There was no salvation until Christ died on the cross for our sins.
So no, once again, the Old Testament Fathers were not saved by BOD. They were not saved at all until Christ descended into Hell and freed them. I haven't been able to find anywhere where the Church teaches who went into the Limbo of the Fathers and who was damned to Gehenna instead, other than vague references to the "righteous dead", but their salvation centuries after death had nothing to do with any sort of desire for a sacrament that didn't yet exist.
Interesting words of St. Thomas Aquinas on the effect of circuмcision during the Old Law:
Tertia Pars (Q. 70, Art. 4):
Article 4. Whether circuмcision bestowed sanctifying grace?Objection 1. It seems that
circuмcision did not bestow
sanctifying grace. For the
Apostle says (
Galatians 2:21): "If
justice be by the
Law, then
Christ died in vain," i.e. without
cause. But
circuмcision was an
obligation imposed by the
Law, according to
Galatians 5:3: "I testify . . . to every
man circuмcising himself, that ne is a debtor to do the whole
law." Therefore, if
justice be by
circuмcision, "
Christ died in vain," i.e. without
cause. But this cannot be allowed. Therefore
circuмcision did not confer
grace whereby the sinner is made righteous.
Objection 2. Further, before the institution of
circuмcision faith alone sufficed for
justification; hence
Gregory says (Moral. iv): "
Faith alone did of old in behalf of infants that for which the water of
Baptism avails with us." But
faith has lost nothing of its strength through the commandment of
circuмcision. Therefore
faith alone justified little ones, and not
circuмcision.
Objection 3. Further, we read (
Joshua 5:5-6) that "the people that were born in the desert, during the forty years . . . were uncircuмcised." If, therefore,
original sin was taken away by
circuмcision, it seems that all who died in the desert, both little children and adults, were lost. And the same argument avails in regard to those who died before the eighth day, which was that of
circuмcision, which day could nol be anticipated, as stated above (
Article 3, Reply to Objection 3).
Objection 4. Further, nothing but
sin closes the entrance to the heavenly kingdom. But before the
Passion the entrance to the heavenly kingdom was closed to the
circuмcised. Therefore men were not justified from
sin by
circuмcision.
Objection 5. Further,
original sin is not remitted without actual
sin being remitted also: because "it is
wicked to hope for half forgiveness from
God," as
Augustine says (De Vera et Falsa Poenit. ix). But we read nowhere of
circuмcision as remitting actual
sin. Therefore neither did it remit
original sin.
On the contrary, Augustine says, writing to Valerius in answer to Julian (De Nup. et Concup. ii): "From the time that circuмcision was instituted among God's people, as 'a seal of the justice of the faith,' it availed little children unto sanctification by cleansing them from the original and bygone sin; just as Baptism also from the time of its institution began to avail unto the renewal of man."I answer that, All are agreed in saying that
original sin was remitted in
circuмcision. But some said that no
grace was conferred, and that the only effect was to remit
sin. The
Master holds this opinion (Sent. iv, D, 1), and in a
gloss on
Romans 4:11. But this is impossible, since guilt is not remitted except by
grace, according to
Romans 3:2: "Being justified freely by His
grace," etc.
Wherefore others said that
grace was bestowed by
circuмcision, as to that effect which is the remission of guilt, but not as to its positive effects; lest they should be compelled to say that the
grace bestowed in
circuмcision sufficed for the fulfilling of the precepts of the
Law, and that, consequently, the coming of
Christ was unnecessary. But neither can this opinion stand. First, because by
circuмcision children. received the power of obtaining
glory at the allotted time, which is the last positive effect of
grace. Secondly, because, in the order of the
formal cause, positive effects
naturally precede those that denote privation, although it is the reverse in the order of the material
cause: since a form does not remove a privation save by informing the subject.
Consequently, others said that
grace was conferred in
circuмcision, also as a particular positive effect consisting in being made worthy of
eternal life; but not as to all its effects, for it did not suffice for the repression of the
concupiscence of the fomes, nor again for the fulfilment of the precepts of the
Law. And this was my opinion at one time (Sent. iv, D, 1; 2, 4). But if one consider the
matter carefully, it is clear that this is not
true. Because the least
grace can resist any degree of
concupiscence, and avoid every mortal
sin, that is committed in transgressing the precepts of the
Law; for the smallest degree of
charity loves
God more than cupidity loves "thousands of gold and silver" (
Psalm 118:72).
We must say, therefore, that
grace was bestowed in
circuмcision as to all the effects of
grace, but not as in
Baptism. Because in
Baptism grace is bestowed by the very power of
Baptism itself, which power
Baptism has as the instrument of
Christ's Passion already consummated. Whereas
circuмcision bestowed
grace, inasmuch as it was a sign of
faith in
Christ's future
Passion: so that the
man who was
circuмcised, professed to embrace that
faith; whether, being an adult, he made profession for himself, or, being a child, someone else made profession for him. Hence, too, the
Apostle says (
Romans 4:11), that
Abraham "received the sign of
circuмcision, a seal of the
justice of the
faith": because, to wit,
justice was of
faith signified: not of
circuмcision signifying. And since
Baptism operates instrumentally by the power of
Christ's Passion, whereas
circuмcision does not, therefore
Baptism imprints a character that incorporates
man in
Christ, and bestows
grace more copiously than does
circuмcision; since greater is the effect of a thing already present, than of the hope thereof.
Reply to Objection 1. This argument would
prove if
justice were of
circuмcision otherwise than through
faith in
Christ's Passion.
Reply to Objection 2. Just as before the institution of
circuмcision,
faith in
Christ to come justified both children and adults, so, too, after its institution. But before, there was no need of a sign expressive of this
faith; because as yet believers had not begun to be united together apart from unbelievers for the worship of one
God. It is probable, however, that parents who were believers offered up some
prayers to
God for their children, especially if these were in any danger. Or bestowed some
blessing on them, as a "seal of
faith"; just as the adults offered
prayers and
sacrifices for themselves.
Reply to Objection 3. There was an excuse for the people in the desert failing to fulfill the precept of
circuмcision, both because they
knew not when the camp was removed, and because, as
Damascene says (De Fide Orth. iv) they needed no distinctive sign while they dwelt apart from other nations. Nevertheless, as
Augustine says (QQ. in Josue vi), those were guilty of disobedience who failed to obey through contempt.
It seems, however, that none of the uncircuмcised died in the desert, for it is written (
Psalm 104:37): "There was not among their tribes one that was feeble": and that those alone died in the desert, who had been
circuмcised in
Egypt. If, however, some of the uncircuмcised did die there, the same applies to them as to those who died before the institution of
circuмcision. And this applies also to those children who, at the
time of the
Law, died before the eighth day.
Reply to Objection 4.
Original sin was taken away in
circuмcision, in regard to the
person; but on the part of the entire
nature, there remained the obstacle to the entrance of the
kingdom of heaven, which obstacle was removed by
Christ's Passion. Consequently, before
Christ's Passion not even
Baptism gave entrance to the kingdom. But were
circuмcision to avail after
Christ's Passion, it would give entrance to the kingdom.
Reply to Objection 5. When adults were
circuмcised, they received remission not only of original, but also of actual
sin: yet not so as to be delivered from all debt of punishment, as in
Baptism, in which
grace is conferred more copiously.
https://www.newadvent.org/summa/4070.htm
Topic: Implicit BOD (Read 4422 times)