Quote from: Luker

I usually try and stay out of BOD threads just because I don't claim to fully understand the doctrine and they tend to turn acrimonious very quickly. I will say that my only desire is to understand this as holy church teaches it. But I do have one question:

I have noticed that this idea comes up that someone who is of good will dies with no normal recourse to the sacraments. But why should this be so? Does not God in his Providence order absolutely everything in our world, even numbering the very hairs on our heads? So knowing this, why would anybody if they are truly of good will, die without baptism?? I mean God is well, God, if He wanted to get the sacraments to someone God could bi-locate a holy priest over there right pronto, or maybe send an angel over to do the baptism just for example (I'm not sure if angels can baptise).

So I guess my question is why do we even need a baptism of desire?

I hope my question makes sense.

Luke

Your "problem" is that you have a Catholic sense.

Quote from: bowler

"Before all decision to create the world, the infinite knowledge of God presents to Him all the graces, and different series of graces, which He can prepare for each soul, along with the consent or refusal which would follow in each circuмstance, and that in millions of possible combinations ... Thus, for each man in particular there are in the thought of God, limitless possible histories, some histories of virtue and salvation, others of crime and damnation; and God will be free in choosing such a world, such a series of graces, and in determining the future history and final destiny of each soul. And this is precisely what He does when among all possible worlds, by an absolutely free act, he decides to realize the actual world with all the circuмstances of its historic evolutions, with all the graces which in fact have been and will be distributed until the end of the world, and consequently with all the elect and all the reprobate who God foresaw would be in it if de facto He created it." [The Catholic Encyclopedia Appleton, 1909, on Augustine, pg 97]


In other words before a man is conceived, God in his infinite knowledge has already put that person through the test with millions of possible combinations and possible histories, some histories of virtue and salvation, others of crime and damnation;along with the consent or refusal which would follow in each circuмstance (of millions of possible combinations!!!) and God will be free in determining which future history and final destiny He assigns each soul.


The idea of salvation outside the Church is opposed to the Doctrine of Predestination. This Doctrine means that from all eternity God has known who were His own. It is for the salvation of these, His Elect, that Providence has directed, does direct, and will always direct, the affairs of men and the events of history. Nothing, absolutely nothing, that happens, has not been taken into account by the infinite God, and woven into that tapestry in which is written the history of the salvation of His saints. Central in this providential overlordship is the Church itself, which is the sacred implement which God devised for the rescuing of His beloved ones from the damnation decreed for those who would not. (Mt. 23:37).

The Doctrine of Divine Election means that only certain individuals will be saved.  They will be saved primarily because, in the inscrutable omniscience of God, only certain individuals out of all the human family will respond to the grace of salvation. In essence, this doctrine refers to what in terms of human understanding and vision, is before and after, the past, the present, and the future, but what in God is certain knowledge and unpreventable fact, divine action and human response.

Calvin and others have made the mistake of believing that these words mean that predestination excludes human choice and dispenses from true virtue. Catholic doctrine explains simply that the foreknowledge of God precedes the giving of grace. It means, further, that, since without grace there can be no merit, and without merit no salvation, those who will be saved must be foreknown as saved by God, if they are to receive the graces necessary for salvation.

Those who say there is salvation outside the Church (no matter how they say it) do not comprehend that those who are in the Church have been brought into it by the Father, through Christ the Savior, in fulfillment of His eternal design to save them. The only reason that God does not succeed in getting others into the Church must be found in the reluctant will of those who do not enter it. If God can arrange for you to be in the Church, by the very same Providence He can arrange for anyone else who desires or is willing to enter it. There is absolutely no obstacle to the invincible God's achieving His designs, except the intractable wills of His children. Nothing prevents His using the skies for his billboard, and the clouds for lettering, or the rolling thunder for the proclamation of His word. (Indeed, for believers, He does just this: "The heavens shew forth the glory of God, and the firmament declareth the work of his hands." I Ps. 18: 11. But for atheists the heavens have no message at all.) If poverty were the reason some do not believe, he could load them down with diamonds; if youth were the reason, He could make sure they grew to a hoary old age. If it were merely the want of information, put a library on their doorstep, or a dozen missionaries in their front room. Were it for a want of brains, he could give every man an I.Q. of three hundred: it would cost Him nothing.

The idea that someone died before he was able to receive Baptism, suggests that God was unable to control events, so as to give the person time to enter the Church. If time made any difference, God could and would keep any person on earth a hundred, or a thousand, or ten thousand years.

Thus, what is the meaning of this election? That from all eternity God has ordered the events of history, so that His Elect might have the grace of salvation. And how do they know of this election? By the fact that they are in the Church, through no deservingness of their own? They know of no reason why God should bestow this grace, the knowledge of the truth, and the willingness and power to believe it, upon them, while others, who seem more worthy, go without it. As regards His Elect, not only has God determined to bestow necessary grace, but also, all His actions in the world must be seen as part of His salvific plan. In a word, nothing that He does is unrelated to the salvation of His Beloved Sheep. Human history, apart from the glory of Holy Church, and the salvation of the Elect, and the punishment of the wicked, has little importance for almighty God. Yet, all these purposes are only a part of the manifestation of His glory.

Those who speak of it have the problem of reconciling the mystery of Predestination with the idea of "baptism of desire." From all eternity, almighty God has known the fate of every soul. In His Providence, He has arranged for the entrance into the Church of certain millions of persons, and has seen to it that they receive the grace of faith, the Sacrament of Baptism, the grace of repentance, the forgiveness of their sins, and all the other requisites of salvation. According to The Attenuators, in the case of "non Catholic saints," and of those who died before they might receive Baptism, God was simply unable to see to these necessaries. Untoward and unforeseen circuмstances arose which prevented His providing these other millions with the means of salvation. Theirs is a story of supreme irony, that although the God of omniscience and omnipotence mastered the history of all nations and the course of every life, angelic and human, in the case of certain ones, His timing was off by just a few days, or hours, or minutes. It was His earlier intention to make sure that they received Baptism of water; He had it all planned out; but alas! on the particular day of their demise, His schedule was so full, that He simply could not get to them; for which reason, in that it was His fault, He is bound to provide an alternative instrumentality: "baptism of desire" is his substitute for the real thing!

The Diluters of the Doctrine of Exclusive Salvation do not perceive the Pelagian tenor of their position, that some may be saved outside the Church through nothing but their good will. It is exactly because this is impossible  and, more important, offensive to God, that the notion must be
 rejected. We say impossible, because no man can save himself. The fact that every man must receive Baptism and thus enter the Church means that he is dependent upon God to make it possible for him to receive the Sacrament, and further, through this Sacrament, it is Christ Who acts to purge the sinner of his sins, and ingraft him into His Mystical Body. No individual can do this by himself. He is dependent upon another to pour the water and say the words, and he is dependent upon God to provide this minister, and to make the sacramental sign effective of grace. It is thus so that none may attribute his salvation to his own doing.
 
Pride is the chief vice of man, as it was and is of the demons of Hell. It is pride more than any other fault that blinds men to the truth, that obstructs faith, and hardens their hearts to conversion from sin.

The Doctrine of Predestination is that almighty God from all eternity both knew and determined who would be saved, that is, who would allow Him to save them. He would be the cause of their salvation, and, as there is no power that can even faintly obstruct or withstand Him, there is no power which can prevent His saving whom He wishes, except, of course, the man himself.

Quote from: Luker

I usually try and stay out of BOD threads just because I don't claim to fully understand the doctrine and they tend to turn acrimonious very quickly. I will say that my only desire is to understand this as holy church teaches it. But I do have one question:

I have noticed that this idea comes up that someone who is of good will dies with no normal recourse to the sacraments. But why should this be so? Does not God in his Providence order absolutely everything in our world, even numbering the very hairs on our heads? So knowing this, why would anybody if they are truly of good will, die without baptism?? I mean God is well, God, if He wanted to get the sacraments to someone God could bi-locate a holy priest over there right pronto, or maybe send an angel over to do the baptism just for example (I'm not sure if angels can baptise).

So I guess my question is why do we even need a baptism of desire?

I hope my question makes sense.

Luke

Of course God can do anything, but He usually operates through natural means to supernatural ends. This is also true of the Sacraments, which are the means He provided us and we must use them. The fact that God's grace is not bound by the Sacraments doesn't mean the Sacraments are not necessary or that we can neglect their use.

If you follow the history of these threads, you'll see that the Denzinger only pseudo-theologians like bowler have been trying various arguments, each time thinking they are even more clever than before, yet they can't find any approved Catholic teachers who teach what they say they hold or have ever noticed these grave errors being taught everywhere!

The BODers of today need Baptism of Desire to justify the salvation of members of false religions.  In their view, they can't possibly conceive that a just and merciful God will condemn so many people outside of the visible Church. They have a flawed understanding on the justice and mercy of God and don't assimilate the extent of Original Sin. Bod also serves as an excuse to void any serious attempt to convert the non- Catholics. They feel uncomfortable proselytizing in an obviously anti - christian society. It's part of the modern sentimental agenda of not hurting the feelings of the non- Catholics and playing nice with everyone in the name of love and tolerance.

Quote from: Cantarella

The BODers of today need Baptism of Desire to justify the salvation of members of false religions.  In their view, they can't possibly conceive that a just and merciful God will condemn so many people outside of the visible Church. They have a flawed understanding on the justice and mercy of God and don't assimilate the extent of Original Sin. Bod also serves as an excuse to void any serious attempt to convert the non- Catholics. They feel uncomfortable proselytizing in an obviously anti - christian society. It's part of the modern sentimental agenda of not hurting the feelings of the non- Catholics and playing nice with everyone in the name of love and tolerance.

Agreed

It seems inconceivable to me that BoD would be vehicle of salvation for members of false religions.  I have only heard of BoD being applied to catechumens, and BoB to martyrs.  So, in my opinion, the proposition stated here above, which is being attributed to Catholics, is a red herring, a gross exaggeration, a broad and sweeping generalization, and without any reservation, completely false.  Nice straw man argument tactic.

Bowler wrote:
What has done the most damage to souls in the history of the Church is your one hair away from universal salvation belief, which is the common belief of even "traditionalist" sedevacantes persons like Fr. Cekada, CMRI, SSPius V, who are foaming liberals when it comes to BOD, for they TEACH that people are saved regularly every day by their false religion, and that although they don't know it, they are Catholics.

This belief has done the most damage to souls in the history of the Church  because it is foundational to Vatican II's teachings on ecuмenism and religious freedom, which IS what Vatican II was all about. Vatican II has done the most damage to the Church of all heresies, and your one hair away from universal salvation belief is foundational to VatII. The reality is that people like you are the root cause of Vatican II, and you don't even know it or see it.

Quote

Bishop Lefebvre, Sermon at first Mass of a newly ordained priest (Geneva: 1976):
“We are Catholics; we affirm our faith in the divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ; we affirm our faith in the divinity of the Holy Catholic Church; we think that Jesus Christ is the sole way, the sole truth, the sole life, and that one cannot be saved outside Our Lord Jesus Christ and consequently outside His Mystical Spouse, the Holy Catholic Church. No doubt, the graces of God are distributed outside the Catholic Church, but those who are saved, even outside the Catholic Church, are saved by the Catholic Church, by Our Lord Jesus Christ, even if they do not know it, even if they are unaware of it...”

Quote

It seems inconceivable to me that BoD would be vehicle of salvation for members of false religions.  I have only heard of BoD being applied to catechumens, and BoB to martyrs.  So, in my opinion, the proposition stated here above, which is being attributed to Catholics, is a red herring, a gross exaggeration, a broad and sweeping generalization, and without any reservation, completely false.  Nice straw man argument tactic..

There is no reason for the SSPX to write all those books about BOD if it was to answer the "Feenyites" about a catechumen and BOB martyr.

Here's all that needed to be said:

"You strict interpreters of the Council of Trent-Canons on the Sacrament of Baptism, Canons 2 and 5, are only putting up this long debate over a catechumen who dies by accident before being baptized? This is a waste of ink!"
----------------------------------------------------------
The SSPX writes all of those books for a reason. I think that two of the reasons are:

1) they don't want to be further "stigmatized' by Rome as "Feeneyites", so they use the Feeneyites as whipping boys to show Rome that the SSPX is  liberal, just like the conciliar church with regard to EENS.

2) All the priests of the SSPX have been taught in their seminaries that non-Catholics can be saved, even if they are not baptized nor have a desire to be baptized (implicit faith, the complete opposite of baptism of desire). Here are the Abp. himself and Bishop Fellay, saying it:

Quote

I start by saying – and this is the fundamental thing – that God’s mercy has no limits if you go to him with a sincere and contrite heart. The issue for those who do not believe in God is to obey their conscience. (Pope Francis)

This is nothing more than the theory of implicit faith which is believed by 99% of you believers of baptism of desire. It is providential that now Pope Francis is openly teaching it. Maybe this will convert the 99% of you believers in baptism of desire who stubbornly stick with your belief that implicit faith is true. I am presently discussing implicit faith on two other threads with two believers of the implicit faith theory. I keep describing it rather than calling it by its name (of implicit Faith), so as to avoid any wiggle room for those adherents:

The belief that a person who has no explicit desire to be a Catholic, or be baptized, or belief in the Trinity and the Incarnation can be saved.

I keep repeating that this belief is opposed to ALL of tradition and revelation, that is, opposed to ALL the Fathers, Doctors, Saints, and the Athanasian Creed (of the Fathers!). I keep repeating that No Father, Doctor, Saint, ever taught that. Yet, I am fought at every turn by the believers in baptism of desire.

Well, here you have Pope Francis teaching it, where are all of those people who down thumbs me at every turn every time I bring up this dark side in the minds of baptism of desire adherents? Why aren't you defending Pope Francis like you defend Abp. Lefebvre and all of the traditionalist priests that learned from him or teach the same as him (Fr. Cekada, SSPV, SSPX, CMRI)?

Quote

From the book Against the Heresies, by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre:

1. Page 216: “Evidently, certain distinctions must be made. Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.), but not by this religion. There may be souls who, not knowing Our Lord, have by the grace of the good Lord, good interior dispositions, who submit to God...But some of these persons make an act of love which implicitly is equivalent to baptism of desire. It is uniquely by this means that they are able to be saved.”  

2.Page 217: “One cannot say, then, that no one is saved in these religions…”

Pages 217-218: “This is then what Pius IX said and what he condemned. It is necessary to understand the formulation that was so often employed by the Fathers of the Church: ‘Outside the Church there is no salvation.’ When we say that, it is incorrectly believed that we think that all the Protestants, all the Moslems, all the Buddhists, all those who do not publicly belong to the Catholic Church go to hell. Now, I repeat, it is possible for someone to be saved in these religions, but they are saved by the Church, and so the formulation is true: Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. This must be preached.”
__________________________________________

Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “We know that there are two other baptisms, that of desire and that of blood. These produce an invisible but real link with Christ but do not produce all of the effects which are received in the baptism of water… And the Church has always taught that you have people who will be in heaven, who are in the state of grace, who have been saved without knowing the Catholic Church. We know this. And yet, how is it possible if you cannot be saved outside the Church? It is absolutely true that they will be saved through the Catholic Church because they will be united to Christ, to the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Catholic Church. It will, however, remain invisible, because this visible link is impossible for them. Consider a Hindu in Tibet who has no knowledge of the Catholic Church. He lives according to his conscience and to the laws which God has put into his heart. He can be in the state of grace, and if he dies in this state of grace, he will go to heaven.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5.)
---------------------------------------------------------
So much for desire to be baptized, or desire to be a Catholic, or a catechumen, or a martyr!

This is the Achilles heal of all the traditional priests ordained by the SSPX. If they can be led to accept even in implicit faith, then the accepting of the teaching that Vatican II contains no errors when interpreted accrding to tradtion, is an easy step.

If it were only about catechumens and BOB Martyrs (an innocuous theory), there would not be one posting on the subject in the entire internet.

 I'm afraid it is way past that, the cat is out of the bag and todays BOD means salvation for anyone in any religion whether they want to be Catholics and baptized or not.

Quote from: SJB

Quote

If it were only about catechumens and BOB Martyrs (an innocuous theory), there would not be one posting on the subject in the entire internet.

 I'm afraid it is way past that, the cat is out of the bag and todays BOD means salvation for anyone in any religion whether they want to be Catholics and baptized or not.

Except you deny what the Church teaches regarding catechumens, as indicated in the 1917 CIC.

Rat poison is 99.97% nutritious food.

Quote from: St Magnus

Quote from: Cantarella

The BODers of today need Baptism of Desire to justify the salvation of members of false religions.  In their view, they can't possibly conceive that a just and merciful God will condemn so many people outside of the visible Church. They have a flawed understanding on the justice and mercy of God and don't assimilate the extent of Original Sin. Bod also serves as an excuse to void any serious attempt to convert the non- Catholics. They feel uncomfortable proselytizing in an obviously anti - christian society. It's part of the modern sentimental agenda of not hurting the feelings of the non- Catholics and playing nice with everyone in the name of love and tolerance.

Agreed

Heretics usually distort a truth to form their new or recycled heresy. The truth isn't to be rejected with the heresy. Universal Salvation can't be rightly derived from the teachings of St. Thomas, St. Alphonsus, Pius IX, Pius XII, The Holy Office in 1949, etc., but those who wish to promote the idea of universal salvation will obviously distort any truth to ensnare others into their heresy.