Author Topic: Baptismofdesire.com (Read 97164 times)

Stubborn · « **Reply #20 on:** April 22, 2013, 02:12:45 PM »

Quote from: saintbosco13

Quote from: Stubborn
It is just as easy to speculate that God provided Baptism to these glorious martyrs through an unseen miracle to supply His requisites for salvation, as it is to use our want of knowledge as proof of its dispensability. *What we do not know is not a proof of anything*.

Further, if the Church honors anyone as a saint, *according to Her own teaching*, the presumption must be that the saint was baptized.

Canon Law (1917) states to the contrary. Do you disagree with it?

“Baptism, the door and foundation of the Sacraments, in fact or at least in desire necessary unto salvation for all, is not validly conferred except through the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words.” (Canon 737).

“Those who have died without baptism are not to be given ecclesiastical burial. Catechumens who die without baptism through no fault of their own are to be counted among the baptized.” (Canon 1239)

Two points to consider:
1) the person on the remote island is no catechumen yet you attempted to justify his salvation without the sacrament. This serves as an excellent example of how easily and how far from the truth BOD leads people.

2) Prior to the 1917 Code of Canon Law, the Church taught that "neither the commemoration of Sacrifice or the service of chanting is to be employed for catechumens who have died without baptism". - Council of Braga 6th century

What this shows is what the constant teaching of the Church was up until less than 100 years ago. IOW, BOD is not a part of the deposit of faith, what it is, is theological speculation at best, outright heresy at worst.

Stubborn · « **Reply #21 on:** April 22, 2013, 02:32:53 PM »

Quote from: saintbosco13

Quote from: Stubborn
This topic is about salvation without the sacrament which, regardless of whatever else has been taught or whoever taught it - that the sacrament of baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation has already been infallibly defined so we can rest assured that there is no way around the necessity of it for salvation.

That "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" is also a teaching of the fathers of the Church - i.e. the "magisterium". As the name itself testifies, the "Baptism of Desire" is the mother of all "good intentions".

There is no salvation outside the Church means what it says - or it means nothing, the sacrament of Baptism is the only way one enters the Church - this has also been defined infallibly - so all other teachings and theological opinions must wholly submit to that which is infallible - "and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding." - Vatican Council 1

You are suggesting that we submit to that which is infallible. That is good. Are you not aware that the First Vatican Council stated that both solemn and ordinary teaching are infallible and must be believed?

"All those things are to be believed by divine and Catholic faith which are contained in the written Word of God or in Tradition, and which are proposed by the Church, either in solemn judgment or in its ordinary and universal teaching office, as divinely revealed truths which must be believed." First Vatican Council

I pulled this from Baptismofdesire.com. I know you hate the thought of reading that site (which is only one page, btw), but maybe it's time you did because the answers are all there. It's literally a 5 minute read.

Using the same logic, it is easy to see how we should all be obedient to the Second Vatican Council because there is no finer example of the teachings of the ordinary and universal magisterium. - - - - but thankfully, it does not work that way.

Please recall that V1 taught "For the holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine"...... BOD is a new doctrine, it is not of the Deposit of Faith, it is not of the Apostles, it is certainly not what Christ or the scriptures teach and since the necessity of the sacrament has been defined infallibly, the issue of whether BOD saves or not has already been defined that it does not save - so the matter has been authoritatively and infallibly settled for all time.

Best you stick to the teaching which is certainly free from the possibility of error - when you do this, you cannot agree with BOD.
As such, you deny the dogma when you believe in BOD.

Incredulous · « **Reply #22 on:** April 22, 2013, 02:42:21 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: Mithrandylan
They martyrology is full of saints who were martyred as catechumens before they were baptized.

Mith,
St. Aiphonsus de Liquori tells us that there were approximately eleven million martyrs in the first three centuries of the Church's history. Out of these eleven million martyrs, and the thousands of others which have been recorded since by various Church historians, there are about ten cases in which the martyrs are reported to have died without baptism. In not one of these cases can we assert or conclude positively that these persons were not baptized.

It is just as easy to speculate that God provided Baptism to these glorious martyrs through an unseen miracle to supply His requisites for salvation, as it is to use our want of knowledge as proof of its dispensability. *What we do not know is not a proof of anything*.

Further, if the Church honors anyone as a saint, *according to Her own teaching*, the presumption must be that the saint was baptized.

Please give me the source for the 11 million martyrs quoted by St. Alphonsus?

Baptism by water is so easy, it is hard for me to believe 11 million souls wanted it, but could not get it by water?

Saliva on one's fingertips, "I Baptize you..." and 15 seconds later... you're in!

Stubborn · « **Reply #23 on:** April 22, 2013, 03:02:32 PM »

Quote from: Incredulous

Quote from: Stubborn
Quote from: Mithrandylan
They martyrology is full of saints who were martyred as catechumens before they were baptized.

Mith,
St. Aiphonsus de Liquori tells us that there were approximately eleven million martyrs in the first three centuries of the Church's history. Out of these eleven million martyrs, and the thousands of others which have been recorded since by various Church historians, there are about ten cases in which the martyrs are reported to have died without baptism. In not one of these cases can we assert or conclude positively that these persons were not baptized.

It is just as easy to speculate that God provided Baptism to these glorious martyrs through an unseen miracle to supply His requisites for salvation, as it is to use our want of knowledge as proof of its dispensability. *What we do not know is not a proof of anything*.

Further, if the Church honors anyone as a saint, *according to Her own teaching*, the presumption must be that the saint was baptized.

Please give me the source for the 11 million martyrs quoted by St. Alphonsus?

Baptism by water is so easy, it is hard for me to believe 11 million souls wanted it, but could not get it by water?

Saliva on one's fingertips, "I Baptize you..." and 15 seconds later... you're in!

Saliva will not work, it must be water, pure and natural. Tap water is fine, soda is not, coffee is not etc.

Out of the 11 million+, only about 10 are reported to have died without the sacrament.

saintbosco13 · « **Reply #24 on:** April 22, 2013, 03:42:43 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

1) the person on the remote island is no catechumen yet you attempted to justify his salvation without the sacrament. This serves as an excellent example of how easily and how far from the truth BOD leads people.

How can a native on a remote island be a catechumen! The definition of a catechumen is "A non-baptized adult under instruction to be received into the Church"...

Quote from: Stubborn

2) Prior to the 1917 Code of Canon Law, the Church taught that "neither the commemoration of Sacrifice or the service of chanting is to be employed for catechumens who have died without baptism". - Council of Braga 6th century

I'm shocked that you used the quote from the Council of Braga against baptism of desire, when the Catholic Encyclopedia, under the article on Baptism, references the same quote in favor of it! Full context below. The same quote is used in favor of Baptism of desire since a "commemoration of sacrifice" is not needed for catechumens, since they are assumed baptized by desire. The article gives an example of this with the Emperor being assumed to have baptism of desire.

Note, only one paragraph after this one, in the same article on Baptism, there is the section called "Substitutes for the Sacrament" where it goes into all the proofs for baptism of desire and baptism of blood. Better scratch the quote from the Council of Braga from your arsenal!

Catholic Encyclopedia, Baptism
"A certain statement in the funeral oration of St. Ambrose over the Emperor Valentinian II has been brought forward as a proof that the Church offered sacrifices and prayers for catechumens who died before baptism. There is not a vestige of such a custom to be found anywhere. St. Ambrose may have done so for the soul of the catechumen Valentinian, but this would be a solitary instance, and it was done apparently because he believed that the emperor had had the baptism of desire. The practice of the Church is more correctly shown in the canon (xvii) of the Second Council of Braga: "Neither the commemoration of Sacrifice [oblationis] nor the service of chanting [psallendi] is to be employed for catechumens who have died without the redemption of baptism."