Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Father Feeney on Trent (Session VI, Chapter 4) or the Catechism of Trent on BOD  (Read 22238 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Regarding desire mentioned in the Council of Trent, the book, Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent , is the actual Council of Trent - not a catechism based on it - but the actual written decrees, the actual record.

- Original text with English translation by Rev. H. J. Schroeder, O.P., from Refuge of Sinners Publishing at www.JoyfulCatholic.com

It explains that "baptism of desire" takes effect at the pouring of the water - at the sacrament itself.

Priest:  "N., do you wish to be baptized?"
N.:  "I do" (or the Godparents for an infant)
- the catechumen has to indicate the will or wish to be baptized, then the sacrament's form and matter follow.

What I don't fully understand is how after all this time, faithful Catholic people are able to convince themselves that Trent left a loop hole, or was not clear, or could contradict Scripture, or heaven help us, taught a BOD.

On Justification, Trent clearly states that justification cannot be effected without the sacrament. What else needs to be said? And if in the future a council defines it again, what words would they use to clarify that which is already clear?


 
Stubborn, I could be wrong about justification.  It seemed to me that the usual quote used to support BOD mentions the word justification, not salvation.  That was what I was referring to in my post above.

Where does Trent say justification can not be effected without the Sacrament?  Does it say justification or does it say Baptism is necessary for Salvation? There is a distinction between those two things, is there not?


Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Stubborn, I could be wrong about justification.  It seemed to me that the usual quote used to support BOD mentions the word justification, not salvation.  That was what I was referring to in my post above.

Where does Trent say justification can not be effected without the Sacrament?  Does it say justification or does it say Baptism is necessary for Salvation? There is a distinction between those two things, is there not?
Session 6, (Decree on Justification)
Chapter 4

"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 [to justification], 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."

Then in the 7th session, (On the Sacraments in general) Trent anathematizes whoever says the sacraments are not necessary for salvation....

Canon 4
If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary

unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof,
men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the
sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.

Also 7th session, (On the Sacrament of Baptism)

CANON II.-If any one saith, that true and natural water is not of necessity for
baptism, and, on that account, wrests, to some sort of metaphor, those words of our
Lord Jesus Christ; Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost; let him
be anathema.

CANON V.-If any one saith, that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary unto
salvation; let him be anathema.

Session 6, (Decree on Justification)
Chapter 4

"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 [to justification], 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."

Then in the 7th session, (On the Sacraments in general) Trent anathematizes whoever says the sacraments are not necessary for salvation....

Canon 4
If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary

unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof,
men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the
sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.

Also 7th session, (On the Sacrament of Baptism)

CANON II.-If any one saith, that true and natural water is not of necessity for
baptism, and, on that account, wrests, to some sort of metaphor, those words of our
Lord Jesus Christ; Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost; let him
be anathema.

CANON V.-If any one saith, that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary unto
salvation; let him be anathema.
The only quote here that speaks of justification rather than salvation is the first one, and it mentions "or desire thereof".  So....that is consistent with the usual quote provided to support BOD.  There is no contradiction.  Both say "desire" for the laver of regeneration/the Sacrament can effect justification....but it does not say it effects salvation.

Nonsense.  In the Magisterium, there's a reference in Trent to the votum for Baptism being required, being necessary for justification, with lack of clarity about whether it suffices for justification.  "Cannot happen without" refers to a necessary condition, but Trent did not clarify whether it's sufficient.  And no indication about whether it suffices for salvation ... and those two terms are clearly distinguished by theologians active around the time of Trent (and even has its roots in Sacred Scripture, St. Paul).

Yes, what is the difference?  Is there a difference?  I always thought there was, but now I'm doubting myself.