFP.)”

@
V.R.S.
========================
Deklaracja doktrynalna - KATOLICKIE PRZYMIERZE BISKUPÓW
"W tych warunkach, uczy Ojciec Święty, oczywiście ani Stolica Apostolska nie może uczestniczyć w ich zjazdach, ani też nie wolno wiernym zabierać głosu lub wspomagać podobne poczynania. Gdyby to uczynili, przywiązaliby wagę do fałszywej religii chrześcijańskiej, różniącej się całkowicie od jedynego Kościoła Chrystusowego".

Dokonując tej uroczystej deklaracji, należy rozumieć, że papież Leon XIII nie czynił anglikańskiej ordynacji nieważną, a deklarował, że była nieważna z powodu jej wad.

A jakie to były wady czy problemy, które w anglikańskim rycie widział Leon XIII, które przyczyniły się do ich nieważności?

Papież Leon XIII, Apostolicae Curae, 13.09.1896: “Rzeczywiście, jeśli ktoś sprawuje sakrament i wymaganą materię i formę poważnie i zgodnie z rytem zachowuje, o nim samym sądzi się, że bez wątpienia zamierza czynić to, co czyni Kościół. Na której to zdrowej zasadzie opiera się nauka, która utrzymuje, że jest prawdziwym sakrament [chrztu], czyli to, co posługą ludzką heretyków albo nieochrzczonych, byleby tylko zgodnie z rytem katolickim było wykonane. Przeciwnie, jeżeli ryt zostałby zmieniony taką decyzją, tak że wprowadzony byłby inny, w Kościele nieprzyjęty, tak iżby to było przeciwne temu, co czyni Kościół i temu, co z ustanowienia Chrystusa dotyczy natury sakramentu, wówczas jest jawne, że nie tylko pozbawiony jest intencji wymaganej do sakramentu, ale intencję posiadałby sakramentowi wrogą i przeciwną.”

Tutaj widzimy, iż papież Leon XIII nauczał, że jeśli minister stosuje katolicki ryt w udzielaniu Sakramentu Święceń, z prawidłową materią i formą, to uważa się z tego samego powodu, że zamierzał robić to, co robi Kościół – zamiar zrobienia tego, co robi Kościół, jest konieczne dla ważności każdego sakramentu. Z drugiej strony mówi nam, że jeśli zmienia się ryt z oczywistym zamiarem wprowadzenia nowego rytu niezatwierdzonego przez Kościół, i odrzuca to, co Kościół czyni, to zamiar jest nie tylko niewystarczający, ale jest destrukcyjny dla sakramentu.

„Oczy mają do widzenia, a nie widzą, i uszy do słuchania, a nie słyszą.”

“Nie błąd szatański uczynił ludzi złymi, lecz ludzie źli błąd szatański sobie przyswoili. Jeśliby błąd uczynił ludzi złymi, to by wina była Boga, który takich ludzi stworzył, aby od błędów byli zwodzeni. Ale skoro człowiek sam wybrał błąd, to wina jest człowieka; zwykle poprzedzają grzechy, a potem następują błędy. Naprzód wieloma grzechami zaślepia się człowiek i tak ułudą szatańską zwodzi, a potem w śmierć popada.”

“A więc na dobre uczynki baczność dawać należy, bo nie błąd rodzi grzechy, ale grzechy błąd. Mędrzec mówi: "Bezbożność wiedzie człowieka do błędów.”

Nie przekonam cię na siłę.

" Nowy ryt ordynacji (biskupów, księży, diakonów) został aprobowany i narzucony przez Pawła VI w dniu 18 czerwca 1968. Poniższa informacja jest kluczowa dla wszystkich katolików, bo dotyczy ważności zasadniczo każdego “kapłana” wyświęconego w strukturach diecezjalnych od około 1968, i w konsekwencji dotyczy ważności niezliczonych spowiedzi, nieważnych [indultowych] Mszy itd.

30 listopada 1947 papież Pius XII wydał konstytucję apostolską zatytułowaną “Sacramentum Ordinis.” W tej konstytucji Pius XII zadeklarował, z mocą swojej najwyższej władzy apostolskiej, słowa, które są konieczne dla ważności ordynacji kapłańskiej."
==========================

Rusz pan głową panie V.R.S. !
Jest napisane czarno na białym , że kto będzie odprawiał z innego Mszału niż ustalono w Bulli - jest z automatu ekskomunikowany ipsco-facto ! niedawno ktoś podał na tym portalu dokumenty biskupów sedewakantystów , którzy twierdza to samo ! nie mówiąc już o groźbie takowej ekskomuniki za współpracy z masonerią ,a o ile my na dziś wiemy to oni czynią to świadomie , bo przez nich samych ( masonów ) zostali podstępnie wkręceni do struktur Stolicy Apostolskiej i Kościoła w celu wszystkim nam znanym . Poza tym słowo " ignorant " nawet tutaj nie pasowałoby , gdyby pan miał nawet w tej kwestii rację. Proszę się przeszkolić w używaniu sformułowań , których pan nie rozumie .

@POLSKA
Mniemana, bo ją sobie pan wymyślił. W Quo primum ma pan jedynie następującą sankcję ekskomuniki:
"Ponadto, aby wymieniony Mszał był zachowany od skazy i utrzymany wolny od defektów i błędów, karą za nieprzestrzeganie niniejszego w przypadku wszystkich drukarń na obszarze bezpośrednio lub pośrednio podległym Nam, bądź Świętemu Kościołowi Rzymskiemu, będzie konfiskata ich książek i grzywna w wysokości 100 dukatów w złocie płatna ipso facto do Apostolskiego Skarbca. W przypadku siedziby w innych częściach świata, karą będzie ekskomunika latae sententiae i inne kary według Naszego uznania; i mocą Naszej Apostolskiej władzy i zgodnie z brzmieniem tego dokumentu, zarządzamy, iż nie wolno im ośmielić się, albo dopuścić myśli o wydrukowaniu, wydaniu lub sprzedaży, lub w jakikolwiek inny sposób przyczynić się do dostarczenia takich ksiąg, bez Naszego potwierdzenia i zgody, lub bez wyraźnej zgody Komisarza Apostolskiego dla wymienionych rejonów świata, który będzie w tym celu przez Nas wyznaczony"

@

V.R.S.
" ....Dlatego więc, aby wszyscy i wszędzie zaadaptowali i przestrzegali tego, co zostało im przekazane przez Święty Kościół Rzymski, Matkę i Nauczycielkę wszystkich innych Kościołów, będzie odtąd bezprawiem na zawsze w całym świecie chrześcijańskim śpiewanie albo recytowanie Mszy św. według formuły innej, niż ta przez Nas wydana; nakaz ten ma zastosowanie do wszystkich kościołów i kaplic, patriarchalnych, kolegialnych i parafialnych, świeckich bądź należących do zgromadzenia religijnego, czy to męskiego (włączając w to wojskowe) czy żeńskiego, w których Msze św. winny być śpiewane głośno w prezbiterium lub recytowane prywatnie, zgodnie z rytami i zwyczajami Kościoła Rzymskiego; ma to zastosowanie nawet wówczas, jeżeli wymienione kościoły zostały w jakikolwiek sposób zwolnione, czy to przez indult Stolicy Apostolskiej, czy przez zwyczaj, przywilej, lub nawet przez przysięgę lub zatwierdzenie Stolicy Apostolskiej, lub też jeżeli ich prawa i swobody były zagwarantowane w jakikolwiek inny sposób; zachowując tylko te, gdzie praktyka odprawiania Mszy św. w inny sposób była przyznana ponad 200 lat temu wraz z jednoczesnym utworzeniem i zatwierdzeniem kościoła przez Stolicę Apostolską,>..."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
" MACIE OCZY A NIE WIDZICIE ! MASIE USZY A NIE SŁYSZYCIE ! "

Na katolika może zostać nałożona ekskomunika mocą samego prawa, czyli bez ingerencji władzy kościelnej - automatycznie, gdy dopuści się określonych czynów. Jakich?
Każdy z nas słyszał o karach kościelnych, ale mało kto wie coś o nich konkretnie. Uzupełnijmy tę lukę. Zasadniczo omawiane kary dzielą się na:
kary poprawcze
kary ekspiacyjne.

Kary poprawcze
Są nimi ekskomunika, suspensa i interdykt. Najcięższą jest ekskomunika. Może ona dotyczyć każdego katolika. Powoduje m.in. następujące zakazy:

zakaz pomocy w sprawowaniu mszy świętej i innych obrzędów religijnych, czyli bycia np. ojcem chrzestnym;
zakaz sprawowania sakramentaliów i sakramentów oraz przyjmowania sakramentów;
zakaz sprawowania jakichkolwiek kościelnych urzędów, posług i zadań oraz podejmowania w Kościele władczych decyzji („aktów rządzenia”).
„Mocą samego prawa”, czyli od razu po popełnieniu czynu, ekskomuniką karany jest ten, kto:
odstąpiłby od wiary katolickiej, byłby heretykiem lub schizmatykiem;
użyłby przemocy fizycznej wobec papieża lub go zabił;
dałby rozgrzeszenie wspólnikowi w grzechu przeciw 6 przykazaniu;
porzuciłby konsekrowane hostie lub w celach świętokradczych zabrał je lub przechowywał;
wyświęciłby kogoś na biskupa bez zgody papieża,
przyjąłby wspomniane święcenia;
bezpośrednio wyjawia grzechy, o których wie dzięki spowiedzi;
powoduje przerwanie ciąży. Dotyczy to zarówno rodziców, jak i np. lekarza czy osób postronnych namawiających do aborcji.

Interdykt
Nałożyć na kogoś ekskomunikę można też dokumentem. I to za różne przestępstwa, np. za zdradzenie tajemnicy spowiedzi przez tłumacza, który w niej pośredniczył.
Również interdykt może dotyczyć każdego katolika. Stanowią go dwa pierwsze zakazy wymienione przy okazji omawiania ekskomuniki. Obowiązuje mocą samego prawa lub jest nałożony personalnie.
W drugim przypadku wyraźnie przewidziany jest tylko dla katolika popierającego jakiekolwiek stowarzyszenie działające przeciw Kościołowi lub nim kierującego.

V.R.S. napisał ;

@POLSKA
No i gdzie tam pan ma zastrzeżoną karę ekskomuniki? Podpowiedź: nigdzie.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I ZNOWU NIE MASZ PAN RACJI PANIE V.R.S ! OTO DOWÓD :

" Na oficjalną reakcję Kościoła rzymskokatolickiego nie trzeba było długo czekać, bo już w czerwcu 1737 roku w Rzymie z inicjatywy Sacra Congregatio Inquisitionis odbyła się, przygotowana przez trzech kierowników kancelarii papieskich, pierwsza konferencja kościelna poświęcona wolnomularstwu. W niecały rok później, 28 kwietnia 1738 roku, papież Klemens XII, kierując się motywami doktrynalnymi i dyscyplinarnymi bullą „In eminenti Apostolatus speculo…” zabronił przynależności do masonerii pod karą ekskomuniki. Jako podstawowy powód, dla którego masoneria została uznana za organizację niebezpieczną dla państwa i Kościoła wymienić należy tajność związku: „Otrzymaliśmy publiczne informacje o szerokim rozpowszechnianiu się […] pewnych stowarzyszeń, zgromadzeń, o spotkaniach i zjazdach, zwanych wolnomularskimi […], w których ludzie wszystkich religii i wszystkich sekt, przyjmując pozory naturalnej prawości, wiążą się pomiędzy sobą układem tak bardzo ścisłym, iż według praw i statutów przez siebie ustanowionych w ogóle nieprzeniknionym, i zobowiązują się pod przysięgą na Biblię i pod najcięższymi karami zachować w nienaruszonej tajemnicy wszystko, czego dokonują w mrokach tajności i sekretu. Z tego rodzaju stowarzyszeń i zgromadzeń wynika zazwyczaj wszelkie zło, nie tylko dla spokoju państw, ale również dla zbawienia dusz”. Potępienie tajności i bezwzględnego zachowania sekretu w sprawach organizacji wynikało stąd, że mogło to pociągać za sobą ukrywanie przed spowiednikiem wszelkich faktów związanych z działalnością stowarzyszeń wolnomularskich."

Organizacja Monarchistów Polskich » Kościół i masoni

Polska znów pod okupacją
V.R.S wprowadził Cie w błąd :"tak, ryty rzymski i nowy się różnią. Co nie powoduje automatycznie wniosku że nowy jest nieważny a Kościół nigdy takiej oceny (że jest nieważny) nie dokonał.
________________________________________________
Posoborowcy nigdy takiej oceny nie poczynią bo nie po to zmieniali ryty by stwierdzić później że są nieważne.
Kościół dokonał takiej oceny i jasno się wypowiedział w tej sprawie na Soborze Trydenckim :
Kan. 13. Jeśli ktoś twierdzi, że przyjęte i uznane w Kościele katolickim obrzędy, które się zazwyczaj stosuje przy uroczystym udzielaniu sakramentów, można albo mieć w pogardzie, albo bez żadnego grzechu dowolnie pomijać, albo mogą być zmienianie przez jakichkolwiek pasterzy Kościoła na nowe jakieś obrzędy - niech będzie wyklęty
Tę "metodykę' rozumowania "nic się nie stało" stosuje FSSPX kiedy przyjmuje do swoich szeregów księży którzy zostali wyświęceni w nowym rycie
Najlepszym przykładem "faryzejstwa" FSSPX jest osoba ks.J.Bałemby /nowy ryt święceń/który odprawiał Mszę Świętą w Rycie Rzymskim korzystając z użyczonej kaplicy FSSPX>
Kiedy ogłosił że przyjął święcenia tzw. "Sub conditione warunkowe" od Bp.Wiliamsona od razu z polecenia ks.Stehlina wyleciał z kaplicy bractwa !

!Ty nazywasz " kościołem " posoborowy twór masonów ! i tutaj " jest pies pogrzebany ! " PRAWDZIWY KK-cki pozostał tylko w Tradycji ze Mszami Św. w rycie rzymskim . To Tradycja jest kontynuacją Kościoła Chrystusowego a nie słudzy diabła i masonów ( najprawdopodobniej nawet nie katolicy ) ! KOŚCIÓŁ JEST TAM , GDZIE JEST " PRAWDZIWA WIARA ! " Św.Hieronim doktor Kościoła .
Ks. Rafał Trytek. Deklaracja (2 lutego 2006)
======================================
Co d drugiej kwestii dotyczącej ks.Jacka Bałemby ;
Nie " czujesz bluessa !!! "
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tę "metodykę' rozumowania "nic się nie stało" stosuje FSSPX kiedy przyjmuje do swoich szeregów księży którzy zostali wyświęceni w nowym rycie

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Księża z Nowego Rytu mogli przejść do Bractwa pod warunkiem całkowitej odmiany i nawrócenia o 360 stopni !
Niejednokrotnie na ten temat wypowiadał się chociażby ks .Świerczek .
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Najlepszym przykładem "faryzejstwa" FSSPX jest osoba ks.J.Bałemby /nowy ryt święceń/który odprawiał Mszę Świętą w Rycie Rzymskim korzystając z użyczonej kaplicy FSSPX>
Kiedy ogłosił że przyjął święcenia tzw. "Sub conditione warunkowe" od Bp.Wiliamsona od razu z polecenia ks.Stehlina wyleciał z kaplicy bractwa !
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Wszyscy czterej biskupi byli wyświeceni przez abp. Lefevbre jako równi PASTERZE !
Kto dał komukolwiek z nich władze decydowania o słuszności ideii Tradycji przyswiecajacych abp.Lefevbre !

Abp.Lefevrbe , gdyby teraz zmartwychwstał przegnał by za zdradę wszystkich trzech biskupów a jedynie przychyliłby sie do wierności biskupa Williamsona .

To tamci trzej wyciagneli łape w kierunkiu posoborowych zdrajców ,faryzeuszy ,apostatów i wilków w owczych skórach -jedynie biskup Williamson pozostał wierny 2000 letniej TRADYCJI i prawdziwym ich papieżom kończąc na Piusie XII-stym . Dlatego ks .Jacek Bałemba nie ufając w prawdziwość posoborowych papieży i Sakrów biskupich zdecydował się na "Sub conditione warunkowe" -JA UCZYNIŁBYM TO SAMO !
Biskup Fellay to zdrajca”

POLSKA ZNÓW POD OKUPACJĄ

"Księża z Nowego Rytu mogli przejść do Bractwa pod warunkiem całkowitej odmiany i nawrócenia o 360 stopni !
Niejednokrotnie na ten temat wypowiadał się chociażby ks .Świerczek .
______________________________________________________________________________
W zasadniczej kwestii tj. święceń nie przechodzą żadnej "odmiany 360*"
"kościół posoborowy" to zwrot dotyczący okresu
"Co d drugiej kwestii dotyczącej ks.Jacka Bałemby ;
Nie " czujesz bluessa !!! "
nie lubię blusa - wystrczą fakty
pisz zwykłym kolorem białym/ bo nic nie widać

Niejednokrotnie powtarzałem , że KK-cki naucza ,że kto popełnił grzech nieświadomie -wtedy .....nie ma grzechu ! to samo dotyczy świeceń kapłańskich -jeśli ktoś przyjął święceni ( nieświadomie ) od faryzeuszy i wilków w owczych skórach -to świecenia są ważne -tak samo jak sa ważne nasze przyjęte Sakramenty z tegoż samego powodu .Natomiast w czasie po przebudzeniu -już takiej " taryfy ulgowej " nie ma ! To co wykonał ks.Jacek Bałemba -wykonał dla pewności , że jest prawdziwie wyświeconym kapłanem od prawowitego i niezłomnego Pasterza . To nie powinno interesować innych kapłanów takich jak chociazny z Bractwa Św.Piusa X-go . Oni z zemsty i nienawiści do bp.Williamsona tego dokonali , bo ks .Jacek Bałemba tym czynem i aktem pokazał ,że identyfikuje się z bp.Williamsonem -co oczywista było drażliwa i nienawistną sprawą dla tych , którzy go odrzucili ( bezpodstawnie i bezprawnie )
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
" nie czujesz bluessa " tzn . nie wiesz jak jest prawdziwa przyczyna zablokowania odprawiania ks.Jackowi Bałembie Ofiar Mszy Św . ( zresztą również wbrew chrześcijańskiemu kościelnemu prawu ) .....a o tej przyczynie wcześniej ci napisałem .

Papież Eugeniusz IV, Sobór Florencki, "Exultate Deo", 1439: “W wypadku konieczności ochrzcić może nie tylko kapłan czy diakon, ale także świecki mężczyzna lub kobieta, a nawet poganin i heretyk, byleby zachował formę Kościoła i miał intencję czynić to, co czyni Kościół.” (Denz. 696)

Ważne udzielenie Chrztu zależy od użycia właściwego obrzędu wraz z właściwą intencją szafarza. Do ważnego udzielenia Chrztu nie jest wymagany ksiądz lub biskup. "W nagłej potrzebie udzielić Chrztu mogą... wszyscy, nawet świeccy, mężczyźni i kobiety. Potrzeba koniecznie trzech rzeczy; nauczcie się ich dobrze, bo ponieważ w razie potrzeby każdy chrzcić może, wypada więc aby każdy chrzcić umiał. Najprzód, potrzeba wody prawdziwej, naturalnej, którą się zlewa na osobę Chrzest przyjmującą; najstosowniej jest zlewać ją na głowę w kształt Krzyża. Po wtóre, potrzeba w tymże samym czasie, to jest w chwili zlewania wody, wymówić te słowa: Ja ciebie chrzczę w Imię Ojca, i Syna, i Ducha Świętego. Po trzecie, potrzeba mieć postanowienie prawdziwie ochrzcić, to jest, dać Sakrament Chrztu ustanowiony przez Chrystusa a dawany przez Kościół. Bo gdyby kto poważył się dopełniać obrzędu Chrztu Świętego przez żart, lub przez zniewagę, popełniłby grzech najcięższy, aleby tam Chrztu nie było; a osoba którą by tym sposobem zlano lub obmyto, nie byłaby ochrzczoną. Chrzest jest nieważny, jeżeli osoba, która chrzci nie zamierza czynić tego, co Chrystus i Kościół czynią. Osoba, która udziela sakramentu musi mieć właściwą intencję, tj. musi mieć intencję czynienia tego, co czyni Kościół albo tego, co Chrystus ustanowił i nakazał czynić (co w rzeczywistości, jest jednym i tym samym).

Św. Tomasz z Akwinu nauczał: "Wymaga się od szafarza intencji, poprzez którą by on, szafarz, poddał się głównej przyczynie działającej, mianowicie by miał zamiar czynić to, co czyni Chrystus i Kościół". Sobór Florencki jasno zdefiniował podstawowe zasady siedmiu sakramentów. "Wszystkie te sakramenty realizują się dzięki trzem elementom: mianowicie pewnym rzeczom jako materii, słowom jako formie i osobie szafarza udzielającego sakramentu z intencją czynienia tego, co czyni Kościół. Jeśli którejś z tych rzeczy brak, sakrament nie dokonuje się".

Unieważnienie Sakramentu Małżeństwa jest praktycznie niemożliwe jeśli tylko obie zaangażowane strony posiadają prawidłową intencję. Dzieje się tak gdyż, jak to oświadczył Sobór Florencki "przyczyną sprawczą małżeństwa (tj. jako Sakramentu) jest w zwyczajnych warunkach wzajemna zgoda wyrażona słowami w chwili jego zawierania". Pius IX nauczał, że "wśród chrześcijan nie może być małżeństwa [zakładając istnienie właściwej intencji], które by jednocześnie nie było Sakramentem... w związku z tym Sakrament nie może być nigdy oddzielony od ugody małżeńskiej" (Alokucja z 27 września 1852). Według takich autorów jak: Pohle-Preuss, Bellarmin, Suarez, Sanchez i innych teologów dorównujących im autorytetem, "zarówno materia jak i forma Sakramentu zawarte są w samej ugodzie małżeńskiej będąc słowami zgody wypowiadanymi przez strony zawierające umowę lub używane znaki przyzwolenia. Słowa albo znaki stanowią materię Sakramentu o ile oznaczają wzajemne poddanie sobie ciał (traditio) oraz jego formę o ile oznaczają akceptację (acceptio) tegoż". Upraszczając nieco tę kwestię można stwierdzić, że materią Sakramentu jest obopólna zgoda stron zawierających umowę na wzajemne oddanie się sobie (ugoda) natomiast formą jest zgoda wyrażona słowami w chwili jego zawierania. Jest to zgodne z nauczaniem św. Tomasza z Akwinu, iż "formą tego sakramentu są słowa ślubowania, wyrażające zgodę nowożeńców na małżeństwo, a nie błogosławieństwo kapłańskie, które należy do tzw. sakramentaliów". (Ugoda jako taka jest nierozróżnialna od słów zgody). Jaka jest zatem rola kapłana? "strony zawierające ugodę małżeńską udzielają sobie wzajemnie Sakramentu. Kapłan jest tylko wykonawcą (okolicznościowej) uroczystości oraz przedstawicielem i głównym oficjalnym świadkiem Kościoła (kapłan nie może być heretykiem -poza Kościołem). Wyjaśnia to dlaczego jego obecność jest wymagana prawem kanonicznym". Istnieją cztery warunki ważności. Nowożeńcy muszą być ochrzczeni, muszą być różnych płci, nie może być żadnej przeszkody unieważniającej małżeństwo (jak np. poprzednie ważne małżeństwo) oraz muszą mieć intencję uczynienia tego, co czyni Kościół – tzn. zawarcia małżeństwa chrześcijańskiego. Zazwyczaj małżeństwo musi być uroczyście zawarte przed kapłanem. Właściwa intencja jest oczywiście wymagana od obu stron przyjmujących ten Sakrament. Intencja ta może być domyślna, jednakże nie może być intencji przeciwnej. Ważna ugoda małżeńska musi być "aż śmierć nas nie rozdzieli", musi uwzględniać podstawowy cel małżeństwa jakim jest zrodzenie potomstwa i wychowanie ich w wierze.

Nowy ryt małżeństwa został ogłoszony dnia 19 marca 1969 roku. Wraz z nową celebracją małżeństwa, prawie wszystkie modlitwy zostały zmienione. W tradycyjnym rycie małżeństwa nakazano czytanie z Listu do Efezjan (5:22-33) określające podporządkowanie żony mężowi. W nowym rycie można dokonać wyboru jednego z dziesięciu różnych odczytów, z których jeden jest wersetem z Listu do Efezjan, z tą różnicą, że czytanie w szczególności pomija wiersze odnoszące się do podporządkowania żony mężowi! Podczas zadawania pytań panu młodemu i pannie młodej o ich zaangażowaniu w prowadzenie prawdziwego chrześcijańskiego małżeństwa, nie pyta się ich oddzielnie, lecz razem.
Zmieniono małżeńskie błogosławieństwo; zmieniono sformułowanie. Ponadto, małżeństwa mieszane są obecnie powszechne, z których wiele jest nieważnych.

Pomimo tych problemów, forma i materia sakramentu małżeństwa nie mogą zostać zmienione, ponieważ materia składa się z osób zawierających związek małżeński, a formą jest ich obopólna zgoda. Jednak zmiany w rycie sakramentu małżeństwa ukazują ponownie charakter i intencję (zamiar) tych, którzy urzeczywistnili rewolucję Soboru Watykańskiego II.
Wniosek: Nowy ryt małżeństwa jest ważny, ale tradycyjnemu katolikowi nie wolno zawrzeć związku małżeńskiego zgodnie z nowym rytem. Wiele małżeństw mieszanych, które dopuszczono, jest nieważnych. Nowy ryt małżeństwa nie przywołuje Boga. Nowy ryt małżeństwa służy do zdeprawowania katolickich nauk oraz do narzucenia parze małżonków fałszywego zrozumienie. Ponieważ kapłan jest świadkiem Kościoła w małżeństwie, katolik nie powinien zawierać związku małżeńskiego przed żadnym kapłanem, nawet ważnie wyświęconym, który nie jest w 100% katolikiem.

Wszystkie spowiedzi wyznające śmiertelne grzechy “kapłanom” ordynowanym w Nowym Rycie muszą być powtórzone jeszcze raz księdzu ważnie wyświęconemu przez biskupa konsekrowanego w Tradycyjnym Rycie Konsekracji Episkopalnej. Jeśli ktoś nie pamięta, które grzechy wyznał “kapłanom” Nowego Rytu, i które rozgrzeszone przez księdza wyświęconego w Tradycyjnym Rycie, to ten katolik musi dokonać generalnej spowiedzi, wymieniając wszystkie śmiertelne grzechy (jeśli takie były), które mógł wyznać “kapłanowi” ordynowanemu w rycie Pawła VI (Nowym Rycie).

Przed otrzymaniem sakramentu, osoba musi postanowić, że już nigdy więcej nie będzie uczestniczyć w nowej Mszy, odrzuci sektę posoborową i jej antypapieży jako niekatolików, musi wierzyć w to, że poza Kościołem nie ma zbawienia bez wyjątku (nie ma “chrztu pragnienia”, nie ma zbawienia dla tych, którzy są “niepokonanymi ignorantami” w wierze katolickiej), powinna odrzucić NPR (Naturalne Planowanie Rodziny), a także nie będzie wspierać żadnych heretyckich księży, itd.

Kroki do nawrócenia na Tradycyjną Wiarę Katolicką

Invincible Ignorance, A Destructive Heresy

Sacred Scripture Against Invincible Ignorance

Na katolika może zostać nałożona ekskomunika mocą samego prawa, czyli bez ingerencji władzy kościelnej - automatycznie, gdy dopuści się określonych czynów. Jakich?
Każdy z nas słyszał o karach kościelnych, ale mało kto wie coś o nich konkretnie. Uzupełnijmy tę lukę. Zasadniczo omawiane kary dzielą się na:
kary poprawcze
kary ekspiacyjne.

Kary poprawcze
Są nimi ekskomunika, suspensa i interdykt. Najcięższą jest ekskomunika. Może ona dotyczyć każdego katolika. Powoduje m.in. następujące zakazy:

zakaz pomocy w sprawowaniu mszy świętej i innych obrzędów religijnych, czyli bycia np. ojcem chrzestnym;
zakaz sprawowania sakramentaliów i sakramentów oraz przyjmowania sakramentów;
zakaz sprawowania jakichkolwiek kościelnych urzędów, posług i zadań oraz podejmowania w Kościele władczych decyzji („aktów rządzenia”).
„Mocą samego prawa”, czyli od razu po popełnieniu czynu, ekskomuniką karany jest ten, kto:
odstąpiłby od wiary katolickiej, byłby heretykiem lub schizmatykiem;
użyłby przemocy fizycznej wobec papieża lub go zabił;
dałby rozgrzeszenie wspólnikowi w grzechu przeciw 6 przykazaniu;
porzuciłby konsekrowane hostie lub w celach świętokradczych zabrał je lub przechowywał;
wyświęciłby kogoś na biskupa bez zgody papieża,
przyjąłby wspomniane święcenia;
bezpośrednio wyjawia grzechy, o których wie dzięki spowiedzi;
powoduje przerwanie ciąży. Dotyczy to zarówno rodziców, jak i np. lekarza czy osób postronnych namawiających do aborcji.

Interdykt
Nałożyć na kogoś ekskomunikę można też dokumentem. I to za różne przestępstwa, np. za zdradzenie tajemnicy spowiedzi przez tłumacza, który w niej pośredniczył.
Również interdykt może dotyczyć każdego katolika. Stanowią go dwa pierwsze zakazy wymienione przy okazji omawiania ekskomuniki. Obowiązuje mocą samego prawa lub jest nałożony personalnie.
W drugim przypadku wyraźnie przewidziany jest tylko dla katolika popierającego jakiekolwiek stowarzyszenie działające przeciw Kościołowi lub nim kierującego.