Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Baptism of Desire is Church Teaching  (Read 57525 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Gray2023

  • Supporter
Re: Baptism of Desire is Church Teaching
« Reply #5 on: August 26, 2024, 12:43:39 PM »
God makes things happen, not man. 

Why does this become such a point of consternation?  It only matters when we are talking about where we think dead people are.  No true Catholic would tell a person, oh you are a good Lutheran, please stay a Lutheran.  That is absurd.

The priests need to understand this maybe for proper burial, but us laity, what is the importance for us to discuss?

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: Baptism of Desire is Church Teaching
« Reply #6 on: August 26, 2024, 12:54:37 PM »
We don't INTERPRET it. The beauty of it is that we allow the (Church) Fathers, catechisms, canon law etc to interpret it...

St. Alphonsus Liguori  "Moral Theology - (Bk. 6):

  "But baptism of desire is perfect conversion to God by contrition or love of God above all things accompanied by an explicit or implicit desire for true Baptism of water, the place of which it takes as to the remission of guilt, but not as to the impression of the [baptismal] character or as to the removal of all debt of punishment. It is called 'of wind' ['flaminis'] because it takes place by the impulse of the Holy Ghost Who is called a wind ['flamen']. Now it is de fide that men are also saved by Baptism of desire, by virtue of the Canon 'Apostolicam De Presbytero Non Baptizato' and the Council of Trent, Session 6, Chapter 4, where it is said that no one can be saved 'without the laver of regeneration or the desire for it.'"

1917 Code of Canon Law

On Ecclesiastical Burial - (Canon 1239. 2)
  "Catechumens who, through no fault of their own, die without Baptism, are to be treated as baptized."
But you must interpret it as it says quite clearly that "unless they are regenerated to God through the grace of Baptism,... they are born to eternal misery and destruction."

We already refuted the OP's misinterpretation, but as for the great Moral (not dogmatic) theologian St. Alphonsus, in his commentary on Trent's necessity of the Sacraments, as regards the sacraments he states:
Quote
"The heretics say that no sacrament is necessary, inasmuch as they hold that man is justified by faith alone, and that the sacraments only serve to excite and nourish this faith, which (as they say) can be equally excited and nourished by preaching.  But this is certainly false, and is condemned in the fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth canons:  for as we know from the Scriptures, some of the sacraments are necessary (necessitate Medii) as a means without which salvation is impossible. Thus Baptism is necessary for all, Penance for them who have fallen into sin after Baptism, and the Eucharist is necessary for all at least in desire ( in voto)."
As for Canon Law, post the whole thing....
Quote
§ 1. Those who die without baptism are not to be accorded ecclesiastical burial.
§ 2. Catechumens who through no fault of their own die without baptism are to be reckoned as baptized.
§ 3. All baptized are to be given ecclesiastical burial unless they are expressly deprived of same by law.
I will admit that CL 1239.2 confuses me somewhat, personally I think it's error, but whatever it is, it's not teaching a BOD, and in light of 1239.1 it's a far cry from teaching a BOD.

The only way a BOD is salvific, is if you altogether remove the Divine Providence from it.... "There is no one about to die in the state of justification whom God cannot secure Baptism for, and indeed, Baptism of Water. The schemes concerning salvation, I leave to the skeptics. The clear truths of salvation, I am preaching to you. - Bread of Life by Fr. Feeney


Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: Baptism of Desire is Church Teaching
« Reply #7 on: August 26, 2024, 12:58:33 PM »
God makes things happen, not man. 

Why does this become such a point of consternation?  It only matters when we are talking about where we think dead people are.  No true Catholic would tell a person, oh you are a good Lutheran, please stay a Lutheran.  That is absurd.

The priests need to understand this maybe for proper burial, but us laity, what is the importance for us to discuss?
I used to be real passionate about this subject, but because *only* those Catholic who are already sacramentally baptized argue for it, these days it's more of a leisurely way to pass time for me.

Offline Gray2023

  • Supporter
Re: Baptism of Desire is Church Teaching
« Reply #8 on: August 26, 2024, 01:36:22 PM »
I used to be real passionate about this subject, but because *only* those Catholic who are already sacramentally baptized argue for it, these days it's more of a leisurely way to pass time for me.
I guess I just find it strange that this topic can push so many emotional buttons.

Re: Baptism of Desire is Church Teaching
« Reply #9 on: August 26, 2024, 01:42:31 PM »
But hang on a minute. I must interpret it? I fear for my salvation too much to be interpreting something of such importance on MY own accord. I will always consult what the Church taught about it. If st Alphonsus is wrong, then please quote contemporary post-Trident APPROVED theologians who disagree with him. You downplay him as a fallible person (sure, he was no pope) but then you give me even more fallible priest of 20th century against him. Fr Feeney was no theologian, I must remind you.

This is one example how proponents of anti bob/bod can twist things:

"Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you." Jn 6,52

It then follows all except you eat flesh of Man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in them, no? You guys take one sentence, remove theologians, diminish the Fathers, throw away canon law and catechisms and hang on for the dear life based on what fr Feeney or brother Dimonds say it means. Why in the world would you do that? It's not like there was someone other than them 3 that started it/elevated it where this is today.


Error? So canon law of Church is in error? It is not a mere error than my friend. It is a hellish heresy which caused poisonous "error" that crept in the 1917 canon law promulgated by a valid pope? Excuse me?