, "I would agree that 'people can be saved without the sacrament of baptism', but I could not go so far as saying without 'belief in Christ and the Incarnation'."  

We know dogmatically that Baptism is necessary for salvation. Even if one entertains the remote possibility of a salvific Baptism of Desire operating in a dying catechumen, I don't think one can safely say that such dying catechumen was saved without Baptism; only that the vow supplied it at last minute. 

That is a far as we can safely go.

I said, "I would agree that 'people can be saved without the sacrament of baptism', but I could not go so far as saying without 'belief in Christ and the Incarnation'."  Like I said, God alone knows, and if God so wills it, anything can be done.

If you say God alone knows, then you really do not know for sure if a person can or can't be saved without the sacrament of baptism and belief in Christ and the Holy Trinity, so there's nothing to hold you back from believing pretty much anything.

In this matter God (The Holy Ghost), has revealed to us His Law, by many clear dogmas. I go by those dogmas. I can tell you without one ounce of hesitation that only baptized Catholics in a State of grace can be saved. Dogma is God's final ruling, if they can be interpreted to mean the complete opposite as the SSPX and Cekada do, then they are useless, and dogmas are a joke. Read my satire again where I quote many of the dogmas and how they are responded to by the BODers like the SSPX and Cekada. You have quoted from Cekada and his material many times, yet Cekada (and the SSPX and all Sede groups) believe and teach that non-Catholics can be saved without a desire to be baptized, without a desire to be a Catholic, and without belief in the Incarnation (Jesus Christ) and the Holy Trinity. Why not go all the way with them?

https://www.cathinfo.com/baptism-of-desire-and-feeneyism/dogmatic-decrees-we-will-interpret-them-to-our-desires/

Dogmatic Decrees? We Will Interpret Them to Our Desires

St. Augustine:   “If you wish to be a Catholic, do not venture to believe, to say, or to teach that they whom the Lord has predestinated for baptism can be snatched away from his predestination, or die before that has been accomplished in them which the Almighty has predestined.’ There is in such a dogma more power than I can tell assigned to chances in opposition to the power of God, by the occurrence of which casualties that which He has predestinated is not permitted to come to pass. It is hardly necessary to spend time or earnest words in cautioning the man who takes up with this error against the absolute vortex of confusion into which it will absorb him, when I shall sufficiently meet the case if I briefly warn the prudent man who is ready to receive correction against the threatening mischief.” (On the Soul and Its Origin 3, 13)

Here are excerpts from some dogmas on EENS and how they are responded to (in red) by BODers who in the end are all teaching that Jєωs, Mohamedans, Hindus, Buddhists, indeed person in all false religions, can be saved by their belief in a god the rewards. Enjoy.


Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra:
“The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jєωs or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire ..and that nobody can be saved, … even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ[/b], unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.” [/color](pagans and Jєωs can be saved by their belief in a god that rewards, thus they are in the Church. They can’t be saved even if they shed their blood for Christ, but they can be saved by a belief in a god that rewards.)


Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, Constitution 1, 1215, ex cathedra: “There is indeed one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which nobody at all is saved, …(Persons in all false religions can be part of the faithful by their belief in a God that rewards)

Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302, ex cathedra:
“… this Church outside of which there is no salvation nor remission of sin… Furthermore, … every human creature that they by absolute necessity for salvation are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Persons in all false religions by their belief in a God that rewards are inside the Church, so they can have remission of sin. They do not have to be subject to the Roman Pontiff because they do not even know that they have to be baptized Catholics, why further complicate things for tem with submission to the pope?)

Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, Decree # 30, 1311-1312, ex cathedra:
“… one universal Church, outside of which there is no salvation, for all of whom there is one Lord, one faith, and one baptism…” (one lord, one faith by their belief in a God that rewards, and one invisible baptism by, you guessed it,  their belief in a god that rewards)

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra:
“Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.” ( the Catholic faith is belief in a God that rewards)

Pope Leo X, Fifth Lateran Council, Session 11, Dec. 19, 1516, ex cathedra:
“For, regulars and seculars, prelates and subjects, exempt and non-exempt, belong to the one universal Church, outside of which no one at all is saved, and they all have one Lord and one faith.” ( Just pick a few from the above excuses, from here on it’s a cake walk, just create your own burger with the above ingredients. You’ll be an expert at it in no time.)

Pope Pius IV, Council of Trent, Iniunctum nobis, Nov. 13, 1565, ex cathedra: “This true Catholic faith, outside of which no one can be saved… I now profess and truly hold…”

Pope Benedict XIV, Nuper ad nos, March 16, 1743, Profession of Faith: “This faith of the Catholic Church, without which no one can be saved, and which of my own accord I now profess and truly hold…”

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, Session 2, Profession of Faith, 1870, ex cathedra: “This true Catholic faith, outside of which none can be saved, which I now freely profess and truly hold…”

Council of Trent, Session VI  (Jan. 13, 1547)
Decree on Justification,
Chapter IV.

A description is introduced of the Justification of the impious, and of the Manner thereof under the law of grace.

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, 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 (John 3:5). (this means you do not need to be baptized or have a desire to be baptized. You can be baptized invisible by desire or no desire, you can call no desire implicit desire, you can also receive water baptism with no desire, no, wait a minute that does not go in both directions, it only works for desire or if you have no desire at all. Come to think of it, just forget about all of it, persons in false religions can be justified by their belief in a god that rewards.)

Chapter VII.

What the justification of the impious is, and what are the causes thereof.

This disposition, or preparation, is followed by Justification itself, which is not remission of sins merely, but also the sanctification and renewal of the inward man, through the voluntary reception of the grace, and of the gifts, whereby man of unjust becomes just, and of an enemy a friend, that so he may be an heir according to hope of life everlasting.

Of this Justification the causes are these: the final cause indeed is the glory of God and of Jesus Christ, and life everlasting; while the efficient cause is a merciful God who washes and sanctifies gratuitously, signing, and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance; but the meritorious cause is His most beloved only-begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when we were enemies, for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, merited Justification for us by His most holy Passion on the wood of the cross, and made satisfaction for us unto God the Father; the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which no man was ever justified;(except all persons in false religions, they can be justified by their belief in a god that rewards)



Pope Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra:  “Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church.  And since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,’ as the Truth says, ‘enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5].  The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.” (Just ignore that language, all persons in false religions can be justified by their belief in a god that rewards)



Council of Trent. Seventh Session. March, 1547. Decree on the Sacraments.
On Baptism

Canon 2. If anyone shall say that real and natural water is not necessary for baptism, and on that account those words of our Lord Jesus Christ: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God (John 3:5), are distorted into some metaphor: let him be anathema.( any persons in false religions can be invisible baptized and justified by their belief in a god that rewards)


Canon 5. If any one saith, that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary unto salvation; let him be anathema (the pope is also speaking here of the invisible baptism of persons in false religions that are baptized and justified by their belief in a god that rewards)


Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis (# 22), June 29, 1943: “Actually only those are to be numbered among the members of the Church who have received the laver of regeneration and profess the true faith.”( the laver of regeneration can be had invisible and the true faith is  belief in a god that rewards)

Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei (# 43), Nov. 20, 1947: “In the same
way, actually that baptism is the distinctive mark of all
Christians, and serves to differentiate them from those who[/size]
have not been cleansed in this purifying stream and
consequently are not members of Christ
orders sets the priest apart from the rest of the faithful who
have not received this consecration.” ( person who believe in a god that rewards do not need the mark, but they are in the Church. Somehow)


(Oh, I forgot, no one mentions it anymore, it is now out of fashion, so I did not include it above, invincible ignorance. If you are old fashioned, just throw in a few invinble ignorants up there with the rest of the ingredients)

Dear JAM,

Keep in mind that St. Thomas (who you quote  many times) died before these dogmas on EENS were declared,  just as he also died before the declaration of The Immaculate Conception, a theological speculation of his time, which he rejected. Also, the infallibility of dogma was not clear till after Vatican I.

Dear JAM,

Keep in mind that St. Thomas (who you quote  many times) died before these dogmas on EENS were declared,  just as he also died before the declaration of The Immaculate Conception, a theological speculation of his time, which he rejected. Also, the infallibility of dogma was not clear till after Vatican I.

Saint Thomas Aquinas is a Doctor of the Church, "considered one of the Catholic Church's greatest theologians".
This last post of yours is a classic logical fallacy, the strawman argument, whereby you are attempting to attribute to me something that I have never said.  My position on Baptism of Desire is well within the boundaries defined by the Church.  No where, and at no time, have I every postured anything contrary to Church teaching.  I provide authoritative, on topic, Church references to the discussion, and never ever stray into personal conjecture.  This sub-forum is ripe with dishonest debate tactics, something so contrary to Catholic charity that I really can't rationalize the sub-forum's presence within this Catholic forum.

This sub-forum is ripe with dishonest debate tactics, something so contrary to Catholic charity that I really can't rationalize the sub-forum's presence within this Catholic forum.

Unless you provide specific examples, your complaint is just emotionalism, like women who complain about something, not wanting solutions, but just for consolement.

Like I said, your last post, wherein you quote Church doctrine then supply a response in red which you attribute to observers of the Church's teaching on baptism of desire.  This is dishonest, a strawman argument.  Church teaching isn't a debate, it should be a discussion.

I do not know what planet you have been living in, but in this planet, what I wrote is exactly what 99% of all those that defend baptism of desire believe. In all of my years of discussions with people here on CI and elsewhere,  the conclusion is that they only hide behind the defense of baptism of desire of the catechumen, when they actual oppose St. Thomas, and teach that people can be saved without any desire to be baptized or Catholic and without  belief in the Incarnation (that Jesus Christ is God) and the Holy Trinity. The SSPX, and all the sede groups (Cekada is one of them) teach the same. It is what Abp. Lefebvre learned, believed and taught all of his ordained like Cekada.

If you are the rare individual (I have only met one in my life) that condemns them as false BODers, then I congratulate you. I have nothing against anyone that teaches the innocuous theory of the baptism of desire of the catechumen of St. Thomas. However, like I said, I have only met one person in 15 years that restricted his belief to BOD of the catechumen and that condemned the teaching of salvation by belief in a God that rewards. Concerning this question, in our times, a real Catholic should spend his time fighting those that teach salvation by belief in a God that rewards, rather than attacking what they call the "Feeneyites". In my long experience, and as a matter of fact, I have found that all of those writers who call people Feeneyites, ALL believe that non-Catholics can be saved without any desire to be baptized or Catholic and without  belief in the Incarnation Jesus Christ ids God) and the Holy Trinity.