I don't know that St. Robert knew any better, which imo means he was simply mistaken, by now you should know better. That's the only problem.

I appreciate the compliment, but I dispute your contention that I'm more knowledgeable in the matter than St. Robert Bellarmine.

I think I'll leave the discussion from here on out to you guys.

But what of Trent? Why ignore that Council's teaching in the matter?

I don't ignore it. 

I accept it. 

What I ignore are contorted reconstructions of it, tailored to fit an agenda. 

If the Feeeneyites were right about what they imagine Trent "really said," someone would have noticed it before Fr. Feeney or his followers.

Why do the two doctors of the Church mentioned in the quote above teach damnable Lutheran doctrine?

Why do so many bishops and priests do any of the wrongs they do?  Some are evil, others are weak, and even more are misinformed.     

This person is doing the same thing: He wants to translate Bellarmine's use of the word "voto" as "resolution" to avoid having him say "desire," in order to construe a different meaning from the phrase:

St. Robert Bellarmine, De Ecclesia Militante:
“Concerning catechumens there is a GREATER DIFFICULTY, because they are faithful [have the faith] and can be saved if they die in this state, and yet outside the Church no one is saved… THE CATECHUMENS ARE IN THE CHURCH, THOUGH NOT IN ACTUAL FACT, yet at least in resolution, therefore they can be saved…”
[De Ecclesia Militante, Book III, Ch. 3, opera omnia, Naples 1872, p. 75; ]
https://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?action=post;quote=784946;topic=64953.0 

However you want to cut it, St .Bellarmine is saying they are saved without water.

As good as he is, Robert Bellarmine is not the Church.  

What should be crystal clear:

Council of Trent
Session 7: Decree on the Sacraments
Canons on the Sacrament of Baptism

Canon 2: If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and therefore reduces to some sort of metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ: "Unless one is reborn of water and the Spirit," let him be anathema.

Canon 5: If anyone says that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema.

So, according to Trent, "salvation" absolutely dogmatically requires water baptism, according to the Canons of Trent. Trent, then, supports the most rigid interpretation of EENS. Baptism of Desire alone will not effect "salvation."


What seems to be unclear:

Council of Trent
Session 6: Decree on Justification
Chapter 4: A brief description of the sinner's justification: its manner under the dispensation of grace.

In these words a description is outlined of the justification of the sinner as being a transition from the state in which man is born a son of the first Adam to the state of grace and adoption as sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ our Savior. After the promulgation of the gospel, this transition cannot take place without the laver of regeneration or the desire for it, as it is written "Unless one is reborn of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."

Read carefully the title of Chapter 4. That whole section (quoted above) only refers to the concept of "justification." Nothing else. It says nothing about "salvation."


My opinion on a resolution:

I believe the solution to the apparent confusion is that people are failing to understand that "salvation" and "justification" are not the same thing. Session 6 of Trent is discussion of "justification" not "salvation."

A sinner can be "justified" by "a desire for the laver of regeneration" (my paraphrase of Session 6, chap.4). But sinner cannot be "saved" without the Sacrament of Baptism (Session 7, canon 5).

Justification removes the impediment preventing sanctifying grace. Salvation is the result of a life lived in the "state of sanctifying grace." The former (justification) is at the beginning of the earthly pilgrimage. The latter (salvation) is the reward at the end of the earthly pilgrimage. Salvation only comes to those who persevere in that state of grace until the end of their life. Since "even the best man sins seven times a day," those who continue to live their life after "justification" will need access to the Sacrament of Penance to be "restored to grace" (Session 6, chapter 14). 

Since those outside the Church are not baptized with the Sacrament, they cannot access the Sacrament of Penance. Those people are dependent on a miraculous, extra-Sacramental gift of God for their justification or restoration to a "state of grace." God can do anything, but it would be presumptuous to expect God to do it. Much better to follow the instructions of His Church.

I believe, Stubborn is simply reading the latin phrase from Session 6, Chapter 4 incorrectly. But I agree totally with Stubborn's argument that Trent says that "salvation" requires the Sacrament of Baptism by water and the Spirit. There is no need to massacre the phrase "laver of regeneration or the desire thereof" to preserve the EENS dogma against the false claim that BoD effects "salvation." BoD effects something, but not "salvation."

First, the lie from bod.com:
"...the Council of Trent, Session 6, Chapter 4, says that Baptism is necessary in fact or in desire". St. Alphonsus Liguori also states above, "Now it is "de fide" that men are also saved by Baptism of desire"

The truth is........

St. Alphonsus:
"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)." - An Exposition and Defense of All the Points of Faith Discussed and Defined by the Sacred Council of Trent, Along With the Refutation of the Errors of the Pretended Reformers, Saint Alphonsus Liguori, Dublin, 1846.


Trent on the Justification of the impious, and of the Manner thereof under the law of grace:
"By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a translation, from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace, and of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God."

St. Alphonsus Liguori teaches that a man can be justified with implicit BOD just three sentences after the portion you quoted of him.

"Besides, who can deny that the act of perfect love of God, which is sufficient for justification, includes an implicit desire of Baptism, of Penance and of the Eucharist.  He who wishes the whole, wishes every part of that whole, and all the means for its attainment.  In order to be justified without Baptism, an infidel must love God above all things and must have a universal will to observe the divine precepts, among which the first is to receive Baptism: and therefore in order to be justified it is necessary for him to have at least an implicit desire of that sacrament. For it is certain that to such desire is ascribed the spiritual regeneration of a person who has not been baptized, and the remission of sins to baptized persons who have contrition, is likewise ascribed to the explicit or implicit desire of sacramental absolution."

Here's the full quote for you to use next time:

"11. Can. 4: Si quis dixerit sacramenta novae legis non esse ad salutem necessaria, sed superflua; et sine eis aut eorum voto per solam fidem homines a Deo gratiam justificationis adipisci, licet omnia singulis necessaria non siut, anathema sit."
   

12. 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)

 
 13. Soave says that at least the implicit desire of Baptism (the same holds for penance in regards to sinners) appeared to many of the fathers not to be necessary for justification: because Cornelius and the good thief were justified without having any knowledge of Baptism.  But, Pallavicini says that this is a mere dream of Soave: for the theologians of Trent could not have adduced the example of Cornelius or of the good thief in defence of such an opinion, when everyone knew that the obligation of Baptism did not commence till after the death of the Saviour, and after the promulgation of the Gospel.  Besides, who can deny that the act of perfect love of God, which is sufficient for justification, includes an implicit desire of Baptism, of Penance and of the Eucharist.  He who wishes the whole, wishes every part of that whole, and all the means for its attainment.  In order to be justified without Baptism, an infidel must love God above all things and must have a universal will to observe the divine precepts, among which the first is to receive Baptism: and therefore in order to be justified it is necessary for him to have at least an implicit desire of that sacrament. For it is certain that to such desire is ascribed the spiritual regeneration of a person who has not been baptized, and the remission of sins to baptized persons who have contrition, is likewise ascribed to the explicit or implicit desire of sacramental absolution.

 
 14. In the fourth canon the words licet omnia singulis necessaria non sint, were afterwards inserted.  By this canon it was intended to condemn Luther, who asserts that none of the sacraments is absolutely necessary for salvation, because as has been already said, he ascribed all salvation to faith, and nothing to the efficacy of the sacraments."

Liguori, St. Alphonsus.  An Exposition and Defence of All the Points of Faith Discussed and Defined by the Sacred Council of Trent, Along With the Refutation of the Errors of the Pretended Reformers. 

Party's over, guys. Next post will have to be posted with your pseudonym next to it.

There is NOTHING in this thread that needs to be anonymous. No abusing the anonymous subforum.

I have no doubt that Lover of Truth created this thread.  He disappeared for years, and then suddenly reappered to ask for prayers regarding his being subject to a jab mandate.  Then suddenly this post appeared, when LoT was notorious for promoting this website.  2 + 2 ...  He posted anonymous because he didn't want us to know that he's back promoting the website.

Yes, that is heretical.  99% of all formulations regarding BoD are in fact heretical.

If you wanted to phrase it as saying, "it's possible to be saved without actually getting physically wet", then that might work.

But one cannot be saved without the SACRAMENT of Baptism, and water is of its essence.

Otherwise, you are turning the necessity of the Sacrament into a mere metaphor, which was anathematized by Trent.

That is why St. Robert was very careful not to say that someone can be saved without Baptism (heretical), but rather said that they received Baptism in voto.  Language matters.  One formulation is heretical, the other tenable without heresy.

Baptism of Desire as defined by St. Robert was simply another MODE of receiving the Sacrament.

So, what I'm getting from all of this is (and I don't really follow the BOD argument), that in voto is an extremely narrow frame referring to those who may have died immediately before the Sacrament was conferred? And that those in support of BOD are stretching it to encompass everyone who has a passing whim of getting baptized? Is that right?