Author Topic: Baptism of Desire.. (Read 11000 times)

Exilenomore · « **Reply #10 on:** August 20, 2011, 10:04:49 AM »

I do not deny that a Saint/Doctor can be mistaken, but when he says that a certain doctrine is de fide, and the contrary proposition temerarious, then it cannot simply be dismissed. Pope Pius XII has settled the case anyway, so there is no grounds for further debate. Also, Pope St. Pius V taught in Ex Omibus Afflictionibus that justification and supernatural faith and charity cannot be separated from the remission of sins.

It is the positive will of Christ that all receive water Baptism to be saved. So, water Baptism is a necessity. But it is not an absolute necessity, in that those who die without water Baptism through no fault of their own can be saved through supernatural desire for it.

qui crediderit et baptizatus fuerit salvus erit qui vero non crediderit condemnabitur (St. Mark 16,16)

When speaking of those who will be condemned, Christ obviously speaks of those who refuse water Baptism because they do not believe it necessary, not of those who do want to receive it but happen to die before they could even receive an emergency Baptism.

Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus is a dogma of the Church, but it must be interpreted the way the Church interprets it.

Quote from: Daegus

With regards to the Holy Innocents, they were martyred before the law of baptism was ever even established and made efficacious by Christ's Passion.

According to the false logic of those who rigorously divorce the EENS dogma of it's true meaning, this would also be a violation of the dogma.

MyrnaM · « **Reply #11 on:** August 20, 2011, 10:10:55 AM »

Quote

Exilenomore said:
There are Saints who where catechumens and who were martyred before having been able to receive water Baptism. The Holy Innocents, too, are in Heaven.

Daegus said: With regards to saints who were Catechumens, I haven't seen any proof that any of those people did not receive water baptism at any point in time. Just because no known text explicitly says that they did doesn't mean that they didn't.

With regards to the Holy Innocents, they were martyred before the law of baptism was ever even established and made efficacious by Christ's Passion.

The books lives of the Saints said so, with approval of the Church, so when you stand before God, better to have that backing you, instead of some Feeynite, who is outside the Church because they deny a de fide teaching.

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #12 on:** August 20, 2011, 10:11:59 AM »

Daegus · « **Reply #13 on:** August 20, 2011, 10:13:48 AM »

What I would like to know is whether or not natural water is absolutely necessary for a person to be baptized, and whether or not baptism (with water) is absolutely necessary for salvation.

Daegus · « **Reply #14 on:** August 20, 2011, 10:16:14 AM »

Quote from: MyrnaM

Quote
Exilenomore said:
There are Saints who where catechumens and who were martyred before having been able to receive water Baptism. The Holy Innocents, too, are in Heaven.

Daegus said: With regards to saints who were Catechumens, I haven't seen any proof that any of those people did not receive water baptism at any point in time. Just because no known text explicitly says that they did doesn't mean that they didn't.

With regards to the Holy Innocents, they were martyred before the law of baptism was ever even established and made efficacious by Christ's Passion.

The books lives of the Saints said so, with approval of the Church, so when you stand before God, better to have that backing you, instead of some Feeynite, who is outside the Church because they deny a de fide teaching.

Are you saying that baptism of desire is a dogma of the faith? I have not seen any clear teaching on whether or not baptism of desire is a dogma of the faith. A saint saying that something is "de fide" does not constitute a dogma.