Author Topic: Paulists Catechism Of Trent BOD (Read 4133 times)

bowler · « **on:** December 31, 2013, 12:35:56 PM »

DESIRE AND DECEPTION by Thomas A. Hutchinson
Page 56

The Catechism of the Council of Trent can give us further insight into Trent's teaching on the matter. Unfortunately (and perhaps tellingly) most recent English translations have altered the words dealing in this area. But the 1985 Daughters of St. Paul edition, translated by Fr. Robert 1. Bradley and Msgr. Eugene Kevane and entitled The Roman Catechism suffers from no such distortion possibly because the vast number of ambiguous Vatican II statements which can be used as footnotes obviate any such need with apparently equally solemn pronouncements. Saving those annotations, though, it is the best and most official catechism in existence. Let us see what it says:

31. The Necessity of Baptism

What we have considered thus far regarding Baptism is all very important. Yet what we must consider now is even more so, viz., its absolute necessity, as taught by Our Lord himself. The law of Baptism applies to all mankind without exception. Unless they are reborn through the grace of Baptism no matter whether they were born of believing or unbelieving parents, they are in fact born to eternal misery and loss. The pastor, therefore, must constantly go back to those oft repeated words of the Gospel: "Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." (p. 178).

This is an interesting passage indeed; it allows for no exceptions (and "baptisms" of blood and desire are surely exceptions) to the law of baptism. It bears particularly hard on "invincible ignorance," for it will not allow exceptions to made even for those born (and so presumably raised) with no knowledge of the Faith. This attitude is in keeping with what the Catechism calls the Ultimate Effect of Baptism in N. 58 (p.191): “By Baptism the gates of heaven, which sin had closed, are opened to us”.

It is that simple!

bowler · « **Reply #1 on:** December 31, 2013, 05:28:16 PM »

Ambrose · « **Reply #2 on:** January 01, 2014, 07:29:02 AM »

The Catechism of the Council of Trent taught:

Quote

Ordinarily They Are Not Baptised At Once

On adults, however, the Church has not been accustomed to confer the Sacrament of Baptism at once, but has ordained that it be deferred for a certain time. The delay is not attended with the same danger as in the case of infants, which we have already mentioned; should any unforeseen accident make it impossible for adults to be washed in the salutary waters, their intention and determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness.

Nay, this delay seems to be attended with some advantages. And first, since the Church must take particular care that none approach this Sacrament through hypocrisy and dissimulation, the intentions of such as seek Baptism, are better examined and ascertained. Hence it is that we read in the decrees of ancient Councils that Jєωιѕн converts to the Catholic faith, before admission to Baptism, should spend some months in the ranks of the catechumens.

Furthermore, the candidate for Baptism is thus better instructed in the doctrine of the faith which he is to profess, and in the practices of the Christian life. Finally, when Baptism is administered to adults with solemn ceremonies on the appointed days of Easter and Pentecost only greater religious reverence is shown to the Sacrament.

SOURCE

Ladislaus · « **Reply #3 on:** January 01, 2014, 08:58:43 AM »

Quote from: Ambrose

The Catechism of the Council of Trent taught:

Quote
Ordinarily They Are Not Baptised At Once

On adults, however, the Church has not been accustomed to confer the Sacrament of Baptism at once, but has ordained that it be deferred for a certain time. The delay is not attended with the same danger as in the case of infants, which we have already mentioned; should any unforeseen accident make it impossible for adults to be washed in the salutary waters, their intention and determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness.

Nay, this delay seems to be attended with some advantages. And first, since the Church must take particular care that none approach this Sacrament through hypocrisy and dissimulation, the intentions of such as seek Baptism, are better examined and ascertained. Hence it is that we read in the decrees of ancient Councils that Jєωιѕн converts to the Catholic faith, before admission to Baptism, should spend some months in the ranks of the catechumens.

Furthermore, the candidate for Baptism is thus better instructed in the doctrine of the faith which he is to profess, and in the practices of the Christian life. Finally, when Baptism is administered to adults with solemn ceremonies on the appointed days of Easter and Pentecost only greater religious reverence is shown to the Sacrament.

SOURCE

Yes another passage distorted by way of mistranslation. You'll notice the similar mistranslation of the famous alleged BoD passage to replace "without" with "except through" ... which completely changes the meaning of the passage.

This passage in the Latin reads more along the lines of "their determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for pas sins will avail them to grace and righteousness lest any unforeseen accident ...", the meaning of which is that God's divine providence will lead them to Baptism if they have the proper dispositions.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #4 on:** January 01, 2014, 09:00:58 AM »

Quote from: bowler

DESIRE AND DECEPTION by Thomas A. Hutchinson
Page 56

The Catechism of the Council of Trent can give us further insight into Trent's teaching on the matter. Unfortunately (and perhaps tellingly) most recent English translations have altered the words dealing in this area. But the 1985 Daughters of St. Paul edition, translated by Fr. Robert 1. Bradley and Msgr. Eugene Kevane and entitled The Roman Catechism suffers from no such distortion possibly because the vast number of ambiguous Vatican II statements which can be used as footnotes obviate any such need with apparently equally solemn pronouncements. Saving those annotations, though, it is the best and most official catechism in existence. Let us see what it says:

31. The Necessity of Baptism

What we have considered thus far regarding Baptism is all very important. Yet what we must consider now is even more so, viz., its absolute necessity, as taught by Our Lord himself. The law of Baptism applies to all mankind without exception. Unless they are reborn through the grace of Baptism no matter whether they were born of believing or unbelieving parents, they are in fact born to eternal misery and loss. The pastor, therefore, must constantly go back to those oft repeated words of the Gospel: "Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." (p. 178).

This is an interesting passage indeed; it allows for no exceptions (and "baptisms" of blood and desire are surely exceptions) to the law of baptism. It bears particularly hard on "invincible ignorance," for it will not allow exceptions to made even for those born (and so presumably raised) with no knowledge of the Faith. This attitude is in keeping with what the Catechism calls the Ultimate Effect of Baptism in N. 58 (p.191): “By Baptism the gates of heaven, which sin had closed, are opened to us”.

It is that simple!

This indeed represents the true Catholic faith, which is continually being undermined by the BoDers.

Stubborn · « **Reply #5 on:** January 01, 2014, 11:02:04 AM »

Quote from: Ambrose

The Catechism of the Council of Trent taught:

Quote
Ordinarily They Are Not Baptised At Once

On adults, however, the Church has not been accustomed to confer the Sacrament of Baptism at once, but has ordained that it be deferred for a certain time. The delay is not attended with the same danger as in the case of infants, which we have already mentioned; should any unforeseen accident make it impossible for adults to be washed in the salutary waters, their intention and determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness.

Nay, this delay seems to be attended with some advantages. And first, since the Church must take particular care that none approach this Sacrament through hypocrisy and dissimulation, the intentions of such as seek Baptism, are better examined and ascertained. Hence it is that we read in the decrees of ancient Councils that Jєωιѕн converts to the Catholic faith, before admission to Baptism, should spend some months in the ranks of the catechumens.

Furthermore, the candidate for Baptism is thus better instructed in the doctrine of the faith which he is to profess, and in the practices of the Christian life. Finally, when Baptism is administered to adults with solemn ceremonies on the appointed days of Easter and Pentecost only greater religious reverence is shown to the Sacrament.

SOURCE

Here again Ambrose, the error is yours here because you are *not* reading what is written.

Take note and re-read your entire quote from the Catechism and you will be forced to admit the following:

The catechism snip makes no mention of death *or* salvation.
The catechism does not reward salvation via a BOD.
The catechism does not even promise them grace and righteousness.
The "unforeseen accident" can easily be that the priest who was supposed to administer the sacrament that day was hit by a car and was 2 hours late.

When reading what is written, the catechism teaches that their contrition, and desire will *avail* them to *grace and righteousness* - IOW, it will put them "in the way" of grace - or to put it another way, before they can be baptized, the person *must* be in the way of grace via the proper intention - i.e. they must "desire" to be baptized prior to actually receiving the sacrament.

Note also WHY the delay in baptizing adults is advantageous:
First, because the Church must take particular care that none approach this Sacrament through hypocrisy and dissimulation.
Next, to be sure that the intentions of such as seek Baptism, are better examined and ascertained.
Third, so that the candidate for Baptism is thus better instructed in the doctrine of the faith which he is to profess, and in the practices of the Christian life. Finally, when Baptism is administered to adults with solemn ceremonies on the appointed days of Easter and Pentecost only greater religious reverence is shown to the Sacrament.

Note the catechism did not teach the advantage of delaying baptism in adults is because if they die before actually receiving the sacrament due to some unforeseen accident, that a BOD will suffice for their salvation.

We all know that is what you want it to say, but hopefully you can now see the truth of the matter.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #6 on:** January 01, 2014, 01:53:48 PM »

Whatever happened to just simple faith anyway?

When the Church defines as dogma the fact that heretics, schismatics, Jews, and pagans cannot be saved, that's what it means. I teach my children that only Catholics can go to heaven. And they take it at the same simple face value that we should understand as well. When the Church defined EENS, it did not add a five-page theological addendum about exceptions, distinctions, scholastic syllogisms, formal this, material that; the Church just said non-Catholics cannot be saved. Period. End of story. If the Church intended to make exceptions, then She would have done so in the dogmatic definitions themselves.

Now, according to the BoDers, in order to avoid heresy, I basically have to apply several paragraphs worth of distinctions and exceptions to properly understand the dogma. Think about that. If I DO NOT SAY that non-Catholics can be saved, i.e. for taking the EENS dogmatic definitions at simple face value, now I am the heretic ... rather than those who even verbatim deny the dogma (CMRI, Cardinal Cushing, etc.). Talk about twisted ... and evil.

So now the EENS dogma really means the EXACT OPPOSITE of what the face value definitions says; otherwise I'm an EENS-denying heretic? That's absurd and perverted, and the devil is laughing at what he's accomplished.

I marvel at what the devil has been able to pull off, that upholding the EENS dogmatic definitions at face value is now considered "heretical" by people who call themselves Traditional Catholics.

I remember when I was a Novus Ordo type in college and an anti-Catholic was attacking the Church for EENS. My first (heretical) reaction was: "Well, what it REALLY means is [the exact opposite of the dogmatic definition]."

Now, if the subject comes up, say, from an ex-Catholic, I just state that salvation isn't possible for them unless they return to the Catholic Church.

And the speculative theology about all the possible exceptions does absolutely NOTHING from a pastoral perspective. Which is more likely to get a person thinking about whether they should convert? "You must become a Catholic in order to be saved." or "Well, if you're sincere in your belief, you can still be saved." ??? BoD explains the death of missionary zeal across the world.

Father Feeney kept looking for the "missing doctrine" that explained the decayed state of the Church, and he finally realized what it was, after years of reflection: denial of EENS.

Ambrose · « **Reply #7 on:** January 01, 2014, 11:58:43 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Quote from: Ambrose
The Catechism of the Council of Trent taught:

Quote
Ordinarily They Are Not Baptised At Once

On adults, however, the Church has not been accustomed to confer the Sacrament of Baptism at once, but has ordained that it be deferred for a certain time. The delay is not attended with the same danger as in the case of infants, which we have already mentioned; should any unforeseen accident make it impossible for adults to be washed in the salutary waters, their intention and determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness.

Nay, this delay seems to be attended with some advantages. And first, since the Church must take particular care that none approach this Sacrament through hypocrisy and dissimulation, the intentions of such as seek Baptism, are better examined and ascertained. Hence it is that we read in the decrees of ancient Councils that Jєωιѕн converts to the Catholic faith, before admission to Baptism, should spend some months in the ranks of the catechumens.

Furthermore, the candidate for Baptism is thus better instructed in the doctrine of the faith which he is to profess, and in the practices of the Christian life. Finally, when Baptism is administered to adults with solemn ceremonies on the appointed days of Easter and Pentecost only greater religious reverence is shown to the Sacrament.

SOURCE

Yes another passage distorted by way of mistranslation. You'll notice the similar mistranslation of the famous alleged BoD passage to replace "without" with "except through" ... which completely changes the meaning of the passage.

This passage in the Latin reads more along the lines of "their determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for pas sins will avail them to grace and righteousness lest any unforeseen accident ...", the meaning of which is that God's divine providence will lead them to Baptism if they have the proper dispositions.

I checked the translation, and it is a good translation, just as I suspected. I will give you some advice, even though I know you won't listen: Distrust yourself and whatever amateurs you relied on to challenge this translation.

The Church's translators are experts in Latin, they read Latin as though you read English on this forum. When translating, a translator often does not translate word for word, as that would make it awkward and clumsy, often they must choose words to maintain the meaning but keep the flow in the translated language.

I stand by my post, and I stand by the approved translation of the Catechism of Trent.

Ambrose · « **Reply #8 on:** January 02, 2014, 12:07:30 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: Ambrose
The Catechism of the Council of Trent taught:

Quote
Ordinarily They Are Not Baptised At Once

On adults, however, the Church has not been accustomed to confer the Sacrament of Baptism at once, but has ordained that it be deferred for a certain time. The delay is not attended with the same danger as in the case of infants, which we have already mentioned; should any unforeseen accident make it impossible for adults to be washed in the salutary waters, their intention and determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness.

Nay, this delay seems to be attended with some advantages. And first, since the Church must take particular care that none approach this Sacrament through hypocrisy and dissimulation, the intentions of such as seek Baptism, are better examined and ascertained. Hence it is that we read in the decrees of ancient Councils that Jєωιѕн converts to the Catholic faith, before admission to Baptism, should spend some months in the ranks of the catechumens.

Furthermore, the candidate for Baptism is thus better instructed in the doctrine of the faith which he is to profess, and in the practices of the Christian life. Finally, when Baptism is administered to adults with solemn ceremonies on the appointed days of Easter and Pentecost only greater religious reverence is shown to the Sacrament.

SOURCE

Here again Ambrose, the error is yours here because you are *not* reading what is written.

Take note and re-read your entire quote from the Catechism and you will be forced to admit the following:

The catechism snip makes no mention of death *or* salvation.
The catechism does not reward salvation via a BOD.
The catechism does not even promise them grace and righteousness.
The "unforeseen accident" can easily be that the priest who was supposed to administer the sacrament that day was hit by a car and was 2 hours late.

When reading what is written, the catechism teaches that their contrition, and desire will *avail* them to *grace and righteousness* - IOW, it will put them "in the way" of grace - or to put it another way, before they can be baptized, the person *must* be in the way of grace via the proper intention - i.e. they must "desire" to be baptized prior to actually receiving the sacrament.

Note also WHY the delay in baptizing adults is advantageous:
First, because the Church must take particular care that none approach this Sacrament through hypocrisy and dissimulation.
Next, to be sure that the intentions of such as seek Baptism, are better examined and ascertained.
Third, so that the candidate for Baptism is thus better instructed in the doctrine of the faith which he is to profess, and in the practices of the Christian life. Finally, when Baptism is administered to adults with solemn ceremonies on the appointed days of Easter and Pentecost only greater religious reverence is shown to the Sacrament.

Note the catechism did not teach the advantage of delaying baptism in adults is because if they die before actually receiving the sacrament due to some unforeseen accident, that a BOD will suffice for their salvation.

We all know that is what you want it to say, but hopefully you can now see the truth of the matter.

No, I am reading what is written. It is clear as day, but again, as with the Council of Trent, again, you cannot read the text for what it says, rather you read it with your internal filter which for some strange reason filters out the Church's teaching on Baptism of Desire whenever you read it.

Don't you find it strange that St. Alphonsus and many other authorities all read from the same docuмents of the Council of Trent that you do, but they clearly see that Baptism of Desire is taught? Meanwhile, you insist the opposite is true.

Whose reading comprehension is better, yours or St. Alphonsus? I have read the passage St. Alphonsus cited, and it clear to me. Others have read it, and it is clear to them, but for some reason those with an agenda to deny Baptism of Desire just cannot read from the Council text and see the obvious: Baptism of desire is explicitly and clearly taught by Trent!

Cantarella · « **Reply #9 on:** January 02, 2014, 12:17:54 AM »

It is indeed very simple!

What is the big deal of accepting the undeniable true that water is required for Baptism? It is not like water cannot be find anywhere! Why would Christ Lord bothered instituting the Sacrament of Baptism of Water if "Baptism of Desire" could substitute it? There is no ambiguity in His words and actions. Christ was absolutely clear in his statement and further more, He went ahead and got baptized himself in water. John 3:5 is to be taken literally by all faithful Catholics. What is the problem with it? :kick-can:

It is that simple.

Ambrose · « **Reply #10 on:** January 02, 2014, 12:22:11 AM »

Quote from: Cantarella

It is indeed very simple!

What is the big deal of accepting the undeniable true that water is required for Baptism? It is not like water cannot be find anywhere! Why would Christ Lord bothered instituting the Sacrament of Baptism of Water if "Baptism of Desire" could substitute it? There is no ambiguity in His words and actions. Christ was absolutely clear in his statement and further more, He went ahead and got baptized himself in water. John 3:5 is to be taken literally by all faithful Catholics. What is the problem with it? :kick-can:

It is that simple.

Of course water is needed for Baptism. Baptism of Desire and Blood are not Baptism.

Cantarella · « **Reply #11 on:** January 02, 2014, 12:38:36 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Whatever happened to just simple faith anyway?

When the Church defines as dogma the fact that heretics, schismatics, Jews, and pagans cannot be saved, that's what it means. I teach my children that only Catholics can go to heaven. And they take it at the same simple face value that we should understand as well. When the Church defined EENS, it did not add a five-page theological addendum about exceptions, distinctions, scholastic syllogisms, formal this, material that; the Church just said non-Catholics cannot be saved. Period. End of story. If the Church intended to make exceptions, then She would have done so in the dogmatic definitions themselves.

Now, according to the BoDers, in order to avoid heresy, I basically have to apply several paragraphs worth of distinctions and exceptions to properly understand the dogma. Think about that. If I DO NOT SAY that non-Catholics can be saved, i.e. for taking the EENS dogmatic definitions at simple face value, now I am the heretic ... rather than those who even verbatim deny the dogma (CMRI, Cardinal Cushing, etc.). Talk about twisted ... and evil.

So now the EENS dogma really means the EXACT OPPOSITE of what the face value definitions says; otherwise I'm an EENS-denying heretic? That's absurd and perverted, and the devil is laughing at what he's accomplished.

I marvel at what the devil has been able to pull off, that upholding the EENS dogmatic definitions at face value is now considered "heretical" by people who call themselves Traditional Catholics.

I remember when I was a Novus Ordo type in college and an anti-Catholic was attacking the Church for EENS. My first (heretical) reaction was: "Well, what it REALLY means is [the exact opposite of the dogmatic definition]."

Now, if the subject comes up, say, from an ex-Catholic, I just state that salvation isn't possible for them unless they return to the Catholic Church.

And the speculative theology about all the possible exceptions does absolutely NOTHING from a pastoral perspective. Which is more likely to get a person thinking about whether they should convert? "You must become a Catholic in order to be saved." or "Well, if you're sincere in your belief, you can still be saved." ??? BoD explains the death of missionary zeal across the world.

Father Feeney kept looking for the "missing doctrine" that explained the decayed state of the Church, and he finally realized what it was, after years of reflection: denial of EENS.

I agree with this. Fr. Feeney was right. The decay of the Catholic Church has its main origin in the denial of EENS. The heresy that non-Catholics can be saved (through invisible, abstract, and ambiguous ties with the True Church) totally undermines the necessity of evangelization and conversion of all heretics, pagans, Jews, freemasons, etc. to the True Faith. Only Catholics can enter Heaven. There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. You take away that Catholic dogma, you take away the True Faith and you destroy the exclusivity of the elect, the chosen people of God. This is why concepts such as Baptism of Desire or Invincible Ignorance are perfidious and dangerous.

Infallible Magisterium on EENS:

* Pope Eugene IV, in the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441, proclaimed ex cathedra:

"The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, also Jews, heretics, and schismatics can ever be partakers of eternal life, but that they are to go into the eternal fire 'which was prepared for the devil and his angels' (Mt. 25:41) unless before death they are joined with Her... No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church."

* Pope Innocent III, ex cathedra, (Fourth Lateran Council, 1215):

"There is one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one at all can be saved".

* Pope Boniface VIII, (Unam Sanctam, 1302):

"We declare, say , define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.
This means, and has always meant, that salvation and unity exist only within the Catholic Church, and that members of heretical groups cannot be considered as "part" of the Church of Christ.

Ambrose · « **Reply #12 on:** January 02, 2014, 12:46:17 AM »

Cantarella,

There is no conflict between the teaching of the Church, as cited in your last post, and Baptism of Desire.

Alcuin · « **Reply #13 on:** January 02, 2014, 12:50:00 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

If I DO NOT SAY that non-Catholics can be saved, i.e. for taking the EENS dogmatic definitions at simple face value, now I am the heretic

That's because everything before Vatican II was hunky-dory - just get to a Latin Mass and don't bother us with theology. :wink:

Alcuin · « **Reply #14 on:** January 02, 2014, 01:01:09 AM »

Quote from: Ambrose

Of course water is needed for Baptism. Baptism of Desire and Blood are not Baptism.

Quote from: Ambrose

There is no conflict between the teaching of the Church, as cited in your last post, and Baptism of Desire.

So you can be saved without Baptism?