CathInfo.com

Question for believers in salvation without belief in Christ:

I assume you acknowledge unbaptized infants go to Hell (limbo). At what point does an infant mature enough to have an "implicit baptism of desire".

If someone is a "vegetable", intellectually akin to an infant, is he capable of an "implicit baptism of desire"?
If yes, why not an infant?

If no, how is a mental barrier to receiving baptism any more just than a physical barrier?

It seems that salvation in ignorance doesn't even ameliorate the supposed problem it is trying to solve.

Everyone has to admit that ignorance cannot be salvific, but merely exculpatory.  To hold that exculpation can be salvific in and of itself is actually the very definition of the Pelagian heresy.

So the only thing invincible ignorance means is that there's no obstacle placed in the way of God's grace by way of a culpable ignorance.

This is all that Pius IX was teaching in those much-abused passages.  To say otherwise would be to make him a Pelagian heretic.

So, once we rule out Pelagianism, the conversation turns to what is the minimum amount of explicit faith required for supernatural faith and therefore for salvation.  In those without the use of reason (infants and others like them), the Sacrament of Baptism can infuse the supernatural virtue of faith without any explicit act of the intellect.

For all others, some explicit act of the intellect is required to make a supernatural act of faith.  Dispute is whether one must believe explicitly at least in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation (with the rest being able to be implicit) or else it suffices to believe in a God Who rewards the good and punishes the wicked.

Former has all of Catholic authority behind it.  It was believed unanimously by the Church Fathers, expressed in the Athanasian Creed, and taught / believed by all for the first 1500 years of Church history.  Around that time a Franciscan and some Jesuits came up with "Rewarder God" theory ... reacting (emotionally) to the discovery of the New World, with people wondering how God would allow all those to be lost.  St. Francis Xavier and St. Isaac Jogues answer that for them (as per above).

At some point, the Holy Office rejected a request to baptize those who believed only in a Rewader God, and insisted that they must believe at least those "mysteries of faith that are necessary by necessity of means for salvation".  Vatican I taught that supernatural faith requires knowledge of mysteries that can ONLY be known through Revelation (that rules out belief in a Rewarder God sufficing, since as Vatican I also taught, those can be known with certainty by reason).  St. Pius X also taught about how certain types of ignorance (ignorance of the explicit mysteries) are required for salvation ... so that explicitly guts the Pelagian interpretation of Pius IX.

There's no support anywhere in the Magisterium for Rewarder God theory, and it's been explicitly rejected by the Holy Office and implicitly by Vatican I.