CathInfo.com

.

Syllogism Time!  



I.
Major proposition:  Baptism of water is a sacrament.

Minor proposition:  But baptism of desire is not a sacrament.

Conclusion:  Therefore, baptism of desire is a kind of baptism.  


II.
Major:  There are 7 (seven) sacraments, one of which is holy Baptism.

Minor:  But there are 3 (three) kinds of baptism.  

Conclusion:  Therefore, 7 (seven) is the same as 9 (nine).  


III.
Major:  Baptism of desire and baptism of blood are kinds of baptism.

Minor:  But BoD and BoB are not sacraments.

Conclusion:  BoD and BoB are kinds of a sacrament without being sacraments.


IV.
Major:  Baptism of desire is a kind of baptism.

Minor:  But Baptism of water is also a kind of baptism.

Conclusion:  Baptism is both the same as baptism of desire, and different, at the same time.  


V.
Major:  Pope Benedict XVI's hermeneutic of continuity says that the principle of non-contradiction no longer applies anymore.

Minor:  But adherents of BoD and BoB deny the principle of non-contradiction.

Conclusion:  BoD and BoB conform to Benedict XVI's hermeneutic of continuity.


VI.
Major:  Holy Baptism leaves an indelible, everlasting mark on the soul.

Minor:  But neither BoD nor BoB leave any such permanent mark on the soul.

Conclusion:  BoD and BoB cannot be the same as holy Baptism.


VII.
Major:  Everyone for all eternity, in heaven or in hell, will know who was baptized and who was not, because of the mark of the sacrament.

Minor:  But those who received BoD or BoB have no such sacramental mark, since BoD and BoB are not sacraments.

Conclusion:  No one in heaven or in hell will know who received BoD or BoB.


VIII.
Major:  No one in eternity will know who received BoB or BoD.

Minor:  But there will be some in heaven and in hell who did receive them.

Conclusion:  Eternity is a place where some things that are real will not be understood.


IX.
Major:  Defined dogma has the added note of papal definition.

Minor:  But BoB and BoD have no such added note of definition.

Conclusion:  BoB and BoD are not dogmatic.


X.
Major:  BoB and BoD are very popular amongst liberals and heretics.

Minor:  But some prominent theologians have promoted some form of BoB and BoD.

Conclusion:  Therefore, liberals and heretics are promoters of Church doctrine.


XI.
Major:  Church doctrine is taught consistently throughout the centuries of the Church's history.

Minor:  BoD and BoB have been largely ignored throughout Church history.

Conclusion:  Consequently, BoD and BoB are not doctrine.  


XII.
Major:  Sometimes even a bad pope can be prophetic and infallible.

Minor:  Pope Paul VI was a bad pope.  

Conclusion:  When he said that the smoke of satan has entered the Church through some crack, Paul VI may have been prophetic and infallible.


XIII.
Major:  False propositions can be a crack in the Church.

Minor:  Saying that BoD and BoB are doctrine can be thought of as a crack in the Church.

Conclusion:  BoB and BoD can be thought of as false propositions.  


XIV.
Major:  Propositions which history's great theologians would have regarded as silly have no credibility among what would be Church doctrine.

Minor:  BoB and BoD as they are promoted and believed by liberals today would have been utterly ridiculous to the great theologians of the past, some of whom the liberals like to quote without any solid basis.

Conclusion:  Therefore, BoB and BoD as they are promoted today do not rise to the level of Church doctrine.


.

.

Baptism of desire is not de fide, and to deny it is not a 'heresy'.

But to accuse someone of 'heresy' for denying it IS a heresy.  

And to accuse someone who says it is de fide of 'heresy' is just nonsense.  


.

(5.)  Anyone who believes in it is not a 'heretic'.  

Should have been item number 6.  :cool:

I agree that BOD in itself is not a heresy but a theological speculation only, which unfortunately has lead to heresy because of the Modernist abuse. BOD/BOB have never been de fide Catholic dogma. The original speculation only applies to actual catechumens and martyrs only. Unfortunately, because of what the BOD/ BOB has morphed into, becoming the theological Modernist loophole into religious indifferentism and Vatican II ecclesiology, I do think the teaching really needs to be re-evaluated.

It's fact that the opinion of a BOD was and is only that - an opinion, and that because Trent defined the necessity of the sacraments unto salvation, the opinion of salvation via a BOD can ever be a dogma, and also true that  originally, the opinion only applied to catechumens.  

Since the time of Trent, no one can say salvation is possible without the sacrament of baptism, without at the same time anathematizing themselves - whether the obstinate and literal rejection of Trent's teaching makes one a heretic or not is debatable, but certainly there have been many heretical postings here on CI promoting in direct contradiction of Trent's teachings, namely, that salvation is assured to those who die without the sacrament, therefore outside the Church.

Does that make those who post such things a heretic? I do not know but it seems that by now, the subject matter of the debate should focus on whether or not those who promote salvation without any sacrament at all, which is in direct contradiction  to Trent, are simply mistaken or whether they are heretics or not.

Also, does anyone know who was the first one to ask: "How many baptisms are there?"