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

Author Topic: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent  (Read 23315 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #110 on: May 31, 2018, 04:14:05 PM »
I would reply in opposition to your opinion, in that the Council of Trent clearly agrees with Saint Thomas Aquinas, as does every Pope and Church theologian since the council (up to, of course, the Second Vatican council).

Other than your own misguided conjecture, can you provide a single authoritative Church reference that expressly denies Baptism of Desire?
The Council of Trent was quite explicit when they said whoever says that the sacraments of the new law are not necessary for salvation and are superfluous, is anathema. Is a BOD the eighth sacrament now?

From: An Exposition and Defence of All the Points of Faith Discussed and Defined by the Sacred Council of Trent, Along With the Refutation of the Errors of the Pretended Reformers, Saint Alphonsus Liguori, Dublin, 1846, St. Alphonsus says: 

"The heretics say that no sacrament is necessary, inasmuch as they hold that man is justified by faith alone [BOD], and that the sacraments only serve to excite and nourish this faith, which (as they say) can be equally excited and nourished by preaching. But this is certainly false, and is condemned in the fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth canons: for as we know from the Scriptures, some of the sacraments are necessary as a means without which salvation is impossible. Thus Baptism is necessary for all."

Was St. Alphonsus misguided?


Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #111 on: May 31, 2018, 04:56:09 PM »
CODEX IURIS CANONICI

LIBER TERTIUS
DE REBUS

PARS PRIMA.
DE SACRAMENTIS.

TITULUS I.
De baptismo.

CAN. 737.
 § 1. Baptismus, Sacramentorum ianua ac fundamentum, omnibus in re vel saltem in voto necessarius ad salutem, valide non confertur, nisi per ablutionem aquae verae et naturalis cuм praescripta verborum forma.
 § 2. cuм ministratur servatis omnibus ritibus et caeremoniis quae in ritualibus libris praecipiuntur, appellatur sollemnis; secus, non sollemnis seu privutus.

A Practical Commentary On The Code Of Canon Law, by Rev. Stanislaus Woywod, O.F.M., LL.B.
Quote
"632. Baptism - the door and foundation of all other Sacraments, the Sacrament which, if we are to attain salvation, must be either actually received or at least desired - is given validly only by ablution with truly natural water and the pronouncing of the prescribed form of words.  Baptism administered with the observance of all the rites and ceremonies prescribed in the ritual is called solemn; otherwise it is called not solemn, or private (Canon 737)."

A COMMENTARY ON CANON LAW, VOLUME FOUR, by The Rev. P. Chas. Augustine, O.S.B, D.D.
Quote
"Baptism is called the gate to, and the foundation of, the other Sacraments, because without it no other Sacrament can be validly received.  The Church has ever taught that Baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation, - either really or by desire - and that consequently no other sacrament can be validly received without it.  Thus ordination would be invalid and imprint no indelible character if the ordinandus had not been baptized.  This necessity of Baptism is called necessitas medii, necessity of means, because without it salvation cannot be obtained.  The reason for this absolute necessity lies in the words of Our Lord, John III, 5.  Either in re or in voto signifies that the baptismus fluminis or flaminis or sanguinis is sufficient."

You added the implication that equates "justified by faith alone" with Baptism of Desire.  This is rather dishonest.  The Church has never taught that Baptism of Desire is a sacrament, in fact, the commentaries on canon law repeatedly make this distinction.

Further, your implication would make Saint Alphonsus Liguori contradict himself in his own Moral Theology work wherein he specifically references the Council of Trent, "But baptism of desire is perfect conversion to God by contrition or love of God above all things accompanied by an explicit or implicit desire for true Baptism of water, the place of which it takes as to the remission of guilt, but not as to the impression of the [baptismal] character or as to the removal of all debt of punishment. It is called 'of wind' ['flaminis'] because it takes place by the impulse of the Holy Ghost Who is called a wind ['flamen']. Now it is de fide that men are also saved by Baptism of desire, by virtue of the Canon 'Apostolicam De Presbytero Non Baptizato' and the Council of Trent, Session 6, Chapter 4, where it is said that no one can be saved 'without the laver of regeneration or the desire for it.'"

While the previous poster may be misguided, you are certainly malicious.


Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #112 on: May 31, 2018, 05:48:40 PM »
I would reply in opposition to your opinion, in that the Council of Trent clearly agrees with Saint Thomas Aquinas, as does every Pope and Church theologian since the council (up to, of course, the Second Vatican council).

Other than your own misguided conjecture, can you provide a single authoritative Church reference that expressly denies Baptism of Desire?
I can think of lots of them. 
The Catholic teaching of the necessity of the Sacrament of Baptism is one authority.  Because it details how it must be administered, that it must be done by another, in water, while pouring, etc.  This teaching denies bod because bod is not Baptism.  Therefore, it cannot, by definition fulfill what the Sacrament demands or promises.  Another authoritative reference: Christ denies bod when He says water and the Holy Ghost are necessary for salvation. Canons in Trent also deny bod because one says water is necessary for Baptism, and another canon says Baptism is necessary for salvation.  How do bod'ers get around this without deviant mental gymnastics?  Just because saints had pious hopes?  Scripture is another authority: Ephesians 4:5 denies bod when it says, "one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism".  What other baptisms is Scripture is excluding?  There are many more papal statements, definitions in councils, including the dogma "no salvation outside the Church."

When people go back and forth laying out this quote or that quote to prove what's true, you'll find a lot of redefining of what the quotes say, rather than what they literally say.  I've been through that scenario for years and its so tiresome.  I suppose I'm glad because I learned a lot.  My approach these days is a more simple and very reasonable one.  Take the teachings as they are written. All together they present a tower of opposition to bod.  Yet arguing back and forth about quote after quote is like pounding the tower's bricks hoping each one stands alone against the monster of indifference.

Seems that if the Devil wanted a way for Catholics to lighten up about getting every last person Baptized, bod would be just the ticket.  In the name of God's mercy no less.  Despicably brilliant.

The risks of getting this wrong should dictate what we ought to believe. 
 

 

Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #113 on: May 31, 2018, 06:10:49 PM »
What I asked for was...
Quote
… a single authoritative Church reference that expressly denies Baptism of Desire?
What I'm looking for is something that explicitly uses the term "Baptism of Desire" in the discourse.

Again, your lay conjecture is absolutely meaningless compared to the numerous authoritative declarations by Church theologians.  

Fr. A. Tanquery, Dogmatic Brevior, ART.IV, Section I,II - 1945 (1024-1)
Quote
   The Baptism of Desire. Contrition, or perfect charity, with at least an implicit desire for Baptism, supplies in adults the place of the baptism of water as respects the forgiveness of sins.
   This is certain.
   Explanation: a) An implicit desire for Baptism, that is, one that is included in a general purpose of keeping all the commandments of God is, as all agree, sufficient in one who is invincibly ignorant of the law of Baptism; likewise, according to the more common opinion, in one who knows the necessity of Baptism.
   b) Perfect charity, with a desire for Baptism, forgives original sin and actual sins, and therefore infuses sanctifying grace; but it does not imprint the Baptismal character and does not of itself remit the whole temporal punishment due for sin; whence, when the opportunity offers, the obligation remains on one who was sanctified in this manner of receiving the Baptism of water.

Fr. Dominic Prummer, O.P., Moral Theology, 1949
Quote
· "Baptism of Desire which is a perfect act of charity that includes at least implicitly the desire of Baptism by water";
· "Baptism of Blood which signifies martyrdom endured for Christ prior to the reception of Baptism by water";
· "Regarding the effects of Baptism of Blood and Baptism of Desire... both cause sanctifying grace. ...Baptism of Blood usually remits all venial and temporal punishment..."

Fr. Francis O'Connell, Outlines of Moral Theology - 1953
Quote
   - "Baptism of Desire ... is an act of divine charity or perfect contrition..."
   - "These means (i.e. Baptism of Blood & Desire) presuppose in the recipient at least the implicit will to receive the sacrament."
   "...Even if an infant can gain the benefit of the Baptism of Blood if he is put to death by a person actuated by hatred for the Christian faith..."

Mgr. J. H. Hervé, Manuale Theologiae Dogmaticae (Vol. III: chap. IV) - 1931
Quote
   II. On those for whom Baptism of water can be supplied:
   "The various baptisms: from the Council of Trent itself and from the things stated, it stands firm that Baptism is necessary, yet in fact or in desire; therefore in an extraordinary case it can be supplied. Further, according to the Catholic doctrine, there are two things by which the sacrament of Baptism can be supplied, namely an act of perfect charity with the desire of Baptism and the death as martyr. Since these two are a compensation for Baptism of water, they themselves are called Baptism, too, in order that they may be comprehended with it under one as it were generic name; so the act of love with desire for Baptism is called Baptismus flaminis (Baptism of the Spirit) and the martyrium (Baptism of Blood)."

Fr. H. Noldin, S.J. - Fr. A. Schmit, S.J., Summa theologiae moralis (Vol. III de Sacramentis); Bk 2 Quaestio prima - 1929
Quote
   "Baptism of spirit (flaminis) is perfect charity or contrition, in which the desire in fact to receive the sacrament of Baptism is included; perfect charity and perfect contrition however have the power to confer sanctifying grace."

Fr. Arthur Vermeersch, S.J., Theologiae moralis (Vol. III, Tractatus II) - 1948
Quote
   "The Baptism of spirit (flaminis) is an act of perfect charity or contrition, in so far as it contains at least a tacit desire of the Sacrament. Therefore it can be had only in adults. It does not imprint a character; ...but it takes away all mortal sin together with the sentence of eternal penalty, according to: 'He who loves me, is loved by my Father.' (John 14:21)"

Fr. Ludovico Billot, S.J., De Ecclesiae Sacramentis (Vol. I); Quaestio LXVI; Thesis XXIV - 1931
Quote
   "Baptism of spirit (flaminis), which is also called of repentance or of desire is nothing else than an act of charity or perfect contrition includeing a desire of the Sacrament, according to what has been said above, namely that, the heart of everyone is moved by the Holy Ghost to believe, and to love God, and to be sorry for his sins."

Fr. Eduardus Genicot, S.J., Theologiae Moralis Institutiones (Vol II); Tractatus XII - 1902
Quote
   "Baptism of the Spirit (flaminis) consists in an act of perfect charity or contrition, with which there is always an infusion of sanctifying grace connected...
   Both are called 'of desire' (in voto)...; perfect charity, because it has always connected the desire, at least the implicit one of receiving this sacrament, absolutely necessary for salvation."

Fr. Aloysia Sabetti, S.J. Fr. Timotheo Barrett, S.J., Compendium Theologiae Moralis; Tractatus XII De Baptismo (Chap. 1) - 1926
Quote
   "Baptism, the gate and foundation of the Sacraments in fact or at least in desire, is necessary for all unto salvation...
   From the Baptism of water, which is called of river (Baptismus fluminis), is from Baptism of the Spirit (Baptismus flaminis) and Baptism of Blood, by which Baptism properly speaking can be supplied, if this be impossible. The first one is a full conversion to God through perfect contrition or charity, in so far as it contains an either explicit or at least implicit will to receive Baptism of water ... Baptism of Spirit (flaminis) and Baptism of Blood are called Baptism of desire (in voto)."




Re: Genuinely curious - rejection of Baptism and the Council of Trent
« Reply #114 on: May 31, 2018, 07:16:29 PM »
What I asked for was...What I'm looking for is something that explicitly uses the term "Baptism of Desire" in the discourse.

Again, your lay conjecture is absolutely meaningless compared to the numerous authoritative declarations by Church theologians.  

Fr. A. Tanquery, Dogmatic Brevior, ART.IV, Section I,II - 1945 (1024-1)
Fr. Dominic Prummer, O.P., Moral Theology, 1949
Fr. Francis O'Connell, Outlines of Moral Theology - 1953
Mgr. J. H. Hervé, Manuale Theologiae Dogmaticae (Vol. III: chap. IV) - 1931
Fr. H. Noldin, S.J. - Fr. A. Schmit, S.J., Summa theologiae moralis (Vol. III de Sacramentis); Bk 2 Quaestio prima - 1929
Fr. Arthur Vermeersch, S.J., Theologiae moralis (Vol. III, Tractatus II) - 1948
Fr. Ludovico Billot, S.J., De Ecclesiae Sacramentis (Vol. I); Quaestio LXVI; Thesis XXIV - 1931
Fr. Eduardus Genicot, S.J., Theologiae Moralis Institutiones (Vol II); Tractatus XII - 1902
Fr. Aloysia Sabetti, S.J. Fr. Timotheo Barrett, S.J., Compendium Theologiae Moralis; Tractatus XII De Baptismo (Chap. 1) - 1926
You said: "What I asked for was...What I'm looking for is something that explicitly uses the term "Baptism of Desire" in the discourse."
In those terms, no.  Still, my response totally whizzed by you.  Bod is a serious problem because it attacks several different Catholic teachings and redefines what is necessary for salvation.  Bod'ers know this is a problem but seem to care less. Why do they do that?  I have yet to hear one that says, "Yea, I worry about that."  Or, "I can see how that might be a problem". They never do. And I know why.  They don't care about the real world, or real people because they have quotes.  Everyone knows there is a tangible laxity manifested in the laity who can't be bothered to spread the Faith. No wonder. Bod takes care of all the well meaning people anyway.  Bod has no definable parameters for the Catholic who wants to see mercy as they understand it. With the perquisites of Baptism out the way, each person sees it his own way and the extremes are mind boggling. Bod is a worm in the minds of Catholics who, to whatever degree they are inclined, prefer to believe a non baptism might reasonably take care of everything, rather than them having to do the work of Christ.  Even if they assumed wrongly one time and didn't do what they should, counting on bod, but doing nothing, they could be accountable!
I know what your quotes say.  I also know some of those quotes contradict not only the teachings of the Church, Popes, Scripture, and what is reasonable, but also each other.  When push comes to shove, the greater authority quotes supersede anyway.  Not only is it safer to approach this with respect for the higher authority, its ridiculous to think our personal belief about dead non-Catholics affects anything.