Author Topic: Baptism of Desire not defined dogma, per theological consensus (Read 39772 times)

Mirari Vos · « **Reply #75 on:** February 22, 2021, 10:13:07 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on February 22, 2021, 08:40:56 AM

Ridiculous, Mirari. You're showing yourself to be of bad will now.

St. Ambrose simply said that he received the grace he asked for ... which is ambiguous. It implies that if he didn't receive the Sacrament, then it's because he didn't truly seek it. So it could be read as the opposite.

This was before news travelled quickly, and the details were likely not all available. Was there a possibility that one of his attendants baptized him as he lay dying? Or was it possible, as some Fathers held, that the angels pronounced the words of Baptism over a dying martyr? So could this be a reference to BoB? Valentinian was in fact killed for rejecting Arianism.

https://catholicism.org/baptism-of-desire-its-origin-and-abandonment-in-the-thought-of-saint-augustine.html

You feigned being sincere and of good will here, but now you're exposing yourself ... as most BoDers usually do.

Ladislaus, you are truly being disingenuous. You know very well that St. Ambrose’s words DON’T ‘simply say that he received the grace he asked for’. Pray tell me what other grace could he be possibly referring to? To say that it “could be read as the opposite” is plainly bogus.

You MUST tear down this and every other, piece of evidence in order to advance your own home cooked theory, and I’m the one who is of bad will? I’m the one who is not being sincere? Also, what I highlighted in red further confirms that he is referring to BOD. Here are his words again:

“ But I hear that you grieve because he did not receive the sacrament of baptism. Tell me: What else is in your power other than the desire, the request? But he even had this desire for a long time, that, when he should come into Italy, he would be initiated, and recently he signified a desire to be baptized by me, and for this reason above all others he thought that I ought to be summoned. Has he not, then, the grace which he desired; has he not the grace which he requested? And because he asked, he received, and therefore is it said: "By whatsoever death the just man shall be overtaken, his soul shall be at rest." (Wisdom 4:7) 52. Grant, therefore, O holy Father, to thy servant the gift which Moses received, because he saw in spirit; the gift which David merited, because he knew from revelation. Grant, I pray, to Thy servant Valentinian the gift which he longed for, the gift which he requested while in health, vigor, and security. If, stricken with sickness, he had deferred it, he would not be entirely without Thy mercy who has been cheated by the swiftness of time, not by his own wish. Grant, therefore, to Thy servant the gift of Thy grace which he never rejected, who on the day before his death refused to restore the privileges of the temples although he was pressed by those whom he could well have feared. A crowd of pagans was present, the Senate entreated, but he was not afraid to displease men so long as he pleased Thee alone in Christ. He who had Thy Spirit, how has he not received Thy grace?”

“Or if the fact disturbs you that the mysteries have not been solemnly celebrated, then you should realize that not even martyrs are crowned if they are catechumens, for they are not crowned if they are not initiated. But if they are washed in their own blood, his piety and his desire have washed him, also.”

Mirari Vos · « **Reply #76 on:** February 22, 2021, 10:23:54 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on February 22, 2021, 08:53:46 AM

It has repeatedly now been explained to you that the Church Fathers did not consider BoB to be an exception because they believed it to merely an alternate mode of confecting the SACRAMENT. St. Cyprian clearly stated this, calling BoB the Sacrament, that the angels spoke the words of the form over a dying martyr, whose blood served as the water, and the 5th century theological manual that was cited explicitly detailed that BoB worked because all the Sacramental elements were present (aka matter and form). That's why they referred to it as Baptism of BLOOD, and not Baptism of Martyrdom ... because they viewed the Blood as washing them the same way as water (with the angels supplying the missing form). So no exception to the Sacrament.

Are you saying that all of the Fathers of the Church who held BOB believed this? If so, please give me the references.

Nishant Xavier · « **Reply #77 on:** February 22, 2021, 10:24:57 AM »

St. Ambrose clearly refers to Baptism of Desire. St. Thomas refers to St. Ambrose as having done so.

Pax Vobis, I see you cannot stick to the subject. Even if Fr. Cekada was a dogmatic sedevacantist, it is irrelevant to whether the OUM has taught BOD. That is the real topic of this thread here, and of course the Jansenist Bauisites BOD-deniers run from it.

I already showed Pope St. Pius V condemned your ideas, and must have posted 10 other sources from Catholic Theologians.

Copy paste and refute this, let's see: "Here is Fr. Adolphe Tanqueray: "Tanquerey, The Ordinary and Universal Magisterium AD. Tanquerey, A Manual of Dogmatic Theology, transl. by Rev. Msgr. John J. Byrnes, Desclee, New York, 1959, pp. 176-182.

"290 Bishops teach the flock entrusted and subject to them by means of catechisms, by synodal directives, mandates, and in public sermons. If it is evident from these docuмents that some doctrine is being set forth universally as an object of faith, then nothing else is required for this doctrine to be accepted de fide. Bishops spread throughout the world, but with the Roman Pontiff forming one Corporate Body, are infallible when declaring a teaching on faith or morals.

I'll get back to the rest later. Btw, here's a Catechism that teaches BOD is divinely revealed, and the Church is certain it can save us.

"Q. 654. How do we know that the baptism of desire or of blood will save us when it is impossible to receive the baptism of water?

A. We know that baptism of desire or of blood will save us when it is impossible to receive the baptism of water, from Holy Scripture, which teaches that love of God and perfect contrition can secure the remission of sins ; and also that Our Lord promises salvation to those who lay down their life for His sake or for His teaching."

From: http://www.baltimore-catechism.com/lesson14.htm

Mirari Vos · « **Reply #78 on:** February 22, 2021, 10:27:26 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on February 22, 2021, 08:45:31 AM

I cited that 5th century theology manual that for a long time had been attributed to St. Augustine, stating quite clearly that BoB was the only exception to the normal Baptismal ceremony because all of the Sacramental elements (aka matter and form) were present. St. Cyprian called BoB a SACRAMENT and explained that the angels pronounced the words of the form over the dying martyr, whose blood served as the matter for the Sacrament.

We have several Church Fathers rule out BoD by saying that martyrdom is the ONLY EXCEPTION to normal Baptism. But even then they held it was no real exception because all the elements were there.

This pretending that the BoB Fathers accepted BoD by inference is absurd and dishonest. Even St. Alphonsus admits that they're different, with BoB acting "quasi ex opere operato".

I never said that BOB and BOD weren’t different, I was pointing out that they were similar in the fact that both did not rely on the actual sacrament with water.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #79 on:** February 22, 2021, 10:28:46 AM »

Quote

“Or if the fact disturbs you that the mysteries have not been solemnly celebrated, then you should realize that not even martyrs are crowned if they are catechumens, for they are not crowned if they are not initiated. But if they are washed in their own blood, his piety and his desire have washed him, also.”

Reading comprehension, people!! Such a lack of reading comprehension...
.
St Ambrose is distinguishing between baptism being "solemnly celebrated" (i.e. performed publically, at Eastertime, or at least in a church, in front of his family/friends, the same ones who were grieving) and just a simple "initiation" of baptism (i.e. done in jail, in a hospital or on a deathbed).
.
If St Ambrose is supporting BOD, why would he make reference that not even martyrs are crowned/saved if they are not initiated/baptized? It makes no sense and doesn't support your view.
.
St Ambrose is clearly giving a "pep talk" to those who are grieving, telling them that Valentinian was prepared and wanted baptism and even though he did not receive it SOLEMNLY (i.e. in a church), St Ambrose openly prays to the Holy Father that he did receive it before he died. St Ambrose is not teaching a doctrine; he is telling people that God is not deceived and that if Valentinian truly desired baptism (which they all thought he did) then he would receive it non-solemnly (i.e. not in a church).
.
At the end, St Ambrose reiterates doctrine that even a martyr is not saved without baptism, which clearly applies to Valentinian.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Baptism of Desire not defined dogma, per theological consensus (Read 39772 times)

Mirari Vos

Re: Baptism of Desire not defined dogma, per theological consensus

Mirari Vos

Re: Baptism of Desire not defined dogma, per theological consensus

Nishant Xavier

Re: Baptism of Desire not defined dogma, per theological consensus

Mirari Vos

Re: Baptism of Desire not defined dogma, per theological consensus

Pax Vobis

Re: Baptism of Desire not defined dogma, per theological consensus