Agreed.  Unfortunately the notion of "implicit BoD" has been morphed into being used synonymously with "implicit faith" ... and I do hold Rewarder God theory to be objectively heretical even if not condemned yet with the note of heresy by the Church.  In recent years, some, like Jorge Begoglio, have taken it even a step further, alleging that even atheists may be saved.

I believe the farthest that "implicit" can be taken would be --

EXPLICIT:  I intend to receive the Sacrament of Baptism.
IMPLICIT:  I intend to become a Catholic .. with the implicit intention to be baptized.

This has been stretched into multiple degrees of separation from explicit however, to where a lot of people interpret it as --

I am a good guy, which implicitly contains wanting to do good, which implicitly contains wanting to do the will of God, which implicitly contains wanting to become a Catholic, which implicitly contains wanting to be baptized.

I was thinking a bit and I think this needs to be given more attention.

EXPLICIT:  I intend to receive the Sacrament of Baptism.

IMPLICIT:  I intend to become a Catholic .. with the implicit intention to be baptized

Let's focus in on this in particular. A great deal of "Explicit BoDers" actually extend the notion described as Implicit to Explicit. I realized XavierSem, for example, holds this exact position but does not believe Hindus etc can be saved. I believe this position is that of the Novus Ordo Fr. Feeney group. Correct me if I am wrong.


Now, I want to ask Implicit BoDers on this forum: is this how you understand Implicit BoD, or is it something different? Mainly looking to understand what the average Implicit BoDer on a trad forum thinks. I have been working on an EENS project for a while and need a not exhausting but somewhat representative collage of ideas regarding this exact point. Not particularly interested in the Explicit/Implicit debate but rather definitions, because that seems to be the issue the vast majority of the time.

I've never run across an "implicit BoD"er who did not attempt to extend it to people who do not have the Catholic faith.

I don't believe in any kind of BoD, but if I were persuaded of it, I would be of the opinion that the intention to receive Baptism has to be EXPLICIT, as in, "I'm a catechumen and I intend to be baptized next Easter."  I believe that St. Robert Bellarmine would hold the same opinion of it.  votum is a very strong term, meaning closer to "vow" than "desire" (a term deliberately chosen to water it down).  You can't "vow" to receive the Sacrament without believing in and intending explicitly to receive it.  It's not enough to "vaguely desire" it somehow.

I agree that this needs to be dogmatically defined. If someone was truly of good will and genuinely searching for God/ the truth wouldn't God lead them to the Catholic faith or at least send someone to baptise him? 

Yes, a definition connecting votum with jusjurandum would seem to rule out Implicit BoD entirely. This seems to be the correct synonym if surveying Aquinas. Desiderium would have supported a much more liberal opinion (please correct if I am wrong on this) but we have votum.