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

Author Topic: God provides: Stories of God providing deathbed Baptism of water  (Read 1062 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Boomerang

  • Supporter
Re: God provides: Stories of God providing deathbed Baptism of water
« Reply #15 on: Yesterday at 02:19:05 AM »

Quote
https://archive.org/details/saintamongsavage0000talb
Saint among savages; the life of Isaac Jogues by Francis Talbot, S.J.

pg 134-135
...Then came a messenger from one of the villages in which they had been welcomed on their entry into the Petun land. The runner told them that some of the people who were sick were begging them to return.
It was a call from God. They could not but heed it. In order to complete the journey of thirty-five miles by daylight, they started out about three o'clock in the morning. All the country was pale with snow in the dawn, and the mountain air was painfully cold. Jogues was still gripped by the fever and unsteady on his legs. They slid their snowshoes labouriously over the crackling crust of the icy snow. Frequently, they stopped for breath in deadly exhaustion. But they had to shorten their rests, for fear lest they die of the cold. Their only food, a lump of corn-bread about the size of the fist, was hard as ice. They arrived at the village late at night, covered with sweat and yet half-frozen, they said. The sick persons were still alive. They were baptized. "Some souls gone astray here and there, who are placed on the road to heaven when they are about to be swallowed up in hell," was their comment, "deserve a thousand times more than these labors, since these souls have cost the Saviour of the world much more than that."

pg 141
Meanwhile, the Fathers were holding their own councils, counting up the results of their spiritual labors and planning new conquests. During the past winter they had preached before or conversed with ten thousand barbarians. They baptized more than a thousand, almost all of whom were dying with the small-pox. Among these were three hundred and sixty children under seven years of age; in addition, they counted "more than a hundred other little children who were baptized in the preceding years, but who were harvested by this same disease and were gathered by the angels like flowers of Paradise."

pg 146
When the missioners were assembled once more at Sainte Marie in March, they totaled the results of the winter of 1640 and 1641. They had announced the Gospel to sixteen or seventeen thousand barbarians of four distinct peoples, the Hurons, the Algonquins, the Petuns, and the neutrals. They had been able to baptize only about one hundred in sickness.


Offline OABrownson1876

  • Supporter
Re: God provides: Stories of God providing deathbed Baptism of water
« Reply #16 on: Yesterday at 10:29:18 PM »
Brother Francis in one of his talks told of a story which happened in, I believe, China:

"A Jesuit priest and brother hiked deep into the woods to convert a woman.  When they came to the woman, she was dead.  Dejected, they headed back, when, in the woods, a young boy came to them and said, 'My mother wants to be baptized, she knew that you would be here.' They followed the boy to his home.  The priest was amazed that the woman knew the truths of the Faith.  He baptized her, gave her Holy Communion.  He then gave her a holy card of St. Joseph.  The mother told the priest, 'He is the man who came and spoke to me, telling me that you would come to me and give me the saving waters.'" 

There are no accidents with God. 


Offline Boomerang

  • Supporter

Quote
https://archive.org/details/saintamongsavage0000talb
Saint among savages; the life of Isaac Jogues by Francis Talbot, S.J.

pg 212-213
A war party arrived, parading with them four Huron whom they captured along the St. Lawrence near Lake Erie. Father Jogues left the platform and followed the howling mob of savages who rushed to welcome and caress the new prisoners. He recognized the Hurons; they were no Christians; he must baptize them. They were already mutilated; each of them had lost some of his fingers, and the chief had had both his thumbs amputated. Jogues watched in anguish as they ran the gauntlet. He hovered over them as they lay lifeless on the platform. He spoke to them consolingly and urged them to give their consent to being baptized. Eustace and the other Christians joined him in instructing and soliciting them.
Two of the Hurons, Jogues learned, were to be burned to death that night at Tionontoguen. He Stayed with them on the platform and concentrated his appeals on them. Finally they consented. About that moment, the Mohawks threw the prisoners some raw corn which had been freshly plucked. The sheaths were wet from the recent rains. Father Jogues carefully gathered the precious drops of water on a leaf and poured them over the heads of the two neophytes, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.
...
That night the two Hurons were burned over the fire.

pg 213.
On August 21, then, the procession wended its way back to Andagaron. The two recent Huron captives were brought with the party, for they were apportioned for death in this village. Along the way, Father Jogues kept close to them, teaching them the essentials they must know and believe for baptism. They listened humbly and gratefully, and begged to be given happiness with God after their death. They came to a little stream flowing down the hills from the hills to the river. As they waded through, the Hurons bent their heads low; Father Jogues sprinkeled the water on them and pronounced the saving words. The Mohawks, despite their sharp eyes, did not perceive his action.

pg 259
Along the way they had to cross a gorge of a swift mountain stream. The bridge was a tree trunk stretched a few feet above the swirling, deep waters. It was unsteady, and slippery with moss. One of the party was a pregnant woman, who also carried a baby in the basket on her back and was otherwise burdened with the camp utensils. The strap of the cradle was across her forehead, and the bundles were fastened to her shoulders. The squaw started to climb across the tree, while Father Jogues waited to follow her. She lost her balance and toppled over into the tumpling rapids. The baggage strapped to her shoulders weighed her to the bottom, the thong that held the cradle slipped from her forehead to her neck and was strangling her.
In an instant Father Jogues leaped into the gorge and icy current. Wading and swimming, he fought his way to the woman, unstrapped the bundles and the cradle, and dragged her and the baby to the bank. He took good care to baptize the baby before he lifted it out of the water. The Mohawks made a roaring fire, and revived the woman, who was number almost to death. They allowed Ondessonk to warm and dry himself, and even commended him, for they realized that the woman would have been drowned except for his aid. She recovered, but the newly baptized child died within a few days.


So, I have said also that, at the very least, God has not revealed (directly) the existence of a BoD.  Then, even if one could argue theologically in favor of a hypothetical BoD, there's no evidence that anyone has ever been saved by said BoD (no, the putative BoB incidents do not prove BoD).

But, as I have also said ... along the lines of a Pascal's wager scenario ... IF there's such a thing as a BoD, and God has willed to save some souls this way ... then my lack of belief in it means nothing, and would not have prevented that soul's salvation.  Now, on the other hand, if there ISN'T a BoD, then some souls could easily be lost on account of BoD theory because it could lessen their zeal to receive the actual Sacrament of Baptism.  How much more ardently would a soul desire the Sacrament if in fact he believed it was his only chance at salvation?  On the other hand, could substituting the desire for Baptism with a desire for the desire for Baptism actually still "count" or would it ironically undermine the possibility of salvation by ACTUAL BoD.

Finally, without BoD, the modern heretical ecclesiology and soteriology, where Jews, Muslims, Hindus in Tibet, etc. can be saved ... would not be possible without being recognized as directly contradicting EENS dogma.

BoD has been used as THE weapon to gradually undermine EENS, lead to religious indifferentism, and lead to the Vatican II ecclesiology.

If I were elected Pope (or selected by God, that is), one of THE FIRST actions I would take would be to forbid all Catholics from ever mentioning BoD again, and I would require the addition to the Creeds, both the Nicene and the Apostles, a phrase or sentence affirming belief in Baptism, without which there can be no salvation.  I would then pray and study about whether it needs to be condemned as grave error or possibly even heresy.
I guess what confuses me though is you could reject baptism of desire but still reject EENS by your understanding by believing Protestants and Orthodox can be saved

and then on the other hand you can accept BOD for catechumens only (even though most people don’t) and from your perspective this wouldn’t go against EENS (even if it could be wrong)

one question I have, do you put baptism of blood in the same category as baptism of desire?  It doesn’t seem to have the same potential EENS issues, and I have a friend (whos Orthodox, and more knowledgeable on patristics than me) that seems to think baptism of desire is debatable but that baptism of blood is just clear cut in the fathers.  What’s your thought? 

The Doctrinal Conflict
The core of the controversy lies in how the Church understands the necessity of Baptism for salvation.
  • The Traditional Teaching: The Church has always taught that Baptism is necessary for salvation. However, the Church has also consistently taught that this necessity is not limited strictly to the Sacrament of Baptism (Baptism of Water) in cases where the Sacrament cannot be received.

    • Baptism of Blood: When a catechumen or an unbaptized person suffers martyrdom for the Faith, they are washed clean of their sins by their own blood.
    • Baptism of Desire: When a person, having perfect contrition for their sins and a sincere desire to do God's will, is prevented by death or impossibility from receiving the Sacrament of Baptism, they are considered to have received the grace of the Sacrament.
    St. Thomas Aquinas explains this clearly: "The sacrament of Baptism may be wanting to anyone in reality, but not in desire: for instance, when a man wishes to be baptized, but by some misfortune he is forestalled by death before receiving baptism. And such a man can obtain salvation without being actually baptized, on account of his desire for Baptism" 1.
  • The Position of Father Feeney: Father Feeney argued that the dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus must be interpreted to mean that only those who are physically baptized with water in the Catholic Church can be saved. He rejected the concepts of Baptism of Blood and Baptism of Desire, labeling them as modern innovations that contradicted the absolute necessity of the Sacrament.
The Church's Response
The Holy Office, under the authority of Pope Pius XII, addressed this error directly in the letter Suprema haec sacra (1949), addressed to the Archbishop of Boston.
  • Rejection of Rigid Literalism: The Holy Office clarified that while the dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus is infallible, it must be understood correctly. It does not require that a person be actually incorporated into the Church as a member in order to be saved, provided they have an "implicit" desire for such incorporation.
  • The Letter's Teaching: The letter states: "For it is not always required that a person be incorporated into the Church actually by baptism, but it is required that he at least desire and wish for it by a desire and a wish which is informed by perfect charity, so that he may be made like to the Church" 2.
  • Condemnation: Because Father Feeney persisted in his error and refused to submit to the authority of the Holy Office, he was excommunicated in 1953.
Theological Assessment
From the perspective of Catholic Tradition, "Feeneyism" is considered a theological error because it attempts to restrict the infinite mercy of God and the efficacy of His grace to the physical administration of the Sacrament, ignoring the Church's long-standing teaching on the votum (desire) for the Sacrament.
The Church teaches that God is not bound by His Sacraments, even though we are bound to them. As the Council of Trent defined: "Justification... cannot be effected without the laver of regeneration or the desire for it" 3. By rejecting the "desire for it," the Feeneyite position contradicts the teaching of the Council of Trent and the constant tradition of the Church Fathers and Doctors.

BTW if you're into Feeneyism does it mean you believe the Church erred this matter with Pope Pius XII, or do you believe the seat was vacant with Pope Pius XII?